On 1/2/09 7:25 AM, "Steve R" <mailing.lists.2...@gmail.com> Broadcast into the ether:
> With Apple going the Intel chip route, I'm wondering if the chip on a > purely Mac OS (and not being used for Windows) is faster/better for > Mac apps? A few things that a lot of these other wise posters are failing to mention is the fact that IBM and Motorola have been letting Apple down with promises of "this speed at this time" for years. They have time and time again failed to deliver the processor they promised to Apple at the time they said they could. Couple that with the fact that their manufacturing process that just stinks by comparison to Intel. The IBM PowerPC 970FX (a.k.a. G5 Processor) originally was fabricated on a 121nm die (970). Then with the advent of the 970FX they were able to reduce the die to 65nm (which is still huge by standards). The larger the die the hotter the chip runs. Current Intel chips are made using a 45nm die process. This makes them cooler and more stable. So with Apple wanting to push the speed (especially in it's laptops) it was basically stuck in "G4 land" speedwise due to the G5 (970)'s heat issues. So it was a "roadmap issue." Meaning that Intel had a brighter future down the line than IBM or Motorola (or AMD for that matter). Early in the 1990's Apple, IBM and Motorola had an alliance called AIM (named with the first initial of each company). IBM and Motorola had differing philosophies on how to proceed with the RISC chips with regard to extended instruction sets. Apple wanted speed and both Motorola and IBM wanted to focus on imbedded application markets (like routers, PDA's, MP3 players or even complicated control systems). With Apple choosing Intel as it's processor supplier AIM has basically been dissolved. And I disagree with a previous poster who said that "IBM will catch up and blow Intel away." Intel has a roadmap that no processor developer is going to be able to catch as far as speed goes. They are by far the best desktop and laptop chip maker in the world. I speculate that IBM and Motorola will go off onto their tangential projects and highly specialized imbedded application markets and do quite well, but not in the mainstream computer market. Now if only ATI and Nvidia could find a clear winner. ATI had made marginal gains in the graphics processor market but recently leapfrogged Nvidia (my graphics proc of choice) with the new 4800 series. Ugh. Kyle Hansen -- This is the way the world ends...not with a bang, but a twitter. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
