PowerMac RoadMap Past and Future

beatle888

macrumors 68000
Feb 3, 2002
1,690
0
:eek:


" A high end multiprocessor workstation class pro model is also in the works. The name XStation has been proposed for it, and it could debut a year from now. It will feature Nvidia's highest end Quadro or equivalent graphics card, and it will feature the upcoming Power 5 chip from IBM. "


:D
 

beatle888

macrumors 68000
Feb 3, 2002
1,690
0
Re: ok...



arn wrote:
Well, I can tell you now - just based on educated
guessing... PowerMacs will NOT be updated at
MWSF

fatalerror101 wrote:
Thanks arn, i kinda figured that. That's why i had
said hoped...ok




looks like fatalerror might be living up to his
name, messing with arn.
:D
 

GeeYouEye

macrumors 68000
Dec 9, 2001
1,651
4
State of Denial
Originally posted by altair


Rather, it is intended to be offered to X86 users when Apple sees market conditions being fit for it. What it means by this is regarding Intel's Lagrande technology, and Microsoft's Palladium technology. Apple intends on releasing OS X on Intel, when consumer dissatisfaction falls to an all time low for Microsoft when users become restricted to what they can do on their PC's due to Lagrande and Palladium.

I don't know if there has been a forum discussing Palladium in the past, however it seems that most people here are unaware of the details of it. To me, the release of Palladium is the greatest possible switch campaign for Apple. I won't try to tell you what Palladium does, you can read for yourself here . I realize that this site looks kinda shady, but just look at all his resources at the bottom, of specific interest is the MS Palladium FAQ, which is linked at the bottom of the article. I hope you all enjoy and get a bit frightened as I have.

-altair

--------------------------------
beastly iMac rev B 333, w/40gig HD


With all this (and this guy doesn't even make Palladium out to be half as bad as it really is) all I have to say is: The future lies with the proles... er... I mean... uh... Macs. Yeah, that's it, Macs.
 

gotohamish

macrumors 65816
Jul 15, 2001
1,070
0
BKLN
Call me crazy, but if the Marklar project is simply a plan should M$ stop Mac development then wouldn't Apple be better suited using their developers to make a kick-ass, 100% compatible pro Office suite of their own? I'm guessing the Marklar project isn't a couple of fellas with PIII's sipping coffee and doing little updates!:cool:
 

Bengt77

macrumors 68000
Jun 7, 2002
1,518
0
Europe
They could team up with Connectix

:rolleyes:

If Apple would release OS X for x86, they could team up with Connectix to build something like Wine together (you know, that open source transparant Windows compatibility environment for Linux). They could even call it Classic! That way, x86 OS X users would have the same usability we have now with Classic. Could be great.

Furthermore, the G4 upgrade path seems soooo dull! The main reason I bought an iMac over a PowerMac is because the latter didn't offer that much more for such a higher price. Seems like they won't, either, for some time to come; damn!

:mad:
 

Pale Fire

macrumors newbie
Nov 25, 2002
15
0
Uppsala, Sweden
I think the important clue here is "when did Apple announce that future macs would not boot OS 9?"

This is the point when Apple was sure they were going to be able to start shipping out 64 bit machines as the 64 bit machines wouldn't be able to run OS 9.

If you're really optimistic you could hope that this means that the machines relased after this date will partly be 64 bit (i.e. running IBM's new chip), but it's probably Apple easing the users into the fact that OS 9 won't be available before making the real 64 bit leap a little later.
 

dekator

macrumors regular
May 18, 2002
178
0
Krautistan
Wonderful !

Certainly made my day. We all knew about the processor problem Apple is currently in! Come on! Still, the outlook is nice. The best thing is the news about the strategy regarding M$/Palladium. That's what I always pondered. The moment Redmond has taken away the last bit of computerational freedom, people will finally be ready for regime change! Yes.
 

