sometimes info is just too good to be true and this would appear to be the case. while everything stated sounds plausible and very realistic I find it hard to believe that one person would know so much.... <hr></blockquote>
Reaction against copy protection stuff is bollocks.
If and when MS introduces its copy protection software/hardware the music/film industries will adopt it too. ie and MS OS will be required to access content so protected. Some sector of computer users may be pissed off by this, but most aren't going to care one way or the other.
Of those that do care, there's no other recourse anyway, because the content they want will only be available in the copy protected form. Thus Apple is not going to pick up recruits because it offers no alternative, or will adopt the same standard of copy protection too in order to get some level of compatibility for existing and future Mac users.
Pissed? Blame all the pirates who've been spoiling it for honest users (or at least reasonably honest users).
This is the best and most logical rumor i have read it for a long time. I don't know if it is true : but in the contrary it must have been write by a Vulcain (pure logic).
The future will bring us an answer. The mac is not still dead yet. But i fear that we have to wait until the 970 to have something exciting coming from Apple.
I read this same article over at <a href="http://www.Macrumors.com"; target="_blank">www.Macrumors.com</a> then I saw it here. I read it twice and have come to the decision that any body that has been following the recent rumors could have put that thing together.
\tThe article is wrong in a few areas. First the problem in early O3 is not that the 7457 will not scale but that it won't be out till 2Q-03. When the chip does come out half way through the year we will see speeds of up to 1.8Ghz. The 970 will come out at around the same time with similar clock speeds as the 7457, of course it will be much faster.
\tBecause of the fact that both of these new chips are coming out at around the same time makes it difficult to predict when apple will release new systems. Will apple release the 970 Powermacs at the same time as the 7457 consumer macs or will apple release the 970 early with a pre order type thing?
\tI would also like to point out that, although I am not sure about the 7457-RM, I do know that it won't be ready for next year. So that chip is out of the picture for awhile.
So the question for the 7457 and 970 is when will we see them. I am guessing that we will see the 970 sooner than later. Otherwise we will see no Powermac speed bumps at MWSF. Also why would Woz be there if something cool wasn't happening.
Also just so you know: Many motorola documents show the 7457 going up to 1.3ghz and the 7455 going up to 1ghz. As we know already apple has a 7455 that runs at 1.25. The smaller process and SOI on the 7457 will allow it to go much faster that the 7455. The reason motorola doesn't advertise the real top speeds is because 90% of their customers want slower but cooler chips. Apple is the only buyer that actually wants the fast but hotter ones. Looking in the right places will reveal the true clock speeds of the 7457.
[quote]If and when MS introduces its copy protection software/hardware the music/film industries will adopt it too. ie and MS OS will be required to access content so protected.<hr></blockquote>
Little sideays here. If and when MS adopts copy protection (Intel as well) it will be a result of working with the music/film industry, who presently find MS's DRM direction very attractive.
[quote]Of those that do care, there's no other recourse anyway, because the content they want will only be available in the copy protected form.
<hr></blockquote>
In its unprotected form it also appears to be platform-centric, that is MS only. Can't name any music or movie delivery services that have Mac compatibility.
[quote]Pissed? Blame all the pirates who've been spoiling it for honest users (or at least reasonably honest users).<hr></blockquote>
No, blame the music/film industry who despite a complete lack of evidence wishes to blame the consumer for the drop in CD sales, and a drop in movie attendance. Anytime an industry acts with the assumption that all their customers are engaged in criminal behavior, that is a good indication that the industry is intellectually bereft of ideas, unable to deal with the future and morally suspect. These are the same people that said that VCR's would kill the industry (it instead opened up a lucrative post-theater sales and licensing market) and who pushed digital (CD's) to replace vinyl because they saw more profits in CD sales. There is still no direct evidence that mp3 downloads kill CD sales--crappy RIAA sponsored studies notwithstanding.
Consumers are sheep up until a certain point, if that were not the case MS would not have made substantial DRM changes to the XP Media OS. The consumer, in general, still believes in the tangibility of goods and purchase as ownership. Anything that messes with that basic assumption will meet with failure.
<strong>Do you think that Intel or Microsoft might actually have moles in Motorola to sabotage the chips?
Come on, pay someone $200,000 to take a dive would be cheap compared to market share riches.
