William Swearingen, Director of Strategic Communications at Motorola, told MacCentral that the G4s driving Apple's new G4 mini-tower systems are indeed the long anticipated Apollo processors. Labeled MPC 7455 and MPC 7445, the Apollo G4s achieve all of the goals that Motorola outlined at the 2000 Microprocessor Forum -- namely GHz+ performance, fabrication using SOI (Silicon On Insulator) technology, the ability to have a 2MB DDR (Double Data Rate) L3 cache, and a superior power consumption/performance ratio.
The Apollo has four integer execution units, one double precision FPU, and four 128-bit AltiVec execution units -- again identical to the G4 Apple used in its previous models. The Apollo also sports a 256KB on-chip L2 cache (512 for the 1GHz chip) -- just like the previous G4. The Apollo is also fully symmetric multi-processing capable and compatible with the 133MHz 64-bit MPX bus which previous G4s used.
However, things begin to change with the L2 cache. The Apollo adds cache-locking instructions to allow critical instructions or data to be locked into the cache for a performance benefit. With the L3 cache, the Apollo allows up to 2MB of DDR RAM to be used. DDR RAM allows data to be sent or retrieved on both the upswing and downswing of the clock cycle, essentially doubling the bandwidth over conventional RAM.
The big change with Apollo comes with its manufacturing. The MPC 7455 and 7445 are manufactured using a 0.18-micron copper fabrication process that takes advantage of SOI technology. SOI is the addition of a thin layer of silicon between the transistors on the chip and the non-conductive base or substrate of the chip. This layer reduces the capacitance, or the necessary time and amount of energy, needed to close the gate. The use of SOI on every transistor on a processor allows the processor to run faster, consume less energy and generate less heat.
As noted above, the Apollo is labeled as MPC 7445 and MPC 7455. The 7455 is thus far the only Apollo used by Apple. The 7445 core is essentially identical to the 7455 except that the 7445 is intended for lower power consumption applications and has no connects for an off-chip L3 cache.
While not essential for Apple, low power consumption is important for all of the other manufacturers who use G4s. At 1GHz, the 7455 typically dissipates about 20W of heat. At 600MHz, this drops to around 10W. To compare, a 1GHz AMD Athlon typically dissipates around 50W of heat. Swearingen said that the Apollo's low power consumption and heat dissipation is very helpful for OEMs. "Using SOI, we have created a processor that can sell across a wide range," said Swearingen.
You don't see many cad/cam, animation, or 3d programs coming to Apple.
They are coming...OS X seems to be helping.
There are some good CAD programs for the Mac, and things like form*Z, Lightwave, EIAS. I have a buddy that works for Digital Domain, and they use a lot of Macs for various things... mostly Photoshop, AfterEffects, and Elastic Reality, which is used for a lot of Rotoscoping.
I think as Macs get faster the lure of using a $4,000 G4 as a workstation vs. $10k for an SGI will start looking very appealing! Back at one shop I used to work we had three Indys and an Indigo. The 180 Mhz PowerMac 9500's we had were faster than the Indys!
Now we just have to wait for stuff like SoftImage...
IBM just got lucky to hit it at the exact right moment with enough money to fill the bill. There aren't that many people sitting around going "gee, I'd buy a computer, if somebody other than Apple made Macs."
The reason you see so many Intel based PCs has nothing to do with IBM getting lucky!
If it were not for Compaq reverse engineering the proprietary IBM BIOS, and MS having tricked IBM into letting them have right to sell MS-DOS, then the only "PCs" you would see would be proprietary IBM PCs. It would be like the old days... Tandys... HPs... Apples... Commodores, all totally different and incompatible!
Then you would have to decide what kind of computer you wanted, just like in the 1970s
The only time Apple would have serious worries is if Microsoft sells a copy of windows that will run on a mac.
Since Apple makes most of their money selling hardware, I don't think they would worry if a bunch of Windows users started buying Apple hardware...in fact it would make them a ton of money!
But remember, Mac users buy Macs to run Mac OS. It's not really because of the hardware, even though we like it too.
So, if there are no proprietary parts or software involved, why did all the clone companies give up?
There was proprietary hardware and software back then. Those Mac clones (and I own one, I run LinuxPPC and Mac OS 9.2.2 on it) were based on Apple designed motherboards (or mainboards as Apple calls them). My PowerCenter was based on a PowerMac 7200, but with a 604 CPU on a daughter card. Interestingly, AMD makes a lot of the chips on the MB.