Ifeelbloated

macrumors regular
Jan 14, 2002
245
0
some God forsaken place
I certainly believe that Steve Jobs went off on Motorola using every expletive in the book. I remember reading somewhere that he did that. I have total faith that Apple is looking elsewhere for processors for their machines. Steve, if you do peruse these boards, I gotta tell ya', the next machines better knock the ball out of the park. As far as the pro users are concerned. I want bragging rights against those PC weenies!!!
 

engpjp

macrumors newbie
Mar 28, 2002
19
0
January is about connectivity

As has happened several times before, the Winter update of *Macs will be minimal as regards clock frequency and bus transfer speeds. The white rabbit, meant to keep everyone's attention away from such matters until October/November, will be about new uses of connectivity. FW2, Bluetooth improvements, AirPort - even USB2 is being considered. The lifestyle gadget development will be less dramatic than often speculated, however: it will be an organic extension of the technology used hitherto.

Unfortunately, the development of OSX will continue as erratically as until now: brilliant new concepts introduced; gaping holes in the UI left untouched. And the parts relevant to enterprise connectivity constantly upgraded and improved. Sad stuff for the common man - although the new metadata capabilities will be exciting to play with.

engpjp
 

j763

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2001
660
0
Champaign, IL, USA
Originally posted by Mudbug
XP is at least a MUCH better operating system that the others M$ has put out in the past.
XP has to be one of the biggest backwards steps in computer history. If Microsoft had kept doing what they started in 2000, there'd really be no reason for using Macs today. 2K had a lot of BSD stuff under-the-hood...

XP is designed for idiotic consumers.

2000 is faster and more stable. It's time to upgrade.
 

j763

macrumors 6502a
Nov 25, 2001
660
0
Champaign, IL, USA
Re: Re: well

Originally posted by arn



Well, I can tell you now - just based on educated guessing... PowerMacs will NOT be updated at MWSF

arn
Some educated guessing...

AGP 8x
FireWire 2
...and some other stuff ;)
@MWT
 

PretendPCuser

macrumors regular
Nov 8, 2001
163
0
Northern, NJ
Marklar and Palladium Question

I realize that Palladium is a Windows thing, but could Marklar be developed in the case that Apple was forced to comply with DRM and switching to x86 would make it easier for them to do so? Any thoughts? I've heard that incorporating DRM wouldn't be too difficult to do on Apple's part, but if somehow M$ had the influence (!) and set standards with Palladium that were tied to the x86 family of processors... i just woke up, i'm thinking different... please ignore me...:confused:
 

Fitzcaraldo

macrumors member
Nov 23, 2002
58
0
Originally posted by GeeYouEye


With all this (and this guy doesn't even make Palladium out to be half as bad as it really is) all I have to say is: The future lies with the proles... er... I mean... uh... Macs. Yeah, that's it, Macs.
With the European Courts currently discussing the making of Cookies illegal, I foresee problems with Palladium in Europe (Thankfully there is some sanity left). Should it go ahead, might we not end up with a situation of switching to say "Seimans" OS or "Phillips".


Re: Faster Macs.

Part of the beauty of the Mac (and perhaps apples problem) is that I still happily use my PPC 7600 for both Graphic and ID professional work. I have faster Machines (Mac’s) as well but when buying I just want a system that does what I need it for.

Re High end work, I welcome the introduction of faster workstations, but would also love to see a cheaper version of X-Serve, aimed primarily at being a render engine/farm, and hope apple will encourage native clustering in high end applications. This way we might scale the power we need for our required productivity?

I don’t know why Apple continue to make such a large issue of MHz in their model No.s and perhaps Gflops would be a better labelling system. Who remembers the days that Non Mac users found it bewildering to understand which Mac did what? ;)
 

wymer100

macrumors member
Apr 16, 2002
53
0
I really hope that the 970 comes out before Q4 2003. I understand that IBM would like to have volume production in Q3 2003. Maybe AMD might provide some pressure to reach this goal. AMD is going to have their 64-bit chips up and running in Q2 2003 (probably June). It would be nice if Apple were right on their heels and introduced the 970 in July. The introduction of the 970 in January is a long shot (1 in a billion). Unless there are miracles with the fab processes, we won't see it until the middle of next year at the earliest.

