From a strategic standpoint, I think it would behoove Apple to release the 970 systems before showing off Panther. While we all agree that Apple will show the world how much better the 970 is over the G4, and more importantly, how well it performs against the current state of x86, Apple may want to prop-up the 970 by equally comparing 32-bit software on other 32-bit processors vs. running 32-bit software natively on a 64-bit processor. In the short term, this would allow Apple to save face by showing they've once again got serious horsepower in their hardware, thus producing a boost in sales; allay software developers concerns; and building up the importance 64-bit processing will have in the future of computing.
Later down the road, when it comes time to debut Panther, it will be easier for Apple to demonstrate its features, especially the brawn and nirvana of a 64-bit OS on a 64-bit processor (the cat will already be out of the bag and the surprise will then focus on just how fast Panther will be). That would be a modern computing home run for Apple in my opinion. Nevermind the fact that 970 users who have already purchased their systems will already be able to take advantage of Panther (more money for Apple), and it will generate more attention to their hardware to provide yet more sales.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just howling at the moon, but it was just a thought that I had and I thought I'd run it by all of you. What do you think?
While we all agree that Apple will show the world how much better the 970 is over the G4, and more importantly, how well it performs against the current state of x86, Apple may want to prop-up the 970 by equally comparing 32-bit software on other 32-bit processors vs. running 32-bit software on a 64-bit processor.
The thing is when running 32 bit software the 970 you are not "running it on a 32 bit processor" just because the OS doesn't handle 64 bits. Assuming you are comparing a 64 bit version of 10.2.5 with a 32 bit version of 10.2.5 (recompiled enough just to actually run on the 970) there will be no difference in 32 bit app speed. The processor only runs 32 bit software one way regardless of the 'bitness' of the OS - natively.
The processor only runs 32 bit software one way regardless of the 'bitness' of the OS - natively.
Thanks for clarifying that confusing line. It was poorly worded on my part, as I was trying to show that Apple would want to show that it can run a 32-bit OS natively on a 64-bit processor...not that it would run any faster...just that it would run natively...
Thanks for clarifying that confusing line. It was poorly worded on my part, as I was trying to show that Apple would want to show that it can run a 32-bit OS natively on a 64-bit processor...not that it would run any faster...just that it would run natively...
No problem 8)
I think the issue for Apple at the introduction is to show everybody that it can run 32 bit apps faster than older models. I think others were right when they said the bake off will make a comeback - vs a G4 and maybe a P4. People will want to know that the software they have already paid a lot of money for will transition really well. I think I'm just repeating what you said tho. They won't be worried about a 64 bit OS until there are apps that will take advantage of one.
I completely agree with your business stratgies. Release the 970 before WWDC and display its abilities with a 32 bit OS, compare it to the current G4s (and maybe the P4s), then . . . later on, wow the developers with Panther in 64 bit mode, just to throw some "icing on the cake".
And yes, part of it is because I 'd like to see the 970 out early, but I also have faith that a mildly massaged over "current" Mac OS can be handled most efficiently by the 970.
I completely agree with your business stratgies. Release the 970 before WWDC and display its abilities with a 32 bit OS, compare it to the current G4s (and maybe the P4s), then . . . later on, wow the developers with Panther in 64 bit mode, just to throw some "icing on the cake".
And yes, part of it is because I 'd like to see the 970 out early, but I also have faith that a mildly massaged over "current" Mac OS can be handled most efficiently by the 970.
I didn't mean to sound like I was articulating a business strategy. I was just trying to make a point about the behaviour of the 970 with 32 bit software. Personally I think that they should still try to push out a 64 bit OS on the 970 ASAP if only to beat the Athlon 64 into the mass market. If "OS X.64"(tm) * comes promptly then the "if you build it, they will come" syndrome will kick in. Developers won't want to start on their 64 versions until they can see that there will be a significant market when they are ready to release their apps. If they think that all the hypothetical early adoptors with a 970 and 32 bit OS will take a while to upgrade to "OS X.64"(tm) then they will wait until the critical mass is their (in their own judgement).
But I do agree 100% with your 2nd paragraph.
MM
* "OS X.64" is a trademark of MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.
I assume you mean that it would be best to release the 970 running with a 32-bit OS X so everyone can see how well the 970 works with 32-bit. Then release 10.3 and tell all that you can run all your 32-bit programs and the "super-fast-big (MHz myth BS)" 64-bit apps too.
I assume you mean that it would be best to release the 970 running with a 32-bit OS X so everyone can see how well the 970 works with 32-bit. Then release 10.3 and tell all that you can run all your 32-bit programs and the "super-fast-big (MHz myth BS)" 64-bit apps too.
No, what I mean is that they should release the 970 machine ASAP and release the OS X.64(tm) ASAP as well. I hope the later is coincident with the former because this will be the largest encouragement to 64 bit development on the platform. 32 bit apps will run the same on either a 32 or 64 bit OS for the 970 (all other things being equal) so there is no need to release a 32 bit OS just so as to prove compatibility of the 970 with 32 bit apps.
