MacTruck said:
same here...dual core! dual core! but you think it's actually possible? Everyone's talking like it can't happen...
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.
5G iPods, PowerBook Updates?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
same here...dual core! dual core! but you think it's actually possible? Everyone's talking like it can't happen...
They changed the thread
Apple just changed the thread to:
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g4_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
</body>
</html>
Apple just changed the thread to:
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g4_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
</body>
</html>
attic salt said:
Well, the only advantage I see to a G5 is in future-proofing. Until RAM prices drop drastically and physical capacity improves, the 4 GB limit on 32-bit processors doesn't affect portables, which max out at half that, due to physical space constraints. On top of that, 64-bit processing is actually slower than 32-bit processing on a PowerPC chip. And clock-for-clock, the G5 is barely faster than the G4 at real-world performance of 32-bit applications. What's made the G5 so great in desktops is the fact that it scales to much higher clock speeds, but nobody expects that to happen in the laptops right away, considering the heat and power consumption that's involved.
So, really, the only technical advantage of putting a G5 into a notebook right now is the fact that it will have a longer lifespan, and can continue to run 64-bit operating systems and applications far into the future, when 32-bit support is eventually dropped.
Of course, that's so far away that people will probably have upgraded again by that point.
So yeah, I would argue that a last-gen G4 would be better than a first-gen G5, due to the stability of the platform. In fact, a dual-core G4 would be awesome. But seeing as how Freescale's dual-core G4 won't even sample until the second half of this year, I don't think it'll ever happen. I'm confident that something's going to happen with the G5 by that time, be it IBM's Cell processor, or a revision of the current G5 chip using new chip-making technologies. As you pointed out, once the G5 is released, the G4 is dead to the marketing world.
Regardless, there will be new powerbooks soon -- probably Tuesday, but possibly not until February 14th (which is not a Tuesday, btw). Maybe announced on Tuesday and shipping on the 14th. Whether it's a G4 revision or a G5 spectacle can be argued either way, at this point. Me, I can't wait any longer. I'll buy whatever is released, and I'll be happy with either one, for different reasons. Every cloud has a silver lining, you know?
Yeah, we wasted a good portion (fun, but we are really just a bunch of loons) of time talking about this the other day...macker said:
Noelster started the craziness about the Ave A link. My bet is that it is a type o -
not bad.....Pringolian said:Heres my PowerBook G5 attempt,
lame but the idea is there
[url]http://www.spymac.com/upload/gallery/f_89/user_898747/upload_317170.jpg
Caiwyn said:
I'd love to get one as soon as possible...but if I have to wait till the 14th it's not a big deal - I'll just buy myself a nice little birthday present for the 17th.
maxandnick said:Apple just changed the thread to:
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g4_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
</body>
</html>
UH OH! Somebody is getting fired! This pretty much validates that a G5 Powerbook is coming out soon don't you think? Apple wouldn't have it fixed if it was not meant to be there. We will see though won't we. If it is a G5 powerbook next week I won't buy it.
I will make this statement (with no research to back it up except my memory) that there has never been an apple computer Rev A product come out that did not have problems that needed fixing in Rev B, and I mean serious problems. Look at the track record:
Powerbook G4 Titanium Rev A: Disc eject problems and jamming, paint chipping, hinge cracking, firewire ports on fire, power supply fires, keyboard screen marks.
Powerbook G4 Aluminum Rev A: White dot screens, bad batteries, Latch problems, hinge problems, Aluminum pitting from PH levels in sweat.
Powermac MDD: Fan problems.
Powermac G5 Rev A: Crashing, fan problems, powersupply chirping, Hard Drive overheating, 6800 card drives don't work.
iBook: Motherboard problems.
So, with this in mind, do you really believe a Powerbook G5 won't be a piece of junk? I will wait until the G5 powerbook is in Rev B or C to be safe. Even with applecare you will get the run around. Get familiar with this apple tech support phrase: "Apple is not aware of that problem. Send it in so we can look at it". Even though there might be 1000 forum threads in there support area about the issue you are calling about. Any body ever having a popular problem with a system can attest I am sure.
attic salt said:same here...dual core! dual core! but you think it's actually possible? Everyone's talking like it can't happen...
That's because it can't happen. The chips don't even exist yet, and Freescale won't have them ready until the second half of this year. They will NOT be in the next revision. And if Apple releases a G5 Powerbook before the end of the year, the dual-core G4 chip won't show up in a Powerbook at ALL.
Which is a shame, because a dual-core G4 would be awesome. But with Tiger still being scheduled for the first half of this year, the onus will be on Apple to deliver a 64-bit capable Powerbook, purely for marketing reasons. We know that the current G5 doesn't really perform better than the G4, unless it's clocked faster or given a redesign. But the G5 is a brand, and that's really what sells.
I don't expect there to ever be a dual-core G4 Powerbook. I'd be perfectly happy to be proven wrong, though.
Caiwyn said:
There might not be a dual core notebook next but there will be one whether its a G5 or a G4. You see we all need to face something, processors are hitting their speed limit. The only way Intel and AMD and IBM can stay competitive is to realease dual core chips. After those are out for a while you will see apple trimming its OS to keep up after Microshaft does it or visa versa.