How would anyone every know? Just have the lead engineer make a circuit mistake, a die error, a process oversight and voila, 12 months effort dow the tubes.
This is really sad. Pretty soon Connectix will come up with an emulator for WinTel for the Mac. VirtualMac. And when Intel is running at 5 Ghz, the VirtualMac will beat out the real, though BASE Macs.
Steve won't be able to cash in those stock options any time soon.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, sticking point would be licensing X I'm sure, if not then you'd need a 5.ghz chip to run it decent if VPC is any clue.
<strong>sometimes info is just too good to be true and this would appear to be the case. while everything stated sounds plausible and very realistic I find it hard to believe that one person would know so much. in order for someone to know all this I would assume they would be pretty high in the apple food chain and in that case easy to track down as a leak.
nice story, but well, I'll believe it when I see it</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I've known about a new moto G4 mobo due in Jan/Feb and that IBM would be making the next chips before the 970 was even announced, and I've said so on these boards. Everyone knows about Maklar, just no one knew it was a kick in the head while M$ is down one (which i think rocks )
So this is all not only very believable, but very likely.
<strong>So Motorola has problem with scaling up the G4. <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
They have had this since 1999.
They also had the same problem with the G3 and IBM stepped in.
They also had the same problem with the 604 and IBM stepped in.
At least they are constent <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, the 604 / 604e scaled pretty well. It debutted close to the 100mhz range and scaled to 350mhz rather quickly. Yes, IBM was in the picture at that time, but if you remember, the 604e actually ran at a higher clock rate than the equivalent Pentium of the day.
[quote]<strong>
There is no reason to call the 970 a G5. The 604 was not a called a G2 or the 603 was not called G1 or the 601 a G0. They should call it the "IBM 970".
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The "G" naming convention was an Apple marketing decision. There were too many version of PPC at the time with little meaning to the names. 601, 603, 603e 603ev, 604, 604e, 620, with 630 (G3) on the way, etc. Motorola then adopted Apple's naming convention to help identify the chips. The "G"eneration is a good way of describing the relative significance of a design change. There was not G1 or G2 because there was no need for it then. In fact, it would have just confused things further. For example, the 603 and 604 products were technically the same "G2" generation. The naming conventions became confusing around the G3 timeframe. Similarly, we've seen multiple "G4"s. There was the 7400, 7410, 7450, 7455, etc.
The PPC970 is a radical departure from the PPC74xx series such that it warrants a significant generation number. While there's no reason Apple "has" to stick with this convention, it would be confusing for it's consumers to do anything else.
[quote]<strong>
"If you want to have a UNIX workstation with a IBM 970 CPU you can buy one from "a big blue company" or from us, we will include iApplication XYZ"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM and Apple really compete for different markets. I don't think Apple will ever be all that successful in the enterprise business. It's not that I don't think they're capable of delivering, it's that there is just to much anti-Apple stigma on the corporate level. OS X is opening a few eyes, but it's going to take some time.
[quote]<strong>
The G4 laggs way behind the P4 and the G3 is behind the Celerons so why name someing G5? To hint that this is behind as well?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You can read anything you want into a name. When I see a new generation of a product (be it P5 or G5), that's a signal to me to throw out every preconceived notion about relative performance until I re-evaluate with new benchmarks. If the "G" terminology says to you that it must be slow, perhaps you should re-think what's in a name and what constitutes a new generation.
AMD called the K8 (codename Opteron) Athlon 64. Perhaps Apple will do the same, with this new chip : the PPC 64.
It will be more logical than the G5. The G5 is supposed to be an evolution of the G4. The ppc 970 is a whole new design derivated from the the power4 chips. It's more than simply a new generation : it's a new family of chips. The name will have to point out this, it's not an evolution it's a new family of chips.
I tell ya, movie attendance is not hurt by any form of piracy. No way. You might make an argument for MP3/music, but it doesn't wash at all for films. Firstly, (like music) the vast majority of films out there simply aren't worth the 13.50 Canadian, mega theatre or not. Consumers know about this, they read reviews online and in the papers and can usually find a critical source that meshes very well with their own tastes. Secondly, video rental/purchase and Cable/satelite are very good at delivering films to the audience. 13.50 Canadian, times 4 or 5 people, plus concessions, quickly turns into a very expensive 2 hours for many families. They'll wait 6 months, rent it and grab a pizza, and instead of 90-120 dollars, they'll spend 30. It makes a difference.
