Linux is free only if your time is free.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hadn't heard that one before -- it sums up my feelings on Linux very well. My time is more valuable than that, and my days of hacking around in the OS for the sake of doing so are long gone. I've got actual work to do.
When you for yourself, time is never free. Every lost hour is food out of mouth if you can not charge back to the client. ie. You gave them a flat rate.
I'd really love to get into debating this -- but I think it'd take the thread too far off of topic. Suffice it to say that Linux is FREE, yet no one wants to use it on their desktop. Literally no one (statistically speaking) -- that speaks volumes, IMHO.
It either needs to improve radically (which seems unlikely, given the Linux crowd's propensity to get into heated debates over which commandline text editor is best, which of the hundred window managers is best, which toolkit is best, etc.), or they need to go beyond free and start _paying_ people to use it.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Moki is my idol. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I tried to bump the thread where this stuff was posted but people seems to have more fun making jokes then they do READING WHY that thread was bumped so I'll post this here...
Interesting poster I found in the archives... He was a 'hit-n-run' poster but looking back it seems he was pretty good a predicting the future. These posts were from June (before MWNY) and while the speculation that MWNY could be a date we could see this new CPU was way wrong and the fact that he thought that September was in the 4th quarter was just a month off...
He sure seems to have some info here and if correct might and to what we already know (as provided by that blurb in the Microprocessor Forum blurb).
Posters Alias: justafriend
(I've cleaned up the format to make things easier to read)
---------------[ 1st post ]-------------
Here's your inside info on IBM PPC designs:
- IBM has developed Power4 for the workstation.
- On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design.
- High-end is a 1 chip, quad core.
- Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
- No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple.
However, if this chip begins shipping in Q4, that would mean Sept., which would work out well if new Power Macs utilizing this chip were intro'd during MWNY.
----------------------------------------
Some people commented that the Power4 has BEEN OUT and isn't 'new'.
---------------[ 1st reply ]-------------
For clarification purposes, what's been out since last year is the SERVER version.
This is a WORKSTATION version - a derivative of the server chip. this isn't out yet.
----------------------------------------
Some people wanted public 'proof' (don't they always)
---------------[ 2nd reply ]-------------
Unfortunately, no direct public reference.
I posed a question to my acquantance in IBM, and was told that the answer to the specific question I asked was "IBM Confidential". Then, it was followed by, "but what I can tell you." and that's what I posted here.
- No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple.
What is still left 'up in the air':
- On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design.
- High-end is a 1 chip, quad core.
- Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
So could it be that this new Power4-Desktop CPU is DUAL CORE! I had been assuming that it wasn't. If this is true that would be even more exciting. Shipping in the 4Q??? Finally a high end chip with QUAD CORE?!?!
Time will tell I guess but I thought it was interesting.
"Wrong. ILM switched from SGI to Intel/Linux machines in their render farms. They did not switch from Apple. Their reasons for switching has nothing to do with Apple."
Just a clarification. My post said nothing about switching from Apple. The point simply goes to illustrate that Apple is losing more attainable marketshare to the wintel world. For most people (i.e. business sector) Apple is not a viable option. Gaining marketshare there is difficult. However, the creative markets are less concerned with platform and more concerened with performance. Hence the comment regarding ILM. The fact that it is only in render farms is irrlelvant. Its only a matter of time for the workstations if the performance gap between Intel/AMD and all other comers continues to widen. It is simple economics. Wintel chips cost less and have acceptable performance.
Steve Jobs desperately wants in on this market sector. Remember Pixar? You cant do it with software, and you cant do it with the G4.
The current lineup smells "interim". The buss speed have improved by 67% over close to 4 years! Apple have compensated this by basically throwing in everything but the kitchen sink into the towers. They did add
1. An additional CPU (good for OS X)
2. An additonal IDE bus (Dual booting)
3.An additonal HD bay
4. An additonal bay for optical drive (very good)
5. analog in&output
6. front mounted headphone jack
7. some bus improvements
This is on top of the ordinary improvements like CPU speed bump, adding L3 in the low end model, faster video cards bigger HDs etc
For the next revison these kind of things can not be added as it is alredy there.
