It's apparently to be based on the same IBN PPC970 processors as the Xbox 360, as well as a custom graphics chip from ATI. First.. Xbox 360 is most certainly not based on PowerPC 970 Second.. There's been absolutely no credible rumors about the specifications of Broadway (Revolution's processor) Third.. Of all the Power PC-processors out there, 970 is one of the least suitable for a game console.
To some degree, what employers want is a trained workforce (as opposed to an educated one), and in that case it makes lots of sense to train them with the exact same tools they will be expected to use in employment. Which means Windows, MS Office, etc.
I was taught DOS when I was in elementary school. When I graduated and got a job, what use did I have for my knowledge in DOS?
This argument you have is absolutely moot since the landscape of operating systems are changeing so fast.
I really hope that they don't release Tiger early since an unstable, unfinished product isn't good in any one's book. Apple have a history of updating their operating systems every other month with a point release for stability, small new features and such and it would be nice to actually have a finished operating system from day one for once.
I LOVE Panther and I am in no need for upgrading, so my message to Apple is: DON*T RUSH IT! There's really no need. Wait a month or two and get it right!
I would hate it if they released 10.4.1 in May and 10.4.2 in time for WWDC in late June. If they did that (and they will, mark my words) they obviously did a rush job and that'd really suck.
Why not release a time bombed public beta if they desperately need a larger beta test group?
What? IBM already uses POWER in it's high-end server products. What do you think they develop it for, anyway?
No they don't! the pSeries and iSeries isn't considered "high end" by IBM, they are considred low end and midrange servers. The high end is the zSeries and they doesn't use POWER/PowerPC processors just yes. Word has it that the future POWER6 processor will converge the three server lines on one processor platform. The eClipz project is tied very closely to this. "e" as in eServer, "l" as in Linux, "i" as in iSeries, "p" as in pSeries and "z" as in zSeries will.. eclips the Sun.
In essence Cell is just that, but it doesn't stay there. Cell technology can distribute it's load to other Cell processosrs nearby. It's built from the ground up to use grid technology transparently. Quite revolutionairy.
I think IBM, Toshiba and Sony eventually will license and sell Cell technology to those who are interessted. One of the core ideas is that they want to spead this technology as far at they can since every Cell based machine tap on the computational power from all other Cell based appliances in its vicinity. The more the merrier!
Cell isn't one processor, it's a class of processors. The one that will go into the workstation is more powerful than one that will fit into a PDA, or a HDTV. I think that IBM will make one workstation, and Sony will make another. They will use different boxes and logos but they probably will use a common "Cell based" lable yet unseen, just like "Intel Inside".
All POWER-processors have been fully compliant (32 and 64 bit) PowerPCs since POWER3, and before that the RS64-procesosrs were too fully PowerPC compliant. So.. you are wrong in saying that most POWER-processors isn't PowerPCs since they have been since 1999, and they have been even more PowerPCs than "clean" PowerPCs since they until the 970 didn't have the full 64 bit ISA.
The ISSCC papers state that Cell is Power based, not POWER based. There's a significant difference here since IBM in its marketing use the "Power" moniker to encompass both PowerPC and POWER processors. If you have seen different papers than I have, please provide me with an URL of PDF that proves me wrong. This is important stuff:)
In all fairness, we really don't know from what processors the CPU in Xbox2 nor Cell will be derived from, but the most reliable information we have says that the Xbox2-CPU will we quite similar to PowerPC 970, but with three cores. As such it is indeed a PowerPC processor but it is also POWER4 derived. Cell on the other hand is stated to have a 64 bit Power core, and that's quite different from saying that it's POWER4 derived. IBM uses the term "Power" for both PowerPC- and POWER-processors, so it very well could be, and probably is, PowerPC-based and not POWER-based.
The core in Cell is probably an highly evolved PowerPC 440 based core since that is a quite proven, capable, lean and have a very modular design. I think it would be unwise to build Cell around a massively complex design like POWER4. It would suffer immensely from compelxity, power consumption and its monolithic design.
PS3 will be Cell based, not POWER based. I assume that Cell will in some manner be based around POWER/PowerPC cores but in essance it'll be a new architechture. And.. this is an uncofirmed fact.
POWER and PowerPC is essentially the same. IBM is marketing them both under the same brand, Power. The difference between POWER and PowerPC is very small, quite comparable to Athlon and Pentium. The majority of code is binary compatible but some instructions must be adapted for the each platform for optimal performance.