The quality argument goes a long way. There's too much crap out there that people just won't pay for. Even a catchy single is often saddled with a total piece of crap of an album. Some albums don't even offer that much. I know, I have a big music collection, and probably half of it was purchased second hand. In as much as I buy new discs, I often take a look through some oldies and find something I've wanted/liked and pick it up. (T.O. has a couple of nice new/used music vendors, and a lot of pretty decent Book shops) I might be more discriminating, but I think even snotty kids and screeching teen girls eventually tire of the 4th heavy breathing installment from teen boy redux version 14. Sure they'll listen to it on the radio, and maybe download it, but let's be honest, no one in their right mind is going to buy the NewKidsOnTheBlock reunion/detox tour live. Most of this serious work was never going to go further than a few months of airplay before it fizzled out and died.
Of course, now that corporate radio has a stake in making sure certain franchises don't die, instead of a few months, you get to listen to the same 40 songs on the radio for the better part of 18 months. Great fun that... not. The point is no one was going to buy the stuff to begin with, cause it stinks. More peope will listen to it, we listen to buskers on the street too, but we don't have a choice if they're standing in our way now, do we? Same thing with Mp3, we'll listen, but you can be pretty sure we won't pay for it when it doesn't meet our expectations.
Also, recent numbers from France and England suggest that music sales in the last 5 years are up not down, despite MP3.
<strong>AMD called the K8 (codename Opteron) Athlon 64. Perhaps Apple will do the same, with this new chip : the PPC 64.
It will be more logical than the G5.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dont think so.. The Athlon 64 is pro based, while Apple sells a lot of consumer machines! And the war between the Nintendo 64, PSX2, Sega and so on, has learned most consumers that dont know better, that 64 is out, and 128 bit is in!
Therefore I think it would be a step back...
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^^
\tThe article is wrong in a few areas. First the problem in early O3 is not that the 7457 will not scale but that it won't be out till 2Q-03. When the chip does come out half way through the year we will see speeds of up to 1.8Ghz. The 970 will come out at around the same time with similar clock speeds as the 7457, of course it will be much faster.
<hr></blockquote>
You're reading wrong for one-
[quote] Apple is in for another G4 drought in early 2003, whereby Motorola may not be able to push the G4 above 1.3 Ghz, which would be a paltry 50 Mhz speed bump with the upcoming 7457 G4 <hr></blockquote>
It means Apple will only have a possible 50mhz speedbump for Jan or early 2003. This is the new moto mobo G4 and we will se it early 2003. The 970 is coming out fall of 2003. So while mac users will be running naked in the streets throwing bitten apples at everyone when the leaves are turning brown, we will be quietly saving up those apples when the flowers bloom.
Dont think so.. The Athlon 64 is pro based, while Apple sells a lot of consumer machines! And the war between the Nintendo 64, PSX2, Sega and so on, has learned most consumers that dont know better, that 64 is out, and 128 bit is in!
Therefore I think it would be a step back...
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^
iMac keeps its name.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why not jsut round off so we coild have XPowermac?
or do a AMD and have Powermac 970/1400, ect. Or just call it a G9 (9=970) and say the powermacs just leap 5 generations into the future by ditching moto.
I still think G5 because it's the 5th generation chip for Apple. Everyone is anticipating the G5, news sites quote our G5 rumors, and every pc user that knows about macs knows about the mythological G5.
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^^
iMac keeps its name.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me guess, you probably like the Performa naming convention too??
I doubt the masses will get the whole 970, 980, etc. thing. If anything, it should be something like PowerMac G5, featuring the PPC970 or PPC980, etc.
I suspect we won't see any dramatic changes to the motherboard prior to the PPC970. I think the G5 will likely mean several things. The processor will be the first and foremost important thing, but faster bus / motherboard, etc. would also be implied with that naming convention. Remember, the "G" naming convention is an Apple marketing thing. It's not tied to any specific company or product line. For example, in handsight, Apple was smart by renaming Motorola's Altivec technology to Velocity engine. Now, when Apple moves to the PPC 970 with VMX, it can still advertise things like G5 with Velocity engine.
<strong>Another question: why would Apple look to IBM for its next generation processor in the fall of 2000 when it was expecting Moto to deliver the G5 in 2001?
