G4i? Or... "Now for something completely different"?!?
Originally posted by Snowy_River
Well, even if Apple gives Moto the boot, I'd expect the IBM 750GX processor (G3 + Altivec compatibility) to be called a G4. Maybe the G4i, as it comes from IBM and would be used in the 'i' line? (i.e. no more G4 based Power Macs or PowerBooks...)
Honestly... Apple could pull a fast one in this instance and make this so-called 750GX (if it exists) called something <name here>, and the PPC 970 called something else <different name here>. I mean... Intel sells Celerons and Pentiums and Itaniums. Perhaps Apple, to ditch the current "G#" nomenclature, switches everything away? Hell, who knows what it'll be called... but since Apple could call Motorola's cryptic "AltiVec" the "Velocity Engine"... who knows what the next generation of Mac processors will be called?!? It depends on our favorite CEO and how creative he's feeling that day...
Perhaps they keep Motorola G4's around 'til time comes when they transition to a future PPC 9xx that is designed for portables. Lord knows the 970 has shown to have more wattage and no accoune><ff power management features (not like IBM is going to use these things in servers if they're geared mostly for laptops, and first generation chips usually produce smaller yields and have higher power consumptions 'til the chipset evolves and shrinks in die size, and efficiency efforts take place) than a Pentium M Centrino-based laptop (12-25w). The low-watt G4's in the laptops are considered hot at their current temperatures... and the high-end desktop G4's are waaaaaay too hot for laptops, and the 970 23w current falls closer to the high-end G4 30w than the low-end G4 12w; and is nowhere near the iBook G3 at 7w. Anyone have any specs on the 750GX wattages? Be curious to see... you guys might be on to something if this is indeed true and if it has speeds and wattages better than what Motorola has or will get with their G4's here soon. It'd at least buy some time 'til IBM scales the 9xx down to less intense wattages and adds some power management features to make it speedy, but also make less of a dent on batteries. I don't see IBM going hog wild on updating a G3 to be a G4, and don't see much point to it when a shrunken die PPC 9xx with power management functionality would likely drop the power down to near 12w, if not lower.
As far as licensing... IBM made the PowerPC... if Motorola sues over the chosen name, IBM can sue over the PowerPC name, which they own. I'm not saying that Motorola won't... but I'm just pointing out a genuine fact. I really think it's more of a case really where Motorola "WANTS" to get out of the desktop game now, and their contractual agreement I feel has been more than served by Apple. This would be a way to amicably split... if not on the best of terms, at least on terms that frees Motorola to pursue what they seemingly want to focus on (embedded) while IBM who uses their processor technology in a more "server" focus can now have a light-server and even workstation processor that they also sell in volumes to Apple and gain some considerable sales to offset it's development costs in servers and workstations, with consumer desktops, and laptops down the road.
The fact IBM didn't support SIMD prior because of no Linux/AIX build accessing it and being rather "unimportant" for the most part in IBM's field... tends to point to a client that talked them into it after they previously said "NO" to it at the time of Motorola and IBM splitting their PowerPC roadmaps in separate directions. Apple has invested a "TON" in AltiVec, they have the instruction calls, their OS is optimized for it, they've just gotten almost everyone except Quark (coming soon) moved over to PowerPC in OS X with AltiVec... so the logic is that:
1) Apple is not leaving PowerPC.
2) Apple is not wanting to lose AltiVec and reoptimize everything.
3) Carbon, overall, hasn't been fused with Cocoa and paired down enough or merged altogether to go jumping to any new processor.
4) AMD/Intel is not going to build a PowerPC, and Apple is not going to jump everything over to x86 this soon and start over.
5) Motorola has no G5 plans anymore... Itanium has no AltiVec-compatible SIMD, neither does AMD's Hammer... neither does Sun's SPARC. The only one that has it? PPC 970 from IBM. Why? Unless someone else is going to use it... good question... for enterprise, Vector processing isn't a major focus, and it's performance features would be "minimal" compared to hardware-based proprietary solutions that better fit enterprise and cost less time to ramp up and mfg.
The fact is... the PPC 970 client seems most likely to be Apple, as Apple has everything to lose by sitting stagnant without a processor future from Motorola (no G5), and IBM has everything to lose on PowerPC if the platform base shrivels and shrinks into nothing... as IBM's desktop G3 sales in iBooks would go out the window if Apple switched to anything but faster PowerPC's as it's "HIGHLY" unlikely that Apple would support 2 platforms simultaneously.
So, by taking the PowerPC back in at their own labs in a big way... and pulling Apple in as a customer (and IBM fits Apple better than Motorola since the axeing of clones anyhow, as Motorola has been bitter and embedded isn't something that Apple is huuuge on, with exception to laptops which are "reasonable" at 12w consumptions... even if a bit warm compared to a iBook at 7w)... IBM keeps their G3 sales for now, adds any interim processor sales to the lower-end power-conscious machines (if Apple doesn't stick with G4's for the near term in low ends... I'd expect to see something like this 750GX to be true... I'm more believing in G4's 'til next spring in Powerbooks, iMacs, and eMacs... when the 9xx efficiency model transitions in and takes over Powerbooks, eMacs, and iMacs while the iBook moves to G4, and then PPC 9xx eventually), and transitions to a new age PowerPC that helps both Apple *&* IBM in machines that "BOTH" sell. IBM focuses on producing powerful chips... Apple needs powerful chips and actually wants "FAR" more powerful chips than they've sat stuck with compared to Intel and AMD. Motorola's biggest sales aren't too Apple... but to embedded chipset customers that use them in everything from printers to automotive to consumer electronics and other gadgetry where efficient, low-power consumption processors reign.
All roads point this way if you analyze it... but how fast we're going down that road... that's where ya'll need to keep your wheels under you before you go spinning in the grass rather than staying on the tarmac. In other words... relax, take a deep breath... be cool, calm, collected, accept the reality of here and now, and don't predict the future and buy what you need when you need it.
As I've said before... will Apple release at WWDC? No telling. The Mac Creative Expo? No telling. Q1 2004? Possibility, but unsure 'til it happens. Don't get so wound up you're losing sleep over it... but rest assured that this "WILL BE" the direction Apple takes in eventuality. For how long? Uncertain... but I don't think Apple will be porting people away from a PPC-based architecture anytime in the next 5 years, and unless Motorola breaks out something wicked... and even if they do... I expect Apple to make usage of the PPC 970 as I don't see them dropping any ties if they can avoid it, no matter how miffed they are. If Motorola decides on a G5 and launches one... Apple "MIGHT" support it, but they'll never bind into a "Motorola-only" contract again.
