Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Hi,
I work in IT for a large corporation and IBM gave us a presentation about the future of their pSeries and other systems today. Part of the presentation was about the Power processors. They talked about the Power 4, 4+, 5 and 5+. They also briefly discussed the blade servers running what they had listed as the Power 970. They mentioned the Vector unit but said it would not be used in their blade servers, it was for something else. I later asked the rep if the 970 was going to be sold to Apple and he said yes. He was sure of this, and seemed surprised that I knew anything about it. He said they (Apple) have them in their labs now, and that they plan to release them. He said the Vector unit (altivec) was for Apple and that IBM has been told to caution their customers that they have no plans to implement it in their Linux or AIX versions of the blade servers. I told him I heard that Linux may support it in the future, but he wasn't sure about that. He said the Blades would be available Q3 but didn't know when Apple would release them. I later asked if the Blades would be out before Macs and he didn't know. So it's possible we could see a 970 Mac at least as soon as the Blades come out, which would fit in with the timelines we've been hearing elsewhere.
Another interesting thing he talked about was the work they were doing on the Playstation 3. He said it was going to be a dual core chip, but one core would be for graphics. He also said they were implementing something with a company called (or a technology called) Blossom that was a grid computing system for the PS3. It had something to do with multiplayer gaming, but allowed the processing power to be shared, at least part of it, on the grid. Then I remembered Apple's XGrid trademark. I would say it's a safe bet that Apple intends to incorporate that sort of technology into future XServes.
They also listed the speed on the Blades as 1.7Ghz+. I suspect that was for marketing though, as the fastest Power 4+ they had on the roadmap for this year was 1.7GHz. So they probably will have 1.8's as reported elsewhere but didn't want to make it in any way seem faster than the POWER based boxes. They also listed a Blade+ but he never showed that slide and like an idiot I forgot to ask him. Although I'm sure it would be just info about the 980 and other things we've already heard.
Anyhow, I hope that's helpful. I'd consider this to be absolute confirmation that the 970 is going to be in Macs soon. The question now is when.
Cheers,
John
[2634 byte] By [
johnpg] at [2007-11-15 7:18:22]

# 1 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
That's pretty interesting.
I've heard that 2.5Ghz was the top, but 1.7 seems reasonable for actual retail production. 2.5 is the number for future implementation I'm asserting.
It will be great to see the IBM chip back at Apple. I was one of the proud owners of a G3/350 IBM Chip in a B/W tower, that thing is a work horse and still goes head to head with my Dual G4/867 everyonce in a while; somethings I can't tell the difference in everyday use between the two.
IBM has the better mind for Chip making in personal/server computers. Where as my thoughts are that Moto perfers the embedded/portable chip markets.
Your statement seems highly likely because what I see usually happening with rumors is that a guy will predict 1Ghz, and then the chip actually ship @ 933Mhz. I've seen that happen about 3 times now which leads me to believe that the manufacturer's max clock estimate is different from Apple's standards.
Did they say anything about a 9800 PowerPC Power5? There has been some buzz about this, and if they didn't talk about it at the presentation, it's likely it's non-existant: for now.
addition>>
======
I had an IBM rep come from the (northern U.S.) to our college in Kansas and I talked to him for about half an hour about their processors centering the conversation around the 970, and the Power4. What he said is that it did have some Apple-specific features in it and that it was highly likely that Apple was going to pursue it as it's main high-end chip. That was in the Fall of 2002. So with your statement, it looks like things are look'n up.
-walloo.
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</p>
# 2 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Another piece of the puzzle...
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" />
# 3 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I keep looking a the needle on my BS meter to see if it's going up but so far it hasn't.
Scott at 2007-11-17 10:10:39 >

# 4 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Well I like the promise of the Xgrid stuff.
I'm inclined to believe that this is definitely plausible. After all I though Workerbee was wrong and we know how that turned out. ;)
# 5 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
There was no mention of a Power 9800. I'm not sure what that is, is it the 980? There was a Blade+ section that he never went too. I was the only one who seemed at all interested in the Blades, everyone else wanted to hear about the big iron. Anyhow, I guess I was so damn happy that he confirmed the Apple rumors that I forgot to ask about the Blade+ or any future revisions. The PS3 thing threw me for a loop too. He brought that up to us on his own, I didn't ask about it or anything. Interesting stuff.
Cheers,
John
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: johnpg ]</p>
johnpg at 2007-11-17 10:12:43 >

# 6 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Then he got him drunk and he spilled the beans...
:D
Bodhi at 2007-11-17 10:13:41 >

# 7 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
(I recant the whole "one-liners" statement, as they provide for humor--on occasion.)
==the message for everyone
I think I'm going to dump the idea of the 9800. I am aware of the 980, but that seems some what far down the road in the Apple timeline. (as well as the theoretical 9800 was I'm sure, heh)
So IBM and Sony will be working together on the PS3, I haven't even looked at this. It makes a huge amount of sense. IBM does RISC processors. Sony uses RISC processors. Man, I can't even imagine using one of those proc. in a 'wrig dedicated with hardware and software only dedicated to gaming.
The PS2 is awesome, but the PS3 will be huge. UT2003 or UT3 -like. Did he/she say anything more on the PS3?
whoa,
-walloo
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</p>
# 8 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I'm not trying to "me too!" here, (really) but in case I haven't been clear in the past, I have similar confirmation straight from IBM employees.
I guess that's part of why I'm so baffled every time people say, "You know, we still don't even know if Apple will use the 970."
Believe it people. Tis good news. :D
# 9 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
The only thing that doesn't smell right is the idea that the 970s in the blade servers won't be using Altivec. That doesn't make any sense.
# 10 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
If Apple can piggy back the Sony PS 3 in any way and there are an exchange of 'minds' 'tween Sony/Apple...then it will have serious implications for us transcending the minority tag.
I'll watching the whisper traces of Sony/Apple co-operation with great interest...
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
# 11 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>The only thing that doesn't smell right is the idea that the 970s in the blade servers won't be using Altivec. That doesn't make any sense.</strong><hr></blockquote>Well Linux and AIX don't support Altivec, so I think that's what they mean. They don't want their customers to think it's going to make their software faster just because it has a vector unit. I think that there is support in gcc for Altivec though, so it's possible that Linux on the 970 might have some support for it. But he didn't know anything about that.
As for Apple and Sony, he did NOT suggest that Apple and Sony were in any way connected. I'm not saying it isn't true, but there was no suggestion of Sony and Apple working together on the PS3, 970 or anything else with IBM.
John
johnpg at 2007-11-17 10:18:49 >

# 12 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>
I'll watching the whisper traces of Sony/Apple co-operation with great interest...</strong><hr></blockquote>
You mean
<a href="http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=258_0_2_0_C" target="_blank">like this</a>? It's been out for a while but it's an interview with Nobuyuki Idei, Chairman and CEO of Sony, about meeting with Steve Jobs:
[quote] Idei: We actually met several times with Steve last year, in January, March, and June to try to work out a mutual strategy. But you know Steve, he has his own agenda. [Laughs.] Although he is a genius, he doesn't share everything with you. This is a difficult person to work with if you are a big company. We started working with them, but it is a nightmare. We have the exact type of guy like Steve within Sony. His name is Ken Kutaragi. They respect each other. So maybe if we can get them both together then they could figure out how the PlayStation and the Mac can work together. <hr></blockquote>
Ken Kutagari of course being the head of Sony Computer Entertainment.
# 13 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>The only thing that doesn't smell right is the idea that the 970s in the blade servers won't be using Altivec. That doesn't make any sense.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am just guessing but maybe because Apple had a hand in making the technology that they get the rights to use it? Seems like a logical reason but I am not to sure myself.
Jared at 2007-11-17 10:20:46 >

# 14 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
It's more likely that AIX is not AltiVec-enhanced, and IBM doesn't see the point in adding AltiVec enhancements (or they don't have them anywhere near done).
I know that some Linux distros (Yellow Dog comes to mind for some reason) are in fact rolling in AltiVec optimizations. I don't know whether to count the distro(s) that IBM is adopting.
Amorph at 2007-11-17 10:21:52 >

# 15 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
This sounds like pretty good news! The G4 is getting old. I wonder what the marketing of this chip will be. G5?
DGMVW at 2007-11-17 10:22:44 >

