Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Yes, I questioned that as well. I could see the Mini (and maybe the eMac, if it still exists) getting something first. But it would be for power and cost. Also if Apple is useing the Mini as an entertainment hub, it would need enough power to decode H.264. The iBooks wouldn't need that right away. Which is why the report that the Mini might get the low power G5.
It's always possible that the iBooks and the PB's will get them at ABOUT the same time. Different processors though.
Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Yes, it could be the other way around or at the same time. If PowerBooks are updated in sept/oct with a 7448 @ 1.8GHz or more, they could stand siding with Intel iBooks @ 1.67Ghz for awhile. Apple could wait for the public reaction on Intel minis and iBooks before shipping the Intel PowerBooks...
As far as I know Single Core Yonahs will be available @ 1.67GHz max while Dual Cores will go up to 2.16GHz.
To add to my last post; I forgot to mention that one site did tests on H.264 decoding, and they found that Intel's current chips don't work nearly as well as the G4's and G5's in that application.
However, MS's WM Hi Def compression worked much better in that it needed a lot less horsepower. Some food for thought.
To add to my last post; I forgot to mention that one site did tests on H.264 decoding, and they found that Intel's current chips don't work nearly as well as the G4's and G5's in that application.
However, MS's WM Hi Def compression worked much better in that it needed a lot less horsepower. Some food for thought.
hi peoples,
i've mentioned it quite a few times, thought i'd interject here again. h.264 decoding can be offloaded to a large large amount to the GPU.
nvidia claims and it does appear that some nvidia gpus decode wmv offloading a lot of work that would otherwise bog down the cpu..
i can tell you wmv hd is smooth as butter decoding on my 1.8-2.2ghz clocked AMD with nvidia 6600gt.
ati HAS promised h.264 decoding
sure, i agree a G5 would be excellent if cool (all puns intended) in a mac mini format. teh snappytasticness? of tiger on a g5 low-watt 1.6ghz with 512mb would be excellence. but apple would definitely prefer h.264 offloaded to gpu's even if it is 'just' a ati9550-or ati-9600-class gpu . sorenson3 in quicktime is sorted. h.264 decoding is where they are placing their quicktime7 bets, so hopefully aTi and nVidia can come to the table fast enough so that a g4/ g5 or pentiumM/derivative can do other great stuff...
i've mentioned it quite a few times, thought i'd interject here again. h.264 decoding can be offloaded to a large large amount to the GPU.
nvidia claims and it does appear that some nvidia gpus decode wmv offloading a lot of work that would otherwise bog down the cpu..
i can tell you wmv hd is smooth as butter decoding on my 1.8-2.2ghz clocked AMD with nvidia 6600gt.
ati HAS promised h.264 decoding
sure, i agree a G5 would be excellent if cool (all puns intended) in a mac mini format. teh snappytasticness? of tiger on a g5 low-watt 1.6ghz with 512mb would be excellence. but apple would definitely prefer h.264 offloaded to gpu's even if it is 'just' a ati9550-or ati-9600-class gpu . sorenson3 in quicktime is sorted. h.264 decoding is where they are placing their quicktime7 bets, so hopefully aTi and nVidia can come to the table fast enough so that a g4/ g5 or pentiumM/derivative can do other great stuff...
The problems are cost, size, and cooling.
A GPU that can do this is currently almost as expensive as the Mini itself. It would also require a turbo cooler for the GPU alone which would mean that it will NEVER fit into a Mini as currently configured, and thereby would require an entirely different machine. Thr low power G5 would do 720p without a problem, which is pretty much standard. It would also do 1080i, which is the alternate standard. I don't know if the 1.6 would be able to do 1080p. I haven't done the math yet.
My dual 1.8 7447a does 720p perfectly, but drops frames on 1080p. We could go by that as a base to figure the numbers. This is using a 9800 Pro.
The problems are cost, size, and cooling......The low power G5 would do 720p without a problem, which is pretty much standard. It would also do 1080i, which is the alternate standard. I don't know if the 1.6 would be able to do 1080p.......
cool. 720p should be sorted on any g5. 1080p though i think not on a low power single-g5.
When the Mini came out there was a lot of hype floating around about how it was Apple's answer to the Media PC's. Sites such as ARs and Anand were talking it up. When it was found to not have the oomph to be used for that, as well as no HDMI connector, everyone was disappointed, to say the least.
