If I were heading up IBM's development of the GPUL, which is 64 bit, I FIRST would have developed a 32 bit version using the same architecture, 9 to 20 pipelines, 6.4 Gbit transfer rate, altivec, etc.
So, If I were heading up the GPUL project and its' projected release date were 2nd half to late 2003, then the GPUUL(giga processor ultra ultra lite) would have been shipping secretly to Apple in October for introduction into a new Apple computer for sale this February.
I think we all can agree that the PPC970 is coming some time this year. We just don't know how soon.
From what I know the PPC7457 was supposed to be ready 1Q-03, but that motorola is having trouble with their .13nm process. I believe that the PPC7457 has been delayed until 2Q-03 or some time in March. The PPC970 from IBM is supposed to go into production in late March for a release date closer to May for the first 970 PowerMacs.
I would assume that we will see the iMac with DDR memory and a slightly faster bus of 133Mhz. The top end iMac may have a 167Mhz bus. The emacs will be similar with maybe a slightly lower spec than the iMac and slightly cheaper. The 15" PowerBooks will be replaced by the new 15" models similar the the just released ones. I have no clue about the iBook. I imagine that you will see these things updated in the next month.
The PowerMacs will either get one more G4 upgrade in late february or march and then switch to the 970 in June. Or they will go ahead and switch to the 970 in March.
I wonder if the first 970's that are released will be available at 1.8 GHz. That was the top stated speed for the chip but may not be possible in its initial run. We could see 1.2-1.5 GHz chips first and then they ramp up to 1.8. Hopefully they will soon be replaced with 0.09 process chips with a corresponding increase in speed.
Any one know anything about moki's hints of other chips in the family? Maybe one designed more for the portables or a dual core chip with Altivec?
What I am wondering is how far the 7455 can go in first place - I think I saw someone post that 1.25 is it's maximum speed (at the possibility that it's already a tad "overclocked"). If that is true and if the 7457 wont arrive until Q203 - does it mean the PowerMacs will stay as they are, possibly until when the 970 systems are ready? Wouldn't that pretty much kill (almost) all PowerMac sales?
<strong>What I am wondering is how far the 7455 can go in first place - I think I saw someone post that 1.25 is it's maximum speed (at the possibility that it's already a tad "overclocked"). If that is true and if the 7457 wont arrive until Q203 - does it mean the PowerMacs will stay as they are, possibly until when the 970 systems are ready? Wouldn't that pretty much kill (almost) all PowerMac sales?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Depends what you mean by Q203. Financially we ARE in Q203. Technically it's Q1.
<strong>What I am wondering is how far the 7455 can go in first place - I think I saw someone post that 1.25 is it's maximum speed (at the possibility that it's already a tad "overclocked").</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mot only advertizes it as going to 1GHz, and its replacement was supposed to take the baton right about now.
[quote]<strong>If that is true and if the 7457 wont arrive until Q203 - does it mean the PowerMacs will stay as they are, possibly until when the 970 systems are ready? Wouldn't that pretty much kill (almost) all PowerMac sales?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wouldn't be surprised is apple drops Motorola for future updates in the near future. Motorola has made it pretty clear that they don't value apple's business and they don't currently have the resources to revamp their processors in a timely manner.
I think we all can agree that the PPC970 is coming some time this year. We just don't know how soon.
Not at all. Try January-April 2004, depending on how motherboard design goes. The 970 is *not* just a plug in replacement for the G4 and Apple is (from reports) having a hell of a time with the board design. There is a considerable chance that that Apple never produces a 970 based machine. (Want a more technical description of why not? Check Ars Technica's Macintosh board.)
As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot...
(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.
Apple are not fools enough to trust their life to a project that is essentially insignificant for a company of IBM's size. At least if Motorola gave up on the G4 altogether, it would seriously impact their reputation (although it would enhance their bottom line).
Luckily, the thing that saves Apple's bacon is that machine speed *is* becoming irrelevant for the vast majority of users. Most users can't see any real speed difference between a 800 Mhz P4 and a 2.4 Mhz P4. The geeks might feel the difference, but for the average browser/emailer/etc., speed is not really an issue, except for marketing. It's one of the reasons that the computer market is being incinerated...