# 16 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I'd be really surprised if Linux doesn't support Altivec on the 970 since an IBM Linux engineer is doing some of the code. Remeber this <a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-08/msg01480.html" target="_blank">link</a> from last summer and the excitement it raised. I can understand no AIX support, but the Linux support should be there. Also Red Hat and Moto had an annoucement pledging Altivec support in Linux in March of 2002 <a href="http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/press/2002/press_motorola/" target="_blank">Red Hat Link</a>
# 17 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>The only thing that doesn't smell right is the idea that the 970s in the blade servers won't be using Altivec. That doesn't make any sense.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Think about it though. What does a blade server really need vector processing for? I think it's more for the graphically challenged desktop/workstation user.
# 18 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
In regards to IBM and Linux, I think IBM is heavily involved in "Redhat", but I'm not sure if there are any Altivec optimizations in that version. Anyone know?
# 19 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>If Apple can piggy back the Sony PS 3 in any way and there are an exchange of 'minds' 'tween Sony/Apple...then it will have serious implications for us transcending the minority tag.
I'll watching the whisper traces of Sony/Apple co-operation with great interest...
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
who said they were cooperating?
Sounds like what this guy got from ibm guy is real but frankly i could have made this up and no ones bs meter would go up.
Anyway 1.8 for top speed powermac with the bus speed and other specs we're hereig about is still very damn impressive.
# 20 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by MacJedai:
<strong>In regards to IBM and Linux, I think IBM is heavily involved in "Redhat", but I'm not sure if there are any Altivec optimizations in that version. Anyone know?</strong><hr></blockquote>
This came out about a <a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0203/11.redhat.php" target="_blank">year ago</a>. Note that Red Hat has <a href="http://sources.redhat.com/binutils/docs-2.12/as.info/PowerPC-Opts.html" target="_blank">supported Altivec</a> for quite some time.
# 21 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by willywalloo:
<strong>That's pretty interesting.
I've heard that 2.5Ghz was the top, but 1.7 seems reasonable for actual retail production. 2.5 is the number for future implementation I'm asserting.
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
2.5ghz is the top end for the .9nm version of the 970. The version or run we get first will only go to 1.8ghz like mentioned when the 970 was first announced to the public.
KidRed at 2007-11-17 10:28:59 >

# 22 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Rhumgod:
<strong>
This came out about a <a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0203/11.redhat.php" target="_blank">year ago</a>. Note that Red Hat has <a href="http://sources.redhat.com/binutils/docs-2.12/as.info/PowerPC-Opts.html" target="_blank">supported Altivec</a> for quite some time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks Rhumgod. I'm not too informed about Linux . . . Guess I will be more informed soon though.
Thanks Again
# 23 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]2.5ghz is the top end for the .9nm version of the 970. The version or run we get first will only go to 1.8ghz like mentioned when the 970 was first announced to the public.<hr></blockquote>
Actually, it was confirmed today that the 2.3 GHz and 2.5 Ghz are .13 not .009, but that they won't be ready to go initially. The 1.8 GHz 970 is going to be the 'prime time' top of the line chip.
# 24 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by johnpg:
<strong>Well Linux and AIX don't support Altivec, so I think that's what they mean. They don't want their customers to think it's going to make their software faster just because it has a vector unit. I think that there is support in gcc for Altivec though, so it's possible that Linux on the 970 might have some support for it. But he didn't know anything about that.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
As someone who ports Linux to various PowerPC processors for a living, I can assure you that Linux supports Altivec (at least, for the Motorola 74xx series, if not the IBM). However, for the kernel (which Linux is), this merely means storing the altivec related registers on context switches if necessary.
The GNU toolsuite (gcc, glibc, etc) also support Altivec. What the whole GNU/Linux package doesn't have is specific optimization of the GUI and/or applications for this (since it is expected to run on a variety of processors, this makes sense).
But, altivec enhanced applications could certainly be written and properly handled by the OS (say, an mp3 encoder or graphical tool).
John
# 25 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Rhumgod:
<strong>
Think about it though. What does a blade server really need vector processing for? I think it's more for the graphically challenged desktop/workstation user.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Can't altivec can be used to speed up encryption and decryption?
# 26 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by John Whitney:
<strong>Can't altivec can be used to speed up encryption and decryption?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am not sure if there is sufficient data intensity in encryption/decryption that would benefit from alitvec processing.
# 27 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>
Actually, it was confirmed today that the 2.3 GHz and 2.5 Ghz are .13 not .009, but that they won't be ready to go initially. The 1.8 GHz 970 is going to be the 'prime time' top of the line chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Really? Damn, must've have missed that. So the move to .009 would get the 970 up there then. Nice, holds well for Apple's future.
KidRed at 2007-11-17 10:34:56 >

# 28 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>
Actually, it was confirmed today that the 2.3 GHz and 2.5 Ghz are .13 not .009, but that they won't be ready to go initially. The 1.8 GHz 970 is going to be the 'prime time' top of the line chip.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I did not see this. Do you happen to have a link?
[Edit]: Ach! Nevermind. I see the info at MacRumors.
[ 03-12-2003: Message edited by: LudwigVan ]</p>
# 29 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Wondering if Apple will overclock the 1.8GHz 970 to 2+GHz just like what they are doing with the G4 ;)
Leonis at 2007-11-17 10:37:02 >

# 30 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Leonis, I don't think they will need to. Won't that be nice for a change? :D
# 31 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
At the very least, I hope they make it fairly straightforward to overclock them ourselves!
There'll be 2.5 GHz 970s running around one way or another :cool:
TJM at 2007-11-17 10:39:03 >

# 32 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>I don't think they will need to.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They will....2 is 2, 1.8 is 1.8....people want NUMBER! ;)
Just snap a 20 lb copper heatsink on top of the chip it should be fine, I think ;)
[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
Leonis at 2007-11-17 10:40:07 >

# 33 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by johnpg:
<strong>Well Linux and AIX don't support Altivec, so I think that's what they mean. They don't want their customers to think it's going to make their software faster just because it has a vector unit. I think that there is support in gcc for Altivec though, so it's possible that Linux on the 970 might have some support for it. But he didn't know anything about that.
As for Apple and Sony, he did NOT suggest that Apple and Sony were in any way connected. I'm not saying it isn't true, but there was no suggestion of Sony and Apple working together on the PS3, 970 or anything else with IBM.
John</strong><hr></blockquote>
Precisely! Altivec is so much wasted silicon for customers whose software makes no use of it. Unless or until the customers have use of it there is no purpose being served by adding expense to the production process and extra spaces to reduce the potential yield.
RBR at 2007-11-17 10:41:08 >

# 34 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
To clarify, here is what the IBM rep said about Altivec.
1) It is for Apple. He said they needed it because their systems were "graphics intensive." His words, not mine. He told me that they wouldn't be using it and that they make a point of informing their customers of that. He also suggested that other people have caught on that it could be for Apple when they see the vector unit on the slide.
2) During the presentation he circled the little box that said vector unit and specifically mentioned that they weren't utilizing it. That could mean anything, but I took it to be a marketing message to their customers not to expect anything from it. Who knows what reality is. I know that IBM certainly mentions it in their press releases, so it doesn't all jive. But that's what the guy said both to the group and to me personally.
I think we're splitting hairs though. The key is that IBM without any doubt confirmed to me that Apple is going to use the 970. None of us doubted this, but it sure is nice to know for sure. This guy is almost certainly NOT a Macintosh user, so the fact that he was so obviously aware of Apple and the 970 really hit home to me.
He seemed impressed that I knew about the Apple connection and the chip details in general. There was no NDA, btw. I didn't get the impression that they were discussing anything that wasn't available on their website. The only thing that might have been somewhat secretive was the PS3 talk. But much like the 970 chip he discussed that with me privately and also to the whole group. So it couldn't have been that big a deal. There were several other reps their too. So either they're clueless or the info isn't that secret.
Cheers,
John
johnpg at 2007-11-17 10:42:12 >

