IBM Announces the PowerPC 970MP

[Object-X]

Maybe

Umm.....can we all switch back now?

Actually, I don't think you will need too. Jobs did say that there were more G5 products in the pipeline; I imagine this is what he was refering too. Besides, maybe the complete switch argument he made was to induce IBM to get off their and give Apple some product it can use. I think an indefinate support of G5 is well within the realm of possibility.

 

[JasonElise1983]

The eMac really needs to go away. Simply replace it with a low-end iMac.

and you think apple can make a 17" iMac G5 for $799 when the baseline iMac is 1299? That's almost half off? What are they going to cut out to make it that cheap? Video card? ok back to the 5200 or even the 9200. RAM? already pretty low. Processor, not a lot of room for that yet. you get the idea. So, they could make a 15", well they would have to spend a lot of money on R&D to get that ot work. Just seems silly. I like the eMac, not a great computer, but for the money, not a bad one either. Great for poorer people who don't have an old computer that they can keep the periferals from to go on a Mac Mini, and even better for students and schools who don't need a G5, just a mac that functions. It's actually a perfect compiment to Apple's Line.

JE

 

[Object-X]

Is that really a problem?

The trick is getting the developers to.

They will also have to have Rosetta run backwards. Right now I think it only does PPC on x86

But if developers are already doing it what's the big deal. You just push the button!

If they can convince everyone to use Xcode then supporting universal binaries seems like it would be trivial. Getting there may not be, but once you have deployed your application with a universal binary how hard would it be to continue to support it? It seems to me that all the hard work at that point is handled by Xcode.

 

[Tastannin]

You are obviously not a developer. For simple applications it would be fine, and Rosetta would not have to go both ways as long as devs don't compile Intel only. The problem is with games and pro apps, developers would now need to optimize for both Altivec and SSE which would not be very easy. Time is money so if the developer's are told only to support what they know (Altivec) to get the product out in time then consumer computers would run much slower than PPC computers. BTW I still think the Inhell switch is a bad move.

Actually, I think Apple is encouraging developers not to write to Altivec or SSE directly, but use some higher level system calls that will be mapped to the particular CPU's vector unit if possible, and if not, they will go to the CPU. Apple really is pushing for developers to write to the Mac OS X API's not low-level. Why do you think they're pushing CoreData, CoreImage, CoreAudio, CoreVideo so hard? Maybe now its a pain in the butt, but later on the developers will thank Apple when Sun announces they're buying Apple and moving the hardware to SPARC.

 

[Lynxpro]

The 970MP is definitely going in the XBOX 360.
The 970FX is more-than-likely going in the Nintendo Revolution.
Think about it. It fits.

Really. And where do you find your proof? IBM, Nintendo, and Microsoft have all failed to state what type of PowerPC chip is going into the two machines. There's no real indication that I've read stating that the Xbox360 is getting a 64 bit chip. Just a 3.2Ghz multi-core PPC chip. That could be a souped-up G4 for all we know.

And 3.2 is faster than 2.9, which is destined for the PowerMac. Hence yet another reason why Jobs is furious with IBM for giving a better spec'ed chip to Microsoft over Apple.

 

[Lynxpro]

You may very well be right, though I have to think that TI might be a better choice.
I'm totally shocked to see people posting on this board in a positive manner with respect to this hardware. It is far to little far to late! I'm not sure where IBM the corporation will go with the semiconductor business now. This pretty much seals thier fate as in industry, they will have a very hard time drumming up custom work after this fiasco.
Further who is IBM going to sell these chips to after Apple leaves the party in two years? All IBM did today was to announce a dead product, they must really feel proud of themselves now.Dave

Agreed. I totally forgot about TI. Which is embarassing for me since even I know they (TI) make a lot of Firewire chips, for example.

