[DrGruv]

Why is it taking soooo long to release the 970mp? It is after all based on a chip that has been out 2 YEARS?

IBM released the power5 for themselves last JULY 2004
POWER5 unleashed Posted Jul 18, 2004 - 04:33 AM

Shouldn't we have the powerpc 980 based on the power5 now or least last January? Aren't they working on it?

So why is the 970p taking so long? Who is sitting on the development?

Hmm - make power5 for IBM at fishkill or make 970mp's for Apple? What do you think they would do?

Wasn't the 970 released as a chip just to get things going... the real work was the next chip? Where are they?

Is IBM slowing the release of apple chips because of the xserve competition? and all the mini supercomputers going up at universities?

Thoughts?

[pgre]

Originally Posted by DrGruv Thoughts?

Nope..

All I can say is if IBM had a product ready to sell then I am sure it would be.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by DrGruv Is IBM slowing the release of apple chips because of the xserve competition? and all the mini supercomputers going up at universities? Thoughts?

Since IBM uses the 970s themselves I hardly think so.

[DrGruv]

Originally Posted by JLL Since IBM uses the 970s themselves I hardly think so.

They also make power5 - put one of those in a mac... why can't we get a power5 in a mac? something... anything....

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by DrGruv They also make power5 - put one of those in a mac... why can't we get a power5 in a mac? something... anything....

Different pinouts, different size, different bus needs, different API...

Might as well ask for Apple to slap an Opteron in there, it'd work as well.

[DrGruv]

so the deal with apple and IBM was 5 generations of chips?

970mp considered a 'generation' wasn't the 980 developed AT THE SAME TIME AS THE power5? Where is it?

Was there a time frame for IBM to release the chips to apple?

[JLL]

Originally Posted by DrGruv so the deal with apple and IBM was 5 generations of chips?

Says who?

[DrGruv]

can't remember where I read it.... trying to find it...

[Kickaha]

Since Apple didn't move over to IBM until G3, (Moto did the work before then on PPC), that would mean a contract until G8.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Since Apple didn't move over to IBM until G3, (Moto did the work before then on PPC), that would mean a contract until G8.

Huh? IBM also made 601, 603 and 604. Even the PowerPC logo used on the first Power Macs is owned by IBM.

[jeannot]

Originally Posted by DrGruv so the deal with apple and IBM was 5 generations of chips? 970mp considered a 'generation' wasn't the 980 developed AT THE SAME TIME AS THE power5? Where is it?

I suspect this processor not to be in their plans anymore (if it ever were). We've been hearing a lot of rumors about it (mostly from MOSR and AI) and they suddenly all stopped after apple introduced the last power macs.

However I remember a pdf from IBM which mentionned some power5 derivative as "GR-UL" (since GPUL - the G5 - means Giga Processor Ultra Light, and don't know what "GR" means...). This was planned for 2004 - early 2005, IIRC.
Now there is a word for this kind of stuff : vaporware.
Maybe we should call for Morpheus again.

[DrGruv]

What incentive does IBM have to give Apple the latest technology?

NONE

Keep 'em back a generation and let IBM have the best first...

Apple is not a concern -

100 million cell chips yes, apple - a couple of million?

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by DrGruv What incentive does IBM have to give Apple the latest technology? NONE Keep 'em back a generation and let IBM have the best first... Apple is not a concern - 100 million cell chips yes, apple - a couple of million?

I have put out similar feelers and reaped the same crop. Yes it would be nice to hear from Morpheus who might be one of the few to agree with you.

[rollercoaster375]

Originally Posted by DrGruv What incentive does IBM have to give Apple the latest technology? NONE

That's not true. What happens if they don't provide Apple with their lastest stuff? They lose the contract that is making them millions of dollars every year.

[Jay]

Originally Posted by rollercoaster375 That's not true. What happens if they don't provide Apple with their lastest stuff? They lose the contract that is making them millions of dollars every year.

Millions aren't all that much to a multibillion dollar company.

[oldmacfan]

Originally Posted by Jay Millions aren't all that much to a multibillion dollar company.

Think stock holders...

