It's pretty much confirmed that Apple will be using this new IBM chip. The only question is when. I don't know for sure but prefer not to be to optimistic. Looking forward to October 15th though... It's going to be great!
\tDon't expect Motorola to leave the picture though they still have some stuff for us.
i'm excited for oct 15...but i have to say, the est. of next yr for use of these chips is rather shi??y..i mean, i know in the long run it will be better, but until then, what is apple stock going to do...i wish it would just get back up to the 20's again, i'd be gitty
There is no direct evidence that Apple will be using the GPUL.
Why most people (including me) think that the GPUL will be used by Apple is that there is nothing else on the horizon. Motorola's given up on even their high-end embedded stuff. Moving to another ISA so soon after X ain't going to happen if there is an alternative.
The alternative is GPUL.
When you eliminate the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
I never said Moki's company didn't make nice software. And even if I had said something insulting (which I didn't), how juvenile would he have to be to increase their shareware prices or something similar - just because people in AI gave him a hard time? I'm guessing he's more mature / thick-skinned than that.
I'm just pointing out you really shouldn't take any of his cryptic comments as signs of future hardware, because he's not likely to know much more than we do. That's all....
You make it sound like you don't want him to hold a threat over our heads or something. Personally, even though the software is pretty nice, I think Ambrosia's licensing schemes are overkill. Don't pander to someone so much just because they can code.
<strong>[[[I think Barto just wanted to quote Sherlock Holmes. ]]]
I thought it was Mr. Spock? :-)
--
Ed</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know your kidding, but really, it is an actual quote that may be slightly off in the posting. I'm fairly sure it was Holmes, but there is a slight chance it was Hercule Poirot. (I like detectives.)
2. end it with the teasing tag of "hang in there..."
Why would we need to hang in there if the GPUL has nothing to do with future Macs? And why bother defending a chip that's irrelevant to the Mac community?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I never said the chip was irrelevant to Mac users at all; but you are not going to see them in Macs this year.
<strong>Hint: Moki doesn't know when the next revision of Power Macs is coming, and he doesn't know what the architecture looks like. .</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, you're wrong on one of those assertions...
<strong>I'm just pointing out you really shouldn't take any of his cryptic comments as signs of future hardware, because he's not likely to know much more than we do. That's all....</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's definitely wrong. I've said a good bit (mentioned GP-UL months ago), and I know quite a bit more than I've said.
Don't be so naive; it isn't about the size of your company, it is who you know.
That's definitely wrong. I've said a good bit (mentioned GP-UL months ago), and I know quite a bit more than I've said.
Don't be so naive; it isn't about the size of your company, it is who you know. </strong><hr></blockquote>
So tell us this: When can we expect the GPUL in a Powermac?
If it's going to be sooner than fall 2003, give a <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
If it's going to be sooner than MWNY03, give a <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Comments
\tDon't expect Motorola to leave the picture though they still have some stuff for us.
<strong>It's pretty much confirmed that Apple will be using this new IBM chip. The only question is when. </strong><hr></blockquote>
2nd half of 2003 (ie "next year" again) according to this link.
<a href="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/10/04/021004hnforum.xml?s=IDGNS"; target="_blank">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/10/04/021004hnforum.xml?s=IDGNS</a>;
Why most people (including me) think that the GPUL will be used by Apple is that there is nothing else on the horizon. Motorola's given up on even their high-end embedded stuff. Moving to another ISA so soon after X ain't going to happen if there is an alternative.
The alternative is GPUL.
When you eliminate the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
Barto
<strong>
What makes you think that Apple using the GPUL is improbable?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think Barto just wanted to quote Sherlock Holmes. It didn't quite fit the situation, that's all.
I'm just pointing out you really shouldn't take any of his cryptic comments as signs of future hardware, because he's not likely to know much more than we do. That's all....
You make it sound like you don't want him to hold a threat over our heads or something. Personally, even though the software is pretty nice, I think Ambrosia's licensing schemes are overkill. Don't pander to someone so much just because they can code.
