@Hammer

Quote:

Not much different to the current X86-to-RISC

Not much different in so far as the Intel and AMD IA-32 processors do it too. But much different in the sense that performance to do X86 wasn't great it was a better option to use a real X86 processor.

Itanium2 improved this as a 1.5Ghz Itanium2 ~ 1.5Ghz Xeon for X86. But again Xeon wins on price performance. If you're only going to do X86. For example you can get a Itanium2 Dell at 1.5Ghz for ~$6K or a 2.8Ghz Xeon Dell for ~$3K. If you primary purpose is to run X86 the Xeon will be 1.5x the performance for 1/2 the cost. No brainer for people if your purpose is IA-32 you won't buy the Itanium.

@Maczilla

Quote:

Rumor has it that a quad core Conroe powered Pro Mac tower will be

I sure hope they will ... and Quad G5s are becoming more affordable on ebay (below $2k).

A 4xG5 + a 7800GT is the closest dev system you can get for a PS3 (or a 360 for that matter).

And beside, one could test altivec optimized code for the Amiga, too.

- and, add an IntelBook to run the games under XP which you can't on the Quad PPC (actually, that's the only reason for me to by an intel mac: WinXP).

_________________
AmigaOne XE G3/933/VIA/FM801/R200 (fixed),
G3SE/600/Voodoo3/Sil680/RTL8139/SBLive! (noiseless!)
µA1-MK2/G3/933/R200/CMI8738
XE/G4 (broken 7450/800)

Quote:

Rogue wrote: I think people are overlooking a fundamental issue, and honestly, I can't believe I need to say it again: Hyperion CANNOT port to x86. Even IF they wanted. They do not have a license for x86, only for PPC. The whole discussion is so redundant I cannot express it. Matter of fact, there is no discussion. It has absolutely no foundation.

Then get a license.

@smithy

Quote:

Then get a license.

_________________
...wait... what?

@Legion

Quote:

Legion wrote: @smithy Quote: Then get a license.

What? Bernd did.

I don't think it's the license standing in the way, a license could be had. I just think nobody wants to do it. That's probably a bigger hurdle anyway.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@T_Bone

Quote:

don't think it's the license standing in the way, a license could be had. I just think nobody wants to do it.

A bit of a change -- Nobody wants to do it for free.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @T_Bone Quote: don't think it's the license standing in the way, a license could be had. I just think nobody wants to do it. A bit of a change -- Nobody wants to do it for free.

I don't think anyone wants to do it for money.

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

@Rogue

Quote:

I think people are overlooking a fundamental issue, and honestly, I can't believe I need to say it again: Hyperion CANNOT port to x86. Even IF they wanted. They do not have a license for x86, only for PPC. The whole discussion is so redundant I cannot express it. Matter of fact, there is no discussion. It has absolutely no foundation.

You just couldn't resist, could you? I'm not sure how you took any of the posts up to the point that you replied to somehow be directed at you or Hyperion. Did anyone mention Hyperion or OS4 at this point? I also find it interesteding that out of all of the platforms that were mentionned, you chose to comment only on the x86 with regards to licensing. Don't forget the many other porting ideas that have been shot down as not worth doing for some reason or other, like to PPC Macs, Pegs, PPC QEMU, etc., whether for OS4 OR any post-OS4 version, OR by anyone that owns the AmigaOS at that point.

Last edited by elatour on 20-Jul-2006 at 09:50 PM.
Last edited by elatour on 20-Jul-2006 at 09:44 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Hans

Quote:

I think that Mac's growth spurt is to do with the fact that switching to x86 is a much more high-profile change than just increasing thing CPU clock-speed or going to the next generation processor. This allowed them to create a rather big splash, with all the hype that goes along with it. The same thing would probably have happened if they had made some other "revolutionary change" to a different CPU.

