http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/12/12.13.shtml
Now would it be there if they weren't working with Apple to include it in their machines?
Now would it be there if they weren't working with Apple to include it in their machines?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
IBM confirms Altivec to be in 970!
- Thread starter gopher
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
good find gopher...
I'm not sure... I don't find it to be an unwise business position to mine the Chip Manufacturers. Ultimately, Mr. Jobs will have to sign off on it, and we can feel confident he wouldn't do anything that wasn't in Apple or it's customer base's best interests.
I'm not sure... I don't find it to be an unwise business position to mine the Chip Manufacturers. Ultimately, Mr. Jobs will have to sign off on it, and we can feel confident he wouldn't do anything that wasn't in Apple or it's customer base's best interests.
I'm not sure that you're right about who "owns" AltiVec. According to the article, IBM "codeveloped" AltiVec. My understanding is that AltiVec is a Moto trademark in which case IBM needs Moto's permission, not Apple's, to use the trademark.
Anyways, if this isn't a confirmation, I don't know what is. So it's now a matter of "when", not "if."
-sampling in 2nd quarter
-production in 2nd half of the year
We now have a six-month window of when the new PowerMacs will arrive. It doesn't seem far-fetched to think that Jobs will announce them and start taking orders at MWNY in July and deliver them a month or two later.
Very cool, hope they get it to us earlier than later - especially with all the clamoring for new machines, Apple is going to want to get these out there soon, or they will see a drop in sales on the current line of G4s.
Best quote from the article though
There is little doubt that this bit of fact announced by IBM will add all kinds of fuel to the rumor sites, but our advice is "a new Mac on your desk is worth two on a rumor site," and that holds true here.
D
Best quote from the article though
There is little doubt that this bit of fact announced by IBM will add all kinds of fuel to the rumor sites, but our advice is "a new Mac on your desk is worth two on a rumor site," and that holds true here.
D
Awesome
Personally, I think that would be great timing. I'm going to buy a new PowerMac late next year in order to edit a DV film I'm working out. New 970 processors would be super.
I've said before that I don't care if Apple goes IBM, or AMD or whatever, as long as they deliver on performance... but now I'm thinking that the PowerPC 970 seems ahead of its time; almost like Intel and AMD are working on perfecting the fuel-injection engine, but IBM is almost ready to bring out the Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.
Anyways, I don't want to turn this into another IBM vs AMD thread. I think it's great that IBM seems on the ball, and even ahead of our expectations in terms of the timetable.
Personally, I think that would be great timing. I'm going to buy a new PowerMac late next year in order to edit a DV film I'm working out. New 970 processors would be super.
I've said before that I don't care if Apple goes IBM, or AMD or whatever, as long as they deliver on performance... but now I'm thinking that the PowerPC 970 seems ahead of its time; almost like Intel and AMD are working on perfecting the fuel-injection engine, but IBM is almost ready to bring out the Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.
Anyways, I don't want to turn this into another IBM vs AMD thread. I think it's great that IBM seems on the ball, and even ahead of our expectations in terms of the timetable.
Re: IBM confirms Altivec to be in 970!
We knew it was altivec back in October... IBM said so.
https://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/10/20021021023740.shtml
arn
We knew it was altivec back in October... IBM said so.
https://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/10/20021021023740.shtml
arn
Please feel free to insult others... it's what we're here for, right?
(BTW, it must be nice to never make a typing error.)
Agreed. 100%. The sooner they get the next PowerMac revision the better for Apple. Because speculation about the 970 is going to severely slow down sales of pro machines come next summer (even if it is still premature to talk about a timetable for new Powermacs based on 970).
NicoMan
I bet they are previewed at MWNY + ship in about september with pre-orders being taken then. However, this makes me think that we may get a decent speed bump from Motorola to stimulate sales for the first half of the year. I have no evidence, but, a 1.6Ghz G4 in january followed by a 1.8Ghz 970 in the summer would be a good step.
Could IBM be lying?
Did anyone ever think that maybe, just maybe Uncle Steve will announce 970 based G4's this January at macworld?
"Woah there" you say "IBM won't even be ready until the 2nd half of next year, fool!"
I know this is what IBM said, but what a perfect surprise! What better way to surprise the entire Macintosh community than to come out with the processor that no one thought they could deliver for 6 more months? Example A: Superbook TiBook. Did anyone see that coming so soon? We knew it was coming some day, but everyone thought it was at least 6 to 12 more months out.
What if Apple and IBM teamed up and are giving us false dates? Now don't get your hopes up, I have no insider info, I'm just thinking out loud here.
Did anyone ever think that maybe, just maybe Uncle Steve will announce 970 based G4's this January at macworld?