# 35 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by johnpg:
<strong>1) It is for Apple. He said they needed it because their systems were "graphics intensive." His words, not mine. He told me that they wouldn't be using it and that they make a point of informing their customers of that. He also suggested that other people have caught on that it could be for Apple when they see the vector unit on the slide.
2) During the presentation he circled the little box that said vector unit and specifically mentioned that they weren't utilizing it. That could mean anything, but I took it to be a marketing message to their customers not to expect anything from it. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I can say with absolute certainty if he said that he doesn't really know (or he has been misinterpreted). IBM definitely isn't planning to withhold the Altivec unit from customers.
[quote]Originally posted by johnpg:
<strong>So either they're clueless or the info isn't that secret.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Everything there is pretty much freely available or was due to be available at the end of the CeBit conference except the stuff about Apple.
# 36 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Most likely IBM just won't be supporting the altivec through their marketing plans. That doesn't mean it won't be usable, just that it won't be supported by IBM.
It will be there for Apple and anybody else who can figure out how to benefit from it. No doubt, there are a lot of folks who will figure out how to use it, and in the end that will likely benefit development for Apple as well.
As to the 2.5ghz chip, my understanding from the beginning was that they are getting a surprisingly larger number of 2.5 ghz yields then expected out of the .13 process, but probably not enough for initial introduction and release. Therefore they will be introduced later, possibly as an incremental increase prior to the eventual 980 on the .09 process.
What I am expecting is that sometime not too long after MacWorld (not at Macworld) the 970 Apple boxes will be introduced with a single 1.4, dual 1.4 and dual 1.8 at very reasonable pricepoints. The 1.4 970's will be noticiably faster then the 1.42 motorola G4 with true high speed bus and a lot more. Even the low end single 1.4 will be quite nice, the rough equivelent of a 2 ghz G4.
The 1.2 ghz will be reseved for portables, with its low heat and miserly power use, but will outperform the current 1 gig Powerbooks by a comfortable margin.
Then again, that is purely my speculation, and I have been wrong before. :rolleyes:
The new limiting factor will be the speed of "affordable" memory.
[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: Shaktai ]</p>
# 37 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Aw, man, this is no fun. We finally know about the next generation processor for sure, and it's not due out for half a year. BAH! Remember all those good times the G5 (the MOT 8500) gave us? There were at least three excitedly over-hyped expos before the idea started dying. This is all *too* certain.
Ah, I miss the good old days. ;) <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
bauman at 2007-11-17 10:45:10 >

# 38 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
A full PowerPC Blade-rack armed with 970 with Altivec, run on Linux with applications like BLAST most certainly will make use of Altivec even if IBM them selves doesn't.
Sun are releasing special blade-modules just for SSL-encryption som I guess that IBM could make something similar and take advantage of Altivec's strength when it comes to encryption.
# 39 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Shaktai:
<strong>...
The 1.2 ghz will be reseved for portables, with its low heat and miserly power use, but will outperform the current 1 gig Powerbooks by a comfortable margin.
Then again, that is purely my speculation, and I have been wrong before. :rolleyes:
The new limiting factor will be the speed of "affordable" memory.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's even possible we see another G4 speed bump in the powerbooks to a 1.25Ghz G4 before we get a 1.2 Ghz 970 in them. that's still a much larger step than the transition from G3/400Mhz to a G4/400Mhz
i also think that the G4 7457 still has a future in apple's. albeit i would love to see ppc 970's across the line. i think that will take another year/year and a half.
besides that i think the limiting factor won't be the speed of affordable memory, but will be apples roadmap. what do they plan to release after the release of the powermac with 970.
[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: gar ]</p>
gar at 2007-11-17 10:47:16 >

# 40 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
The problem with the G3 G4 transition was several fold, with the main one that the G4 did not scale higher then the G3 for a very long time and that the OS did not support SMP.
Who would buy a G4/500 tower if a iMac G3/450 was sold for a fraction of the price? --Very few!
Now having dual in towers and servers and single in ther other line is a viable option.
Also, replacing a 1GHz G3 with a 1GHz G4 does little to the performance outside strict Altivec performance. Replacing a 1GHz G4/G3 with a 1GHz 970 will at least double the performance.
A iMac is better of with 1 GHz 970 than 1.6 GHz G4 if they can be inplemented at similar total costs. Not only will the computer be faster but Apple would by using 970 invest in a CPU that has a future as a desktop CPU. Buying G4 is investing in a dead end desktop CPU, the fact that is very good in embedded applications is a good thing for CISCO but not for Apple.
I can not imagine that Apple could replace all G4 and G3 computers overnight with 970 but I do not see any problem with doing it if it would have been possible, if you understand what I mean.
ASAP:First the towers, shortly there after the servers. The other ones can wait for their natrual replacement cycles to incorporate the 970.
I would guess that the G4 hold out the longest in the iBook. With 970 in both PB and iB the two lines will merge totaly or partly.
So no more G4 speed bumps in the towers ever and no speed bumps next year at all to the G4. So: 2003 in with the 970 in towers and servers and plain vanilla speed bumps for the rest, 2004 out with the G4. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
DrBoar at 2007-11-17 10:48:12 >

# 41 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Geez oh man! I need a laptop for school by September. I really hope we'll see some 970 laptops by then. I have never owned a laptop before...but this is going to be great.
Keynote presentations with my computer. OmniOutliner to take notes in class. And NES, SNES emulation when I'm bored in class. Heck...with the 970, I should get perfectly fast PSX and N64 emulations with Mupen and Flarestorm.
Combine this with 10.3 Panther which should continue to be optimized for speed and this package should blow away any Wintel offerings.
And the 'expect more software from Apple' comment I heard earlier is great news too.
Is 2003 going to be the turning point for Apple like 1997 was when the iMac was introduced?
I'd have to say yes. And if Stevie doesn't back away from his comments, if this is to be trusted as 'the year of the laptop', I should be getting my PowerBook 970 Extreeeeme by September.
We now have a great OS which will continue to make leaps and bounds at every release. And now we're getting a processor that doesn't suck to match the demanding software. HOT DAMN!!!!!!
[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>
# 42 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Panther? Oooohh, I like it! Sounds like some kinda super-deadly stealth jet, ready to bomb the Wintel world... :D
# 43 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Hey, what's gonna happen when Apple runs out of 'big cat' names...what are they gonna use then? "Announcing OS X 10.7...'Margay!'"
Could the G3 be adapted to the 970's bus architecture, or are the chips too different? Because if it could be adapted, then Apple could just use IBM G3s with real DDR support, fast FSB, and Altivec. They would no doubt perform better than the current G4s and possibly draw less power.
# 44 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Could the G3 be adapted to the 970's bus architecture, or are the chips too different? Because if it could be adapted, then Apple could just use IBM G3s with real DDR support, fast FSB, and Altivec. They would no doubt perform better than the current G4s and possibly draw less power.
<hr></blockquote>
Wouldn't be worth the effort. A PPC 970 1.1 Volt at 90nm woul only consumer probably 12watts or so @1.4Ghz. Why go through the effort to revamp the G3 or G4. They're pretty much history.
[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: hmurchison ]</p>
# 45 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
OS X 10.5, Codename: Ocelot. Hmmm...I don't think so. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> But the cat name is good until it comes to "Calico". :D
# 46 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Is it just me or IBM's roadmap with PPC 970 mass release should coincide with delivery of Panther ?
It should be easy then for Apple to relaunch heavily armed Powermac and XServe in the midst of The Battle : 10.3 & 10.3 Server, X11 final, 970 64 bits computing and new enclosure generation : time to show what is aggressive marketing at Apple !
# 47 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Stephane:
<strong>Is it just me or IBM's roadmap with PPC 970 mass release should coincide with delivery of Panther ?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah...it kinda does.
And while I always feel like beating the pulp out of people and their "It's snappier!" comments when new point releases of OS X are installed, I'm willing to cut a break to those that get Panther shipped on a 970 machine if they say "It's snappier!" :D
# 48 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Wouldn't be worth the effort. A PPC 970 1.1 Volt at 90nm woul only consumer probably 12watts or so @1.4Ghz. Why go through the effort to revamp the G3 or G4. They're pretty much history.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I disagree -- if the 7x0 core, or a decendent of it w/ VMX, is put into a 44x-style system-on-a-chip with I/O & memory controller plus a RapidIO bus and its power consumption is down in the 2-3W range then it makes a lot of sense. Trying to stretch a single processor design across the gamut of applications is what has gotten Apple into its current mess, its time to have "options".
# 49 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
I disagree -- if the 7x0 core, or a decendent of it w/ VMX, is put into a 44x-style system-on-a-chip with I/O & memory controller plus a RapidIO bus and its power consumption is down in the 2-3W range then it makes a lot of sense. Trying to stretch a single processor design across the gamut of applications is what has gotten Apple into its current mess, its time to have "options".</strong><hr></blockquote>
In fact, IBM does have a design similar to this in planning. The unknown variable is if it will include VMX or not. By including it, it would make an ideal solution for Apple's portable low-end/consumer machines.
# 50 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>
In fact, IBM does have a design similar to this in planning. The unknown variable is if it will include VMX or not. By including it, it would make an ideal solution for Apple's portable low-end/consumer machines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yeah, so does moto's 7457.
gar at 2007-11-17 10:58:23 >