They still needed the Apple ROM back then, and Apple had to approve the design before they could get a license for Mac OS.
Without that license, they couldn't sell the clones as "Mac OS Compatible."
What Apple eventually did was cancel their Mac OS licenses. Motorola is still pissed at Apple!
Those were "Old World" machines. The "New World" machines use "Rom in Ram' by reading a file from the hard drive (as other's have said).
Why deal with Apple? Because dealing with Apple means difficult to use, closed systems.
Not difficult to use at all... give a few examples.
Apple traditionally promotes "simple" over "easy to use". A hammer might be much simpler than a tool box, but it is a lot hearder to use a hammer to turn a bolt.
Macs are known for being easy to use. It must be you!
Until now, "PowerPC" was a dishonest marketing trick: the Mac wasn't a PC, but the PC in the PowerPC chip might have misled some fools into thinking it was.
Well, no. Apple invented the personal computer, also known as the "PC."
IBM coined the phrase "PC" for their first entry into the field to compete with Apple.
Now as far as PowerPC, that's IBM's trademark, not Apple's, since it was their Power CPU to begin with. They went to Apple with the chip.
Bottom line... it doesn't have to be Wintel to be a PC.
On the plus side the PPCs will be able to run Mac OS X (or will they?), but they won't be able to run any flavor of Windows (which I need for games and such).
The Windows NT 4 CD has a PPC version on it... don't know if it would run on one of these MBs though.
Where did you get that idea? The annoying child was talking about SGIs running a stupid demo that came on one of the demo disks.
Maybe, but all the computers you saw in Jurassic Park were Macs. What was running on the monitors is another thing all together, and was probably done in Director, just like the monitors on Enterprise, which are run by 16 G4 Cubes... From MacNN.com
UPN's Enterprise television show
uses G4 Cubes to power the "Bridge" of the ship: "I just read an article that idrivex (an Apple Developer) wrote after visiting the set of the UPN show Enterprise. In it, he reveals that all the displays on Enterprise are run by 16 G4 Cubes."
Uhhh... AOL client software works perfectly fine on classic MacOS (though without IE 5.1 integration), and they've released a decent beta of a version for OS X.
That's another thing... Macs don't age nearly as fast as PCs do...
I'm sorry but that is the biggest MYTH.
One half of Apple's current lineup of computers, the iMac and the iBook (2 computers that I bet make up the bulk of their sales) have NO expansion slots. No PCI slots on the iMac, and no PCMCIA slots on the laptops.
My last Mac was a 1997 PowerComputing - PowerCenter 132, which was a Mac clone. It came with 16 MB, 1 GB, and a 132 MHz 604 PPC. Since then I upgraded it to a 500 MHz G3, 192 MB and a 9 GB SCSI drive. And except for a USB card, I never installed any PCI cards in it.
I'd say that's a pretty good lifespan for a computer, and i think most average users don't add any cards to their computers anyway...
I do have two PCI cards in my G4, a SCSI card and a M-Audio Delta sound card... but most people wouldn't need those. I wanted a Cube, but had to get the G4 tower. If a user knows they will need PCI, then they wont buy an iMac.
My brother has a 266 MHz iMac, and has no need for expansion, since the iMacs have USB already, he has his Zip drive, Epson printer, Umax scanner, floppy drive, etc. all hooked up.
Also it's ATI who writes the drivers for the video cards, not Apple, so they are the ones that are not going to support the older hardware for OS X.
There was even talk at one time of Apple adopting Be, but instead went with this OS-X
Actually they bought NeXT. But you have the right idea. They were thinking of buying Be, but they felt it would need too much work to turn it into Mac OS... Considering they got Steve Jobs as part of the deal, who ousted that clown Gil Amileo, I guess they made the right choice. Be's Gasse was one of the people at Apple that thought Mac OS running on Intel hardware was a bad idea....
I happily upgraded my motherboard/cpu, but kept the rest of my machine. My friend, who uses a mac, lacks this option...
What planet does he live on? My old Mac was a PowerComputing clone. When I bought it ran a 132 MHz PPC 604 processor. It had 16 MB of RAM, a 1 GB hard drive, and 1 MB VRAM on the built in controller.