"Woah there" you say "IBM won't even be ready until the 2nd half of next year, fool!"
I know this is what IBM said, but what a perfect surprise! What better way to surprise the entire Macintosh community than to come out with the processor that no one thought they could deliver for 6 more months? Example A: Superbook TiBook. Did anyone see that coming so soon? We knew it was coming some day, but everyone thought it was at least 6 to 12 more months out.
What if Apple and IBM teamed up and are giving us false dates? Now don't get your hopes up, I have no insider info, I'm just thinking out loud here.
Re: Could IBM be lying?
Yeah sure it's possible. But I don't think IBM is really in the business of spreading misinformation. It'd be out of their charater.
And it's also possible that Apple won't actually use these chips until 2004 or something, due to some technical or economic reasons.
Yeah sure it's possible. But I don't think IBM is really in the business of spreading misinformation. It'd be out of their charater.
And it's also possible that Apple won't actually use these chips until 2004 or something, due to some technical or economic reasons.
Re: Could IBM be lying?
Some people thought it was coming (superdrive TiBook)...but what threw people off was slot-loading. Sure, Apple delivered, but at a measley 1X. Everyone else that has a SuperDrive in a laptop is at 2X soon to be 4X. That would be Fujitsu, Sony, etc. I agree that Apple suprised everyone in November. That makes me nervous about January.
Some people thought it was coming (superdrive TiBook)...but what threw people off was slot-loading. Sure, Apple delivered, but at a measley 1X. Everyone else that has a SuperDrive in a laptop is at 2X soon to be 4X. That would be Fujitsu, Sony, etc. I agree that Apple suprised everyone in November. That makes me nervous about January.
Altivec compatable
IBM co-developed Altivec, Altivec is just a name for a Vector Processeing Unit, which is a SIMD, those types of processors aren't "owned" by anyone, they are simple a type of processor, IBM could call it a Geemawitsgotdemtharvectorthingysinit vector processor, and it would still be the same thing. But here, the instructios it accepts just so happent oo b the same as the instructions Altivec accepts
IBM co-developed Altivec, Altivec is just a name for a Vector Processeing Unit, which is a SIMD, those types of processors aren't "owned" by anyone, they are simple a type of processor, IBM could call it a Geemawitsgotdemtharvectorthingysinit vector processor, and it would still be the same thing. But here, the instructios it accepts just so happent oo b the same as the instructions Altivec accepts
Memo to myself:
Wait to use Apple Student Developer Discount until the end of next year.
And touch the puppethead.
Wait to use Apple Student Developer Discount until the end of next year.
And touch the puppethead.
Re: Re: Could IBM be lying?
It wouldn't be spreading misinformation *IF* it wasn't going to be available to anyone *but* Apple before the timeframe they have stated.
But...
It wouldn't be spreading misinformation *IF* it wasn't going to be available to anyone *but* Apple before the timeframe they have stated.
I know nothing about processors, so any statement I make, feel free to correct me. I was told that the fastest desktop computer was a anything with a dual zeon by intel. If and when 970's are put in macs, will they be dual, and how will they compare with the current top of the line PC, and the future versions of PCs that will be produced the same time as the 970 macs?
I have a ibook g3 500 with a upgraded 40 gig drive. I do alot of dv editing, and the time it takes.......well, it is long. A dual 1.8 970 on os X. With a buttload of DDR ram. The sheer thought of it is making my mouth water.
I have a ibook g3 500 with a upgraded 40 gig drive. I do alot of dv editing, and the time it takes.......well, it is long. A dual 1.8 970 on os X. With a buttload of DDR ram. The sheer thought of it is making my mouth water.
a bit about processors
First off, just so you know, it is an utter falacy to compare two different processors based on Mhz. A dual Xeon machine would be very fast, mostly because Xeons have a lot of cache, and there are two of them. Following Apple's recent trends and the fact that the 970 is designed to be used in a multiprocessor configuration, I think any powermac based on them will be dual. Given the 970's amount of bandwidth and the dual floating, fixed point, and vector units, I think that even 6 months from now a dual 1.8 Ghz machine would still rival if not beat the latest Intel or AMD powered machines.
First off, just so you know, it is an utter falacy to compare two different processors based on Mhz. A dual Xeon machine would be very fast, mostly because Xeons have a lot of cache, and there are two of them. Following Apple's recent trends and the fact that the 970 is designed to be used in a multiprocessor configuration, I think any powermac based on them will be dual. Given the 970's amount of bandwidth and the dual floating, fixed point, and vector units, I think that even 6 months from now a dual 1.8 Ghz machine would still rival if not beat the latest Intel or AMD powered machines.