I was speaking of prototype Apple boxes, not prototypes of the CPUs from IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My bad. I thought you were refering to machines based on 970 prototypes.
But here's a question for you. If Apple has had prototype boxes running the 970 CPU, what are they using for a memory controller? There isn't one in the 970, IBM has made no announcements concerning one, and I doubt that Motorola is interested in supplying one for the 970, so what would these "prototypes" be using?
My bad. I thought you were refering to machines based on 970 prototypes.
But here's a question for you. If Apple has had prototype boxes running the 970 CPU, what are they using for a memory controller? There isn't one in the 970, IBM has made no announcements concerning one, and I doubt that Motorola is interested in supplying one for the 970, so what would these "prototypes" be using?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Since Apple has a long history of building their own chipsets I'd go out on a limb and venture to guess that they're using a new prototype chipset that Apple designed...? Duh.
There are the theories about Apple PI being a processor interconnect bus, and who knows -- maybe that is what the 970 uses (IBM isn't going to call their new PowerPC's bus interface "Apple PI", after all). In that case Apple designed the thing in the first place. Alternatively IBM designed the bus and, once they had, they would tell their leading customer what the specs were so that they could get going on the design. There's not much point in IBM being able to start shipping mid-03 if they haven't told anybody how to use it!
Programmer pretty much read me right. Ah well, it sounded good at 2:30am.
Here's a though though: If Apple were able to enable 2:1 compression across the bus then they would get quite a speed up. Could the RAM keep up? Would the hardware be worth it? Latencies suck?
<strong>Since Apple has a long history of building their own chipsets I'd go out on a limb and venture to guess that they're using a new prototype chipset that Apple designed...? Duh.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which would mean that Apple had samples so they could design the chipset, and given how long it would take them to finalize and test a chipset for a brand new CPU with a brand new bus, that in turn would mean that production level quantities of the CPU would be available today. So where are they?
[quote]<strong>There's not much point in IBM being able to start shipping mid-03 if they haven't told anybody how to use it!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unless the CPU is done and they are now working on a memory controller to hook it up to, and they don't expect it to ship until then?
Unless the CPU is done and they are now working on a memory controller to hook it up to, and they don't expect it to ship until then?</strong><hr></blockquote>
They don't work on these things one after the other. They develop the spec for the bus, usually do some test designs which are just the bus controller, and then start developing the final parts. If the processor designer and the chipset designer both know the bus spec then they can both design and build their chips at the same time. When the first prototypes arrive they put them together and test the heck out of them, revising the design(s) to fix mistakes. Then they start production when everybody is sure its going to work.
Look, if IBM is going to start spending all kinds of money making these things they are going to want to sell them immediately so they generate revenue and pay for the production. Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.
Well to use the common well respected car analogy methodolgy, it would be like designing a 5,000 HP motor for a dragtser and not having a transmission to deliver the power to the wheels, kinda got to do both at the same time or it ain't gonna be much use.
<strong>Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not quite sure if I fully understand your statement, but it sounds to me like you are assuming IBM is designing and assembling not only the CPU but the main logic board as well, with memory controllers etc. If that's a wrong interpretation, correct me, but if not, I think that's false. Apple will be designing (based off specs for the parts IBM supplies them with) and assembling the main logic board and various controllers. IBM has to ensure the pieces work, but it is up to Apple to actually design and build the board the brings them all together. No?
Not quite sure if I fully understand your statement, but it sounds to me like you are assuming IBM is designing and assembling not only the CPU but the main logic board as well, with memory controllers etc. If that's a wrong interpretation, correct me, but if not, I think that's false. Apple will be designing (based off specs for the parts IBM supplies them with) and assembling the main logic board and various controllers. IBM has to ensure the pieces work, but it is up to Apple to actually design and build the board the brings them all together. No?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you may be assuming that Apple will be the only one using this part. Fact is IBM has it's own plans for the chip and will be designing a motherboard for use in it's own workstation/servers.
<strong>If the processor designer and the chipset designer both know the bus spec then they can both design and build their chips at the same time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Up to a point. Past that point, you need samples to do QA against. And in a relationship like this one, it's going to be the CPU designer (IBM) who determines what the bus specs are ultimately going to be. Apple's not going to start work on a memory controller based on prototypes or specs that may have to change at some future point in order to address a design or fabrication problem.
