Slashdot Mirror
Motorola G4 Chip News
Anonymous Coward writes "MacOS Rumors has a few tidbits on the upcoming G4 chips. Sounds like it should have good SMP capabilities, and be blazingly fast. I think Linux certainly has a good future on the macs "
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I've worked with IBM SP2's high nodes pushing 8-way 604e's. Though their performance is respectible, for FPU instensive applications wouldn't Alpha be the best choice? Of course I reserve the right to be wrong......
I'm CHEAP?
Bah, I own a 20th Annversery Mac.
I bought it BECAUSE I had hopes of running Rhapsody on it.
Apple HAD promised that Rhapsody would run on it.
I'm tired of seeing /. posts on the order of "Linux PPC works, so Be must be lying when they say that they need Apple's cooperation".
Reverse engineering is fine for the hacker/hobbyist, but it's a legal nightmare for a company to rely on it. However great Apple's hardware may be, it would be pure idiocy (from a *business* standpoint) for a company with limited engineering manpower to spend its effort that way. Apple could easily break BeOS-compatibility with every new model (the old M$ "moving target" game).
I think it makes a lot of sense (again, in the business sense) for Apple to be more hostile to BeOS than to Linux. The average Mac user would have a lot of difficulty with Linux, but BeOS could definitely win them over - it's really easy and user-friendly. The current MacOS just feels sluggish, unstable, and dated in comparison. Maybe Apple will relax a little when Mac OS X comes out, but I doubt it. I think Apple wants Be six feet under.
Intel is trying to stem the tide. They're losing tons of sales to Apple (the iMac is converting massive amounts of PC users to the Mac side) so they fabricate a dirty rumor that basically says: Don't bother switching to Apple hardware now because MacOS will be running on our HW real soon now.
Spreading this kind of garbage could really hurt Apple in the long run. I guess Intel realized that they can't compete any longer on technical grounds, so they had to stoop to such an insidious form of guerilla warfare. They surely learnt a thing or two from Microsoft.
Be isn't MS. It doesn't ship apps, it ships an OS. How many users? Not a lot yet? Is this a race? Gee, I guess Windows won. Why are you so weird about it, anyway? It's a great OS. Feeling threatened or something?
The entire second half of the artical cautions the reader about this can't be taken too seriously. Beside What makes you think Apple wouldn't still have its own priotory chip set?
Too bad BeOS doesn't run on those machines, because the 4.5 release (slated for june) is probably the best USB implementation : you can hot plug keyboards and mice and all of them works at the same time... you can have 3 mouses pluged and they all works :-). Of course there's no use for this kind of things but it's a pretty nice demo of what USB(and the Be ingineers) can do !
secrets of the one button mouse ... it's a "time-based" mechanism, not fully
1) simple, fewer things to break,
That's a meaningless argument. How much more is there to break with another button??
2) reduce UI complications,
Explain please.
3) click and hold the button to get second button function
implimented but very effective,
Effective, maybe. Very inefficient compared with right-buttons that have the same function.
4) the mouse is just an extension of the keyboard, which has lots of buttons already,
Well then why don't you get a mouse with NO buttons, and map all the old mouse buttons to keyboard buttons?
5) extend your keyboard with a new multibutton mouse, how does a four button Kensington sound?
Sounds great. Why don't they just include one with the computer?
6) multibutton mice came about to assist DOS/UNIX CLI, where a high level GUI like Mac is by design (not
omission) served by a single button,
I never found an app in DOS that used the second mouse button.
7) ergonomics notwithstanding.
Absolutely.
I helped a bud of mine setup and iMac for his daughter. The first thing I noticed (after drooling over the beautiful plastic) was the mouse: as always, a tactilely sensational mouse, but a shit shape. The mouse is too small, and I couldn't figure out which way was up.
BTW: The Apple Extended Keyboard ][ is one of the best keyboards in the business. The iMac's feels nice, but is too small. Either way, both are of much higher quality than the Gateway and Dell keyboards I've used over the past year.
G4, Altivec, and OSX. I wish they were avaliable now. But I will still be using hp-ux at school, for now.
LinuxPPC recently posted a beta kernal for the new G3s. One of my friends installed it and says it works quite well.
Sure YellowBox is the future.
Apple told Newton developers that the spin in of the newton division was to BETTER support the Newton platform.
And exactly how TODAY does Apple's UNANNOUNCED and NON-SHIPPING products help consumers NOW?
Parterning with Apple is a sure way to be burned.
Actually the failure to run on B&W G3s has nothing to do with USB - they've got LinuxPPC running on iMacs. And it seems they are making some very good headway on the Yosemites. See http://www.linuxppc.com/news/BlueG3.shtml for more details.
Theoretically, you could build digital amplifiers and/or speakers. At the amplifier level, you would use a technique called PWM (pulse width modulation) - this is essentially the same approach taken by "1 bit" D to A converters. Instead of having resistance ladders to achieve n voltage steps between the extremes in an analog waveform you switch an output stage on and off at a frequency proportional to the associated analog voltage level. That is to say, when the analog waveform is at its crest, the pulses are mostly 1, when that same waveform drops to its trough, the pulses are mostly 0. For this to work, the switching rate is many times the sampling frequency. In a typical 1 bit DAC, the switching rate is in the range of 800 times the audio sample rate. (So where the PCM sample rate is 44KHz, the PWM rate is something like 35MHz.) You could actually construct the output stage of an audio amplifier with only two states (on and off) and drive using PWM technique - an analog speaker attached to this output would "see" an approximation of the original analog waveform. I know of at least one commercially available amplifier design that works in this way. Also, a great majority of the currently available DACs utilize a similar "1 bit" method. This may seem contrary to intuition, but you can actually achieve lower distortion using such switching techniques than to use trimmed resistor ladders traditionally employed in DACs. And, if you build a power amplifier with a digital output stage, you actually bypass a whole bunch of analog stages in the process.
Now - how about a digital speaker? Have you read about the NXT flat speaker technology? If you read their white paper carefully, you will notice that current designs use a "traditional" magnetic drive system that you would find in any old analog loudspeaker and that can be connected to any old power amplifier. BUT - they also say that it is possible to develop alternate drive systems for the flat speakers, and that such alternate drives systems may actually result in better performance! Once again, you can imagine a digital pulsed drive system - perhaps using peizo elements - to drive a flat panel speaker. How about that? Digital all the way through to the transducer. Of course, the end result is still "analog" - a system of high and low pressure moving through air.
Perhaps the only question is can any of this stuff be done in a cost effective manner? Today, most amplifiers, speakers, etc. are analog - you have inertia in the design and manufacture of such systems so the end product is quite cost effective. But just as the NXT flat speaker technology (random excitation of a flat surface) is a departure from traditional point source/piston driven design, if the design and manufacturing process is refined, cost will likely come in line with and possibly go significantly below that of current analog technology.
