G4 iMac - are we missing the MAJOR problem with this?
It just came to me then. If apple release a G4 equiped iMac, say at 1000mhz.......
Will it ever go beyond 1.2ghz?
The G4 has problems scalling, we all know that. The G3 doesn't seem to - 233 -> 1000, and surely with IBM at the reigns it'll continue.
Understand?? I don't think apple want the RISK - of another moto fiasco - but this time on their (higher selling?) consumer line!
I think there is something long termish to be afraid of with a G4 in the iMac.... Hopefully not, but there is a easy chance
Will it ever go beyond 1.2ghz?
The G4 has problems scalling, we all know that. The G3 doesn't seem to - 233 -> 1000, and surely with IBM at the reigns it'll continue.
Understand?? I don't think apple want the RISK - of another moto fiasco - but this time on their (higher selling?) consumer line!
I think there is something long termish to be afraid of with a G4 in the iMac.... Hopefully not, but there is a easy chance
Comments
The fact is that ever since the G4 has been around, it has just been a very difficult chip to scale, but that doesn't mean that Apple will just give up hope. Motorola has (slowly) conjured up new ways of pumping more power out of it, the same way IBM has with the G3, and it will most likely continue.
Where does this Moto is holding up IBM stuff come from? IBM is holding up IBM. And togther the PPC alliance is holding up the entire Mac platform.
You won't see such a disparity between IBM and Moto chip speeds, so relax.
<strong>G4 the iMac will be. Required for the SuperDrive it is. SuperDrive the iMac will have. Endless cycle I am going in here, yes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
FYI: That's going to get really old, REALLY quick. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
That might work. The iMacs only go up to 700mhz right now, so starting the new models at an 800mhz G4 sounds like a pretty big improvement.
<strong>Actually IBM hasn't done much better than Moto. They've supplied a 700 Mhz G3 to date. Moto has at least supplied an 867Mhz G4. These arguments about Apple not using faster G3's because of the limits on G4 speeds just don't wash. At no time has IBM offered a chip that is faster than 700Mhz (and only recently). IBM is holding Apple up at least as much as Moto. Based on their past record, there is nothing to suggest that IBM would indeed scale better than moto. Nothing.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OMFG!!! You are SO WRONG! IBM has had the ability to produce MUCH faster G3's than Mot has G4's....for a long time! Apple is the G3's biggest customer.....they wouldn't ship faster G3's than G4's......that absolutely DOES WASH!!!!
BASED ON THEIR PAST RECORD???? WHAT???? IBM has the best Fab process in the world! They could have sacked Mot, but Mot owned the rights to the G4!!!
As far as the scaling problem goes..the Apollo's won't have the same problem the originals did. I would bet that Steve Jobs personally told Mot management that he was about to sue the living shit out of them based on their lies to Apple. We know Apple has gotten involved and Mot has straightened out the fab process....since that time yields and speed have increased.
Whatever!
[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
<strong>
OMFG!!! You are SO WRONG! IBM has had the ability to produce MUCH faster G3's than Mot has G4's....for a long time! Apple is the G3's biggest customer.....they wouldn't ship faster G3's than G4's......that absolutely DOES WASH!!!!
BASED ON THEIR PAST RECORD???? WHAT???? IBM has the best Fab process in the world! They could have sacked Mot, but Mot owned the rights to the G4!!!
As far as the scaling problem goes..the Apollo's won't have the same problem the originals did. I would bet that Steve Jobs personally told Mot management that he was about to sue the living shit out of them based on their lies to Apple. We know Apple has gotten involved and Mot has straightened out the fab process....since that time yields and speed have increased.
Whatever!
[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
care to back that up?
the G3 is widely used in embedded devices. each major increase in clockspeed for the G3 has come after a major redesign/revision of the G3. IBM has never had much higher clockspeeds available than Motorola. both the G3 and G4 clock similarly. the only thing more impressive about the latest G3 which is not available yet is that it clocks up to 1 Ghz without adding pipelines
Fact is, if you look at IBM's other designs, none of them are particularly high clock rate parts. The Power3, 4 etc, while very powerful chips, don't run at blazing clock rates, far from it. In fact, energy efficient, fast but 'low clock' chips are as much a part of IBM's recent Microprocessor design as they are of Motorola's.
This myth that IBM can save Apple would be better forgotten. If they had cared about Apple, they'd have licensed altivec sooner and provided G4 equivalent parts. They have dragged their feet at least as much as Moto, if not more. Even their current design focus, on efficiency and power consumption, looks primarily to the embedded market, and then to the personal computer market.
<strong>
FYI: That's going to get really old, REALLY quick. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
What do you mean "going?" It already was really old.
Oh, and Matsu is right. There's no empirical evidence that IBM or the G3 scales better than the G4. G3 from 1998-2001: 233-700 MHz. G4 from 1999-2001: 350-867 MHz Any talk about higher clock speeds is speculative because it hasn't happened -- it's only been announced.
<strong>
care to back that up?
the G3 is widely used in embedded devices. each major increase in clockspeed for the G3 has come after a major redesign/revision of the G3. IBM has never had much higher clockspeeds available than Motorola. both the G3 and G4 clock similarly. the only thing more impressive about the latest G3 which is not available yet is that it clocks up to 1 Ghz without adding pipelines</strong><hr></blockquote>
Perhaps....but it I have heard, as I thought most had, that IBM was able to deliver faster chips but was prevented form doing so by legal agreements with MOT.....perhaps that was wrong....