[quote]<strong>When the first prototypes arrive they put them together and test the heck out of them, revising the design(s) to fix mistakes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But that's my point. If Apple were at the stage of building "prototype" boxes, they would, of necessity, be building them with near-production yield samples connected to chipsets in the final stages of completion. In other words, if we can believe the rumors that Apple has had 970 "prototype" boxes out there for some time (as some have rumored) then finished systems can not be so far off as to not be available until the middle of next year.
The mid-03 timing would indicate that Apple is just now seeing samples with which to build and test chipsets. Which would also explain IBM's schedule in as much as they aren't going to finalize any companion chips for their own use without having samples to work with either.
[quote]<strong>Look, if IBM is going to start spending all kinds of money making these things they are going to want to sell them immediately so they generate revenue and pay for the production. Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.
Why is this even a discussion?!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mostly because you're missing the point, I think. I'm not saying Apple isn't going to be using these chips, or that there isn't a market for them. I'm just saying that either rumors of previous Apple "prototype boxes" based on the 970 have been greatly exagerated or the 970 is much closer to full scale production than IBM admits.
In either case, we will see the 970 made available at the same time as a memory controller for it becomes available since, as you say, it's not much use without one. The only question is... when?
You're onto something that has been on my mind since IBM announced the "Target Date" for the 970. Lets introduce another factor into the mess :
Apple is secretive, as we all know and hate. Maybe Apple asked IBM to only announce their "General Target Date" for non-partners, keeping the other Target Date (one that is afforded to Apple only) unannounced. Or maybe Apple has a contract with IBM to get first rights to production units (aside from IBM itself), until after a specified amount of time has elapsed.
I really don't think that IBM would announce a Target Date and reduce "Steve's Thunder" of an announcement of PowerMacs reclaiming their "Power". Such an announcement saying Macs would have "exclusive" access to the 970 before the General Target Date would cement the alliance between Apple and IBM, and allow IBM to evaluate sales and expand the market according to needs.
i am beginning to think that those 970's are gonna be making it into mac next spring and NOT next fall or winter.
there is a e-week article that mentions that "sources" say apple and ibm have been working on this chip together for "over" a year.
we all have read what architosh has said about the whole G5 bruh ha ha,and their information is quite reliable from my point of view.
also...this will be the first powerpc processor that was announced before it shipped,which i find quite troubling and a VERY un-apple thing to do.
but i does make sense in light of previous archintosh prophecies about ndivia chipsets and motherboards that use hypertransport(apple pi).
i think what apple is very slowly and very shrewdly doing is positiioning the imac to take over part of the powermac range and when the next generation powermacs come out they will be the high-bandwidth high-end machines that everyone wants.
remember when new macs were over 5 grand?
i think those days are coming back.
apple is MUCH smarter than people give them credit for,mainly,most of the people who post on boards like this.
apple has mega-history in the personal computer industry,respect that.
excuse me - i just want to add a question here: wasn't the "velocity engine"-"altivec"-"ibm simd"-thing a part which has been co-developed by all three companies? if the 970 will be the first chip from ibm that'll get this simd-extension isn't this a hint that apple and ibm worked together on this chip? or at least apple has it's hands on it because it contains technology which apple co-developed? i think it could happen, that apple - as with the mot G4 - has the ability to produce machines with this chip earlier as others and perhaps at higher frequencies (for example: mot G4 @ 1.25Ghz) ...
so i keep my hopes up that i don't have to wait too long for my new 64bit-machine...
i have no doubt that apple has G5's with the new IBM cpu in them and have for a while now. the only problem is IBM didnt have the fab capabilities that apple required. which is why IBM just started building that new fab plant earlier this year that will double their current fabrication abilities.
i think what apple is very slowly and very shrewdly doing is positiioning the imac to take over part of the powermac range and when the next generation powermacs come out they will be the high-bandwidth high-end machines that everyone wants.
...
apple is MUCH smarter than people give them credit for,mainly,most of the people who post on boards like this.
...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
i hope you're right about the powermac, i think you're right about the imac (go get me a 19" imac),
No, Apple is NOT much smarter. They have only managed, through a succession of CEO's, over the last two decades, to slowly become smaller and smaller relative to the expansive explosion in the computer market. Now it's a bad time and people like to blame that, but Apple was doing even worse when times were good. They have been incredibly short sighted outside the areas of ergonmics and interface design. NOT smart.