Yes, AltiVec does have a great impact on embedded devices - in particular, any embedded device which requires digital signal processing (DSP) like functionality. However, AltiVec is equally beneficial to any desktop app that requires DSP like functionality - things that come to mind? How about really fast/efficient MPEG encoding/decoding, certain image processing functions, practically anything to do with audio, some aspects of a 3D geometry pipeline, etc. Hmm, audio and imaging applications are already strong on the Mac platform - and can benefit greatly from AltiVec. Looks to me like Motorola pretty well took out two birds with one stone.
In addition, the G4 provides the necessary signaling for cache coherency in SMP systems. In fact, it provides more logic than the 604 which was also a SMP capable chip. (As you might know, the G3 and the 603 lack this signaling - you can use them in SMP systems but with a performance hit because you must work around the missing hardware logic in software.) SMP will be great for many applications such as 3D rendering, high performance servers, etc.
Sure YellowBox is the future.
And exactly how TODAY does Apple's UNANNOUNCED and NON-SHIPPING products help consumers NOW?
Uhhh... Yellow Box has been shipping for a few weeks now. It's a fundamental part of WebObjects and MacOS X Server. You also could have purchased it last December with WebObjects 4.0 for Windows NT (a subset runs under Solaris/SPARC and HP/UX to support WebObjects also).
I remember seeing an article regarding this in /. a couple months ago... I also remember it was quite expensive...
:)
;-)
Have any of the LinuxPPC people seen/used this board? Will it run LinuxPPC?
I'd love to run Linux on a non-Apple PowerPC box, especially with the superior FP of the 604. It'd make a nice addition to my Alpha, Sparc, Amiga and x86 boxes, all running Linux or NetBSD
An expensive habit, no doubt
~AC
new mouse?
True Apple needs better perfessional keyboards and mice, but its hard to fault a plateform on two of the cheapist componants. Cheap PC USB keyboards and mice might even work.
Actually, I'm pretty sure there was to be a 604e based G3--the 760 (not the 350mhz 604e you're talking about).
ppc750 - 603e based
ppc740 - same as ppc750, but w/o backside cache.
ppc760 - 604e based core, which also allows multiprocessing.
If I remember correctly, AIM was having troubles getting the multiprocessing to work with the backside cache. This pushed ppc760 development back. In the meantime, the g4 was ahead of schedule (and also needed the multiprocessing+cache problem solved before it reached production), so they decided to scrap the ppc760 and concentrate on the G4.
Of course, I could be horribley wrong.
If a company or community doesn't make your ideal system, they're ignorant? Get real. If you don't see what you like, you simply don't buy it and take your business elsewhere. That part I agree with. But the trashing and bad-mouthing you do really speaks more of you than the company's faults.
Another point: what you exactly want is NOT what everyone else wants. Those iMacs were the result of demand for low cost Macs. Apple delivered. They reaped profit for listening. My point? Everyone has different criteria. Again, you have yours. If Apple doesn't meet them, then don't buy. But I know of no platform, x86 included, that meet *my* criteria. That doesn't make x86 stuff "moldy" nor does it make me think 3com, AMD or Intel, Tyan, etc. are shoving things down my throat. I just don't buy from them.
So don't go pretending x86 stuff is like open-source hardware. Hardly. You've probably just adapted your criteria or thinking to what available in x86 land. It's limited just as well, just in different ways, ways *you* might find acceptable.
I install Linux PPC 5 on an iMac (with a lot of help) for a local install fest a month ago and it work very well. Select USB keybord and voila. X was the real problem.
;-)
People where very impress by the iMac running someting else that MacOS.
Now go see your friend and change is life
Yeah, Be *really* made the right move! Hey, have they shipped any apps yet? Do they have a user base outside HQ??!! HA HA HA!
Apple makes motherboards for their own computers. Apple does not make powerpc processors.
Beg IBM or Motorola to make you some boards.
The name is Apple, not Asus.
They have, but VERY expensive : a single 604e@300MHz and 3 pci ports is $1800 ! the same with dual 604e is $3200 !!!
Because there WILL be 64 bit G4's from IBM at least, and they could very likely be multicore down the line. The Merced generation is too...."unstable" (let's see, Merced will come out, but it will suck, so wait for "Whitney") for anybody to bet the bank on Intel (except maybe Micro$oft, but they're WAY too stupid to realize that they should have seriously supported cross platform a LOOONNG time ago, at least with NT).
In other words, IBM and/or Mot will provide Apple with their 64 bit chips when Apple needs them, and Intel can kiss their round, Bondi Blue arses.
I agree. Although my example is a little extreme, it demonstrates while my next desktop will not be a G3, but rather a G4.
The application: SuperAnova (68k)
The Patch: PowerFPU (maps 68k fpu calls to ppc fpu calls).
The combatants: 1) PowerCenter Pro 210. 210mhz 604e, 1meg L2 cache at 60 mhz, 60 mhz fpm dram.
2) Powerbook G3: 250mhz ppc 750, 1meg L2 cache at 125 mhz, 83mhz sdram.
The winner: PowerCenterPro, by a margin of 3:1!!!
I also write my own fpu intensive data analyses in C. The G3 is faster than the 604e (40%), but it is twice as fast as the Intel/NT pos I have at work. I take that back: when doing batch processing of huge data files, my 604e is 4x faster than my Intel NT machine (233mhz vs. 210mzh for the 604e).
Matt Peterson
Well OF COURSE Steve Jobs said the rumor was b.s. What
did you expect him to say, "Well, yes, we are"?? That would cause utter mayhem!
The fact remains, Apple is going to have a much more portable codebase with OS X, and they have every reason to have *survival*, not allegiance to Motorola, as a top priority.
If PowerPC development fades (though it's doing reasonable, if not great, now), I'd have no problem with Apple moving to any chip that was good, even an "Evil Empire" chip.
What is Linux's user base compared to Windows?
What range of apps does Linux have compared to Windows?
If size of user base and number of applications is how an OS should be evaluated, then we're all in trouble, because Windows kicks some serious butt in THOSE respects.
BeOS is a really great OS that deserves our support (or at least our interest and respect). If the company survives and eventually gets complete hardware support and a UNIX-style multiuser security model, BeOS will be the best OS on the planet. They're not there yet, but what they've done so far is damn impressive.
http://www.fr.netbsd.org/Ports/mac ppc/index.html
snapshot
ftp://ftp.jp.netbsd.org/pu b/NetBSD/arch/macppc/snapshot/
for iMac
ftp://ftp.jp.netbsd.org/pub/Ne tBSD/arch/macppc/imac/
Consider: left mouse button as usual, right mouse button for context menus, and middle mouse button to display the app menubar in the form of a popup menu (like a context menu) on MacOS. I do the latter under NEXTSTEP all the time and it's a great timesaver.