Methinks the very effective advertising campaign has helped alot, along with the fact that people can also run a ton more software than they used to be since OSX came out because of the underlying Unix base and the easier porting this offered for Unix apps. It also helps that now one can very easily either dual boot Windows or run Windows hosted through a virtual machine without needing x86 emulation.

I think that there is still some oomf left to the growth spurt as result of the above, so we may yet see a year or two more out of this. But I guess only time will tell if Apple manages to turn this into a more serious momentum shifter, at least for the home consumer/entertainment/hobbyist side of things anyway.

Last edited by elatour on 20-Jul-2006 at 10:13 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@cHaOs667

Quote:

In my opinion they had similiar success if they had updated theyre I-Book and PowerBook Notebooks to current G4 or G5 CPUs and current GPUs...

I don't agree that this would have been the case. The fact that many people are now considering the Mac after many years of not giving a s#!t is perception not just technology. And with good marketting has also come some pretty good incentives to consider using Macs again...they now have more software than they used to and on a more modern, capable and robust OS, made possible by the fact that they moved from the classic OS to a Unix based OS and can now also run x86 stuff either natively or hosted on virtual machines, through dual-boot or through system virtualization.

Last edited by elatour on 20-Jul-2006 at 10:13 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@elatour

I think we still have to wait. It would be nice to have Microsoft not own the market they way they do right now. I think their success is due more to their advertising campagn rather than the move to Intel. Their commercials are all over the place and attack the PC at it's weak points.

@elatour

Quote:

elatour wrote: @Rogue Quote: I think people are overlooking a fundamental issue, and honestly, I can't believe I need to say it again: Hyperion CANNOT port to x86. Even IF they wanted. They do not have a license for x86, only for PPC. The whole discussion is so redundant I cannot express it. Matter of fact, there is no discussion. It has absolutely no foundation. You just couldn't resist, could you? I'm not sure how you took any of the posts up to the point that you replied to somehow be directed at you or Hyperion. Did anyone mention Hyperion or OS4 at this point? I also find it interesteding that out of all of the platforms that were mentionned, you chose to comment only on the x86 with regards to licensing. Don't forget the many other porting ideas that have been shot down as not worth doing for some reason or other, like to PPC Macs, Pegs, PPC QEMU, etc., whether for OS4 OR any post-OS4 version, OR by anyone that owns the AmigaOS at that point.

Here is yet another example of a thread that has *nothing to do with Amiga* (as almost every single thread in "General Computing and Technology"), yet gets a lot higher regarded than certain subjects close to the Amiga community.

But let's forget that, and *make* this Amiga related!

AFAIK, here is Hyperions mandate to create OS4:

Quote:

(square brackets are the relevant definitions from section "1.01 Definitions") "2.01 Appointment. Amiga hereby grants the Amiga One Partners ["means Eyetech and Hyperion collectively"] a right and license to use and modify the Software ["means the Source Code of AmigaOS 3.1 and the upgrades of AmigaOS 3.1 including but not limited to OS 3.5 and 3.9 and associated 'Boing Bags'"] and an exclusive right and license to market and distribute OS4 as a standalone version for the Target Hardware ["'Target-Hardware' means any PPC based hardware developed and marketed for the Amiga platform and userbase including but not limited to the hardware developed and marketed by Phase5, DCE and the AmigaOne hardware developed by Escena under contract with the Amiga One Partners"] and as an OEM version shipped with the Amiga One. Amiga furthermore grants the Amiga One Partners a right and license to use the Amiga trademarks in conjunction with the Amiga One. Hyperion shall develop Amiga OS 4.0 for the Target-Hardware with the minimal feature-set set out in Annex I and pursuant to the development guidelines set out in Annex I. Amiga acknowledges and accepts that Hyperion will bring in third party contractors (Annex II) to fulfill its contractual obligations."

This is the foundation for OS4's existence, the very reason to why it's here, and the explanation to the shape it's in. The shape is PPC (nothing else), Amiga Inc granted Hyperion this, and thanks to this there is an OS4.