If Apple could rectify this in the $699 model, with multi-channel out, then the sales would go up significantly.
Even if they had to "raise the roof" so to speak, to accommodate more cooling, it would be worth it. I would have bought one just for the hell of it, but the current one is too limited.
As a media center, it would be great; if Apple made it so, and included software to enable those functions.
He said that the hardware transition will be done by end of 2007.
Thanks for the clarification. That implies the transition schedule is wide open between now and then so even the most far-fetched speculations of when the first Intel-based products will ship are possible.
Re: Intel iBook or PowerBook first. Obviously that's anyone's guess, and maybe there'll be some unexpected changes in Apple's mobile product line thrown in to better differentiate them from non-Apple offerings. More generally, and especially if OS X on Intel is "too easily" hackable for non-Apple hardware (and remains unlicensed to other vendors), it's easy to anticipate we'll see something that sweetens the deal in Apple's favor. Sure, "it's the software" but running it on an Apple box that's too much like other commodity PCs isn't something we'd expect from Steve Jobs.
Of course it's unclear if what's made and makes Apple computer systems appealing for its customers is sustainable (and eventually growable) in the same ways it's been and is now, e.g. with the current popular mainstream view being "that iPod company". But enough with that old and tired topic, except to say there's certainly curiosity about what their next "think different" strategy might be in light of the Intel transition.
i tried the alpha one month ago. has some potential, hopefully it comes along alright. integration with elgato, what their focusing on, is a step in a great direction right now.
my brother loves his mac mini + elgato thingy hooked up to the TV. it's UK digital terrestial (dvd-quality) so no high def yet but the mac mini rocks with mpeg2 approx. 480p digital tv.
back to my GPU obsession but it's taken 5 years and virtually all video cards even on the low end have built-in mpeg2 decoding, of course. h.264 has only really been out for 1 year
i tried the alpha one month ago. has some potential, hopefully it comes along alright. integration with elgato, what their focusing on, is a step in a great direction right now.
my brother loves his mac mini + elgato thingy hooked up to the TV. it's UK digital terrestial (dvd-quality) so no high def yet but the mac mini rocks with mpeg2 approx. 480p digital tv.
back to my GPU obsession but it's taken 5 years and virtually all video cards even on the low end have built-in mpeg2 decoding, of course. h.264 has only really been out for 1 year
Yup, two years from now todays high end cards will be low end cards. The 6800 and 850's are now medium range cards.
We don't know prices of future chips and GPUs yet, but does anyone care to guess how a Cell processor might compete for this role in future Apple PCs? I understand that digital HDTV is one thing the Cell is designed to do very well. It could be cheaper than a GPU for this job. It might also serve as a VMX coprocessor and be the key that stops OS X from running on a generic PC.
The other day I read an article (might take a bit to search for it now) by someone who thinks people are underestimating the complexity for multiprocessor Cell game programming. But as a specialized coprocessor, as you've suggested, might be an easier and more immediate way to tap Cell's potential.
We don't know prices of future chips and GPUs yet, but does anyone care to guess how a Cell processor might compete for this role in future Apple PCs? I understand that digital HDTV is one thing the Cell is designed to do very well. It could be cheaper than a GPU for this job. It might also serve as a VMX coprocessor and be the key that stops OS X from running on a generic PC.
This is one of the things that the Cell does well. Toshiba had a demonstration when the cell was first shown of a couple of dozen video feeds being processed through the cell at the same time.
As a co-processor it would work well. It might be easier if Apple were still using the PPC as the main cpu than the x86 simply because the instruction sets would have more points of convergence. But that might not matter. The question is whether Apple would want to do so.
I had rhought that Apple using the Cell for most all rendering tasks, including that of screen rendering would have made up for the differences between it and x86 machines, but that seems to be less and less a posibility at this point.
Comments
Originally posted by mjteix
Spring '06: Intel minis and iBooks ( Yonah )
Summer '06: Intel PowerBooks ( DualCore Yonah )
Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Originally posted by sjk
For accuracy's sake, does anyone remember for sure whether Steve said in 2007 during the keynote or by 2007?
He said that the hardware transition will be done by end of 2007.
So there will be products with G4s or G5s for another 2 and a half years.