If the reception of this is luke warm imagine the reception of the next version it it is a similar speed bump and the only new feature is front mounted FW and USB ports! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
The current revision is a good improvement despite the minor CPU boost. Escpecially the two IDE busses and the two front bays. The previous generation really is a B&W G3 (1999) tower with AGP slot and some minor tweeks
Now Apple is up against the wall, the next revsion must have a major performance improvement...
"Wrong. ILM switched from SGI to Intel/Linux machines in their render farms. They did not switch from Apple. Their reasons for switching has nothing to do with Apple."
Just a clarification. My post said nothing about switching from Apple. </strong><hr></blockquote>
... yeah, buddy went off half cocked didn't he?
Specu-locks says:
"This one can't connect the dots"
"Another one only connects dots, and get's lost in the pretty connections"
"That one get's it just right"
... one of the nice things about being on this board, is you sure get a lot of practice trying to get it just right.
Fact 2: Windows doesn't run on PPC. AIX is overkill for the target market. OS/2 is dead. </strong><hr></blockquote>
True enough, but that doesn't mean IBM is interested only in using the new power4 chips alone. It has a new fab plant in NY it needs to keep busy. What incentive do they have to keep the chips to themselves? they make PPC chips for ibooks, the Gamecube, etc... why not Powermacs?
Quote:
<strong>
Fact 3: Linux runs on PPC and is open.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Darwin is open. What's your point? You're assuming IBM is making these chips ONLY to use with it's own operating system. What's the benefit of that, as a chipmaker? As a business? these people think in bottom lines. Making a Power4 chip to Apple makes IBM richer and Apple a better buy. Who looses here? Apple isn't about to compete in linux servers, so IBM has no other linux competition for the power4 desktop chip. [/QB]
[quote] <strong>
Fact 4: Mac OS X is tightly controlled by another company (Apple).</strong><hr></blockquote>
And Windows is tightly controlled by yet another company whose marketshare both IBM and Apple would be happily like to erode.
[quote] <strong>
Fact 5: IBM made a $2 Billion investment in Linux (says IBM)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good for them. they also sunk a boatload into a new fab plant that can't possibly be turning out processors only for specialized linux machines.
[quote] <strong>
Fact 6: Red Hat is developing a PPC version of Red Hat Linux (to run on what hardware? Certainly not Macs!)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Power to them. the more the merrier, this still does not preclude IBM selling the same chips to Apple. In fact, it makes it easier to share software accross the two platforms and it breaks the INTEL stranglehold on motherboards, x86 specs, etc....
[quote] <strong>
Fact 7: Linux is making the most inroads into the business world in the entry-level server segment
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed.
[quote] <strong>
Suggestion 1: Draw your own conclusions as to what you would do, if you were IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay. If I were IBM, having pumped hordes of cash into developing a desktop Power4 chip with a new plant to manufacture them, i would be selling the chips to as many customers as possible. Furthermore, from an overal business strategy, it makes sense for IBM to expand the influence of PPC - they own it, and they don't have to buy chips from anyone else in order to use it. If Apple uses the same PPC chips as they do -power to them! Different markets. Linux is not a home computer for the masses - the Mac is.
Maybe Apple is making a deal w/IBM to sell them OS X server for their high priced equipment, It is UNIX based. That would add some benefit to IBM over chip sales.
If Apple chooses to go with this processor then I will become the biggest Linux on PPC honk there is. The only way to get the price of these processors down is to ship LOADS of them. If that happens to be with boxes running OS X and Linux ...fine. I just want kickass machines with the OS of my choice.
<strong>Maybe Apple is making a deal w/IBM to sell them OS X server for their high priced equipment, It is UNIX based. That would add some benefit to IBM over chip sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My thought exactly. I know its a long shot, but what of a strategic alliance? Let IBM use OSX server for low end stuff. Instant support for Macs in corporate environment. Instant credibility. No competition in core markets. Cool.