Just like it's a piece of cake porting Windows games to Linux on the x86?Precisely! Nintendo Game Cube runs a 485 MHz G3-processor and an ATI-based GPU. If it was no big deal porting games to similar hardware, there would be droves of GC games for Mac.. but there are hardly none.
This isn't a hardware issue, it's clearly software. APIs, operating systems and developer tools.
Opterons and PowerPC together
on
Cray XT-3 Ships
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It seems that the XT-3 not only use Opteron processors but they also use PowerPC 440 co-processors from IBM to off load inter-processor communication from the main computing CPUs. Quite an interessting set up.
The XT-3's biggest comptetitor in this segment must be the BlueGene/L type super computer made by IBM. The processors in Blue Gene/L is a custom built dual core version of the PowerPC 440 with built in high speed interconnects.
Just like IBM have a finger in all the future game consoles, they seem to have a finger in several of the next generation super computers also. Nice going IBM.
The peak of VTs System X cluster was about 17 Tflops, and the sustained rate was just over 10 (which rendered it the third place on the Top500 list). This peak/sustained ratio is significantly less that Earth Simulator's 90% efficiency, but compared to the cost it's extremely cost effective. ES cost 100 times more but have just 3 times higher sustained rate.
POWER IS PowerPC. Ever since POWER3 the POWER-processors have hade the complete 32- and 64-bit PowerPC ISAs. there would only be the matter of drivers that would keep OSX from running on any PowerPC hadware, including POWER-based servers.
I mean, we don't really support 8-bit today and I'm not really sure if we even have support for 16-bit software in todays CPU's. So when are we going to rid our selves of the legacy throw backs?
CPUs will never lose its 32 bit support because 64 bits are bad for a application if it isn't necessairy. The binaries get larger, the pointers get larger and the application won't run faster.
A good operating system, and a good processor will allow for a mix of 32 bit and 64 bit applications. Use the technoogy we're it's needed.
All 64-bit PowerPCs are 32/64 bit processors running both with no performance penalty. Same goes with Sparc and 64 bit x86 processors. It's _not_ the same with Itanium though, as 32 bit applications will take a considerable performance hit running on Itanium.
I can't say how other 64 bit platforms behave (Alpha, MIPS, PA-RISC) but I would guess that they behave like good 32 bit processors if needed.
Really when you think about it, Biometrics basically halts any kind of Social Engineering. You can't get around them without chopping off someone's hand and plucking out their eyes
If there's a machine capable of identifying fingerprints, hand prints, face lay out or retina patterns there sure are one that can record and duplicate the same. Social engineering the new way will sure involve scanning of fingers, hands, retinas and so forth.. "Hi there Sir, how are you doing? (voice). Can you take (fingerpints, hand patterns, DNA) my picture? (face, retina)"
They do maintain indexes fot Spotlight serach and in file content search.
It will drag the system somewhat since this file will be wquite large and there wll be frequent read/writes to it, but the OS seems to do this quite transparently and I havn't noticed any noticable drag. OSX does multitask quite good and my computer mainly sits idle anyway.
Spotlight is an API that developeras can use istead of building theri own search tool. Old apps will not automagically benefit from Spotlight.
Mor info on spotlight: http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/spot lighttech.ht ml
You can upgrade from any previous OSX version. The system requrements will probably be the same as Pather, but the Tiger beta has some limitation, like a DVD drive (it will install from an image) and FireWire (probably due to the new migration tool), but it installs just fine on every machine that Panther supported. Some feature will require special hardware, stuff like CoreImage and CoreVideo.
Since Apple continues to opmitize and hone the operating system I would guess that Tiger will be quicker that previous versions och the same hardware. I've noticed significant speed ups on a PowerBook G4/400 compared to the previous Panther install. This is consistent with the history as Jaguar was quicker than Puma (10.1) that was quicker than Cheetah (10.0).
Slashdot Mirror
So.. Is there really any doubt whether Apple will use EFI in their machines? Seriously.. they can't use BIOS now!
They could be using QuickTime 7 Pro since it can be used to encode 5.1 AAC. However.. they could also be using something else.
Max OS X have had GPU supportet transparency since Panther, through Quartz Extreme. Prevoiusly, it was all done on the CPU.
Xserve RAID uses an Intel Xscale chip for the controller.