Of course, if you are part of the market that needs speed, life sucks. However, Motorola engineers are unwilling to use their magic wand that makes everything speed up. At least, that's the impression I get from these boards. How dare Motorola be unable to match Intel! How dare Apple not make Motorola produce faster chips! Obviously any half-competent engineer in a garage could do it :-)
Anyway, this why Apple is moving to portables. The performance penalty is becoming negligable in the eyes of the user and the margins are a lot higher.
BTW there are some new releases of information (Jan '03) on Mot's website about the 7455. One in particular, MPC7455EC.pdf has info about current DDR implementation, but I haven't seen any clues to tell of what might be forthcoming, which is typical. (Not that I understand any of it).
Evidently there is another processor bus (besides MPX) available for some applications, it's called 60x and connects to each processor in a DP config individually. Pardon my ignorance - Is this news? No mention of processor bus frequency >100 MHz though.
There is a considerable chance that that Apple never produces a 970 based machine.
I suppose there are idiots who might believe this.
As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot...
(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
You're peculiar take on the how multi-billion dollar corporations would walk away from hundreds of millions of dollars in sunk costs just because they got their panties in a knot is refreshingly naive.
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.
IBM designed the 970 on a lark and might walk away from it any time? Whatever. IBM sat down with its signficant and longtime customer, Apple, spent time and money projecting the future of the CPU market, spent tens of millions designing and developing the result, released it to universal acclaim at the MPF, and are now going to shelve it.
mmkay. thanks for taking the time to write.
The 970 won't just materialize. When it comes, it may simply put Apple on par with the lastest intel/amd computers. But what, when, how and why the 970 appear wil have nothing to do with your "analysis".
Evidently there is another processor bus (besides MPX) available for some applications, it's called 60x and connects to each processor in a DP config individually. Pardon my ignorance - Is this news? No mention of processor bus frequency >100 MHz though.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The MPX Bus superceded the 601 bus. the 601 bus was so named because it first appeared in the PPC 601 series of PPC chips. The 601 chips were in the Power Macintosh 6100, 7100 and 8100
The MPX Bus superceded the 601 bus. the 601 bus was so named because it first appeared in the PPC 601 series of PPC chips. The 601 chips were in the Power Macintosh 6100, 7100 and 8100</strong><hr></blockquote>
No doubt you are correct, but just so you don't think I'm completely batty this is what I found: [quote]This document describes the design information on the MVP reference platform. MVP, short
for Multiprocessing Verification Platform, is a dual-processor MPC7455-based platform
which allows evaluation of the 60X or MPX bus interfaces. It provides all necessary
I picked up two of the new 12" PowerBooks at MWSF. To me, they were very, very hot on the bottom. I asked several Apple reps whether these machines would ship (few weeks) with the same model of G4 chips as were in these show samples. I was assured they would be the same G4 model.
I have to agree with some of the sentiments posted above. Apple does a great job of making the best (spin) out of what it has available at that time. However, this may not be what many customers want or need.
Obviously this prob doesn't relate to Apple products, but I found it interesting that the 7455 could have another bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 60x bus is what the G3 uses, and for a long time Motorola didn't even offer a memory controller for the G4 that supported MaxBus. Apple ended up rolling their own.
Trust me, you don't want to downgrade back to the 60x. MaxBus might not support clock-doubling, but it's incredibly efficient. The 60x is not. It's still an option because it's much simpler and cheaper to support the 60x than the MaxBus.
<strong>Not at all. Try January-April 2004, depending on how motherboard design goes. The 970 is *not* just a plug in replacement for the G4 and Apple is (from reports) having a hell of a time with the board design. There is a considerable chance that that Apple never produces a 970 based machine. (Want a more technical description of why not? Check Ars Technica's Macintosh board.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
And there are plenty more arguments @ Ars indicating that Apple will use the 970. Let's see, the 970 is designed for desktops and low end towers, mmmmm, who might use this chip?