* "OS X.64" is a trademark of MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.
you dirty aliens always think you infented spaceflight because a stupid drunk redneck saw the dish flying through the air and thought: "wow, ufo" instead of: ow, the wife is very mad at me"...
so, we infented spaceflight (well, some drunk rednecks did, but you understand my point)
and now you think you are the first who named osx in its 64 bitness.
but osx 10.2.6 v64; osx 10.2.64 and osx 10.3 v64 are mentioned already in these boards.
Apple Computer today announced the release of Mac OS X Gay Edition. The new OS will only work with the new "Gay Four" CPU, instead of the much anticipated PowerPC 970 (produced by IBM). Phil Shiller remarked that "it is essentially the same as Jaguar with a G4, but compared to the latest PC offerings it is 50% more gay!" The Gay Four CPU takes the G4's core and pairs it (anally) with a new emulated vector unit, Pentium style.
An obscure intellectual property developer, "MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.", threatened legal action, claiming the new OS infringed on their OS X.Gay trademark.
The Iraqi Information Minister publicly denied the existance of the new Gay OS and CPU.
you dirty aliens always think you infented spaceflight because a stupid drunk redneck saw the dish flying through the air and thought: "wow, ufo" instead of: ow, the wife is very mad at me"...
so, we infented spaceflight (well, some drunk rednecks did, but you understand my point)
Little do you know... Muahahaha
Quote:
and now you think you are the first who named osx in its 64 bitness.
but osx 10.2.6 v64; osx 10.2.64 and osx 10.3 v64 are mentioned already in these boards.
you're late.
nagnagnagnagnag*
*we think original thoughts
Well, I pretty much stick to FH and even just the talk about future processors. At least OS 10.64 was mostly original. The (tm) thing was a joke that it seems our cobber Barto failed to grasp... \ I don't care what they call it as long as it is easier to say than "Apple's 64 bit version of OS X", which is why I "invented" a name for it for now.
As for the subject of this thread, I think the rest of the PC world has pretty much written off Apple as nothing more than a bit player with 3% share. I read a Cox News Service article today in our local rag (Seattle P-I) on the topic of the rumoured Universal Music aquisition interest which basically reinforced this outside view.
I want the 970 based powermacs to come out Real Soon Now but I think Apple has a little bit of room after the availability of the processors in quantity from IBM to make sure they get the whole package right. That, I think, includes all the motherboard features everyone is after running stably with a 64 bit OS X with fewer bugs than other first releases. Sure they could release with a 32 bit version as we discussed above but I don't think a month or two will matter if it means shipping with 64 bit. Especially since (we all hope) the 970 will really boost Apple's prospects and even market share. If the delay would be longer than that (if they have more work left to get a 64 bit OS X ready than we think) then they should definitely bring the 970 PM to market with whatever OS will run on it.
The Mac OS X Gay Edition? post was a reference to how absurd this thread and others have become, not a commentary on your posts in particular, MartianMatt.
Comments
Originally posted by Amorph
Um, no? If the music service requires the horsepower of a 970, Apple is just about to shoot themselves in the foot. With an RPG.
Yeah, I think the music service has to do more with finding new ways for revenue and expanding the digital lifestyle options.
Later down the road, when it comes time to debut Panther, it will be easier for Apple to demonstrate its features, especially the brawn and nirvana of a 64-bit OS on a 64-bit processor (the cat will already be out of the bag and the surprise will then focus on just how fast Panther will be). That would be a modern computing home run for Apple in my opinion. Nevermind the fact that 970 users who have already purchased their systems will already be able to take advantage of Panther (more money for Apple), and it will generate more attention to their hardware to provide yet more sales.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just howling at the moon, but it was just a thought that I had and I thought I'd run it by all of you. What do you think?
if apple shows off 970 with a 10.2.x release then the good news is that the speed delta will be even faster when panther is released...
Originally posted by DHagan4755
While we all agree that Apple will show the world how much better the 970 is over the G4, and more importantly, how well it performs against the current state of x86, Apple may want to prop-up the 970 by equally comparing 32-bit software on other 32-bit processors vs. running 32-bit software on a 64-bit processor.
The thing is when running 32 bit software the 970 you are not "running it on a 32 bit processor" just because the OS doesn't handle 64 bits. Assuming you are comparing a 64 bit version of 10.2.5 with a 32 bit version of 10.2.5 (recompiled enough just to actually run on the 970) there will be no difference in 32 bit app speed. The processor only runs 32 bit software one way regardless of the 'bitness' of the OS - natively.
MM
Originally posted by MartianMatt
The processor only runs 32 bit software one way regardless of the 'bitness' of the OS - natively.
Thanks for clarifying that confusing line. It was poorly worded on my part, as I was trying to show that Apple would want to show that it can run a 32-bit OS natively on a 64-bit processor...not that it would run any faster...just that it would run natively...
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Thanks for clarifying that confusing line. It was poorly worded on my part, as I was trying to show that Apple would want to show that it can run a 32-bit OS natively on a 64-bit processor...not that it would run any faster...just that it would run natively...