# 51 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Baah! Die, Moto, die! Heck, I don't know why I even bothered to capitalize moto!
# 52 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by gar:
<strong>
yeah, so does moto's 7457.</strong><hr></blockquote>
When is that due again? With RapidIO and built in memory controller? Motorola hasn't even commited to the 7457-RM. And the 130nm 7457 (just a die shrunk 745X with 512K cache) is STILL not due until the late 3rd or 4th quarter of THIS year. God knows why. And it'll STILL have that lame MPX 166MHz bus; Motorola will be lucky if they could get it up to 200MHz even. With a roadmap like that, it's no wonder Apple would pin their hopes on IBM for the future.
# 53 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by os10geek:
<strong>OS X 10.5, Codename: Ocelot. Hmmm...I don't think so. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> But the cat name is good until it comes to "Calico". :D </strong><hr></blockquote>
Panther is OK, as long that don't color the X logo on the box pink.
KidRed at 2007-11-17 11:01:33 >

# 54 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
How 'bout a Carbon fiber X on the box? That would be cool. And it would be a good metaphor. "Carbon" fiber? Get it? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
# 55 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Combine this with 10.3 Panther which should continue to be optimized for speed and this package should blow away any Wintel offerings.
And the 'expect more software from Apple' comment I heard earlier is great news too.
Is 2003 going to be the turning point for Apple like 1997 was when the iMac was introduced?
<hr></blockquote>
Yep.
Lemon Bon Bon
capitalise moto'? when they can't get it up? nah. no captials for them in fact why give them any punctuationatallnadda
# 56 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
Panther is OK, as long that don't color the X logo on the box pink.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but at least they'd have an excuse to use the tune in Switch ads :D
If only Peter Sellers was alive...
My name is Inspector Clueso, and I'm a switcher!
Barto
Barto at 2007-11-17 11:04:28 >

# 57 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>
When is that due again? With RapidIO and built in memory controller? Motorola hasn't even commited to the 7457-RM. And the 130nm 7457 (just a die shrunk 745X with 512K cache) is STILL not due until the late 3rd or 4th quarter of THIS year. God knows why. And it'll STILL have that lame MPX 166MHz bus; Motorola will be lucky if they could get it up to 200MHz even. With a roadmap like that, it's no wonder Apple would pin their hopes on IBM for the future.</strong><hr></blockquote>
sorry my fault, i didn't realise that the G3 has rapidIO already. <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
[quote]Originally posted by Barto:
<strong>
Yeah, but at least they'd have an excuse to use the tune in Switch ads :D
If only Peter Sellers was alive...
My name is Inspector Clueso, and I'm a switcher!
Barto</strong><hr></blockquote>
well, that won't be a problem at all: let pixar render that anglosaksian dwarf... something like Weta Digital did with Gollem in Lord of the rings.
gar at 2007-11-17 11:05:28 >

# 58 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Remember when we thought that the G5 would be out in january 2000?
Sad...
# 59 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>Remember when we thought that the G5 would be out in january 2000?
Sad...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but that was all wild speculation that fed itself and ZERO concrete facts. I'm sure some of this is the rumor mill just feeding on itself but the FACT is that this chip DOES exsist.
# 60 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by gar:
<strong>
sorry my fault, i didn't realise that the G3 has rapidIO already. </strong><hr></blockquote>
It doesn't. IBM has plans to do it though.
# 61 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:
<strong>Remember when we thought that the G5 would be out in january 2000?
Sad...</strong><hr></blockquote>Not 2000. The G4 came out in late 1999. The Register's rumors were for Jan. 2002.
# 62 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>
It doesn't. IBM has plans to do it though.</strong><hr></blockquote>
great. so my remark about the 7457 everybody was flamming wasn't as stupid as it seems:
Motorola has the same plans with it's 7457 RM (but if it ever will be released is another story, look at the 7500. great plans, everybody expected this G5 and after a few months Moto pulled it from it's roadmap, sad indeed)
gar at 2007-11-17 11:10:34 >

# 63 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by gar:
<strong>great. so my remark about the 7457 everybody was flamming wasn't as stupid as it seems:
Motorola has the same plans with it's 7457 RM (but if it ever will be released is another story, look at the 7500. great plans, everybody expected this G5 and after a few months Moto pulled it from it's roadmap, sad indeed)</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 7457 will just have the existing MPX bus and no other changes except a double sized L2. Power levels will drop. This will definitely be an improvement for Apple portables, no doubt about it. When it arrives late this year.
The 7457-RM was last listed as "under considertion" on a Motorola roadmap a few months ago, and given Moto's typical timeline for new processor development this doesn't bode well. I think everybody is skeptical that we'll ever see it, and if we do that it will be in a useful timeline for Apple's purposes. The 970 might arrive @ 0.09 micron before the 7457-RM shows up @ 0.13 and the idea of a 7457-RM @ 0.09 will instill much laughter. Nobody would complain if it actually materialized, it just seems far more likely that IBM will get there first.
# 64 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
johnpg, is this the presentation you saw?
<a href=" http://www.cse.clrc.ac.uk/disco/mew/Talks/Follows_IBM.pdf" target="_blank">IBM LINK</a>
Very interesting.
# 65 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
I disagree -- if the 7x0 core, or a decendent of it w/ VMX, is put into a 44x-style system-on-a-chip with I/O & memory controller plus a RapidIO bus and its power consumption is down in the 2-3W range then it makes a lot of sense. Trying to stretch a single processor design across the gamut of applications is what has gotten Apple into its current mess, its time to have "options".
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It seems like four or five years ago that I read about Motorola developing a system-on-a-chip processor code named Thunderbird at the time. It even had a PCI bus controller, if I remember correctly. I always thought that something like this would be great for very low cost systems, and hoped Apple would have such a chip someday.
If I understand what you are saying, it could be a possibility from IBM. Apple needs this kind of chip so they can lower prices on Macs for the home, educational and general purpose business computer markets.
snoopy at 2007-11-17 11:13:39 >

# 66 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>It seems like four or five years ago that I read about Motorola developing a system-on-a-chip processor code named Thunderbird at the time. It even had a PCI bus controller, if I remember correctly. I always thought that something like this would be great for very low cost systems, and hoped Apple would have such a chip someday.
If I understand what you are saying, it could be a possibility from IBM. Apple needs this kind of chip so they can lower prices on Macs for the home, educational and general purpose business computer markets.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That became the 8xxx embedded host processor series, I believe. Not appropriate for Apple desktop use due to the weak core and lack of FPU&VMX. Conceptually, however, a G3/G4+memory controller+RIO makes a lot of sense and I have to believe that either IBM or Moto will get there eventually.
# 67 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Bah! Yes, the G4 will be with us for a long while after the 970 is instituted in a Powermac, probabably in the iBooks and maybe iMacs.
# 68 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote] eventually <hr></blockquote>
:mad:
Lemon Bon Bon
# 69 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
That became the 8xxx embedded host processor series, I believe. Not appropriate for Apple desktop use due to the weak core and lack of FPU&VMX. Conceptually, however, a G3/G4+memory controller+RIO makes a lot of sense and I have to believe that either IBM or Moto will get there eventually.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Embedded processors from both IBM and Mot are gettting to the point where they can do all of the "basic" computing functions (writing, web-surfing, email, etc) very competently and at extremely low power consumption. I think there is a market for an "e-mate"-like portable with no pretenses of being a game platform or a portable video workstation. Wireless internet, word processing, presentations, (tablet, maybe?) etc. with 10-12 hours of battery life for $700 would sell, IMHO.
There are portions of the semiconductor space in which Motorola is really a champ. Some of Moto's chips only consume 1 or 2 watts and are every bit as competent as G3s of a couple years ago. Given first Apple's then their own near-death experiences of the past few years, though, I don't believe Moto's got the cojones to compete in the top end, performance-is-everything, power-consumption-be-damned arena any more.
I think there is a role for Motorola processors in Apple's future, but only by using them in Moto's strengths - ultra low-power, moderate performance portables.
TJM at 2007-11-17 11:17:49 >

