The Apple-powered PS3 is almost totally baseless...it's like saying that...I don't know! But it makes no coherent sense. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
MacWhispers offers up a few more rumor crumbs to nibble on regarding among other things PM970 motherbrd (semi)details.
2. The two motherboards we reported as being in the bidding stage, prior to production, are for single processor and a dual-processor variants, are said to be "larger, longer, and narrower" than present designs. No word on other details, yet.
<strong>MacWhispers offers up a few more rumor crumbs to nibble on regarding among other things PM970 motherbrd (semi)details.
2. The two motherboards we reported as being in the bidding stage, prior to production, are for single processor and a dual-processor variants, are said to be "larger, longer, and narrower" than present designs. No word on other details, yet.
Hmm, this could indicate the nature of Apple dual processor implimentation. If the boards need to be designed for either dual or single then it could mean that there is separate memory spaces for each processor and the dual version could include 6 (3+3) or even 8 (4+4) DIMM slots. While the single version would only need a set of memory slots for one processor+companion chip. Also IBM might be pacaging the chip on it's own interposer and Apple will just use a ZIF or LIF for it. So the companion chip proabably sits on the motherboard and you need one for each processor. For Apple, the cost would be prohibitive to design a motherboard with more than two CPUs.
<strong>The Apple-powered PS3 is almost totally baseless...it's like saying that...I don't know! But it makes no coherent sense. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. If the PS3 (faster then 50 1.4ghz pMacs) can run OSX, then we'd have a $300 or so computer faster then a lot of offerings.
Not really. If the PS3 (faster then 50 1.4ghz pMacs) can run OSX, then we'd have a $300 or so computer faster then a lot of offerings.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What nonsense is that ???? The PS3 will have a great 3D chip, which has nothing to do with overal performance. Just because games are 90% 3D would not mean my MS Word would go faster.
And noone has a comparision between the PS3 3D chip and the Radeon 9800Pro or GeForce FX Ultra. By the time the PS3 is released (2004 at earliest) ATI and nVidia will have 3D chips that can rival the playstation. Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.
This whole PS3 thread on Appleinsider is a lame result of mac freaks having wanked out too much over the PPC 970 and now searching for new hoopla to go berserk over. Let it die.
<strong>Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually the xbox hardware wise is allot more powerful than the ps2. And the ps2 is harder to develop for especially if you want to take advantage of all the hidden tricks. But we all know its not all about power its about quality of games.
The scant information available about PS3 so far seems to indicate that it is very aggressively multi-core and has many vector processors which are usable for both graphics and non-graphics related tasks. It looks like there might be very fast on-chip memory for each processor too. If this comes to pass it will be a significantly different machine from XBox/PC, and represents a direction that the PC might not be able to go and still retain compatibility with the existing software, which is something that the PC (at least) can't get away from. The next XBox might be able to rival the PS3's change in direction, but its questionable whether Microsoft would choose to do that given its approach to building the XBox out of commodity parts (hardware and software).
Hmm, this could indicate the nature of Apple dual processor implimentation. If the boards need to be designed for either dual or single then it could mean that there is separate memory spaces for each processor and the dual version could include 6 (3+3) or even 8 (4+4) DIMM slots. While the single version would only need a set of memory slots for one processor+companion chip. Also IBM might be pacaging the chip on it's own interposer and Apple will just use a ZIF or LIF for it. So the companion chip proabably sits on the motherboard and you need one for each processor. For Apple, the cost would be prohibitive to design a motherboard with more than two CPUs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It could also mean Single or Dual daughter cards, which would allow for 1-4 processor configurations. This design would allow for a much wider range of products for Apple to offer covering a very broad market range. I'm a little skeptical about Apple offering ZIF or LIF sockets for their processors, it makes it too easy for upgrade manufacturers to put out processor upgrades. I doubt that Apple will have the clout with IBM to keep the processors off the market like they did with the G4 for so long. Daughter cards offer Apple flexability, and help to keep the cost of processor upgrades high, which makes new computers more attractive.
<strong>we can hope they're spot-on, but i seriously doubt it. Even transcedental octopoop who claimed the earliest release date so far never insinuated may, but rather june/july</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.
That's what a lot of us would like to know... </strong><hr></blockquote>
From T.O.'s post, "<strong>But what do I know?</strong>". I would venture to say . . . enough to get someone a jail sentence. There are others as well, who have credible sources.
<strong>Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
At least it would be official confirmation that there will be an announcement, which we don't even have right now.
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that a hypothetical theory or a working theory?
What nonsense is that ???? The PS3 will have a great 3D chip, which has nothing to do with overal performance. Just because games are 90% 3D would not mean my MS Word would go faster.
And noone has a comparision between the PS3 3D chip and the Radeon 9800Pro or GeForce FX Ultra. By the time the PS3 is released (2004 at earliest) ATI and nVidia will have 3D chips that can rival the playstation. Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.
This whole PS3 thread on Appleinsider is a lame result of mac freaks having wanked out too much over the PPC 970 and now searching for new hoopla to go berserk over. Let it die.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't see how it's nonsence but it doesn't really concern me so I'm not gonna argue the point.
