Apple and IBM's PowerPC Potential

[arnaudsj]

In this story of Apple going from PPC to x86 architecture, it is pretty obvious to me that it is not so much a choice or advantage of one architecture versus the other, but clearly a business related decision.
IBM relations with Apple were probably not that great since IBM could not deliver what the G5 roadmap they had promised Apple since the first G5.

Freescale (the worldwide embedded processor leader) is obviously only looking at making embedded chips, and is very successful at it! PPC chips are found already everywhere in many systems, planes, cars, networking devices, etc... The latest 7448 is a marvel of engineering, consuming 10W at 1,7Ghz and offering CPU power way beyond any other chip on the market using 10W or lower.

I think that the success of the move of Apple to Intel will solely be determined by if Intel can make the roadmap they sold to Apple for their x86 chip.

I also believe that such a move by Apple is going to have to be justified by hard number to the shareholders, and if you look at how antsy are the shareholders are to make a lot of money now with Apple since the iPod, my guess is that the move to Intel better show some major costs savings for Apple, because I don't believe they will be happy with the explanation: "Intel promised us better chips", because after all Intel just trashed the Pentium 4 architecture and 4-5 year long project, a few billions dolllar in the process... So their enginneering capability is not that supperior. Intel shines by its manufacturing and agressive marketing, not its designs (which BTW is often not even done by Intel itself!).

The future will be interesting

 

[tatle]

All about IBM and Charismatic customer relationships

There is absolutely no way IBM does not have the technology to fix the power issues for Apple, so what's going on here is a relationship thing, like Rob Adkins goes far to admit.

I made some reflections on this in my blog a couple of weeks ago why IBM and Charismatic customers does not go well together:

http://www.andwest.com/blojsom/blog...IBM_not_geared_for_charismatic_customers.html

 

[FoxyKaye]

It just seems a very risky strategy to switch wholesale as it implies no going back. So if IBM does come out with some Power5 derived 8 core beast, Apple have already burnt their bridges there.

Oh it certainly is a risky strategy, I'll grant Apple that. However, I think realistically (sp?) IBM wasn't going to come out with anything that Apple could use for its desktop/laptop offering that wouldn't require a nuclear cooling tower to accompany the computers. Just speculation, and I agree with other folks that Intel must have shown Steve some really cherry chips that they aren't yet discussing publicly. I think this is also why Apple is really playing up Rosetta and Universal Binaries - they don't want current PPC users or buyers in the next 2-3 years (which I believe is what Steve said it would take Apple to completely make the switch to Intel chips) to shy away. It's really just a guess, but I'll venture that developers and Apple will be supporting PPCs at least until 2010.

I can't really comment on the PPC vs. Intel roadmaps, mostly when folks write about these I nod my head while hearing the teacher from Peanuts in the back of my mind. Just not my specialty...

 

[Ti_Poussin]

What "everyone knows" is wrong in this case. The Pentium M is dramatically faster per clock cycle than the Pentium 4, and probably the G5. The Pentium M branched from the Pentium 3 in a separate development path from the Pentium 4, and the two, when comparing clock frequencies, are pretty much like comparing across processor families. So saying the G5 is faster per cycle than the P4 says nothing about the Pentium M.

As for IBM... I think their statement can be summarized as a spin on what everyone already knows... if Apple had paid them a lot of money, they could have done all sorts of special development, but it didn't really work as a business case for IBM (and Apple.) With Intel, Apple simply has to buy product that Intel is already building, and get a nice chipset in the bargain, which will probably end up being faster, cheaper, and better.

I hope you know the G4 was better than a P3 at equal frequency, the problem is not the raw power of PPC chip and never have been (they are more powerfull chip and have a lot better design). The problem come from optimization to make code for those processor. In reallity no compagny could justify to put a lot of money to optimize code for a PPC that 5% of the market that's all (PC and ATI (not sure if it's ATI or NVidia, anyway it doesn't mather) took a full years with around 25 ingineers to optimize the code versus 6 month with around 10 guys for Mac). Look at programme made specific for PPC and see the difference by yourself. It's sad but financial management have won over good technology again, but appz will be more optimize for our platform like it never been before, but don't await new appz that will run faster with new version, will be like with windows, every update slow you down. Mac won't last long anymore, changing more often is our futur now.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Ibm And Motorola have both proven they Both suck at advancing the PPC. Neither one is close to Intel or AMD thats the Facts. There isnt a single G5 or G4 that can match a single AMD 3800 let alone a FX57!!! IBM and Moto dont let the door slam you in the arse on the way out. Both of these loosers could have cared a less at any progress.......Pathetic. Apple should intro the Intel Machines Now! 2nd rate performance is 2nd rate. water cooling just to get to 2.5??? pathetic is as pathetic does and Moto/IBM have been Pathetic when it came to Macs.

 

[DonWilson]

IBM lost it's chance. This is like Kerry trying to kiss babies after November 2nd

 

[pighuddle]

+ dual core.