Look at the new crop of 90nm chips, they run hotter than thier 13nm counter parts. P4 4ghz was pulled from production. Its all over people. G5 2.5ghz runs with fans AND liquid cooling. I doubt we will ever see a 3ghz or higher G5 chip. Expect dual core chips and then quad core chips with OSes that take advantage of such processing.
Upcoming in the next 5 yrs of hardware is going to be all about dual core and multiprocessing OSes in 64bit. None will pass 3ghz unless the widen the core like the P4 and G5 have done to get more GHZ. You can expect hard drives to be a big focus as they make them faster and cooler and larger. Also modular CPU ad ons like little minis can be stacked and connected to form 1 computer with multiple processors, unlimited. This is the only way computers will get much faster.
Its not a faster processor we need folks, its a faster OS. If I use my 1ghz Tibook on OS 6.1 then I have a faster computer then anything out today. Same goes for a PM Dothan at 2ghz running windows 3.1 or dos. Speed is not an issue then. We are put into this mess of getting faster and faster processors to run the new operating systems that Apple and Microsoft keep churning out every year and as they do increase them in Gloat. Look at XP pro. Its a 2.5gb install vs windows 95s 115mb install. Insane. Its all marketing and hype to sell more computers. Thats why we see things like CI coming out of Tiger. Guess what, got to buy a new computer. Won't be much faster either than what you have.
Caiwyn said:
Yes. Apple would not have changed it if it was supposed to be there. Its an obvious mistake that was corrected.
Caiwyn said:
Half Right.
It isnt a 4 GB limit on a 32 bit processor.... It is a 2 GB limit( per thread)
A 32 bit processor can support tons of memory as long as your App doesnt need more than 2 GB for a single thread. I personally used a 8-way Xeon processor box with 32 GB of ram 4 years ago.
Also dont count on 64 bit OS X support from Apple for at least 3 years. Tiger is not 64 bit. I doubt whether 10.5 will be either. The only 64 bit part of Tiger is for command line POSIX compliant applications.(read no gui based apps like photoshop)
Until Apple no longer sells ANY G4 processors they wont even put a 64 bit OS on their product roadmap. And if their OS history has any merit I would expect that you wont see a true 64 bit OS X until at least 3 years after they stop selling G4's.
Heck Panther is still supported on the G3 platform. And if you take a look at the darwin kernel source you will find that its memory subsytem is optimized for... Guess what processor.... thats right the G3...
And Guess what Tiger will still run on a G3 too. So maybe you wont see it as true 64 bit before 5 years.
Edit: FROM THE READ BEFORE YOU INSTALL.pdf found on the TIGER BETA
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
PowerPC G3, G4, or G5 Processor
End EDIT
I personally find it ludicrous that Apple is still supporting such an old processor as a G3.
Now your comment about 64 bit apps running on the G5 being slower than 32 bit apps on it..... is half right too... Because it really depends on the App..
As to the part about a 2 GB on a laptop... you are right on.
I personally will be very disapointed if Apple puts a G5 in the PBook.
It will be hot(read larger form factor)... It will consume too much power(read reduced battery life)
And thats even with the lower power version of the G5 that IBM is suppose to be releasing.
IMO the best way to go would be to use the freescale dual core.
1st. Its available right now in quantity.
2nd. It is lower power than the current G4( read longer battery life)
3rd. Faster bus speed
4th. they increased the cache to 1 meg cache
5th.It would smoke any G5 that would be sandwiched into a PBook in performance
Last but not least would give Apple the first dual core laptop on the market.
which would be great for Advertizing.
~loserman~ said:
Ah, you're right, of course. I was thinking of the current 4GB limit for Windows on 32-bit systems. That amount of memory gets divided between 2 GB of kernel space and 2 GB of applications, but nothing can use more than 2 GB at once, due to the limitations of 32-bit processing. My mistake.
~loserman~ said:
In the context of RAM capacity, Tiger is most certainly 64-bit, though. A 32-bit application will only be able to address 2 GB at a time, sure, but the operating system is capable of allocating much more.
~loserman~ said:
Why not? They've got the capability to create fat binaries with 32-bit and 64-bit versions in each. I'd expect 10.5 to be fully capable of 64-bit operation, and for them to eventually drop 32-bit support in some later version, like 10.7 or 10.8.
~loserman~ said:
Of course. What I'm saying is that a process or thread that only addresses 32-bit registers will be faster than the same process or thread trying to address 64-bit registers. But you're right, there's always some give-and-take due to coding and optimization.
~loserman~ said:
That all really depends on the chip. We all know there's no way a 970FX is making its way into a PowerBook. There HAS to be a chip redesign for the G5 powerbook to happen, and if that's in the works, no one knows what the specs are yet.
~loserman~ said:
Where have you heard this? Everything I've read says the MPC8641D (the dual-core G4 chip) isn't even schedule to sample until the second half of this year. The only thing that should be available now is the MPC7448, which is not dual-core, but a drop-in replacement for the current line of G4 processors.
Caiwyn said:
Capacity... hmmm... now thats a funny term...
