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.
No More Motorola?
- Thread starter arn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: rewrite
You know this whole x86 thing brings up an interesting question. If Apple were to go x86 or Itanium, would their major software parnters follow suit? Let's say I am Adobe, Macromedia or Microsoft. What incentive do I have to recompile and ship an x86 or Itanium version of my application? Microsoft Windows is already running on that processor architecture with over a 95% market share. How many of my customers are going to buy the new systems and can I justify the increased distribution and support costs? Sure recompiling is trivial but distribution and support are not.
The same question goes for the publishing and graphics industry. If I am going to go through the pain of moving to an x86 or Itanium system, why not go the full distance and switch to Microsoft Windows? My guess is that most publishers and graphics artists are not computer zealots and faced with this level of change may decide to go all the way and put themselves on a commodity hardware and software platform. For myself, once I am in Photoshop, I don't really notice too much whether I am on Mac OS or Windows beyond the very superficial level.
You know this whole x86 thing brings up an interesting question. If Apple were to go x86 or Itanium, would their major software parnters follow suit? Let's say I am Adobe, Macromedia or Microsoft. What incentive do I have to recompile and ship an x86 or Itanium version of my application? Microsoft Windows is already running on that processor architecture with over a 95% market share. How many of my customers are going to buy the new systems and can I justify the increased distribution and support costs? Sure recompiling is trivial but distribution and support are not.
The same question goes for the publishing and graphics industry. If I am going to go through the pain of moving to an x86 or Itanium system, why not go the full distance and switch to Microsoft Windows? My guess is that most publishers and graphics artists are not computer zealots and faced with this level of change may decide to go all the way and put themselves on a commodity hardware and software platform. For myself, once I am in Photoshop, I don't really notice too much whether I am on Mac OS or Windows beyond the very superficial level.
Re: I hope so
You know, I realize it is fashionable to call Motorola evil, but let's face some facts. Motorola is a business and out there to make money. The writing is on the wall for the PowerPC architecture. It is a wonderful embedded processor (almost without equal) but the 32-bit version has no hope of competing against Intel and AMD on the desktop. Apple simply is too marginal of a player to make that a large market. It would not suprise me in the least, given Motorola's situation, that someone important has decided that desktop processors for Apple simply does not fit into Motorola's future plan.
And before you say Motorola screwed Apple and blah, blah, look at Apple. I am sure if Apple had any hope of seriously increasing their market share and total sales of top of the line G4 processors, Motorola would pony up the R&D dollars to keep Apple in the game. But Apple has not. Their market movers are based on the G3 and lower end G4 processors. Apple makes wonderful products but so far has not demonstrated in any way the ability to significantly grow their market share. Since Apple cannot demonstrate they are able to increase market share, Motorola can hardly be faulted for focusing on the telecommunications market where the PowerPC is very attractive.
Selling to the Cisco's, Lucent's, Nortel's and Ericsson's of the world are Motorola's future. Not Apple.
You know, I realize it is fashionable to call Motorola evil, but let's face some facts. Motorola is a business and out there to make money. The writing is on the wall for the PowerPC architecture. It is a wonderful embedded processor (almost without equal) but the 32-bit version has no hope of competing against Intel and AMD on the desktop. Apple simply is too marginal of a player to make that a large market. It would not suprise me in the least, given Motorola's situation, that someone important has decided that desktop processors for Apple simply does not fit into Motorola's future plan.
And before you say Motorola screwed Apple and blah, blah, look at Apple. I am sure if Apple had any hope of seriously increasing their market share and total sales of top of the line G4 processors, Motorola would pony up the R&D dollars to keep Apple in the game. But Apple has not. Their market movers are based on the G3 and lower end G4 processors. Apple makes wonderful products but so far has not demonstrated in any way the ability to significantly grow their market share. Since Apple cannot demonstrate they are able to increase market share, Motorola can hardly be faulted for focusing on the telecommunications market where the PowerPC is very attractive.
