IBM has spent more than $1 Billion dollars in Linux development. Their head of software even stated that he could see the day an a few years that Linux would replace AIX on their pSeries (formerly RS/6000) servers.
Also remember, the POWER4 has been shipping since October 2001 (Volume shipment in Dec 2001) so this isn't a start from scratch design if it is a POWER4 based design. That should speed things up.
My take is in 1 year we get Macs based on this system. I remember someone (Dorsal?) mentioning new test mules that were RS/6000 based and only ran Darwin. That a good way to get Darwin-64 debugged before tipping your hand.
Sampling to production is sixteen+ months?!? I've been doing some google searching and I've not seen that kind of window ever mentioned when it came to previous CPUs. Or could that be sampling to production X months and then X more months for a final computer based on the new chip?
Either way that sure seems like a pretty long time. I'd assume much of the work (chip going from sample to production AND Apple working out a mobo for the new chip) would be done in parallel wouldn't it?
That is kinda the point of producing samples in the first place, for potential customers to design hardware around the chips before they're availabe in quantity.
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>FWIW, a little bird just told me that all Apple business is moving to IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
No! Four to Five months, from samples of production chips to Mac product out! If the insider information is correct about samples in March or April, next August is four to five months from that., not sixteen. Ahhh, I see the problem. Next August was my way of saying a year from now, and you read it as a year and four months from samples. I was ambiguous. I was told that Sahara was four months to the iBook.
That is kinda the point of producing samples in the first place, for potential customers to design hardware around the chips before they're availabe in quantity.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think there is a problem with definitions, so if somebody really knows this industry, feel free to inform us. I think the "sampling" they refer to is samples of final production chips. The product design is usually done already. Early chips for Apple to use in designing a new product might be called prototype chips or something like that. I am half guessing here based on things I've read.
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, sorry. I meant to say that the bird claimed that all of Apple's chip needs would be supplied by IBM. Did I do better that time? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>
No, sorry. I meant to say that the bird claimed that all of Apple's chip needs would be supplied by IBM. Did I do better that time? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
All of you imply a connection where none exists between IBM's new Power-derived chip and Apple's "G5" aka next-generation successor to the G4.
All IBM did was mention in a few lines a new processor to be discussed in October. Nothing ELSE was ever said including what it really will be (server-specific, desktop, portable anything) nor WHEN it will actually ship.
All of you claiming to "know" someone at IBM who knows details about a project they are not related to or working on is silly.
Only one man in the world trully knows the future of Apple and he's a bit pissed at all these web sites running rampant speculation about products that will never exist and therefore depressing CURRENT hardware sales.
If you need a new Mac, GET ONE NOW and SHUT UP about what it "lacks" or whatever mythical spec or standard it DIDNT ship with. In 6-8 months it will be replaced with something else, thats how Apple has worked for YEARS now.
Nothing mysterious about product upgrades, new products will eventually come. Just don't buy before an expo and you will be fine.
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think what it was suppose to mean is that ALL of Apple's business to Motorola (CPU chips) will eventually be coming from IBM, not motorolla.
What I think would be a great thing is for Apple and IBM to strike up a licensing agreement so IBM can make servers running OS X. I know Apple just released their server, but I'm getting the feeling that Apple knows it is a serious uphill battle to get people to buy their hardware in the server market. However, hardware coming from IBM is another matter. Oh boy, this would reallly REALLY get the suit&tie folks to more seriously look at OSX for their corportate needs. IT might be the only way for Apple to seriously enter the enterprise market. And of course, if Apple continues their server line, it would give IT people what they sometimes demand.... Two sources of hardware. Not being forced to deal with a single company.
All of you claiming to "know" someone at IBM who knows details about a project they are not related to or working on is silly.
[...deleted...]
Only one man in the world trully knows the future of Apple and he's a bit pissed at all these web sites running rampant speculation about products that will never exist and therefore depressing CURRENT hardware sales.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did I say or imply that the person was NOT directly working on the project? The person I referred to is directly working on the project.
As for only one person knowing the future of Apple... Get real. Far more than one person knows the future of Apple, or at least as much as possible without being psychic.
But I agree with you on the rumors depressing current sales, and if you need a mac, buy one.
So, with that said and done.... I'm going to go order a 17" iMac for my wife. (But I am waiting on the G5 for my desktop needs!
