XCode 1.2 will be just fine ... actually gcc would be just fine
...actually Xcode would be nice to learn on. Formats decently. But if he stays with Xcode as he grows, he'll have a good understanding of Obj-C. My first "Intro to C" class did the usual silly little program building. It was a Winders based class, natch, but I bought a couple nice Cocoa books and taught myself Obj-C/Cocoa alongside C.
So, we'd do a little program in C, and I'd write the thing in Cocoa and build a whole app with GUI at the same time. I know the professor would have been impressed if he could run Cocoa apps.
Well, I did make him a QT movie of my applications in action, just for the brownie points. I guess that is the reason I scored tops in the class, even ahead of that working OpenGL programmer in to "get his certificate."
I don't see that happening but it would be a VERY smart move. If Apple updated and slightly redesigned the PM G4 and gave it a new name with a price under $999, I think it would sell really well.
It would be the headless iMac that everyone wants. Question is: then what would happen to the iMac?
...actually Xcode would be nice to learn on. Formats decently. But if he stays with Xcode as he grows, he'll have a good understanding of Obj-C. My first "Intro to C" class did the usual silly little program building. It was a Winders based class, natch, but I bought a couple nice Cocoa books and taught myself Obj-C/Cocoa alongside C.
So, we'd do a little program in C, and I'd write the thing in Cocoa and build a whole app with GUI at the same time. I know the professor would have been impressed if he could run Cocoa apps.
Well, I did make him a QT movie of my applications in action, just for the brownie points. I guess that is the reason I scored tops in the class, even ahead of that working OpenGL programmer in to "get his certificate."
I'm quite impressed that you took a precedural programming class and were able to learn Obj-c so easily. It has one of the biggest learning curves (with cocoa) out of any other language I've built with. I'm a Software Engineer, so Object Oriented is customary to me... but with most (escpecially computer science majors) OO is not usually mastered.
But yah XCode would be nice to learn on... but he doesn't NEED 2.0 to use it... 1.2 should be just fine.
I don't see that happening but it would be a VERY smart move. If Apple updated and slightly redesigned the PM G4 and gave it a new name with a price under $999, I think it would sell really well.
It would be the headless iMac that everyone wants. Question is: then what would happen to the iMac?
The main reason that they held on to this model is to continue to support dual boot for graphic production that is stuck at OS 9 for Quark 4.1 support. Apple would need to keep that support to any upgrade, which would add software development cost. Even with that, based on current offerings even 1.5 Ghz is a joke for a desktop PC.
I'm quite impressed that you took a precedural programming class and were able to learn Obj-c so easily. It has one of the biggest learning curves (with cocoa) out of any other language I've built with. I'm a Software Engineer, so Object Oriented is customary to me... but with most (escpecially computer science majors) OO is not usually mastered.
But yah XCode would be nice to learn on... but he doesn't NEED 2.0 to use it... 1.2 should be just fine.
That's good to hear emig647. I guess I was just worried about Xcode and Java. I know I could run Eclipse on my PC but I'd rather use a Mac if it works. I find it kind of strange that they want us to start with Java but I guess that's what the bulk of Comp Sci students are asking for. I'm thinking of bypassing C++ entirely for the moment. Would that be ok?
That's good to hear emig647. I guess I was just worried about Xcode and Java. I know I could run Eclipse on my PC but I'd rather use a Mac if it works. I find it kind of strange that they want us to start with Java but I guess that's what the bulk of Comp Sci students are asking for. I'm thinking of bypassing C++ entirely for the moment. Would that be ok?
DO NOT BYPASS C++... so many Object Oriented languages have so many C++ traits that if you are going to study more than one language know C++ is critical. From pure virtual functions to abstract classes to function overridding. Its really hard to find places to teach all of that though, I was really fortunate. I definitely recommend studying an OO language (java) before a procedural language (c). It doesn't make sense to most but once you master Object Oriented design, it makes procedural a lot easier to build in.
The best advice I can tell you is: Learn UML inside and out. UML is a bunch of software designing protocols. My first UML book was "UML Distilled". Its a really good book. And since you're on a Mac go to versiontracker and look at "ObjectPlant"... its a little complicated until you understand AOMD, DOMD, Use Case / Scenerio's, CRC Cards, etc.