Selling to the Cisco's, Lucent's, Nortel's and Ericsson's of the world are Motorola's future. Not Apple.
Re: Re: Re: Learn what you are talking about
Unfortunately no, I hate posting rumors that I can't back-up, but this time I did. I did see images of the layout of this CPU. I have no idea what it's performance was, power consumption, or if Apple ever intended to use it. My main point is that IBM would do some amount of work for Apple, if Apple was willing to pay for it. Apple switching to IBM for fab is definitely believable. Apple could pay for the AltiVec license if IBM didn't want to. The great thing about business is that if you are willing to pay enough for something, someone will sell it to you.
Unfortunately no, I hate posting rumors that I can't back-up, but this time I did. I did see images of the layout of this CPU. I have no idea what it's performance was, power consumption, or if Apple ever intended to use it. My main point is that IBM would do some amount of work for Apple, if Apple was willing to pay for it. Apple switching to IBM for fab is definitely believable. Apple could pay for the AltiVec license if IBM didn't want to. The great thing about business is that if you are willing to pay enough for something, someone will sell it to you.
avkills
macrumors 65816
How does this sound?
What if Apple has secretly had Motorola developing the Altivec as a stand alone co-processor. How do we know that Altivec 2 is actually a separate processor which would allow Apple to do this:
IBM makes the core processors because they have the R&D bank to compete with Intel, and I bet they would love for Apple to stick it to them and Microsoft. IBM G3's (hell just call them G5s...who cares, the G4 is pretty much just a G3+Altivec, clocked up to whatever they can produce, which I think is 1.5Ghz at the moment.
Motorola keeps on developing Altivec, because it is highly useful in the embedded market where high-powered DSP is needed. Motorola keeps making money from Apple, which keeps them happy.
Apple can now bump up the processor speeds and still keep altivec at whatever speed Motorola, who is lazy, currently offers.
I am banking on a 2-4 processor IBM G? based machine with 1-2 altivec co-processors from Motorola. Apple has generally designed their own chips to do what the nForce does, so I am skeptical about Apple using the nForce. And the Xserve does not really even need the altivec unless it is being used to compress and stream video in real time.
It seems like a win-win-win for the AIM alliance.
-mark
What if Apple has secretly had Motorola developing the Altivec as a stand alone co-processor. How do we know that Altivec 2 is actually a separate processor which would allow Apple to do this:
IBM makes the core processors because they have the R&D bank to compete with Intel, and I bet they would love for Apple to stick it to them and Microsoft. IBM G3's (hell just call them G5s...who cares, the G4 is pretty much just a G3+Altivec, clocked up to whatever they can produce, which I think is 1.5Ghz at the moment.
Motorola keeps on developing Altivec, because it is highly useful in the embedded market where high-powered DSP is needed. Motorola keeps making money from Apple, which keeps them happy.
Apple can now bump up the processor speeds and still keep altivec at whatever speed Motorola, who is lazy, currently offers.
I am banking on a 2-4 processor IBM G? based machine with 1-2 altivec co-processors from Motorola. Apple has generally designed their own chips to do what the nForce does, so I am skeptical about Apple using the nForce. And the Xserve does not really even need the altivec unless it is being used to compress and stream video in real time.
It seems like a win-win-win for the AIM alliance.
-mark
scem0
macrumors 604
I am very glad to hear this, I have been hoping Apple would do this. Apple makes the best quality computers out there, even if they arent the fastest. I think that Apple's innovation and quality, mixed with IBM/AMD/maybe intel, will make a GREAT computer. THe only thing I cant deicde is to wait for the g5 (if it is released) from motorola, or wait for a IBM/AMD processor mac. THe longer I wait the better computer I can get, so I guess I will wait. 😀 🙁 Waiting is bad....🙄
tjwett
macrumors 68000
Yipee! I hope it's true. I don't think they will go x86 though. Hopefully we'll see some adaptation of the IBM Power4. This is the best rumor I've ever heard. If anything else surfaces I'll surely be holding out on buying anything until the big change. I'm hoping no x86. I hope they stay PPC but I'll be psyched no matter what. As long as I don't see a TiBook with an "Intel Inside" sticker on it.
this is new...Go get it Apple!! Goodboy!!
