#Power PC
32 messages in this thread
Just read something about Motorola coming out with the the POWER PC chip?
It's supposed to be in the $400 – 600 range, and be paralleled performance
wise with Intel's Pentium. The article sez it's isn't windoz compatible,
so I take it, it is not any type of 486/P5 replacment.
But will it work in the Amiga? Is this a new marketing name for the 68060,
or a RISC based Processor?
Dave
Elite MicroComputers – Flying high on AutoPilot
Dave,
Here is the lowdown on the PowerPC chip…
* Its going to be even cheaper than you mention. Quantity price is more
like $300, which is cheaper than most Intel CPUs (486's).
* It is comparable to the Pentium in terms of power.
* It is completely non-compatible with the 68k series of processors. It
is a relatively new RISC design, based on the IBM processor set from their
RS/6000 workstation line.
* A completely new OS is being put together for it. Depending on who you
talk to, it will run native apps, Mac, OS/2, DOS and Windows. Apple
claims to have a functioning 68k emulation layer built into their version
of the OS, with the Mac Toolbox code calls being translated to RISC code.
Can't wait to see these dogs run 🙂
* No one has jumped on the bandwagon yet, accept for IBM and Apple, the
folks that banded together to develop it in the first place.
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
There are a larger number of companies that just IBM and Apple that
have backed the PowerPC chip: Harris Corporation is one, and there
are others.
Steve,
Perhaps I should have said that no one of consequence is using the
PowerPC. So far, there is no one outside of Apple and IBM that is
trying to get the chip onto the average desktop.
Well, thank you so very much. I work for that company in the OS
group. It's nice to know that we're not of any consequence. 🙁
Steve,
Don't get so defensive – I meant, anyone of consequence to IBM and Apple.
If some of the bigger names in desktop PCs don't pick up the chip, it
won't become a "standard". This would be a big problem to their marketing
plan.
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
I completely disagree. IBM and Apple are *the* big names on the desktop
and it's a standard by default because of that. This chip extends far
beyond the desktop anyway. Frankly I don't think they really care about
those other clone companies, or what they do..
Steve
"I don't think they really care about those other clone companies, or what
they do…"
Perhaps this is why IBM has a new CEO, known as "Max the Axe" in the
decimated halls of IBM. :^) Perhaps that's why Apple, with a VERY good
product, arguably much, much better than ANY pc, never even took 10% of
the market from the almighty clones.
Someone here just said "perception is reality". You'd better believe it!
Although I agree, it appears that they beleive exactly as you said.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Steve,
They must care, since they are trying to interest these same companies in
adopting the chip.
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
If those other companies don't adopt the chip, it's not going to stop IBM,
Apple, Motorola and other companies from using it.
Steve,
Perhaps I am not making myself clear, but it seems to me that Apple and IBM are
not simply trying to their own thing; they are trying to achieve Intel-like
hegemony. If others do not adopt their "standard", they are not likely to sell
the amount of machines they are counting on.
If the PowerPC platform does not become a "standard", IBM and Apple will lose
market share that they have now using off the shelf chips.
You're making yourself perfectly clear. They're not trying to do their
own thing. I just don't think that IBM and Apple are going to stop
because other companies don't jump on the bandwagon. They're going to
continue whether other companies join or not. Some have already joined,
and more will follow.
Whether or not other companies adopt the PowerPC chip will have not effect
Apple sales. The real question there is whether or not the migration path
that Apple is trying to build will allow their current software base to
run on the new machines. If they succeed in doing that, the machines will
succeed because people will buy them, just as they do other Apple
products.
Now, as to IBM…. No telling with them. 🙂 I think the real key here
is what Microsoft will do. If they offer the same sort of software
migration path, hardware companies will follow.
Steve
No one of consequence? Huh? Apple and IBM are the two biggest
manufacturers of PCs in the world.
Users count, not manufacturers. IBM (in the desktop market) is 90
some odd percent based on Intel technology. Apple is 100% based on
Motorola technology. The facts of the world of desktop computing are
that if it won't run DOS or Finder…it won't sell…doesn't matter
how neat it is because users won't buy it. Witness our own
favorite..the Amiga.
So, just because Apple and IBM are the 2 largest computer
manufacturers, doesn't mean they can push whatever they want on the
public.
Don
Don,
You say that users won't buy a mashine which can't run a finder or
dos… Well don't you think that in that case they should ALL be buying
amiga????? just stick in 2 emulator cards and you're running both and a
third! 🙂
Say "on ara!"
Sean
Sean,
I hope it's obvious that I'm very PRO Amiga. But, if I wanted to run
Finder or MS-DOS I certainly wouldn't buy an Amiga just so I could put an
emulator card in it.
Of course, if I already had an Amiga..then putting a card in is an
option.
And, from a marketing viewpoint…those of us that already own Amigas
don't really count…what really counts is new users, who buy new
machines.
Don
I don't know how well Pink will sell, but the Mac OS is already being
ported to the PowerPC and future Macs will be based around it. It
will include a 68k emulator, and apps will be recompiled for the new
chip. So the PowerPC may not be the ultimate in success, but I think
it will do very well, especially for a RISC chip.