Since then (1997) I have upgraded the CPU three times, without having to replace the motherboard, and it's currently running a 500 MHz G3 processor, 192 MB Ram, has a 10 GB hard drive, USB card, and an ATI Radion PCI graphics card. This computer is now owned by my 10 year old son;-)
I'm also one of those people who doesn't mind spending a little more for quality. Oh and you can get a 733 MHz G4 for $1700.
Personally I think the argument is like saying "but I can buy three Ford Focuses for the price of that Jaguar"
Well, yeah. But if you can afford it, buy the nice one instead...
But back to Be OS. I used to run Be on my old PowerMac clone. It was a nice OS. Ihave to say that I like OS X a lot better... Be OS used to get cranky sometimes, and there is more software for OS X.
Which G4 do you have? I have a 466 mHz Digital Audio, and the fan is almost as loud as my old PowerComputing clone! I'm thinking of replacing the fan with one of those quiet ones.
Sorry, every time I see "Tesla" I cannot help but think "utter crackpot." He may have done one or two scientifically valid things in his life
Hmmmmm, like alternating current? That IS utter crackpot material! I think you need to read up on his work. He had a lot of interesting things going on... like wireless florescent lights and stuff. I think most of the brilliant minds have been very eccentric, to say the least.
At one point of another probably every great inventor has said something to make them look like a crackpot
On Mac web browsers you only need one hand. If you want the menu to pop up you just click and hold anywhere on the browser... on a link, on the background, etc. and the menu will pop up.
To simulate the second button with a one button mouse you hold down the Control key (which is not used for much on a Mac, the Mac equivalent of the PC control key is the Command [Apple] key).
I do use a multi-button mouse though... a MS IntelliMouse Optical, and on my old Mac I had a cordless three button mouse and a wired 3 button mouse late on.
Steve and Steve wrote the game "Breakout" for Atari.
Also Steve Jobs "wrote" Pong. Back then it was all hard wired logic however.
When Jobs found he was in over his head with Breakout he got Woz involved. The story goes that Woz's circuit was so involved that the Atari guys couldn't understand it and had to reverse engineer it!
I have heard, though, some major horror stories about iMac/iBook/G3/G4 stability with versions of Mac OS prior to 9.1, especially when using USB devices. Luckilly 9.1 and 9.2.1 are a free upgrade to 9.X. 8.6 is the free upgrade to 8.5.X. There is no free upgrade from 8.X to 9.X.:( But that's ok, I can't afford any more expensive ram for my 8600 anyway!
You can install 9.1 on the 8600 off of the CD you got with the iBook... it should work fine.
9.2.1 probably wont run on the 8600 however. We have 9.1 running on an old 7500 at work (updated with a 266 MHz G3 card) but 9.2.1 wont install on it.
If you can't run 9.1 on the 8600, consider running 8.6 (8.6.1), it was much faster and more stable than 8.5.
Slashdot Mirror
At home I have been running OS X since March without a single crash. It's UNIX.
William Swearingen, Director of Strategic Communications at Motorola, told MacCentral that the G4s driving Apple's new G4 mini-tower systems are indeed the long anticipated Apollo processors. Labeled MPC 7455 and MPC 7445, the Apollo G4s achieve all of the goals that Motorola outlined at the 2000 Microprocessor Forum -- namely GHz+ performance, fabrication using SOI (Silicon On Insulator) technology, the ability to have a 2MB DDR (Double Data Rate) L3 cache, and a superior power consumption/performance ratio.
The Apollo has four integer execution units, one double precision FPU, and four 128-bit AltiVec execution units -- again identical to the G4 Apple used in its previous models. The Apollo also sports a 256KB on-chip L2 cache (512 for the 1GHz chip) -- just like the previous G4. The Apollo is also fully symmetric multi-processing capable and compatible with the 133MHz 64-bit MPX bus which previous G4s used.
However, things begin to change with the L2 cache. The Apollo adds cache-locking instructions to allow critical instructions or data to be locked into the cache for a performance benefit. With the L3 cache, the Apollo allows up to 2MB of DDR RAM to be used. DDR RAM allows data to be sent or retrieved on both the upswing and downswing of the clock cycle, essentially doubling the bandwidth over conventional RAM.
The big change with Apollo comes with its manufacturing. The MPC 7455 and 7445 are manufactured using a 0.18-micron copper fabrication process that takes advantage of SOI technology. SOI is the addition of a thin layer of silicon between the transistors on the chip and the non-conductive base or substrate of the chip. This layer reduces the capacitance, or the necessary time and amount of energy, needed to close the gate. The use of SOI on every transistor on a processor allows the processor to run faster, consume less energy and generate less heat.