-------------
Back on subject:
I know we're going to see a stronger push for Cocoa at WWDC. I noticed they are going to have a class on using the PerlObjBridge to use perl with the Cocoa API's. That will really benefit a lot of Unix devs. Hopefully perl 6 will work easily with it too.
As far as machinery I'm going for...
PowerMac
Dual 2.0
Dual 2.4 9600xt
Dual 2.8 x800 (or whatever its called)
Dual 2.0 could be discountinued in September and dual 3.0 may become top machine.
I believe they'll sport a redesigned case with 2 opt drives
iMac
1.6-1.8 g5
This will also sport a new redesigned bottom.
I believe this will be announced here to push developers into practicing and using more 64bit libraries.
XCode 2.0
-This will include more Unix libraries. Perhaps CigWin api's (wishful thinking).
-Also migrating design with code with Interface builder will be a lot easier (perhaps closer to what .net does).
-Support for more languages: ppc assembly (has support now but could be better), algorithm coloring (hopefull on this), PHP.
Hopefully its a good show cause I got a scholarship to go there for free, should be interesting... stevey don't let me down!
Call me crazy but I think the iMac has one more speed bump left in it before it goes to G5. Apple's desktop sales are slipping and it's not because people are waiting for a 64-bit iMac.
For the iMac I see either a small bump and a new feature (maybe a gooseneck or something) or a price drop...or both.
For the G5...well, that's anyone's guess. I'll differ to the group opinions and go with dual 2.8Ghz, but Apple needs to do something to invigorate sales.
Other hardware....I actually think we might see a new iPod. Seriously. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Apple adopts the buttonless iPod Mini wheel on all its iPods, and doing so now might help sway some people who want a mini but don't want to wait.
Again I feel I should caution people not to be too optimistic about the next G5 updates. Though I would love to be proven wrong I can't see Apple refreshing their line to more than 2.4 Ghz. Strictly from a business perspective it makes more sense to have a good (but not too good) refresh and have some breathing room if they have more fab troubles down the line. If IBM is really having a tough going of it, we may only see even a 2.2 Ghz refresh at the WWDC.
I think Steve is just going to take it on the chin on this one. It's not like he has any control over IBM's ability to fab chips at any rate and he knows any negative press will blow over in a month.
Call me crazy but I think the iMac has one more speed bump left in it before it goes to G5. Apple's desktop sales are slipping and it's not because people are waiting for a 64-bit iMac.
For the iMac I see either a small bump and a new feature (maybe a gooseneck or something) or a price drop...or both.
For the G5...well, that's anyone's guess. I'll differ to the group opinions and go with dual 2.8Ghz, but Apple needs to do something to invigorate sales.
Other hardware....I actually think we might see a new iPod. Seriously. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Apple adopts the buttonless iPod Mini wheel on all its iPods, and doing so now might help sway some people who want a mini but don't want to wait.
I totally forgot about the iPod. I completely agree. Color screen or not they need to re-arrange the size of the iPod and change to the buttonless design. Also iPod mini's are available again to the masses. (NOT the rest of the world though)
I also forgot to mention we'll be seeing new Displays.
I think they will be moved to 18/22/24.
I wanted to comment on apple only updating to dual 2.4 or less.
First off IBM announced they had 2.5's running on the 90nm process back in February. (Please don't make me dig up the url again, i've been asked to do this repeatedly and I lose it everytime. Look on other threads for it).
Updating to dual 2.2 is a waste of time (from a business point of view). The demand for such a machine is going to be limited. Why buy a dual 2.2 when you can buy a dual 2 for much cheaper. a 200 mhz update got us by 2 years ago. It won't work any more in the pro machines. I was being a little optimistic with the dual 2.8... but I am extremely confident that the update won't be anything less than dual 2.5ghz.
But in a way I hope you're right. If they are anything below 2.5 than I won't be wasting my money on one (even with my dev discount). I'd rather go out and buy a new YZF 450. Also I won't be a developer any more either. So we'll just have to see what happens. This will seriously determine the path in a fork in my life. Either new G5 with lots of apple developing (new job), or continue racing trying to make ends meet.
But again... this totally relies on IBM... and getting info out of them is like getting blood out of a turnip.