No problem 8)
I think the issue for Apple at the introduction is to show everybody that it can run 32 bit apps faster than older models. I think others were right when they said the bake off will make a comeback - vs a G4 and maybe a P4. People will want to know that the software they have already paid a lot of money for will transition really well. I think I'm just repeating what you said tho. They won't be worried about a 64 bit OS until there are apps that will take advantage of one.
MM
I completely agree with your business stratgies. Release the 970 before WWDC and display its abilities with a 32 bit OS, compare it to the current G4s (and maybe the P4s), then . . . later on, wow the developers with Panther in 64 bit mode, just to throw some "icing on the cake".
And yes, part of it is because I 'd like to see the 970 out early, but I also have faith that a mildly massaged over "current" Mac OS can be handled most efficiently by the 970.
Originally posted by MacJedai
DHagan4755 and MartianMatt,
I completely agree with your business stratgies. Release the 970 before WWDC and display its abilities with a 32 bit OS, compare it to the current G4s (and maybe the P4s), then . . . later on, wow the developers with Panther in 64 bit mode, just to throw some "icing on the cake".
And yes, part of it is because I 'd like to see the 970 out early, but I also have faith that a mildly massaged over "current" Mac OS can be handled most efficiently by the 970.
I didn't mean to sound like I was articulating a business strategy.
But I do agree 100% with your 2nd paragraph.
MM
* "OS X.64" is a trademark of MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.
Originally posted by Bigc
I assume you mean that it would be best to release the 970 running with a 32-bit OS X so everyone can see how well the 970 works with 32-bit. Then release 10.3 and tell all that you can run all your 32-bit programs and the "super-fast-big (MHz myth BS)" 64-bit apps too.
No, what I mean is that they should release the 970 machine ASAP and release the OS X.64(tm) ASAP as well. I hope the later is coincident with the former because this will be the largest encouragement to 64 bit development on the platform. 32 bit apps will run the same on either a 32 or 64 bit OS for the 970 (all other things being equal) so there is no need to release a 32 bit OS just so as to prove compatibility of the 970 with 32 bit apps.
MM
[add the last sentance]
Originally posted by MartianMatt
* "OS X.64" is a trademark of MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.
so, we infented spaceflight (well, some drunk rednecks did, but you understand my point)
and now you think you are the first who named osx in its 64 bitness.
but osx 10.2.6 v64; osx 10.2.64 and osx 10.3 v64 are mentioned already in these boards.
you're late.
nagnagnagnagnag*
*we think original thoughts
An obscure intellectual property developer, "MartianMatt Enterprises Ltd.", threatened legal action, claiming the new OS infringed on their OS X.Gay trademark.
The Iraqi Information Minister publicly denied the existance of the new Gay OS and CPU.
-AP
Originally posted by gar
so, we infented spaceflight (well, some drunk rednecks did, but you understand my point)
Little do you know... Muahahaha
and now you think you are the first who named osx in its 64 bitness.
but osx 10.2.6 v64; osx 10.2.64 and osx 10.3 v64 are mentioned already in these boards.
you're late.
nagnagnagnagnag*
*we think original thoughts
Well, I pretty much stick to FH and even just the talk about future processors. At least OS 10.64 was mostly original.
As for the subject of this thread, I think the rest of the PC world has pretty much written off Apple as nothing more than a bit player with 3% share. I read a Cox News Service article today in our local rag (Seattle P-I) on the topic of the rumoured Universal Music aquisition interest which basically reinforced this outside view.
I want the 970 based powermacs to come out Real Soon Now but I think Apple has a little bit of room after the availability of the processors in quantity from IBM to make sure they get the whole package right. That, I think, includes all the motherboard features everyone is after running stably with a 64 bit OS X with fewer bugs than other first releases. Sure they could release with a 32 bit version as we discussed above but I don't think a month or two will matter if it means shipping with 64 bit. Especially since (we all hope) the 970 will really boost Apple's prospects and even market share. If the delay would be longer than that (if they have more work left to get a 64 bit OS X ready than we think) then they should definitely bring the 970 PM to market with whatever OS will run on it.
MM
Barto
Originally posted by Ti Fighter
adding to the absurdity....
WINNER...this thread is over
Barto
"The following is surely going to drop this September. It was leaked about 5 weeks ago, so I can tell you without pain and discomfort in my ballz.
Listen jerk, remember......you heard this from a bird on a big tree. Don't ****ing quote me you bitch. :P
The New PowerMac's all with the PPC970 Chip.
2 Models confirmed. (Possibly three)
1) Panther OS X 10.3 (Free upgrade from Jaguar. OS 9.2 will be terminated.)
2) 1.6Ghz-1.9Ghz, with the new PPC970 processor(maybe duals)
3) PCI extreme (much faster than PCI and AGP 8X and backwards compatible with PCI)
4) 900Mhz system Busses.
5) Serial ATA, Firewire 800, USB 2, AirportExtreme, BlueTooth
6) Water Cooling, so there is no fan noise!! :P"
Originally posted by fgjh
6) Water Cooling, so there is no fan noise!! :P"
What?! Damn! What is this?!