[quote]<strong>As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Mmmmm, @ the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002, Motorola had a press release listing Apple in the top FIVE or their customers in dollar purchasing. If I were a CEO I don't think I'd ignore a top five customer, unless, I didn't like my job. But then again who knows what Motorola might do?
[quote]<strong>(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM wouldn't have spent the R&D in developing a cpu they thought would be an insignificant part of their total sales. Me personally, I suspect IBM has BIG plans for this chip in the low-end server market, going head to head with competitors. Let's see, they announce the chip @ the Microprocessor Forum in quite significant detail. Then cancel the product and face the ridicule of the entire industry for spending millions on a product with no future, this is patently absurd. Maybe Apple won't use it, but the 970 will be produced.
[quote]<strong>Apple are not fools enough to trust their life to a project that is essentially insignificant for a company of IBM's size. At least if Motorola gave up on the G4 altogether, it would seriously impact their reputation (although it would enhance their bottom line).</strong><hr></blockquote>
How do you know dropping the G4 would enhance their bottom line. I say it would degrade their bottom line.
[quote]<strong>Luckily, the thing that saves Apple's bacon is that machine speed *is* becoming irrelevant for the vast majority of users. Most users can't see any real speed difference between a 800 Mhz P4 and a 2.4 Mhz P4. The geeks might feel the difference, but for the average browser/emailer/etc., speed is not really an issue, except for marketing. It's one of the reasons that the computer market is being incinerated...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's a P4 problem.
[quote]<strong>Of course, if you are part of the market that needs speed, life sucks. However, Motorola engineers are unwilling to use their magic wand that makes everything speed up. At least, that's the impression I get from these boards. How dare Motorola be unable to match Intel! How dare Apple not make Motorola produce faster chips! Obviously any half-competent engineer in a garage could do it :-)</strong><hr></blockquote>
In the past Motorola's competition was not Intel, but that may be changing. Intel, AMD and IBM appear to be looking into Motorola's market more actively. Will see.
[quote]<strong>Anyway, this why Apple is moving to portables. The performance penalty is becoming negligable in the eyes of the user and the margins are a lot higher.</strong><hr></blockquote>
We'll see. I believe Steven Jobs references to replacing desktops with laptops has been blown out of proportion. Certainly, there is a market for this but the desktops won't be going away soon. PR fluff for Macworld.
And there are plenty more arguments @ Ars indicating that Apple will use the 970. Let's see, the 970 is designed for desktops and low end towers, mmmmm, who might use this chip?
Obviously Apple is *meant* to use this chip. That doesn't necessarily that it will be *able* to effectively use the chip. If Apple can't design the appropriate memory controllers, it'll have to give the chip a pass, or at least a big delay.
Mmmmm, @ the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002, Motorola had a press release listing Apple in the top FIVE or their customers in dollar purchasing. If I were a CEO I don't think I'd ignore a top five customer, unless, I didn't like my job. But then again who knows what Motorola might do?
Was that top 5 client or top 5 microprocessor client? If Apple is really a top 5 client, then you are right and its unlikely the Motorola is going to just stop selling G4's. On the other hand, there are continued rumors about Motorola just selling the whole division and getting out while it can. Not something you do if the division is making money...
IBM wouldn't have spent the R&D in developing a cpu they thought would be an insignificant part of their total sales.
Garbage. IBM is so diverse that there is *nothing* that is a huge part of their total sales. It's why they're so resilient. Think OS/2. They put a *huge* effort into it (probably about 100 times what they're putting into the 970). It only had hundreds of thousands of paying customers, so it was effectively killed. For crying out loud, IBM has pretty much stopped making desktops because the return wasn't good enough! This is a company that can rationally look at a market and say "We're not making 10% annually on our investment, kill the project and move on."
Of course, IBM doesn't *intend to fail*. However, unlike Apple, if they run into development trouble or slow sales, they will ditch it. It's the same reason why having Apple bought by a big company would be disasterous. Having a bad year? Close the division down. It's always wise to have a supplier that depends on their product as much as you do. Apple doesn't have that choice, but they'd be fools to depend entirely on a product that is 0.1% of IBM's sales.