Has Appl been planning to deliver a 970 workstation since 2000?
"Apple has numerous working prototypes, and will begin to send them to key developers later this month."
Is there anyone within the AI commune who will be receiving one of these?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple has been working with IBM on this project since before April 2000, and have had prototypes since mid March 2002.
<strong>Can someone explain to me why it would take a year from tape out to produce this part in quantity? 6-8 mos is more in line with industry average?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me guess, you probably like the Performa naming convention too??
I doubt the masses will get the whole 970, 980, etc. thing. If anything, it should be something like PowerMac G5, featuring the PPC970 or PPC980, etc.
I suspect we won't see any dramatic changes to the motherboard prior to the PPC970. I think the G5 will likely mean several things. The processor will be the first and foremost important thing, but faster bus / motherboard, etc. would also be implied with that naming convention. Remember, the "G" naming convention is an Apple marketing thing. It's not tied to any specific company or product line. For example, in handsight, Apple was smart by renaming Motorola's Altivec technology to Velocity engine. Now, when Apple moves to the PPC 970 with VMX, it can still advertise things like G5 with Velocity engine.
Steve
Steve</strong><hr></blockquote>
The problem with using the G5 moniker to describe the 970 is that it implies that the 970 is merely an evolution of the G4, much like the G4 was an evolution of the G3.
The 970 is a completely different beast (64-bit ISA, derived from POWER4, different system bus, made exclusive by IBM, etc.), and because the developemnt of the desktop PPC has stagnated at Motorola, as a result, the "brand" G4 has become tainted, so it makes more sense, IMO, to use a different naming convention, one that indicates that PowerMacs (and Xserves, Tibooks, imacs, etc.) equipped with the 970 are a huge leap ahead in performance and features.
The problem with using the G5 moniker to describe the 970 is that it implies that the 970 is merely an evolution of the G4, much like the G4 was an evolution of the G3.
The 970 is a completely different beast (64-bit ISA, derived from POWER4, different system bus, made exclusive by IBM, etc.), and because the developemnt of the desktop PPC has stagnated at Motorola, as a result, the "brand" G4 has become tainted, so it makes more sense, IMO, to use a different naming convention, one that indicates that PowerMacs (and Xserves, Tibooks, imacs, etc.) equipped with the 970 are a huge leap ahead in performance and features.</strong><hr></blockquote>
See I disagree, I see the G5 as meaning the next chip from Apple, the new chip, the next step. I don't think it has anything to do do with being the same family of chip, but if that's what it is, then the Powermac 970 is the most logical choice.
Comments
sometimes info is just too good to be true and this would appear to be the case. while everything stated sounds plausible and very realistic I find it hard to believe that one person would know so much.... <hr></blockquote>
1 word: Layoffs.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
If and when MS introduces its copy protection software/hardware the music/film industries will adopt it too. ie and MS OS will be required to access content so protected. Some sector of computer users may be pissed off by this, but most aren't going to care one way or the other.
Of those that do care, there's no other recourse anyway, because the content they want will only be available in the copy protected form. Thus Apple is not going to pick up recruits because it offers no alternative, or will adopt the same standard of copy protection too in order to get some level of compatibility for existing and future Mac users.
Pissed? Blame all the pirates who've been spoiling it for honest users (or at least reasonably honest users).
The future will bring us an answer. The mac is not still dead yet. But i fear that we have to wait until the 970 to have something exciting coming from Apple.
\tThe article is wrong in a few areas. First the problem in early O3 is not that the 7457 will not scale but that it won't be out till 2Q-03. When the chip does come out half way through the year we will see speeds of up to 1.8Ghz. The 970 will come out at around the same time with similar clock speeds as the 7457, of course it will be much faster.
\tBecause of the fact that both of these new chips are coming out at around the same time makes it difficult to predict when apple will release new systems. Will apple release the 970 Powermacs at the same time as the 7457 consumer macs or will apple release the 970 early with a pre order type thing?
\tI would also like to point out that, although I am not sure about the 7457-RM, I do know that it won't be ready for next year. So that chip is out of the picture for awhile.
So the question for the 7457 and 970 is when will we see them. I am guessing that we will see the 970 sooner than later. Otherwise we will see no Powermac speed bumps at MWSF. Also why would Woz be there if something cool wasn't happening.
