[quote]The G5 being on hold is an issue with Motorola. The processors are not standing by, ready to go. The development was halted at Motorola recently. A lot of the reasons are financial: cost to develop, cost to integrate, cost of goods, etc. vs. demand / need for a 64-bit processor. My guess is that the development will continue later this year and probably take another 6 months to a year to finish and integrate. That's just a guess. The other possibility is that IBM has something better. A lot of folks thought the iMac was going to be the IBM G3 Sahara and that didn't happen. I think Motorola is still the vendor of favor. <hr></blockquote>
So, not sure what to think, Moto just sitting on the G5s, while working on the Apollos? If true, maybe Apple ahs gone or will go to IBM to fab?
So, not sure what to think, Moto just sitting on the G5s, while working on the Apollos? If true, maybe Apple ahs gone or will go to IBM to fab?</strong><hr></blockquote>
or perhaps apple will give motorola the money to continue production of the G5 ...
Never happened, or the media simply is not reporting it? Read, the corporate media doesn't choose to cover the effects of welfare reform, because it would take too much effort, and doesn't carry a sensationalist impact that a good sex story does.
Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters.
And unless the drugs are catching up to me, I could swear that welfare reform was a bipartisan effort, signed into law by Clinton. Odd that you use it as an example of a right wing triumph.
But I must agree, conservative or liberal, in the political sense, does not always adhere to dictionary definitions. Life is not so simple, issues are never so simple...it's childish idealism to think otherwise. Of course each party looks out for their own interests..if they didn't then they would be replaced by a party that did understand its interests. Don't blame the individuals, blame the system..a system that requires big money to win, and where big money comes from corporate interests, and in the end a government by the corporations, for the corporations, and of the corporations. Empowered by a public too stupid to think for themselves, who vote for whoever spends the most money in an election (ok, a generalization, but a damn good one). But then, when the same corporations that own and run the government are the ones spoon-feeding "news" to the public, well. ...I think that a democracy is only as good as the quality of the information that the voting public has to base their decisions upon.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow, JD, I know this isn't the thread for this, and I usually I think you have some good things to say, but on this point I just disagree.
Corportate Media? Yes, but they sure as hell are NOT conservatives! The liberal bias in the media is well documented and proven. It has been proven that interviews with conservatives are, on average, edited THREE times more than their liberal counterparts. Dan Rather and Peter Jennings, as well as Tom Brokaw are all outspoken liberals. There are VERY few balanced networks.
The only network that I have seen that usually dos not have a liberal bias is Fox News Channel. They even lean towards conservative at times.
Bipartisan Effort? BWWWHAHAHAH. That is ridiculous. Republicans , not Democrats wanted welfare reform. Yes, Clinton signed it, But that doesn't mean he actually supported it. He was a "waffler". He did what the polls said. Period.
[quote] Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters. <hr></blockquote>
---Seriously now. That is VERY harsh. And the fact that you believe that right wing/conservative people/politicians are like this is proof of the criminal liberal media's influence on the population of this nation.
Our Government is a bloated, corrupt institution. As I have said before, if you add up the taxes that are paid in this nation by the working class and even "lower upper class" (say those that earn up to 200,000 year), it comes to 50-60% of your income. What??? You say that sounds absurdly high? Well:
40% goes to Federal Income and SS tax.
In PA, where I live, the state tax is 2.5%
Local Tax: 1% of my income for me.
Gas Tax=50% of total purchase price. Assuming a two car family spends 1200/year on gas, that means about 1-2% of income goes to this tax. ($30-60,000 per year income assumed)
This brings us to 44.5% without considering: Luxury Tax, Ciggarette Tax, Licensing Fees (drivers license, fishing hunting, boating.....they are all really just another way of taxing).
Don't forget about property taxes, assuming my income (between 30-60,000 let's just say), the property taxes on my house I'm buying will be over 5% of my INCOME!!!!