It's not any worse than Apple killing a few software companies that depended on Apple technologies that they abandoned. Or does noone remember document-centric computing anymore? Or Newton? Or...
(IBM Year 2000 sales, 88 billion, Apple CPU sales at $100 x 1,000,000 CPU's $100,000,000)
Me personally, I suspect IBM has BIG plans for this chip in the low-end server market, going head to head with competitors. Let's see, they announce the chip @ the Microprocessor Forum in quite significant detail. Then cancel the product and face the ridicule of the entire industry for spending millions on a product with no future, this is patently absurd. Maybe Apple won't use it, but the 970 will be produced.
I think it almost a certainty that the 970 will be produced unless IBM has a incredibly bad 2003, in which case they may just kill all sorts of projects as "too much additional investment required".
However, the chance that it (and its follow-ons) are in production in 5 years is about 75% in my opinion. Would I throw my company completely around a chip with a 25% (my guess) chance of disappearance? Not in your life. And I doubt IBM would be willing to guarantee 10 years of multimillion dollar investments...
How do you know dropping the G4 would enhance their bottom line. I say it would degrade their bottom line.
Only because if the microprocessor division was making money, they wouldn't have essentially stopped putting R+D money into it.
In the past Motorola's competition was not Intel, but that may be changing. Intel, AMD and IBM appear to be looking into Motorola's market more actively. Will see.
I doubt that anyone is going to fight for a market that's already marginal. Even the Intel processor market is looking weak for anyone but Intel.
IBM is investing a lot into Linux. I suppose that is for lowend servers. The money on Linux is support contracs and the hardware.
Let see what would make more money for IBM selling a Linux box with a Intel P4 or a a Linuxbox with IBM 970
The thought that Motorola is able to produce a competetive CPU is questionable. The last one they made was the 68030 for the IIfx. This was the time of OS 6 and multifinder. Way before the advanced OS 7...
(The 604E in the 9600/350 and the G3 in the B&W G3/450 were made by IBM).
Getting the 970 to work might be tricky but what options do Apple have. The current top of the line tower is only 230 MHz away from running at 1/3 of the speed of the P4. The grave technical problem that started with the G4 in 1999 does not seem to be truly solved now 2003 and I do not expect them to ever be.
<strong>They didn't update the pBook, they added new models, there's a difference. If the 15" was updated only then I'd see an issue, not by adding totally new models. Jobs wanted something out before Christmas but wanted to make a splash at a big expo. So, only rlease the 15" and don't update it at the show.</strong><hr></blockquote>
With that reasoning it has been ovthe intro of the 15" iMac, and 6 months since the intro of the 17" iMac...it is past time for a rev of these models. Come on Apple, these slow updates and underwelming revisions are hurting...and this will only get worse if they dont find a solution and come out with a BIG rev soon.
<strong>[qb]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
Well, the info I have says yes, the 970 will beat the 57 & 47.</strong>
Wow! This would mean that Motorola would be 2 years behind with its 0.13 micron fab. I can sort of believe you since Moto's PowerQUICC III (MPC8560) and 8540 haven't hit the market yet, at least as far as I can tell, and maybe won't until mid-2003.
<strong>But others here sound like they have info that the 57/47s are almost ready to go (esp. KidRed), so I'm hoping that my info is either wrong, or just extremely hedged.</strong>
We've been waiting for a 0.13 (HiP 7) G4 for at least a year. Waiting another year would almost seem like the final death knell of Moto as Apple's CPU supplier. But sooner or later, Moto's 0.13 micron fab has to start ramping up so product for Apple.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
It seams to me Moto can design chips, but cant fab them...why dont they just contract the fab out to other componies like IBM or AMD, especially for thier high profile chips like the G4 (it is their only commericailly labeled processor that I know of today, other)
Comments
If I were heading up IBM's development of the GPUL, which is 64 bit, I FIRST would have developed a 32 bit version using the same architecture, 9 to 20 pipelines, 6.4 Gbit transfer rate, altivec, etc.
So, If I were heading up the GPUL project and its' projected release date were 2nd half to late 2003, then the GPUUL(giga processor ultra ultra lite) would have been shipping secretly to Apple in October for introduction into a new Apple computer for sale this February.