# 70 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by TJM:
<strong>
Embedded processors from both IBM and Mot are gettting to the point where they can do all of the "basic" computing functions (writing, web-surfing, email, etc) very competently and at extremely low power consumption. I think there is a market for an "e-mate"-like portable with no pretenses of being a game platform or a portable video workstation. Wireless internet, word processing, presentations, (tablet, maybe?) etc. with 10-12 hours of battery life for $700 would sell, IMHO. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Jobs apparently loved the eMate.
I would not put it past him to revive something very much like it.
Amorph at 2007-11-17 11:18:50 >

# 71 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by TJM:
<strong>Embedded processors from both IBM and Mot are gettting to the point where they can do all of the "basic" computing functions (writing, web-surfing, email, etc) very competently and at extremely low power consumption. I think there is a market for an "e-mate"-like portable with no pretenses of being a game platform or a portable video workstation. Wireless internet, word processing, presentations, (tablet, maybe?) etc. with 10-12 hours of battery life for $700 would sell, IMHO.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The problem is that they are generally not capable of running Macintosh software. The Mac APIs, libraries, and apps in generally are full of uses of standard PowerPC FPU-based floating point math which these embedded processors typically have omitted or implemented in a non-standard fashion. For this reason a 7x0 core is about the minimum required to run MacOS X and its applications. Sure you could come up with a new platform and build around that, but more attractive is simply using a more advanced core in a SoC package... which we haven't seen yet from IBM or Moto.
# 72 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
The problem is that they are generally not capable of running Macintosh software. The Mac APIs, libraries, and apps in generally are full of uses of standard PowerPC FPU-based floating point math which these embedded processors typically have omitted or implemented in a non-standard fashion. For this reason a 7x0 core is about the minimum required to run MacOS X and its applications. Sure you could come up with a new platform and build around that, but more attractive is simply using a more advanced core in a SoC package... which we haven't seen yet from IBM or Moto.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Picky, picky, picky... ;)
I understand what you're saying completely. I didn't mean to imply that I thought current processors were suitable, only that such a processor was within reach.
For example, a Motorola 8560 with an FPU added would be pretty good for that sort of thing - probably overkill, in fact, even without AltiVec. It may be missing much more than the FPU - I'm certainly not an expert (or even exceptionally knowedgeable). They don't publish the power consumption of it yet, but its core runs at only 1.2 V, and puts out 1850 MIPS at 800 MHz. Their 82xx series run typically at 1.9 V and dissipate 2-3 W at 300 MHz or so with a 603e core. I doubt the 8560 would put out much more than that.
My point really was that this is an area where Motorola excels and they really could still be an important part of Apple's processor mix. It would only require Moto to extend proven designs a bit to fit Apple's needs, not try to maintain an entirely distinct line of high-power desktop chips used only by Apple. Whether or not they actually do is an entirely different matter. There's enough bad blood at this point that the relationship may be past salvaging.
TJM at 2007-11-17 11:20:51 >

# 73 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[Not entirely convinced that economy of topic items in the topic list is worth shoehorning posts into ill-fitting topic headings, nevertheless, I re-post as follows...]
I've heard a lot of talk about OS X needing to be updated to a 64-bit OS for the PowerPC 970, and I've also heard a lot of talk that this shouldn't be that hard to do.
Still, I have a hard time imagining that such a change wouldn't constitute a major new version of the OS - 10.3, rather than 10.2.x.
Given that the 970 can run 32-bit code just fine, and that even at 32 bits, the 970 will be a substantial improvement over the G4, would it make sense for Apple, if 10.3 isn't right around the corner, to release new 970-based computers, with only a slightly tweaked OS 10.2.x that simply uses the 970 in 32-bit mode?
I think that would be a good move if it gets us new 970-based systems sooner that we would by waiting for OS 10.3.
# 74 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[This is a 970 thread, not a tablet thread]
Hmmm...I don't know about you guys, but a slow G3 with 4 MB of VRAM would run OS X Lite just fine, especially considering the small screen size of this idea.
# 75 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by os10geek (and moved from a locked thread):
<strong>Definitely not. It would be maginally acceptable to have the Powermac 970 announced before the 64-bit OS was ready, but that would be just plain cheap. I expect all Apple Pro software titles to be ready at the time that the PM 970 ships. That means that Finalcut Pro, not Express, Web Objects, and Shake will be ready to run 64-bit.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not that there aren't plenty of 970 rumors going about now, but still, I'd expect to hear much more rumbling if all of these 64-bit software upgrades were already well under development, most likely requiring that developer versions of a 64-bit OS, and the hardware to run it on.
Besides, OS X 10.3, while quite likely to be a 64-bit OS to support the 970, won't be all about 64-bitness. There's like to be a whole lot more to 10.3, and who knows how far along the whole package of goodies that will be 10.3 is?
For people hoping for July availability of a 970 Power Mac (not just a July announcement of something that will ship in September or later) it seems to me that there'd have to be widespread beta copies of 10.3 now, or very soon, if those July Power Macs are going to have a 64-bit 10.3 installed when they ship.
Now, maybe neither 970s nor OS 10.3 will be ready until northern-hemisphere Fall arrives, in which case, my speculation might be a moot point.
But the question remains, if the 970 is ready to roll much sooner than 10.3, and if 64-bitness is not something Apple wants to graft into a 10.2.x OS release, does anyone here think that Apple would be satisfied to ship a 970 system, with full 64-bit OS support not included, but "coming soon"?
I'd happily buy such a system -- I expect the 970 to be quite an enormous leap beyond the G4, even running in 32-bit mode, with or without a 64-bit OS behind it. Besides, I'd know that 64-bit goodness would come soon, and that I'd probably have something of a wait before much software was able to take advantage of 64-bit architecture anyway.
[ 03-15-2003: Message edited by: shetline ]</p>
# 76 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
How 'bout a "What will we see in 10.3" thread, in OS X Forum? I'll do that NOW.
# 77 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Shetline-
Your theory hinges on the difficulty of moving OSX to 64bit. Well written apps by either Apple or 3rd parties should be able to support G4bits with a relatively minores tweaks and a recompile. You won't see Apple holding up PPC 970's system IMO. I doubt that the PPC 970 is going to see large scale production until 2H 2003 so 10.3 and the PPC 970 could/should coincide nicely as far as their release.
[quote] But the question remains, if the 970 is ready to roll much sooner than 10.3, and if 64-bitness is not something Apple wants to graft into a 10.2.x OS release, does anyone here think that Apple would be satisfied to ship a 970 system, with full 64-bit OS support not included, but "coming soon"?
<hr></blockquote>
I don't think Apple would have a problem with that. But I doubt that moving OSX to 64bit is going to present that much of a challenge anyways.
# 78 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I don't think Apple would do that...I think that they would try to have the 64-bit OS preloaded into the machine at the plant.
# 79 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by os10geek:
<strong>I don't think Apple would do that...I think that they would try to have the 64-bit OS preloaded into the machine at the plant.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why not as it's most likely a few code tweaks and a recompile away. I believe it would depend more on the compiler supporting 64bit. Some of the GCC 3.x Mavens around here would be better off explaining but I think that moving to 64bit has confused many a person on just how it's done and what benefits it will entail.
# 80 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by shetline:
<strong>
. . . But the question remains, if the 970 is ready to roll much sooner than 10.3, and if 64-bitness is not something Apple wants to graft into a 10.2.x OS release, does anyone here think that Apple would be satisfied to ship a 970 system, with full 64-bit OS support not included, but "coming soon"? . . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If we are giving out opinions, I think Apple would ship with 10.2.
If the 970 is ready to go well before OS X 10.3, I don't believe Apple would hold back the new PowerMacs. From what IBM has said, a 32 bit OS needs relatively few changes to work with the 970. Since Apple had this information before we did, they may have rolled those minor changes into 10.2 already, especially if they suspected 10.3 might be the critical path.
Who wouldn't buy a new PowerMac with an IBM 970 running OS 10.2? It will still run 64 bit applications, even if the OS is 32 bits, and we know that OS X will soon be upgraded to 64 bits too.
[ 03-15-2003: Message edited by: snoopy ]</p>
snoopy at 2007-11-17 11:28:58 >

