I read a quote by a Sony exec a couple years back stating that the PS3 would be 1000 times what the PS2 is capable of, now I am not sure on the specifics, but let us say that CELL only gets them halfway(no offense all you CELL fanboys), what other options would they be able to take to let them reach their goal? The Sony exec also mentioned that netoworking all the PS3s together into a cluster might be used as well. Would this not fit perfect with Apple's Xgrid technology? Apple may very well opt to provide this closed service (much like M$'s Xbox Live initiative, only computation is the main purpose) through a variation on .Mac, that would allow PS3 owners to send H.264 video, hi-aac audio messages, a multiplayer infrastructure, and of course provide computational power to other PS3 owners. Of course this is a long shot but none the less, any ideas? and then the real kicker, if any of the above turns out to be true, what does Apple get from Sony?

[DrGruv]

from sony apple gets video gear, audio gear, cell - BTW the sony AU plugs are very hot http://www.sonyplugins.com/

[DrGruv]

IBM pledges 100 million to linux... maybe they don't want osx...

http://www.newsfactor.com/trends/sto...ategory=trends

[Programmer]

Actually it just means that they want Linux. They could use OS X as well if their clients wanted it (I don't think that is terribly likely, myself), and it doesn't mean they don't want Apple building machines around their chips.

[FallenFromTheTree]

It seems clear than IBM is catering to PowerPC driven UNIX based operating systems running their hardware for the immediate future.

OSX and LINUX have that in common.

[Henriok]

Originally Posted by DrGruv IBM pledges 100 million to linux... maybe they don't want osx...

Just to put this figure into perspective. Apple spends about 460 million a year on R&D, and about 40% of that on it's software business. That's about 180 million.. a year. IBM will invest 100 million in Linux technologies in the comming three years. Granted.. not all of Apple's R&D in software is in Mac OS X, but IBM's not plowing all of the money into the Linux itself, but rather in applications like Lotus Notes and Websphere.

I'm not that impressed.

[Enki]

And those $$ include marketing those products, not just development of them. $33M a year marketing+development, not a very big investment, but lots of splash when you just tout that magic $100M number.

[Morpheus]

I would not be at all surprised if we would see some interesting stuff from Apple soon... maybe both PM and xServe. My guess is that by now they will have a wide choice, from 1.6 to 2.5...

Morpheus

[mugwump]

Ah, I remember the good ole days when "Antares" was supposed to be delivered to "Cupertino" by the "End of the Year" (2004).

"Antares is a dual core (two processors on single die) follow-on to Altair, using IBM's CMOS SOI10K technology with SOI (Silicon On Insulator) and copper bus with 10 layers of metal. Each core has a 1M L2 cache. L3 cache is not supported. "

[artse]

Originally Posted by Morpheus I would not be at all surprised if we would see some interesting stuff from Apple soon... maybe both PM and xServe. My guess is that by now they will have a wide choice, from 1.6 to 2.5... Morpheus

Oh dear, Morpheus speaks and no one is listening (yet)...PM and xServer soon...YEESSS!!!

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by mugwump Ah, I remember the good ole days when "Antares" was supposed to be delivered to "Cupertino" by the "End of the Year" (2004). "Antares is a dual core (two processors on single die) follow-on to Altair, using IBM's CMOS SOI10K technology with SOI (Silicon On Insulator) and copper bus with 10 layers of metal. Each core has a 1M L2 cache. L3 cache is not supported. "

What do you mean "was supposed"?

Morpheus

[FallenFromTheTree]

Ah yes, but how does one define "soon" in Apple terms?

If we take 12 apples and cut them into 52 slices

how many more slices to go before we have pie?

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by Morpheus What do you mean "was supposed"? Morpheus

Does that mean they did deliever them? Are these the new 1.6 to 2.5 choices you mention above?

[del-uks]

According to the initial prevision (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/antares.html), Apple might be putting the finishing touches to the next PowerMac revision with Antares.

If everything goes without a hitch, they should ship soon...

[Programmer]

Originally Posted by Kurt Does that mean they did deliever them? Are these the new 1.6 to 2.5 choices you mention above?

You guys really need to be spoon fed, don't ya?

[micmoo]

Morpheus,
In your opinion, should the new dual core 2.5 high end give a substantial performance boost over an exsisting dual 2.5 PM tower if only one dual core chip is used?

Question for the rest of the group... Is a dual processor dual core machine likely from Apple any time soon, and does OSX handle more than 2 processors? Any speculation on performance of a quad 2.5 PM?