But that's just my fantasy.
From what I know the PPC7457 was supposed to be ready 1Q-03, but that motorola is having trouble with their .13nm process. I believe that the PPC7457 has been delayed until 2Q-03 or some time in March. The PPC970 from IBM is supposed to go into production in late March for a release date closer to May for the first 970 PowerMacs.
I would assume that we will see the iMac with DDR memory and a slightly faster bus of 133Mhz. The top end iMac may have a 167Mhz bus. The emacs will be similar with maybe a slightly lower spec than the iMac and slightly cheaper. The 15" PowerBooks will be replaced by the new 15" models similar the the just released ones. I have no clue about the iBook. I imagine that you will see these things updated in the next month.
The PowerMacs will either get one more G4 upgrade in late february or march and then switch to the 970 in June. Or they will go ahead and switch to the 970 in March.
What do you think? Sound reasonable?
Any one know anything about moki's hints of other chips in the family? Maybe one designed more for the portables or a dual core chip with Altivec?
<strong>What I am wondering is how far the 7455 can go in first place - I think I saw someone post that 1.25 is it's maximum speed (at the possibility that it's already a tad "overclocked"). If that is true and if the 7457 wont arrive until Q203 - does it mean the PowerMacs will stay as they are, possibly until when the 970 systems are ready? Wouldn't that pretty much kill (almost) all PowerMac sales?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Depends what you mean by Q203. Financially we ARE in Q203. Technically it's Q1.
<strong>
Depends what you mean by Q203. Financially we ARE in Q203. Technically it's Q1.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I ment techincally 2 days before technical Q3...
<strong>What I am wondering is how far the 7455 can go in first place - I think I saw someone post that 1.25 is it's maximum speed (at the possibility that it's already a tad "overclocked").</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mot only advertizes it as going to 1GHz, and its replacement was supposed to take the baton right about now.
[quote]<strong>If that is true and if the 7457 wont arrive until Q203 - does it mean the PowerMacs will stay as they are, possibly until when the 970 systems are ready? Wouldn't that pretty much kill (almost) all PowerMac sales?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why do you think Steve rolled out the 17" PB?
Not at all. Try January-April 2004, depending on how motherboard design goes. The 970 is *not* just a plug in replacement for the G4 and Apple is (from reports) having a hell of a time with the board design. There is a considerable chance that that Apple never produces a 970 based machine. (Want a more technical description of why not? Check Ars Technica's Macintosh board.)
As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot...
(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.
Apple are not fools enough to trust their life to a project that is essentially insignificant for a company of IBM's size. At least if Motorola gave up on the G4 altogether, it would seriously impact their reputation (although it would enhance their bottom line).
Luckily, the thing that saves Apple's bacon is that machine speed *is* becoming irrelevant for the vast majority of users. Most users can't see any real speed difference between a 800 Mhz P4 and a 2.4 Mhz P4. The geeks might feel the difference, but for the average browser/emailer/etc., speed is not really an issue, except for marketing. It's one of the reasons that the computer market is being incinerated...
Of course, if you are part of the market that needs speed, life sucks. However, Motorola engineers are unwilling to use their magic wand that makes everything speed up. At least, that's the impression I get from these boards. How dare Motorola be unable to match Intel! How dare Apple not make Motorola produce faster chips! Obviously any half-competent engineer in a garage could do it :-)
Anyway, this why Apple is moving to portables. The performance penalty is becoming negligable in the eyes of the user and the margins are a lot higher.
BTW there are some new releases of information (Jan '03) on Mot's website about the 7455. One in particular, MPC7455EC.pdf has info about current DDR implementation, but I haven't seen any clues to tell of what might be forthcoming, which is typical. (Not that I understand any of it).
Evidently there is another processor bus (besides MPX) available for some applications, it's called 60x and connects to each processor in a DP config individually. Pardon my ignorance - Is this news? No mention of processor bus frequency >100 MHz though.
[ 01-10-2003: Message edited by: pey/coy-ote ]
[ 01-10-2003: Message edited by: pey/coy-ote ]</p>
I suppose there are idiots who might believe this.