Paul,
I'm of the opinion that if the emulator doesn't run at least as fast as
the original…who cares. Of course, in this case…I have no idea if the
PowerPC in 68x emulation mode is or isn't faster than the original.
As to porting the Mac OS…who cares. The OS is worthless unless the
software companies also port their software…or the emulation mode is at
least twice as fast as running on a native Mac (or whatever). It usually
takes a 2x speedup for the users to really notice it.
Don
I'm not sure what will happen – MSoft has an 80k emulator built into
NT for its RISC platforms, and I doubt (except on the really
expensive platforms) that a 2x speedup will happen – but recompiled
apps _will_ run faster, and there are plenty of NT apps coming out.
Not whordes, yet, but enough on the high end to at least open the
door.
As to Macs, 68k-compiled apps will probably run slower on the first
few PowerPC Macs, but I'm sure Apple will manage to pull several
PowerPC recompiled Apps out of the wood-work, and unlike
Clone-owners, Mac people won't have a choice – the 060 is the last
68k chip, so where else are they going to go? I can't imagine that
the entire Mac platform is going to instantly die when it shifts to
another chip.
And what are we going to do when the Amiga shifts to another chip? I
hope not curl up and die. (If I don't get a new one sooner and
assuming nothing strange and unfortunate happens) When it comes time
for me to get a new Amiga I'm not going to get an 060 Amiga when the
entire platform is shifting to, say, Alpha Amigas – 68k apps would
run reasonably fast on an Alpha and as time went by (I would hope)
there would be more and more native Alpha apps.
It's a different game for us (Macs and Amigas) than it is for Clones.
Our chips are drying up.
I'm not so sure that the 68060 will be the last of the line….
Bob Comer — Cruising the nets on AutoPilot
Why's that? Their main customer – Apple – is switching to the
PowerPC. And backwards-compatability can only be carried so far,
especially when it's done well. (Try telling that to those #*$@@#s
at Intel. :() ) But do you know something the rest of us don't? Do
tell… Do tell.
Well…it may not matter what anyone does for their "new line" of
computers. You see, there's a limit to the amount of power Joe and
Jane Average User can use. You speed up a desktop to the point that
it "beats" the user's think time…and any extra power is generally
wasted.
Of course, it depends on the applications, but for the Average user
an '040 in the Motorola line or a 486 in the Intel line is just about
at that point. For a server..sure, the more power the better
presuming there's enough client apps running to keep the server
relatively busy.
As to using the PowerPC chip in a Mac or an Amiga or MS-DOS box,
why? Why buy a box that is slower than the current native boxes? Oh
sure, there will always be those that want the latest and greatest
whether it benefits them or not.
Think about what people are doing (for the most part) with
computers today. How much of that will benefit from a faster CPU?
I think you'll find that the vast majority have just about all the
CPU they can use right now. It's *new* applications that the new
breed of CPU's can spawn that will more than likely be the target of
the latest and greatest. For example, video and animation
packages..they probably will benefit from the newer chips.
Significant improvements in areas like desktop publishing,
multi-media presentation packages will probably follow also.
But word processing, spread sheets, local databases…nah…they'll
stay pretty much right where they are.
Don
040s and 486s aren't even close to that point. I have an HP Vectra
486/25T at work – respectable though not cutting edge by any means –
and an ATI Graphics Ultra+ card, and the video is anything but faster
than my think time. The display at high resolutions and color depths
is sluggish – even 1024x768x8 is pretty slow. Of course it's a
wickedly fast DOS box, but who wants DOS, especially as a long term
platform? Not me, anyway.
The increase in video information has substantially outpaced CPU
developement – a 486/25 is something like 40x faster than an 8086.
But whereas a CGA display took up about 64k (I'm guessing at the
exact numbers on that) a 1280x1024x24 display takes up something like
62x that amount of memory, outstripping the increase in CPU power,
which also has to be divided up among more other areas. (My numbers
probably aren't exact, but my point is correct – I lifted it out of a
BYTE article I read a few months ago.) And why should 1280×1024 be
the be-all and end-all of display resolutions? I hunger for a
larger, sharper, more detailed display. Crisper text, more room to
multitask, more of a page on-screen at once. Multimedia workspaces.
And sooner or later FED displays will become a commercial reality,
opening the door to humungous flat cheap displays. Think of the
bandwidth required then. There are always new uses for power. So
far those uses are growing faster than the power supply.
And I don't think video and animation and sound will be limited to a
small group of elite users – applications will incorporate them,
operating environments will incorporate them, and there will always
be people poo-pooing the importance of animated buttons and
high-quality computer synthesized speech, but these are things that,
used properly, can make one's working environment more attractive,
pleasant, user-friendly, information-dense, and productive.
And just think of the reams of data streaming in from all over the
world and beyond. As more and more of it comes online, more and more
people are going to want and use it. And it will become more
difficult to manage and sort through. I don't think anything is
going to seriously impede the ongoing computer revolution short of
major economic shifts – sure, the pace of upgrades will slow as
people become satisfied with their setups, but only, I think, to a
point.
