Intel Powerbook and iMac in January?

[AidenShaw]

http://news.com.com/Intel+brings+virtualization+to+the+desktop/2100-1006_3-5950225.html

Intel is expected to launch new processors on Monday [14 Nov] starting with its Pentium line that have the ability to subdivide tasks in a hardware feature called Virtualization Technology--or VT.

While VT is currently found in some of Intel's Xeon processors, this is the first time that the chipmaking giant has extended the technology to the desktop.

VT makes it easier to run multiple operating systems or applications in independent partitions or "containers" on the same chip, said Chad Taggard, Intel's director of technology marketing.

...

 

[ksz]

I have work apps that only work under Windows. Being able to run them simultaneously with my Mac would be brilliant.

Exactly! Simultaneously and at full speed on a dual-core processor (even a laptop) so that each VM gets a dedicated core. Bloody brilliant.

 

[AidenShaw]

dedicating cores is not brilliant

Exactly! Simultaneously and at full speed on a dual-core processor (even a laptop) so that each VM gets a dedicated core. Bloody brilliant.

It won't work that way....

The system will schedule the cores as needed - if two threads on Windows need to run and nothing is happening on OSX, Windows gets both cores.

The scheduling is re-evaluated every few milliseconds, so that the most important runnable threads will be executing.

If you tamper with the scheduling (by setting affinity, for example) - you'll often have a situation where one core is idle while multiple busy threads are competing for the other core. Not brilliant, not brilliant at all.

 

[ksz]

If you tamper with the scheduling (by setting affinity, for example) - you'll often have a situation where one core is idle while multiple busy threads are competing for the other core. Not brilliant, not brilliant at all.

Sure. I oversimplified with the point being that two cores and two operating systems allow both operating systems to be doing useful things simultaneously without significantly degrading overall system performance compared to uni-processor, uni-core laptops that everyone has today. Hence, not only will we be able to run Windows and Mac OS at the same time, but thanks to a dual-core processor, we could run them at the same time at high speed. In reality, bus, memory, and disk contention will create traffic jams. Disk contention may be the biggest drawback, but it could be mitigated by separate hard drives (not so easy to do in a laptop).

 

[AidenShaw]

Sure. I oversimplified with the point being that two cores and two operating systems allow both operating systems to be doing useful things simultaneously without significantly degrading overall system performance compared to uni-processor, uni-core laptops that everyone has today. Hence, not only will we be able to run Windows and Mac OS at the same time, but thanks to a dual-core processor, we could run them at the same time at high speed.

It was the word "dedicated" that got me going ...

In general, you'll often have more threads wanting to compute than you have CPUs (cores) to run them on. A VM is just a thread that needs to be scheduled when it has work to do.

A couple of VMs is about the same as a couple of applications - whether you want to run OSX and Windows and Linux "simultaneously" or run Photoshop, Itunes and Mathematica "simultaneously" is basically the same problem.

With more CPUs (cores), you'll be able to run truly simultaneously - instead of the "appearance" of simultaneity that you get with a single CPU. To whatever extent your apps (or VMs) really call for CPU at the same time, multi-cores will be faster.

 

[ksz]

A couple of VMs is about the same as a couple of applications - whether you want to run OSX and Windows and Linux "simultaneously" or run Photoshop, Itunes and Mathematica "simultaneously" is basically the same problem.

Keyword 'basically'. The real difference is that concurrent applications are separated from each other by process boundaries erected and maintained by the operating system. But the operating system itself has states that are shared or available to all processes. The resources of the operating system such as network ports, file handles, number of queues, number of processes, etc. are shared, and it's possible for misbehaving applications to corrupt system state.

VM provides another layer of isolation on top of the process boundary by segmenting the operating system itself into multiple partitions, resulting in an operating system boundary. But because VMs are themselves managed by an OS process, it is possible to breach a VM boundary to provide inter-VM communication that is analogous to inter-process communication. VMs can be selectively shut down, relocated to other processors on a multi-processor system, or suspended, without interfering with other VMs.

The main distinction, then, is that VT turns the entire operating system into a process and allows you to invoke multiple such "processes."

 

[apollo8fan]

A lot of people's penchant for calling these new Intel-based Apple Macintoshes as "Intel Powerbook" or "Intel Mac Mini" has got to be driving Apple's PR, marketing, and sales teams completely bonkers.

To a company such as Apple, their brand name is king. Replacing "Apple" with "Intel" is just lazy journalism. One writes, "Intel Powerbook" when one should really write "Intel-based Apple Powerbook", or something similar. This makes it clear to the consumer/reader to what the writer is referring.