<strong>Maybe Apple is making a deal w/IBM to sell them OS X server for their high priced equipment, It is UNIX based. That would add some benefit to IBM over chip sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>
While I think this could be a mutually benifitual agreement for IBM and Apple, I don think that we will see it. First of all IBM has just invested a large sum on money into Linex. Second Apple is just making a serious move into the server market. If they were looking for a partner I dont thiink that we would have the Xserve becouse that would encroach on IBM's market. Add to that Steve's distast for "clones" and I would rate its probability at near 0%.
I think what we might be seeing is IBM's chip division making a move to market the PPC chip as an alternative to Intel, particularly in the high end market. There are a number of potential clients, such as Apple, Sun, and SGI. There is also the potential for a new Linex platform to come about, based off of the CHRP model that IBM was working on a number of years ago.
This is just conjecture, and reality may prove most of us wrong to some degree.
Comments
<strong>to quote someone famous,
Linux is free only if your time is free.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hadn't heard that one before -- it sums up my feelings on Linux very well. My time is more valuable than that, and my days of hacking around in the OS for the sake of doing so are long gone. I've got actual work to do.
Amen brother!
People with macs actually _DO_ stuff. Which correlates back to my MEGA-Do myth.
the myth that 2.4 ghz pc is actually more procuctive (software, ease of use, daliy maintanace) than my 667 mhz mac.
<strong>to quote someone famous,
Linux is free only if your time is free.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<offtopic>
That's what we say here about Windows installation, service packs, patches, hot fixes, and upgrades.
That's what we say too when we get prompted "Reboot required. Do you want to reboot now?".
That's what we say event about licensing and internal auditing.
That's what we say about virus scanning.
Yes indeed, time is free. And it is the industry standard.
</offtopic>
So, um, how about that IBM processor? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <hr></blockquote>
The one where you can install Linux, if you have the time?
It'll certainly be faster than tomorrow's to-be-announced G4 even with one or more FPU tied behind its back.
<strong>
The one where you can install Linux, if you have the time?
It'll certainly be faster than tomorrow's to-be-announced G4 even with one or more FPU tied behind its back.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that it will take too much time to install Linux on the new PPC. In fact, I think it will come preinstalled. Here is my conjecture:
Fact 1: The processor is targetted at workstation/entry-level server (says IBM)
Fact 2: Windows doesn't run on PPC. AIX is overkill for the target market. OS/2 is dead.
Fact 3: Linux runs on PPC and is open.
Fact 4: Mac OS X is tightly controlled by another company (Apple).
Fact 5: IBM made a $2 Billion investment in Linux (says IBM)
Fact 6: Red Hat is developing a PPC version of Red Hat Linux (to run on what hardware? Certainly not Macs!)
Fact 7: Linux is making the most inroads into the business world in the entry-level server segment
Suggestion 1: Draw your own conclusions as to what you would do, if you were IBM.
<strong>
I'd really love to get into debating this -- but I think it'd take the thread too far off of topic. Suffice it to say that Linux is FREE, yet no one wants to use it on their desktop. Literally no one (statistically speaking) -- that speaks volumes, IMHO.
It either needs to improve radically (which seems unlikely, given the Linux crowd's propensity to get into heated debates over which commandline text editor is best, which of the hundred window managers is best, which toolkit is best, etc.), or they need to go beyond free and start _paying_ people to use it.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Moki is my idol. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: MacRonin ]</p>
Interesting poster I found in the archives... He was a 'hit-n-run' poster but looking back it seems he was pretty good a predicting the future. These posts were from June (before MWNY) and while the speculation that MWNY could be a date we could see this new CPU was way wrong and the fact that he thought that September was in the 4th quarter was just a month off...
He sure seems to have some info here and if correct might and to what we already know (as provided by that blurb in the Microprocessor Forum blurb).
Posters Alias: justafriend
(I've cleaned up the format to make things easier to read)
---------------[ 1st post ]-------------
Here's your inside info on IBM PPC designs:
- IBM has developed Power4 for the workstation.
