Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the insulation-is-good dept.
hypos writes: "According to this ZDNet article, IBM is going to add an insulating layer of oxide between the transistor and its silicon bed, which IBM claims can increase a processor's performance by 20 to 30%. Best of all, it's supposed to come to new Macs soon. "
Re:PowerPC users have always been SOL.
by
um...+Lucas
·
· Score: 5
I don't mean this to sound like flamebait, but it always seems that the PowerPC is playing second or third fiddle.
I think this is flamebait...
It gets knocked aside by x86 users on the desktop due to lack of applications.
Same thing always happens to Linux around here, but everyone seems to defend that OS.
Yeah, sure, it's nifty to do graphics/desktop publishing, but if you're serious about that, you're running an Amiga or BeOS anyway.
The Mac decimates both the Amiga and BeOS in the graphics and desktop publishing arena's. The Amiga used to be (and still is somewhat) a wonderous machine to work with video with, but it's been floundering the past several years due to not really having an owner that's been willing to pour money into it. The BeOS, yes, has a more elegant architecture, but alas, it lacks color management, postscript font support, and applications from Quark, Adobe, and Macromedia. Until it gets more apps, the BeOS will remain an oddity to everyone except it's core users.
I recall reading once that a Mac makes a nice webserver because it's too dumb to really break into or do any damage.
Well, that's true, but if you're buying a mac specifically to serve web pages, in most cases I'd say that you just wasted a pile of money... Or else you're limiting your sites functionality serverly. The mac is missing a lot of support i the server arena. Doubtless, that will change when OS X arrives, but until then.
So why do people insist on using the Power PC?
Because 99% of the computers that use PowerPC's run the Mac OS. And some people prefer that OS to those available from Microsoft, IBM, Redhat, Be, or any other. They even like it enough to spend a few more dollars on the hardware i nwhich to run it.
Why do companies like IBM spend development dollars trying to push an outdated chip architecture, when they could be pushing next generation technologies.
With Apple shipping nearly a million iMacs and G3/G4's per quarter and with Power PC chips selling for (a complete stab in the dark) $250 a piece, that translates to a BILLION dollars a year of business for IBM and Motorolla. If you ran a company, would you turn down that much money?
The PowerPC chip isn't geared towards "PC's" as it's name implies... At least in my world, i equate PC with "x86 compatible". People shouldn't be buying Power PC based computers unless (for now) they want to run the Mac OS, or for the small percentage of folks (Linux PPC users) they value to superior hardware designs enough that a few more dollars doesn't hurt. Asd for your 3 year time limit, I don't quite get it. Are you suggesting that Mac users should abandon the platform they chose and switch to Windows or Linux after 3 years for no reason? I've been computing for 15 or so years and the Mac is still my favorite platform for getting work done on and I'm sure plenty of other/. readers will agree..
As this is getting into a fest of Mac Bashing I though I'd try and do something on-topic. So here is a little explaination of how IBM's method works (note this is not a new method as the Silicon on Saphire method has been around for years.. however IBM seems to have altered the idea by replacing the expensive saphire with cheap silica) A normal NMOSFET transistor would to something like this (side view) Drain Source MMMMM Gate MMMMMM OOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMOOOOO OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS (M Metal track) (# Doped silicon) (O Silica) (S Intrinsic silicon)
When the transistor is in operation it has a charged region (depletion zone) around it as such... Drain Source MMMMM Gate MMMMMM OOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MOOOOO OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS SS@SSSSSSSSSSS@@@@@@@@@@@@@@SSS SSS@@@@@@@@@@@SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
This charged region (boundary shown with @ signs) acts as capacitor which is bad (slows down the operation of the transistor). What the process does is to place a layer of oxide below the chip as shown MMMMM MMMMMM OOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MOOOOO OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO This stops some of the charged layer from forming as the charge cannot move (easily) in the oxide. Which speeds up the transistor. 'Tis a nice idea doing it with silica though which should make the chips very affordable (ie. only 2 or 3 extra process stages) (btw. this is my on words no trade secrets - not that/. would allow that;) ) -mG
-- Physicists are said to stand on one another's shoulders while programmers stand on one another's toes.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't mean this to sound like flamebait, but it always seems that the PowerPC is playing second or third fiddle.