 

[Frobozz]

http://news.com.com/Intel+brings+virtualization+to+the+desktop/2100-1006_3-5950225.html

Intel is expected to launch new processors on Monday [14 Nov] starting with its Pentium line that have the ability to subdivide tasks in a hardware feature called Virtualization Technology--or VT.

While VT is currently found in some of Intel's Xeon processors, this is the first time that the chipmaking giant has extended the technology to the desktop.

VT makes it easier to run multiple operating systems or applications in independent partitions or "containers" on the same chip, said Chad Taggard, Intel's director of technology marketing.

...

This may be a stupid question, but why is VT a big deal? What advantage is running multiple OS's or applications in their own containers?

 

[ksz]

This may be a stupid question, but why is VT a big deal? What advantage is running multiple OS's or applications in their own containers?

See message #298 on page 12 for some possibilities.

 

[Frobozz]

A lot of people's penchant for calling these new Intel-based Apple Macintoshes as "Intel Powerbook" or "Intel Mac Mini" has got to be driving Apple's PR, marketing, and sales teams completely bonkers.

To a company such as Apple, their brand name is king. Replacing "Apple" with "Intel" is just lazy journalism. One writes, "Intel Powerbook" when one should really write "Intel-based Apple Powerbook", or something similar. This makes it clear to the consumer/reader to what the writer is referring.

Yeah I have a feeling Apple will have to figure out a good plan of attack on this issue when they are released. I think even more than the pre-release whoopla about Intel PowerBook, Apple will have to decide on what revision to call this PowerBook line.

PowerBook 520, etc...
Through '040 and Early 601, 603, etc. PowerPCs we had PowerBook *Modelnumber* (520c for example.) Prior to this point the model number was representative as a conglomeration of features including the processor.

PowerBook G3 ...
Instead of discreet model numbers being advertised, they used the processor class for the PowerBook G3. (Third generation PowerPC.) Great for brand recognition but terrible for identifying your model number easily over many revisions. Since point-of-sale is probably more important, they stick with this. Interestingly, this might be the internal name used for the PowerBook, but marketing liked it so much they stuck with it (amongst other factors of simplifying their product line to consumers.) Even more interesting is how the Cat monikers for OS X have stuck from development into release. How long will (can?) they continue that trend?

PowerBook G4 ...
Again PowerPC based, this model followed the G3 naming theme and is otherwise identical in marketing approach. KISS.

[Intel Based PowerBook] ...
Now what do we call this one? Let's consider a couple:

PowerBook G5 -- This isn't too bad, but for purists the "G" stood for a generation of PowerPC architecture. For most consumers, however, this is simply a number upgrade and a cool name. So a G5 is "better" than a G4. Might not be as blasphemous as it sounds to a lot of us on these boards.

PowerBook I5, G5i (or similar) -- Some kind of modifier applied to the generation concept to denote it's Intel based. Not bad but not very sexy, either.

PowerBook 5, 5d, 5m -- Some name based on a broad processor family. In this case they drop the G and leave the 5. Not too bad... if they want, they can even denote the number of cores, such as the PowerBook 5 for single core and PowerBook 5d for dual core.

Any other good ideas?

 

[Frobozz]

See message #298 on page 12 for some possibilities.

Very interesting. So, more than performance this is a security feature? I can see how advantageous each major application type having it's own sandbox to play in would be. That's a really good way to prevent virus' from spreading, or any other corruption for that matter. Could you purge an invected virtualization when trouble arises and just "reboot" it? And how does this apply to consumer oriented software? As a web designer/developer I easily see why you'd want to have your DB and Apache running in one, with your OS in another, for example. But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?

 

[AidenShaw]

But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?

What if you want to run Photoshop 5 & 6 & 7 & CS & ... ?

Many applications don't work well (or at all) with multiple versions installed. You could put each in a separate VM....

What if you want to test an upgrade before committing it to production ?

You could clone the VM with the app, apply the upgrade and test. Then, if the upgrade is good you trash the original VM, if it's crap you trash the clone, or if you want to keep both you can do that.

What if you want to install some shareware/freeware apps but don't know if they're safe or usable?

Put 'em in a VM - trash the VM if they're crap.

 

[Salty Pirate]

Very interesting. So, more than performance this is a security feature? I can see how advantageous each major application type having it's own sandbox to play in would be. That's a really good way to prevent virus' from spreading, or any other corruption for that matter. Could you purge an invected virtualization when trouble arises and just "reboot" it? And how does this apply to consumer oriented software? As a web designer/developer I easily see why you'd want to have your DB and Apache running in one, with your OS in another, for example. But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?

Look at this technology. I read about it linked from another website. http://www.lanswitchboard.com

It puts every user in a self contained VLAN.

