. . . If Steve Jobs spoke to an Intel sales meeting, then there should have been some mainstream coverage of the event. . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I read this correctly, something did appear in the Wall Street Journal. Could be checked out, but I'm not interested in spending time on it.
Quote: Around the same time, Lee Gomes from The Wall Street Journal quoted " Who does Steve Jobs think he is ? Trying to make the PC industry interesting "
Pity there is so little real info on the POWER5 -- IBM likes to make it sound like they've got an ace up their sleeve on that one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have read somewhere (sorry but forget where) that the Power 5 will be supposed to have Hyperthreading. did you hear that also ?
<strong>Not to mention Pixar choosing Apple would have been just a tad bit of "conflict of interest."</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. Steve Jobs ramming Apple down Pixar's throat would be a clear conflict of interest (and it would cost him a lot of talent in the ensuing revolt), but if the engineers settle on Apple computers as their machines of choice, fine. Everyone knows how Steve runs Pixar: hands-off, at least as far as technical details go.
No matter what, I don't see Apple taking the renderfarm space by storm. They might sell fairly general-purpose servers like Xserve that can be clustered, but at the end of the day anyone looking for absolute price/performance will settle on Linux running on something or other. Right now the something or other is a P4 (Xeon). Tomorrow it might be something else. However, given Apple's history of shipping complete solutions, and given the fact that renderfarm machines are basically CPUs with ethernet connections, Pixar's move to Linux is probably for the long haul. If not, a move to OS X would not be so huge, I don't think. Linux is different, but it's not that different.
Now, as to the workstations they do design on - 2D (as they do now) and 3D once the horsepower arrives - those could be Macs. Apple could also get a foothold in markets where the time and effort (and cost, since this kind of talent is rarely free) of setting up a barebones Linux cluster simply isn't worth it.
I have read somewhere (sorry but forget where) that the Power 5 will be supposed to have Hyperthreading. did you hear that also ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Inspired post. Especially the 'Third Ring of Hell' being warmed by Pentium Laptops!!!
Intel has access to alot more customers than Apple does. Alot of people like buying mhz and the Intel dream (though the workstation comparison in 'Digit' magazine is no dream. The dual gig 'power'Mac is roundly stuffed on Lightwave and Photoshop by a moderate 2.6 gig Intel based workstation...ouch...) With Intel or IBM, you're buying 'mindshare'...what people know...just like having 'Office' on the Mac brings with it. For now. There's no harm having 'what people know' and then bringing out a superior product eg Explorer vs Safari, Powerpoint vs Keynote, Intel vs 970? We'll see. We'll have to see if Apple does offer up an Intel option in the future.
Renderman is now on Linux. Okay. But considering Apple now have Maya, Shake, Final Cut Pro etc. Surely a 'Renderman' recompile for 'X' is just around the corner, logically speaking..? If Macs are going to be taken seriously as 'Workstations'. Maybe we might see Renderman sometime after the 970 hits. Not to mention a pro version of Nvidia/Ati's cards?
CPU
Renderman
Pro Cards.
If they want to go there they have to 'get' THERE. Though it was gratifying to see 'Shake' and Apple on the Lord of the Rings II credits.
And the related thread, Dell are now getting 'Quadro to go' in their laptops. Hopefully the 17 incher will follow with a Quadro to go option.
[quote] S.J. is once again in auto-destruct mode, talking to Intel to p... off IBM and endangering future cooperation between the latter and Apple. <hr></blockquote>
No. I think this is a different Steve Jobs to one you're talking about. IBM themselves offer Intel and IBM solutions!!! So why would they mind Apple buying into an Intel X-serve option for their customers. I don't care if it runs an Intel or G4 so long as the performance for Lightwave and Photoshop is there.
IBM won't care as long as Apple sells loads of 970s in the 'power'Macs. As the 970 comes to the rest of Apple's range over the next couple of years...IBM gets to sell loads more. Not to forget they'll offer their Linux 970 solution. IBM couldn't care less... If Apple co-developed the 970 (which isn't entirely clear...) then Steve's Intel diplomacy is irrelevant.
IBM have been quoted as considering the Power future for an Itannic future...but they remain convinced their POWER solution, in particular the Power5, will wipe the Itannic off the map. Should be a good fight.
I read that the Power5 WILL have hyperthreading. Don't have the link, sorry.
