Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
IBM Businesses Portables (Apple) Apple Hardware

PowerPC 750GX Begins Sampling Next Month 119

Posted by pudge from the what-no-mobile-g5 dept.
Trollaxor writes "The June issue of IBM's PowerPC Processor News features an article on the latest G3, Big Blue's PowerPC 750GX. The chip, which begins sampling next month, runs at 1.1 GHz and has 1 megabyte of on-chip L2 cache. Could this be Apple's next speedbump to the iBook?" Or, maybe, they will kill the iBook altogether in favor of the 12" AlBook.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PowerPC 750GX Begins Sampling Next Month More

PowerPC 750GX Begins Sampling Next Month

Comments Filter:

  • goodbye to G3 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by boomerny ( 670029 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @11:24AM (#6339961)
    with G5's announced, why would they still produce any G3 machines? G5 for pro, G4 for consumer seems the path to go. An iBook with a G4 and Altivec should run Jaguar and Panther much better than the G3 versions. They could use features and clock speed to differentiate between iBook G4 and Powerbook G4 until the G5 Powerbooks are ready.

    • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:5, Informative)

      by Elwood P Dowd ( 16933 ) <judgmentalist@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @11:59AM (#6340363) Journal
      G5 Powerbooks may be a long time in the making. The G5 produces a lot more heat than the 970 Powerbook fanatics expected. Apple's chief of hardware design said that the G5s wouldn't be seeing the inside of a portable for a long time. I can't imagine why he'd lie.

      Plus, the G3 uses much less power and heat than the G4, it's a lot cheaper, and with Quartz Extreme, Apple's UI isn't dependent on altivec for reasonable performance. I've got the last model of iBook with a non Quartz Extreme compatible graphics card, and I don't lust after a G4. I lust after QuartzGL.

      Gobi is family. Never disrespect him again in my presence.

      • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:2, Insightful)

        by dmarcoot ( 96402 )
        very good point. also, im not mistaken, wasnt there a IBM roadmap for g3 released about 4 months ago which had g3's hitting 1.5 ghz mark? i think g3 has more legs than g4 does in apples product line
      • Don't forget that the G3 "Gobi" is supposed to use 20W at the same speed...

        The G3 is a fucking GREAT laptop chip.
      • I've got the last model of iBook with a non Quartz Extreme compatible graphics card, and I don't lust after a G4.

        Then, I assume, you haven't read the system requirements for iCat AV, which requires a G4. Actually, I'm not that impressed by iChat AV, since real time communication removes the one reason I like IM, but I digress. Apple seem to be putting 'requires AltiVec' on their comsumer products, making a G4 a minimum requirement.

        • I've run the Audio functionality of iChatAV on both an eMac and an iBook laptop with no problems whatsoever. If it does require a G4, it is only for the video conferencing. The software runs fine otherwise. -Hill

        • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:3, Interesting)

          by King Babar ( 19862 )
          I'm not that impressed by iChat AV, since real time communication removes the one reason I like IM, but I digress.

          I agree that it's not exactly a replacement for IM per se, but it's a much more practical person-to-person video-conferencing solution than I have seen, and with audio only and a broadband connection, it's free phonecalls at the margin. :-)

        • iChat AV will install on any Mac capable of running OS X 10.2.6. The video works on a 400 MHz G4 and may even work on a 350 MHz G4. However, the video will not work on any G3 running at less than 600 MHz. The video does work fine on a 700 MHz iBook (a G3, of course).

          In the past I have run FireWire video on a 400 MHz G3 PowerBook with no problems. For that matter, I have done NTSC video on a 100 MHz PPC601.

          I have no doubt that Apple has instituted a rather artificial lower limit on G3 video participati

      • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:2, Insightful)

        by bdsesq ( 515351 )
        Apple's chief of hardware design said that the G5s wouldn't be seeing the inside of a portable for a long time. I can't imagine why he'd lie.

        Because once he says G5 notebooks are around the corner -- NO ONE will buy a G4 never mind a G3 notebook
        • Because once he says G5 notebooks are around the corner -- NO ONE will buy a G4 never mind a G3 notebook

          While I agree that Powerbook sales would take a serious hit, I doubt iBook sales would be noticeably affected, if at all. The iBooks are inexpensive but nice laptops. For most college students, they are the perfect computer. If you are shopping for an iBook, I doubt the chip in the high end Powerbook line is going to affect your decision.

      • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @03:49PM (#6343167)
        "Apple's chief of hardware design said that the G5s wouldn't be seeing the inside of a portable for a long time. I can't imagine why he'd lie."

        First off the comments you refer to were made by Greg Joswiak, head of hardware MARKETING, not design, and he said not "anytime soon", which is pretty darn vague and not the same thing as not for a long time. Furthermore, a marketing chief has to be worried about inventory on the shelf, not the stuff on the drawing board ... and that's as good a reason as any to mislead buyers about future product intro dates.

      • Re:goodbye to G3 (Score:3, Interesting)

        by jo_ham ( 604554 )
        Word.

        I have the 600Mhz iBook with the 8Mb rage card - the last iBook to be made that doesn't support QE.

        I'm happy with my CPU, but I'd kill for a QE-capable graphics chip.

        I suspected that IBM would roll out these >1Ghz G3s after the G5 was announced. Now that Apple can't be embarrased that their consumer line will be equal or greater clock speed than their "pro" G4 line, they're free to bump the iBook right up there well past the 1Ghz mark.

        The iBook isn't going away - it fits a particular part of the

  • g3s are cool (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zojas ( 530814 ) <kevin@astrophoenix.com> on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @11:31AM (#6340049) Homepage
    literally! much less heat than a g4, which is great for a laptop.

    also, a g3 is faster than a g4 for non-altivec operations. I even have toy benchmarks [desertsol.com] to prove it!

    • Re:g3s are cool (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I'm typing on an 800 mhz ibook and my left wrist gets fairly warm. Of course, I've only ever heard the fan run once, bu I suspect a 1.1 ghz G3 will need some more cooling, even though it's cooler than a g4.

      anyone know how hot the currently shipping 900mhz ibooks run? Does the fan spin up often.

      • Re:g3s are cool (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        That's your hard drive, sir.

        • Re:g3s are cool (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Well, since the hard drive, the CPU, and the graphics chipset use a single heatspreader, it is all three of them.
    • This is indeed true, as in P3 vs. P4 comparisons. However the G4 has always had more pipeline stages, so it can be clocked faster, more than enough to offset the the G3 being faster at equivalent clock frequency.
      • But clearly it could not be clocked that much faster. That's why the G4 sucked so much (at the end of its life span).

      • Re:g3s are cool (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Toraz Chryx ( 467835 )
        It has more to do with the fact that Apples G4 implementations have been more brute force than their G3 implementations

        G3 900Mhz w/512KB L2 on a 100Mhz bus, no L3
        G4 1000Mhz w/256KB L2 on a 167Mhz bus, 1MB L3

        If they were to go balls out with the G3 and run the FSB at 200Mhz (which the IBM spec sheets say they'll do.) paired up with some appropriate ram.. I don't think it would _outrun_ the G4, but it would close the gap one hell of a lot.

  • maybe not for new macs; upgrades would be nice (Score:4, Interesting)

    by alien666 ( 623909 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @12:12PM (#6340511) Journal
    I'm not going to shell out $600 bucks for a 1 gigahertz G4 upgrade for my trusty 400mhz G3 server, but I might consider a 1 gigahertz G3 if the price was under $300.

    This is hardly an Apple story. The G3 (aka PPC 750) has many applications other than Macs.

    P.S. It's only a G3, G4, or G5 when it is used in a Mac, otherwise it's just a plain old PowerPC.