Again I feel I should caution people not to be too optimistic about the next G5 updates. Though I would love to be proven wrong I can't see Apple refreshing their line to more than 2.4 Ghz. Strictly from a business perspective it makes more sense to have a good (but not too good) refresh and have some breathing room if they have more fab troubles down the line. If IBM is really having a tough going of it, we may only see even a 2.2 Ghz refresh at the WWDC.
I think Steve is just going to take it on the chin on this one. It's not like he has any control over IBM's ability to fab chips at any rate and he knows any negative press will blow over in a month.
C.
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
Well thats good news. How do you know they have been producing the 970fx for the last month with no flaws? Any url or is this just word of mouth?
Updating to dual 2.2 is a waste of time (from a business point of view). The demand for such a machine is going to be limited. Why buy a dual 2.2 when you can buy a dual 2 for much cheaper. a 200 mhz update got us by 2 years ago. It won't work any more in the pro machines.
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
Quote:
I was being a little optimistic with the dual 2.8... but I am extremely confident that the update won't be anything less than dual 2.5ghz.
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
Quote:
Originally posted by atomicham:
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
Good news indeed! Where did you hear this btw? All the news I've heard coming out of IBM so far is all the problems they're having migrating to their smaller process.
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
But it would be a waste of money to update the powermacs to dual 2.2. I didn't finish my previous point. They would spend all this money to update a whole 200mhz per proc and still have the same design is such a huge waste. Not to mention PISS OFF their developers. If they are going to make such a mild update I guarantee you they would NOT announce it at WWDC. That would seriously be a slap in the face to all their faithful developers.
Quote:
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
I still think 2.4 is a little slow to be updating. I think apple would be better off announcing dual 2.5 or dual 2.6 and shipping in august or september. (Remember the IBM blades will be shipping before WWDC with 975 procs.
(Remember the IBM blades will be shipping before WWDC with 975 procs.
Where did you here this, IBM is just starting to ship blades with 970's, now they will ship servers with Power5 chips, but not 975's, they don't officially exists yet.
Where did you here this, IBM is just starting to ship blades with 970's, now they will ship servers with Power5 chips, but not 975's, they don't officially exists yet.
I thought the 975 and the Power5 chip was the same thing?
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
This is an excellent indicator for a small form factor, 970fx based desktop Mac, whether it be AIO or headless.
I'm glad you have such high regards for the new FX's. Lets hope that IBM has things squared away for the higher clock rate devices that we are all waiting on.
But that is about rumors what I'd really like from you is more info on your XServe. How does it perform, what type of modeling are you doing on it, eitc & etc. Also a little more technical, are you using this as a compute server and if so how are you managing resources? In other words MPI or something like that involved in your work?
Thanks
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by atomicham
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
I'm not at all convinced that 2GHz has been a wall, the old 970 could run above that point. Maybe not at extremely high yields but none the less functional. Cooling the chips was and is the big issue.
The generally accepted explanation seems to be on target. That is they have or had problems with some assembly material. Now that perspective can always be reconsidered if more info comes to light. The fact of the matter is that IBM would be the laughing stock of the micro world if their 90nm process could not out perform their own previous process.
Quote:
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
Yes but some of use where hearing about 2.5 GHz a year ago on the old process. One should realize that some of this information may be disinformation.
AS far as the next refresh I wouldn't put it past Apple to go to 24. and then wash the filth from their hands. There are two many issues in play though to not hope for much better. First is the statement about being at 3GHz that everyone makes a big stink about. It is about that time, in effect to late for slower machines. Then we have issues like dual core processors, SMT and a host of other things coming into play. It is very likely that the G5 PowerMac could be going through major updates soon.
Quote:
Good news indeed! Where did you hear this btw? All the news I've heard coming out of IBM so far is all the problems they're having migrating to their smaller process.
Comments
Originally posted by Frank777
From your lips to the Lord's ears...
(I'm resigned to the fact that only Heaven can help us now.)
Originally posted by emig647
XCode 1.2 will be just fine
...actually Xcode would be nice to learn on. Formats decently. But if he stays with Xcode as he grows, he'll have a good understanding of Obj-C. My first "Intro to C" class did the usual silly little program building. It was a Winders based class, natch, but I bought a couple nice Cocoa books and taught myself Obj-C/Cocoa alongside C.