Then I upgrade my dual 2ghz G5.

Man, I hope IBM squeezes out a 2x3 before the switch to Intel! That'd be a great machine to sit on until the storm blows over.

 

[jragosta]

IBM wishful thinking.....

What a bunch of crap.

First IBM says 'we didn't have any idea that Apple wasn't ecstatic about our product lineup and we had no idea they were going to drop us'. Then, they claim that they really do have all these super chips and Apple just didn't want to use them.

Of course, if you read the fine print, they say 'availability to Apple would have been limited'. So, essentially, IBM had a couple of chips in the lab that MIGHT have met some of Apple's requirements and they want Apple to stay loyal on that basis?

I wonder who the crybabies are who run the IBM outfit. They need to be fired.

 

[lyinginggray]

hears what I think

2006
ibook will be running on Intel
mac mini/emac by end of year

2007
Powerbooks
iMac
yearend Power mac

Powerbooks imac and powermacs will be running on prossers that we have not seen yet. Just my thoughts

 

[BornAgainMac]

IBM is selling vaporware. They Longhorned Apple. Intel gives another advantage besides production capacity, speed, and lower power. They give a switcher the possibility to run their Windows applications at full speed along with their new Mac apps on the same hardware. The Intel switch is the first real chance that Apple has to regain marketshare.

I agree with the comment earlier that it would have been nice if Apple announced they were going to ship both Intel and PPC instead of just moving 100% to Intel in 2 years. I thought that was a bad move on Apple's part.

 

[FoxyKaye]

They Longhorned Apple...

LOL - I'll have to remember that verb "Longhorned" for the future, it could apply to so many things: "Hey, stop Longhorning on that financial report, I need to FedEx it to the foundation today!" or "Gawd that presentation was really boring, he/she really Longhorned on the podium."

 

[minimax]

This sounds like a PR move from the company that basically just confessed that Apple's Intel switch had them completely blindsided. Like a little, "hey, we're still cool, we can still hang with the cool kids," for the rest of the world that's using IBM PPC chip variations in their stuff.

IBM is still trying to win apple back, what losers

This is emberassing, please stop that nonsense. Apple switches to Intel thus IBM are losers, lyers, retards etc. RDF in full effect, long live MacEvangelism.

Let me look on my 3.0 GHz G5 and check that out....

That's new...a month of 'reflection' or the hostage-syndrome perhaps?

Let's get our facts together please. Neither IBM nor Intel could deliver on their original roadmap. Where's the 4 GHz P4 processor that was promised? please tell me 'cause i can't find it at my local computergrocery.

The whole performance / watts story is some pretty embarrassing spin. Yeah, sure enough Intel might have a spectacular roadmap. So does IBM. So does Freescale, no doubt. Actual products please. Pentium M? nice. Does it justify such a switch? Absolutely not. Neither performance nor power consumption is much ahead of the G4, and both Intel and Freescale still have no actual mobile dual core produkt on the shelves.

This is NOT about Freescale or IBM failing with their products or roadmaps. If Apple does not give the guaranty to IBM to buy their mobile solution they will sure as hell not develope it into production, as it is their ONLY costumor for PPC. Apple is the one holding the cards here.
So get it in your heads fanboys, this was a STRATEGIC move, not a tactical one based on the situation on the battlefield.

 

[fluidinclusion]

Apple probably did

i'm still a little bummed that it didn't work out w/ IBM. i had HIGH hopes when they switched to Big Blue and for a while it seemed like they were really jumping out there w/ some cool s#!+, but it really fizzled out, huh?

it is too bad that they supposedly didn't learn about Jobs jumping ship until they read the rumors. unless Jobs has something big up his sleeve w/ Intel (very possible), it would have been nice to let IBM have one last chance to wow him.

Apple probably did give them "one last chance", but Apple or any customer shouldn't have to give ultamatums when the company itself (IBM) made the guarantee of 3 GHz and still hasn't gotten there. After 2 years, it's clear that they just can't produce their vaporware. Intel can. I had high hopes for IBM too.

 

[Some_Big_Spoon]

Well, I don't think they are really.. IBM has a major investment in the PPC arcitecture for their own products, and potential customers moving to Linux on POWER. The high profile move of Apple ditching the entire line in favor of the "One Ring" looks a bit like PPC isn't all it's cracked up to be. Apple leaving doesn't directly hit IBM's bottom line (despite what fan-boys wish), but it does leave a residual black mark on the line the IBM is trying to male the top dog eventually.

I know you all what anyone who's "wronged" Apple to burn in the depths of hell, but I wouldn't count IBM out of business just yet. They've weathered far, far worse than this in their very, very long history.

IBM is still trying to win apple back, what losers

 

[MongoTheGeek]

The whole power / watts story is plain spin, everybody with common sense knows that. And yeah, sure enough Intel might have a spectacular roadmap. So does IBM. So does Freescale, no doubt. Actual products please. Pentium M? nice. Does it justify such a switch? Absolutely not. Neither performance nor power consumption is much ahead of the G4, and both Intel and Freescale still have no actual mobile dual core produkt on the shelves.