<strong>What I think would be a great thing is for Apple and IBM to strike up a licensing agreement so IBM can make servers running OS X. I know Apple just released their server, but I'm getting the feeling that Apple knows it is a serious uphill battle to get people to buy their hardware in the server market. However, hardware coming from IBM is another matter. Oh boy, this would reallly REALLY get the suit&tie folks to more seriously look at OSX for their corportate needs. IT might be the only way for Apple to seriously enter the enterprise market.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is actually the best idea I have ever seen at FH.
1) I know of at least five big firms (Carlsberg being one) that would never touch anything serverwise unless it had IBM on it.
2) IBM has better experience dealing with maitenance than Apple will have five years from now.
3) Another reason for IBM to focus on desktop PPC chips (we don´t want them to loose interest too)
<strong>All IBM did was mention in a few lines a new processor to be discussed in October. Nothing ELSE was ever said including what it really will be (server-specific, desktop, portable anything) nor WHEN it will actually ship.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Kevin Krewell, Senior Editor, Microprocessor Report; General Manager, MDR
Breaking Through Compute Intensive Barriers - IBM's New 64-bit PowerPC Microprocessor
Peter Sandon, Senior Processor Architect, Power PC Organization,
IBM Microelectronics IBM is disclosing the technical details of a new 64-bit PowerPC microprocessor designed for desktops and entry-level servers. Based on the award winning Power4 design, this processor is an 8-way superscalar design that fully supports Symmetric MultiProcessing. The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and implements a system interface capable of up to 6.4GB/s."
No shipping dates, of course, otherwise it's pretty clear what this processor is targeted for.
... If you need a new Mac, GET ONE NOW and SHUT UP about what it "lacks" or whatever mythical spec or standard it DIDNT ship with. ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey, many of us are not complaining, but like to do this for entertainment or whatever. We know that Apple is doing the best it can, considering its suppliers. We won't mention a name. If we couldn't speculate about great things in the Mac's future, it would really get depressing when PC makers introduce some better stuff, for the moment anyway.
An Apple/IBM deal would really help. I know many people that are afraid to buy an Apple because they think the company is going out of business. Getting IBM to sell the stuff just means corporate buyers don't need to worry about their supplier disappearing.
<strong>"Oh, I'd wait 4-5 months. We're going to demo the G5 in October and it should be ramped up quickly after."</strong><hr></blockquote>
IMO, if you had any credibility you just blew it. I can't see anyone from IBM referring to a new chip as the "G5". "We've a new chip", maybe, but G5, no way.
<strong>Has Apple realized that by the time the G5 is released at the rumored clock speeds, Intel's processors will probably be upwards of around 4 or possibly even 5 Ghz. I understand Mhz aren't everything. I am a Mac guy and proud of it. It's great that the G5 may be out by mid to late 2003, but by then, Apple may still be behind...I'm just worried, thats all...</strong><hr></blockquote>
<rant>
Nobody will ever catch Intel in terms of clock speed unless they foolishly choose to follow Intel's design with long instruction pipelines, tons of added prefetch logic, etc. Let's get over this fact and move on. The only thing people should be concerned about is performance. If you want to use SPEC as your guideline (which I think is a big mistake), then the P4 at 2.53GHZ has caught the Power 4 at INT performance, but still lags considerably in FP performance. Keep in mind that the P4 is manufactured on the .13u process whereas the Power4 is still on the .18u process. Also keep in mind that SPEC is only measuring half of the Power4's performance, as the tests are single threaded. In short, the Power4 design clobbers the P4 six ways from Sunday, even at half the clock speed and on an older manufacturing process. So, please, let's dispense with the MHZ envy, shall we?
Finally, I wouldn't get to excited about IBM's workstation chip until I found out if it in fact handles all existing PowerPC instructions and operates natively in 32bit mode as well. Otherwise, there will be another "transition process" for apps to make use of the new chip. That said, I'd rather have one of the last G4s then the first G5s (for compatibility reasons) as I actually use my machine for real tasks, not a measuring stick of my manhood. Likewise, my order is in for a new dual 1GHZ / Geforce 4 Ti box.
IMO, if you had any credibility you just blew it. I can't see anyone from IBM referring to a new chip as the "G5". "We've a new chip", maybe, but G5, no way.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I see your point, but IBM employees likely use the terms G3 and G4 already. (Isn't IBM a backup supplier for Motorola on the G4?) If IBM has been working with Apple on this new chip, and I'm sure they have, then it is not far fetched that they picked up on the term G5 by now. This is what Apple will surely call it.