Comments
<strong>
I was speaking of prototype Apple boxes, not prototypes of the CPUs from IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
My bad. I thought you were refering to machines based on 970 prototypes.
But here's a question for you. If Apple has had prototype boxes running the 970 CPU, what are they using for a memory controller? There isn't one in the 970, IBM has made no announcements concerning one, and I doubt that Motorola is interested in supplying one for the 970, so what would these "prototypes" be using?
Really I have little idea what Apple Pi is, but it sounds pretty cool.
<strong>
My bad. I thought you were refering to machines based on 970 prototypes.
But here's a question for you. If Apple has had prototype boxes running the 970 CPU, what are they using for a memory controller? There isn't one in the 970, IBM has made no announcements concerning one, and I doubt that Motorola is interested in supplying one for the 970, so what would these "prototypes" be using?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Since Apple has a long history of building their own chipsets I'd go out on a limb and venture to guess that they're using a new prototype chipset that Apple designed...? Duh.
There are the theories about Apple PI being a processor interconnect bus, and who knows -- maybe that is what the 970 uses (IBM isn't going to call their new PowerPC's bus interface "Apple PI", after all). In that case Apple designed the thing in the first place. Alternatively IBM designed the bus and, once they had, they would tell their leading customer what the specs were so that they could get going on the design. There's not much point in IBM being able to start shipping mid-03 if they haven't told anybody how to use it!
Programmer pretty much read me right. Ah well, it sounded good at 2:30am.
Here's a though though: If Apple were able to enable 2:1 compression across the bus then they would get quite a speed up. Could the RAM keep up? Would the hardware be worth it? Latencies suck?
I gotta stop reading this forum in the wee hours.
IBM says, "We call this new bus the GX32-UDx2 bus."
Apple says, "We're going to call it the ApplePI bus! Get it? ApplePie! Hehehehaha!"
IBM says, "
<strong>I can imagine the conversations between IBM and Apple:
IBM says, "We call this new bus the GX32-UDx2 bus."
Apple says, "We're going to call it the ApplePI bus! Get it? ApplePie! Hehehehaha!"
IBM says, "
Heh, yep that pretty much sums up the difference between the IBM and Apple corporate cultures.
<strong>Since Apple has a long history of building their own chipsets I'd go out on a limb and venture to guess that they're using a new prototype chipset that Apple designed...? Duh.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which would mean that Apple had samples so they could design the chipset, and given how long it would take them to finalize and test a chipset for a brand new CPU with a brand new bus, that in turn would mean that production level quantities of the CPU would be available today. So where are they?
[quote]<strong>There's not much point in IBM being able to start shipping mid-03 if they haven't told anybody how to use it!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unless the CPU is done and they are now working on a memory controller to hook it up to, and they don't expect it to ship until then?
<strong>
Unless the CPU is done and they are now working on a memory controller to hook it up to, and they don't expect it to ship until then?</strong><hr></blockquote>
They don't work on these things one after the other. They develop the spec for the bus, usually do some test designs which are just the bus controller, and then start developing the final parts. If the processor designer and the chipset designer both know the bus spec then they can both design and build their chips at the same time. When the first prototypes arrive they put them together and test the heck out of them, revising the design(s) to fix mistakes. Then they start production when everybody is sure its going to work.
Look, if IBM is going to start spending all kinds of money making these things they are going to want to sell them immediately so they generate revenue and pay for the production. Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.
Why is this even a discussion?!
(edit, can't spell)
[ 11-15-2002: Message edited by: Bigc ]</p>
<strong>Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not quite sure if I fully understand your statement, but it sounds to me like you are assuming IBM is designing and assembling not only the CPU but the main logic board as well, with memory controllers etc. If that's a wrong interpretation, correct me, but if not, I think that's false. Apple will be designing (based off specs for the parts IBM supplies them with) and assembling the main logic board and various controllers. IBM has to ensure the pieces work, but it is up to Apple to actually design and build the board the brings them all together. No?
<strong>
Not quite sure if I fully understand your statement, but it sounds to me like you are assuming IBM is designing and assembling not only the CPU but the main logic board as well, with memory controllers etc. If that's a wrong interpretation, correct me, but if not, I think that's false. Apple will be designing (based off specs for the parts IBM supplies them with) and assembling the main logic board and various controllers. IBM has to ensure the pieces work, but it is up to Apple to actually design and build the board the brings them all together. No?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you may be assuming that Apple will be the only one using this part. Fact is IBM has it's own plans for the chip and will be designing a motherboard for use in it's own workstation/servers.