<strong>The Apple-powered PS3 is almost totally baseless...it's like saying that...I don't know! But it makes no coherent sense. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I think that the most likely area for Apple and Sony to be talking about in refernece to the PS3 is Rendevue, and not OS X. This would be great technology for Sony to implement in the PS3. Other areas might be trying to get Apples experience with the PPC to help Sony develop software for the platform. There was probably some contention on how to bring this about, say Sony wanted to license OS X so that they could offer networking the PS3 with their own computers via Rendevue. We know that Jobs dosnt like licensing, so that would cause a rift. Apple might have wanted Sony to give up the name iLink, and go with FireWire which would help Apple out with the credability of this technology. Possibly Sony wanted Xserves to manage online gaming as well. I think that there are many possabilities besides OS X on PS3 that these companies would be talking about. There will also probably be some posturing by each company to try to gain leverage in whatever agreements that they are talking about, and it is quite possable that not everyone at Sony has the same "agenda" in these talks. I'm sure that the PC devision at Sony would not like PS3's being more compatable with Macs than with thier own products, thus the statement that they are competators. It definatly does not refer to consoles or AV equipment, becouse as of now Apple is not in those markets (with the exception of the iPod).
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. But, I think most of us would feel a whole heck of a lot better if they did. It would be confirmation that Apple will use the PPC 970.
The PS3 is interesting to me because 1) it's PowerPC, 2) it's significantly parallelized. IBM is heading this way. Apple is almost certainly heading this way. The decisions made, and the means used, in order to make this thing go head to head against the more monolithic XBox 2 will be of considerable interest, even if there isn't a line of Apple code anywhere near the PS3 itself. SMP is the direction of the PowerPC as a platform.
@homenow seized upon an important fact, which Apple has been using to great advantage recently: The host system or application can be whatever it is. What matters are document formats and hardware interfaces. If those are standard and interoperable, then there's room for a great deal more diversity as far as systems and applications go. Proprietary formats lock people into particular applications: That's one of the ways MS got where they are. (Raise your hand if you actually like using MS Word.) If the PS3 has 6-pin FireWire, Rendezvous support, Bluetooth support (wireless joysticks! whee!) and other standard connections, then it can interoperate with a Mac, no licensing necessary. This really is the best way to go, because then Apple can make the best OS for their hardware, Sony can make the best OS for their hardware, consumers can choose the apps and games best suited for their needs, and everything still works with everything else. Standard means of communication allow and encourage diversity and real innovation.
Comments
2. The two motherboards we reported as being in the bidding stage, prior to production, are for single processor and a dual-processor variants, are said to be "larger, longer, and narrower" than present designs. No word on other details, yet.
<a href="http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000047.php"; target="_blank">http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000047.php</a>;
<strong>
Even transcedental octopoop </strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey!
[quote]
<strong>
who claimed the earliest release date so far never insinuated may, but rather june/july</strong><hr></blockquote>
I've never claimed a release date at all. I've only passed on IBM production info. I've stated repeatedly that I have no Apple sources.
However, based on the several source of info I do have, I would not doubt a demo of a 970 PM at WWDC for a second.
Still think a release is in early summer.
But what do I know?
<strong>But what do I know?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's what a lot of us would like to know...
<strong>MacWhispers offers up a few more rumor crumbs to nibble on regarding among other things PM970 motherbrd (semi)details.
2. The two motherboards we reported as being in the bidding stage, prior to production, are for single processor and a dual-processor variants, are said to be "larger, longer, and narrower" than present designs. No word on other details, yet.
<a href="http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000047.php"; target="_blank">http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000047.php</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;
Hmm, this could indicate the nature of Apple dual processor implimentation. If the boards need to be designed for either dual or single then it could mean that there is separate memory spaces for each processor and the dual version could include 6 (3+3) or even 8 (4+4) DIMM slots. While the single version would only need a set of memory slots for one processor+companion chip. Also IBM might be pacaging the chip on it's own interposer and Apple will just use a ZIF or LIF for it. So the companion chip proabably sits on the motherboard and you need one for each processor. For Apple, the cost would be prohibitive to design a motherboard with more than two CPUs.
<strong>
Still think a release is in early summer.
But what do I know?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, AFAIC, you are the most credible 970 production status rumor propagator here. Please keep it up.
<strong>The Apple-powered PS3 is almost totally baseless...it's like saying that...I don't know! But it makes no coherent sense. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. If the PS3 (faster then 50 1.4ghz pMacs) can run OSX, then we'd have a $300 or so computer faster then a lot of offerings.
<strong>
Not really. If the PS3 (faster then 50 1.4ghz pMacs) can run OSX, then we'd have a $300 or so computer faster then a lot of offerings.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What nonsense is that ???? The PS3 will have a great 3D chip, which has nothing to do with overal performance. Just because games are 90% 3D would not mean my MS Word would go faster.
And noone has a comparision between the PS3 3D chip and the Radeon 9800Pro or GeForce FX Ultra. By the time the PS3 is released (2004 at earliest) ATI and nVidia will have 3D chips that can rival the playstation. Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.