OS-X on the G4 with SMP should be really cool. looks like they're making all the right architectural changes to have one of the best hardware / OS solutions out there.
if you compare #transistors to CPU instruction throughput, the efficiency of the G4 is much greater than the pentium iii. if you actually put a piii and g4 chip side by side, the physical size alone reveals the overhead that legacy support of the archiac 8088 instruction set has had on the development of the processor design - its about 3 times as huge! efficient chips and efficient OS make this a really sweet combination. it'll be interesting to see how OS-X bsd compares with linux in real world performance.
johnrpenner@earthlink.net
You misspeak: we all know that speakers themselves cannot be digital. As you corrected yourself in the next sentence, though, we know that digital->analog conversion is merely done further down the signal chain, closer to the speakers. While in theory this is a good idea, it's very poorly implemented in the USB chain as far as I can tell.
In fact, about the only way I can think of to possibly make the current standard (doing the D/A conversion in a noisy, magnetic-field-filled, rf-plagued computer case with a $50 chip and then piping it over unbalanced wires to the amp) worse is to do the D/A conversion in close proximity to the amp and speaker drivers, so integrated that the consumer can't choose his own components, and with a $10 POS chip that sounds terrible and requires special software to emulate what the $50 chip did before. Further, the USB bus provides no guaranteed bandwidth, so it may either slow or be slowed by other traffic such as USB camera streams, network data, or even your typing on your USB keyboard.
Digital audio over firewire is far superior because it provides ample bandwidth for several data streams of sufficient data rate, plus it provides quality-of-service guarantees so you don't have to worry about other traffic making it skip (or its interfering with other traffic). For now, though, there are no consumer-level digital-audio-over-firewire solutions so we're stuck with essentially the "winmodem" of computer audio. Forget it.
OK, let's look at this a little rationally. Apple has a responsibility to its shareholders to ensure that the Mac is a viable platform in the future. Given that PowerPC could *possibly* fall behind Intel's performance, or Motorola and IBM could decide to focus it solely on embedded systems, and forget about the desktop.
Both of these scenarios are unlikely, IMHO, but definitely POSSIBLE. Given this, Apple has to ensure that its OS - the core of its business - could be ported to alternative processors - and, realistically, that means to Intel's x86 architecture.
So, if Apple is to correctly do its fiduciary duty, it MUST look at alternatives to PowerPC ie. Intel. In order to do that, it would have to have a team of people looking at porting from PowerPC to x86. So, somewhere in the bowels of Apple, there's almost certainly a couple of geeks working on this, probably with Intel's help (for compilers, architecutural consultancy, etc.)
(The source for the story, incidentally, was a very senior Intel exec. Go figure out for yourself why an Intel exec might spill info like this.)
Of course, this doesn't mean it's going to happen. But Apple would be being irresponsible if it didn't look at alternatives to PowerPC.
And, of course, if it did happen, it wouldn't mean you could run Mac OS on your standard IBM-compatible PC box. Apple could easily build a proprietory motherboard architecture around an Intel processor.
As for what Steve Jobs says... let's put it this way. A few weeks ago, Apple sent a letter to its US dealers categorically denying that there was a new, speed-bumped iMac on the way. Now, we find that one will be released on April 19th. They're already with dealers.
Believe everything Apple says - or denies - at your own risk.
IBM is loose money selling pc's because they can not compete with Intel's companion brands like Dell...why that IBM?
The nice thing about firewire is that most of RAID can be implemented in hardware without a dedicated controller. Firewire devices are able to copy among themselves, for example, without a CPU driving them; also, they are naturally hot-swappable. Add striping and parity checking in software (as the Linux kernel does) and you've got a raid, just as fast or faster than most SCSI raids and with off-the-shelf Firewire devices.
Of course, those are still REALLY expensive right now, so SCSI dedicated RAID systems are probably more cost-effective, but as Firewire devices drop in price as they become more common, and as Linux (and LinuxPPC) become more mainstream, this is the solution I'll be looking for.
I, too, am psyched about the G4's, by the way, but not because of what I'll be able to get from Apple. There was a story on Slashdot several weeks ago about quad 604 motherboards that fit into ATX cases that Motorola was building. I imagine it would be pretty well supported under LinuxPPC, complete with drivers for all the typical PCI cards I would want to chuck in it. With G4's SMP strengths (and Linux 2.2's as well), that machine would make a monster home server, well-equipped to handle multimedia, serve files, and host X sessions for the whole family.
>Anyway, you may want to try newest boot floppy from:/ floppy/
>
>ftp://ftp.jp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/arch/macppc
Actually, Apple has been moving away from proprietary chips wherever possible - probably has a bit to do with why the price is coming down on Apple hardware. In the latest G3 systems, they are using the Motorola core logic (grackle), a VIA USB controller, the ATI Rage 128 graphics chip, a DEC PCI to PCI bridge, etc. (You read that right, VIA - a chip from the Wintel hardware world. I tell 'ya - the world ends tomorrow!)
LinuxPPC seams to be doing pretty well, w/out Apple's help. Beside Apple supports MKLinux and now Darwin. you can always grab info from them.
so take a 3-button PC USB mouse and use that.
you're overreacting just a _little_
Don't believe every rumor you hear. Apple may be reaching a near processer independant code base, but that doesn't mean a change anytime soon, especially a death bed line like the x86. With Molt and IBM pushing out kick *** PowerPC processors, I doubt that Apple will switch anytime soon.
Cool! Some people that read/post to the slashdot discussions actually have a clue!
You forgot to mention things like: IBM's "big iron" division (those awesome 64 bit Power3 systems you speak of) and their semiconductor fab in general (which builds those Power3 CPUs as well as G3s and 604s and MPEG encoders/decoders, etc.) are both profitable business units. OTOH the Wintel clone division lost a billion dollars last year!
About Intel - yeah - I totally agree that if they were not bound by the x86 instruction set they would probably be cranking out some pretty awesome chips these days. In fact, they have in the past - SGI used to run parallel i860s for geometry engines. Of course, Intel never advanced that chip beyond its first generation incarnations - the enormous engineering effort required to advance the x86 series probably had something to do with the i860s demise.
I mean - look at the processor Sony/Toshiba designed for a game console! The thing has 10 floating point MACs (multiply and accumulate) and 2 floating point divide units that all run in parallel - that's right, it can crank through 12 FP instructions per clock cycle! That's awesome for 3D geometry setup (which mostly consists of matrix composition - lots of multiplies) - I bet it would make one hell of a DSP too! Again, just reinforces your point that if you aren't bound by an arcane instruction set, you can practically work miracles!