Originally posted by sjk
Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Yes, I questioned that as well. I could see the Mini (and maybe the eMac, if it still exists) getting something first. But it would be for power and cost. Also if Apple is useing the Mini as an entertainment hub, it would need enough power to decode H.264. The iBooks wouldn't need that right away. Which is why the report that the Mini might get the low power G5.
It's always possible that the iBooks and the PB's will get them at ABOUT the same time. Different processors though.
Originally posted by sjk
Since its creation hasn't the PowerBook been Apple's flagship mobile product, always preceding the iBook? If that's true I don't see Intel processors in an iBook (and maybe the mini) happening before the PowerBook, especially if that hypothetical Intel iBook_were to outperform the current PPC PowerBook at the time.
Yes, it could be the other way around or at the same time. If PowerBooks are updated in sept/oct with a 7448 @ 1.8GHz or more, they could stand siding with Intel iBooks @ 1.67Ghz for awhile. Apple could wait for the public reaction on Intel minis and iBooks before shipping the Intel PowerBooks...
As far as I know Single Core Yonahs will be available @ 1.67GHz max while Dual Cores will go up to 2.16GHz.
However, MS's WM Hi Def compression worked much better in that it needed a lot less horsepower. Some food for thought.
Originally posted by melgross
To add to my last post; I forgot to mention that one site did tests on H.264 decoding, and they found that Intel's current chips don't work nearly as well as the G4's and G5's in that application.
However, MS's WM Hi Def compression worked much better in that it needed a lot less horsepower. Some food for thought.
hi peoples,
i've mentioned it quite a few times, thought i'd interject here again. h.264 decoding can be offloaded to a large large amount to the GPU.
nvidia claims and it does appear that some nvidia gpus decode wmv offloading a lot of work that would otherwise bog down the cpu..
i can tell you wmv hd is smooth as butter decoding on my 1.8-2.2ghz clocked AMD with nvidia 6600gt.
ati HAS promised h.264 decoding
sure, i agree a G5 would be excellent if cool (all puns intended) in a mac mini format. teh snappytasticness? of tiger on a g5 low-watt 1.6ghz with 512mb would be excellence. but apple would definitely prefer h.264 offloaded to gpu's even if it is 'just' a ati9550-or ati-9600-class gpu . sorenson3 in quicktime is sorted. h.264 decoding is where they are placing their quicktime7 bets, so hopefully aTi and nVidia can come to the table fast enough so that a g4/ g5 or pentiumM/derivative can do other great stuff...
Originally posted by sunilraman
hi peoples,
i've mentioned it quite a few times, thought i'd interject here again. h.264 decoding can be offloaded to a large large amount to the GPU.
nvidia claims and it does appear that some nvidia gpus decode wmv offloading a lot of work that would otherwise bog down the cpu..
i can tell you wmv hd is smooth as butter decoding on my 1.8-2.2ghz clocked AMD with nvidia 6600gt.
ati HAS promised h.264 decoding
sure, i agree a G5 would be excellent if cool (all puns intended) in a mac mini format. teh snappytasticness? of tiger on a g5 low-watt 1.6ghz with 512mb would be excellence. but apple would definitely prefer h.264 offloaded to gpu's even if it is 'just' a ati9550-or ati-9600-class gpu . sorenson3 in quicktime is sorted. h.264 decoding is where they are placing their quicktime7 bets, so hopefully aTi and nVidia can come to the table fast enough so that a g4/ g5 or pentiumM/derivative can do other great stuff...
The problems are cost, size, and cooling.
A GPU that can do this is currently almost as expensive as the Mini itself. It would also require a turbo cooler for the GPU alone which would mean that it will NEVER fit into a Mini as currently configured, and thereby would require an entirely different machine. Thr low power G5 would do 720p without a problem, which is pretty much standard. It would also do 1080i, which is the alternate standard. I don't know if the 1.6 would be able to do 1080p. I haven't done the math yet.
My dual 1.8 7447a does 720p perfectly, but drops frames on 1080p. We could go by that as a base to figure the numbers. This is using a 9800 Pro.
Originally posted by melgross
The problems are cost, size, and cooling......The low power G5 would do 720p without a problem, which is pretty much standard. It would also do 1080i, which is the alternate standard. I don't know if the 1.6 would be able to do 1080p.......
cool. 720p should be sorted on any g5. 1080p though i think not on a low power single-g5.