# 81 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>
Jobs apparently loved the eMate.
I would not put it past him to revive something very much like it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Your first line I assumed was sarcasm since Steve quickly axed the Newton (and the eMate which ran the same OS) but you second line sounded serious. I find it hard to believe he would revive something like the eMate. Was I just missing a little more sarcasm?
Kurt at 2007-11-17 11:29:55 >

# 82 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Your first line I assumed was sarcasm since Steve quickly axed the Newton (and the eMate which ran the same OS) but you second line sounded serious. I find it hard to believe he would revive something like the eMate. Was I just missing a little more sarcasm?<hr></blockquote>
Nope. Amorph is right-- Steve did like the eMate, which is why his rolling Newton, Inc. back into Apple and then killing the entire platform wholesale was a bit of a surprise. And to think Newton, Inc. was about to post it's first profitable quarter ever... :(
# 83 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by snoopy:
<strong>Who wouldn't buy a new PowerMac with an IBM 970 running OS 10.2? It will still run 64 bit applications, even if the OS is 32 bits, and we know that OS X will soon be upgraded to 64 bits too.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is incorrect -- if the OS isn't "64-bit" then it cannot present any 64-bit APIs or even a 64-bit address space to any 64-bit applications. The OS support for 64-bitness must be in place before any 64-bit applications can be created for it. The cart before the horse, and all that.
For what its worth I think we'll see 10.3 (64-bit) and the 970 hardware appear at the same time. There might be a few limitations on what 64-bit apps can have access to, but they'll deliver. Apple has actually had a pretty good software release track record since 10.1 arrived... at least compared to their history (and most of the rest of the industry).
# 84 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Your theory hinges on the difficulty of moving OSX to 64bit.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I'd originally stated that I know many people have said that bringing OS X to 64 bits won't be that hard.
But even if all you had to do was change five #define lines and recompile, you can bet that there'd still be at least three months of internal QA work, and then a beta test phase, to make sure those little changes didn't result in a subtle bug or two or cause some instability.
Plus, as a marketing and as a philosophical milestone, going to 64-bit support is enough of a big step, regardless of the technical difficulty (or lack thereof) of doing so, that I think the change would warrant a major version change -- to 10.3. This would then tie 64-bitness together with who knows what other features are planned for 10.3.
64-bitness might be easy, but better Windows file sharing, fixing Finder bugs (still a few of those in Jaguar!), or the tele-olfactory version of iChat might be running behind schedule. That would mean no 64-bit support until the whole enchilada is ready to go.
This is why I postulate the idea of a 10.2.x release that does nothing more than tweak the OS to recognize the 970 and makes sure it runs in its 32-bit compatibility mode.
# 85 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
This might be better in the Looprumors 970 thread, particularly because this thread seems to be wondering toward another newton returns thread (and Fran isn't contributing? :eek: )
But I'll put it here anyway:
Just heard a rumor that 10.3 isn't scheduled until fall. This does make some sense with 10.2 coming out last fall, but it doesn't seem to jive with when 970 shipments are to begin to Apple.
Just throwing that out for whatever it's worth to you.
(One disclaimer: this is a rumor I heard, and thus comes from a much different source than previous info that I have recieved, some of which I've shared with you folks.)
Oh, and Apple's had a heck of a long time to plan for the move to the 970 and the 64bitness that comes with, so I would sure hope that they have done all they can to make it easy for themselves when they finally flip the 64bit switch in gcc (or whatever).
Where are all the lonely people that normally dig through Mac OS's to find interesting strings and such? If there is support in 10.2 already, has Apple really hidden any such references so well that people with time on their hands can't find them? :confused:
Or has no one looked? I doubt that.
# 86 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Thank Programmer for genial precision and rationality. Thank God (Apple) for IBM. Don't thank Florida for W.
-----------
970 bound in Nashville
# 87 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>
This is incorrect -- if the OS isn't "64-bit" then it cannot present any 64-bit APIs or even a 64-bit address space to any 64-bit applications. The OS support for 64-bitness must be in place before any 64-bit applications can be created for it. The cart before the horse, and all that.
For what its worth I think we'll see 10.3 (64-bit) and the 970 hardware appear at the same time. . .
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, in that case I change my mind, and agree with your last comment above. I don't believe Apple will ship new PowerMacs unless they run 64 bit applications. I think Apple will make a big deal of 64 bits and the future of computing, and will want 64 bits working right from the start. They likely will have one or more 64 bit applications ready to go, just to make their point.
Thanks for the correction. I assumed too much from IBM's statement that the 970 would work with a 32 bit OS, with just a few minor changes.
snoopy at 2007-11-17 11:36:03 >

# 88 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
IIRC the IBM PowerSeries chips were designed to run different OSes that IBM uses with the setting of one-bit software switches. I don't see why this can't be done with OS X, which is Unix Based. Therefore they could set a switch in the 970 to run 32-bit or 64-bit OS X if they wanted to. This would also give IBM the ability to run their OSes on the 970, which I am sure they are planning on.
Bigc at 2007-11-17 11:37:07 >

# 89 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
[quote]Originally posted by Bigc:
<strong>IIRC the IBM PowerSeries chips were designed to run different OSes that IBM uses with the setting of one-bit software switches. I don't see why this can't be done with OS X, which is Unix Based. Therefore they could set a switch in the 970 to run 32-bit or 64-bit OS X if they wanted to. This would also give IBM the ability to run their OSes on the 970, which I am sure they are planning on.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, this is correct -- but unless your OS is 64-bit aware you cannot run 64-bit applications in it. 64-bit applications require a 64-bit OS. If they ship a 10.2.x update with support for the 970 (which is easily doable) then only 32-bit applications will be able to run on it. When the OS is 64-bit it will look at the application, decide if it is a 32-bit or 64-bit app and setup the mode bit plus the address space accordingly. A 32-bit OS doesn't know how to do that... if it did it would be a 64-bit OS!
For what its worth, MacOS X 10.2 shipped last August and its not unreasonable for Apple to plan on a .1 increment roughly annually. The 970 hardware looks like it'll be ready in the Aug-Sept timeframe. This is an interesting co-incidence, is it not? Last time I checked August was a summer month so shipping in August would fullfill the "before fall" rumour. Applying Occam's Razor we should therefore conclude that the most likely course of events will be a preview at WWDC to allow developers to start preparing, followed by an August introduction.
# 90 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Yes, understood about the 32/64-bit switch and I was real tempted to get the DP 1.42, has anyone seen speed comparison between the original DP 1 GHz (Jan 2002) and the 1.42?. I'd still consider if it has a 50% speed increase over the DP-gigger
Bigc at 2007-11-17 11:39:01 >

# 91 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Bigc
Yes, understood about the 32/64-bit switch and I was real tempted to get the DP 1.42, has anyone seen speed comparison between the original DP 1 GHz (Jan 2002) and the 1.42?. I'd still consider if it has a 50% speed increase over the DP-gigger
Does it really matter? If you need a machine now, buy it now. You really aren't going to notice a +/- 10% speed difference anyhow unless you have hard real-time constraints (in which case you probably don't want a Mac or a Windows box).
# 92 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
Does it really matter? If you need a machine now, buy it now. You really aren't going to notice a +/- 10% speed difference anyhow unless you have hard real-time constraints (in which case you probably don't want a Mac or a Windows box).
Nope it doesn't really matter, its just my mental aberration (justification) to not buy a new Mac until I can gain a 50% increase in speed over my old one. My DP gigger suits me fine for my level of work (in most cases except limited use of 3-d rendering in POV-ray and 700 MB tiff file work in AI/PS)
Bigc at 2007-11-17 11:41:12 >

# 93 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Bigc
Nope it doesn't really matter, its just my mental aberration (justification) to not buy a new Mac until I can gain a 50% increase in speed over my old one. My DP gigger suits me fine for my level of work (in most cases except limited use of 3-d rendering in POV-ray and 700 MB tiff file work in AI/PS)
If those exeptions are the only where your current 1gigger isn't fast enough for you, I'd say wait for the good stuff, the 1,42Ghz DP one is still not going to be fast enough for you, since 40-50% is pretty unnoticeable on that kind of work IMO. Unless you have no problems throwing lots of cash on a small step-up in speed, I don't think there's a very good point in upgrading to the current top-end.
# 94 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I kind of get that same feeling.
Bigc at 2007-11-17 11:43:05 >