I seem to remember reading that the G4 will actually have more power management abilities than the G3! So actually, the G4 will (I sure) show up in notebooks at some point. Also, about the G3, it started out at about 6 watts for the high end (300Mhz) - it has sense gone through a die shrink and the 400Mhz parts draw less power - something like 4 watts - than the first gen G3s. Certainly the G4 will draw more power than the current G3 as it has a much higher transistor count. However, chips such as the mobile PII draw considerably more power than even the first gen G3 - so it is technically feasible to build a notebook with a power hungry CPU. It just means shorter power life and active (fan) cooling. If the G4 really does have good power management (such as ability to shut down the AltiVec and FPU when not in use) - I could definitely see it working well in a notebook - at least a high end notebook
Oh - and re: the main topic - about the FPU in general - yeah, I'm totally stoked! FPU performance is always a plus - especially for people like myself who are into 3D render apps
Not so fast buddy! The idea of using USB for speakers did not originate at Apple! The USB bus is something in the range of 12Mbit - stereo PCM audio (44k 16bit x 2) is something in the range of 1.4Mbit. That's about 1/10th the bandwidth of the USB bus. Also, putting speakers on the USB bus has been in the design spec right from the start (that is to say, it came from its Wintel/PC heritage)- the USB bus has the ability for fixed allocation of bandwidth to devices (like Speakers) that need a continuous data stream - devices that do not need a continuous stream (like keyboard, mouse, modem, etc.) have bandwidth dynamically allocated from the remaining pool.
And remember that Apple supported the future of:
YEllowBox as the development platform (Replaced-Mac API WWDC 1998)
Newton
Rhapsody on intel
Rhapsody on all hardware sold by Apple at that time (G3 only support)
OpenDoc
And then ask yourself: Why trust Apple?
Go read one of the MANY Apple history books. Then ask yourself if you REALLY want to be 'working' with Cartoon Maker (CEO of Pixar) STeve Jobs?
Simply not true. The Blue and White G3 has a working ADB port on the back. You can hook up keyboards, mice, copy-protection dongles, etc. The iMac is a different story. It has no ADB port. Of course, how many iMac owners will suffer through a Linux install?
Window Maker is easily changed so that popup menus normally produced by wizzy extra buttons can be produced by f1-f2 or whatever :)
That said, I have yet to work out my xmodmap troubles, so other details like optionclicking only works with one of the option keys...
Posted by DonR:
LinuxPPC 5 will be out within the next few weeks. All reports are confirming that it runs beautifully on the B&W G3s, and the iMacs, as well as all previous hardware.
I think there are some hacks to get LinuxPPC 4.1 running on the B&W and I'm certain there are some to get it working on the iMac.
It runs like a champ on my Powerbook 3400.
---
Donald Roeber
get used to it buddy... your gonna see more of it
ever wonder why the folks at soundblaster bought Cambridge soundworks (one of the best comercial speaker companies around)
hummm could it be because the saw the witing on the wall... soundcards are our... digital is in... it just make more sense
hell its cheaper to put a dedicated usb port and usb speakers in then a sound card.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
I love hot plugable....
:)
the other day I was working on an iMac and I unpluged and repluged the mouse just for fun
its was a surprisingly liberating experience
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
WOW... flashback to didgital electronics lab
thnaks... that was cool
of course your absolutely right... but the primary driving force here is money... USB speakers will take over because they will be a cheaper solution...
you want a traditional solution... pay a premium...
welcom to the wonderfull world of comodity class computers...
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
I wouldn't mind taking a spin on OS X/Rhapsody myself. Linux should be a Ferrari on these puppies. Time for a Mac... :)
No Linux supports USB on any platform, but there is a version of LinuxPPC that does have limited support for it (keyboard and mouse)
It's far easier to forgive your enemy after you get even with him.
It's far easier to forgive your enemy after you get even with him.
OK, let's look at this a little rationally. Apple has a responsibility to its shareholders to ensure that the Mac is a viable platform in the future. Given that PowerPC could *possibly* fall behind Intel's performance, or Motorola and IBM could decide to focus it solely on embedded systems, and forget about the desktop.
Both of these scenarios are unlikely, IMHO, but definitely POSSIBLE. Given this, Apple has to ensure that its OS - the core of its business - could be ported to alternative processors - and, realistically, that means to Intel's x86 architecture.
So, if Apple is to correctly do its fiduciary duty, it MUST look at alternatives to PowerPC ie. Intel. In order to do that, it would have to have a team of people looking at porting from PowerPC to x86. So, somewhere in the bowels of Apple, there's almost certainly a couple of geeks working on this, probably with Intel's help (for compilers, architecutural consultancy, etc.)
(The source for the story, incidentally, was a very senior Intel exec. Go figure out for yourself why an Intel exec might spill info like this.)
Of course, this doesn't mean it's going to happen. But Apple would be being irresponsible if it didn't look at alternatives to PowerPC.
And, of course, if it did happen, it wouldn't mean you could run Mac OS on your standard IBM-compatible PC box. Apple could easily build a proprietory motherboard architecture around an Intel processor.
As for what Steve Jobs says... let's put it this way. A few weeks ago, Apple sent a letter to its US dealers categorically denying that there was a new, speed-bumped iMac on the way. Now, we find that one will be released on April 19th. They're already with dealers.
Believe everything Apple says - or denies - at your own risk.
Umm, actually, no. The new USB speakers (not FireWire, no such thing as FireWire speakers) are COMPLETELY digital. the D/A converts is in the speaker. You no longer need a sound card, since all of the conversion is done off-system, and software can emulate the rest (MIDI sampling, certain sound effects, etc.). It seems pretty cool.
Did you even look at the back of the machine? There is a nice ADB port right on the back. You could probably pick up an ADB keyboard and mouse (used) for about $20. A lot easier than waiting for LinuxPPC to fully support USB.
Speaking of which, I thought that some guys had LinuxPPC running on an iMac with limited (keyboard and mouse) USB support a while ago (shortly after the release of the iMac). I am pretty sure the upcoming LinuxPPC 5 is going to support the Blue and White more fully.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
I'll believe it when I hear it from someone at Apple. This article is just anti-PPC FUD, probably because the G3 is faster than any Merced chip on the market (wait... there are no Merced chips on the market! Silly me...) and the G4 will be faster still.
This'll be fun, watching the G5 (what'll probably be out by the time Merced is released) thrash Merced around...
Honestly, it's not that hard. Lots of multibutton mice exist out there. A well-coded app should never need more than one (witness Gimp, which no longer requires more than one thanks to some thought they put into the interface of the 1.1.x tree). But agreed: two are nice for shortcuts. Three? It just invites horrible interfaces (such as XFig; I use the program a lot but honestly, those guys need to learn way more than a few things about UI design, though the most critical thing would be learning that not all of us have 19-inch monitors). It would help if more Linux program authors put some real thought into their interfaces.
As for the mouse being designed for a child's hand: I'll have to agree with you. The mouse is awful. Then again, if I got an iMac I'd likely buy a trackball instead.
The first chip to use "G3" technologies was actually not 603-based (like the current one, the 750 is now). It was a 604 variant, known as the Mach 5 604e. And as a chip, it was in fact better than the G3. But it lacked one thing the 750 had: backside cache. This turned out to make the 750-based systems a great deal faster overall than Mach 5 604e-based one, even though the performance of the chip was worse.