That brings us to 49.5%. Oh, and don't forget your phone, cable and internet bills. They not only get taxed, they included things like "federal access fees" and the like, which are taxes intended to pay for things like innner city internet connections and the like. Oh, and did I mention SALES TAX? That, in my state, is 6% of almost everything you spend! Assuming most Americans spend more than 80% of their incomes (and that is probably a LOW figure), we can tack on another 4% or so.
hmmm...by my math, that equals 53.5%. That is without even really trying to think of other things. Imagine, if you will, what that number actually is.
So, one can plainly see that our government is appoaching "confiscation through taxation". It is unreasonable.
I choose to support the party that has historically been in favor of large tax cuts across the board. And don't give me any of that "only for the rich bullshit", look at your check in 2002....I got a $50/check raise in pay becauseof the most recent cut and and I am middle income.
Are they all corrupt? Yep. But, given the choices we have, my choice is clear.
People, let us not forget that Macworld spoke to one of Motorola's employees back in November.
Paul Clark confirmed that the G4 would top out at around 1 Ghz and that the G5 was progressing 'well'. I don't know where all the rumours of 1.4 Ghz G4's have come from, but it sounds unlikely. I have faith in Apple announcing the G5 soon (it certainly won't be announced by Motorola). Especially with the move to such high speed G4s in the iMac.
That's great that it is shipping and available now. "
"I just went to the where to buy section, but alas not a single supplier;
. Arrow
. Avnet
. DigiKey
. Future
. Newark
. Richardson
listed the MPC8540. Just thought I'd buy one and build my own computer "
"But since they are available I would expect Apple's version should be ready by MWNY"
"Oh, I just thought that a press release on 10/17/2001 wasn't that old. "
"I'm really confused now.
I went to the 1st Quarter 2002 selector guide(a link to it is at the bottom of the fact sheet you linked to) and the MPC8540 isn't listed. "
If any one can confirm that the MPC8540 is available, like a current product catalog that lists it, please post a link. This would be fantastic news, meaning an Apple version would almost be a certainty by MWNY. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong> However, SdC, Moogs, and a couple others seem so thoroughly intent on pissing on everyone's fun that it's just not interesting anymore. I have better things to do with my time.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude you *need* to get out more if that's your attitude. I'm not pissing on anyone. If you'd read my damn comments with any attention you'd realize I have more than once said things to the effect "I'm not real sure what's next, but I don't have much faith in Motorola". How is that pissing on anyone other than Motorola??
Further the person I've been "arguing" with the most - Kidred - isn't even "mad" about what I've been posting, and in fact it's been a pretty good-natured debate ( you know, more joking around than pissing contest?).
So do get yourself a prescription for 5mg of Vallium and just RELAX.
It repeatedly states the MPC8540 to be the first of the series, the foundation to the next generation, etc., etc. and still people insist that the G5 for Apple is right around the corner. I hope they're right, but ....well......it just doesn't appear possible.
Granted the spec sheet lists where to buy. I checked all the links shortly after the spec sheet appeared, several weeks ago and again a few days ago. NONE of the suppliers listed the MPC8540 and on top of that ,Motorola's own cross reference list for all available semiconductors for the 1st quarter of 2002 does not list the MPC8540(if it were available now wouldn't it be on the list.) Check it out, maybe I missed it.
"If any one can confirm that the MPC8540 is available, like a current product catalog that lists it, please post a link. This would be fantastic news, meaning an Apple version would almost be a certainty by MWNY. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> "
Certainly a very interesting quote and certainly basis for people to stop using "It hasn't even been shown yet" as any evidence. The G5 desktop chip my well be on course to be released before the MPC8540.
Either way it certainly explains Motorola's silence.