# 95 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
Yes, this is correct -- but unless your OS is 64-bit aware you cannot run 64-bit applications in it. 64-bit applications require a 64-bit OS.
I'd like to contest your conclusion that a 64-bit app would need a 64-bit OS.
As we've been told the 970 will be able to run 32-bit software without skipping a beat. This implies that we have both 64-bit and 32-bit instruction sets.
Therefore, the operating system API can be 32-bit even on a 64-bit processor. If Apple decides to make OS X 970 aware that does not imply that awareness will force all 64-bit (or 32-bit) instructions to be ignored (it's not an either/or proposition).
What we could have is a 64-bit enabled processor with 32-bit APIs running applications that can be either 32-bit or 64-bit, BUT have both type call on the 32-bit APIs (existing OS X 10.2.x).
When the OS is ready for full 64-bit operation those applications that are taking advantage of the 64-bit instruction set could be re-linked with 64-bit API libraries (OS X 10.3).
The 32-bit applications would have to call the 32-bit APIs for the rest of their product lives anyway, so a 32-bit API must be in place even if the operating system is pure 64-bit code.
Those that would like to adopt the 64-bit instruction set early would have to chose between developing their own 64-bit to 32-bit API translation layer or pick up the Apple supplied version if the OS is not fully 64-bit at the time of the 970 release.
I would be very surprised if Apple does not already have an API strategy already in place.
None the less as long as the 970 has the 64-bitness bit enabled by the OS developers could use 64-bit instructions to develop custom code (alas rendering, audio processing, etc.) that runs on a 32-bit OS.
Please let me know where I may have made a mistake in my reasoning.
iCode at 2007-11-17 11:44:06 >

# 96 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by iCode
I'd like to contest your conclusion that a 64-bit app would need a 64-bit OS.
As we've been told the 970 will be able to run 32-bit software without skipping a beat. This implies that we have both 64-bit and 32-bit instruction sets.
Therefore, the operating system API can be 32-bit even on a 64-bit processor. If Apple decides to make OS X 970 aware that does not imply that awareness will force all 64-bit (or 32-bit) instructions to be ignored (it's not an either/or proposition).
What we could have is a 64-bit enabled processor with 32-bit APIs running applications that can be either 32-bit or 64-bit, BUT have both type call on the 32-bit APIs (existing OS X 10.2.x).
When the OS is ready for full 64-bit operation those applications that are taking advantage of the 64-bit instruction set could be re-linked with 64-bit API libraries (OS X 10.3).
The 32-bit applications would have to call the 32-bit APIs for the rest of their product lives anyway, so a 32-bit API must be in place even if the operating system is pure 64-bit code.
Those that would like to adopt the 64-bit instruction set early would have to chose between developing their own 64-bit to 32-bit API translation layer or pick up the Apple supplied version if the OS is not fully 64-bit at the time of the 970 release.
I would be very surprised if Apple does not already have an API strategy already in place.
None the less as long as the 970 has the 64-bitness bit enabled by the OS developers could use 64-bit instructions to develop custom code (alas rendering, audio processing, etc.) that runs on a 32-bit OS.
Please let me know where I may have made a mistake in my reasoning.
The main point of using 64 bits is the ability to address memory using 64 bit pointers. If your OS (which does all the memory management) only uses 32 bits for memory addresses there is no way it can understand the pointers a 64 bit programme will want to pass to it.
The ability to use the 64 bit instructions (basically 64 bit integers) is not, of itself, enough, and indeed, very few programmes would benefit from using them.
michael
# 97 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by iCode
Therefore, the operating system API can be 32-bit even on a 64-bit processor. If Apple decides to make OS X 970 aware that does not imply that awareness will force all 64-bit (or 32-bit) instructions to be ignored (it's not an either/or proposition).
Yes, but, you are linking against OS provided libraries. When you call malloc, you will get a 32-bit pointer back. As mentioned, the OS in doing memory management, CPU management, etc. is still treating everything in 32-bit (in your scenario).
Though I would suspect 10.3 will be our 64-bit OS, from the sounds of IBM's quote, there could be a 10.2.x that was only for the 970 and supported 64-bit.
# 98 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM - AppleInsider
# 99 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
OK, I understand all the objections. This to me simply means that a 970 Mac MUST have a 64-bit OS on practical grounds.
This conclusion leads us to the questions:
Will Apple have the OS X 10.3 (64-bit) code ready at the introduction of the 970 based Mac?
Will the 970 be available in short order from IBM?
The problem is that BOTH the OS and CPU must be ready for the new Mac to appear (not to mention a number things people are asking for on these forums: FW2, USB2, Serial ATA, etc. plus things we don't even think of).
We can only hope that Apple has everything properly lined up for July. I sure hope so, because I will not be able to take any more insta-pundit comments such as the latest Dvorak column. :mad:
iCode at 2007-11-17 11:48:16 >

# 100 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by iCode
OK, I understand all the objections. This to me simply means that a 970 Mac MUST have a 64-bit OS on practical grounds.
This conclusion leads us to the questions:
Will Apple have the OS X 10.3 (64-bit) code ready at the introduction of the 970 based Mac?
Will the 970 be available in short order from IBM?
The problem is that BOTH the OS and CPU must be ready for the new Mac to appear (not to mention a number things people are asking for on these forums: FW2, USB2, Serial ATA, etc. plus things we don't even think of).
We can only hope that Apple has everything properly lined up for July. I sure hope so, because I will not be able to take any more insta-pundit comments such as the latest Dvorak column. :mad:
And what about PCI-Express or other fast bus to replace the present PCI/AGP busses? I had heard that Apple was interested in the fiber channel some time back, but not much recently. PCI Express is probably not to be had in PCs until Q1 or Q2 next year unless Dell is pulling a fast one. Did you know that the AGP 8X spec allows for *two* AGP 8X slots? That would allow some interesting possibilities (even if you only install AGP 4X cards in the slot). :err:
RBR at 2007-11-17 11:49:14 >