Also just so you know: Many motorola documents show the 7457 going up to 1.3ghz and the 7455 going up to 1ghz. As we know already apple has a 7455 that runs at 1.25. The smaller process and SOI on the 7457 will allow it to go much faster that the 7455. The reason motorola doesn't advertise the real top speeds is because 90% of their customers want slower but cooler chips. Apple is the only buyer that actually wants the fast but hotter ones. Looking in the right places will reveal the true clock speeds of the 7457.
Little sideays here. If and when MS adopts copy protection (Intel as well) it will be a result of working with the music/film industry, who presently find MS's DRM direction very attractive.
[quote]Of those that do care, there's no other recourse anyway, because the content they want will only be available in the copy protected form.
<hr></blockquote>
In its unprotected form it also appears to be platform-centric, that is MS only. Can't name any music or movie delivery services that have Mac compatibility.
[quote]Pissed? Blame all the pirates who've been spoiling it for honest users (or at least reasonably honest users).<hr></blockquote>
No, blame the music/film industry who despite a complete lack of evidence wishes to blame the consumer for the drop in CD sales, and a drop in movie attendance. Anytime an industry acts with the assumption that all their customers are engaged in criminal behavior, that is a good indication that the industry is intellectually bereft of ideas, unable to deal with the future and morally suspect. These are the same people that said that VCR's would kill the industry (it instead opened up a lucrative post-theater sales and licensing market) and who pushed digital (CD's) to replace vinyl because they saw more profits in CD sales. There is still no direct evidence that mp3 downloads kill CD sales--crappy RIAA sponsored studies notwithstanding.
Consumers are sheep up until a certain point, if that were not the case MS would not have made substantial DRM changes to the XP Media OS. The consumer, in general, still believes in the tangibility of goods and purchase as ownership. Anything that messes with that basic assumption will meet with failure.
[ 11-25-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]
[ 11-25-2002: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
<strong>Do you think that Intel or Microsoft might actually have moles in Motorola to sabotage the chips?
Come on, pay someone $200,000 to take a dive would be cheap compared to market share riches.
How would anyone every know? Just have the lead engineer make a circuit mistake, a die error, a process oversight and voila, 12 months effort dow the tubes.
This is really sad. Pretty soon Connectix will come up with an emulator for WinTel for the Mac. VirtualMac. And when Intel is running at 5 Ghz, the VirtualMac will beat out the real, though BASE Macs.
Steve won't be able to cash in those stock options any time soon.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, sticking point would be licensing X I'm sure, if not then you'd need a 5.ghz chip to run it decent if VPC is any clue.
<strong>sometimes info is just too good to be true and this would appear to be the case. while everything stated sounds plausible and very realistic I find it hard to believe that one person would know so much. in order for someone to know all this I would assume they would be pretty high in the apple food chain and in that case easy to track down as a leak.
nice story, but well, I'll believe it when I see it</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I've known about a new moto G4 mobo due in Jan/Feb and that IBM would be making the next chips before the 970 was even announced, and I've said so on these boards. Everyone knows about Maklar, just no one knew it was a kick in the head while M$ is down one (which i think rocks
So this is all not only very believable, but very likely.
<strong>So Motorola has problem with scaling up the G4. <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
They have had this since 1999.
They also had the same problem with the G3 and IBM stepped in.
They also had the same problem with the 604 and IBM stepped in.
At least they are constent <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, the 604 / 604e scaled pretty well. It debutted close to the 100mhz range and scaled to 350mhz rather quickly. Yes, IBM was in the picture at that time, but if you remember, the 604e actually ran at a higher clock rate than the equivalent Pentium of the day.
[quote]<strong>
There is no reason to call the 970 a G5. The 604 was not a called a G2 or the 603 was not called G1 or the 601 a G0. They should call it the "IBM 970".
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The "G" naming convention was an Apple marketing decision. There were too many version of PPC at the time with little meaning to the names. 601, 603, 603e 603ev, 604, 604e, 620, with 630 (G3) on the way, etc. Motorola then adopted Apple's naming convention to help identify the chips. The "G"eneration is a good way of describing the relative significance of a design change. There was not G1 or G2 because there was no need for it then. In fact, it would have just confused things further. For example, the 603 and 604 products were technically the same "G2" generation. The naming conventions became confusing around the G3 timeframe. Similarly, we've seen multiple "G4"s. There was the 7400, 7410, 7450, 7455, etc.
