Slashdot Mirror


PowerPC Open Platform Motherboards Finally Here

Cajal writes: "IBM's POP (PowerPC Open Platform) is a standard for making PowerPC-based motherboards. It's been out for years, but no one did anything with it. That's now changed. According to a story on PenguinPPC, Mai Logic is finally making POP motherboards. Finally, we can buy PowerPC motherboards without dealing with Apple."

6 of 248 comments (clear)

  1. So, We can get a PPC Motherboard by OS24Ever · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What would the advantadge of this be over an Intel/AMD system? Or is the clone AIX market going to open up?

    If they're comparable in price to an intel I could see Linux folks using them for servers vs. Intel. But if the PPC is a lot more expensive (20%) I don't see the value in this.

    If MacOS still ran on something other than Apple's machines like it did in the mid 90s that'd be a reason to get one, but at the moment I'm not seeing it.

    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  2. If performance is the only goal..... by Pengo · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Why not just buy a damn Athlon +++++ whateever system. At least I can be sure my binary only applications would work (ie. Java, Games, drivers, etc). Yes, in an open-source-only world, thats cool...

    If I HAVE to have a risc-based work-station I would rather do it on Solaris. You can pickup a sun-blade very cheep, throw in some ram and you have a great unix workstation. It will run all the crap you would want to run on linux, including linux itself.

    If I want to use a PPC platform, I personally will buy an Apple.

  3. Apple Proprietary ROMs still an issue? by swngnmonk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd assume that Apple continues to tie their Operating Systems to proprietary ROMs - making a generic PPC motherboard fairly useless if you're planning to run MacOS. Not like this is a new thing - since the early 80's, Apple has used their ROM chips to sue any clone manufacturers. I remember my 1992-vintage Mac emulator for the Amiga required Mac ROMs that the emulator manufacturer would not supply.


    I'd love to be wrong on this one - getting more competition in the PPC-hardware space would be great, but I doubt Steve Jobs will play along - he'll take his ball home first.

    --

    'ARRGH! Pirate Designers of the Internet, we be!'

  4. Open is interesting, but working is better by shagoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This likely won't have much impact on Apple as a whole. Frankly, after trying to make older hardware useful spending countless hours failing to have successful installs of LinuxPPC and Yellowdog Linux, I was thrilled to see that I can in fact have BSD albiet Darwin flavored without agony (and, of course, my old hardware remains unused).

    Apple's ultimate desktop success with Darwin/OSX will be because users who need that kind of OS power can now have it without the niggling driver details that plague Intel OS distributions. It amazes me that Linux has been as successful as it has with the agony that users have to endure to successfully install the OS. The bar is much higher now. Users can expect their OS install to just happen and still have the power tools of compilers and real server software without the electronic equivalent of repeatedly stabbing themselves in the leg with a fork.

    Of course, the die hard slashdot crowd will always prefer Linux, but it seems to me that things are shifting to a new and friendlier approach.

  5. Re:You're seriously clue-deficient. by Emil+Brink · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Um, I really think you're stretching the meaning of the word "open" here, especially in the end. I can probably dig up the specs for PCI or USB without too much trouble, but show me the register-level specs for any recent ATI or nVIDIA GPU, and I'll show you a broken NDA. Those devices are not "open", in my world. But hey, I'd just love to be proven wrong, and really like links! ;^)

    --
    main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
  6. Initial High Prices May Fall... by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Early Intel Xeon systems were pretty pricey, and early IA64 systems probably aren't exactly "cheap."

    $3900 is a mite high, but high prices are not particularly surprising when something is being sold in its initial "units of 1 board to early implementors."

    It obviously won't get wildly popular until they can get pricing a bit more competitive with the hardware emitted by Apple, but it's a little early to say that this will never happen.

    MAI may be able to maintain a viable commercial business without prices ever falling to $100/unit, by the way...

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.