This whole PS3 thread on Appleinsider is a lame result of mac freaks having wanked out too much over the PPC 970 and now searching for new hoopla to go berserk over. Let it die.
<strong>Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually the xbox hardware wise is allot more powerful than the ps2. And the ps2 is harder to develop for especially if you want to take advantage of all the hidden tricks. But we all know its not all about power its about quality of games.
<strong>
Hmm, this could indicate the nature of Apple dual processor implimentation. If the boards need to be designed for either dual or single then it could mean that there is separate memory spaces for each processor and the dual version could include 6 (3+3) or even 8 (4+4) DIMM slots. While the single version would only need a set of memory slots for one processor+companion chip. Also IBM might be pacaging the chip on it's own interposer and Apple will just use a ZIF or LIF for it. So the companion chip proabably sits on the motherboard and you need one for each processor. For Apple, the cost would be prohibitive to design a motherboard with more than two CPUs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It could also mean Single or Dual daughter cards, which would allow for 1-4 processor configurations. This design would allow for a much wider range of products for Apple to offer covering a very broad market range. I'm a little skeptical about Apple offering ZIF or LIF sockets for their processors, it makes it too easy for upgrade manufacturers to put out processor upgrades. I doubt that Apple will have the clout with IBM to keep the processors off the market like they did with the G4 for so long. Daughter cards offer Apple flexability, and help to keep the cost of processor upgrades high, which makes new computers more attractive.
<strong>we can hope they're spot-on, but i seriously doubt it. Even transcedental octopoop who claimed the earliest release date so far never insinuated may, but rather june/july</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.
<strong>
That's what a lot of us would like to know...
From T.O.'s post, "<strong>But what do I know?</strong>". I would venture to say . . . enough to get someone a jail sentence. There are others as well, who have credible sources.
<strong>Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
At least it would be official confirmation that there will be an announcement, which we don't even have right now.
<strong>
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is that a hypothetical theory or a working theory?
<strong>
What nonsense is that ???? The PS3 will have a great 3D chip, which has nothing to do with overal performance. Just because games are 90% 3D would not mean my MS Word would go faster.
And noone has a comparision between the PS3 3D chip and the Radeon 9800Pro or GeForce FX Ultra. By the time the PS3 is released (2004 at earliest) ATI and nVidia will have 3D chips that can rival the playstation. Remember that the XBox (with a GeForce3 in it) is at comparable performance of the PS2. I expect the XBox2 to equal the PS3 within half a year, using a GeForce FXX or Radion 9900 or whatever.
This whole PS3 thread on Appleinsider is a lame result of mac freaks having wanked out too much over the PPC 970 and now searching for new hoopla to go berserk over. Let it die.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't see how it's nonsence but it doesn't really concern me so I'm not gonna argue the point.
<strong>The Apple-powered PS3 is almost totally baseless...it's like saying that...I don't know! But it makes no coherent sense. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I think that the most likely area for Apple and Sony to be talking about in refernece to the PS3 is Rendevue, and not OS X. This would be great technology for Sony to implement in the PS3. Other areas might be trying to get Apples experience with the PPC to help Sony develop software for the platform. There was probably some contention on how to bring this about, say Sony wanted to license OS X so that they could offer networking the PS3 with their own computers via Rendevue. We know that Jobs dosnt like licensing, so that would cause a rift. Apple might have wanted Sony to give up the name iLink, and go with FireWire which would help Apple out with the credability of this technology. Possibly Sony wanted Xserves to manage online gaming as well. I think that there are many possabilities besides OS X on PS3 that these companies would be talking about. There will also probably be some posturing by each company to try to gain leverage in whatever agreements that they are talking about, and it is quite possable that not everyone at Sony has the same "agenda" in these talks. I'm sure that the PC devision at Sony would not like PS3's being more compatable with Macs than with thier own products, thus the statement that they are competators. It definatly does not refer to consoles or AV equipment, becouse as of now Apple is not in those markets (with the exception of the iPod).
<strong>
Well, in theory, if Apple showed a PPC 970 prototype at WWDC, that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are being released, or even officially announce then.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. But, I think most of us would feel a whole heck of a lot better if they did. It would be confirmation that Apple will use the PPC 970.
@homenow seized upon an important fact, which Apple has been using to great advantage recently: The host system or application can be whatever it is. What matters are document formats and hardware interfaces. If those are standard and interoperable, then there's room for a great deal more diversity as far as systems and applications go. Proprietary formats lock people into particular applications: That's one of the ways MS got where they are. (Raise your hand if you actually like using MS Word.) If the PS3 has 6-pin FireWire, Rendezvous support, Bluetooth support (wireless joysticks! whee!) and other standard connections, then it can interoperate with a Mac, no licensing necessary. This really is the best way to go, because then Apple can make the best OS for their hardware, Sony can make the best OS for their hardware, consumers can choose the apps and games best suited for their needs, and everything still works with everything else. Standard means of communication allow and encourage diversity and real innovation.
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>