[quote] Damn people come up with weird ideas. Apple has no presence in this market. Pixar wouldn't have even considered Apple. They might have had discussions with IBM but for when they needed the hardware they felt Linux on Intel was the best solution. Only real story is they dumped Sun, which is a blow for them. Apple wouldn't have ever even been invited to come to the starting grid.
<hr></blockquote>
Apple don't have a solution...yet.
And you're right, to lose a key client is a body blow, at least PR wise, for any company.
But these kind of news stories show how no one company can sit on their laurels. The market is a shifting sand. Who's to say the Power5 derivative mightn't be a potent contender for many companies when Apple gets on the starting grid?
We know little of X-raid, the 970, X-grid... where Apple will take their unifying corporate OS in the future. Why have a box that runs Unix and one that runs Wintel 'Office' stuff when you can have a powerful all in one solutions ala 'X' with a 970 cpu that blows it out the water..?
'Consolidation' maybe apple's revenge for the kind of 'Wintel' consolidation that has been giving their edu' marketshare a hammering.
IBM are really going for Sun by the looks of things. They'll have to. Intel are nibbling on the 'low end'.
Apple are also after the low end. Sun looks like it's getting a kicking all round.
Be interesting to see server market share in a couple of years time.
But I remember also that IBM was in cahoots with some company that specializes in motherboard architecture that enables two procs to run as virtually one -- 1.8 GHz=3.6. I don't recall exactly who and the exact nomenclature for this technology, but wouldn't it seem obvious for Apple to want to invest in this? I believe it's being fast proven a viable technique -- just can't remember the details.
<strong>You'll find it has multithreading not hyperthreading. Similar ideas but different.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I call it hyperthreading because Intel marketing has made that term more recognizable. They are essentially the same thing -- having multiple simultaneous paths of execution using the same execution units in the same core.
I can't believe the angst that Steve Jobs talking at an Intel conference has generated. Did you guys even read the blog about it?
<strong>But I remember also that IBM was in cahoots with some company that specializes in motherboard architecture that enables two procs to run as virtually one -- 1.8 GHz=3.6. I don't recall exactly who and the exact nomenclature for this technology, but wouldn't it seem obvious for Apple to want to invest in this? I believe it's being fast proven a viable technique -- just can't remember the details.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Its talked about in another thread and no it does not allow two processors to run as one, your software still has to be multi-threaded to take advantage of it.
It needs software enhancements to work...hmmm. Well, the Mac seems to be fairly well supported by developers so it shouldn't be too much of a prob'. Altivec seems to be there on the majors apps (and good job too, I say...)
Anyhow, according to IBM a 970 is a 3.6 gig G4 (double the performance they say!)
And if that's in duals 3.6 = 7.2 gig.
So if Intel wants to play the 'mhz' game, Apple can play the PR game and call the top end 970 a 3.6 gigger, not by any Intel...but by their own G4. That's as easy as explaining the performance improvement in some little bit of web sales blurb.
Though I know the AMD PR rating didn't go down well too well with many PC users. Retailers don't mind using it. And from a personal viewpoint I like the idea of having a figure...knowing it beats the snot out of the G4.
Who knows what Apple will do...
We're well into Feb' and still the dark clouds enshroud Apple's future cpu strategy. Maybe come May, in a few months time, we'll hear of either a 970 or a SURPRISE Moto' G5, heh.
Lemon Bon Bon
[quote] You'll find it has multithreading not hyperthreading. Similar ideas but different.
I call it hyperthreading because Intel marketing has made that term more recognizable. They are essentially the same thing -- having multiple simultaneous paths of execution using the same execution units in the same core.
<hr></blockquote>
Oops. Quite correct. Beg your pardon. Us laymen techies, eh?
The whole Steve giving a keynote at the Intel Marketing show is true. But he basicly said Intel innovates so much that other companies (like Dell) don't have to. They can just throw boxes together with intels chips (not only processors, but other chips they make), and Dell can sell really cheap boxes using very little to no R&D. And the intel guy was at Macworld as a gesture from Steve for letting him give a keynote at an Intel gig.