So, we'd do a little program in C, and I'd write the thing in Cocoa and build a whole app with GUI at the same time. I know the professor would have been impressed if he could run Cocoa apps.
Well, I did make him a QT movie of my applications in action, just for the brownie points. I guess that is the reason I scored tops in the class, even ahead of that working OpenGL programmer in to "get his certificate."
Originally posted by oldmacfan
what are you smoking?
I don't see that happening but it would be a VERY smart move. If Apple updated and slightly redesigned the PM G4 and gave it a new name with a price under $999, I think it would sell really well.
It would be the headless iMac that everyone wants. Question is: then what would happen to the iMac?
Originally posted by mooseman
...actually Xcode would be nice to learn on. Formats decently. But if he stays with Xcode as he grows, he'll have a good understanding of Obj-C. My first "Intro to C" class did the usual silly little program building. It was a Winders based class, natch, but I bought a couple nice Cocoa books and taught myself Obj-C/Cocoa alongside C.
So, we'd do a little program in C, and I'd write the thing in Cocoa and build a whole app with GUI at the same time. I know the professor would have been impressed if he could run Cocoa apps.
Well, I did make him a QT movie of my applications in action, just for the brownie points. I guess that is the reason I scored tops in the class, even ahead of that working OpenGL programmer in to "get his certificate."
I'm quite impressed that you took a precedural programming class and were able to learn Obj-c so easily. It has one of the biggest learning curves (with cocoa) out of any other language I've built with. I'm a Software Engineer, so Object Oriented is customary to me... but with most (escpecially computer science majors) OO is not usually mastered.
But yah XCode would be nice to learn on... but he doesn't NEED 2.0 to use it... 1.2 should be just fine.
Originally posted by dferigmu
I don't see that happening but it would be a VERY smart move. If Apple updated and slightly redesigned the PM G4 and gave it a new name with a price under $999, I think it would sell really well.
It would be the headless iMac that everyone wants. Question is: then what would happen to the iMac?
The main reason that they held on to this model is to continue to support dual boot for graphic production that is stuck at OS 9 for Quark 4.1 support. Apple would need to keep that support to any upgrade, which would add software development cost. Even with that, based on current offerings even 1.5 Ghz is a joke for a desktop PC.
Originally posted by emig647
I'm quite impressed that you took a precedural programming class and were able to learn Obj-c so easily. It has one of the biggest learning curves (with cocoa) out of any other language I've built with. I'm a Software Engineer, so Object Oriented is customary to me... but with most (escpecially computer science majors) OO is not usually mastered.
But yah XCode would be nice to learn on... but he doesn't NEED 2.0 to use it... 1.2 should be just fine.
That's good to hear emig647. I guess I was just worried about Xcode and Java. I know I could run Eclipse on my PC but I'd rather use a Mac if it works. I find it kind of strange that they want us to start with Java but I guess that's what the bulk of Comp Sci students are asking for. I'm thinking of bypassing C++ entirely for the moment. Would that be ok?
Originally posted by hmurchison
That's good to hear emig647. I guess I was just worried about Xcode and Java. I know I could run Eclipse on my PC but I'd rather use a Mac if it works. I find it kind of strange that they want us to start with Java but I guess that's what the bulk of Comp Sci students are asking for. I'm thinking of bypassing C++ entirely for the moment. Would that be ok?
DO NOT BYPASS C++... so many Object Oriented languages have so many C++ traits that if you are going to study more than one language know C++ is critical. From pure virtual functions to abstract classes to function overridding. Its really hard to find places to teach all of that though, I was really fortunate. I definitely recommend studying an OO language (java) before a procedural language (c). It doesn't make sense to most but once you master Object Oriented design, it makes procedural a lot easier to build in.
The best advice I can tell you is: Learn UML inside and out. UML is a bunch of software designing protocols. My first UML book was "UML Distilled". Its a really good book. And since you're on a Mac go to versiontracker and look at "ObjectPlant"... its a little complicated until you understand AOMD, DOMD, Use Case / Scenerio's, CRC Cards, etc.