  • Eliminating the iBook (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HebrewToYou ( 644998 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @12:17PM (#6340577)
    "Or, maybe, they will kill the iBook altogether in favor of the 12" AlBook." Apple still needs a sub $1000 laptop for college students that provides e-mail, web browsing, instant messaging and small ventures into the graphical arts. There is no way a PowerBook would ever breach the $1000 barrier... The G3 processor still has legs. My iMac DV Special Edition (purchased in 1999) runs Jaguar quite well with only 256MB of RAM at a 400Mhz clock speed. Throw a 1.1Ghz G3 with 512MB RAM and that would be one kickass machine. It would run quietly, have a more compact design and offer speeds that would, if not by benchmark than by real-world usage, equal that of a much-higher clocked Pentium 3.
    • I second that Apple would never eliminate the iBook, as it is a great option for budget-conscious students! I have a Sony VAIO right now with a 15.2" screen, and all I want to do is get rid of it! It is a pain in the butt to lug around my campus all the time! I'm working all summer long so that I can afford a nice iBook, or maybe a 12" AlBook, but the iBook is much more likely because of price reasons. If Apple were to EOL the iBook line they would be eliminating a huge intro market, and with the Switch cam
      • Apple will certainly keep the iBook around forever, but I certainly expect it to go G4 eventually (certainly by the time PowerBook goes G5). The big advantage of the G3 was that it was cheap and power efficient. The new Motorola G4 chips are going to be as cheap and power efficient.

        There are lots of reasons why Apple would like to have ALL new Macs have AltiVec, so they can rely on its awesomeness. Note that iChat AV requires a G3 600+, or any G4.
        • What new G4s? Where has Motorola announced any realistic plans for fiture G4s? Sure, they claim that they'll have 64-bit and dual-core chips out in a few years, but they were saying the same things a few years ago.

          IBM has a solid roadmap for the G3. The 750GX looks to be a good speed improvement over the 750FX, while maintaining the features Apple needs in a CPU - low power consumption and low heat generation. IBM's future G3, the 750VX, is rumored to have a 400 MHz bus, Altivec and possibly SMP support.

          W

          • Re:iBook G4 (Score:3, Informative)

            by benwaggoner ( 513209 )
            I'm talking about this Bad Boy:

            http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_s um mary.jsp?code=MPC7457&nodeId=03C1TR04670871865 3

            Should be shipping in quantity Q3 of this year.
    • I'd like Apple to ratchet-up the bus speed on the next iBooks to 166 or 200 MHz, they'd have to use faster-than-standard memory though. I don't think it would be a problem, as I'd bet a lot of 144-pin laptop ram can clock up to 166MHz. Apple could also swap out the memory controller for one that handles DDR, or they could sell their own memory 'dertified' for the iBook, they'd make a killing on it.

  • What about Panther? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TechnoPope ( 516563 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @12:31PM (#6340767) Homepage
    A lot of this stuff will really hinge on Panther. It will be tough for apple to sell G3's if Panther doesn't run well on the processor. I know Jaguar runs fine for what it does, but it still misses having Quartz. How much of Panther will require more than what the G3 can handle.

    What's worse is that there is no guarantee from Apple that they will even continue to really care about the G3. They are already trying to steer people away from the sub 1ghz G4's with the creation of Pixlet. So it definitely leaves a hole with concern to the G3.

    I hate to say it, but the G3's time may be almost up.

    • Re:What about Panther? (Score:4, Informative)

      by andfarm ( 534655 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @01:01PM (#6341141)
      I have heard from several insiders that Panther actually runs better than Jaguar did on low-end machines.
      • Yes I remember reading on a Mac site that Panther dev preview is faster than Jaguar on a Bondi iMac.
      • And Apple's OS X will continue to get faster and faster on all CPUs because they're stilll getting it more and more optimized. They use GCC, which has a LOT of room to grow on the PPC arch (not to say that it's bad now). I think Panther uses GCC-3.3, which has a new processor pipeline description model (DFA) that makes scheduling for a particular CPU easier to describe and produces code that takes better advantage of the CPU.

        Also, (AFAIK) Mac OS X has the ability to put multiple compiled versions of code i
        • > Resource forks are kewl!

          To be a bit pedantic, resource forks aren't what make this work anymore. Although HFS resource forks are still supported under OS X (from the command line, try less path/to/file/rsrc to view the resource fork!) but they are officially deprecated for Cocoa apps. Multiple binaries are supported by putting several binaries in the data fork of the file -- the MachO standard allows for this, as you said.

      • I can say as an outsider running Panther on a 14" 700 iBook it is indeed faster.