X86 is not in the picture. If you want x86 Amiga, go use AROS. It's even Open Source! Hey, AROS has had everything "needed for success" for a decade soon (open source and x86), so no wonder it's so successful, right? (Spot the irony)

Anyway, I'm glad that MacOS found a new home on the x86 platform. That's the only reasonable architecture for a serious competitor on the desktop platform.

But for OS4, the PPC is just fine! I think lots of cool things are about to happen on the POWER side of the industry, much involves quite cool ideas for SoC's!

@elatour

Quote:

You just couldn't resist, could you?

There is something interesting in Rogue's reply, though.... He refers to Hyperion as "they". I am pretty sure that used to be "we"...

@umisef

Quote:

There is something interesting in Rogue's reply, though.... but first let me put on my tinfoil hat. He refers to Hyperion as "they". I am pretty sure that used to be "we"...

There, fixed it for ya.

Last edited by Legion on 21-Jul-2006 at 03:23 AM.

_________________
...wait... what?

@takemehomegrandma

Quote:

Here is yet another example of a thread that has *nothing to do with Amiga* (as almost every single thread in "General Computing and Technology"),...

Drawing parallels between other companies' current situations and that of the Amiga, then expressing a wish that previous, current and/or future owners of the Amiga would take a page from their succesful strategies, has everything to do with Amiga. Whether from/with OR without Hyperion OR OS4 in the picture was/is irrelevent to this discussion. However, somehow, you and Rogue have managed to turn this into a condescending "let's educate the masses about why Hyperion cannot bring OS4 to platform X" and "Why you are all a bunch of idiots for ever wanting to have things done any other way, whether in past, present or in the future" session. OS4 and Hyperion were brought up into the discussion by Rogue and yourself, not me. Unlike what you would have this thread turned into, this is not a "why OS4 should be ported to x86 and why isn't Hyperion doing it" thread.

I just can't understand some people's constant need to try control what people can and can't discuss on these forums. Why can't people just state their opinions, on the content of message instead of on whether the message has any merrit or relevance or not, and/or why the person is an idiot for posting it.

Last edited by elatour on 21-Jul-2006 at 03:50 AM.
Last edited by elatour on 21-Jul-2006 at 03:47 AM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@umisef

I believe he also said "don't try to read between the lines when I say something, because you won't find anything". Or something like that

@cHaOs667

Quote:

In my opinion they had similiar success if they had updated theyre I-Book and PowerBook Notebooks to current G4 or G5 CPUs and current GPUs...

The current 7448 is crippled with a slow FSB. MPC8641D Dual Core Processor's release date would have been late to capitalize the laptop bandwagon (factor in motherboard design phase/certification/supply pipeline).

Factor in wattage for NB and SB. For example,
ATI RD580 Express 3200 chipset has 8 watts TDP (max power).

The superseded Intel 82865G GMCH (Integrated Graphics @ 266 MHz)
Dual-channel / 4 DIMMs / 400 MHz DDR / 800 MHz FSB 12.9 W
Dual-channel / 2 DIMMs / 400 MHz DDR / 800 MHz FSB 11.8 W
Single-channel / 2 DIMMs / 400 MHz DDR / 800 MHz FSB 10.0 W

The TDP for the ICH5 is listed as 2.4 watts (Intel doc 25267301).

What was IBM CPC925 (Apple U3H) 's wattage before CPC945 low power release ("offers power management options enabling total power as low as 12 watts")?

My 2005 era MSI 635 laptop @C3 state has total system (AMD Turion MT, ATI PCI-Express chipset, 15.4" TFT, keyboard, 5400RPM 80GB HD, DVD-RW, WiFI, BlueTooth, 1GB RAM, ATI X700 GPU) enables a total power as low as ~17Watts.