The PPC970 is a radical departure from the PPC74xx series such that it warrants a significant generation number. While there's no reason Apple "has" to stick with this convention, it would be confusing for it's consumers to do anything else.
[quote]<strong>
"If you want to have a UNIX workstation with a IBM 970 CPU you can buy one from "a big blue company" or from us, we will include iApplication XYZ"
</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM and Apple really compete for different markets. I don't think Apple will ever be all that successful in the enterprise business. It's not that I don't think they're capable of delivering, it's that there is just to much anti-Apple stigma on the corporate level. OS X is opening a few eyes, but it's going to take some time.
[quote]<strong>
The G4 laggs way behind the P4 and the G3 is behind the Celerons so why name someing G5? To hint that this is behind as well?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You can read anything you want into a name. When I see a new generation of a product (be it P5 or G5), that's a signal to me to throw out every preconceived notion about relative performance until I re-evaluate with new benchmarks. If the "G" terminology says to you that it must be slow, perhaps you should re-think what's in a name and what constitutes a new generation.
Steve
Power Mac G5 with IBM PowerPC 970 CPU.
That would be the logical marketing progression.
Barto
It will be more logical than the G5. The G5 is supposed to be an evolution of the G4. The ppc 970 is a whole new design derivated from the the power4 chips. It's more than simply a new generation : it's a new family of chips. The name will have to point out this, it's not an evolution it's a new family of chips.
C64
G464
PPC 64
G4 PPC 64
The quality argument goes a long way. There's too much crap out there that people just won't pay for. Even a catchy single is often saddled with a total piece of crap of an album. Some albums don't even offer that much. I know, I have a big music collection, and probably half of it was purchased second hand. In as much as I buy new discs, I often take a look through some oldies and find something I've wanted/liked and pick it up. (T.O. has a couple of nice new/used music vendors, and a lot of pretty decent Book shops) I might be more discriminating, but I think even snotty kids and screeching teen girls eventually tire of the 4th heavy breathing installment from teen boy redux version 14. Sure they'll listen to it on the radio, and maybe download it, but let's be honest, no one in their right mind is going to buy the NewKidsOnTheBlock reunion/detox tour live. Most of this serious work was never going to go further than a few months of airplay before it fizzled out and died.
Of course, now that corporate radio has a stake in making sure certain franchises don't die, instead of a few months, you get to listen to the same 40 songs on the radio for the better part of 18 months. Great fun that... not. The point is no one was going to buy the stuff to begin with, cause it stinks. More peope will listen to it, we listen to buskers on the street too, but we don't have a choice if they're standing in our way now, do we? Same thing with Mp3, we'll listen, but you can be pretty sure we won't pay for it when it doesn't meet our expectations.
Also, recent numbers from France and England suggest that music sales in the last 5 years are up not down, despite MP3.
<strong>AMD called the K8 (codename Opteron) Athlon 64. Perhaps Apple will do the same, with this new chip : the PPC 64.
It will be more logical than the G5.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dont think so.. The Athlon 64 is pro based, while Apple sells a lot of consumer machines! And the war between the Nintendo 64, PSX2, Sega and so on, has learned most consumers that dont know better, that 64 is out, and 128 bit is in!
Therefore I think it would be a step back...
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^^
iMac keeps its name.
[QB]
\tThe article is wrong in a few areas. First the problem in early O3 is not that the 7457 will not scale but that it won't be out till 2Q-03. When the chip does come out half way through the year we will see speeds of up to 1.8Ghz. The 970 will come out at around the same time with similar clock speeds as the 7457, of course it will be much faster.
<hr></blockquote>
You're reading wrong for one-
[quote] Apple is in for another G4 drought in early 2003, whereby Motorola may not be able to push the G4 above 1.3 Ghz, which would be a paltry 50 Mhz speed bump with the upcoming 7457 G4 <hr></blockquote>
It means Apple will only have a possible 50mhz speedbump for Jan or early 2003. This is the new moto mobo G4 and we will se it early 2003. The 970 is coming out fall of 2003. So while mac users will be running naked in the streets throwing bitten apples at everyone when the leaves are turning brown, we will be quietly saving up those apples when the flowers bloom.
hehe
<strong>
Dont think so.. The Athlon 64 is pro based, while Apple sells a lot of consumer machines! And the war between the Nintendo 64, PSX2, Sega and so on, has learned most consumers that dont know better, that 64 is out, and 128 bit is in!