<strong>I think you may be assuming that Apple will be the only one using this part.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. Just confining the discussion to the Mac World.
<strong>If the processor designer and the chipset designer both know the bus spec then they can both design and build their chips at the same time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Up to a point. Past that point, you need samples to do QA against. And in a relationship like this one, it's going to be the CPU designer (IBM) who determines what the bus specs are ultimately going to be. Apple's not going to start work on a memory controller based on prototypes or specs that may have to change at some future point in order to address a design or fabrication problem.
[quote]<strong>When the first prototypes arrive they put them together and test the heck out of them, revising the design(s) to fix mistakes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But that's my point. If Apple were at the stage of building "prototype" boxes, they would, of necessity, be building them with near-production yield samples connected to chipsets in the final stages of completion. In other words, if we can believe the rumors that Apple has had 970 "prototype" boxes out there for some time (as some have rumored) then finished systems can not be so far off as to not be available until the middle of next year.
The mid-03 timing would indicate that Apple is just now seeing samples with which to build and test chipsets. Which would also explain IBM's schedule in as much as they aren't going to finalize any companion chips for their own use without having samples to work with either.
[quote]<strong>Look, if IBM is going to start spending all kinds of money making these things they are going to want to sell them immediately so they generate revenue and pay for the production. Nobody is going to buy any of these things if they can't do anything with them, therefore IBM will ensure that by the time they start shipping this part they will have ensured that they have somebody to ship them to.
Why is this even a discussion?!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mostly because you're missing the point, I think. I'm not saying Apple isn't going to be using these chips, or that there isn't a market for them. I'm just saying that either rumors of previous Apple "prototype boxes" based on the 970 have been greatly exagerated or the 970 is much closer to full scale production than IBM admits.
In either case, we will see the 970 made available at the same time as a memory controller for it becomes available since, as you say, it's not much use without one. The only question is... when?
You're onto something that has been on my mind since IBM announced the "Target Date" for the 970. Lets introduce another factor into the mess :
Apple is secretive, as we all know and hate. Maybe Apple asked IBM to only announce their "General Target Date" for non-partners, keeping the other Target Date (one that is afforded to Apple only) unannounced. Or maybe Apple has a contract with IBM to get first rights to production units (aside from IBM itself), until after a specified amount of time has elapsed.
I really don't think that IBM would announce a Target Date and reduce "Steve's Thunder" of an announcement of PowerMacs reclaiming their "Power". Such an announcement saying Macs would have "exclusive" access to the 970 before the General Target Date would cement the alliance between Apple and IBM, and allow IBM to evaluate sales and expand the market according to needs.
Anyway, just my nagging thoughts.
there is a e-week article that mentions that "sources" say apple and ibm have been working on this chip together for "over" a year.
we all have read what architosh has said about the whole G5 bruh ha ha,and their information is quite reliable from my point of view.
also...this will be the first powerpc processor that was announced before it shipped,which i find quite troubling and a VERY un-apple thing to do.
but i does make sense in light of previous archintosh prophecies about ndivia chipsets and motherboards that use hypertransport(apple pi).
i think what apple is very slowly and very shrewdly doing is positiioning the imac to take over part of the powermac range and when the next generation powermacs come out they will be the high-bandwidth high-end machines that everyone wants.
remember when new macs were over 5 grand?
i think those days are coming back.
apple is MUCH smarter than people give them credit for,mainly,most of the people who post on boards like this.
apple has mega-history in the personal computer industry,respect that.
they have been there since the beginning.
yes....
so i keep my hopes up that i don't have to wait too long for my new 64bit-machine...
[ 11-16-2002: Message edited by: Krassy ]</p>
<strong>
i think what apple is very slowly and very shrewdly doing is positiioning the imac to take over part of the powermac range and when the next generation powermacs come out they will be the high-bandwidth high-end machines that everyone wants.
...
apple is MUCH smarter than people give them credit for,mainly,most of the people who post on boards like this.
...
i hope you're right about the powermac, i think you're right about the imac (go get me a 19" imac),
i know you're right about apple
[ 11-16-2002: Message edited by: gar ]
[ 11-16-2002: Message edited by: gar ]</p>