- On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design.
- High-end is a 1 chip, quad core.
- Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
- No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple.
However, if this chip begins shipping in Q4, that would mean Sept., which would work out well if new Power Macs utilizing this chip were intro'd during MWNY.
----------------------------------------
Some people commented that the Power4 has BEEN OUT and isn't 'new'.
---------------[ 1st reply ]-------------
For clarification purposes, what's been out since last year is the SERVER version.
This is a WORKSTATION version - a derivative of the server chip. this isn't out yet.
----------------------------------------
Some people wanted public 'proof' (don't they always)
---------------[ 2nd reply ]-------------
Unfortunately, no direct public reference.
I posed a question to my acquantance in IBM, and was told that the answer to the specific question I asked was "IBM Confidential". Then, it was followed by, "but what I can tell you." and that's what I posted here.
As an aside, Jamee Abdulhafiz is listed on this page ( <a href="http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/461/luddeaut.html"; target="_blank">http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/461/luddeaut.html</a>; ) as Senior Engineer and verification leader for a POWER4 derivative microprocessor. So, there is some proof to the statement that Power4 *derivatives* are planned.
Just no detail like what I was provided.
-------------------------------------------
(last post he made)
Anyway what does he have right so far:
- IBM has developed Power4 for the workstation.
- No word on any relation to these proc's and Apple.
What is still left 'up in the air':
- On the low-end is a 1 chip, dual core design.
- High-end is a 1 chip, quad core.
- Shipping 4th quarter, 2002.
So could it be that this new Power4-Desktop CPU is DUAL CORE! I had been assuming that it wasn't. If this is true that would be even more exciting. Shipping in the 4Q??? Finally a high end chip with QUAD CORE?!?!
Time will tell I guess but I thought it was interesting.
Dave
[ 08-14-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
"Wrong. ILM switched from SGI to Intel/Linux machines in their render farms. They did not switch from Apple. Their reasons for switching has nothing to do with Apple."
Just a clarification. My post said nothing about switching from Apple. The point simply goes to illustrate that Apple is losing more attainable marketshare to the wintel world. For most people (i.e. business sector) Apple is not a viable option. Gaining marketshare there is difficult. However, the creative markets are less concerned with platform and more concerened with performance. Hence the comment regarding ILM. The fact that it is only in render farms is irrlelvant. Its only a matter of time for the workstations if the performance gap between Intel/AMD and all other comers continues to widen. It is simple economics. Wintel chips cost less and have acceptable performance.
Steve Jobs desperately wants in on this market sector. Remember Pixar? You cant do it with software, and you cant do it with the G4.
Even the performance is close to PC but the 3x price will still make people go for the cheaper solutions
G-News
1. An additional CPU (good for OS X)
2. An additonal IDE bus (Dual booting)
3.An additonal HD bay
4. An additonal bay for optical drive (very good)
5. analog in&output
6. front mounted headphone jack
7. some bus improvements
This is on top of the ordinary improvements like CPU speed bump, adding L3 in the low end model, faster video cards bigger HDs etc
For the next revison these kind of things can not be added as it is alredy there.
If the reception of this is luke warm imagine the reception of the next version it it is a similar speed bump and the only new feature is front mounted FW and USB ports! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
The current revision is a good improvement despite the minor CPU boost. Escpecially the two IDE busses and the two front bays. The previous generation really is a B&W G3 (1999) tower with AGP slot and some minor tweeks
Now Apple is up against the wall, the next revsion must have a major performance improvement...
<strong>quote:
"Wrong. ILM switched from SGI to Intel/Linux machines in their render farms. They did not switch from Apple. Their reasons for switching has nothing to do with Apple."
Just a clarification. My post said nothing about switching from Apple. </strong><hr></blockquote>
... yeah, buddy went off half cocked didn't he?
Specu-locks says:
"This one can't connect the dots"
"Another one only connects dots, and get's lost in the pretty connections"
"That one get's it just right"
... one of the nice things about being on this board, is you sure get a lot of practice trying to get it just right.