The 750 was originally intended to be a low-end-systems chip. The original G3's were supposed to be low-end, with higher-end six-slot machines based on that Mach 5 chip coming up later. Apple scrapped that idea because the original G3 did so well (I do wish they'd go to six slots though, though having more than three does jack up the price of building a system significantly due to the PCI bridge you then have to add to the motherboard).
The only thing holding me back from even considering the PPC platform is the lack of the ablilty for me to get the parts to build me one. You can get a Mac board (one specific kind) I am told, but you are limited by the onboard junk that cant be replaced and has only three PCI slots. I want to be able to get EXACTLY what I want. Not what some ignorant company thinks everyone should have.
Whine, whine, whine.
Look, perhaps you should be looking into Apple's BTO options. You'll find that it has more options than you seem to think. Also, ever thought about getting an older motherboard, say, one for a 9600? You could make a sweet system out of that (6 PCI slots, oodles of RAM expandability, daughtercard-upgradable processor, etc).
I am sorry, but I am not letting Apple shove their Moldy iMacs and Blue Trash Cans down my throat as an acceptable computer system.
Why not?
Another thing that they need is to get rid of their arrogant attitude about everything and making rediculus/frivilous claims in attempt to boost public appearance.
I'd agree with you, except for one thing: their claims are justified. Or perhaps you could point me to one which wasn't? (and don't even start with that "up to twice as fast" crap; while BYTEmark might have said that of the G3 it should be known that other benchmark tests which I suppose you'd consider more "appropriate" for reasons I don't understand found the Mach 5 604e to be even faster).
You could always buy whatever mouse you want for about 20 bucks.
Of course Be could make it's OS run on G3s.
Fact: I've been working with a number of friends on a new GPL OS for PowerMacs for 2 years now. The project has been kept secret until we have something to show for, because we wanted to avoid bad press generated by past hoaxes on the subject (remember OpenOS? Infinite OS? PowerOS?). The kernel that was written for this OS (a nano+macro kernel) can boot on any PowerMacs right now, even some powerbooks that we've been able to get to. Including G3s. (In fact, this kernel supports more hardware than MkLinux and Mac OS X Server).
We have access to HFS, ADB, SCSI in all their chipsets, and a whole slew of other hardware components--all without Apple info. Even our booter is home-grown.
It's about to go public. In fact, the part I'm responsible for (the UI stuff) is already sorta public; if all goes well, I should have a company copyright disclamer today, allowing me to publish the sources as soon as tonight.
The UI is not finished and am looking for some help.
It should be easy enough to make this UI run on top of Darwin and Linux. I just lack experience coding on those two platforms to do it. Besides, I seriously lack time for this.
The info on the Moira UI is at
http://pages.infinit.net/mouser/Moira/
("infinit.net" is my cable service provider's web site for users--it's in no way related to Infinite OS)
Please dont consider this as an official announcment. That'll be done later this week. Or next week. Depending on the amount of time I can put in the web site above to properly document things.
Firewire speakers?
:)
Speakers are analog devices - hooking them up to an ultra-high-speed digital serial connection would probably result only in severe ear/speaker damage
--
Posted with Mozilla
Somebody needs to fix the various *nix window managers so that they can be used reasonably well with one-button mice. C'mon people, several ergonomic studies have shown that the more mouse buttons you have, the sooner you're likely to suffer RSI.
It can't be that hard for someone to configure the code to work this way. And if the Linux advocates are really serieous about attracting novice users, fewer bottons makes for an easier learning curve as well.
I dunno. I have rather large hands, yet I find the iMouse (good a name as any for it) to be the best I've used.
I prefer having only one button on the top. That way I can use multiple fingers and reduce the overall strain on each finger (as with multibutton mice, which tend to require each button only be pressed by one finger)
The size and shape let me cup it in my hand in a manner that I've grown very accustomed to. Using other mice lately, I've found that they seem bulky and oversized. I suspect part of this is also due to the mouse ball being relatively further towards my fingertips when compared to larger mice (with the balls further back). Usually, the farther forward the ball, the more control you've got over it.
But at any rate, people should not default to a mouse without trying lots of other mice. The same thing goes for keyboards and monitors. Everyone has different preferences, so they should look for what they like best and are most comfortable with. After all, these three devices are your only serious I/O with the computer. One size does not fit all.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I'm stuck using one of Microsoft's right handed mice today at work. It's not the sort with the wheel in it, but the overall shape is the same.
I HATE it.
It's forcing me to hold it in a way that is causing pains in my wrist (the generic keyboard and lack of a wrist rest isn't helping - so I'm hunting and pecking today, in an effort to type less)
The Apple mouse just sits in my cupped palm. Their earlier ADB II mouse (which is the only rounded grey one they made) was also pretty good although I like the iMac one more. What really bugs me about multibutton mice though, is that i normally use three fingers (all but the pinky) to click the mouse. With this two button mice, I not only have to think about what I'm doing, but the shape forces me to use only one finger.
My conclusion: I should start bringing in my Apple mouse to work - it won't give me RSI, like the MS mouse will.
Different mice for different, uh, folks.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
USB support is really quite widespread. There are a number of USB joysticks (the Saitek Cyborg joystick is nice, IMO) that will work fine as long as a game supports inputsprockets (most have for years)
There are a number of printer drivers of course, and if you can find a USB postscript printer (like the inexpensive lexmark something or other e310) they should work without a hitch - just use the regular laser printer driver.
Oh, btw, USB is completely hot swappable, and hardware wise work with any kind of device (of course the keyboard and mb only have type A connectors, but you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an A-B converter.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Personally I like the new round mouse. I've been using it ever since I got my blue and white G3, and it's great. Of course, you do have to sort of 'cup' it in your hand, rather than rest your hand on it. Slide it around with your fingers (I nudge the cord, myself) that sort of thing.
Now I did pass on the new keyboard, since I already have a great, albeit grey, Apple II Extended. Best keyboard I've ever used.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I drooled at the machine's internals, but since I have neither ADP nor USB anything, I didn't bother to look at the back. My mistake.
As far as running on the iMac, I understood the same but at the time, the advice on linuxPPC if you wanted to run on a B&W was something along the lines of "good luck." At the moment it still seems like a pretty ugly hack. Particularly since my friend has invested a good deal of money in a USB scanner and multi-button mouse (which according to the ppc-linux-user mailing list is still unsupported) this is not going to be his first Linux experience.
~luge
IAAL,BIANLY
A good friend got a brand new Yosemite box (G3, 300 mhz) and turns around to me THAT DAY and says "now that it is up and running, can you help me put linux on it?" I had to tell him no- because every peripheral on the machine is USB based. No keyboard means no install. Until that gets changed (and I understand that project is moving very slowly) there will be no linux on the new macs.
~luge
P.S. Of course, this could be a huge opportunity for Apple to prove themselves to the community after the APSL bungling. Imagine if they hired a team of guys to write a USB module? The PR value would be huge. Of course, don't hold your breath...
