could be interesting....</strong><hr></blockquote>
So this is the source of all the "info" that's been batted around here for the last 9 months?
Well, yes, it's interesting, certainly; could even be accurate if we discount their (clearly speculative) time-frame.
What I find most interesting is that it gives support to the idea that Apple's had a substantially longer run-up on the next-gen CPU question than is generally allowed. IF volume production actually began 9 months ago, that is.
If true, I'd say this makes it more likely that we'll see a G5 release @ MWNY.
If the "French rumour" is true, however, I fear Apple will take a PR beating that will make us long for the days of Amelio, when "beleaguered" was all we had to deal with.
The news is stale, the atmosphere is stuffy, the conversation is boring. Can we move on?
OFF TOPIC ALERT
Saw my first "Switch" commercials last night. No idea why Dvorak should feel as personally humiliated as his hyperbole suggests him to be. Sure they're geeks, but so what? Does Dvorak imagine himself the 'Frasier' of PC journalism? Too urbane, too sophisticated to be associated in the public mind w/ any real computer nerds? It would explain why we never see him on TechTV's geek programming.
Perhaps HE is the "lifestyle" model that the Naked Mole-Rat lampoons so brilliantly. The cash to pay for his bag-o'-schwag and his 3-deep altarboys would come straight outta Redmond, and he clearly received his marching orders along w/ his last check; so when the Switch campaign hit the streets, he obediently began to bark.
I expect he'll keep it up until his credibility is way beyond repair.
Does anyone know for certain what processor is going to be used in the XServe? It hasn't actually been released yet and there is no information at Apple. Will it use the same 1GHz G4 as in the Power Macs or something different?
This is relevant since the XServe seems to be the prime candidate for any G5. The chance of a G5 appearing in the Power Macs at MWNY (or later) while the XServe continues with a G4 are not likely; we can consider the XServe as a barometer of G5 implementation.
[Unless of course Apple is holding off with delivering the XServe until AFTER MWNY and surprise us by actually shipping it with a G5. (Or hell, I'd even take a new multi-core G4...)]
<strong>Does anyone know for certain what processor is going to be used in the XServe? It hasn't actually been released yet and there is no information at Apple. Will it use the same 1GHz G4 as in the Power Macs or something different?
This is relevant since the XServe seems to be the prime candidate for any G5. The chance of a G5 appearing in the Power Macs at MWNY (or later) while the XServe continues with a G4 are not likely; we can consider the XServe as a barometer of G5 implementation.
[Unless of course Apple is holding off with delivering the XServe until AFTER MWNY and surprise us by actually shipping it with a G5. (Or hell, I'd even take a new multi-core G4...)]
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The Xserve slides pretty clearly state that it is a 1 GHz G4 (or two of them). I don't think Apple would play games with this. I also disagree that they would hold off shipping their flagship desktop product with a G5 just because their initial rackmounted product uses a G4. Look at x86 rackmounts -- many (if not most) of them use Pentium IIIs, not Pentium IVs... and the Pentium IV has been out for a long time now. Remember, in a U1 configuration heat is a serious issue and if the G5 is a 40 watt monster then it is not appropriate for use in the Xserve.
I can really see Apple going with a workstation version of the Power4 instead of Motorola's G5.
The G5 from Motorola will never be a serious desktop contender because Motorola is an embedded chipmaker now. They haven't shipped a product targeted for desktops in many years, and there is no reason to suggest things will change with the G5.
The truth is there is no desktop G5 on the way. The real G5 is the 8550, and it is pretty much useless in a desktop environment.
If you think about it, if the real G5 is the 8550, then all the rumors of Apple rejecting the G5 makes sense. They just can't continue using Motorola if Motorola won't produce a real desktop CPU.
IBM is the only one Apple can turn to. Although IBM's chips aren't targeted at desktops either, I'm sure they'd sell Apple some crippled Power4s.
Apple would finally get a high performance chip and IBM would make a profit selling them since no R&D is involved in crippling an existing design.
You are much more likely to convince a company to cripple, than you are likely to convince them to enhance something. That's why using Motorola would be a bad choice. They?ll never build Apple a desktop G5.
<strong>I can really see Apple going with a workstation version of the Power4 instead of Motorola's G5......</strong><hr></blockquote>
The whole idea of the G5 (e500 core and OCEAN interconnect), is that any of Motorla's customer can create its own processor (if enough are ordered).
This really is a solution to Motorola's lack of descent desktop processor. Apple could ask Motorola to create a dual-core, Altivec-enhanced, DDR enabled (on-chip controller) desktop processor. That is the whole idea of the G5, and this is why Apple will not go with the Power4 (at least in its desktop systems).
Comments
<strong><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/21692.html"; target="_blank">WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS?</a>
could be interesting....</strong><hr></blockquote>
So this is the source of all the "info" that's been batted around here for the last 9 months?
Well, yes, it's interesting, certainly; could even be accurate if we discount their (clearly speculative) time-frame.