 

[reflex]

But surely you would have to factor in the "loss" of sales of ibooks and minis if that was true. There would be a huge downturn in sales of those models.

Not if the new machines are (some of) the expensive ones. People buying a Mini do so either because they want something small or because they want something cheap. People who buy an iBook most likely do so because they can't afford a Powerbook.

So if the Powerbook goes Intel first, this would still leave a lot of people who can afford an iBook but not a Powerbook. In terms of sales this probably won't make a huge difference.

 

[oskar]

What if you want to run Photoshop 5 & 6 & 7 & CS & ... ?

Many applications don't work well (or at all) with multiple versions installed. You could put each in a separate VM....

What if you want to test an upgrade before committing it to production ?

You could clone the VM with the app, apply the upgrade and test. Then, if the upgrade is good you trash the original VM, if it's crap you trash the clone, or if you want to keep both you can do that.

What if you want to install some shareware/freeware apps but don't know if they're safe or usable?

Put 'em in a VM - trash the VM if they're crap.

Isn't that like Virtual PC and using "undo drives" or having various OSes running at once? I would believe the difference is performance?

 

[AidenShaw]

Isn't that like Virtual PC and using "undo drives" or having various OSes running at once? I would believe the difference is performance?

A couple of inter-mixed issues here....

First of all, "Virtual PC" to most Mac users is a product that emulates an x86 CPU on a PPC CPU, with performance that hopes to be marginally acceptable.

To Windows users, "Virtual PC" or "Virtual Server" or "VMware" or "Xen" are virtual machines that run at full native speed on purely user-compute code - but suffer additional overhead for applications that do a lot of I/O and system calls (particularly if they do a lot of small I/Os).

The main advantage of VT/Pacifica is that the IO/system call overhead can be reduced.

So, yes you get the VPC "undo" advantages, but at performance levels that are much closer to native levels across the board.

The real paradigm shift for virtualization that VT will enable, however, is that suddenly the "downside" of virtual machines basically disappears. Running your laptop as a "cluster" of VMs is feasible, and desirable.

 

[pionata]

Hd

Hey, do you think the next gen of Powerbook will be able to play HD 1080i 1080p movies smoothly?

Im asking becose I just noticed it requires dual 2.0ghz on quicktime.com.

 

[iEdd]

It's likely that they will be 2.5Ghz+ or dual core ~2Ghz, so probably.

 

[Blackheart]

Hey, do you think the next gen of Powerbook will be able to play HD 1080i 1080p movies smoothly?

Im asking becose I just noticed it requires dual 2.0ghz on quicktime.com.

First of all you'd have to get a display bigger than the current 17" to play a 1080 movie, as the current display only has 1050 horizontal lines.

 

[pionata]

First of all you'd have to get a display bigger than the current 17" to play a 1080 movie, as the current display only has 1050 horizontal lines.

Yeah I know, I wanted to get a 30" with my intel PB.

 

[RobHague]

Nooooooooooooo its like a nightmare j/k

Though this could be a protype

 

[iEdd]

*Shudders* I know apple won't have stickers on them. Heres a phrase for PC users. "If you still have a sticker saying 'intel inside', your opinions on computers are even less valid than before"
*Continues refreshing thread to find friends*

 

[Blackheart]

Yeah I know, I wanted to get a 30" with my intel PB.

Ouch! Quite nice. Those are beautiful.

 

[pionata]

Ouch! Quite nice. Those are beautiful.

Yeah, Ive been dreaming of getting one since its out and saving my money since then. With the present prices drops and a little student loan that pays for half the system, I will be able to finaly have one.

 

[Ljunberg]

Beyond the problem of porting applications, Apple's biggest debate must be offering products that will blow away PC users vs. affordability. Some balance of these two factors will give Apple the biggest sales in the beginning and it is absolutely imperative that Apple Intel machines don't experiene a slow start.

With this in mind, I believe we'll see Powerbooks first. Of course, not all Pro apps will be ready at the time, but Apple will make Powerbooks because:

1) the Powerbook needs to address the perception that is noticeably slower than PC equivalents. The quickest way to alter this perception is to offer the fastest available mobile processor speeds.
2) some will argue that not all pro-apps will be ready. the people making the biggest noise about this are people who already own a Powerbook and are using it for Adobe and other apps. However, the fact is that
i) the PowerPC processor is unlikely to get much faster
ii) Apple laptops typically last a long time, so
People who bought Powerbooks in the last two or three years won't need to buy a new powerbook and those who are still using older powerbooks will likely experience a speed bump even while using Rosetta on the new intel Powerbook.

With these reasons in mind, I'd expect to see Powerbooks coming out first. iBooks should be available at latest just before the summer to allow customers to start placing orders for the next school year.