No they don't. They are using Intel's IOP331 running at 800 MHz which is ARM based but certainly not an Xscale processor.
It's apparently to be based on the same IBN PPC970 processors as the Xbox 360, as well as a custom graphics chip from ATI.
First.. Xbox 360 is most certainly not based on PowerPC 970
Second.. There's been absolutely no credible rumors about the specifications of Broadway (Revolution's processor)
Third.. Of all the Power PC-processors out there, 970 is one of the least suitable for a game console.
To some degree, what employers want is a trained workforce (as opposed to an educated one), and in that case it makes lots of sense to train them with the exact same tools they will be expected to use in employment. Which means Windows, MS Office, etc.
I was taught DOS when I was in elementary school. When I graduated and got a job, what use did I have for my knowledge in DOS?
This argument you have is absolutely moot since the landscape of operating systems are changeing so fast.
You just forgot the largest prist/press media company: Quark.
However... they won't stay at no.1 for long.
I really hope that they don't release Tiger early since an unstable, unfinished product isn't good in any one's book. Apple have a history of updating their operating systems every other month with a point release for stability, small new features and such and it would be nice to actually have a finished operating system from day one for once.
I LOVE Panther and I am in no need for upgrading, so my message to Apple is: DON*T RUSH IT! There's really no need. Wait a month or two and get it right!
I would hate it if they released 10.4.1 in May and 10.4.2 in time for WWDC in late June. If they did that (and they will, mark my words) they obviously did a rush job and that'd really suck.
Why not release a time bombed public beta if they desperately need a larger beta test group?
What? IBM already uses POWER in it's high-end server products. What do you think they develop it for, anyway?
No they don't!
the pSeries and iSeries isn't considered "high end" by IBM, they are considred low end and midrange servers. The high end is the zSeries and they doesn't use POWER/PowerPC processors just yes. Word has it that the future POWER6 processor will converge the three server lines on one processor platform. The eClipz project is tied very closely to this. "e" as in eServer, "l" as in Linux, "i" as in iSeries, "p" as in pSeries and "z" as in zSeries will.. eclips the Sun.
Name one good novel that was written by committee.
The Bible?
Quite a best seller last I heard.
Put GIMP in a separate virtual desktop and use a grey wallpaper.
In essence Cell is just that, but it doesn't stay there. Cell technology can distribute it's load to other Cell processosrs nearby. It's built from the ground up to use grid technology transparently. Quite revolutionairy.
I think IBM, Toshiba and Sony eventually will license and sell Cell technology to those who are interessted. One of the core ideas is that they want to spead this technology as far at they can since every Cell based machine tap on the computational power from all other Cell based appliances in its vicinity. The more the merrier!
Cell isn't one processor, it's a class of processors. The one that will go into the workstation is more powerful than one that will fit into a PDA, or a HDTV. I think that IBM will make one workstation, and Sony will make another. They will use different boxes and logos but they probably will use a common "Cell based" lable yet unseen, just like "Intel Inside".
All POWER-processors have been fully compliant (32 and 64 bit) PowerPCs since POWER3, and before that the RS64-procesosrs were too fully PowerPC compliant. So.. you are wrong in saying that most POWER-processors isn't PowerPCs since they have been since 1999, and they have been even more PowerPCs than "clean" PowerPCs since they until the 970 didn't have the full 64 bit ISA.
:)
The ISSCC papers state that Cell is Power based, not POWER based. There's a significant difference here since IBM in its marketing use the "Power" moniker to encompass both PowerPC and POWER processors. If you have seen different papers than I have, please provide me with an URL of PDF that proves me wrong. This is important stuff
In all fairness, we really don't know from what processors the CPU in Xbox2 nor Cell will be derived from, but the most reliable information we have says that the Xbox2-CPU will we quite similar to PowerPC 970, but with three cores. As such it is indeed a PowerPC processor but it is also POWER4 derived. Cell on the other hand is stated to have a 64 bit Power core, and that's quite different from saying that it's POWER4 derived. IBM uses the term "Power" for both PowerPC- and POWER-processors, so it very well could be, and probably is, PowerPC-based and not POWER-based.
The core in Cell is probably an highly evolved PowerPC 440 based core since that is a quite proven, capable, lean and have a very modular design. I think it would be unwise to build Cell around a massively complex design like POWER4. It would suffer immensely from compelxity, power consumption and its monolithic design.