<strong>Finally, I wouldn't get to excited about IBM's workstation chip until I found out if it in fact handles all existing PowerPC instructions and operates natively in 32bit mode as well. Otherwise, there will be another "transition process" for apps to make use of the new chip. That said, I'd rather have one of the last G4s then the first G5s (for compatibility reasons) as I actually use my machine for real tasks, not a measuring stick of my manhood. Likewise, my order is in for a new dual 1GHZ / Geforce 4 Ti box.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fear not, the POWER4 (and the POWER3) use a 64-bit PowerPC ISA, which is backwards compatible with the 32-bit PowerPC ISA of the PowerPC line of chips (G4, G3, 604e, etc.).
Consider for a moment that a tip about G5 production samples in March is correct. How does Apple keep PowerMac sales from drying up? After October 15, the cat will be out of the bag. We will realize a G5 is on the way, and maybe this means new PowerMacs with the G5. When? A high sales volume Mac product may start shipping in July or August, if the Sahara introduction is used as a guide. So what happens between October 15 and July or August? Something like that would give Steve nightmares. Everybody waiting for G5 PowerMacs, and nobody buying. I think Steve Jobs would have a plan. Here is just one idea.
A Workstation Grade G5 Mac is introduced in Paris, well in advance. It is significantly beyond the PowerMacs and meant to run things like Shake and Maya. Everyone knows the price will be up there, way up. How long in advance was the Xserve announced? This G5 may be set for shipping in spring. On October 15, IBM talks about the G5 and demos it. Interest builds, but everyone knows this is not a PowerMac. The PowerMac will stay with the G4, but no one knows how long. The G5 Mac starts to ship in May or June in small quantities. This is not a high volume product, so it may be possible to do it on a faster track. The design may be complete right now.
What about the PowerMac? An update may be introduced at MWNY. Higher clock rate G4s that have a good bus too, from IBM, surprise, surprise. While everyone was ga-ga over the G5, nobody suspected that IBM was working with Apple on a new G4 too. The daughter card and memory controller are designed so the same motherboard can be used with either a G4 or a G5. (Is this possible?) At some point, the highest end PowerMac gets a G5, and it gradually works its way down.
Okay, I better get my space ship back to planet Earth now.
Comments
<strong>FWIW, a little bird just told me that all Apple business is moving to IBM. The bird made it sound like it was already done.
And no, the bird doesn't work for any retailer or anything that stupid. This bird would know.
[ 08-22-2002: Message edited by: Transcendental Octothorpe ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Any idea on what timeframe we are looking at?
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Also remember, the POWER4 has been shipping since October 2001 (Volume shipment in Dec 2001) so this isn't a start from scratch design if it is a POWER4 based design. That should speed things up.
My take is in 1 year we get Macs based on this system. I remember someone (Dorsal?) mentioning new test mules that were RS/6000 based and only ran Darwin. That a good way to get Darwin-64 debugged before tipping your hand.
<strong>
Sampling to production is sixteen+ months?!? I've been doing some google searching and I've not seen that kind of window ever mentioned when it came to previous CPUs. Or could that be sampling to production X months and then X more months for a final computer based on the new chip?
Either way that sure seems like a pretty long time. I'd assume much of the work (chip going from sample to production AND Apple working out a mobo for the new chip) would be done in parallel wouldn't it?
Dave
[ 08-22-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is kinda the point of producing samples in the first place, for potential customers to design hardware around the chips before they're availabe in quantity.
[ 08-22-2002: Message edited by: Analogue bubblebath ]</p>
<strong>FWIW, a little bird just told me that all Apple business is moving to IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>
Sampling to production is sixteen+ months?!?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
No! Four to Five months, from samples of production chips to Mac product out! If the insider information is correct about samples in March or April, next August is four to five months from that., not sixteen. Ahhh, I see the problem. Next August was my way of saying a year from now, and you read it as a year and four months from samples. I was ambiguous. I was told that Sahara was four months to the iBook.
<strong>
That is kinda the point of producing samples in the first place, for potential customers to design hardware around the chips before they're availabe in quantity.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think there is a problem with definitions, so if somebody really knows this industry, feel free to inform us. I think the "sampling" they refer to is samples of final production chips. The product design is usually done already. Early chips for Apple to use in designing a new product might be called prototype chips or something like that. I am half guessing here based on things I've read.
<strong>
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
No, sorry. I meant to say that the bird claimed that all of Apple's chip needs would be supplied by IBM. Did I do better that time? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
<strong>
No, sorry. I meant to say that the bird claimed that all of Apple's chip needs would be supplied by IBM. Did I do better that time? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
All IBM did was mention in a few lines a new processor to be discussed in October. Nothing ELSE was ever said including what it really will be (server-specific, desktop, portable anything) nor WHEN it will actually ship.