[mugwump]

Agreed, Apple is the highest profile company. When IBM had issues with the new G5 process, their quarterly analyst conference call had quite a few questions about it. IBM tried to deflect the issue by stating how small the order was, but the questions continued.

I suppose problems for IBM delivering to Apple stokes concern of execution for other clients as well.

[Chinney]

If IBM is taking Apple for a ride, my question would be why IBM would even have let Apple come into the car in the first place.

Apple is on the upswing lately - both software and hardware - and much more so, presumably, than when IBM initially decided to work on a G5 for Apple. I don't know what is in it for IBM in working with Apple, but whatever it is, it there would appear to be more incentive now to develop for Apple than there was previously.

My own feeling is that there is no 'nefarious plot' against Apple, but that IBM, like other chip manufactures, has just hit something of a technical wall lately.

[gyroscope]

Originally Posted by Jay Millions aren't all that much to a multibillion dollar company.

The chip division is a tiny tiny part of IBM Corp. it'd better make a profit to justify its existence.

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by Chinney If IBM is taking Apple for a ride, my question would be why IBM would even have let Apple come into the car in the first place.

Priorities change?

[unixguru]

Originally Posted by DrGruv Why is it taking soooo long to release the 970mp? It is after all based on a chip that has been out 2 YEARS? IBM released the power5 for themselves last JULY 2004 POWER5 unleashed Posted Jul 18, 2004 - 04:33 AM Shouldn't we have the powerpc 980 based on the power5 now or least last January? Aren't they working on it? So why is the 970p taking so long? Who is sitting on the development? Hmm - make power5 for IBM at fishkill or make 970mp's for Apple? What do you think they would do? Wasn't the 970 released as a chip just to get things going... the real work was the next chip? Where are they? Is IBM slowing the release of apple chips because of the xserve competition? and all the mini supercomputers going up at universities? Thoughts?

I can think of a couple potential things holding this back. One is that IBM is having more yield issues. They've had plenty of time to work this out though, so I really can't see it.

Another is that Apple hasn't finished work on their revision to the U3 to support this. But they've had plenty of time to do that too.

I'm sure that to effectively use the MP, Apple will need to install its Tiger OS. As has been said in the promo material, they have improved the locking granularity of the kernel for better SMP scalability. But if they're ready to ship, or will be soon, why didn't they annouce and steal the Wintel thunder? That seems to indicate that the machines' hardware isn't ready.

Really, I can't think of any good reason why the hardware hasn't shipped. I bet Jobs has been yelling a lot lately.

Oh, one other thing. The XServe isn't competing with anything from IBM. It's a nice machine, but the only thing it compares to is IBM's JS20 blade. IBM's Power5 machines have features that business users want that the XServe doesn't have. Apple really isn't considered in business except for publishing/design industry. IBM isn't even on our radar in education. It's extremely odd that we have any IBM equipment at all in my dept.; it's there because IBM loaned it to us.

[Programmer]

Originally Posted by DrGruv What incentive does IBM have to give Apple the latest technology? NONE Keep 'em back a generation and let IBM have the best first... Apple is not a concern - 100 million cell chips yes, apple - a couple of million?

There is a joking inside IBM's chip division that IBM makes more money on each machine that Apple sells than on each machine that IBM sells (obviously this applies only to desktop machines).

Your argument is not sensible -- it is in IBM's best interest to ensure that their customers have their latest and greatest designs. The "delay" is almost certainly due to the time taken to get yields up (they are now), and to get the clock rate and power consumption under control (still in question) before going and doubling the number of transistors. Of course there is also the possibility of a delay on Apple's end as well -- if they are going to roll out a new chipset with DDR2/PCI-E/etc support, this will have to be properly tested and debugged before going into production.

[Dave J]

Originally Posted by Programmer Your argument is not sensible -- it is in IBM's best interest to ensure that their customers have their latest and greatest designs.

I think we all have to agree with this; perhaps that is why DrGruv posted the thread: to ferret out any hanky-panky that could throw the paradigm off.

Alas we have fished all night and caught nothing. Morpheus? Anything fishy?