[quote] Motorola Semiconductor Products representative Jeff Gorin told NewsFactor: "Because of our close working relationship with Apple, we are not able to discuss future plans for processors that may potentially end up in Apple products. That could be tantamount to pre-announcing future Apple product offerings." Gorin also referred to the fact that Apple now uses the G4 in a consumer product offering. <hr></blockquote>
<strong>Certainly a very interesting quote and certainly basis for people to stop using "It hasn't even been shown yet" as any evidence. The G5 desktop chip my well be on course to be released before the MPC8540.
Either way it certainly explains Motorola's silence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A very interesting article. It's strange to see this minutiae over which we obsess so much actually showing up in a (sort-of) mainstream news outlet.
The only thing wrong with the "it could just be a big secret" theory is that Motorola did announce the Apollo prior to its (pending) introduction into new Macs. It's not completely implausible that they're making an exception with the G5: this is a whole new architecture, not just a modification to an existing one, so maybe Apple wants extra secrecy for that reason. Not sure if I actually believe that, but I could be persuaded.
I should point out he actually makes a couple errors in the article but that isn't the point
As for the Apollo it isn't really any sort of new chip it is just more of the same for the most part.
Besides we have no proof it is actually aimed at PowerMacs in any way. It's existence doesn't really give us any true idea of where it will go. Had they announced a G5 chip though it would have meant Apple was definitely about to release new PowerMacs.
That said Apollos may still come to PowerMacs but they are very different to the release of a completely new chip.
Anyway it gives you some more stuff to speculate on so go nuts
After reading this extremely long thread. I guess I'm not as convinced as I once was that the timing for both the Apollo and the G5 has just been poor for Apple. I had suspected that the decision on which chip to use for the next desktops was hinging on either not using Apollo and jumping right to the G5 or letting the G5 sit it out for another generation judging from reports I had seen. Now I'm not so sure.
As far as saying that Moto will never put out a chip at 3Mhz goes. You may be right but not for the reasons you think. Though the announcement of Moto's Gallium Arsenide on silicon process didn't get a whole lot of press, what I did see would suggest that they may jump from 2Ghz up to 20 in short order. Chip manufacturers have known for a long time that if they could use GA on Silicon it would reap huge benifits but now that a process for doing it is a reality we may see a huge jump in speed.
Unlike some of the recent chip advances already being used like SOI and copper connections this would be useful for analog and digital electronics. As I understand it the manufacturing process is being worked out and the timetable for first product in the stories I was was 2003. I can't imagine Apple not wanting to jump on this. It's all a matter of how long it takes to get it going.
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
Here's hoping we see Steve demonstrate a 20Ghz desktop Mac in a speed test with a 3Ghz Pentium by the end of 2003. Hopefully I'm not dreaming too much.
This would certainly explain some of those rumors about the test machines running 10 to 20 times faster than current macs. It also would have lived up to the pre-MacWorld hype.
<strong>After reading this extremely long thread. I guess I'm not as convinced as I once was that the timing for both the Apollo and the G5 has just been poor for Apple. I had suspected that the decision on which chip to use for the next desktops was hinging on either not using Apollo and jumping right to the G5 or letting the G5 sit it out for another generation judging from reports I had seen. Now I'm not so sure.
As far as saying that Moto will never put out a chip at 3Mhz goes. You may be right but not for the reasons you think. Though the announcement of Moto's Gallium Arsenide on silicon process didn't get a whole lot of press, what I did see would suggest that they may jump from 2Ghz up to 20 in short order. Chip manufacturers have known for a long time that if they could use GA on Silicon it would reap huge benifits but now that a process for doing it is a reality we may see a huge jump in speed.
Unlike some of the recent chip advances already being used like SOI and copper connections this would be useful for analog and digital electronics. As I understand it the manufacturing process is being worked out and the timetable for first product in the stories I was was 2003. I can't imagine Apple not wanting to jump on this. It's all a matter of how long it takes to get it going.
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
Here's hoping we see Steve demonstrate a 20Ghz desktop Mac in a speed test with a 3Ghz Pentium by the end of 2003. Hopefully I'm not dreaming too much.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The thing about GaAs and other III-V semiconductors is that they are not Silicon. They can be used to make very fast transistors, but not MOS devices, certainly not CMOS, hence no low power digital circuits. They can be used to make memory, but frankly, they are'nt very good at that either. They can make very fast logic circuits, but at a considerable cost in static power draw.