There is no other way to say that IBM is stupid. Look at the PPC and Cell chips they are selling to the videogame console manufacturers. Would they even have those wares had they not had the Apple Computer incentive to continue designing PowerPC chips? Nope. So now they've ran off Apple and are boasting their chip wins for the game companies. The only problem is that consoles last for 3-5 years. What will they have to offer after that? Obviously it won't be another generation chip. Sony will lead the development of Cell's successor, and thus they could shop out another company to built it for them independent of IBM. And the Xbox360 is not even a safe bet for IBM chip profitability because from the looks of it, the Xbox360 is going to get *Dreamcasted* because so many gamers will be holding out until the PS3 hits the market before upgrading.

IBM has screwed the silicon pooch (and I'm not talking the Sony Aibo or that famous Time Lord's K-9 pet) with lagging around on the PPC architecture. They'll probably only have AMD on contract for a couple more years until AMD has some more of their own fab plants too. Once that happens, IBM Semiconductor is gone the way of OS/2.

Oh wait. There are some multifunction Japanese printers that use the G3 as their processor. Maybe IBM can sell the G5s to them.

 

[Wonder Boy]

No if yoiu believe that Apple just found out about these I know of a bridge that is for sale /QUOTE]

I don't understand the "bridge for sale" joke. i've heard it 100 times but can't figure it out. could someone explain? thanks.

 

[AlmightyG5]

When?

When does everyone think Apple will make these updates? I was going to buy an iMacG5 this weekend...I dont want to wait but if there will be a iMac Rev C next week then i'll wait. What do you think?

 

[VanMac]

Dont know what all the hype is about.

Just an announcement around processors that should have been produced a year ago.

It's one thing to announce a product.....and another thing to be able to deliver in quantity and quality.

I would not wait on this for any purchase decisions.....

 

[macorama]

When does everyone think Apple will make these updates? I was going to buy an iMacG5 this weekend...I dont want to wait but if there will be a iMac Rev C next week then i'll wait. What do you think?

No way will there be a new iMac next week. New Powermacs are much more likely though, after all the last update was a real disappointment for most, so an upgrade to dual processor dual core machines would be well worth it. So buy the iMac - they're just upgraded, and their last update was a good one for sure.

 

[GFLPraxis]

I can't see Apple bothering to put a G5 in their laptops this late into the game. Aren't they expected to be the first InteliMacs announced in early '06? That'd be two major revisions in 6 months or so.
Seems more likely to me that two of these new 970MP's will go into the PowerMacs and Xserves in the near future, with a single 970MP going in the iMac line.

Regardless, it is nice to see new PPC chips from IBM.

Why; it's almost a full year before they'll get Intel chips. I can't see one reason Apple would not want to update while they wait. Put a G5 in a PowerBook and get sales boosts for a year, then get Intel Pentium M's. Better than leaving a G4 in for the next year.

 

[rog]

Ooooh wow, potentially a PowerBook with a 1.6Ghz G5. What a joke. Who wants to pay nearly 3 grand for a laptop that runs slower (given slower laptop hard drives) than the LOW-END tower did 2.5 years ago? I sure don't. Nevertheless Apple should get these in PowerBooks like tomorrow, and dramatically slash the prices to encourage sales. Otherwise, portable sales are going to be dead until the first Mactels come out. Apple would be wise to drop the current PowerMac 2.7 and replace it with a Dual dual core 2.5. With 1MB L2 caches and 4 cores it would be quite a bit faster than the 2.7. but of course, They won't do that for another year and then they'll raise prices because that's what they do.

 

[Lynxpro]

Maybe now its a pain in the butt, but later on the developers will thank Apple when Sun announces they're buying Apple and moving the hardware to SPARC.

Ha! More likely that Apple will buy Sun out and:

1. Sell the hardware [servers, etc.] division to HP, IBM, or Dell.

2. Trade what's left of the SPARC people off to Intel for a better price on wifi chips and the like.

3. Spin-off Java completely open-source as a "Darwin" project. Or sell it to IBM.

4. Keep the OS people and adapt the security benefits of Solaris into OS X even if it takes a blow torch to weld it.

5. Restrict the retained-former-Sun-employees from ever uttering the word "Linux" again in public.

and

6. If there are Sun employees still working on Mozilla, transfer them to developing Safari.

-------------------------------------------------

What I'm interested to know is what will Apple do with any of their intellectual property they own in the PowerPC architecture? Will they sell it to IBM and Freescale, license it to Intel and AMD, or just quietly sit on it?