As noted above, the Apollo is labeled as MPC 7445 and MPC 7455. The 7455 is thus far the only Apollo used by Apple. The 7445 core is essentially identical to the 7455 except that the 7445 is intended for lower power consumption applications and has no connects for an off-chip L3 cache.
While not essential for Apple, low power consumption is important for all of the other manufacturers who use G4s. At 1GHz, the 7455 typically dissipates about 20W of heat. At 600MHz, this drops to around 10W. To compare, a 1GHz AMD Athlon typically dissipates around 50W of heat. Swearingen said that the Apollo's low power consumption and heat dissipation is very helpful for OEMs. "Using SOI, we have created a processor that can sell across a wide range," said Swearingen.
They are coming...OS X seems to be helping.
There are some good CAD programs for the Mac, and things like form*Z, Lightwave, EIAS. I have a buddy that works for Digital Domain, and they use a lot of Macs for various things... mostly Photoshop, AfterEffects, and Elastic Reality, which is used for a lot of Rotoscoping.
I think as Macs get faster the lure of using a $4,000 G4 as a workstation vs. $10k for an SGI will start looking very appealing! Back at one shop I used to work we had three Indys and an Indigo. The 180 Mhz PowerMac 9500's we had were faster than the Indys!
Now we just have to wait for stuff like SoftImage...
The reason you see so many Intel based PCs has nothing to do with IBM getting lucky!
If it were not for Compaq reverse engineering the proprietary IBM BIOS, and MS having tricked IBM into letting them have right to sell MS-DOS, then the only "PCs" you would see would be proprietary IBM PCs. It would be like the old days... Tandys... HPs... Apples... Commodores, all totally different and incompatible!
Then you would have to decide what kind of computer you wanted, just like in the 1970s
IBM never allowed cones! IBM was proprietary!
Since Apple makes most of their money selling hardware, I don't think they would worry if a bunch of Windows users started buying Apple hardware...in fact it would make them a ton of money!
But remember, Mac users buy Macs to run Mac OS. It's not really because of the hardware, even though we like it too.
There was proprietary hardware and software back then. Those Mac clones (and I own one, I run LinuxPPC and Mac OS 9.2.2 on it) were based on Apple designed motherboards (or mainboards as Apple calls them). My PowerCenter was based on a PowerMac 7200, but with a 604 CPU on a daughter card. Interestingly, AMD makes a lot of the chips on the MB.
They still needed the Apple ROM back then, and Apple had to approve the design before they could get a license for Mac OS.
Without that license, they couldn't sell the clones as "Mac OS Compatible."
What Apple eventually did was cancel their Mac OS licenses. Motorola is still pissed at Apple!
Those were "Old World" machines. The "New World" machines use "Rom in Ram' by reading a file from the hard drive (as other's have said).
Why deal with Apple? Because dealing with Apple means difficult to use, closed systems.
Not difficult to use at all... give a few examples.
Apple traditionally promotes "simple" over "easy to use". A hammer might be much simpler than a tool box, but it is a lot hearder to use a hammer to turn a bolt.
Macs are known for being easy to use. It must be you!
Until now, "PowerPC" was a dishonest marketing trick: the Mac wasn't a PC, but the PC in the PowerPC chip might have misled some fools into thinking it was.
Well, no. Apple invented the personal computer, also known as the "PC."
IBM coined the phrase "PC" for their first entry into the field to compete with Apple.
Now as far as PowerPC, that's IBM's trademark, not Apple's, since it was their Power CPU to begin with. They went to Apple with the chip.
Bottom line... it doesn't have to be Wintel to be a PC.
The Windows NT 4 CD has a PPC version on it... don't know if it would run on one of these MBs though.
OS X might run, if you hack the kernel.
Maybe, but all the computers you saw in Jurassic Park were Macs. What was running on the monitors is another thing all together, and was probably done in Director, just like the monitors on Enterprise, which are run by 16 G4 Cubes... From MacNN.com
UPN's Enterprise television show uses G4 Cubes to power the "Bridge" of the ship: "I just read an article that idrivex (an Apple Developer) wrote after visiting the set of the UPN show Enterprise. In it, he reveals that all the displays on Enterprise are run by 16 G4 Cubes."
The 22" Apple Cinema Display is $2494, and right now Apple has a $100 rebate offer.
$700 for a 19" CRT? You can get a 17" LCD for about that much! Almost the same viewing area too!