As far as not booting into OS9 come January, I think people are reading *way* too much into it. This move is simply a way of cutting costs and giving an extra push to developers to start developing for OSX. It's the same reason why MS doesn't support Win95. The fewer OS's people have to support, the more resources they to divert into other areas.
 

Icewolf08

macrumors newbie
Nov 25, 2002
1
0
Boston
The G5 fiasco

I sat here reading this article after a friend of mine said to check it out. I have a few things to say. First of all we have known about IBM's planned release of the PPC 970 processor for some time, in fact there is a PDF file available that give all of the product specs for it that was released a while back. Next, what is the the big deal if Apple moves to IBM for processors. The original Apple PPC computers were based on chips that were the joint creation of Apple, IBM, and Motorola. We have been working with IBM PPC chips since the 601. Granted when we got to the G3 it was Motorola's baby that does not mean that we should shun or fear our partner.

Apple has to progress, and we have to keep turning out new machines and new technology because we have one of the best, if not the best platform out there. We also have to remember that raw processor speed is not everything I am not going to describe it here, but go read the latest issue of MacAddict magazine, they do a very good job.

It isn't worth our time to worry that IBM is going to manufacture the next generation of Apple processors, we should be happy, happy that apple is still pushing forward!
 

drastik

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2002
978
0
Nashvegas


As far as not booting into OS9 come January, I think people are reading *way* too much into it. This move is simply a way of cutting costs and giving an extra push to developers to start developing for OSX. It's the same reason why MS doesn't support Win95. The fewer OS's people have to support, the more resources they to divert into other areas.
I agree here, 9 is dead tech. I realize that upgrading software is expensive and a pain, its taken me the better part of two years, but one day I woke up and realized that I hadn't run classic in months. All major applications now have X versions, and most of the minor ones. Those that do not, probably wouldn't have mac updates ever again anyway.

Exceptions to this are Pro Tools and Quark, but they are slowly comming, have faith.

So we wait another year. Who cares, Apple will survive and then we will have great fast computers. Speed don't mean crap unless you are a render farm or some other high production business, and then you have racks to work with.

I use a Mac because I believe, because it I con avoid M$ with relative ease, and because I'd rather support the right system, and yes, WAIT for the right system, than use stopgap crap.
 

grgu

macrumors newbie
Nov 25, 2002
1
0
Originally posted by beatle888
:eek:


" A high end multiprocessor workstation class pro model is also in the works. The name XStation has been proposed for it, and it could debut a year from now. It will feature Nvidia's highest end Quadro or equivalent graphics card, and it will feature the upcoming Power 5 chip from IBM. "


:D
Will the Power 5 include a vector processing unit? I have seen this article and it speeks about VMX2 in conjunction with the Power5. Is it some evolution of the VMX for the 970 or is VMX2 just something completly different? (A bus ...)

http://www.nersc.gov/news/blueplanetmore.html
 

reyesmac

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
374
53
Central Texas
Unless Steves adds the Nvida Gforce Ti card, two hard drives in a raid configuration and half maxed out ram in EVERY Powermac at MWNY, he can keep his 50mhz speedbump. If he released a 50mhz speed bump, it would take winning the mhz race later in the year to end the ridicule we will end up getting.
 

3777

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2002
379
0
Damn..... remind me to stock up on PC hardware just before this palladium crap is released. I'll run Linux and buy new Macs after Palladium
 

Cappy

macrumors 6502
May 29, 2002
386
2
Originally posted by j763


XP has to be one of the biggest backwards steps in computer history. If Microsoft had kept doing what they started in 2000, there'd really be no reason for using Macs today. 2K had a lot of BSD stuff under-the-hood...

XP is designed for idiotic consumers.

2000 is faster and more stable. It's time to upgrade.
Please share with us what BSD stuff was under the hood of Win2k and what of that was removed in WinXP.