There is some truth to the power/cpu logic though. The cooler the CPU the smaller heatsinks you need. The smaller the heatsink, the more you can fit in a box. Since X seems to play nicely with multiple processors a 4,6 or 8 way desktop box isn't out of the question.

 

[minimax]

Apple probably did give them "one last chance", but Apple or any customer shouldn't have to give ultamatums when the company itself (IBM) made the guarantee of 3 GHz and still hasn't gotten there. After 2 years, it's clear that they just can't produce their vaporware. Intel can. I had high hopes for IBM too.

So AGAIN, where is the 4 GHz processor Intel promised, please tell me.
There is such a thing called 'physics' FYI.

 

[minimax]

There is some truth to the power/cpu logic though. The cooler the CPU the smaller heatsinks you need. The smaller the heatsink, the more you can fit in a box. Since X seems to play nicely with multiple processors a 4,6 or 8 way desktop box isn't out of the question.

Yeah but the Freescale processors are actually lower on powerconsumption as the Pentium M. Performance / watt is probably even to the advantage of Freescale.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Apple did the right thing only they should have done it before G5, for god sakes if Apple didnt push IBM they would be selling dual 1.67 G4 Powermacs right now. You want to build computers you better have a cpu maker who is interested not sleeping or working hard at Consoles while you are waiting,waiting,waiting.............

 

[tsk]

There is absolutely no way IBM does not have the technology to fix the power issues for Apple, so what's going on here is a relationship thing, like Rob Adkins goes far to admit.

If IBM has the power to fix this, where the hell is the PB G5? Why did they go to water cooling in the PowerMacs? Seems like a great big power issue IBM can't fix.

 

[joeboy_45101]

Would surprise me if IBM did not have something in the works. Sure they aren't the fastest company, but evolution is still there. ALso, it would not surprise me if Intel let Steve know of something major in their line - the nail in the coffin for him to switch. But what does it matter? What is done is done...

Has anybody seen the latest cover of Technology Review. It features an Intel processor that is absolutely amazing. It's an optoelectronic CPU, a silicon laser processor if you will. If Intel really works on this thing then nobody on this board will ever be bitching about speed again. We're talking unprecedented speed and power. Imagine Apple producing a PowerBook that is equally as powerful as a PowerMac and does so by using a fraction of the power that is required today.

 

[crap freakboy]

The whole performance / watts story is some pretty embarrassing spin. Yeah, sure enough Intel might have a spectacular roadmap. So does IBM. So does Freescale, no doubt. Actual products please. Pentium M? nice. Does it justify such a switch? Absolutely not. Neither performance nor power consumption is much ahead of the G4, and both Intel and Freescale still have no actual mobile dual core produkt on the shelves.

This is NOT about Freescale or IBM failing with their products or roadmaps. If Apple does not give the guaranty to IBM to buy their mobile solution they will sure as hell not develope it into production, as it is their ONLY costumor for PPC. Apple is the one holding the cards here.
So get it in your heads fanboys, this was a STRATEGIC move, not a tactical one based on the situation on the battlefield.

Spot on m8y.
Power per watt? I think Jobs see us as morons, theres BS and theres iBS. With each keynote the marketing nonsense increases. Saying that I personally think the Intel move and its ramifications for Apple is a very, very smart move. Roadmaps are vapourware until the plants are spitting them out. Apple are bravely edging their bets, who knows whos going to have the next technical breakthrough? IBM? AMD? Intel? Who knows?
Just hope Intel don't turn into IBM or Moto before the transistion.

 

[amholl]

I hate IBM and I hate their idiotic PowerPC chips. Long live Intel!!!

i cant believe that someone said this. last year, they would have been shunned by every1 on this site.

 

[w_parietti22]

the problem is that Intel is slower.
The chips we are talking about from Intel is dual core 2.13ghz Yonath (sp) Pentium M.

A dual core G5 will beat them.

I don't know how fast the G5 MPs are. But they should be arround 3 ghz. That is quite faster than Intels 2.13ghz. (yeah, I know. Clockspeed isnt all, but everyone knowes that PPC are as fast or faster than X86 per clock cykle)

FYI- If you're comparing GHz and asaying that more GHz =faster than look at this:

Current PowerBook= 1.67GHz max
New PowerBook= 2.13GHz max (Pentium M Yohan)
PowerBook G5= House goes bye bye.

Current PowerMac G5 = 2.7ghz
New PowerMac= 3.8Ghz (Pentium 4)
Dual Core G5= 3.2Ghz

hmmmm... I think your confused, the Yohan is not going into the PowerMac.

 

[Lacero]

i cant believe that someone said this. last year, they would have been shunned by every1 on this site.

Yes, interesting how my comments are not shot down, eh?

 

[iGary]

That's new...a month of 'reflection' or the hostage-syndrome perhaps?

I didn't take my medication today.