A very few sections of a processor might incorporate III-V circuits, where speed is paramount, but the major benefit will be in being able to use the optical properties of direct-bandgap semiconductors to build LEDs and lasers for comms. (inter or intra-chip) purposes.
Don't get me wrong, this is marvelous advance in process technology for III-Vs, but it is not going to lead immediately to much faster processors.
Regarding the G5 existing or not or when its going to be released, I say if it exists and is ready, then Apple should release it asap. The reason is that the longer they wait to release it, the more time AMD and Intel has to work on increasing the clock speeds of their chips. Also, both companies are working hard right now on new chips with improved architectures. If the G5 gets released next year and its around the same time as a new improved Intel or AMD chip release, there may not be much difference in performace between a G5 and a new AMD or Intel chip. As such, there would not be much of a compelling reason for a wintel user to switch to a mac.
It seems to me if you have a kick a$$ chip that could make your computer the most powerful personal computer ever built so far, release it asap. By doing so, you'll be the king of the hill longer and have a longer time for wintel users to comteplate switching over to a mac.
[quote] Gorin also referred to the fact that Apple now uses the G4 in a consumer product offering. <hr></blockquote>
The ability of the people on this forum to get sidetracked into irrelevant discussions is astounding.
OK, a reporter asks a Motorola semiconductor representative about the G5 and he basically says, "Well, we don't announce new stuff because it'd piss Apple off. Oh, and did you realise their consumer computers have G4s now?"
I mean, could it be any more abvious what this guy is trying to hint at?
The G5 is here people and it will ship in an Apple product before the end of this year. What remains to be seen is whether Apple will give the G4 a final push with Apollo before the G5 arrives, or whether we'll see 64 bit PowerMacs in MacWorld TY
I'm pretty sure that the MPC8540 is not available yet. I'm going to put in a few calls and see what I can find out, might not get a response until next week if it's not available though.
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel has been talking up its own 20+ GHz technologies. I don't think Intel would ever license its core process technology from another company, that would be exposing itself far too much.
Comments
[quote]The G5 being on hold is an issue with Motorola. The processors are not standing by, ready to go. The development was halted at Motorola recently. A lot of the reasons are financial: cost to develop, cost to integrate, cost of goods, etc. vs. demand / need for a 64-bit processor. My guess is that the development will continue later this year and probably take another 6 months to a year to finish and integrate. That's just a guess. The other possibility is that IBM has something better. A lot of folks thought the iMac was going to be the IBM G3 Sahara and that didn't happen. I think Motorola is still the vendor of favor. <hr></blockquote>
So, not sure what to think, Moto just sitting on the G5s, while working on the Apollos? If true, maybe Apple ahs gone or will go to IBM to fab?
<strong>Just saw this-
So, not sure what to think, Moto just sitting on the G5s, while working on the Apollos? If true, maybe Apple ahs gone or will go to IBM to fab?</strong><hr></blockquote>
or perhaps apple will give motorola the money to continue production of the G5 ...
<strong>
Never happened, or the media simply is not reporting it? Read, the corporate media doesn't choose to cover the effects of welfare reform, because it would take too much effort, and doesn't carry a sensationalist impact that a good sex story does.
Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters.
And unless the drugs are catching up to me, I could swear that welfare reform was a bipartisan effort, signed into law by Clinton. Odd that you use it as an example of a right wing triumph.
