PowerBooks, Displays, and IBM's PowerPC

[GetSome681]

Originally posted by arn


If you price around LCD's... that's roughly the going price for a quality 20" LCD.

Formac 20" - $1699
Sony 20" - $1999
NEC-Mitsubishi 20.1" - $1599 <- This was announced yesterday

Obviously, you can find cheaper models if you look, but we're talking about Apple here. It will be high end.

arn

Not saying that it looks the best (doesn't look that bad in person), but the Dell 2000FP (1600 x 1200 resolution, so not widescreen) can be had for ~$760 at the moment. I think 500:1 contrast ratio, and 15 ms response time.

If apple releases a 20" @ 1799...hahaha..i mean come on...I'm not going to be paying an extra $1k for a pretty encasing.

Also, you can't say that it's not "quality," b/c in terms of LCD, neither apple nor dell "makes" the screens, they purchase them. Therefore besides someone's opinion on how the device looks, the real "quality" lies in the screen specs, and 15ms is pretty much as good as it gets, especially if you call yourself a gamer.

 

[DharvaBinky]

PowerPC 970 Introduction

I was wondering about the possibility of the early introduction of a high-end model of the PPC970.... For the first time in recent memory, (with the introduction of the 17 and 12 inch powerbooks) the product line is Assymtrical, meaning, not all product have feature parity. Here's what I think would be interesting...

When Intel introduced their 64-bit platform, Itanium, they declared that the first iteration of the technology was for "Test and Development" purposes only, and wasn't meant to be a real performer. Now, this is clearly bull *grin* however... as it was an entirely new architecture and instruction set, it was a good idea to get the chips into developer's hands as soon as possible.

I'm SURE apple has ppc970s in the hands of their BIG developers right now (Adobe, Macromedia, etc) but what about the medium guys?

I would like to see Apple introduce a ultra-high-end solution that would feature early revs of the PPC970 (possibly at sorry clock-speeds) to allow developers to begin optimizing their software with the new instructions. Users (except possibly scientific community where fast 64-bit math is particularly nice) wouldn't buy these machines in general, since they might even under perform a Motorola 7457 system vs these low clocked singleton ppc970s.

This would be good for Apple, it's a slight tip of the hand for future hardware plans, and would get the business world whispering about it. It would be good for developers, they'd be able to cut some code on the new chip. And it would be good for mac users, they'd get some restored faith in their beloved platform. *and* it's good for windows users, It seems that windows users have all kinds of Freudian envy obsessions (megahertz, triangles/sec, etc), so... maybe releasing 64-bit PPCs would give them all "Bit-length" envy.

You know... size matters.

*grin*

Dharvabinky

 

[Frobozz]

Originally posted by type_r503
OSX will have to be rebuilt to run on the new chip as well as all the memory and peripheral vendors.

That's not true.

The 970 is 32 bit capable, and the OS X can handle 64bit data now. There will be no transition, except for high end apps to accept 64bit mathematical computation. In most cases, this should be a simple recompile and minor edits to the code. The key is that they don't have to do anything for it to work-- just to take advantage. Kind of like AltiVec.

64bit is going to be useful more as a way to address memory over 2 GB than anything. With solid state, battery backed up memory, you can do a lot of things faster than mechanical drives...

 

[Frobozz]

Originally posted by GetSome681
Not saying that it looks the best (doesn't look that bad in person), but the Dell 2000FP (1600 x 1200 resolution, so not widescreen) can be had for ~$760 at the moment. I think 500:1 contrast ratio, and 15 ms response time.

That is VERY cheap for a 1600 x 1200 LCD of quality. I question if this is a good one...

Also, you can't say that it's not "quality," b/c in terms of LCD, neither apple nor dell "makes" the screens, they purchase them.

LG has made the screens for Apple's LCD lines. Not sure about the HD. There are HUGE differences between LCD screen quality from cheaper LCD's, so if Dell's isn't using the same screen it's not even in the same ballpark.

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by Frobozz


That's not true.

The 970 is 32 bit capable, and the OS X can handle 64bit data now. There will be no transition, except for high end apps to accept 64bit mathematical computation. In most cases, this should be a simple recompile and minor edits to the code. The key is that they don't have to do anything for it to work-- just to take advantage. Kind of like AltiVec.

64bit is going to be useful more as a way to address memory over 2 GB than anything. With solid state, battery backed up memory, you can do a lot of things faster than mechanical drives...

So another question about 64 bit. If the chip has both 64bit and 32 bit capability, will you be limited to 2gb memory when running a 32 bit app and a 64 bit app at the same time. Will the chip be able to use all the memory over 2 GB for both 32bit and 64bit at the same time? Will 32 bit apps limit 64 bit apps when running at the same time? Okay, so it was three questions that are the same, but asked in different ways.

 

[gbojim]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
So another question about 64 bit. If the chip has both 64bit and 32 bit capability, will you be limited to 2gb memory when running a 32 bit app and a 64 bit app at the same time. Will the chip be able to use all the memory over 2 GB for both 32bit and 64bit at the same time? Will 32 bit apps limit 64 bit apps when running at the same time? Okay, so it was three questions that are the same, but asked in different ways.