What I find most interesting is that it gives support to the idea that Apple's had a substantially longer run-up on the next-gen CPU question than is generally allowed. IF volume production actually began 9 months ago, that is.
If true, I'd say this makes it more likely that we'll see a G5 release @ MWNY.
If the "French rumour" is true, however, I fear Apple will take a PR beating that will make us long for the days of Amelio, when "beleaguered" was all we had to deal with.
The news is stale, the atmosphere is stuffy, the conversation is boring. Can we move on?
OFF TOPIC ALERT
Saw my first "Switch" commercials last night. No idea why Dvorak should feel as personally humiliated as his hyperbole suggests him to be. Sure they're geeks, but so what? Does Dvorak imagine himself the 'Frasier' of PC journalism? Too urbane, too sophisticated to be associated in the public mind w/ any real computer nerds? It would explain why we never see him on TechTV's geek programming.
Perhaps HE is the "lifestyle" model that the Naked Mole-Rat lampoons so brilliantly. The cash to pay for his bag-o'-schwag and his 3-deep altarboys would come straight outta Redmond, and he clearly received his marching orders along w/ his last check; so when the Switch campaign hit the streets, he obediently began to bark.
I expect he'll keep it up until his credibility is way beyond repair.
Hey, "Thumper"! Switch this!
This is relevant since the XServe seems to be the prime candidate for any G5. The chance of a G5 appearing in the Power Macs at MWNY (or later) while the XServe continues with a G4 are not likely; we can consider the XServe as a barometer of G5 implementation.
[Unless of course Apple is holding off with delivering the XServe until AFTER MWNY and surprise us by actually shipping it with a G5. (Or hell, I'd even take a new multi-core G4...)]
CGI
<strong>Does anyone know for certain what processor is going to be used in the XServe? It hasn't actually been released yet and there is no information at Apple. Will it use the same 1GHz G4 as in the Power Macs or something different?
This is relevant since the XServe seems to be the prime candidate for any G5. The chance of a G5 appearing in the Power Macs at MWNY (or later) while the XServe continues with a G4 are not likely; we can consider the XServe as a barometer of G5 implementation.
[Unless of course Apple is holding off with delivering the XServe until AFTER MWNY and surprise us by actually shipping it with a G5. (Or hell, I'd even take a new multi-core G4...)]
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The Xserve slides pretty clearly state that it is a 1 GHz G4 (or two of them). I don't think Apple would play games with this. I also disagree that they would hold off shipping their flagship desktop product with a G5 just because their initial rackmounted product uses a G4. Look at x86 rackmounts -- many (if not most) of them use Pentium IIIs, not Pentium IVs... and the Pentium IV has been out for a long time now. Remember, in a U1 configuration heat is a serious issue and if the G5 is a 40 watt monster then it is not appropriate for use in the Xserve.
<strong>By lower priced, IBM means in the high tens of thousands or one-hundred thousand dollar range...</strong><hr></blockquote>
The new pSeries 630 starts at $12,495.00 (<a href="http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/entry/p630_desc.html"; target="_blank">pSeries Description</a>
I wonder what a machine without
- 32MB L3 cache
- integrated service processor
- builtin error correction functions
- two Ultra3 SCSI controllers
could cost - if it was made by apple
<strong>I wonder what a machine without
- 32MB L3 cache
- integrated service processor
- builtin error correction functions
- two Ultra3 SCSI controllers
could cost - if it was made by apple
$12,495
The G5 from Motorola will never be a serious desktop contender because Motorola is an embedded chipmaker now. They haven't shipped a product targeted for desktops in many years, and there is no reason to suggest things will change with the G5.
The truth is there is no desktop G5 on the way. The real G5 is the 8550, and it is pretty much useless in a desktop environment.
If you think about it, if the real G5 is the 8550, then all the rumors of Apple rejecting the G5 makes sense. They just can't continue using Motorola if Motorola won't produce a real desktop CPU.
IBM is the only one Apple can turn to. Although IBM's chips aren't targeted at desktops either, I'm sure they'd sell Apple some crippled Power4s.
Apple would finally get a high performance chip and IBM would make a profit selling them since no R&D is involved in crippling an existing design.
You are much more likely to convince a company to cripple, than you are likely to convince them to enhance something. That's why using Motorola would be a bad choice. They?ll never build Apple a desktop G5.
<strong>I can really see Apple going with a workstation version of the Power4 instead of Motorola's G5......</strong><hr></blockquote>
The whole idea of the G5 (e500 core and OCEAN interconnect), is that any of Motorla's customer can create its own processor (if enough are ordered).
This really is a solution to Motorola's lack of descent desktop processor. Apple could ask Motorola to create a dual-core, Altivec-enhanced, DDR enabled (on-chip controller) desktop processor. That is the whole idea of the G5, and this is why Apple will not go with the Power4 (at least in its desktop systems).