But I must agree, conservative or liberal, in the political sense, does not always adhere to dictionary definitions. Life is not so simple, issues are never so simple...it's childish idealism to think otherwise. Of course each party looks out for their own interests..if they didn't then they would be replaced by a party that did understand its interests. Don't blame the individuals, blame the system..a system that requires big money to win, and where big money comes from corporate interests, and in the end a government by the corporations, for the corporations, and of the corporations. Empowered by a public too stupid to think for themselves, who vote for whoever spends the most money in an election (ok, a generalization, but a damn good one). But then, when the same corporations that own and run the government are the ones spoon-feeding "news" to the public, well. ...I think that a democracy is only as good as the quality of the information that the voting public has to base their decisions upon.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow, JD, I know this isn't the thread for this, and I usually I think you have some good things to say, but on this point I just disagree.
Corportate Media? Yes, but they sure as hell are NOT conservatives! The liberal bias in the media is well documented and proven. It has been proven that interviews with conservatives are, on average, edited THREE times more than their liberal counterparts. Dan Rather and Peter Jennings, as well as Tom Brokaw are all outspoken liberals. There are VERY few balanced networks.
The only network that I have seen that usually dos not have a liberal bias is Fox News Channel. They even lean towards conservative at times.
Bipartisan Effort? BWWWHAHAHAH. That is ridiculous. Republicans , not Democrats wanted welfare reform. Yes, Clinton signed it, But that doesn't mean he actually supported it. He was a "waffler". He did what the polls said. Period.
[quote] Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters. <hr></blockquote>
---Seriously now. That is VERY harsh. And the fact that you believe that right wing/conservative people/politicians are like this is proof of the criminal liberal media's influence on the population of this nation.
Our Government is a bloated, corrupt institution. As I have said before, if you add up the taxes that are paid in this nation by the working class and even "lower upper class" (say those that earn up to 200,000 year), it comes to 50-60% of your income. What??? You say that sounds absurdly high? Well:
40% goes to Federal Income and SS tax.
In PA, where I live, the state tax is 2.5%
Local Tax: 1% of my income for me.
Gas Tax=50% of total purchase price. Assuming a two car family spends 1200/year on gas, that means about 1-2% of income goes to this tax. ($30-60,000 per year income assumed)
This brings us to 44.5% without considering: Luxury Tax, Ciggarette Tax, Licensing Fees (drivers license, fishing hunting, boating.....they are all really just another way of taxing).
Don't forget about property taxes, assuming my income (between 30-60,000 let's just say), the property taxes on my house I'm buying will be over 5% of my INCOME!!!!
That brings us to 49.5%. Oh, and don't forget your phone, cable and internet bills. They not only get taxed, they included things like "federal access fees" and the like, which are taxes intended to pay for things like innner city internet connections and the like. Oh, and did I mention SALES TAX? That, in my state, is 6% of almost everything you spend! Assuming most Americans spend more than 80% of their incomes (and that is probably a LOW figure), we can tack on another 4% or so.
hmmm...by my math, that equals 53.5%. That is without even really trying to think of other things. Imagine, if you will, what that number actually is.
So, one can plainly see that our government is appoaching "confiscation through taxation". It is unreasonable.
I choose to support the party that has historically been in favor of large tax cuts across the board. And don't give me any of that "only for the rich bullshit", look at your check in 2002....I got a $50/check raise in pay becauseof the most recent cut and and I am middle income.
Are they all corrupt? Yep. But, given the choices we have, my choice is clear.
Paul Clark confirmed that the G4 would top out at around 1 Ghz and that the G5 was progressing 'well'. I don't know where all the rumours of 1.4 Ghz G4's have come from, but it sounds unlikely. I have faith in Apple announcing the G5 soon (it certainly won't be announced by Motorola). Especially with the move to such high speed G4s in the iMac.
"The MPC8540 is available for sale right now."
Also posted in that thread:
"BadAndy
That's great that it is shipping and available now. "
"I just went to the where to buy section, but alas
. Arrow
. Avnet
. DigiKey
. Future
. Newark
. Richardson
listed the MPC8540. Just thought I'd buy one and build my own computer "
"But since they are available I would expect Apple's version should be ready by MWNY"
"Oh, I just thought that a press release on 10/17/2001 wasn't that old. "
"I'm really confused now.