Finaly, is there any rumor of an onboard memory controler on these new dual core chips like AMD uses? If AMD gets help from IBM with there chips, why WOULDNT IBM use this tec in there design? thanks for any feedback/speculation!

[CoreMac]

Originally Posted by Morpheus My guess is that by now they will have a wide choice, from 1.6 to 2.5... Morpheus

Should I buy one of these or wait for the Cell announcement at WWDC?

[jeannot]

Originally Posted by Morpheus I would not be at all surprised if we would see some interesting stuff from Apple soon... maybe both PM and xServe. My guess is that by now they will have a wide choice, from 1.6 to 2.5... Morpheus

Well, that would confirm recent rumors from macosrumors (yes I know... ).

But 2.5 GHz... I thought antares would debut at 3 GHz (thinksecret).
And 1.6 GHz ?? Maybe in powerbooks then...

[HHogan]

I'd predict dual 2, 2.3 and 2.5 in the PMs

And the same in the iMacs, but with singles.

[jeannot]

A powermac update without any speed bump in clock frequency ? I'd be rather desappointed...
Those machines won't be much faster when running single threaded apps (which represent most of the current software).

[Dave Hagan]

Given what we thought was the promise of the G5, my hope for the next rev would be something like this:

Low:
Dual 2.3GHz

Mid:
Dual 2.6GHz

High:
Dual 3.2GHz

[micmoo]

i bet they'd scream in a heavy multitasking environ like my shop... sign me up for the top of the line when it ships!

[micmoo]

I'm dreaming, but i'd take it...
Low: Dual 2
Mid: Dual 2.5
High: Dual 3
Workstation class: Quad 3 (dual dual core)

I'd pay a premium for the high end wish system!

[frankd]

Originally Posted by artse Oh dear, Morpheus speaks and no one is listening (yet)...PM and xServer soon...YEESSS!!!

Like the Powerbook g5 he predicted by January?? (2004-10-08)

Originally Posted by Morpheus I certainly hope by January... How does low-power 1.6 and 1.8Ghz (maybe even a 2Ghz) sound like? Morpheus

(The question was by Commodus on a pbg5 between July and September of 2005)

[ja0912]

Heh, everyone's giving Morpheus a hard time now. I thought we all recognised his info pertained to what IBM was up to, not Apple. One can assume what Apple's plans are from what IBM is doing, but it's just assumption.

Or am I now assuming too much?

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by frankd Like the Powerbook g5 he predicted by January?? (2004-10-08) (The question was by Commodus on a pbg5 between July and September of 2005)

He said nothing about a G5 Powerbook in January. He said the chip for the G5 pbook would be ready. Remember, Morpheus only has info on IBM not exactly Apple. So the G5 pbook chip should be out and could see pbook G5 at WWDC.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by Programmer You guys really need to be spoon fed, don't ya?

Programmer, please don't pick on me. I can be a little slow sometimes.

[berner]

My guess is that a quad system would only be an advantage during extreme multitasking. as it stands most dual systems still run the majority of the proccessing for the frontmost app. on one processor, so a quad could speed up stuff in the background but you'd have to keep the background apps busy for it to really be a benefit. it could be killer fast if an app was 4 processor aware, i dunno. i would think that dual cores is gonna lead to a mobo redesign, a chance to improve performance and have an end product that costs a bit less to manufacure(one chip and cooling solution instead of two)
just speculation, to add to the discussion.
Kev.
i'm very happy because if antares gets in the powermacs and xserves than it frees up some 970fx's to be used for the next iMac upgrade! bring it on!

[Bucolic Old Sir Henry]

Originally Posted by Undertaker He said nothing about a G5 Powerbook in January. He said the chip for the G5 pbook would be ready. Remember, Morpheus only has info on IBM not exactly Apple. So the G5 pbook chip should be out and could see pbook G5 at WWDC.

Which fits rather nicely with the DigiTimes piece that suggested Q2 (Apr-Jun) 2005 G5 PowerBooks.

Now what I'd like to know is: is the low power chip the same as the GX, or is it another variant? And does it have anything "extra" to give it an advantage over the current G4 chips?

Pip pip!

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Bucolic Old Sir Henry Which fits rather nicely with the DigiTimes piece that suggested Q2 (Apr-Jun) 2005 G5 PowerBooks. Now what I'd like to know is: is the low power chip the same as the GX, or is it another variant? And does it have anything "extra" to give it an advantage over the current G4 chips? Pip pip!

Well personally, I think it is a different variant. But, no one exactly knows except for morpheus maybe. The G5m would have a way faster FSB then the horrendus 167 Mhz FSB of the G4. The 7448 is supposed to hit 200 Mhz. But, that is still pretty bad.