IAAL,BIANLY
No problem :-)
just in case, AFAIK is As Far As I Know.
IAAL,BIANLY
That's why I said AFAIK. My mistake. I assumed that since he was not using his old stuff (esp. the mouse) it was because there was no ADP support. I guess there is another reason, but maybe not.
~luge (who really does like apple and drools over the thought of a chip not burdened by 8088 compatibility and a MB mounted so that you can actually access it)
IAAL,BIANLY
AFAIK, the hardware no longer supports ADB.
~luge
IAAL,BIANLY
are even cooler. http://www.theregister.co.uk/990413-000018.html I guess Apple realized that Be made the right move by switching to more open intel hardware
---
yeah but we're talking about 64 bit chips from intel-not x86 Pentium III's.
---
no I'm no fan of intel but at least you can buy intel-based pc's from many vendors.
---
The reason why Linux is preferred on x86 and PowerPC is because it is a vastly better O/S in terms of quality than Windows and Mac OS 8.x. However, when compared with a robust and extant UNIX like Mac OS X (aka NeXTStep aka OPENSTEP aka Rhapsody), the native functionality is going to be better.
According to an ad from this site, you can buy an UltraSparc workstation for $2,495. That's fairly affordable if you aren't a student and are looking for a high-powered computer. But almost nobody is going to buy a brand spanking new UltraSparc II to put Linux on it, when Solaris does the job much better. (watch me get a flood of contradictions)
I have the feeling the same is going to happen with Mac OS X and the G4.
Sometimes we have to be willing to pay for quality products. Roads are free, and we get traffic jams. Downloading the Linux kernel is free, and bandwidth drops when a new kernel is released.
Three Step Plan:
1. Take over the world.
2. Get a lot of cookies.
3. Eat the cookies.
If Motorolla would build an inexpensive G3/G4 motherboard, then we could all afford to run their resonably priced chips. Someone needs to seed the market. BeOS, Linux, and BSD would run on a simple MB with a PCI bus, SDRAM, etc. A simple, $100 single-processor board would be enough to establish the market--it should fit in a standard AT or ATX case and take advantage of all the inexpensive hardware which is available. Motorolla should seed its own market, or does Apple have their proverbial balls in a vice?
-- This is not a signature.
The rumors of Apple offering a dual setup are really making me drool.
A dual sawtooth with 256 MB RAM and a RAID solution with 9 gig Ultra2 SCSI drives would just be really suh-weet. Toss in dual Apple Studio displays and some kickin' firewire speakers.
To top it off, run Rhapsody on it.
yee-haw
All editorial writers ever do is come down from the hill after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.
The problem people have is you don't hold it like a normal mouse, in your palm. Instead, you grab it with your fingertips.
:-)
Hmmm. That is how I always use my mouse. I love my mouse... it is a Logitech MouseMan Sensa that I bought in 1995. I'll never buy another mouse
Why did Logitech stop making that design? Oh well.
The *only* reason that you can buy a cheap x86 motherboard is because there's a huge bolt-and-screw clone market out there. The individual build-it-yourself market is not very large.
There used to be a few bare PPC motherboards available, but they were spin-offs from the Taiwanese Mac Clone makers. When IBM dropped the "Power Personal" and Apple dropped the clones, the loose board market disappeared.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
PowerPC is a great platform and I wish people would pick up on it. For embedded systems, it is awesome. All of IBM's really big horsepower runs on PPCs in steroids(Power 3) that do SMP like it was nothing. Consumer wise, PowerPC is only being utilized by Apple. If you want to talk about allegiance, look no farther than the x86 instruction set. Intel fostered the attitude and all the clone chip makers are trying to follow suit.
I think allegiance to x86 is holding the industry back the most. Imagine what intel would have now if Microsoft didn't just hand them the OS market by focusing 99% of their efforts on x86. They certainly wouldn't have tried their socket antics.
Whatever, time will tell.
remy
http://www.mklinux.org
Just because a particular mouse comes in the box, it does not mean that it's chained to the computer.
"Look at my great mouse on this 486! I wish I didn't have to throw out that G3 when the mouse got dirty. If only there were some way to buy a NEW mouse, one I really liked, and attach it to this computer..."
I'm pretty sure LinuxPPC isn't being held back by the lack of mice. If anything is holding back LinuxPPC it's the fact that most Mac owners actually like their OS and don't intend to partition their hard drive and go through a byzantine install and configuration process just so their iMacs can serve web pages even faster.
BTW - I hated both the keyboard and the mouse at first, but I've come to love the keyboard, and the mouse I can tolerate. It's almost the perfect size for my two year old daughter.
By making Linux available on so many platforms, we are making things so much easier for developers like myself. I've had to work with stuff like Visual Studio for way too long, where I can't tell what's going on in the cast of OS problems. You don't hit dead ends like that when you develop under an OSS solution like Linux, though!
:)
This is a great way to change all the "my chip is better than your chip" wars to "my distro is better than your distro" wars!
You would *never* be able to port an application this easily between a Motorola and Intel box under Windows than you can with Linux.
Heh... Linux forever. Sorry about the rant!
BTW... SMP is the future. I hope it becomes an integral part of all the Linux ports!
æeee!
Their arrogance is 'bad arrogance' but your arrogance is 'good arrogance'.
Go figure.
Within a week of the iMac release www.usbstuff.com started carrying iMac coloured one button mice and iMac coloured mac keyboards I thought to myself Why on earth would someone need a replacement mouse and keyboard for a machine they just bought last week, these companies should be making something useful... then I looked at an iMac in the store and understood completely.
Forgive me for sounding out of it, but do the x86 Linux distributions have support for USB? Or is it just Linux PPC that's missing it?
If there really exist studies that one mouse button is less stressful than three, I'd like to see them, because in real life I've seen the reverse, especially due to the especially-streasful double-clicking required in the average, ill-thought-out, one mouse button GUI.
It's requiring multiclick that's bad, not spreading the stress out over several sets of tendons rather than one. Would you want a one-finger keyboard, too? Didn't think so.
that article is such poop...
#1 The only reason they can even consider writing this is because of the portability of Darwin. Apple actually encourages people to work on getting Darwin running on Intel. (It's in one of their FAQs) And why wouldn't they? They don't have to "support" it on Intel. They don't have to write drivers (IBM spent millions on drivers for OS/2). They can just sell MacOS X Server for Darwin and it can go to Intel, PPC, Merced, Sparc or whatever platform Darwin runs on. Apple gets money, we get MacOS X, everyone's happy.
#2 Motorola has been working on getting their embedded processors in space for a while. Their high-end embedded product is the 603e core (which were the base of PowerBooks the gen before G3s). Embedded PPCs are nothing new, and if it wasn't for that market desktop PPCs wouldn't be as great as they are today. The major benefits of AltiVec directly affect embedded applications. Coincidence? I don't think so.