My 2004 era Mitac 8355 laptop @C2 state has total system (AMD Athlon 64 Mobile, VIA K8T800 AGP8X chipset, 15.1" TFT, keyboard, 5400RPM 80GB HD, DVD-RW, WiFI, 1GB RAM, ATI M10P GPU) enables a total power as low as ~19Watts.

Has IBM designed a G5 laptop platform can be compete against Intel’s “white book” or AMD’s Yamato (i.e. building laptop reference designs for “cut-n-paste” engineering) initiative?

Anyway... In
http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/E9B802F318B43FB787256EB700530418
IBM CPC925 dissipates around 18 watts typical...

in http://www.970eval.com/images/SaberTooth_Maple_D_10.pdf
In 46 page PDF
IBM CPC925 NB listed at 29 Watts.

Are you sure a PPC970FX/MP with IBMCPC945/IBM CPC925 based laptop can be successful?

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 08:37 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 08:26 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 08:15 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 08:13 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 07:59 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@takemehomegrandma

If that's the "real" contract then this

'Target-Hardware' means any PPC based hardware developed and marketed for the Amiga platform and userbase including but not limited to the hardware developed and marketed by Phase5, DCE and the AmigaOne hardware developed by Escena under contract with the Amiga One Partners

sounds a bit.. funny.. Doesn't that mean that to get a license for hardware you go to the Amiga One Partners eg Hyperion and Eyetech ?

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@cHaOs667

Quote:

In my opinion they had similiar success if they had updated theyre I-Book and PowerBook Notebooks to current G4 or G5 CPUs and current GPUs...

I think more or less the same than you. If they had pushed Freescale to release the MPC8641D they could have got a similar spec cpu but a PPC one with Altivec so current programs would be noticeable faster and no time and money would have been invested in rossetta.

Or maybe they could have used a low-power g5 or Cell. MacOSX uses a lot of Vector code so changing Altivec code by SPE code probably wouldn't be difficult for them. Most of comercial apps would need to be recompiled to get comparable speed to the g5/2ghz versions, but Mac users are interested in video/audio/photoshop, so CELL could have helped a lot in those tasks and once they got optimized filters they would forget G5s forever. Vectorial code is the future

I think it's still too soon to see if the change to x86 really has increased sales. People buy new laptops each 2-3 years so I guess that until two years pass and the G5s dissapear we won't see if the Mac community has grown.

I guess that for low cost macs it's a good idea (but the point is that prices haven't come down) because x86 gives the best price/performance ratio, but for high-end machines running vector code it's obvious that PPC is still better (this may change in the future if intel improved their currently crappy vector units)

On the Amiga market most of people want to run old 68k apps so a big endian cpu is required. But I think that an x86 release wouldn't be bad. It would attract some developers because hardware is expensive and hard to get. And future apps could perfectly be written for OS4-ppc and OS4-x86 (of course, the x86 version wouldn't be able to run 680x0 software).

Although I prefer PPC I certainly would pay for a x86 version. Being able to run OS4 everywhere is a BIG advantage. I currently use crosscompilers but my code is tested in WinUAE firstly. If OS4 ran on x86 I could test the new features without having to wait until I have access to my OS4-PPC machine.

Last edited by Crumb on 21-Jul-2006 at 09:46 AM.
Last edited by Crumb on 21-Jul-2006 at 09:41 AM.

_________________
The only spanish amiga news web page/club: CUAZ

@Crumb

Quote:

I guess that for low cost macs it's a good idea (but the point is that prices haven't come down) because x86 gives the best price/performance ratio, but for high-end machines running vector code it's obvious that PPC is still better (this may change in the future if intel improved their currently crappy vector units)

For pixel shader usages, the pixel shaders(SIMD) units in Intel GMA900 kills Altivec.

Quote:

Or maybe they could have used a low-power g5 or Cell

A G5 can't operate without a NB and STI's Cell is not designed for laptops. What was wattage for Cell again?

Last edited by Hammer on 21-Jul-2006 at 10:11 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)