Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Originally posted by dongmin
Yeah MacWhispers has really been beating the 970 drum recently. I don't think they have much of a track record (other than the fact that the site is run by the MacTables guy); I can't recall them being particular right or wrong on anything yet.

Basically, if I believe their rumors, I'm expecting new 970 PowerMacs AND new 970 PowerBooks at the June WWDC at the latest. They're now saying that the actual production of 970 PowerBooks are being ramped up. If these babies don't make it to market within 3 months, I'm calling MacWhispers a big fat liar. And for PowerMacs, I'll accept nothing less than a dual 1.8 ghz 970 machine within a couple months of the WWDC.

Personally, I think it's all speculation on their part. I can't believe that a brand spanking new rumor site has these unbelievable sources in all parts of the industry telling them all these juicy, detailed insider info. It's all a bit too much. As someone else mentioned, this guy probably going off on all these rumors to increase traffic to his site and make a quick buck.

I feel similarly. I think info from MacWhispers should be taken with a grain of salt, until some of the rumors that they post prove to be true. I also thought MacWhispers was changing its format to move away from speculation and instead just post facts that they found out like "Apple bought 1000 clear plastic cases" (assuming they are facts).

This is in no way meant to bash MacWhispers, it's just hard to believe their rumors until some of them pan out. They were really pushing iPod rumors a month or so ago and nothing happened with those.
 
Originally posted by bentmywookie
I feel similarly. I think info from MacWhispers should be taken with a grain of salt, until some of the rumors that they post prove to be true. I also thought MacWhispers was changing its format to move away from speculation and instead just post facts that they found out like "Apple bought 1000 clear plastic cases" (assuming they are facts).

This is in no way meant to bash MacWhispers, it's just hard to believe their rumors until some of them pan out. They were really pushing iPod rumors a month or so ago and nothing happened with those.

Yep. The iPod fiasco taught me to take a much more cautious approach to what's actually published on MacWhispers. If you'll notice, postings went from 5 to 7 per week down to 2 or 3 per week, or less. I'm screeening what I hear in my OEM communications with a much more jaded eye now, before deciding to publish.

MacWhispers is teaching me to take what my business contacts tell me with a very large grain of salt. At this point, there are only a handful of regular contacts I accept as being truly reliable. Anything not from these few people, I try to double source... something very difficult to do with "whispers."
 
I really gotta wonder about some of this...

I mean MacWhispers has thrown so much against the wall that some it has to stick... if the 15 inch comes out with either the G4 or the 970 then MacWhispers can claim a win - it has both bases covered...

Also, does this pass the common sense test. Can Apple release the 970 without an operating system that is 64 bit ready ( Panther )? And Panther is not due till Sept...

Being an engineer I seriously doubt that 2 things are remarkably ahead of schedule...
 
.
Originally posted by chazmox
Also, does this pass the common sense test. Can Apple release the 970 without an operating system that is 64 bit ready?

Yes they can. The PowerPC 970 can run 32-bit operating systems with ease, IBM has said this whenever they talk about the 970. You would need to make a few changes to the base system, but the changes are minor. If Apple did release a 970 based PowerMac before Panther is released then it would ship with a modified version of 10.2 (10.2.7?) that specifically could boot on a 970 machine. The abilities to make these kinds of changes are why Apple moved to Mac OS X :).
 
Well this sounds really nice, if its true. Makes the June WWDC debut seem more reasonable.

I just hope we don't have to wait until September for delivery.

D
 
green elves? (from page one)

my money says not elves but gnomes are at the core of this. i happen to have inside sources and know what their plan is...

step 1: buy materials and equipment for making processors
step 2:
step 3: profit

actually, i don't have any reason to doubt that things are ahead of schedule - the first rumors and or speculations of apple/ibm cooperations happened long ago, and even then it was said to have been going for months. considering how several threads of information are converging, i would expect to see something bigger than just a panther demonstration.
 
Originally posted by mangoduck
green elves? (from page one)

my money says not elves but gnomes are at the core of this. i happen to have inside sources and know what their plan is...

step 1: buy materials and equipment for making processors
step 2:
step 3: profit

if you are going to troll slashdot style, do it right :D

step 1: buy materials and equipment for making processors
step 2: ??????
step 3: PROFIT!!!!
 
Originally posted by chazmox
I really gotta wonder about some of this...

I mean MacWhispers has thrown so much against the wall that some it has to stick... if the 15 inch comes out with either the G4 or the 970 then MacWhispers can claim a win - it has both bases covered...

Also, does this pass the common sense test. Can Apple release the 970 without an operating system that is 64 bit ready ( Panther )? And Panther is not due till Sept...

Being an engineer I seriously doubt that 2 things are remarkably ahead of schedule...