I think you might be confusing physical and virtual memory. 32 bit apps can address 4GB of memory with the lower 2GB available for user code and data. 64 bit apps can of course address much more than that. So, if you are running both, each has its own virtual space based on its own limitations. The OS maps the virtual memory space to what you have physically installed in the machine - currently max 2GB. Apple could allow 4GB in the box now if it wanted to. This is not a CPU limitation.

 

[arn]

Originally posted by GetSome681


Not saying that it looks the best (doesn't look that bad in person), but the Dell 2000FP (1600 x 1200 resolution, so not widescreen) can be had for ~$760 at the moment. I think 500:1 contrast ratio, and 15 ms response time.

As I said there are exceptions... though the Dell retails for $999 and you can't get it for $760 at the moment... more like $860 or so... (I know, cause I'm in the market for one) but regardless... I challenge you to find another one of any actual quality at that price...

And what about those other screens I cited?

Then ask yourself - does Apple traditionally offer products that are the most inexpensive in the market?

arn

 

[GetSome681]

Originally posted by arn


As I said there are exceptions... though the Dell retails for $999 and you can't get it for $760 at the moment... more like $860 or so... (I know, cause I'm in the market for one) but regardless... I challenge you to find another one of any actual quality at that price...

And what about those other screens I cited?

Then ask yourself - does Apple traditionally offer products that are the most inexpensive in the market?

arn

You are correct, there aren't that many high quality, high resolution 20+ inchers out there. The screens you cited are definitely very nice, and of course the apple LCDs are always top-notch, especially their HD display.

Also, I got one of my 2000fp's for 812, and the other for $760 (plus tax each time).

I just say that when ppl are seeing 17" 1280x1024 LCDs for $300-$600 that suit most ppl's needs, such a high price for a 20" seems ridiculous to most ppl who don't know very much.

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by gbojim


I think you might be confusing physical and virtual memory. 32 bit apps can address 4GB of memory with the lower 2GB available for user code and data. 64 bit apps can of course address much more than that. So, if you are running both, each has its own virtual space based on its own limitations. The OS maps the virtual memory space to what you have physically installed in the machine - currently max 2GB. Apple could allow 4GB in the box now if it wanted to. This is not a CPU limitation.

Thanks! I just learned something.

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by GetSome681


Not saying that it looks the best (doesn't look that bad in person), but the Dell 2000FP (1600 x 1200 resolution, so not widescreen) can be had for ~$760 at the moment. I think 500:1 contrast ratio, and 15 ms response time.

Can you provide a link to this monitor? I can't seem to find it. I found the 17, 18, and 19" monitors.

 

[AmbitiousLemon]

Here is my interpretation of this information. This calendar was written and published before the previous powerbook update and was actually predicting that update not the 12" 17" update. They simply got the date wrong.

This calendar is not meant as a indication of insider information, but as light hearted specualtion. The Mac Rumor sites have been getting much attention lately and the magazine editors probably decided they would jump on the bandwagon with a small and fun little piece. this is pure specualtion and wasn't intended to be anything more than that.

The prediction of the IBM PPC 970 is simply predicting that they begin to be produced, and based on the rumors they are probably right. If production is suppose to be at volume production in 2nd quarter then it wouldn't be crazy to predict that they would begin production in February.

I don't think we need to take this any more seriously than any source that makes predictions based on the rumors that have been circulating lately. By reviewing all the rumors and their sources all of us can make predictions just as acurate as these.

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
Can you provide a link to this monitor? I can't seem to find it. I found the 17, 18, and 19" monitors.

wow, it's not there. I'll email my dad at work and ask him (he works for dell).

 

[MacArtist]

the Dell 2000 FP

I just checked Dells website and there is no 2000 FP available in the monitors section. However, when I went to check out a system and configure it this is what I found:

Monitors
20.1 in 2000FP Dell Ultrasharp? Digital Flat Panel Display (add $950.00) (that's on top of the price of the default monitor)

Refurbished Monitors
Refurbished 20.1 in 2000FP Dell Ultrasharp? Digital Flat Panel Display (add $1,050.00)

Optional Second Monitor
20.1 in 2000FP Dell Ultrasharp? Digital Flat Panel Display (add $1,250.00)

So I'd like to know where you guys are getting the prices you are quoting for the Dell monitor.

As far as the Apple Monitor goes, the spectulated price is not really that bad as long as the quality is what we've come to expect from Apple.

 

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
Here is my interpretation of this information. This calendar was written and published before the previous powerbook update and was actually predicting that update not the 12" 17" update. They simply got the date wrong.

This calendar is not meant as a indication of insider information, but as light hearted specualtion. The Mac Rumor sites have been getting much attention lately and the magazine editors probably decided they would jump on the bandwagon with a small and fun little piece. this is pure specualtion and wasn't intended to be anything more than that.

The prediction of the IBM PPC 970 is simply predicting that they begin to be produced, and based on the rumors they are probably right. If production is suppose to be at volume production in 2nd quarter then it wouldn't be crazy to predict that they would begin production in February.