<strong>
I don't think that it will take too much time to install Linux on the new PPC. In fact, I think it will come preinstalled. Here is my conjecture:
Fact 1: The processor is targetted at workstation/entry-level server (says IBM) </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, the Microprocessor Forum website says this:
"IBM Microelectronics IBM is disclosing the technical details of a new 64-bit PowerPC microprocessor designed for desktops and entry-level servers"
<a href="https://www.mdronline.com/mpf/conf.html"; target="_blank">https://www.mdronline.com/mpf/conf.html</a>;
[quote] <strong>
Fact 2: Windows doesn't run on PPC. AIX is overkill for the target market. OS/2 is dead. </strong><hr></blockquote>
True enough, but that doesn't mean IBM is interested only in using the new power4 chips alone. It has a new fab plant in NY it needs to keep busy. What incentive do they have to keep the chips to themselves? they make PPC chips for ibooks, the Gamecube, etc... why not Powermacs?
<strong>
Fact 3: Linux runs on PPC and is open.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Darwin is open. What's your point? You're assuming IBM is making these chips ONLY to use with it's own operating system. What's the benefit of that, as a chipmaker? As a business? these people think in bottom lines. Making a Power4 chip to Apple makes IBM richer and Apple a better buy. Who looses here? Apple isn't about to compete in linux servers, so IBM has no other linux competition for the power4 desktop chip. [/QB]
[quote] <strong>
Fact 4: Mac OS X is tightly controlled by another company (Apple).</strong><hr></blockquote>
And Windows is tightly controlled by yet another company whose marketshare both IBM and Apple would be happily like to erode.
[quote] <strong>
Fact 5: IBM made a $2 Billion investment in Linux (says IBM)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good for them. they also sunk a boatload into a new fab plant that can't possibly be turning out processors only for specialized linux machines.
[quote] <strong>
Fact 6: Red Hat is developing a PPC version of Red Hat Linux (to run on what hardware? Certainly not Macs!)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Power to them. the more the merrier, this still does not preclude IBM selling the same chips to Apple. In fact, it makes it easier to share software accross the two platforms and it breaks the INTEL stranglehold on motherboards, x86 specs, etc....
[quote] <strong>
Fact 7: Linux is making the most inroads into the business world in the entry-level server segment
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed.
[quote] <strong>
Suggestion 1: Draw your own conclusions as to what you would do, if you were IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay. If I were IBM, having pumped hordes of cash into developing a desktop Power4 chip with a new plant to manufacture them, i would be selling the chips to as many customers as possible. Furthermore, from an overal business strategy, it makes sense for IBM to expand the influence of PPC - they own it, and they don't have to buy chips from anyone else in order to use it. If Apple uses the same PPC chips as they do -power to them! Different markets. Linux is not a home computer for the masses - the Mac is.
nuff said.
<strong>Maybe Apple is making a deal w/IBM to sell them OS X server for their high priced equipment, It is UNIX based. That would add some benefit to IBM over chip sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My thought exactly. I know its a long shot, but what of a strategic alliance? Let IBM use OSX server for low end stuff. Instant support for Macs in corporate environment. Instant credibility. No competition in core markets. Cool.
<strong>Maybe Apple is making a deal w/IBM to sell them OS X server for their high priced equipment, It is UNIX based. That would add some benefit to IBM over chip sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>
While I think this could be a mutually benifitual agreement for IBM and Apple, I don think that we will see it. First of all IBM has just invested a large sum on money into Linex. Second Apple is just making a serious move into the server market. If they were looking for a partner I dont thiink that we would have the Xserve becouse that would encroach on IBM's market. Add to that Steve's distast for "clones" and I would rate its probability at near 0%.
I think what we might be seeing is IBM's chip division making a move to market the PPC chip as an alternative to Intel, particularly in the high end market. There are a number of potential clients, such as Apple, Sun, and SGI. There is also the potential for a new Linex platform to come about, based off of the CHRP model that IBM was working on a number of years ago.
This is just conjecture, and reality may prove most of us wrong to some degree.