Yes I agree on the (the two things ahead of schedule,) but remember what happened when the first dual g4s were released? OSX was not out yet, and it took about six months until it was released. That means Dual proc. machines running OS 9, which was no very firendly with dualies at all. I remember I had to erase the system extention that allowed me to run the second proc. because the computer kept crashing. So....if PB 970 are released and then they release 64bit panther a couple of months latter it won't be such a pleoblem. The 970 are 32bit backward compatible right?
 
Originally posted by hacurio1
Yes I agree on the (the two things ahead of schedule,) but remember what happened when the first dual g4s were released? OSX was not out yet, and it took about six months until it was released. That means Dual proc. machines running OS 9, which was no very firendly with dualies at all. I remember I had to erase the system extention that allowed me to run the second proc. because the computer kept crashing. So....if PB 970 are released and then they release 64bit panther a couple of months latter it won't be such a pleoblem. The 970 are 32bit backward compatible right?

We've waited this long for "the next big thing" I think we can wait 2 or 3 months longer. I just think it's really important for Apple to do this thing right.

Having said that, BRING IT ONNNN !!!!
 
Rincewind, thanks for answerinng the 32bit/970 question. Do you have a link - I'd like to read more...

I DO still have my doubts but that would remove one roadblock - then again Apple probably feels pressure from the Centrino/Pentium M crowd ( reason for jumping to 970 early... ) so they would have some strong motivation.
 
Here are the quotes and links.

The exact quote is this:
In addition to its support of new 64-bit solutions, the 970 retains full native support for 32-bit applications. This not only protects 32-bit software investments, but provides these 32-bit applications with the same high-performance levels that it extends to 64-bit uses. This native, nonemulated, 32-bit support is not limited to application code, which runs unmodified. 32-bit operating systems with minor updates can also take advantage of the PowerPC 970's outstanding performance.
From here: http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/powerpc/newsletter/dec2002/newproductfocus2.html

In addition:
IBM made its way around this problem by adding a 32-bit native mode to the processor that essentially changes the PowerPC 970's instruction registers, allowing it to run as a 32-bit processor. Sandon stressed that this was not any sort of emulation.

"All 32-bit applications can run as is on the 970," Sandon said. "Changes are needed to make a 32-bit OS run on the 970, but the list of changes is small."

Sandon said that IBM has a 64-bit version and a 32-bit version of Linux running on the PowerPC 970 in the lab.
From here:http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/16.ibm.php

There is also the presentation that IBM shows the world when they unvieled the PowerPC 970. You can download it here: http://www.simdtech.org/apps/group_public/download.php/23/IBM_PPC970_MPF2002.pdf
 
Originally posted by MacQuest
:D HOLY $h!t!! :D

Bring it on Apple and IBM...:D

Just to keep things in context, Architosh has also had their share of miscalls. Back in 2001 they claimed that their "sources" were using test versions of a G5 class chip that was "wiping the floor" with everything that Intel and AMD had to offer. But obviously these machines either never existed or Apple never released them (I find the latter possibility extremely unlikely). And I remember this because I actually e-mailed the guy in charge of the site with a correction about one of the publicly available details in his article, and in his reply he assured me that his "sources" explicitly told him they were testing this amazing processor and he saw no reason why they would have any desire to mislead him.

Now, I believe what he told me, but it clearly seems as if his sources were inaccurate back then (and probably intentionally inaccurate). So while I am not claiming that the rumor is clearly false, I would not take it as reliable confirmation of the impending shipment of the PPC 970.

The only rumor site that I've found to be consistently pretty accurate is Think Secret. And As The Apple Turns used to be pretty good when posting their *own* rumors (as opposed to quoting someone else's), but they're not publishing much these days...
 
Originally posted by macrumors12345
Just to keep things in context, Architosh has also had their share of miscalls. Back in 2001 they claimed that their "sources" were using test versions of a G5 class chip that was "wiping the floor" with everything that Intel and AMD had to offer. But obviously these machines either never existed or Apple never released them (I find the latter possibility extremely unlikely).

Actually the Moto G5 was a real chip and was produced, but not on mass. Apple has used it for testing but after 9/11 Moto cancelled the G5 and the rest is history.
 
Originally posted by hvfsl
Actually the Moto G5 was a real chip and was produced, but not on mass. Apple has used it for testing but after 9/11 Moto cancelled the G5 and the rest is history.

I would love to see a reliable source for that, because it makes ABSOLUTELY NO economic sense. If you have already spent money developing the chip - and it is as great as claimed - why not produce it? Maybe you won't get the return on investment that you had hoped for if the market is softer than expected, but it's not as if you will somehow recoup all of your R&D expenditures by not producing the chip! The R&D is a sunk cost - it can't be recovered!! And if they were already sampling this chip, then clearly the development phase was coming to a close and production (at least in limited quantities) had already begun. So the only reason you would want to cancel the chip at this point is if you were getting horrible yields and it was performing terribly. But according to your story, the chip was performing great, and they still decided to cancel it anyway and throw away all of their R&D investment. Again, that makes NO SENSE.