I don't think it's so much that they decided not to use the 604 but rather they were following a specific roadmap. The G3 was always going to be based on the 603 which didn't have the (double precision?) FP capability that the 604 had. They couldn't put a 604 in a PowerBook cuz they'd burn up. The G3 was meant to go across Apples whole line so it had to be cheaper and cooler.
:)
The G4 is based on the 604, so it will inherit that chips FP while using the G3s advances for low power consumption. What's more I'm sure AltiVec will help the scientific community alot. It'll make for a nice boost to Mathmatica I bet
Yellow Box as dev platform:
I don't know where you get the idea that YB is gone. It's still *the* most important future dev platform for Apple. It is the basis WO. It is the basis of MacOS X Server, for now. Apple is combining YB and Java so that you can use the two APIs interchangeably. After MacOS X is released, Apple will start to push YB, for now they just want support for Carbon so they have software base to start with.
I miss the Newton.
However, soon we will have the P1 and or iBook. Which should have everything Newton had plus MacOS and a PPC processor.
Rhapsody on Intel.
We have Darwin, which, when you think about it, is better than Apple spending millions to support (probably poorly) the thousands configurations out there. Better we do it with IOKit then Apple. Apple can sell us a MacOS X Server for Darwin product later.
Rhapsody on pre-G3 hardware... well the 603s don't work... so what? Do you really care if you get "support" from Apple when you can easily get better help from the Internet. Go buy a $500 8500/180 (which happens to be what I'm runnning) if you're that cheap.
OpenDoc. OK, you got a point. I don't know what will replace it. Anyone know any possible candidates?
I think the people at LinuxPPC will do fine. They've managed to get it running on almost every PPC Mac by reverse engineering alone. Especially with the release of Darwin and the talk on Darwin lists that they should consider the new "unified UNIX driver" thing I think it will only get easier.
The only thing holding me back from even considering the PPC platform is the lack of the ablilty for me to get the parts to build me one. You can get a Mac board (one specific kind) I am told, but you are limited by the onboard junk that cant be replaced and has only three PCI slots. I want to be able to get EXACTLY what I want. Not what some ignorant company thinks everyone should have. I am sorry, but I am not letting Apple shove their Moldy iMacs and Blue Trash Cans down my throat as an acceptable computer system.
Another thing that they need is to get rid of their arrogant attitude about everything and making rediculus/frivilous claims in attempt to boost public appearance.
Wait wait wait wait. Because Jobs was the CEO of a company that specialized in computer-based animation, who happened to make a hit film, we should label him as a "Cartoon Maker" and make a judgement call that since he is associated with something as childish as CARTOONS (and hey, don't forget to hit User Friendly today!), you shouldn't 'work' with Apple?
While Steve Jobs very well might be an egotistical asshole at times, your judging of a company because of the former occupation of it's CEO...wait, strike that. Jobs has gone from being a CEO to being a CEO. There's nothing to argue about here.
You need to make the crucial step of realizing that trusting a company and doing business with a company are two different things. For instance: I don't TRUST Hotline Communications, but I use their software. I don't TRUST most web sites I go to, but I still read them. I don't TRUST UPS, but I (unfortunately) still use them occasionally.
D'yasee?
Linux has a future on Macs if Apple abandons their policy of not releasing developer info for their hardware.
Of course they release hardware specs for developers. The only information they don't release is whats on the ROM chips (easily bypassed if you want to run Linux) and the Mezzine specs, which is the expansion slot on the rev A, B and possibly D iMacs. But I can tell you that that's also irrelevant, since I have a Voodoo 2 card in mine.
Oh yes, that would kick ass. I want one of those quad proccessor boxes. :)
Well OF COURSE Steve Jobs said the rumor was b.s. What did you expect him to say?
The fact remains, Apple is going to have a much more portable codebase with OS X, and they have every reason to have *survival*, not allegiance to Motorola, as a top priority.
I belive him because there's no chance that Apple will ditch a processor with the great future for the dead end that is x86.
Just because the code is portable and Apple CAN make such a move doesn't mean they WILL. Personally, I think Apple could make a lot of money by making an Intel version of OS X, but they aren't going to ditch the PowerPC anytime soon.
USB support works just fine for keyboards and mice. I got a 3 button USB mouse from Belkin and it just worked- didn't have to fiddle with it at all to get it to work.
The only problems are that I think the USB modules only work for keyboard and mice, and they aren't hot-swappable.
(not FireWire, no such thing as FireWire speakers)
Actually, I did see a hugeass pair of Firewire speakers in a catalog. They also had a hugeass price: $4700.
Anybody who bashes the iMac mouse hasn't bothered to use it for more than five minutes. Nice weight, nice size, and yes its easy to tell which side is up.
And remember that Apple supported the future of:
YEllowBox as the development platform (Replaced-Mac API WWDC 1998)
It still is.
Newton
Apple is working with 3Com to build a Palm Pilot with Newton technologies.
OpenDoc
The whole point of OpenDoc was to reduce the size of programs by using libraries, and to reduce software development time. Thats what the Yellow Box is all about. Why support OpenDoc (which only had about 5 apps made for it) when you have a kickass API like the YB?
Rhapsody on intel
Rhapsody on all hardware sold by Apple at that time (G3 only support)
Aside from the usual arguments about Apple still being a hardware company, you also need to consider this: Apple doesn't support non-G3's for two reasons, to get the damn thing out the door and cost.
If Apple had support for Intel hardware and older Macs, the OS would still cost $1000, maybe more. I'm much happier that they dropped the price to $500 (which means was able to order it for $200 since I'm a student).
BTW, Server should work on any PCI Power Mac and the iMac just fine, as well as G3 laptops. You just can't complain to Apple if something doesn't work.
The story about Apple moving to Intel hardware is bull. Appleinsider went straight to the horses mouth, and Steve Jobs said the story was "total fiction."
And BTW, Intel is no more of an open company than Apple is. Propreitary sockets, anyone?
And don't tell me about carpal tunnel. I'm supposed to agree to a completely uncomfortable design in order to prevent some syndrome that I will probably never get? And if you want to not bend your wrist anymore, you can do that little finger thing you described on any normal mouse.
I would like to respond individually to each comment, but I don't have the patience. Perhaps I did overreact in stating that the terrible mouse was an obstacle to LinuxPPC, but I didn't realize there were such inexpensive Mac-compatible mice. Everything I've ever seen from apple has been in the $70-80 range, so I assumed the replacements would also be ludicrously priced.
As for the comment that "A good application shouldn't need more than one button:" What? Why not? I think the hold-down-the-button-until-a-menu-pops-up feature is crap. Contextual menus are very nice and a right mouse button is much more convenient.
As for the comment that three buttons are not necessary, I agree with you. I just wanted more than one.