Chipmakers Advanced Micro Devices and Infineon, together with foundry United Microelectronics Corp., are collaborating to create faster, cooler and more power-saving processors expected to be at the heart of the next generation of computers
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-947131.html
Chipmakers Advanced Micro Devices and Infineon, together with foundry United Microelectronics Corp., are collaborating to create faster, cooler and more power-saving processors expected to be at the heart of the next generation of computers
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-947131.html
na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey............good riddance.
I still think there's something significant about MIPS hiring the former Apple chief AltiVec Engineer.
Everyone who's anyone in high-end post uses SGI machines for finishing. I think there's something in the works there. The nVidia nForce card is strikingly similar to the graphics coprocessor in an SGI machine that makes them so outrageously powerful. Perhaps they're porting OS X to run on MIPS architecture? IRIX is nearly identical to BSD UNIX. As far as writing, or rewriting, software, it should be similar to making a web page work properly in IE and Nutscrape. The fundamentals are identical, the syntax is slightly different.
Who knows. But I would LOVE an AltiVec enabled 64-bit MIPS-based G5 with an nForce 2. There's little reason why that can't happen rather quickly. Remember, Shake runs on IRIX, and Apple has no plans to stop development on that platform.
*hopes* 😉
I still think there's something significant about MIPS hiring the former Apple chief AltiVec Engineer.
Everyone who's anyone in high-end post uses SGI machines for finishing. I think there's something in the works there. The nVidia nForce card is strikingly similar to the graphics coprocessor in an SGI machine that makes them so outrageously powerful. Perhaps they're porting OS X to run on MIPS architecture? IRIX is nearly identical to BSD UNIX. As far as writing, or rewriting, software, it should be similar to making a web page work properly in IE and Nutscrape. The fundamentals are identical, the syntax is slightly different.
Who knows. But I would LOVE an AltiVec enabled 64-bit MIPS-based G5 with an nForce 2. There's little reason why that can't happen rather quickly. Remember, Shake runs on IRIX, and Apple has no plans to stop development on that platform.
*hopes* 😉
tjwett
macrumors 68000
this may have been posted before but this is a very good article regarding the current state of the Mac. it's a few pages long but well worth it.
http://macbuyersguide.com/reviews/editorial-mac_on_intel.html
http://macbuyersguide.com/reviews/editorial-mac_on_intel.html
moto's out for a while
this rumor that "moto's out" is very close to what
my friend who works there told me two weeks
ago.
He said that they just finished what they called
Apollo 7 (which should be in this next round of
macs), and that IBM was going to make the next
few rounds of PPCs for Apple (he didn't say it,
but I am assuming the G5).
He also said that they have just begun to work
on the early phases of the G7.
He works at Motorola, and is not the type to
pull legs, so I believe him.
I posted more of what he said in an earlier rumor
on the IBM Power4 and the G5, but nobody
seemed to notice...
this rumor that "moto's out" is very close to what
my friend who works there told me two weeks
ago.
He said that they just finished what they called
Apollo 7 (which should be in this next round of
macs), and that IBM was going to make the next
few rounds of PPCs for Apple (he didn't say it,
but I am assuming the G5).
He also said that they have just begun to work
on the early phases of the G7.
He works at Motorola, and is not the type to
pull legs, so I believe him.
I posted more of what he said in an earlier rumor
on the IBM Power4 and the G5, but nobody
seemed to notice...
tjwett
macrumors 68000
Re: moto's out for a while
it makes perfect sense. Moto makes all their money from the embeded market and the communications stuff. i really think designing chips for Apple has been low on the priority list for quite sometime now. it's probably best for both parties to part ways. and i never noticed until i started looking but Moto has chips in ALOT of stuff, all over my own house!
it makes perfect sense. Moto makes all their money from the embeded market and the communications stuff. i really think designing chips for Apple has been low on the priority list for quite sometime now. it's probably best for both parties to part ways. and i never noticed until i started looking but Moto has chips in ALOT of stuff, all over my own house!
do you really think that a 1.5 ghz chip will be released next week? Do not kid yourself. That would be a 50% speed increase. That doesn't happen all at once. Look for 1.2 or so.