I went to the 1st Quarter 2002 selector guide(a link to it is at the bottom of the fact sheet you linked to) and the MPC8540 isn't listed. "
If any one can confirm that the MPC8540 is available, like a current product catalog that lists it, please post a link. This would be fantastic news, meaning an Apple version would almost be a certainty by MWNY. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
- Mark
<strong> However, SdC, Moogs, and a couple others seem so thoroughly intent on pissing on everyone's fun that it's just not interesting anymore. I have better things to do with my time.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude you *need* to get out more if that's your attitude. I'm not pissing on anyone. If you'd read my damn comments with any attention you'd realize I have more than once said things to the effect "I'm not real sure what's next, but I don't have much faith in Motorola". How is that pissing on anyone other than Motorola??
Further the person I've been "arguing" with the most - Kidred - isn't even "mad" about what I've been posting, and in fact it's been a pretty good-natured debate ( you know, more joking around than pissing contest?).
So do get yourself a prescription for 5mg of Vallium and just RELAX.
:eek:
Urine is in the eye of the beholder.
SdC
"The last time I checked Motorla's web site where they list press releases, the MPC8540 was scheduled to be sampled around summertime of this year."
I know, I've been posting the link to that 10/17/01 press release virtually since the day it appeared.
<a href="http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,1958,568_322_23,00.html"; target="_blank">http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail/0,1958,568_32 2_23,00.html</a>
It repeatedly states the MPC8540 to be the first of the series, the foundation to the next generation, etc., etc. and still people insist that the G5 for Apple is right around the corner. I hope they're right, but ....well......it just doesn't appear possible.
Granted the spec sheet lists where to buy. I checked all the links shortly after the spec sheet appeared, several weeks ago and again a few days ago. NONE of the suppliers listed the MPC8540 and on top of that ,Motorola's own cross reference list for all available semiconductors for the 1st quarter of 2002 does not list the MPC8540(if it were available now wouldn't it be on the list.) Check it out, maybe I missed it.
updated 1/1/02
<a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/SG1000CR.pdf"; target="_blank">http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/SG1000CR.pdf</a>;
I'll say it again:
"If any one can confirm that the MPC8540 is available, like a current product catalog that lists it, please post a link. This would be fantastic news, meaning an Apple version would almost be a certainty by MWNY. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> "
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
Either way it certainly explains Motorola's silence.
[quote] Motorola Semiconductor Products representative Jeff Gorin told NewsFactor: "Because of our close working relationship with Apple, we are not able to discuss future plans for processors that may potentially end up in Apple products. That could be tantamount to pre-announcing future Apple product offerings." Gorin also referred to the fact that Apple now uses the G4 in a consumer product offering. <hr></blockquote>
Whole article is here:
<a href="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nf/20020117/tc/15852_1.html"; target="_blank">Article</a>
<strong>Certainly a very interesting quote and certainly basis for people to stop using "It hasn't even been shown yet" as any evidence. The G5 desktop chip my well be on course to be released before the MPC8540.
Either way it certainly explains Motorola's silence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A very interesting article. It's strange to see this minutiae over which we obsess so much actually showing up in a (sort-of) mainstream news outlet.
The only thing wrong with the "it could just be a big secret" theory is that Motorola did announce the Apollo prior to its (pending) introduction into new Macs. It's not completely implausible that they're making an exception with the G5: this is a whole new architecture, not just a modification to an existing one, so maybe Apple wants extra secrecy for that reason. Not sure if I actually believe that, but I could be persuaded.
As for the Apollo it isn't really any sort of new chip it is just more of the same for the most part.
Besides we have no proof it is actually aimed at PowerMacs in any way. It's existence doesn't really give us any true idea of where it will go. Had they announced a G5 chip though it would have meant Apple was definitely about to release new PowerMacs.
That said Apollos may still come to PowerMacs but they are very different to the release of a completely new chip.