So no, there was no mention of Marklar, Apple swiching to X86, or anything like that. It was just a marketing conference where Steve bashed companies that use Intel chips
come on everyone, read between the lines here. this has nothing to do with intel and apple and the future of apple on x86... i mean it could happen, but this is about pixar with steve at the helm.
pixar's contract with disney will soon be up and they are checking their options. the short of the story is they're tired of coughing up 65% of profits from their movies to disney, when they are clearly the genius behind the productions.
so what does that have to do with intel and apple? with apple - nothing, except that steve is head of both companies. with intel - a lot more. wouldn't it be a smart move to upgrade their systems while disney is still on board and pixar can get them to cough some of the costs for doing this, before they get into contract batles in the future.
so what it comes down to this has all to with business decisions by pixar and not the hopes or fears of an x86 mac. i think the reason we all saw the apple logo in that picture was for clout. as in, "hi, my name's steve and i run two big companies. now give me a great deal for the new servers we need."
There's a very simple reason for Intel to invite Steve to a marketing conference, besides what that blog entry alludes to: Intel is looking for ways to get people to buy new PCs - with Intel® Inside, of course. Simply bumping up the GHz isn't doing it. The upgrade cycle has been slowed for some years now. Intel has sponsored "future PC" showcases with all kinds of dumb ideas about how to package PCs as Ottomans and pyramids and who knows what else, all driven by whimsy rather than utility. Needless to say, none of them have made an impact. On the other hand, the new Apple makes an impact with just about every release, and it's no secret that although Jon Ives and his team do the actual grunt work, and does it surpassingly well, the engine behind all the gorgeous hardware is Steve. Given all that, Steve is a logical choice to bring in to figure out what the PC market isn't doing right.
If the blog is reporting accurately, Steve nailed at least part of the problem: Intel's offerings might be good and fast, but nothing around them is compelling. People don't buy CPUs, they buy computers, and so the whole package has to be balanced and thoughtfully designed.
I don't expect anything to come of what Steve said, because the box makers have proven beyond doubt that they wouldn't know industrial design if it rearchitected their corporate HQs. More to the point, real ID means moving away from market standards like the various permutations of ATX, which means moving the PC away from being a commodity, which no box maker wants to be the first company to attempt. But it does signal that someone at Intel is aware of what the problem is. Also, it had to be immensely satisfying for Jobs, commander of 3% of the market, to walk into an Intel conference and rag on PCs for an hour.
As for the Intel rep at a Stevenote, well, maybe he wanted to see how a keynote's done. Certainly, no other tech CEO - and for that matter, no other CEO - can do one tenth as well on stage. The marketing implications of that one thing are significant.
im sorry, maybe i missed it, but what exactly is Marklar? (no, im not talking the alien planet on southpark here). this entire thread and many others woudl make more sense to me if i knew what this was about. i definatly missed somthing here a while back.
<strong>im sorry, maybe i missed it, but what exactly is Marklar? (no, im not talking the alien planet on southpark here). this entire thread and many others woudl make more sense to me if i knew what this was about. i definatly missed somthing here a while back.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OSX On Intel ... further speculation around here has fueled the idea that Apple might even liscence OSX for certain third party vertical market Intel boxes.
Comments
<strong>
. . . If Steve Jobs spoke to an Intel sales meeting, then there should have been some mainstream coverage of the event. . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I read this correctly, something did appear in the Wall Street Journal. Could be checked out, but I'm not interested in spending time on it.
Quote: Around the same time, Lee Gomes from The Wall Street Journal quoted " Who does Steve Jobs think he is ? Trying to make the PC industry interesting "
<strong>nt.
Pity there is so little real info on the POWER5 -- IBM likes to make it sound like they've got an ace up their sleeve on that one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have read somewhere (sorry but forget where) that the Power 5 will be supposed to have Hyperthreading. did you hear that also ?
<strong>Not to mention Pixar choosing Apple would have been just a tad bit of "conflict of interest."</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. Steve Jobs ramming Apple down Pixar's throat would be a clear conflict of interest (and it would cost him a lot of talent in the ensuing revolt), but if the engineers settle on Apple computers as their machines of choice, fine. Everyone knows how Steve runs Pixar: hands-off, at least as far as technical details go.
No matter what, I don't see Apple taking the renderfarm space by storm. They might sell fairly general-purpose servers like Xserve that can be clustered, but at the end of the day anyone looking for absolute price/performance will settle on Linux running on something or other. Right now the something or other is a P4 (Xeon). Tomorrow it might be something else. However, given Apple's history of shipping complete solutions, and given the fact that renderfarm machines are basically CPUs with ethernet connections, Pixar's move to Linux is probably for the long haul. If not, a move to OS X would not be so huge, I don't think. Linux is different, but it's not that different.