# 101 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Its possible that Apple could ship a revision of 10.2.x which supports the 970, with no support for 64-bit applications. This would allow them to ship the new super-fast hardware without delivering 10.3 at the same time. They probably have this ready as a contingency in case there are severe problems that delay the delivery of the full 64-bit OS. My guess is (still) that we'll see the new hardware + OS arrive in August or September.
# 102 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
Its possible that Apple could ship a revision of 10.2.x which supports the 970, with no support for 64-bit applications. This would allow them to ship the new super-fast hardware without delivering 10.3 at the same time. They probably have this ready as a contingency in case there are severe problems that delay the delivery of the full 64-bit OS. My guess is (still) that we'll see the new hardware + OS arrive in August or September.
I agree with you, Programmer.
However Apple's trend since Steve's return has been to make new ideas and changes to the platform as brain-free as possible.
I think from a satanic-marketing perspective that:
PowerMac G4 - 32bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 32bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 64bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 64bit OS, 64bit apps .
Is too much for us simple purchasers to get our heads around.
They would much rather see us dazzled by:
PowerMac G4 - 32bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 64bit OS, 64bit apps.
However with slow developer support (and let's be honest they're a bit pants, consider Quark!) I think you're more likely that they'll settle for:
PowerMac G4 - 32bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 64bit OS, 32bit apps then...
PowerMac 970 - 64bit OS, 64bit apps .
With a huge media blitz on the 64 bit supercomputer power of the new PM 970 with Mac OS X the worlds first 64bit Desktop OS, with a nice extra of the 32-64 bit compatibiltiy to make up for no actual shippping 64bit photoshop or office, all wrapped up in a nice simple advert with a smooth reassuring american voice to make us docile...
Cynical? Moi?...
# 103 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
With Apple rescheduling WWDC for June to showcase 10.3 Panther for developpers, we should have 10.3 ready in august/september for customers long 64 bits Powermacs...
What I am wondering is if Apple is gonna give 10.3 to developpers at WWDC : it should be 32 bits version, unless Apple want the developpers admiring the CD until Powermac 970 are released...
So why not a 32 bits only Beta version of Panther and a 64 bits final one ?
# 104 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I'm trying to figure out why Apple would delay WWDC due to Panther. If they are going to show a pre-release then does it really matter how early a pre-release they use? These are developers, after all, and they've given developers pre-alpha previews before. Is it because they want to have preview hardware? I'm sure they have had prototype 970s for some time now, and if its just a developer preview then it doesn't really matter how early the hardware is -- its actually better the more different it is from the final shipping hardware. If you are showing pre-release stuff, is it worth delaying an enormous event by a month to show slightly less pre-release stuff?! I don't think so... so why else delay the show, unless you are ready to ship? Nah... couldn't be.
Could it?
# 105 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
Could it?
Just an opinion...but...
Maybe the delay of the show on the grounds of Panther is to allow Apple to give out a 32 and 64bit version to developers. I would have thought this bodes extremely well for a late summer release of 970 powered Macs...
Alternatively it's just an excuse to put the date back and the real reason is that they want to have 970 boxes to preview under NDA.
# 106 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
From MacWhispers:
"March 21, 2003
Confirmed: New PowerMac Motherboards To Use PPC 970
A source inside one of the three OEM manufacturing companies now preparing bids on producing the two next generation PowerMac motherboards offered additional information about the new boards late Thursday.
According to our source, the new motherboards are designed around the IBM PPC 970 processor, with one board being a single processor design, and the other running two processors. This source states that he has seen and inspected pre-production board samples populated with the PPC 970 chips. Additionally, the bid deadline for constructing these boards was reaffirmed as March 28th, only one-week from today."
-Spacemonk
# 107 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by robster
Maybe the delay of the show on the grounds of Panther is to allow Apple to give out a 32 and 64bit version to developers. I would have thought this bodes extremely well for a late summer release of 970 powered Macs...
Alternatively it's just an excuse to put the date back and the real reason is that they want to have 970 boxes to preview under NDA.
I agree, but I also thought of this:
Since the PPC 970 doesn't run unmodified 32-bit OS's (does not require a large modification though), maybe Apple needs that extra month to complete the transition to 64-bit OS X. They can't really show PPC970's unless they have a (prefereably well-working) 64-bit OS, and they will probably want to have new hardware (the 970) to either show spesific features of the OS (that requires the 970, but hopefully not), or something that the 970 helps alot. Maybe they just want to be sure they have both the 970 and 64-bit Panther, tested and complete for either shipping, or other reasons.
# 108 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
I'm trying to figure out why Apple would delay WWDC due to Panther. If they are going to show a pre-release then does it really matter how early a pre-release they use? These are developers, after all, and they've given developers pre-alpha previews before. Is it because they want to have preview hardware? I'm sure they have had prototype 970s for some time now, and if its just a developer preview then it doesn't really matter how early the hardware is -- its actually better the more different it is from the final shipping hardware. If you are showing pre-release stuff, is it worth delaying an enormous event by a month to show slightly less pre-release stuff?! I don't think so... so why else delay the show, unless you are ready to ship? Nah... couldn't be.
Could it?
Could it be something else, not only 10.3 on 970? Something so important that a month makes sense? Or could it be so that Apple hasn't even started working on 10.3?:no:
# 109 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by costique
Could it be something else, not only 10.3 on 970? Something so important that a month makes sense? Or could it be so that Apple hasn't even started working on 10.3?:no:
Heh, some people are eternally pessimistic. 10.3 is going to take a lot longer to build than from now until June, they will have had to start it pretty much as soon as Jaguar shipped. The incremental improvements in Jaguar are just the changes made in parallel to both branches of their codebase.
Apple has gotten quite good with their software releases in the last couple of years, I don't think such negativity is called for. :)
# 110 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
Apple has gotten quite good with their software releases in the last couple of years, I don't think such negativity is called for. :)
I'm with you programmer, this can only really be good news.
# 111 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Maybe Apple is delaying not because of 10.3 but because they want a 64 bit app to show off how great it is. Maybe a 64 bit preview of final cut pro or some other baseless speculation type thing.
# 112 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
I do not really understand why people are in a panic with Mac OS 10.3 needing to be 64 bit code allowing it to be shown on a 970. You are forgetting that Apple is very good at backwards engineering.
There will no doubt be a version of Mac OS 10.3 that runs on current Mac's and Apple has not stated otherwise that it will be running (or previewing in this case) on anything more than just that: hardware that is currently shipping!
Jared at 2007-11-17 12:01:22 >

# 113 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM - AppleInsider
# 114 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by AirSluf
This move creates a MUCH higher set of expectations for the developer community and is trying to tell more folks to come out because it will be worth their time, all without saying anything definite.
I think this line on the WWDC page says it all:
This is the one you don't want to miss!
# 115 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Flounder
I think this line on the WWDC page says it all:
I believe they said that last year too...
Jared at 2007-11-17 12:04:25 >

# 116 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Flounder
I think this line on the WWDC page says it all:
Maybe because of PANTHER ?
# 117 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Programmer
I'm trying to figure out why Apple would delay WWDC due to Panther. . . . <snip> . . . I don't think so... so why else delay the show, unless you are ready to ship? Nah... couldn't be.
Could it?
I read in MacCentral (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/03/21/panther/) that (quoting from article):
'Ron Okamoto, Apple's vice president of Worldwide Developer Relations. "Moving to June ensures that every developer will leave the event with a copy of Panther in their hands." '.
So, as you said Programmer, "Nah... couldn't be".
>>>But I can sure hope!
# 118 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
It's also possible that Apple wasn't getting a lot of people signing up and/or there were complaints about no Panther preview. So they moved it back in order to have a beta to give out, and in turn get more developers to show up.
Although I'm thinking in line with eWeek that Apple is positioning WWDC as the new summer Macworld. At least in the sense that it will be the show that has the Jobs keynote.
John
P.S. To that guy who linked that PDF file, no that's not the presentation we were given.
johnpg at 2007-11-17 12:07:35 >

# 119 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
It's also possible that Apple wants to have production 970's to run 10.3 in all it's 64 bit glory, while taking orders for the first ones off the production lines to give the developers priority orders before MWNY's unvailing of the 970 for "the rest of us".
...
# 120 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20030327S0029
Two interesting parts:
For those concerned about costs:
"this is the year TI expects to achieve the 30 percent per-chip cost savings promised by 300-mm manufacturing"
And for those concerned about IBM's ability to meet demand:
"By year's end, IBM may be running 15,000 to 18,000 of the 300-mm wafers per month, filling its first module at Fishkill as part of its emphasis on high-end foundry manufacturing."
neumac at 2007-11-17 12:09:35 >

# 121 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
By year's end, IBM may be running 15,000 to 18,000 of the 300-mm wafers per month, filling its first module at Fishkill as part of its emphasis on high-end foundry manufacturing."
That must mean we should be all Dual 970 PM next year. That's encouraging news!
# 122 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
How many 970's do you get out of one 300-mm (?12") wafer?
Bigc at 2007-11-17 12:11:34 >

# 123 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by Bigc
How many 970's do you get out of one 300-mm (?12") wafer? probabily between 200 to 300. That means more than 3 millions of chips produced each months (but not only PPC 970).
# 124 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by MacJedai
I read in MacCentral (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/03/21/panther/) that (quoting from article):
'Ron Okamoto, Apple's vice president of Worldwide Developer Relations. "Moving to June ensures that every developer will leave the event with a copy of Panther in their hands." '.
So, as you said Programmer, "Nah... couldn't be".
>>>But I can sure hope!
I normally don't partake in idiot conspiracy theories, but is it possible that, seeing as Apple surely is aware Panther is going to be warezed sky-high once the WWDC is over, they simply want to make sure that nothing too immature ends up getting in circulation, where bad word-of-mouth by uninformed users ("I installed this after downloading it off Carracho, and it totally hosed my system!! WTF?!?!?!") might reflect poorly on the mothership?
# 125 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by MacJedai
I read in MacCentral (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/03/21/panther/) that (quoting from article):
'Ron Okamoto, Apple's vice president of Worldwide Developer Relations. "Moving to June ensures that every developer will leave the event with a copy of Panther in their hands." '.
So, as you said Programmer, "Nah... couldn't be".
>>>But I can sure hope!
The thing about that is the feature set will be frozen for 2 months [June] before panther's public release in September [according to a eweek artcle http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,993485,00.asp]
The only justification I see is the this gives developers 2 months to get used to a 64 bit OS and 2 months to prepare their apps for a 970 release in September. So putting 2 and 2 toegther, I see a September [ooh, that's the fall right?] release with the 970 running a 64 bit OS X Panther.
KidRed at 2007-11-17 12:14:36 >

# 126 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Originally posted by KidRed
I see a September [ooh, that's the fall right?] release with the 970 running a 64 bit OS X Panther.
tsk tsk, you should know better than that! Fall isn't until Sept. 21 ;)
# 127 Re: Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM
Apple to use 970, confirmed by IBM - AppleInsider