-------------
Back on subject:
I know we're going to see a stronger push for Cocoa at WWDC. I noticed they are going to have a class on using the PerlObjBridge to use perl with the Cocoa API's. That will really benefit a lot of Unix devs. Hopefully perl 6 will work easily with it too.
As far as machinery I'm going for...
PowerMac
Dual 2.0
Dual 2.4 9600xt
Dual 2.8 x800 (or whatever its called)
Dual 2.0 could be discountinued in September and dual 3.0 may become top machine.
I believe they'll sport a redesigned case with 2 opt drives
iMac
1.6-1.8 g5
This will also sport a new redesigned bottom.
I believe this will be announced here to push developers into practicing and using more 64bit libraries.
XCode 2.0
-This will include more Unix libraries. Perhaps CigWin api's (wishful thinking).
-Also migrating design with code with Interface builder will be a lot easier (perhaps closer to what .net does).
-Support for more languages: ppc assembly (has support now but could be better), algorithm coloring (hopefull on this), PHP.
Hopefully its a good show cause I got a scholarship to go there for free, should be interesting... stevey don't let me down!
For the iMac I see either a small bump and a new feature (maybe a gooseneck or something) or a price drop...or both.
For the G5...well, that's anyone's guess. I'll differ to the group opinions and go with dual 2.8Ghz, but Apple needs to do something to invigorate sales.
Other hardware....I actually think we might see a new iPod. Seriously. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Apple adopts the buttonless iPod Mini wheel on all its iPods, and doing so now might help sway some people who want a mini but don't want to wait.
I think Steve is just going to take it on the chin on this one. It's not like he has any control over IBM's ability to fab chips at any rate and he knows any negative press will blow over in a month.
C.
Originally posted by Michael Grey
Call me crazy but I think the iMac has one more speed bump left in it before it goes to G5. Apple's desktop sales are slipping and it's not because people are waiting for a 64-bit iMac.
For the iMac I see either a small bump and a new feature (maybe a gooseneck or something) or a price drop...or both.
For the G5...well, that's anyone's guess. I'll differ to the group opinions and go with dual 2.8Ghz, but Apple needs to do something to invigorate sales.
Other hardware....I actually think we might see a new iPod. Seriously. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Apple adopts the buttonless iPod Mini wheel on all its iPods, and doing so now might help sway some people who want a mini but don't want to wait.
I totally forgot about the iPod. I completely agree. Color screen or not they need to re-arrange the size of the iPod and change to the buttonless design. Also iPod mini's are available again to the masses. (NOT the rest of the world though)
I also forgot to mention we'll be seeing new Displays.
I think they will be moved to 18/22/24.
I wanted to comment on apple only updating to dual 2.4 or less.
First off IBM announced they had 2.5's running on the 90nm process back in February. (Please don't make me dig up the url again, i've been asked to do this repeatedly and I lose it everytime. Look on other threads for it).
Updating to dual 2.2 is a waste of time (from a business point of view). The demand for such a machine is going to be limited. Why buy a dual 2.2 when you can buy a dual 2 for much cheaper. a 200 mhz update got us by 2 years ago. It won't work any more in the pro machines. I was being a little optimistic with the dual 2.8... but I am extremely confident that the update won't be anything less than dual 2.5ghz.
But in a way I hope you're right. If they are anything below 2.5 than I won't be wasting my money on one (even with my dev discount). I'd rather go out and buy a new YZF 450. Also I won't be a developer any more either. So we'll just have to see what happens. This will seriously determine the path in a fork in my life. Either new G5 with lots of apple developing (new job), or continue racing trying to make ends meet.
But again... this totally relies on IBM... and getting info out of them is like getting blood out of a turnip.
Originally posted by Concord
Again I feel I should caution people not to be too optimistic about the next G5 updates. Though I would love to be proven wrong I can't see Apple refreshing their line to more than 2.4 Ghz. Strictly from a business perspective it makes more sense to have a good (but not too good) refresh and have some breathing room if they have more fab troubles down the line. If IBM is really having a tough going of it, we may only see even a 2.2 Ghz refresh at the WWDC.
I think Steve is just going to take it on the chin on this one. It's not like he has any control over IBM's ability to fab chips at any rate and he knows any negative press will blow over in a month.
C.