Now, as to the workstations they do design on - 2D (as they do now) and 3D once the horsepower arrives - those could be Macs. Apple could also get a foothold in markets where the time and effort (and cost, since this kind of talent is rarely free) of setting up a barebones Linux cluster simply isn't worth it.
<strong>
I have read somewhere (sorry but forget where) that the Power 5 will be supposed to have Hyperthreading. did you hear that also ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Simultaneous multithreading it's called.
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
Pim
Inspired post. Especially the 'Third Ring of Hell' being warmed by Pentium Laptops!!!
Intel has access to alot more customers than Apple does. Alot of people like buying mhz and the Intel dream (though the workstation comparison in 'Digit' magazine is no dream. The dual gig 'power'Mac is roundly stuffed on Lightwave and Photoshop by a moderate 2.6 gig Intel based workstation...ouch...) With Intel or IBM, you're buying 'mindshare'...what people know...just like having 'Office' on the Mac brings with it. For now. There's no harm having 'what people know' and then bringing out a superior product eg Explorer vs Safari, Powerpoint vs Keynote, Intel vs 970? We'll see. We'll have to see if Apple does offer up an Intel option in the future.
Renderman is now on Linux. Okay. But considering Apple now have Maya, Shake, Final Cut Pro etc. Surely a 'Renderman' recompile for 'X' is just around the corner, logically speaking..? If Macs are going to be taken seriously as 'Workstations'. Maybe we might see Renderman sometime after the 970 hits. Not to mention a pro version of Nvidia/Ati's cards?
CPU
Renderman
Pro Cards.
If they want to go there they have to 'get' THERE. Though it was gratifying to see 'Shake' and Apple on the Lord of the Rings II credits.
And the related thread, Dell are now getting 'Quadro to go' in their laptops. Hopefully the 17 incher will follow with a Quadro to go option.
Lemon Bon Bon
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
No. I think this is a different Steve Jobs to one you're talking about. IBM themselves offer Intel and IBM solutions!!! So why would they mind Apple buying into an Intel X-serve option for their customers. I don't care if it runs an Intel or G4 so long as the performance for Lightwave and Photoshop is there.
IBM won't care as long as Apple sells loads of 970s in the 'power'Macs. As the 970 comes to the rest of Apple's range over the next couple of years...IBM gets to sell loads more. Not to forget they'll offer their Linux 970 solution. IBM couldn't care less... If Apple co-developed the 970 (which isn't entirely clear...) then Steve's Intel diplomacy is irrelevant.
IBM have been quoted as considering the Power future for an Itannic future...but they remain convinced their POWER solution, in particular the Power5, will wipe the Itannic off the map. Should be a good fight.
I read that the Power5 WILL have hyperthreading. Don't have the link, sorry.
Lemon Bon Bon
<hr></blockquote>
Apple don't have a solution...yet.
And you're right, to lose a key client is a body blow, at least PR wise, for any company.
But these kind of news stories show how no one company can sit on their laurels. The market is a shifting sand. Who's to say the Power5 derivative mightn't be a potent contender for many companies when Apple gets on the starting grid?
We know little of X-raid, the 970, X-grid... where Apple will take their unifying corporate OS in the future. Why have a box that runs Unix and one that runs Wintel 'Office' stuff when you can have a powerful all in one solutions ala 'X' with a 970 cpu that blows it out the water..?
'Consolidation' maybe apple's revenge for the kind of 'Wintel' consolidation that has been giving their edu' marketshare a hammering.
IBM are really going for Sun by the looks of things. They'll have to. Intel are nibbling on the 'low end'.
Apple are also after the low end. Sun looks like it's getting a kicking all round.
Be interesting to see server market share in a couple of years time.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>S.J. is once again in auto-destruct mode, talking to Intel to p... off IBM and endangering future cooperation between the latter and Apple.
Pim</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unlike many AI members I think that IBM can see that Pixar and Apple are two separate companies.
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
Furious discussion going on over there. Not to mention the 'fake photo'(?)
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>
I read that the Power5 WILL have hyperthreading. </strong><hr></blockquote>
You'll find it has multithreading not hyperthreading. Similar ideas but different.