        The install is faster, the little windows that slide down when you agree to a EULA are faster, everything is quicker. Even the genie effect is faster. I'm assuming that a lot of the speed can be attributed to optimization of Quartz Extreme, which contrary to the grandparent does indeed run on iBooks. QE doesn't care what processor you're using, all it cares about is 16MB VRAM.

        One thing to note is that the default file system
        • I agree with all of the above, except that the rollover effect feature of the rapid user switching relys on quartz extreme, which is not present on my 15" TiBook 500 mHz. Panther is exceptionally fast also on my IMac DVSE 400 and shows a performance boost to most apps. I have personally found few bugs. Expose has become impossible to live without. Now if iSight would run under 600 mHz....

    • Re:Pixlet and Quartz Extreme (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Johnny Mozzarella ( 655181 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @01:25PM (#6341405)
      Pixlet is designed for HD quality video with good compression. How many FinalCut Pro users are working on iBooks?

      QuartzExtreme is not dependent on the CPU but on the GPU. There is no reason why Apple couldn't continue to use G3 processors and upgrade the video hardware to support QuartzExtreme.

      Rumor has it that the next generation of G3 processors will also have AltiVec. This will extend the lifespan of teh G3 line of processors.

      The G3 has 2 major factors going for it low cost and low power. The G3 will continue to find a niche in Apple's product line. Perhaps we will see it in future iPads or other consumer lifestyle devices.
    • Yeaah, man, the G3 is a beleaguered platform!
    • G3 machines don't miss Quartz - all OS X machines use Quartz, which is Apple's name for it's graphics system.

      Some G3 machines miss Quartz Extreme, which is the hardware accelerated form of Quartz, where the OS passes off all the drawing and compositing tasks to the graphics chip - it's completely CPU independent. If you have a graphics chip that will support it, it will work on a G3 system. Every iBook with an 700Mhz or higher has a graphics card that supports Quartz Extreme.

      A 1Ghz G3 with 512/1Gb RAM and
    • Panther is running fine on my pre 600 MHz iBook -- better than Jaguar as per some other readers' comments.

      Quartz Extreme's minimum requirements are a 16MB OpenGL video card; it works better with 32MB. Radeons are NOT required -- Quartz Extreme is scalable.
  • The G3 is still a good, fairly fast, cool-running chip. I've seen plenty of gumdrop iMacs still kickin' butt out there, same with the iBook. But now we have the G5. Apple isn't going to have a spread of three generations of processors in their line-up. We could ramble on and on about technical features, etc, but the simple marketing is that there will be the "low-end" G4s and the pro-level G5s. No more G3.

    • Re:G3s can't go on (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sean23007 ( 143364 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @03:56PM (#6343257) Homepage Journal
      If IBM can continue to improve the G3 like this, why not drop Motorola's dead-in-the-water G4 and sell the G5 as the high end chip and continue to sell the G3 as the low end chip? If IBM can keep this up, the G3 will surpass the G4, performance-wise, fairly soon. Especially if the rumors about AltiVec support and 1.5 GHz are true.
      • Now THAT is a very good question. I actually stopped working and thought about it all for a minute. I agree, in terms of performance, it would be a good thing to do. Motorola sat on their laurels way too long and figured Apple would stick with them forever. Not wise to upset Mr. Jobs though.

        In terms of marketing, I would think that they would rename the chip and have it not be G3 per se. Hm...now I must ponder. What WILL Apple put in the iBooks?
      • While you could make a very good technical argument about ditching the G4 altogether and going with the new G3's in the iBooks, iMacs, and eMacs, I just don't see how it could work in the iMacs and eMacs from a marketing standpoint. Your average consumer would be very confused if they were looking at an older G4 iMac or a newer G3 (750 GX) iMac.

        I just hope Apple sticks with the G3 in the iBook. It looks like a dream laptop chip for power usage and heat, and it would still run virtually everything you need
      • But adding AltiVec to the G3 would negate all the advantages of the G3 that keep it alive. Altivec is really 80% useless, it accelerates a few media operations at the expense of power consumption, die size, and cost to produce.

        Remember that the G3 chip is primarily marketed for use in big routers and other embedded applications, where altivec is useless. Apple uses it because it works well and costs very little.