From that respect panther can support 16 GB Ram on an XServe....
Believe me on this one TIGER IS NOT a 64 bit OS.
Edit: On second thought dont believe me.... BELIEVE APPLE
from http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/technology.html
Tigers new 64-bit features enable developers to address massive amounts of virtual memory for command-line applications, server applications and computation engines with no-compromise 32-bit application support.
The enhanced kernel, plus a 64-bit version of libSystem, let command-line programs, background daemons and network services directly manipulate up to 16 exabytes of virtual memory, more than four billion times the memory addressable by todays 32-bit applications.
All of these processes are POSIX compliant apps.(Read command line only)
*
Tiger runs on a g3,g4,or,g5
And they are not using fat binaries for the backwards support.
The only part of Tiger that is 64 bit is its Posix compliant stuff at the command line
Caiwyn said:
I can not give further details on this than what I said. Otherwise I will be in violation of a couple NDA's... and I wont say with which company or companies.
MacTruck said:
Well, researched or not, i have personal experiences that entirely go against the above. I've owned a Rev A 12" PB with no issues. a Rev A 400mhz G4 15" PB with no issues, and a Rev A 400mhz G4 PM with no issues.
Now, would you beleive that the only NON-Rev A Apple product i've owned was a Rev C G3 iBook? And would you beleive that it was the only one that gave me issues (mainboard crash... ahem... TWICE)?
Whats the moral of the story? Other than the fact that Rev A curses are a complete and utter myth.. the moral is Apple is not immune to Murphy's Law. They might be immune to the Blaster Bug, but they still make computers, and computers f*%# up. Be it Rev A, Rev B or Rev whatever up to Z. I'm not gonna live by the word of "No Rev C's ever again" like some anti-Rev A champions do. Because i've seen no correlation with the revision of a product and how more or less prone it is to having "issues". Yes there are some issues that are specific to a model, revision. but that doesn't mean that A) all units from that model/revision will have problems or B) the next revision won't have any problems, or will have fixed any of the problems.
so please, quit with the anti-Rev A propoganda. its tired.
typed proudly on a Rev A G4 iBook.
friends, brothers, and countrymen lend me your ear. Lets not turn this great thread into a celebrity death match. lets not also kill the excite of the upcoming g4 speed bump or g5. we are all here to speculate and theorize, not to give each other crap. whenever Stevey boy lets loose the new stuff, we will all rejoice. so in the mean time, i want to hear more rumors and such even though some if it is totally bogus, it still sturs that adrenalin in me.
I was the founder I tell you
I still like to think that I was the one that started all the rage about that HTML code.
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g5_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
Sorry I was just wanted to state that ( I am proud that I found that on my own )
I still like to think that I was the one that started all the rage about that HTML code.
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g5_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
Sorry I was just wanted to state that
( I am proud that I found that on my own )~loserman~ said:
Right. How again does that translate to "Not 64-bit?"
~loserman~ said:
WRONG. From the very page you linked to:
"Tiger simplifies software distribution with support for fat binaries, applications that contain both 32-bit and 64-bit binaries within a single file."
Add that to this quote:
"Tigers new 64-bit pointers enable individual processes to access massive amounts of virtual memory. The enhanced kernel, plus a 64-bit version of libSystem, let command-line programs, background daemons and network services directly manipulate up to 16 exabytes of virtual memory, more than four billion times the memory addressable by todays 32-bit applications."
and you realize that there is no way to add that kind of functionality WITHOUT using fat binaries. Just because the 64-bit support in Tiger has not yet been extended to applications doesn't mean that the operating system is incapable of addressing 16 exabytes of memory all by itself. What you are saying has been directly contradicted by Apple.
~loserman~ said:
Now you are just contradicting yourself. In order for that to be true, the operating system has to be able to perform 64-bit operations via the kernel. It is true that you won't be able to run 64-bit applications from anything except the command line, but that's the kind of functionality you can expect to be delivered in a future version of the OS via fat binaries. Meanwhile, the kernel is already 64-bit, contrary to what you say.
~loserman~ said:
Considering that every bit of press on the MPC8641D has stated that it won't be ready until the second half of this year, and that your assertions about Tiger are a bit crooked, and that you don't have a single source to back up that statement, I don't think I'll be betting any money on a dual-core G4 Powerbook arriving any time soon, if at all.
Sure, it would be nice, but I'm not convinced until I see at least a shred of evidence.
noelister said:I still like to think that I was the one that started all the rage about that HTML code.
<!--BEGIN AVENUE A-->
<img height="1" width="1" alt="" src="http://switch.atdmt.com/action/apple_g5_powerbook">
<!--END AVENUE A-->
Sorry I was just wanted to state that
You are definitely dynamite with a laser beam, noe.
Emphasis mine.
I've seen exactly one article (from The Register) that gives any sort of timeline for the MPC8641D. Do you have other sources?
As I recall, the G3 was only pulled out of iBooks a year and a half ago. That's hardly ancient.
Moreover, I seem to recall that the G3 and G4 have very similar architectures, which means that if you support one it's not much work to support the other...
Really, what downside do you see to Apple supporting the G3?