As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot...
(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
You're peculiar take on the how multi-billion dollar corporations would walk away from hundreds of millions of dollars in sunk costs just because they got their panties in a knot is refreshingly naive.
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.
IBM designed the 970 on a lark and might walk away from it any time? Whatever. IBM sat down with its signficant and longtime customer, Apple, spent time and money projecting the future of the CPU market, spent tens of millions designing and developing the result, released it to universal acclaim at the MPF, and are now going to shelve it.
mmkay. thanks for taking the time to write.
The 970 won't just materialize. When it comes, it may simply put Apple on par with the lastest intel/amd computers. But what, when, how and why the 970 appear wil have nothing to do with your "analysis".
<strong>*(some of)what he said*
Evidently there is another processor bus (besides MPX) available for some applications, it's called 60x and connects to each processor in a DP config individually. Pardon my ignorance - Is this news? No mention of processor bus frequency >100 MHz though.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The MPX Bus superceded the 601 bus. the 601 bus was so named because it first appeared in the PPC 601 series of PPC chips. The 601 chips were in the Power Macintosh 6100, 7100 and 8100
<strong>
The MPX Bus superceded the 601 bus. the 601 bus was so named because it first appeared in the PPC 601 series of PPC chips. The 601 chips were in the Power Macintosh 6100, 7100 and 8100</strong><hr></blockquote>
No doubt you are correct, but just so you don't think I'm completely batty this is what I found: [quote]This document describes the design information on the MVP reference platform. MVP, short
for Multiprocessing Verification Platform, is a dual-processor MPC7455-based platform
which allows evaluation of the 60X or MPX bus interfaces. It provides all necessary
computing platform devices needed to boot Linux, QNX, VxWorks, or other OSes.<hr></blockquote> In this article: MVPX3DW.pdf <a href="http://search.motorola.com/computers/query.html?col=corp&col=sps&col=mcg&charset=iso-8859-1&ht=0&qp=&qt=7455++60x&qs=&qc=&pw=100%&ws=1&la= en&qm=0&st=1&nh=25&lk=1&rf=0&rq=0&si=0" target="_blank">seeMVPX Product Summary Page</a>
Obviously this prob doesn't relate to Apple products, but I found it interesting that the 7455 could have another bus.
I have to agree with some of the sentiments posted above. Apple does a great job of making the best (spin) out of what it has available at that time. However, this may not be what many customers want or need.
<strong> In this article: MVPX3DW.pdf <a href="http://search.motorola.com/computers/query.html?col=corp&col=sps&col=mcg&charset=iso-8859-1&ht=0&qp=&qt=7455++60x&qs=&qc=&pw=100%&ws=1&la= en&qm=0&st=1&nh=25&lk=1&rf=0&rq=0&si=0" target="_blank">seeMVPX Product Summary Page</a>
Obviously this prob doesn't relate to Apple products, but I found it interesting that the 7455 could have another bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 60x bus is what the G3 uses, and for a long time Motorola didn't even offer a memory controller for the G4 that supported MaxBus. Apple ended up rolling their own.
Trust me, you don't want to downgrade back to the 60x. MaxBus might not support clock-doubling, but it's incredibly efficient. The 60x is not. It's still an option because it's much simpler and cheaper to support the 60x than the MaxBus.
[ 01-11-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>Not at all. Try January-April 2004, depending on how motherboard design goes. The 970 is *not* just a plug in replacement for the G4 and Apple is (from reports) having a hell of a time with the board design. There is a considerable chance that that Apple never produces a 970 based machine. (Want a more technical description of why not? Check Ars Technica's Macintosh board.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
And there are plenty more arguments @ Ars indicating that Apple will use the 970. Let's see, the 970 is designed for desktops and low end towers, mmmmm, who might use this chip?
[quote]<strong>As for Motorola, there's a semi-serious chance that if Apple gives them too much flack for slow design that they'll cut Apple off. There losing money on the entire chip area, so why should they continue subsidizing a whining Apple? A lot of Motorolans (especially right after being chewed out by Apple) feel that they'd be better off just closing up shop and saving all the money being wasted on R+D. Of course, that would be the end of Apple on the spot... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Mmmmm, @ the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002, Motorola had a press release listing Apple in the top FIVE or their customers in dollar purchasing. If I were a CEO I don't think I'd ignore a top five customer, unless, I didn't like my job. But then again who knows what Motorola might do?