[ 10-09-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
Codename = Nostradamus = PowerMacG4 = knows nothing.
Carry on...
I thought it was Mr. Spock? :-)
--
Ed
<strong>[[[I think Barto just wanted to quote Sherlock Holmes. ]]]
I thought it was Mr. Spock? :-)
--
Ed</strong><hr></blockquote>
I know your kidding, but really, it is an actual quote that may be slightly off in the posting. I'm fairly sure it was Holmes, but there is a slight chance it was Hercule Poirot. (I like detectives.)
<strong>[[[I think Barto just wanted to quote Sherlock Holmes. ]]]
I thought it was Mr. Spock? :-)
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You mean Data.
Wow, the closest thing to actual scoop in a swan's age. And the guy who said it didn't even post it! No, we're not desperate for news or anything ...
<strong>With all due respect Moki then why,
1. post a GPUL defense in a Mac forum and
2. end it with the teasing tag of "hang in there..."
Why would we need to hang in there if the GPUL has nothing to do with future Macs? And why bother defending a chip that's irrelevant to the Mac community?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I never said the chip was irrelevant to Mac users at all; but you are not going to see them in Macs this year.
<strong>Hint: Moki doesn't know when the next revision of Power Macs is coming, and he doesn't know what the architecture looks like. .</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, you're wrong on one of those assertions...
<strong>I'm just pointing out you really shouldn't take any of his cryptic comments as signs of future hardware, because he's not likely to know much more than we do. That's all....</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's definitely wrong. I've said a good bit (mentioned GP-UL months ago), and I know quite a bit more than I've said.
Don't be so naive; it isn't about the size of your company, it is who you know.
Apple might consider you a liability or am I wrong?
<strong>
Don't be so naive; it isn't about the size of your company, it is who you know.
Indeed.
I present as Exhibit A; the Power Mac G4 software bundle, containing Snapz Pro X.
And yes, I was quoting the fictional Sherlock Holmes.
My point was, I don't know of ANY other chip which has any chance of replacing the G4 other than the GPUL.
Impossible (in near term for some): Moto G5, Transmeta Crusoe/PPC (both low-performance), Pentium and Athlon (too soon after X).
However Improbable: GPUL.
Note that I don't think that the GPUL is improbable (it's performance will just seem that way after being stuck with the G4 for 4 years).
"however improbable" can mean anywhere from not improbable to extremely improbable. It doesn't refer to any particular case.
Barto
Moki including "GP-UL" in every second post for a month running was his way of saying to the majority "I know something you don't!"
It was also a way of saying to the minority "I know about the IBM desktop-PPC too!"
In Australia (possibly elsewhere), it's known as "dog-whistling".
Moki does tell us when any rumor is completely untrue.
Moki's "water-cooler gossip" on the DDR Power Macs turned out to be true.
Moki HAS said that the GP-UL will probably be in Power Macs starting 2nd half 2003. Not all in one breath.
The Steve Jobs "Uzi" comment (before 2004)
Telling JYD that the GP-UL won't be shipping in the first half of 2003 as JYD had speculated.
Now that it won't be this year at all.
Barto
PS In the post above this I've typed the sound "for" three times in a row :eek:
[ 10-10-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>
<strong>
That's definitely wrong. I've said a good bit (mentioned GP-UL months ago), and I know quite a bit more than I've said.
Don't be so naive; it isn't about the size of your company, it is who you know.
So tell us this: When can we expect the GPUL in a Powermac?
If it's going to be sooner than fall 2003, give a <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
If it's going to be sooner than MWNY03, give a <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>Shouldn't you be worried about getting in trouble? Isn't leaking information a bit risky, especially if people know who you are?
Apple might consider you a liability or am I wrong?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I do not work for Apple, and I have not violated any NDAs I have with Apple -- I take that very seriously.
However, the information I pick up elsewhere is another story entirely...