I don't think we need to take this any more seriously than any source that makes predictions based on the rumors that have been circulating lately. By reviewing all the rumors and their sources all of us can make predictions just as acurate as these.

Yeah based on what info we have now, I guess that apple will only start the testing Feb or later.

Mass production, eh give it some time. I really don't expect to these till next year. (I'm hoping for eariler). Look what happened in testing with the G5, it was canned because of some flaw, and we would of had those chips by now in our hands and not talking about the chips to come. But Moto (or apple) f'ed up.

Whichever the case I hope IBM made a perfect chip with no flaws in it and they can go to mass production right away, or else we are gonna be waiting till, well next year.

 

[Rocketman]

It wouold not be at all surprising for Apple to release a Q3 PowerMac considering that technically it is already "late" thanks to the G5 meltdown.

But the Power4 derivitive will likely suffer the same Mhz envy but suddenly also suffer up to 2x performance of existing machines.

What is cool is the box itself will have new features: FW400, APE, BT and possibly another surprise.

It may have both compact PCI via APE and PCI.

Rocketman

 

[Nemesis]

Future memory

Originally posted by Frobozz


64bit is going to be useful more as a way to address memory over 2 GB than anything. With solid state, battery backed up memory, you can do a lot of things faster than mechanical drives...

Does anyone know anything about solid state memory devices, such as this? I mean, are we going to wait forever to get rid of those clumsy and inefficient hard-drives?

Solid state memory would be a great thing, and such memory alone could boost up the performance of today's computers by at least 5 times. What about optical (three-dimensional) memory? I know that it already works in IBM laboratories.

Remeber guys, the hard-drives and all other mechanical devices in our computers are a bottleneck. We have to get rid of them, asap.

Imagine computers without HDs, without CDs, DVDs ... just memory sticks, memory cubes of some sort, etc ... Imagine what would that do to the laptops, alone! Sub-inch thin laptops, superfast, no mechanical parts, power-efficient, superlightweight ...

I am waiting for your roumors on this, as well....

 

[Duff-Man]

Originally posted by GetSome681
Not saying that it looks the best (doesn't look that bad in person), but the Dell 2000FP (1600 x 1200 resolution, so not widescreen) can be had for ~$760 at the moment. I think 500:1 contrast ratio, and 15 ms response time.

Duff-Man says....just the thought of putting even one nickel in michael dell's pocket is enough to make me hurl....oh yeah!

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Originally posted by gbojim


I think you might be confusing physical and virtual memory. 32 bit apps can address 4GB of memory with the lower 2GB available for user code and data. 64 bit apps can of course address much more than that. So, if you are running both, each has its own virtual space based on its own limitations. The OS maps the virtual memory space to what you have physically installed in the machine - currently max 2GB. Apple could allow 4GB in the box now if it wanted to. This is not a CPU limitation.

From what I undrstand they could then put terrabytes of ram with the 970 so even 4GB would be at the low end of the scale the question then becomes how many slots will they have for DDR modules and what speed they will be running at. All this is just so cool I hope they come out soon with the 970 and the nividia fx card in one machine . But I think we will be looking at the 7457 for awhile with small speeed bumps. You KNOW Motorolas Little tiny winy itsy bitsy baby steps thats supposed to make us mac lovers just jump up and SCREAM for JOY!

 

[Frobozz]

Re: Future memory

Originally posted by Nemesis


Does anyone know anything about solid state memory devices, such as this? I mean, are we going to wait forever to get rid of those clumsy and inefficient hard-drives?

Yeah, I think it's the next big step in storage. You can buy these types of systems now, but they are outrageously expensive (obviously). I have 1 GB of RAM and my brother has 2 GB. even then, I can store the contents of an entire CD-ROM in memory and have instant access. It doesn't cost that much to get a 512mb stick of PC133 ram these days, and for about $500 you could have a very fast 3.5GB solid state "hard drive" for storage.

 

[nighthawk]

Originally posted by MrMacman

Look what happened in testing with the G5, it was canned because of some flaw, and we would of had those chips by now in our hands and not talking about the chips to come. But Moto (or apple) f'ed up.

The problem that the G5 was having was that the Altivec subprocessor could not handle the high clock speeds... which was the same problem that the G4 was having beyond 500mhz a few years ago. I wonder how IBM has fixed the problem, and if they would be willing to "share" it with Motorola?

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Originally posted by nighthawk


The problem that the G5 was having was that the Altivec subprocessor could not handle the high clock speeds... which was the same problem that the G4 was having beyond 500mhz a few years ago. I wonder how IBM has fixed the problem, and if they would be willing to "share" it with Motorola?

I think they have it fixed it and its called 970 so why give it to motobutt when they can sell it to apple themselves? I think all the g3's would have been faster a long time ago but apple couldnt let them pass the g4 so it was held behind wherever moto was with the g4. My wife has a g3 and there is not much difference accept for those few altivec programs. of coarse the 970 has altivec also they just call it something else.

 

[yeash28]

maybe this might be the next alternative to the hard drive as we know it.

http://www.research.ibm.com/resources/news/20020611_millipede.shtml