Slashdot Mirror
PPC 970 Powerbooks and Powermacs in Production?
Thadddius_Brinks writes "MacWispers.com
is reporting here
that apple is currently in production of a redesigned single processor PowerPC
970 Powermac system and a 15.4 inch Powerbook. They (MacWhispers.com) are also standing by
their earlier claims about the speed of the new processor."
This article consolidates many of the major rumors surrounding WWDC including
the rumor of a new case for the Powermacs, but it raises the ultimate question: 17" Powerbook, or PPC 970 Powerbook?
1. That the 970's are being produced, but so far, there's still small numbers, so either only folks at the Developer's Conference will first crack, or you'll have to wait for a bit of time before you can actually get your hands on one (kind of like when the 12" and 17" first started shipping).
2. The major OS Upgrade to 64 bits will happen in a few more months - either way, I expect that OS 10.3 will cost another $50 - $100 (depending on how they do it).
3. The G3 iBook line will be slowly phased out, and replaced with G4 based systems.
4. Dual processor systems by Christmas or so.
5. iTunes for Windows sooner than we thought.
6. Somewhere in this timeframe, new Xserves will start to appear with the 970 chip and the 64-bit server operating system (which should be interesting for folks running "big ass" database/graphical rendering farms.
So either way, I'd say we'll "see" the devices, a few "first adopters" will play with them, pass judgement, Ars Techana [SIC] will write a big ass article on them, and "everybody else" will pick them up later.
Hopefully somebody can convince Valve that Half Life 2 would really run rather nicely on these boxes so I don't have to spend money upgrading my old Wintel Game Box.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
If they release a 15" g5 powerbook, what would happen to sales of their 17" g4 powerbook? I don't believe apple would have a powerbook line with their midrange model having such a radically better architecture/processor then their high end model.
yes i run a goth/punk/emo porn site.
Isn't much more elegant to use hexadecimal?
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
I'm no fan of Jack Campbell and honestly do not believe anything his site spouts. The only time I ever hear anything about it is when (semi-)legitimate news sources pick up "scoops" from his site.
To read more about how cool a guy he is, check out the MacTable report at Macintouch:
http://www.macintouch.com/mactable.html
I am not who I say you are.
Everyone's immediate reaction to MacWhispers is always negative.
"Oh, I'll believe it when I see it."
Obviously. MacWhispers has given up on making release date predictions. You'll notice that they have *not* given a specific timeframe for the release of these machines. They have said that they are being built.
So, now, when WWDC makes no mention of the 970, everyone will say "See! MacWhispers are a bunch of damn fools." and no one will remember, two months from now, when these machines surface, that it fits perfectly with MacWhispers' information.
If you take them completely literally, they are a valuable source of information. They cannot divine the future, and they don't seem to be trying to do so, either.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Specifically:
Unlike the G4, where the AltiVec unit is integrated rather nicely into the issue unit, and can issue several types of vector instructions in parallel, the 970 can only do a permute in parallel with another instruction. Hence, for some tasks, I would expect the G4 to be almost twice as fast as a similarly clocked 970.
They make a similar claim about the non-AltiVec speed, which I tend to believe. The compiler has to be a little smarter (but Apple did add a bunch of G4 optimizations to gcc anyway), but the 970 can do more per clock the the G4 can, under many circumstances. Not only can it have more instructions in-flight, but it has a much more advanced reordering unit than the G4.
Oh yeah, and when did /. just copy over Apple rumor stories? </obligatory>
Yes, I'm still a junky. Are you still a bitch?
I don't think the ArsTechnica report said that the implementation was supposed to be worse - just that it was more of a hack. Just because something is a hack doesn't necessarily mean it can't perform well. In fact, most hacks are done for none other than performance reasons.
Gotta get me one of these!
To determine what features will be on the leading edge PCs of the coming years, all you have to do is go to www.apple.com.
Egads, I've turned into a troll!
"I hardly would describe them as a dependable source of unfounded rumours."
What are you trying to say, they are a great source of unfounded rumours! Not to mention dependable!
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
I don't get why its believed that Mac OS X has to be 64-bit to run on the 970. We've been told in numerous places (Ars, IBM's frickin website) that the 970 runs in 32-bit just fine.
SO... that being said... my WWDC announcment predictions along with what Apple has already stated
- New Macs with PPC 970
- New PowerBook 15 with PPC 970 (the 15" PowerBook is the workhorse of the line, always will be, sorry)
- Preview of Panther
- Macintosh Roadmap Roadmap showing the future... and this is the big-ass news that everyone's been talking about.
Roadmap steps will look something like this...
July 2003:
10.2.7 running on new 970-based Macs practically unmodified because the 970 handles 32-bit operation just totally fine. x.x.+1 updates between WWDC and October 2003. Developer-only release of 64-bit SDK which will not be ready for prime time, but will allow developers to make the swtich, if necessary (similar to Mac OS 9 -> Carbon transition)
October 2003:
10.3 release - all those cool updates in iApps, updates in performance and operation of Mac OS X UI that were shown at WWDC. Panther Will NOT BE a 64-Bit OS!! - why not? Does not need to be because there are no 64-bit apps! Where are the apps? They are still being worked on with the 64-bit SDK, see you at Mac World San Fran with first 64-bit apps.
Jan 2004 (MWSF):
10.3.5 release. Mac OS X will run 64-bit applications. Only apps that NEED to be recomplied 64-bit clean will be recompiled 64-bit clean (iChat, for example, does NOT need to be 64-bit). Finder will be first app to be 64-bit clean because it needs to be.
beyond that, its non-speculateable.
But i think that the real news at this WWDC is going to be the first major Macintosh Roadmap since we saw the Rhapsody one in 1997(8?). You will see where the Mac is going hardware-wise and software wise.
Apple is going to push into the small-medium server market in a hard way.... 64-bit XServes which can run horkin Oracle databases, huge fileservers, and be the backbone of big-ass renderfarms... all with Mac OS X moron-simple UI and none of the pain of cost with Windows servers or admin headache of Linus servers? Puhlease... Apple is going to kick ass and move in where Intel and AMD are just simply lagging behind.
(yes, half the guys in my wedding party have apple.com email addresses.. no, none of this information was gleaned from them.)
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Apple can waffle on about the Mhz myth all they want, but I don't see them REDUCING clock rates generation after generation.
Pentium 4: 3 GHz
Xeon: 2.6 GHz
Pentium M: 1.6 GHz
Itanium 2: 1 GHz