My 19" monitor was about $300.
Uhhh... AOL client software works perfectly fine on classic MacOS (though without IE 5.1 integration), and they've released a decent beta of a version for OS X.
The OS X version is final now...
I'm sorry but that is the biggest MYTH.
One half of Apple's current lineup of computers, the iMac and the iBook (2 computers that I bet make up the bulk of their sales) have NO expansion slots. No PCI slots on the iMac, and no PCMCIA slots on the laptops.
My last Mac was a 1997 PowerComputing - PowerCenter 132, which was a Mac clone. It came with 16 MB, 1 GB, and a 132 MHz 604 PPC. Since then I upgraded it to a 500 MHz G3, 192 MB and a 9 GB SCSI drive. And except for a USB card, I never installed any PCI cards in it.
I'd say that's a pretty good lifespan for a computer, and i think most average users don't add any cards to their computers anyway...
I do have two PCI cards in my G4, a SCSI card and a M-Audio Delta sound card ... but most people wouldn't need those. I wanted a Cube, but had to get the G4 tower. If a user knows they will need PCI, then they wont buy an iMac.
My brother has a 266 MHz iMac, and has no need for expansion, since the iMacs have USB already, he has his Zip drive, Epson printer, Umax scanner, floppy drive, etc. all hooked up.
Also it's ATI who writes the drivers for the video cards, not Apple, so they are the ones that are not going to support the older hardware for OS X.
Actually they bought NeXT. But you have the right idea. They were thinking of buying Be, but they felt it would need too much work to turn it into Mac OS... Considering they got Steve Jobs as part of the deal, who ousted that clown Gil Amileo, I guess they made the right choice. Be's Gasse was one of the people at Apple that thought Mac OS running on Intel hardware was a bad idea....
What planet does he live on? My old Mac was a PowerComputing clone. When I bought it ran a 132 MHz PPC 604 processor. It had 16 MB of RAM, a 1 GB hard drive, and 1 MB VRAM on the built in controller.
Since then (1997) I have upgraded the CPU three times, without having to replace the motherboard, and it's currently running a 500 MHz G3 processor, 192 MB Ram, has a 10 GB hard drive, USB card, and an ATI Radion PCI graphics card. This computer is now owned by my 10 year old son ;-)
Sounds like I replaced parts to me...
Personally I think the argument is like saying "but I can buy three Ford Focuses for the price of that Jaguar"
Well, yeah. But if you can afford it, buy the nice one instead...
But back to Be OS. I used to run Be on my old PowerMac clone. It was a nice OS. Ihave to say that I like OS X a lot better... Be OS used to get cranky sometimes, and there is more software for OS X.
I would just pick up a G4 Cube and save myself all that trouble... ;-)
Hmmmmm, like alternating current? That IS utter crackpot material! I think you need to read up on his work. He had a lot of interesting things going on ... like wireless florescent lights and stuff. I think most of the brilliant minds have been very eccentric, to say the least.
At one point of another probably every great inventor has said something to make them look like a crackpot
No, it would be "Fascist"
Hey, the freak that started NeXT started Apple!
Maybe the new NeXT Cube didn't survive (G4 Cube) but NeXTSTEP is alive and kicking with a pretty blue GUI ;-)
(running OS X)
Not optional...it's standard. The option was getting a second adapter
On Mac web browsers you only need one hand. If you want the menu to pop up you just click and hold anywhere on the browser... on a link, on the background, etc. and the menu will pop up.
To simulate the second button with a one button mouse you hold down the Control key (which is not used for much on a Mac, the Mac equivalent of the PC control key is the Command [Apple] key).
I do use a multi-button mouse though... a MS IntelliMouse Optical, and on my old Mac I had a cordless three button mouse and a wired 3 button mouse late on.
Also Steve Jobs "wrote" Pong. Back then it was all hard wired logic however.
When Jobs found he was in over his head with Breakout he got Woz involved. The story goes that Woz's circuit was so involved that the Atari guys couldn't understand it and had to reverse engineer it!
You can install 9.1 on the 8600 off of the CD you got with the iBook... it should work fine.
9.2.1 probably wont run on the 8600 however. We have 9.1 running on an old 7500 at work (updated with a 266 MHz G3 card) but 9.2.1 wont install on it.
If you can't run 9.1 on the 8600, consider running 8.6 (8.6.1), it was much faster and more stable than 8.5.