        Adding AlitVec to the G3 would be like adding SSE to the PII, but even more so.

        Now, if IBM has

        • Maybe it is?!? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by MarcQuadra ( 129430 ) *
          Whoops! I just got to thinking. I may be wron in the above post.

          The G4 is going away, it won't clock-up enough, and Apple pays through the nose for them. The IBM 970 is a power/heat hog (compared to the G3 and G4) because it's based on the POWER4 chips. IBM has the G3, which is low power and heat, but a bit feature-starved. I don't think the 970 will ever scale down well for laptop usage, it's from a family of CPUs with no power considerations to worry of.

          IBM could certainly reengineer the G3 line with

          • I don't think the 970 will ever scale down well for laptop usage, it's from a family of CPUs with no power considerations to worry of.

            You should read this [macopinion.com] article when you have a chance... It seems that the prospects aren't as bad as they originally appeared. Plus, IBM is supposedly scaling down to a 0.9 micron fab process (from 0.13 micron) on their PPC970s early next year, which should reduce power consumption and heat dissipation a fair bit. These are interesting times...

      • I completely agree with this. Although I do own a 733Mhz G4 and love it dearly, the G4 is just not what it should be. In my opinion, Apple should use the new PPC chips from IBM (G3s) on a new motherboard (faster bus, DDR maybe, better gfx) and just call it the new G4. The G4 naming scheme goes against the geek in me, but it's marketing.
        • They could call it the the G4X, or the XG4, or the xG4, or something that would make it seem more extreme (and somehow more desirable) to the masses and at the same time allow people like us to distinguish between new and old.
      • Jobs made a comment once at a press conference when someone asked about ditching Motorola that would indicate they probably will, as soon as possible. The G3+Altivec chip was announced before the 970 was found to be so hot, so at that time it seemed redundant, since we all assumed that the G4 would move to the low end (temporarily) and the 970 would fill everything else. Now we know that the 970 is pretty hot, and even the die-shrink version might not cut it for all mobile applications, so your idea seems t
    • You are right. Apple has been systematically dumping G3 processors in all of its products. First was weaning off the Powermacs, then the Powerbooks, then Apple buried the old iMac, and now, the iBook will have to give up at some point. The G3 does have its low power consumption and heat benefits, but it will have to go I think. Though there is some light at the end of the tunnel: The G3 is just as fast at non-Altivec optimized operations. This will mean that it is faster at rendering websites or word

  • No Altivec (Score:4, Insightful)

    by am46n ( 615794 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @01:02PM (#6341143)
    Until the G3 has an AltiVec unit, Apple will not be ditching Motorola completely.

    The next PB will probably use moto's G4+. Apple's reluctance to put the same chip in both its "consumer" and "pro" laptops will mean that the iBook wont get Altivec for a while.
    • There's nothing to stop Apple (a) switching to IBM's G3s with Altivec; (b) shipping consumer models with 1.2GHz G5s; (c) naming the 1.2GHz G5 the GWhizItGoesInAConsumerMac.

      That said, Apple may choose to keep some of its eggs in Motorola's basket the way it kept some of its eggs in IBM's basket when IBM steadfastly ignored Altivec. The problem for Apple with sticking by Motorola remains that average consumers simply do NOT believe a 1GHz G4 is as fast as a 2GHz Celeron. Hell, I don't.

  • Trollaxor must love the Apple and PowerPC... (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Apple

    PowerPC

  • G3 won't be around long (Score:4, Informative)

    by dafz1 ( 604262 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @02:02PM (#6341840)
    With Apple's announcing that beige G3s won't be supported for Panther, that's probably an indication of Apple moving away from the six year old processor.

    As for Apple not using the same processor in pro v. consumer notebooks, the same was true in Power Macs and iMacs until the iMac G4(and then eMac). There will probably be a short time in which Apple will put the G4 into an iBook replacement to co-exist with the Powerbooks.