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
Originally posted by atomicham
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
Well thats good news. How do you know they have been producing the 970fx for the last month with no flaws? Any url or is this just word of mouth?
originally posted by emig647:
Updating to dual 2.2 is a waste of time (from a business point of view). The demand for such a machine is going to be limited. Why buy a dual 2.2 when you can buy a dual 2 for much cheaper. a 200 mhz update got us by 2 years ago. It won't work any more in the pro machines.
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
I was being a little optimistic with the dual 2.8... but I am extremely confident that the update won't be anything less than dual 2.5ghz.
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
Originally posted by atomicham:
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
Good news indeed! Where did you hear this btw? All the news I've heard coming out of IBM so far is all the problems they're having migrating to their smaller process.
Originally posted by Concord
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
But it would be a waste of money to update the powermacs to dual 2.2. I didn't finish my previous point. They would spend all this money to update a whole 200mhz per proc and still have the same design is such a huge waste. Not to mention PISS OFF their developers. If they are going to make such a mild update I guarantee you they would NOT announce it at WWDC. That would seriously be a slap in the face to all their faithful developers.
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
I still think 2.4 is a little slow to be updating. I think apple would be better off announcing dual 2.5 or dual 2.6 and shipping in august or september. (Remember the IBM blades will be shipping before WWDC with 975 procs.
Originally posted by emig647
(Remember the IBM blades will be shipping before WWDC with 975 procs.
Where did you here this, IBM is just starting to ship blades with 970's, now they will ship servers with Power5 chips, but not 975's, they don't officially exists yet.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
Where did you here this, IBM is just starting to ship blades with 970's, now they will ship servers with Power5 chips, but not 975's, they don't officially exists yet.
I thought the 975 and the Power5 chip was the same thing?
Originally posted by atomicham
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
This is an excellent indicator for a small form factor, 970fx based desktop Mac, whether it be AIO or headless.
I'm glad you have such high regards for the new FX's. Lets hope that IBM has things squared away for the higher clock rate devices that we are all waiting on.
But that is about rumors what I'd really like from you is more info on your XServe. How does it perform, what type of modeling are you doing on it, eitc & etc. Also a little more technical, are you using this as a compute server and if so how are you managing resources? In other words MPI or something like that involved in your work?
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by atomicham
Well, all indications are that IBM is not having a tough go of it any longer. They have been cranking out the 90nm chips for over a month now without problems. The Xserves have been fulfilled (I received mine a couple of weeks ago) and they appear to be at full capacity. They had trouble, they worked out the problems and are now making chips.
I have been running a model on my G5 Xserve for 11 days straight now (using 95-100% of each processor the whole time) without a single heat problem or any other issue.
Originally posted by Concord
That was my prediction *if* IBM was still having real trouble ramping up to faster speeds. From several sources I've heard that 2.0 Ghz has been a quite a wall for them to overcome. And if that's all you can do in quantity... that's all you do.
I'm not at all convinced that 2GHz has been a wall, the old 970 could run above that point. Maybe not at extremely high yields but none the less functional. Cooling the chips was and is the big issue.
The generally accepted explanation seems to be on target. That is they have or had problems with some assembly material. Now that perspective can always be reconsidered if more info comes to light. The fact of the matter is that IBM would be the laughing stock of the micro world if their 90nm process could not out perform their own previous process.
Quote:
I've also heard that IBM had produced 2.5 Ghz chips in Feb. but that *may* also mean that they can produce them in the most limited quatities. My feeling is since Apple's PMs all seem to have processors with speeds nicely divisible by 2, I figure 2.4 sounds about right for the next refresh.
Yes but some of use where hearing about 2.5 GHz a year ago on the old process. One should realize that some of this information may be disinformation.
AS far as the next refresh I wouldn't put it past Apple to go to 24. and then wash the filth from their hands. There are two many issues in play though to not hope for much better. First is the statement about being at 3GHz that everyone makes a big stink about. It is about that time, in effect to late for slower machines. Then we have issues like dual core processors, SMT and a host of other things coming into play. It is very likely that the G5 PowerMac could be going through major updates soon.
Quote:
Good news indeed! Where did you hear this btw? All the news I've heard coming out of IBM so far is all the problems they're having migrating to their smaller process.