All of you claiming to "know" someone at IBM who knows details about a project they are not related to or working on is silly.
Only one man in the world trully knows the future of Apple and he's a bit pissed at all these web sites running rampant speculation about products that will never exist and therefore depressing CURRENT hardware sales.
If you need a new Mac, GET ONE NOW and SHUT UP about what it "lacks" or whatever mythical spec or standard it DIDNT ship with. In 6-8 months it will be replaced with something else, thats how Apple has worked for YEARS now.
Nothing mysterious about product upgrades, new products will eventually come. Just don't buy before an expo and you will be fine.
<strong>
Sorry, but I don't understand what this sentence means. Does it mean Apple's moving to all IBM chips? Does it mean Apple's given up on the Enterprise and is selling it's technology to IBM (like WebObjects etc) ...
I think what it was suppose to mean is that ALL of Apple's business to Motorola (CPU chips) will eventually be coming from IBM, not motorolla.
What I think would be a great thing is for Apple and IBM to strike up a licensing agreement so IBM can make servers running OS X. I know Apple just released their server, but I'm getting the feeling that Apple knows it is a serious uphill battle to get people to buy their hardware in the server market. However, hardware coming from IBM is another matter. Oh boy, this would reallly REALLY get the suit&tie folks to more seriously look at OSX for their corportate needs. IT might be the only way for Apple to seriously enter the enterprise market. And of course, if Apple continues their server line, it would give IT people what they sometimes demand.... Two sources of hardware. Not being forced to deal with a single company.
<strong>
All of you claiming to "know" someone at IBM who knows details about a project they are not related to or working on is silly.
[...deleted...]
Only one man in the world trully knows the future of Apple and he's a bit pissed at all these web sites running rampant speculation about products that will never exist and therefore depressing CURRENT hardware sales.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did I say or imply that the person was NOT directly working on the project? The person I referred to is directly working on the project.
As for only one person knowing the future of Apple... Get real. Far more than one person knows the future of Apple, or at least as much as possible without being psychic.
But I agree with you on the rumors depressing current sales, and if you need a mac, buy one.
So, with that said and done.... I'm going to go order a 17" iMac for my wife. (But I am waiting on the G5 for my desktop needs!
<strong>What I think would be a great thing is for Apple and IBM to strike up a licensing agreement so IBM can make servers running OS X. I know Apple just released their server, but I'm getting the feeling that Apple knows it is a serious uphill battle to get people to buy their hardware in the server market. However, hardware coming from IBM is another matter. Oh boy, this would reallly REALLY get the suit&tie folks to more seriously look at OSX for their corportate needs. IT might be the only way for Apple to seriously enter the enterprise market.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is actually the best idea I have ever seen at FH.
1) I know of at least five big firms (Carlsberg being one) that would never touch anything serverwise unless it had IBM on it.
2) IBM has better experience dealing with maitenance than Apple will have five years from now.
3) Another reason for IBM to focus on desktop PPC chips (we don´t want them to loose interest too)
<strong>All IBM did was mention in a few lines a new processor to be discussed in October. Nothing ELSE was ever said including what it really will be (server-specific, desktop, portable anything) nor WHEN it will actually ship.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://www.mdronline.com/mpf/conf.html#day1_2"; target="_blank">From the Microprocessor Forum Conference page:</a>
"Session One: PC Processors
Kevin Krewell, Senior Editor, Microprocessor Report; General Manager, MDR
Breaking Through Compute Intensive Barriers - IBM's New 64-bit PowerPC Microprocessor
Peter Sandon, Senior Processor Architect, Power PC Organization,
IBM Microelectronics IBM is disclosing the technical details of a new 64-bit PowerPC microprocessor designed for desktops and entry-level servers. Based on the award winning Power4 design, this processor is an 8-way superscalar design that fully supports Symmetric MultiProcessing. The processor is further enhanced by a vector processing unit implementing over 160 specialized vector instructions and implements a system interface capable of up to 6.4GB/s."
No shipping dates, of course, otherwise it's pretty clear what this processor is targeted for.
<strong>
... If you need a new Mac, GET ONE NOW and SHUT UP about what it "lacks" or whatever mythical spec or standard it DIDNT ship with. ...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey, many of us are not complaining, but like to do this for entertainment or whatever. We know that Apple is doing the best it can, considering its suppliers. We won't mention a name. If we couldn't speculate about great things in the Mac's future, it would really get depressing when PC makers introduce some better stuff, for the moment anyway.