And as for the comment that the biggest obstacle to LinuxPPC being people satisfied with their OS and not willing to partition and whatnot: I don't think so. I did a FTP install -- several actually -- of LinuxPPC after doing the partitioning and other such pleasantries, and after about the fourth time (when I finally decided having the compilers might be a good idea), everything worked fine. I don't think the majority of Linux users on Intel computers said to themselves one day, "Boy, I am dissatisfied with my operating system. Let me partition my hard disk and install Linux." They probably either had experience with Linux and wanted it on the computer, or just wanted to learn it. I contend that this would be the same motivation driving a Mac user to install LinuxPPC. Believe me, if I can do it, anybody can do it.
But maybe not over FTP. I got all 322MB in 30 minutes... don't try that at home, kids.
So I guess you can fill in the blank.
The biggest obstacle to LinuxPPC is: __________
I, for one, would like to see performance comparisons of a G3/400/128MB with LinuxPPC and a PII(or III)/400/128MB. THAT, I think, would be as close to a fair fight as we could ever see.
-Begin Evan's Dumb Signature.....
rooooar
-Begin Evan's Dumb Signature.....
rooooar
Sorry, I'm not good with internet acronyms...
Have you tried it? It takes a bit to get used to, but it's a great design. The problem people have is you don't hold it like a normal mouse, in your palm. Instead, you grab it with your fingertips. The reason they did this, and you'll see if you try it, is that you don't bend your wrist anymore to move the mouse around. It's much easier on carpal tunnel.
I wonder how my ADB trackball works on my blue and white G3 400...
Finally! One more way in which Apple can decide what is good for me so that my MacOS-asphyxiated brain can go back to tryting to remember which keys are where on my spiffy transparent keyboard. Seriously, who would ever want to waste a dinky little serial bus which is already being used by the keyboard, mouse, zip drive, scanner, etc. and stream high bandwidth digital audio over it so that you don't have to have a sound card (that is already standard on the motherboard anyway)??? Even if the WAS a good idea, would you really want to be limited to using Apple multimedia speakers with the five cent D/A converter that their outsourced vender found in the back of his warehouse? Not I. Until my stereo equipment comes with a USB bus I'm sticking with plain vanilla analog.
LinuxPPC does have USB support. It already runs on Imacs and beige G3s.
check out :
LinuxPPC Imacs page
Who am I? Subscribe and find out
> ...
... *COUGH*Pentium III*COUGH*
> Another thing that they need is to get rid of
> their arrogant attitude about everything and
> making rediculus/frivilous claims in attempt
> to boost public appearance.
*COUGH*Intel*COUGH*
Give an infinite number of monkeys infinite bandwidth and they'll eventually take themselves seriously and write /
I've know about this stuff for a couple months now... This is the slowest I've seen /. move on a good story like this. And yes, the chips will have awesome SMP capability. The main point of interest is the 128 bit bus between processors. There will be no slowdown between processors. They will be able to talk at real time. This also applies to the cache. Say goodbye to bottle-necks. (Note that this 128 bit bus will also be supported for the main system bus in some systems.)
--
Matthew Walker
My DNA is Y2K compliant
Matthew Walker
http://www.tweeterdiet.com/ - My Diet Tracking Tool
Get a copy of YellowDogLinux. A new kick ass PPC linux distro available at www.yellowdoglinux.com or download it at ftp.yellowdoglinux.com.
Cya
Militant
-- Evan Read
Linux -- "It is computing, Jim, but not as we know it"
"The future comes 60 minutes an hour no matter who you are or what you do." The Screwtape Letters - C.S. Lewis
The first time i hear that was from a column by John C. Dvorak, which means that it isn't true.
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
Steve Jobs and the NeXT Big Thing is an awesome, though out of print tome that will curl your hair.
Steve Jobs is no more your friend than Steve Ballmer.
Apple ][ Forever.
A wacky space shows up in the link.
/ qid%3D924087982/002-8231988-7392046
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0689121350
secrets of the one button mouse ... it's a "time-based" mechanism, not fully implimented but very effective,
1) simple, fewer things to break,
2) reduce UI complications,
3) click and hold the button to get second button function
4) the mouse is just an extension of the keyboard, which has lots of buttons already,
5) extend your keyboard with a new multibutton mouse, how does a four button Kensington sound?
6) multibutton mice came about to assist DOS/UNIX CLI, where a high level GUI like Mac is by design (not omission) served by a single button,
7) ergonomics notwithstanding.
Currently I only know of one multi-button mouse and that's the Kensington Orbit, but there must be others, and anyway the iMac has universal drivers available for it so any multi-button mouse should work.
Committee for Symmetric Distribution of the Future
Electronics Boutique ran a an ad on it.
The ship sank. Get over it. (This sig was cut out from another's shirt and painstakingly hand-posted)
Have a look at these two articles
l
http://www.MacKiDo.com/Press/TheRegister.html
http://www.MacKiDo.com/Hardware/Parallelism.htm
Something should be done to make Apple move from
its position of withholding hardware information
for its current and future machines.
I think his point was that most window managers expect a three-button mouse and have very basic functionalities that depend on this.
:)
With 2 buttons, you can use a chording technique to emulate 3 buttons but with only one, you have to resort to the very unsatisfactory method of combining keystrokes and mouseclicks.
It is stupid of Apple to introduce contextual menus into the OS and stick with a 1-button mouse design.
And I'm not a Mac-basher (although I used to be)...I own 3 Macs. And a Kensington Orbit
--
Posted with Mozilla
Linux has a future on Macs if Apple abandons their policy of not releasing developer info for their hardware. However, for the moment this looks unlikely. Good ol' proprietary Apple, making the world safe for Intel.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" -Salvor Hardin
On the other hand, it ought to be straightforward to make the Linux install immensely easy on an iMac. After all, they are all pretty much identical. There's been a lot of news about making Linux easy for newbies, and it seems like the iMac is a great opportunity.
--Artemisia
The Linux PPC guys figured out how to make Linux run on the beige G3's without any help from Apple, disproving Be's complaint that they need all the developer info in order to develop for a platform. Hey, they got N64 and Playstations running on computers after all.
Of course, it'll slow things down a bunch for Linux development, but either way, Linux will still have a future on the Mac. Besides, Apple just posted a job opening for a "Linux Master" a month ago, didn't they?
I recently installed LinuxPPC, and let me tell you, I'm considering bringing my crappy 486 from home just to run Linux. One mouse button makes running Linux very annoying. There are ways aroung this with aftermarket mice and special commands, I know, but linuxPPC will not take off until these speedy Macs come with a REAL mouse designed for an ADULT HAND and THREE (3) BUTTONS!!!
That said, I can't wait for the Lombards...
-Begin Evan's Dumb Signature.....
rooooar
But they still support ADB. And most people will probably prefer to use the older style mouse and keyboard anyway :)
I'm glad they decided to include a good FPU. The 604 had a nice one, but when the "optimized for the MacOS" the G3 they decided that they would be better off without a fast FPU. Very sad, for a physicist like me. But at last they seem to have turned around and made a chip that is more like the old 604's.