Therefore I think it would be a step back...
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^
iMac keeps its name.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why not jsut round off so we coild have XPowermac?
or do a AMD and have Powermac 970/1400, ect. Or just call it a G9 (9=970) and say the powermacs just leap 5 generations into the future by ditching moto.
I still think G5 because it's the 5th generation chip for Apple. Everyone is anticipating the G5, news sites quote our G5 rumors, and every pc user that knows about macs knows about the mythological G5.
Powermac G5
Powermac 970
XPowermac
<strong>
I go for Powermac 970, Powermac 980, Powermac 990 and so on.. ^^
iMac keeps its name.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me guess, you probably like the Performa naming convention too??
I doubt the masses will get the whole 970, 980, etc. thing. If anything, it should be something like PowerMac G5, featuring the PPC970 or PPC980, etc.
I suspect we won't see any dramatic changes to the motherboard prior to the PPC970. I think the G5 will likely mean several things. The processor will be the first and foremost important thing, but faster bus / motherboard, etc. would also be implied with that naming convention. Remember, the "G" naming convention is an Apple marketing thing. It's not tied to any specific company or product line. For example, in handsight, Apple was smart by renaming Motorola's Altivec technology to Velocity engine. Now, when Apple moves to the PPC 970 with VMX, it can still advertise things like G5 with Velocity engine.
Steve
Steve
<strong>Another question: why would Apple look to IBM for its next generation processor in the fall of 2000 when it was expecting Moto to deliver the G5 in 2001?
Has Appl been planning to deliver a 970 workstation since 2000?
"Apple has numerous working prototypes, and will begin to send them to key developers later this month."
Is there anyone within the AI commune who will be receiving one of these?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple has been working with IBM on this project since before April 2000, and have had prototypes since mid March 2002.
<strong>Can someone explain to me why it would take a year from tape out to produce this part in quantity? 6-8 mos is more in line with industry average?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Revisions ... maybe??
<strong>
Let me guess, you probably like the Performa naming convention too??
I doubt the masses will get the whole 970, 980, etc. thing. If anything, it should be something like PowerMac G5, featuring the PPC970 or PPC980, etc.
I suspect we won't see any dramatic changes to the motherboard prior to the PPC970. I think the G5 will likely mean several things. The processor will be the first and foremost important thing, but faster bus / motherboard, etc. would also be implied with that naming convention. Remember, the "G" naming convention is an Apple marketing thing. It's not tied to any specific company or product line. For example, in handsight, Apple was smart by renaming Motorola's Altivec technology to Velocity engine. Now, when Apple moves to the PPC 970 with VMX, it can still advertise things like G5 with Velocity engine.
Steve
Steve</strong><hr></blockquote>
The problem with using the G5 moniker to describe the 970 is that it implies that the 970 is merely an evolution of the G4, much like the G4 was an evolution of the G3.
The 970 is a completely different beast (64-bit ISA, derived from POWER4, different system bus, made exclusive by IBM, etc.), and because the developemnt of the desktop PPC has stagnated at Motorola, as a result, the "brand" G4 has become tainted, so it makes more sense, IMO, to use a different naming convention, one that indicates that PowerMacs (and Xserves, Tibooks, imacs, etc.) equipped with the 970 are a huge leap ahead in performance and features.
<strong>
The problem with using the G5 moniker to describe the 970 is that it implies that the 970 is merely an evolution of the G4, much like the G4 was an evolution of the G3.
The 970 is a completely different beast (64-bit ISA, derived from POWER4, different system bus, made exclusive by IBM, etc.), and because the developemnt of the desktop PPC has stagnated at Motorola, as a result, the "brand" G4 has become tainted, so it makes more sense, IMO, to use a different naming convention, one that indicates that PowerMacs (and Xserves, Tibooks, imacs, etc.) equipped with the 970 are a huge leap ahead in performance and features.</strong><hr></blockquote>
See I disagree, I see the G5 as meaning the next chip from Apple, the new chip, the next step. I don't think it has anything to do do with being the same family of chip, but if that's what it is, then the Powermac 970 is the most logical choice.