[quote]<strong>(All I can think is that thank God the Motorolans don't read this board or they'd just let Apple rot tomorrow... :-))
As for IBM, it should be pointed out that the 970 is going to be such an insignificant part of their total sales that they could easily decide to vaporize the entire project at the stroke of a pen. Larger projects than the 970 get killed off without a second thought because of refocus in other areas, bad market outlook, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM wouldn't have spent the R&D in developing a cpu they thought would be an insignificant part of their total sales. Me personally, I suspect IBM has BIG plans for this chip in the low-end server market, going head to head with competitors. Let's see, they announce the chip @ the Microprocessor Forum in quite significant detail. Then cancel the product and face the ridicule of the entire industry for spending millions on a product with no future, this is patently absurd. Maybe Apple won't use it, but the 970 will be produced.
[quote]<strong>Apple are not fools enough to trust their life to a project that is essentially insignificant for a company of IBM's size. At least if Motorola gave up on the G4 altogether, it would seriously impact their reputation (although it would enhance their bottom line).</strong><hr></blockquote>
How do you know dropping the G4 would enhance their bottom line. I say it would degrade their bottom line.
[quote]<strong>Luckily, the thing that saves Apple's bacon is that machine speed *is* becoming irrelevant for the vast majority of users. Most users can't see any real speed difference between a 800 Mhz P4 and a 2.4 Mhz P4. The geeks might feel the difference, but for the average browser/emailer/etc., speed is not really an issue, except for marketing. It's one of the reasons that the computer market is being incinerated...</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's a P4 problem.
[quote]<strong>Of course, if you are part of the market that needs speed, life sucks. However, Motorola engineers are unwilling to use their magic wand that makes everything speed up. At least, that's the impression I get from these boards. How dare Motorola be unable to match Intel! How dare Apple not make Motorola produce faster chips! Obviously any half-competent engineer in a garage could do it :-)</strong><hr></blockquote>
In the past Motorola's competition was not Intel, but that may be changing. Intel, AMD and IBM appear to be looking into Motorola's market more actively. Will see.
[quote]<strong>Anyway, this why Apple is moving to portables. The performance penalty is becoming negligable in the eyes of the user and the margins are a lot higher.</strong><hr></blockquote>
We'll see. I believe Steven Jobs references to replacing desktops with laptops has been blown out of proportion. Certainly, there is a market for this but the desktops won't be going away soon. PR fluff for Macworld.
[ 01-11-2003: Message edited by: rickag ]
[ 01-11-2003: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
Obviously Apple is *meant* to use this chip. That doesn't necessarily that it will be *able* to effectively use the chip. If Apple can't design the appropriate memory controllers, it'll have to give the chip a pass, or at least a big delay.
Mmmmm, @ the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002, Motorola had a press release listing Apple in the top FIVE or their customers in dollar purchasing. If I were a CEO I don't think I'd ignore a top five customer, unless, I didn't like my job. But then again who knows what Motorola might do?
Was that top 5 client or top 5 microprocessor client? If Apple is really a top 5 client, then you are right and its unlikely the Motorola is going to just stop selling G4's. On the other hand, there are continued rumors about Motorola just selling the whole division and getting out while it can. Not something you do if the division is making money...
IBM wouldn't have spent the R&D in developing a cpu they thought would be an insignificant part of their total sales.
Garbage. IBM is so diverse that there is *nothing* that is a huge part of their total sales. It's why they're so resilient. Think OS/2. They put a *huge* effort into it (probably about 100 times what they're putting into the 970). It only had hundreds of thousands of paying customers, so it was effectively killed. For crying out loud, IBM has pretty much stopped making desktops because the return wasn't good enough! This is a company that can rationally look at a market and say "We're not making 10% annually on our investment, kill the project and move on."