AMD is in trouble so they may be looking for new markets. I don't think that they are gonna be around very long as intel kills them in the next 3-5 years.
I just hope that apple doesn't go out of business, cuz the wintel machines are much faster. Megahertz myth my ass. Well, OK, somewhat of a myth, but 3 ghz chips smoke.
AMD is in trouble so they may be looking for new markets. I don't think that they are gonna be around very long as intel kills them in the next 3-5 years.
I just hope that apple doesn't go out of business, cuz the wintel machines are much faster. Megahertz myth my ass. Well, OK, somewhat of a myth, but 3 ghz chips smoke.
Actually, if there was to be a 1.5GHz machine.. what with DDR, improved chip interconnect speeds and improved Graphics subsys, youd prob be looking at a machine closer to twice as fast.. hey ho.. we can only hope.
G4scott
macrumors 68020
LaserWriter 16/600 PS
LaserWriter 16/640 PS
LaserWriter 8500
LaserWriter Select 310
LaserWriter Select 360
LaserWriter 4/600 PS
Color LaserWriter 12/600 PS
Color LaserWriter 12/660 PS
These are all that I can find, but they all have either a 25 or 30 Mhz AMD 29030 Processor. I wonder if it's a form of the Motorola 68030???
Anyways, I have a calculator with a Motorola 68000 running at 18 Mhz...
re: Moto not being used any more
First many comment in these posts are possible, which ones that will come true, well we will just have to wait and see.
Just because Moto is ending future development doesn't mean they wont be supplying G4's to apple for a year or two to come, it also doesn't mean that Moto will not improve their Fab yields and speeds over that time period. This will bring faster G4's over time just not big improvements? This is in Moto's best interest as well ( less waste) I believe it will take at least two years for the g4 to work it's way threw the line.( iBook)
IBM has made G4's for apple before, under license from apple and Moto but I believe they couldn't sell anything faster than what Moto produced under that agreement.
IBM it seems to me has the advantage in regards to being the next chip "Faber" for apple. Moto designs very well, it is in the manufacturing that things aren't up to speed. I do think IBM is better at this side than Moto which means better things short term for apple and it's customers.
This could also lend credibility to apple designing it's future chips in house and having a contractor produce those chips. with this close relationship (which seems to be developing ) between IBM amd apple then it is also possible that apple could design a chip for the mac based on the power4/5 from IBM.
One thing is for sure the next two years will be very interesting and I for one am looking forward to it.
😀
First many comment in these posts are possible, which ones that will come true, well we will just have to wait and see.
Just because Moto is ending future development doesn't mean they wont be supplying G4's to apple for a year or two to come, it also doesn't mean that Moto will not improve their Fab yields and speeds over that time period. This will bring faster G4's over time just not big improvements? This is in Moto's best interest as well ( less waste) I believe it will take at least two years for the g4 to work it's way threw the line.( iBook)
IBM has made G4's for apple before, under license from apple and Moto but I believe they couldn't sell anything faster than what Moto produced under that agreement.
IBM it seems to me has the advantage in regards to being the next chip "Faber" for apple. Moto designs very well, it is in the manufacturing that things aren't up to speed. I do think IBM is better at this side than Moto which means better things short term for apple and it's customers.
This could also lend credibility to apple designing it's future chips in house and having a contractor produce those chips. with this close relationship (which seems to be developing ) between IBM amd apple then it is also possible that apple could design a chip for the mac based on the power4/5 from IBM.
One thing is for sure the next two years will be very interesting and I for one am looking forward to it.
😀