    My guess is they will put a new name on the 12" AlBook and maybe even a "new" 14" version. The 17" with a better processor(MPC7457 G4)/motherboard(DDR333 RAM) combo will be the main selling feature until they can get heat to a manageable level on the G5.
    • The reason they dropped support for the beige G3 is because it is slow as ass. Those were like 300 MHz. At 1+ GHz, the G3 would be able to move.
    • that's probably an indication of Apple moving away from the six year old processor.

      That may be the case, but if I'm reading the information about the 750GX correctly, it's actually a brand new processor[1]! It's not really that surprising though, because I then realized if the 750GX had been available 6 years ago, Apple would have had a nice kit at the time.

      [1] based on an older design with minor improvements to bring it in line with other contemporary chips.
    • With Apple's announcing that beige G3s won't be supported for Panther, that's probably an indication of Apple moving away from the six year old processor.

      No, it's an indication they're moving away from the six year old motherboard. Blue & white G3s are still fully supported, as are G3 iMacs and iBooks, and I expect this to be the case until they drop support for everything older than Sawtooth.

    • With Apple's announcing that beige G3s won't be supported for Panther, that's probably an indication of Apple moving away from the six year old processor.

      There is nothing wrong with a 6 year old processor. Look at the Alpha for a good example, despite compaq's and HP's best efforts it is still a fast and a worthy processor.

      IBM to there credit have been updating the powerpc processor. I think that for a small laptop you really can't how past the powerpc, look at what else is out there and decide

  • I can't imagine them phasing out the iBooks right now. This being the "year of the laptop" and all, the price point on the iBooks is just right for competing with low-end PC offerings.

    The iBook is also a more durable machine, designed to better hold up to the kind of abuse you'd expect from students and whatnot.
  • They renamed the ibm 970 to "G5" for marketing reasons, so if they used the 750GX why on earth would they give it the outdated sounding G3 name? Calling it a G750 or G5e or something else would be far better from a marketing point of view.

  • Ibook may need a little more than the 1.1 ghz g3 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Enrique1218 ( 603187 ) on Tuesday July 01, 2003 @06:35PM (#6344707) Journal
    If apple keeps the G3 in the iBook for another year, it may not be able to compete against other sub 1000 notebooks with desktop 2.2 Ghz P4, 15 inch displays, and combo drives. You can argue small size and battery life (I would agree), but that would still be a tough sell to those on a slim budget and don't look that far down the spec sheet. Unless Apple leverages the low power capabilities of the G3 and built a sub 5 pound notebook with a 14 inch display to replace 12 inch, I wont be able to recommend it.
    • Ah, but there are many who view the small size as the key factor for buying the 12" model. For some, it's more imortant that it fits in their backpack with a lot of room to spare.

      I doubt they will kill the 12" model.
    • When talking about Apple v. Wintel, let's not forget Centrino. Intel certainly thinks that less power hungry processors are the way to go in laptops, even at the expense of MHz. They are planning on phasing out any P4s in laptops. It would seem the size/battery life advantages of the iBook will be coming to an end.
      • But the current Centrino offerings pale in comparison to the iBook - for all intents and purposes, they're iBook copies that have been run through a bad photocopier several times.

        Ugly, creaky, Windows-based etc etc.

        I think the iBook will get faster, much faster, while still keeping its low power consuption. It will also retain its good looks and rock solid build quality. I've yet to see anything in the PC world that even comes close.
        • I agree that the iBook is a great laptop -- I've had mine for 2 years now. But that doesn't mean you should discount the competition so quickly.

          Firt of all, the Centrino is a processor (the Pentium M) + built in wireless card. It's not a laptop. That would be like calling the G3 a laptop. Lots of different companies make P-M/Centrino based laptops. The Centrino compares favorably with the P4 in terms of performance, while consuming remarkably little power. As Apple themselves will admit [apple.com], a single P4 co
          • I agree with you on the Centrino point - my argument being that Intel, and the PC world, are playing catchup to Apple.

            The G3 and G4 are different chips entirely - IBM's processes and chip fab factories are different to Motorola's. The fact that Motorola doesn't want to put in the time/money/effort to get the G4 to scale past 1.42Ghz doesn't mean that IBM won't be able to with their chip. I'd expect to see the G3 going up in speed by quite a bit over the next year or so.

Slashdot Top Deals

Hold on to the root.

Close