<strong>"Oh, I'd wait 4-5 months. We're going to demo the G5 in October and it should be ramped up quickly after."</strong><hr></blockquote>
IMO, if you had any credibility you just blew it. I can't see anyone from IBM referring to a new chip as the "G5". "We've a new chip", maybe, but G5, no way.
<strong>Has Apple realized that by the time the G5 is released at the rumored clock speeds, Intel's processors will probably be upwards of around 4 or possibly even 5 Ghz. I understand Mhz aren't everything. I am a Mac guy and proud of it. It's great that the G5 may be out by mid to late 2003, but by then, Apple may still be behind...I'm just worried, thats all...</strong><hr></blockquote>
<rant>
Nobody will ever catch Intel in terms of clock speed unless they foolishly choose to follow Intel's design with long instruction pipelines, tons of added prefetch logic, etc. Let's get over this fact and move on. The only thing people should be concerned about is performance. If you want to use SPEC as your guideline (which I think is a big mistake), then the P4 at 2.53GHZ has caught the Power 4 at INT performance, but still lags considerably in FP performance. Keep in mind that the P4 is manufactured on the .13u process whereas the Power4 is still on the .18u process. Also keep in mind that SPEC is only measuring half of the Power4's performance, as the tests are single threaded. In short, the Power4 design clobbers the P4 six ways from Sunday, even at half the clock speed and on an older manufacturing process. So, please, let's dispense with the MHZ envy, shall we?
Finally, I wouldn't get to excited about IBM's workstation chip until I found out if it in fact handles all existing PowerPC instructions and operates natively in 32bit mode as well. Otherwise, there will be another "transition process" for apps to make use of the new chip. That said, I'd rather have one of the last G4s then the first G5s (for compatibility reasons) as I actually use my machine for real tasks, not a measuring stick of my manhood. Likewise, my order is in for a new dual 1GHZ / Geforce 4 Ti box.
</rant>
Sorry for the rant!
Steve
<strong>
IMO, if you had any credibility you just blew it. I can't see anyone from IBM referring to a new chip as the "G5". "We've a new chip", maybe, but G5, no way.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I see your point, but IBM employees likely use the terms G3 and G4 already. (Isn't IBM a backup supplier for Motorola on the G4?) If IBM has been working with Apple on this new chip, and I'm sure they have, then it is not far fetched that they picked up on the term G5 by now. This is what Apple will surely call it.
<strong>Finally, I wouldn't get to excited about IBM's workstation chip until I found out if it in fact handles all existing PowerPC instructions and operates natively in 32bit mode as well. Otherwise, there will be another "transition process" for apps to make use of the new chip. That said, I'd rather have one of the last G4s then the first G5s (for compatibility reasons) as I actually use my machine for real tasks, not a measuring stick of my manhood. Likewise, my order is in for a new dual 1GHZ / Geforce 4 Ti box.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fear not, the POWER4 (and the POWER3) use a 64-bit PowerPC ISA, which is backwards compatible with the 32-bit PowerPC ISA of the PowerPC line of chips (G4, G3, 604e, etc.).
Consider for a moment that a tip about G5 production samples in March is correct. How does Apple keep PowerMac sales from drying up? After October 15, the cat will be out of the bag. We will realize a G5 is on the way, and maybe this means new PowerMacs with the G5. When? A high sales volume Mac product may start shipping in July or August, if the Sahara introduction is used as a guide. So what happens between October 15 and July or August? Something like that would give Steve nightmares. Everybody waiting for G5 PowerMacs, and nobody buying. I think Steve Jobs would have a plan. Here is just one idea.
A Workstation Grade G5 Mac is introduced in Paris, well in advance. It is significantly beyond the PowerMacs and meant to run things like Shake and Maya. Everyone knows the price will be up there, way up. How long in advance was the Xserve announced? This G5 may be set for shipping in spring. On October 15, IBM talks about the G5 and demos it. Interest builds, but everyone knows this is not a PowerMac. The PowerMac will stay with the G4, but no one knows how long. The G5 Mac starts to ship in May or June in small quantities. This is not a high volume product, so it may be possible to do it on a faster track. The design may be complete right now.
What about the PowerMac? An update may be introduced at MWNY. Higher clock rate G4s that have a good bus too, from IBM, surprise, surprise. While everyone was ga-ga over the G5, nobody suspected that IBM was working with Apple on a new G4 too. The daughter card and memory controller are designed so the same motherboard can be used with either a G4 or a G5. (Is this possible?) At some point, the highest end PowerMac gets a G5, and it gradually works its way down.
Okay, I better get my space ship back to planet Earth now.