<strong>You'll find it has multithreading not hyperthreading. Similar ideas but different.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I call it hyperthreading because Intel marketing has made that term more recognizable. They are essentially the same thing -- having multiple simultaneous paths of execution using the same execution units in the same core.
I can't believe the angst that Steve Jobs talking at an Intel conference has generated. Did you guys even read the blog about it?
<strong>But I remember also that IBM was in cahoots with some company that specializes in motherboard architecture that enables two procs to run as virtually one -- 1.8 GHz=3.6. I don't recall exactly who and the exact nomenclature for this technology, but wouldn't it seem obvious for Apple to want to invest in this? I believe it's being fast proven a viable technique -- just can't remember the details.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Its talked about in another thread and no it does not allow two processors to run as one, your software still has to be multi-threaded to take advantage of it.
Sounds nice.
It needs software enhancements to work...hmmm. Well, the Mac seems to be fairly well supported by developers so it shouldn't be too much of a prob'. Altivec seems to be there on the majors apps (and good job too, I say...)
Anyhow, according to IBM a 970 is a 3.6 gig G4 (double the performance they say!)
And if that's in duals 3.6 = 7.2 gig.
So if Intel wants to play the 'mhz' game, Apple can play the PR game and call the top end 970 a 3.6 gigger, not by any Intel...but by their own G4. That's as easy as explaining the performance improvement in some little bit of web sales blurb.
Though I know the AMD PR rating didn't go down well too well with many PC users. Retailers don't mind using it. And from a personal viewpoint I like the idea of having a figure...knowing it beats the snot out of the G4.
Who knows what Apple will do...
We're well into Feb' and still the dark clouds enshroud Apple's future cpu strategy. Maybe come May, in a few months time, we'll hear of either a 970 or a SURPRISE Moto' G5, heh.
Lemon Bon Bon
[quote] You'll find it has multithreading not hyperthreading. Similar ideas but different.
I call it hyperthreading because Intel marketing has made that term more recognizable. They are essentially the same thing -- having multiple simultaneous paths of execution using the same execution units in the same core.
<hr></blockquote>
Oops. Quite correct. Beg your pardon. Us laymen techies, eh?
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
So no, there was no mention of Marklar, Apple swiching to X86, or anything like that. It was just a marketing conference where Steve bashed companies that use Intel chips
pixar's contract with disney will soon be up and they are checking their options. the short of the story is they're tired of coughing up 65% of profits from their movies to disney, when they are clearly the genius behind the productions.
so what does that have to do with intel and apple? with apple - nothing, except that steve is head of both companies. with intel - a lot more. wouldn't it be a smart move to upgrade their systems while disney is still on board and pixar can get them to cough some of the costs for doing this, before they get into contract batles in the future.
so what it comes down to this has all to with business decisions by pixar and not the hopes or fears of an x86 mac. i think the reason we all saw the apple logo in that picture was for clout. as in, "hi, my name's steve and i run two big companies. now give me a great deal for the new servers we need."
If the blog is reporting accurately, Steve nailed at least part of the problem: Intel's offerings might be good and fast, but nothing around them is compelling. People don't buy CPUs, they buy computers, and so the whole package has to be balanced and thoughtfully designed.
I don't expect anything to come of what Steve said, because the box makers have proven beyond doubt that they wouldn't know industrial design if it rearchitected their corporate HQs. More to the point, real ID means moving away from market standards like the various permutations of ATX, which means moving the PC away from being a commodity, which no box maker wants to be the first company to attempt. But it does signal that someone at Intel is aware of what the problem is. Also, it had to be immensely satisfying for Jobs, commander of 3% of the market, to walk into an Intel conference and rag on PCs for an hour.
As for the Intel rep at a Stevenote, well, maybe he wanted to see how a keynote's done. Certainly, no other tech CEO - and for that matter, no other CEO - can do one tenth as well on stage. The marketing implications of that one thing are significant.
<strong>im sorry, maybe i missed it, but what exactly is Marklar? (no, im not talking the alien planet on southpark here). this entire thread and many others woudl make more sense to me if i knew what this was about. i definatly missed somthing here a while back.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OSX On Intel ... further speculation around here has fueled the idea that Apple might even liscence OSX for certain third party vertical market Intel boxes.