Given that there has NEVER been ANY reliable confirmation that the Motorola G5 existed, it strains credibility to think that it was developed, went into sampling, performed great, and then for some inexplicable and totally illogical reason was canceled due to some great Motorola conspiracy.

A far more likely explanation is that the rumors of its existence, none of which came from a credible source, were simply false to begin with (as with a vast majority of the rumors out there). Don't believe everything that you read!!
 
Rincewind... thank you again - the quoted text was very helpful, on target, and interesting and I will take a look at the links...

Macrumors12345: I agree with your doubt about the G5; however, I worked for Motorola for 7 years and, out of around 20 projects I worked on in some form or fashion, only five of those actually shipped. Motorola is notorious for getting something almost to shipping and then cancelling because marketing has changed a target... I could tell so many stories...

And it does make NO SENSE and does wonders for the morale of the engineers on the projects...
 
Originally posted by macrumors12345
I would love to see a reliable source for that, because it makes ABSOLUTELY NO economic sense. If you have already spent money developing the chip - and it is as great as claimed - why not produce it? Maybe you won't get the return on investment that you had hoped for if the market is softer than expected, but it's not as if you will somehow recoup all of your R&D expenditures by not producing the chip! The R&D is a sunk cost - it can't be recovered!! And if they were already sampling this chip, then clearly the development phase was coming to a close and production (at least in limited quantities) had already begun. So the only reason you would want to cancel the chip at this point is if you were getting horrible yields and it was performing terribly. But according to your story, the chip was performing great, and they still decided to cancel it anyway and throw away all of their R&D investment. Again, that makes NO SENSE.

As I recall (though I don't have a link to it), those G5 chips that were functional did perform quite well. The problem was the Moto was having massive problems with yields, and little to no luck with solving those problems. Further, there was a lot of politics going on between Apple, Moto, and IBM at that time, and Moto was essentially feeling that further investment in the non-embedded field was wasted money. That is when they cancelled the G5. It was still a long way from being production ready...

However, do take all of this with a grain of salt. It is all rumor and scuttle-but. But, to play devil's advocate, the converse doesn't make much sense either. To assert that there was no G5 would be to say that Apple has been happily sitting on its laurels knowing that they didn't have a chip to go to after the G4, until last year when IBM came up with the 970. That, too, makes no sense.

If Moto didn't have a chip in the works, then Apple would have been working with IBM a lot sooner to try to get a new chip. Or the infamous Marklar would have been more than just a back-up plan. For that matter, why not move to x86 at the same time as converting over to OS X, if there was no processor roadmap to take them forward with PPC chips after the G4?

No, I'm quite sure that there was a G5 (non-embedded), and that it had some major problems with production. It only makes sense.

:)
 
Originally posted by chazmox

Also, does this pass the common sense test. Can Apple release the 970 without an operating system that is 64 bit ready ( Panther )? And Panther is not due till Sept...

Yes, they can, the 970 has a 32bit compatibility mode, all it would take would be for OpenFirmware to boot the 970 machines in 32bit mode and then WHEN OS level 64bit support is available, have the OS re-enable 64bit mode after the initial boot, if a 64bit PPC is detected. Thats assuming OS-wide 64bit mode is required, remember, Mach is a microkernel, it could just enable 64bit mode for the MM portion of the kernel, and for apps that require 64bit addressing/data.

Doing it this way would be a bit similar to how ALL PCs boot in 16bit mode, even in these days of 32bit OSs everywhere.

Also, this method would mean that only one version of 10.3 (or any future 10.x release) would be required for both G3/G4 and 970 based machines. The postings saying '2 versions of 10.3 will need to be written' or '10.3 will be required for the 970' postings have been annoying me for a while.
 
Originally posted by QCassidy352
so... what will the PPC 970 be called? Will it just be referred to as the PPC 970? Or will it be the G5? Or the G6 (with the G5 never having made it in to actual computers)?

Wouldn't there be legal rights owned by Moto on the G5 name? After all the G-series machines were directly named via the Moto chip generation number.

I would suspect the death of the Gx name from Apple if the 970 is used.
 
Originally posted by macrumors12345
I would love to see a reliable source for that, because it makes ABSOLUTELY NO economic sense. If you have already spent money developing the chip - and it is as great as claimed - why not produce it? Maybe you won't get the return on investment that you had hoped for if the market is softer than expected, but it's not as if you will somehow recoup all of your R&D expenditures by not producing the chip! The R&D is a sunk cost - it can't be recovered!! And if they were already sampling this chip, then clearly the development phase was coming to a close and production (at least in limited quantities) had already begun. So the only reason you would want to cancel the chip at this point is if you were getting horrible yields and it was performing terribly. But according to your story, the chip was performing great, and they still decided to cancel it anyway and throw away all of their R&D investment. Again, that makes NO SENSE.