/. readers will agree..
I think this is flamebait...
It gets knocked aside by x86 users on the desktop due to lack of applications.
Same thing always happens to Linux around here, but everyone seems to defend that OS.
Yeah, sure, it's nifty to do graphics/desktop publishing, but if you're serious about that, you're running an Amiga or BeOS anyway.
The Mac decimates both the Amiga and BeOS in the graphics and desktop publishing arena's. The Amiga used to be (and still is somewhat) a wonderous machine to work with video with, but it's been floundering the past several years due to not really having an owner that's been willing to pour money into it. The BeOS, yes, has a more elegant architecture, but alas, it lacks color management, postscript font support, and applications from Quark, Adobe, and Macromedia. Until it gets more apps, the BeOS will remain an oddity to everyone except it's core users.
I recall reading once that a Mac makes a nice webserver because it's too dumb to really break into or do any damage.
Well, that's true, but if you're buying a mac specifically to serve web pages, in most cases I'd say that you just wasted a pile of money... Or else you're limiting your sites functionality serverly. The mac is missing a lot of support i the server arena. Doubtless, that will change when OS X arrives, but until then.
So why do people insist on using the Power PC?
Because 99% of the computers that use PowerPC's run the Mac OS. And some people prefer that OS to those available from Microsoft, IBM, Redhat, Be, or any other. They even like it enough to spend a few more dollars on the hardware i nwhich to run it.
Why do companies like IBM spend development dollars trying to push an outdated chip architecture, when they could be pushing next generation technologies.
With Apple shipping nearly a million iMacs and G3/G4's per quarter and with Power PC chips selling for (a complete stab in the dark) $250 a piece, that translates to a BILLION dollars a year of business for IBM and Motorolla. If you ran a company, would you turn down that much money?
The PowerPC chip isn't geared towards "PC's" as it's name implies... At least in my world, i equate PC with "x86 compatible". People shouldn't be buying Power PC based computers unless (for now) they want to run the Mac OS, or for the small percentage of folks (Linux PPC users) they value to superior hardware designs enough that a few more dollars doesn't hurt. Asd for your 3 year time limit, I don't quite get it. Are you suggesting that Mac users should abandon the platform they chose and switch to Windows or Linux after 3 years for no reason? I've been computing for 15 or so years and the Mac is still my favorite platform for getting work done on and I'm sure plenty of other
As this is getting into a fest of Mac Bashing I though I'd try and do something on-topic. So here is a little explaination of how IBM's method works (note this is not a new method as the Silicon on Saphire method has been around for years .. however IBM seems to have altered the idea by replacing the expensive saphire with cheap silica)
/. would allow that ;) ) -mG
A normal NMOSFET transistor would to something like this (side view)
Drain Source
MMMMM Gate MMMMMM
OOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMOOOOO
OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO
SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS
SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS
SSSS######SSSSSSSSSS######SSSSS
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
(M Metal track) (# Doped silicon)
(O Silica) (S Intrinsic silicon)
When the transistor is in operation it has a charged region (depletion zone) around it as such...
Drain Source
MMMMM Gate MMMMMM
OOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MOOOOO
OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
SS@SSSSSSSSSSS@@@@@@@@@@@@@@SSS
SSS@@@@@@@@@@@SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
This charged region (boundary shown with @ signs) acts as capacitor which is bad (slows down the operation of the transistor). What the process does is to place a layer of oxide below the chip as shown
MMMMM MMMMMM
OOOOMMMMMMMMMMM MOOOOO
OOOOMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMOOOOO
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
SS@S######SSSSSSSSSS######S@SSS
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
This stops some of the charged layer from forming as the charge cannot move (easily) in the oxide. Which speeds up the transistor.
'Tis a nice idea doing it with silica though which should make the chips very affordable (ie. only 2 or 3 extra process stages)
(btw. this is my on words no trade secrets - not that
Physicists are said to stand on one another's shoulders while programmers stand on one another's toes.