Motorola has the fabrication and technology.Mr.
Jobs prefers a slower chip than truly necessary because he gets a better price.Care to guess how much Apple pays per chip per 1,000 or 10,000 Especially, when he has a monopoly on the chips.
That is why alot of people in the industry do not trust Steve Jobs..He lied in the past to Wozniak
his founding partner.It is called greed.And marketing,marketing , and more marketing.Like
Michael Jackson.A performance.We are in the year 2001 not 1975.The technology is there.Whether
it is for sale...business as usual.Horizontal and
vertical markets?Perhaps it is not a hardware war
but a software war instead.Hewlett-Packards 15"LCD,
CDRW/DVD 30Gig,256 Ram,Pentium 3 1.2 GHz and Windows 98 is not bad for $1,700.00 Maybe we hardcore Apple consumers need to chill and let Apple be until Sept. 2003 G-5 8500 1.8 Ghz
I will start saving now. Watch Apples stock drop...
Now they need patches for DVD or is it CDRW
on O/S-X? Like cabbage patch dolls does the new
iMac flat panel, G-3 maybe 1 GHz come with papers?Ground breaking consumer toy.By 2003 O/S X will have all the patches and kinks worked out.Awesome...By then you will also pay alot less
for the G-5 because AMD will be manufacturing it
for Apple.It will be cheaper and cost effective.
We all win.Ours hope wont be so high and we wont let down.With the ground breaking iPod.Seal has one in the commercial.If Apple invested 100 million in Samsung...how much do you think they get the 15" LCD panels for?Don't you dare say $300.00 Think about it.Ponder....
<strong>IBM has always had substancially higher speed chips in the ready, merely held back by Apple's persistance of not having a higher clocked iMac than the top G4. Sad really.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yea, sure. you read to much AppleInsider
<strong>It is business as usual at Apple with Jobs there.
Motorola has the fabrication and technology.Mr.
Jobs prefers a slower chip than truly necessary because he gets a better price.Care to guess how much Apple pays per chip per 1,000 or 10,000 Especially, when he has a monopoly on the chips.</strong><hr></blockquote> How does this relate to yields? If you want the faster chips, but they are a small part of the yield, then there is a premium. [quote]<strong>
That is why alot of people in the industry do not trust Steve Jobs..He lied in the past to Wozniak
his founding partner.It is called greed.And marketing,marketing , and more marketing.Like
Michael Jackson.A performance.We are in the year 2001 not 1975.The technology is there.</strong> <hr></blockquote>I get it now - because Steve is greedy, Apple won't use faster chips. This makes more money for Steve. [quote]<strong>Whether
it is for sale...business as usual.Horizontal and
vertical markets?Perhaps it is not a hardware war
but a software war instead.Hewlett-Packards 15"LCD,
CDRW/DVD 30Gig,256 Ram,Pentium 3 1.2 GHz and Windows 98 is not bad for $1,700.00 Maybe we hardcore Apple consumers need to chill and let Apple be until Sept. 2003 G-5 8500 1.8 Ghz
I will start saving now. Watch Apples stock drop...</strong><hr></blockquote>Shouldn't the stock go up? Steve and Apple charge so much for the systems.<strong> [quote]
Now they need patches for DVD or is it CDRW
on O/S-X? Like cabbage patch dolls does the new
iMac flat panel, G-3 maybe 1 GHz come with papers?Ground breaking consumer toy.By 2003 O/S X will have all the patches and kinks worked out.Awesome...By then you will also pay alot less
for the G-5 because AMD will be manufacturing it
for Apple.It will be cheaper and cost effective.</strong><hr></blockquote>But I thought Motorolla has the technology and fabrication capability, and if it weren't for Steve's greed, we'd be going so much faster? Won't Steve also be greedy with the AMD chips? He'll keep the fast ones for himself? [quote]<strong>
We all win.Ours hope wont be so high and we wont let down.With the ground breaking iPod.Seal has one in the commercial.If Apple invested 100 million in Samsung...how much do you think they get the 15" LCD panels for?Don't you dare say $300.00 Think about it.Ponder....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is a $8 billion revenue business, Samsung is a $120 billion revenue business... I'm thinking about it....
I'm thinking you're looking for one person to blame for high prices and slow progression in clock speed. I don't think it's Steve Jobs. Ponder this - what if Gil was still in charge?
[ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: jwdawso ]</p>
Will it ever go beyond 1.2ghz? <hr></blockquote>
So what? Apple could introduce a G4 iMac right now at 933 MHz. The Apollo is rumored to clock up to 1.233 GHz, so that leaves enough headroom for a year of CPU speed bumps for the iMac, with current technology. After a year, Moto will have scaled the Apollo even higher.
I don't believe that the G4 will be discontinued with the arrival of the G5. Rather, I see the two chips being developed in parallel, one for consumer computers, and one for pro computers. This leaves the G3 to be EOL, but it is an old chip, and ready to kick the bucket. IBM can fab extra G4s and G5s for Apple (they will probably have to because Moto sucks so hard).
If the iMac doesn't get a G4 by MWNY at the very latest, I will be surprised and very disapointed in Apple. It is time for Altivec to become widespread, so that developers will have incentive to code for it. Since Apple has optimized OS X for Altivec, this suggests that they are committed to it, but now Apple must prove to developers that they are committed to Altivec by USING Altivec in the majority of their product line, i.e., not just the high end market, but the larger consumer market.