Given that there has NEVER been ANY reliable confirmation that the Motorola G5 existed, it strains credibility to think that it was developed, went into sampling, performed great, and then for some inexplicable and totally illogical reason was canceled due to some great Motorola conspiracy.

A far more likely explanation is that the rumors of its existence, none of which came from a credible source, were simply false to begin with (as with a vast majority of the rumors out there). Don't believe everything that you read!!

Actually, economically this makes sense. Generally companies do R&D on tons of stuff (even making prototypes) which never go into production. The major cost of producing something is the tooling and marketing. If you never make the plant to produce the chips all you're out is R&D (which in the big scheme of things is not that much). So Moto probably did have the chips but either they were having problems with yields or more likely they just decided the market wasn't big enough to justify the massive amount of money a facility would require for nice processors. There's a reason why only big companies like IBM and Intel are building facilities. $$
 
Originally posted by wdlove
A very good article, coorobating what I have been reading. I think we have alot to look forward to at WWDC in June. More reason why the date was changed so that product will be available in a timely manner. :) Hopefully the wait won't be like the PowerBook! ;)

Uhh, the Architosh article doesn't say jack to corroborate any rumors. The only thing significant they say is "IBM is under increased pressure to ramp up production at new microprocessor fabrication plants in order to make way for new contracts."

This bit of info, even if it's real, doesn't specify what chip they are under pressure to produce. As they say themselves, it could be Nvidia chips. All Architosh is saying is that 1) the new fab facility is 'under pressure' to ramp up production, of what we can only speculate; and 2) that it makes sense for this new fab to be producing the 970 for Apple, but this is pure speculation on their part. As someone else noted, their rumoring record is not so hot.
 
Originally posted by Zeke
Actually, economically this makes sense. Generally companies do R&D on tons of stuff (even making prototypes) which never go into production....So Moto probably did have the chips but either they were having problems with yields or more likely they just decided the market wasn't big enough to justify the massive amount of money a facility would require for nice processors. $$

In order to have yield problems, Motorola would actually have to have the production lines up and running (as they would need if they were sampling the chip). And that would imply a big investment that they could not recoup simply by canceling the chip. So I am still very skeptical that this would make good business sense...there is a big difference between building a prototype versus actually sampling a chip and sending batches of them off to prospective customers (like Apple).

But really, that is neither here nor there, because, again, there were NO credible reports that the G5 ever existed in the form you are referring to (e.g. an ultra-high performance processor near production). If you know of any, then please provide the URL. Otherwise, my statement stands. Virtually all of the reports about the G5 and its breathtaking performance (easily exceeding that of a 4 Ghz Pentium 4, according to the reports) back in late 2001 came either from The Register or other articles quoting the The Register (the only "independent" source I ever saw that also said there might be a new processor coming was, ironically, Architosh). In retrospect, those articles were obsviously a hoax - presumably The Register was sincere in its reporting, but apparently they did not or could not verify the credibility of their "sources" (who were clearly misleading them). Why do we know this? Because the articles explicilty stated that Motorola was already G5 processors in quantity for Apple, and the Apple production lines were supposedly churning out new PowerMac G5 towers only weeks before MWSF 2002. If Apple already had so many of these magnificent processors available and was producing new towers, there is NO WAY that they would have canceled this machine. They might have delayed it, if there were some technical glitches, but they would never have canceled it. So the rumors were clearly false. There is no doubt of that, so don't kid yourself otherwise. Somebody had their fun, and whoever it was misled a large portion of the (admittedly gullible) Mac rumors community. And hey, I'll be the first to admit that even I believed the rumors might be true at one point in time. But in retrospect they were CLEARLY FALSE. Once again, THERE IS NO DOUBT about this. Oh, did I mention yet that the rumors were false? Because I wanted to be totally clear about that.

Now, is it possible that there was SOME OTHER (real) Motorola G5 that we NEVER heard anything about and that was entering production yet suddenly got canceled? Conceivably, that could be true. But since, again, we have NEVER heard any rumors about this chip, there is absolutely no reason why we would think that it would exist, especially since it would make no economic sense.
 
Don't doubt that moto would pull the plug so fast on the G5. Look at the auto industry. They spend millions in designing outragious cars for auto shows. Some morph into real car models, others die a quiet death. Even some of the ones that die have engines and all the fixings.

Hell, look at the space program. They were billions into the replacement for the space shuttle and Bush cancelled it. I even saw the prototype lander in Houston.

Don't even think there ever will be physical proof. This is Apple we're talking about. They aren't exactly open with their development plans. If they were, sites like this wouldn't exist.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.