If Apple could rectify this in the $699 model, with multi-channel out, then the sales would go up significantly.
Even if they had to "raise the roof" so to speak, to accommodate more cooling, it would be worth it. I would have bought one just for the hell of it, but the current one is too limited.
As a media center, it would be great; if Apple made it so, and included software to enable those functions.
Originally posted by melgross
.......As a media center, it would be great; if Apple made it so, and included software to enable those functions.
well, that's what a lot of us are waiting for like the salivating dogs that we are....
Originally posted by sunilraman
well, that's what a lot of us are waiting for like the salivating dogs that we are....
Sure; and this has implications well beyond Apple's gooey base.
http://centerstageproject.com/
Originally posted by nowayout11
He said that the hardware transition will be done by end of 2007.
Thanks for the clarification. That implies the transition schedule is wide open between now and then so even the most far-fetched speculations of when the first Intel-based products will ship are possible.
Re: Intel iBook or PowerBook first. Obviously that's anyone's guess, and maybe there'll be some unexpected changes in Apple's mobile product line thrown in to better differentiate them from non-Apple offerings. More generally, and especially if OS X on Intel is "too easily" hackable for non-Apple hardware (and remains unlicensed to other vendors), it's easy to anticipate we'll see something that sweetens the deal in Apple's favor. Sure, "it's the software" but running it on an Apple box that's too much like other commodity PCs isn't something we'd expect from Steve Jobs.
Of course it's unclear if what's made and makes Apple computer systems appealing for its customers is sustainable (and eventually growable) in the same ways it's been and is now, e.g. with the current popular mainstream view being "that iPod company". But enough with that old and tired topic, except to say there's certainly curiosity about what their next "think different" strategy might be in light of the Intel transition.
Originally posted by melgross
And as we're talking about it, I just saw this on xlt8yourmac.com.
http://centerstageproject.com/
i tried the alpha one month ago. has some potential, hopefully it comes along alright. integration with elgato, what their focusing on, is a step in a great direction right now.
my brother loves his mac mini + elgato thingy hooked up to the TV. it's UK digital terrestial (dvd-quality) so no high def yet but the mac mini rocks with mpeg2 approx. 480p digital tv.
back to my GPU obsession but it's taken 5 years and virtually all video cards even on the low end have built-in mpeg2 decoding, of course. h.264 has only really been out for 1 year
Originally posted by sunilraman
i tried the alpha one month ago. has some potential, hopefully it comes along alright. integration with elgato, what their focusing on, is a step in a great direction right now.
my brother loves his mac mini + elgato thingy hooked up to the TV. it's UK digital terrestial (dvd-quality) so no high def yet but the mac mini rocks with mpeg2 approx. 480p digital tv.
back to my GPU obsession but it's taken 5 years and virtually all video cards even on the low end have built-in mpeg2 decoding, of course. h.264 has only really been out for 1 year
Yup, two years from now todays high end cards will be low end cards. The 6800 and 850's are now medium range cards.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25057
We don't know prices of future chips and GPUs yet, but does anyone care to guess how a Cell processor might compete for this role in future Apple PCs? I understand that digital HDTV is one thing the Cell is designed to do very well. It could be cheaper than a GPU for this job. It might also serve as a VMX coprocessor and be the key that stops OS X from running on a generic PC.
Originally posted by snoopy
We don't know prices of future chips and GPUs yet, but does anyone care to guess how a Cell processor might compete for this role in future Apple PCs? I understand that digital HDTV is one thing the Cell is designed to do very well. It could be cheaper than a GPU for this job. It might also serve as a VMX coprocessor and be the key that stops OS X from running on a generic PC.
This is one of the things that the Cell does well. Toshiba had a demonstration when the cell was first shown of a couple of dozen video feeds being processed through the cell at the same time.
As a co-processor it would work well. It might be easier if Apple were still using the PPC as the main cpu than the x86 simply because the instruction sets would have more points of convergence. But that might not matter. The question is whether Apple would want to do so.
I had rhought that Apple using the Cell for most all rendering tasks, including that of screen rendering would have made up for the differences between it and x86 machines, but that seems to be less and less a posibility at this point.