> CPU power and word processors, local databases, etc
Don't forget: bigger CPUs/more resources seem to mean bigger executable files,
6 gazillion new features that nobody uses but have to be included anyway,
slothful compilers that generate several versions of the same thing to run on
the (slightly) different versions of said CPU/FPU/etc combinations out there,
etc, etc, etc
.. give us the power, we'll siphon it off to nowhere in no time flat.
Paul,
Please see my other messages…I was trying to say that if the major clone
makers, or computer makers, such as Dell, Gateway, Compaq, NEC, etc.,
don't adopt this as a "standard", it is going to put a big crimp in Apple
and IBM's marketing plan. Together, they hold a minority of the computer
pie…they will need more widespread adoption by other manufacturers.
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
I don't know, they could just well leave the other clone makers behind…
The PowerPC chipset, with a decent bus around it (micraochannel) is a
decent machine (The OS they're running needs work though (Pink may be
good, but it's vapor still))
Eventually people are going to wake up and decide that Windows is not all
that great. Amiga's could get more market share when that happens, but
probably the next "standard" is going to be something like PowerPC.
Bob Comer — Cruising the nets on AutoPilot
The PowerPC chip is a "RISC" based chip that is being developed in concert
with IBM.
> But will it work with the Amiga? A distinct possibility 🙂
Acutally the PowerPC is kindof targeted at the poor mans workstations
right now, and I'd rather go with an Alpha (for now), but your guess is as
good as mine what C= will go with.
The PowerPC is DEFINTELY not a 68060…
Bob Comer — Cruising the nets on AutoPilot
The Power PC is, as others have mentioned, a RISC chip based on
IBM's RS/6000 chip. It is intended for use in the IBM/Apple alliance
"new" system, using Taligent's PINK OS, though it will undoubtedly
run DOS and MAC software as well (indeed, rumors of System 7 running
on the RS/6000 are at least 6 months old now).
Motorola was brought in to manufacture the chips, and possibly
improve the design (though I doubt IBM would say so).
Motorola is a full year ahead of schedule on the Power PC, while Pink
remains nebulous.
The Power PC is currently being listed in 4 different configurations. The
inital release, the 601 will NOT be as powerful as a Pentium, though it
will be faster than a 486. The later models, starting with the 603, I
believe, are slated to be significantly more powerful than a Pentium.
Because of the problems developing an object-oriented OS, it remains to
be seen where the Power PC gets used.
It is completely unrelated to either the 68K line or the 88K line.
At a recent meeting at IBM here in Kansas City, the chip was mentioned (in
passing). I don't think commodore will be getting it's hands on the chip…
Apple has a huge investment in the design and the new Taligent operating system
is supposed to run on it.
It is interesting to note that IBM has estimated quantity shipping prices of
20,000 to be in the $300 range… Kinda forces Motorola's hand on the 060… I
wonder what kind of pricing it will have and how comparable it will be in terms
of performance. Seems to me that Motorola is playing both sides of the fence,
and if apple does go the way of the PowerPC what will that mean to the 680×0
based market….
> Seems to me that Motorola is playing both sides of the fence…
Hey, if it was good enough for Bill Gates….
No, not a new name. It's a cooperative venture between Motorola and IBM
(and, in a way, Apple, because they will be the first and biggest market
for the chip and because they're working with IBM too) and is based on the
IBM RS/6000 line of chips. The first in the PowerPC line is (I think) the
601, which is basically a scaled down, tightened, streamlined version of
the RS/6000 design. I don't have a firm figure on the price, but I think
the 601 will be _much_ cheaper than $400-$600 – it's designed to be a
cheap chip, and it's very simple. I think quantity prices are supposed to
start out at around $300, and are expected to drop fairly quickly (as
future PowerPC chips are rolled out, I guess) to something in the
neigborhood of _$100_ if you can believe that. A far cry from $900 bucks
for Pentiums in lots of 1000. It will roll out in early '94 – about the
same time as the '060.
Basically, IBM gave the designs for the RS/6000 line to Motorola and lent
Motorola the services of some RS/6000 engineers and then stepped back and
watched Motorola go at it. (At least that's the way I've heard it.)
Future versions of the PowerPC will offer a range of cost and
performance.
It will have slightly less than Pentium-class integer performance but
floating point performance a fair amount better than the Pentium. Macs
and the Mac OS will be built around the PowerPC line in the future. I'm
not sure what C= will do – the 68060 will be the last 0x0 chip and will
come out at around the same time as the first PowerPC, but they're still
basing the next generation of Amigas around (understandably) the '060 and
(not necessarily
understandably) haven't figured out which chip to go with in the future.
By the way, on a completely different topic, I just heard from my dealer
about some product which attaches to the bottom of the A1200 and gives the
user 2 additional A1200-style card slots. Is this in any way related to
the idea you mentioned a while ago? Either way, do you know anything
about it?
Paul