PS3 will be Cell based, not POWER based. I assume that Cell will in some manner be based around POWER/PowerPC cores but in essance it'll be a new architechture. And.. this is an uncofirmed fact.
POWER and PowerPC is essentially the same. IBM is marketing them both under the same brand, Power. The difference between POWER and PowerPC is very small, quite comparable to Athlon and Pentium. The majority of code is binary compatible but some instructions must be adapted for the each platform for optimal performance.
Just like it's a piece of cake porting Windows games to Linux on the x86?Precisely! Nintendo Game Cube runs a 485 MHz G3-processor and an ATI-based GPU. If it was no big deal porting games to similar hardware, there would be droves of GC games for Mac.. but there are hardly none.
This isn't a hardware issue, it's clearly software. APIs, operating systems and developer tools.
It seems that the XT-3 not only use Opteron processors but they also use PowerPC 440 co-processors from IBM to off load inter-processor communication from the main computing CPUs. Quite an interessting set up.
The XT-3's biggest comptetitor in this segment must be the BlueGene/L type super computer made by IBM. The processors in Blue Gene/L is a custom built dual core version of the PowerPC 440 with built in high speed interconnects.
Just like IBM have a finger in all the future game consoles, they seem to have a finger in several of the next generation super computers also. Nice going IBM.
The peak of VTs System X cluster was about 17 Tflops, and the sustained rate was just over 10 (which rendered it the third place on the Top500 list). This peak/sustained ratio is significantly less that Earth Simulator's 90% efficiency, but compared to the cost it's extremely cost effective. ES cost 100 times more but have just 3 times higher sustained rate.
POWER IS PowerPC. Ever since POWER3 the POWER-processors have hade the complete 32- and 64-bit PowerPC ISAs. there would only be the matter of drivers that would keep OSX from running on any PowerPC hadware, including POWER-based servers.
I mean, we don't really support 8-bit today and I'm not really sure if we even have support for 16-bit software in todays CPU's. So when are we going to rid our selves of the legacy throw backs?
CPUs will never lose its 32 bit support because 64 bits are bad for a application if it isn't necessairy. The binaries get larger, the pointers get larger and the application won't run faster.
A good operating system, and a good processor will allow for a mix of 32 bit and 64 bit applications. Use the technoogy we're it's needed.
All 64-bit PowerPCs are 32/64 bit processors running both with no performance penalty.
Same goes with Sparc and 64 bit x86 processors.
It's _not_ the same with Itanium though, as 32 bit applications will take a considerable performance hit running on Itanium.
I can't say how other 64 bit platforms behave (Alpha, MIPS, PA-RISC) but I would guess that they behave like good 32 bit processors if needed.
Mac OS X's X Server is still based on XFree86.. That might change with Tiger though.
Really when you think about it, Biometrics basically halts any kind of Social Engineering. You can't get around them without chopping off someone's hand and plucking out their eyes
If there's a machine capable of identifying fingerprints, hand prints, face lay out or retina patterns there sure are one that can record and duplicate the same. Social engineering the new way will sure involve scanning of fingers, hands, retinas and so forth..
"Hi there Sir, how are you doing? (voice). Can you take (fingerpints, hand patterns, DNA) my picture? (face, retina)"
They do maintain indexes fot Spotlight serach and in file content search.
t lighttech.ht ml
It will drag the system somewhat since this file will be wquite large and there wll be frequent read/writes to it, but the OS seems to do this quite transparently and I havn't noticed any noticable drag. OSX does multitask quite good and my computer mainly sits idle anyway.
Spotlight is an API that developeras can use istead of building theri own search tool. Old apps will not automagically benefit from Spotlight.
Mor info on spotlight:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/spo
You can upgrade from any previous OSX version. The system requrements will probably be the same as Pather, but the Tiger beta has some limitation, like a DVD drive (it will install from an image) and FireWire (probably due to the new migration tool), but it installs just fine on every machine that Panther supported. Some feature will require special hardware, stuff like CoreImage and CoreVideo.
Since Apple continues to opmitize and hone the operating system I would guess that Tiger will be quicker that previous versions och the same hardware. I've noticed significant speed ups on a PowerBook G4/400 compared to the previous Panther install. This is consistent with the history as Jaguar was quicker than Puma (10.1) that was quicker than Cheetah (10.0).