Of course, IBM doesn't *intend to fail*. However, unlike Apple, if they run into development trouble or slow sales, they will ditch it. It's the same reason why having Apple bought by a big company would be disasterous. Having a bad year? Close the division down. It's always wise to have a supplier that depends on their product as much as you do. Apple doesn't have that choice, but they'd be fools to depend entirely on a product that is 0.1% of IBM's sales.
It's not any worse than Apple killing a few software companies that depended on Apple technologies that they abandoned. Or does noone remember document-centric computing anymore? Or Newton? Or...
(IBM Year 2000 sales, 88 billion, Apple CPU sales at $100 x 1,000,000 CPU's $100,000,000)
Me personally, I suspect IBM has BIG plans for this chip in the low-end server market, going head to head with competitors. Let's see, they announce the chip @ the Microprocessor Forum in quite significant detail. Then cancel the product and face the ridicule of the entire industry for spending millions on a product with no future, this is patently absurd. Maybe Apple won't use it, but the 970 will be produced.
I think it almost a certainty that the 970 will be produced unless IBM has a incredibly bad 2003, in which case they may just kill all sorts of projects as "too much additional investment required".
However, the chance that it (and its follow-ons) are in production in 5 years is about 75% in my opinion. Would I throw my company completely around a chip with a 25% (my guess) chance of disappearance? Not in your life. And I doubt IBM would be willing to guarantee 10 years of multimillion dollar investments...
How do you know dropping the G4 would enhance their bottom line. I say it would degrade their bottom line.
Only because if the microprocessor division was making money, they wouldn't have essentially stopped putting R+D money into it.
In the past Motorola's competition was not Intel, but that may be changing. Intel, AMD and IBM appear to be looking into Motorola's market more actively. Will see.
I doubt that anyone is going to fight for a market that's already marginal. Even the Intel processor market is looking weak for anyone but Intel.
IBM is investing a lot into Linux. I suppose that is for lowend servers. The money on Linux is support contracs and the hardware.
Let see what would make more money for IBM selling a Linux box with a Intel P4 or a a Linuxbox with IBM 970
The thought that Motorola is able to produce a competetive CPU is questionable. The last one they made was the 68030 for the IIfx. This was the time of OS 6 and multifinder. Way before the advanced OS 7...
(The 604E in the 9600/350 and the G3 in the B&W G3/450 were made by IBM).
Getting the 970 to work might be tricky but what options do Apple have. The current top of the line tower is only 230 MHz away from running at 1/3 of the speed of the P4. The grave technical problem that started with the G4 in 1999 does not seem to be truly solved now 2003 and I do not expect them to ever be.
<strong>They didn't update the pBook, they added new models, there's a difference. If the 15" was updated only then I'd see an issue, not by adding totally new models. Jobs wanted something out before Christmas but wanted to make a splash at a big expo. So, only rlease the 15" and don't update it at the show.</strong><hr></blockquote>
With that reasoning it has been ovthe intro of the 15" iMac, and 6 months since the intro of the 17" iMac...it is past time for a rev of these models. Come on Apple, these slow updates and underwelming revisions are hurting...and this will only get worse if they dont find a solution and come out with a BIG rev soon.
<strong>[qb]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
Well, the info I have says yes, the 970 will beat the 57 & 47.</strong>
Wow! This would mean that Motorola would be 2 years behind with its 0.13 micron fab. I can sort of believe you since Moto's PowerQUICC III (MPC8560) and 8540 haven't hit the market yet, at least as far as I can tell, and maybe won't until mid-2003.
<strong>But others here sound like they have info that the 57/47s are almost ready to go (esp. KidRed), so I'm hoping that my info is either wrong, or just extremely hedged.</strong>
We've been waiting for a 0.13 (HiP 7) G4 for at least a year. Waiting another year would almost seem like the final death knell of Moto as Apple's CPU supplier. But sooner or later, Moto's 0.13 micron fab has to start ramping up so product for Apple.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
It seams to me Moto can design chips, but cant fab them...why dont they just contract the fab out to other componies like IBM or AMD, especially for thier high profile chips like the G4 (it is their only commericailly labeled processor that I know of today, other)