Anyway it gives you some more stuff to speculate on so go nuts
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
As far as saying that Moto will never put out a chip at 3Mhz goes. You may be right but not for the reasons you think. Though the announcement of Moto's Gallium Arsenide on silicon process didn't get a whole lot of press, what I did see would suggest that they may jump from 2Ghz up to 20 in short order. Chip manufacturers have known for a long time that if they could use GA on Silicon it would reap huge benifits but now that a process for doing it is a reality we may see a huge jump in speed.
Unlike some of the recent chip advances already being used like SOI and copper connections this would be useful for analog and digital electronics. As I understand it the manufacturing process is being worked out and the timetable for first product in the stories I was was 2003. I can't imagine Apple not wanting to jump on this. It's all a matter of how long it takes to get it going.
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
Here's hoping we see Steve demonstrate a 20Ghz desktop Mac in a speed test with a 3Ghz Pentium by the end of 2003. Hopefully I'm not dreaming too much.
But...
<strong>After reading this extremely long thread. I guess I'm not as convinced as I once was that the timing for both the Apollo and the G5 has just been poor for Apple. I had suspected that the decision on which chip to use for the next desktops was hinging on either not using Apollo and jumping right to the G5 or letting the G5 sit it out for another generation judging from reports I had seen. Now I'm not so sure.
As far as saying that Moto will never put out a chip at 3Mhz goes. You may be right but not for the reasons you think. Though the announcement of Moto's Gallium Arsenide on silicon process didn't get a whole lot of press, what I did see would suggest that they may jump from 2Ghz up to 20 in short order. Chip manufacturers have known for a long time that if they could use GA on Silicon it would reap huge benifits but now that a process for doing it is a reality we may see a huge jump in speed.
Unlike some of the recent chip advances already being used like SOI and copper connections this would be useful for analog and digital electronics. As I understand it the manufacturing process is being worked out and the timetable for first product in the stories I was was 2003. I can't imagine Apple not wanting to jump on this. It's all a matter of how long it takes to get it going.
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
Here's hoping we see Steve demonstrate a 20Ghz desktop Mac in a speed test with a 3Ghz Pentium by the end of 2003. Hopefully I'm not dreaming too much.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The thing about GaAs and other III-V semiconductors is that they are not Silicon. They can be used to make very fast transistors, but not MOS devices, certainly not CMOS, hence no low power digital circuits. They can be used to make memory, but frankly, they are'nt very good at that either. They can make very fast logic circuits, but at a considerable cost in static power draw.
A very few sections of a processor might incorporate III-V circuits, where speed is paramount, but the major benefit will be in being able to use the optical properties of direct-bandgap semiconductors to build LEDs and lasers for comms. (inter or intra-chip) purposes.
Don't get me wrong, this is marvelous advance in process technology for III-Vs, but it is not going to lead immediately to much faster processors.
Michael
It seems to me if you have a kick a$$ chip that could make your computer the most powerful personal computer ever built so far, release it asap. By doing so, you'll be the king of the hill longer and have a longer time for wintel users to comteplate switching over to a mac.
- Mark
The ability of the people on this forum to get sidetracked into irrelevant discussions is astounding.
OK, a reporter asks a Motorola semiconductor representative about the G5 and he basically says, "Well, we don't announce new stuff because it'd piss Apple off. Oh, and did you realise their consumer computers have G4s now?"
I mean, could it be any more abvious what this guy is trying to hint at?
The G5 is here people and it will ship in an Apple product before the end of this year. What remains to be seen is whether Apple will give the G4 a final push with Apollo before the G5 arrives, or whether we'll see 64 bit PowerMacs in MacWorld TY
<strong>
Although Motorola has said it will license the technology, it seems as though Intel and to an extent AMD never seem to be interested in these technologies.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Intel has been talking up its own 20+ GHz technologies. I don't think Intel would ever license its core process technology from another company, that would be exposing itself far too much.