I'll give you that 2000 is more stable but faster? Not if you turn the eye candy off in XP to give it a similar 2000 interface. Sure, the average consumer may not realize to do this but the average support person should be intelligent enough to do this for those he supports.
 

lmalave

macrumors 68000
Nov 8, 2002
1,614
0
Chinatown NYC
Originally posted by reyesmac
Unless Steves adds the Nvida Gforce Ti card, two hard drives in a raid configuration and half maxed out ram in a new model at MWNY, he can keep his 50mhz speedbump. If he released a 50mhz speed bump, it would take winning the mhz race later in the year to end the ridicule we will end up getting.
I agree. I think SJ realizes this, though, and will be forced to demo prototypes of PowerMacs and XServes running the 970, maybe even as early as MWSF. It will kill PowerMac sales, but they are dead in the water anyway in the high-end Pro market if they don't do someting soon. They just can't afford to have one of their few areas of strength start defecting in large numbers to the x86. With their $4 Billion cash reserves, they can afford to lower their profitability for 2 or 3 quarters, if that's the cost of keeping a one of their key markets on the Mac platform.

I think consumers sales will be fine, though, even with only minor speed bumps. The iBook, TiBook, iMac, and eMac are still great consumer computers, and will have to compete on features and design rather than raw power.
 

lmalave

macrumors 68000
Nov 8, 2002
1,614
0
Chinatown NYC
And let's not forget the iPod and any other new consumer electronic devices. I think Apple will hold its own in 2003, and at this time next year will be poised to really start making some inroads in the desktop market.
 

gotohamish

macrumors 65816
Jul 15, 2001
1,070
0
BKLN
Originally posted by reyesmac
Unless Steves adds the Nvida Gforce Ti card, two hard drives in a raid configuration and half maxed out ram in EVERY Powermac at MWNY, he can keep his 50mhz speedbump. If he released a 50mhz speed bump, it would take winning the mhz race later in the year to end the ridicule we will end up getting.
I agree
I don't want to start another Megahertz Myth war again BUT I will say this:

(1) We all know how fast these Macs are, and to be perfectly honest, they're fast by any standards. I'm sitting here on a G4/500 tower with a Radeon 8500, and it's GREAT. It's done me proud since the day it came out, and I love it.

(2) I looked at MacUser this month and it had real-world benchmarks for the entire current Apple desktop range, and there were only a handful of seconds in it in most cases. I know that a new dual would rock for my video editing, but for the financial outlay it's just not worth it for speed alone.

(3) It's almost better that the Mhtz gap is large! Why? Because if I was Joe Public walking into a store to get a new PC and I saw a 2.5GHtz P4 for $1000 and an eMac 700 for $1000 I'd like to think they wouldn't say "Hell, that's a lot for 700MHtz compared to that P4" - they'd think "why's that, what does it do that's different? It must be a different item."

I will not get a new Mac until it can actually DO something new, not just the same stuff, faster. Like Gigawire/FW2, new digital devices etc.

Roll on MWSF, just keep it all coming, I will not use a PC, so it just doesn't matter. To quote the famous Arn:

"If you need a new computer now, get one. If you don't, wait!"

Thanks for listening.:D
 
What do YOU want to do today?

Seriously folks, what tasks do you do that the current offerings are not up to snuff? Is this just about swordfights with your Wintel friends? At some point, more horsepower is just more horsepower. It won't make your driving experience any better. My Acura might hit 120mph, but that does me little good for the way I drive. In fact, for day to day trolling around the city (the driving equivalent of how most users use their computers), a 5 yr. old Saturn probably gets the job done just as well (but with less style, eh?)...

I'm still plugging away at home on a BEIGE G3!! For email and iTunes and some light design, it's still a great machine. I even do some Electric Image renderings on it from time to time. Any of the current machines, or those in the past year or two, would blow me away (especially if they killed the bevy of OSX speed lags).

King of the hill is a lonely place to be and you're always watching your back. On top of that, it's a short lived euphoria. Perhaps it's the frustration that the finest looking machines DESERVE to be powered by the fastest processors. Perhaps it's the frustration of not living up to potential. At this point, I could care less about processor speed as long as Apple continues to refine OSX itself and doesn't continue to paint themselves as Microsoft wanna be's with their poorly thought hostile marketing strategies.

- j