[ldv]

Originally Posted by Programmer There is a joking inside IBM's chip division that IBM makes more money on each machine that Apple sells than on each machine that IBM sells (obviously this applies only to desktop machines). Your argument is not sensible -- it is in IBM's best interest to ensure that their customers have their latest and greatest designs. The "delay" is almost certainly due to the time taken to get yields up (they are now), and to get the clock rate and power consumption under control (still in question) before going and doubling the number of transistors. Of course there is also the possibility of a delay on Apple's end as well -- if they are going to roll out a new chipset with DDR2/PCI-E/etc support, this will have to be properly tested and debugged before going into production.

IBM makes diddly on the Apple G5 machines compared to what Apple makes. The current generation of G5 machines could be reduced in price by $1000 and Apple would still make money. It is insanely greedy for Apple to keep their Powermac prices as high as they are.

Look at these specs from today's Apple store:

1.8GHz PowerPC G5
600MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

This is a dirt cheap entry-level PC that goes for less than $500. It is even hard to find a PC this slow and crippled.

Yet Apple demands $1500!!!

IBM has come to hold Apple in disdain... as instead of selling 50 million G5's, Apple is happy to sell 5 million and make a higher margin. What IBM really wants is the "Dell of PowerPC". Apple is a boutique that is only useful in bulding some buzz around the G5.

Of course when Microsoft shows Longhorn running on 970MP there will be a possibility for Dell to get involved. Dell loves blowing the hell out of high prices. All Dell would have to do is somehow escape their marriage to Intel

[JLL]

Originally Posted by ldv The current generation of G5 machines could be reduced in price by $1000 and Apple would still make money.

No they wouldn't.

[Mugge]

@IDV
The joke was not that IBM makes more money than Apple on the G5's, but that IBM itself doesn't make any money on their own hardware. Hence they sold off their PC division to the chinese

Agreed the prices for the PowerMacs are a little too high. But if I was Apple I'd also do whatever to optimize my profits.

About the MP thing: Well, it's probably all due to some technical explanation, but what's the rush? The Intel and AMD have just released their dualcores. So it's not like Apple is waaay behind schedule. In my opinion a flawless rev. A would be better than a rush to the finishline

[DrGruv]

Originally Posted by Chinney If IBM is taking Apple for a ride, my question would be why IBM would even have let Apple come into the car in the first place. Apple is on the upswing lately - both software and hardware - and much more so, presumably, than when IBM initially decided to work on a G5 for Apple. I don't know what is in it for IBM in working with Apple, but whatever it is, it there would appear to be more incentive now to develop for Apple than there was previously. My own feeling is that there is no 'nefarious plot' against Apple, but that IBM, like other chip manufactures, has just hit something of a technical wall lately.

IBM first - Apple second

IBM is on the highway - Apple can't get directions to the ramp

[rollercoaster375]

Originally Posted by DrGruv IBM first - Apple second IBM is on the highway - Apple can't get directions to the ramp

Did you not even read the rest of what was said? IBM hasn't finished Dual-core yet, so they can't provide Apple with it.

[DrGruv]

Originally Posted by rollercoaster375 Did you not even read the rest of what was said? IBM hasn't finished Dual-core yet, so they can't provide Apple with it.

How hard are they working on it? How hard would you? IBM issues come first.

Looks like the cell is done - right? 100 million chips

DO YOU THINK IBM COULD PUT THE DEVELOPMENT INTO THIS CHIP?

Of course they could, BUT IT'S NOT a priority... apple is an after thought.

If the 970 and future gens are so expensive - then apple would be foolish not to go for the sub $100 cell that will be mass produced.

[JLL]

Originally Posted by DrGruv How hard are they working on it? How hard would you? IBM issues come first. Looks like the cell is done - right? 100 million chips DO YOU THINK IBM COULD PUT THE DEVELOPMENT INTO THIS CHIP? Of course they could, BUT IT'S NOT a priority... apple is an after thought. If the 970 and future gens are so expensive - then apple would be foolish not to go for the sub $100 cell that will be mass produced.

Read the thread again: IBM USES THE 970 CHIPS THEMSELVES!!!!!