And with this Intel partnership, what does this mean for Firewire800? Will Intel license this broadly for the PC market, or will Apple quietly downplay it in favor of better prices on USB 3.0 (?) whenever that hits the market?

And...will Apple drop support of Bluetooth in favor of Intel's Wireless USB?

 

[dontmatter]

so. Supposing these chips don't make it into macs-what would they go into? IBM uses power chips for workstations, cell and other weird ones for gaming.... what would these be suited for?

 

[iMeowbot]

I don't understand the "bridge for sale" joke. i've heard it 100 times but can't figure it out. could someone explain? thanks.

I don't know why it's always a bridge (and often the Brooklyn Bridge in particular), since the real instances have tended to be towers and monuments.

 

[Bonte]

Actually no. Rosetta is only for running PPC code on Intel. You don't need Rosetta to run intel code on PPC because all intel compatible binaries will be univeral binaries, which run on PPC.

Hm, no. There's definitely going to be a lot of software written for Macintel only either with windows compatibility modules or games that take advantage of pure GPU power. I love the transition to intel but were going to have a few rocky years ahead in ibm/intel software madness.

i'l stick with IBM for my next update if these get it to the iMac or Mini.

 

[weezer160]

looks like IBM doesn't want to be shown up!

finally, even though we may not use PPCs in our high end in two years, at least IBM got their a$$es moving again.

i'm very mixed about this.

 

[iHateWindows]

Nice work there, Apple.

 

[cr2sh]

looks like IBM doesn't want to be shown up!

finally, even though we may not use PPCs in our high end in two years, at least IBM got their a$$es moving again.

i'm very mixed about this.

Indeed. **** IBM. So, they finally announced the MP... why didn't we have this 6months ago? If this is really what's going on.. would Jobs have made the decision they did?

 

[oingoboingo]

The trick is getting the developers to.

They will also have to have Rosetta run backwards. Right now I think it only does PPC on x86

Why will Rosetta have to run backwards when there are Universal Binaries which execute native code on both PPC and x86 platforms? Why will developers not check both the 'PowerPC' and the 'Intel' boxes in XCode when releasing new software from now on?

 

[oingoboingo]

Hm, no. There's definitely going to be a lot of software written for Macintel only either with windows compatibility modules or games that take advantage of pure GPU power. I love the transition to intel but were going to have a few rocky years ahead in ibm/intel software madness.

i'l stick with IBM for my next update if these get it to the iMac or Mini.

Windows compatibility modules? Games that take advantage of GPU power? Games on Mac OS X already do...via OpenGL. Are you suggesting DirectX and Win32/WinFX will be ported to Intel/OS X?

 

[oingoboingo]

Once that happens, IBM Semiconductor is gone the way of OS/2.

So who will design and manufacture the POWER series of CPUs which are used in IBM's (highly successful) server range?

 

[Mass Hysteria]

I don't know why it's always a bridge (and often the Brooklyn Bridge in particular), since the real instances have tended to be towers and monuments.

could be that 'bought london bridge, thought it was tower bridge' thing

 

[iMeowbot]

Windows compatibility modules? Games that take advantage of GPU power? Games on Mac OS X already do...via OpenGL. Are you suggesting DirectX and Win32/WinFX will be ported to Intel/OS X?

In fact, Codeweavers are already working on porting wine and winelib to Macintel, and I'd expect Transgaming to be doing similar things for their gaming-oriented wine stuff (they already have a Mac PPC product that does this kind of thing).

 

[reyesmac]

neat

Good to see Macs will get updated this year maybe. These chips might be alot faster but the low mhz would have caused problems for Apple. Now all they have to do is say, see why we are switching. I wonder if these chips are lower in price, would be nice to see price cuts on PPC hardware.