Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Geezus_Aach · Oct 17, 2004, 09:46 PM

Being new to Macs, I've been reading up on the hardware used in building 'em... whatever I can learn, the better. Well, coming from the PC industry, I commonly referred to PCs as IBM clones and Apple has always been Apples. I understand Apple first used CPUs from Motorola (PowerPC) but now they've switched to use IBM chips. Doesn't that seem ironic?? Hmmm, so who's the IBM clones now!?!

the_glassman · Oct 17, 2004, 09:55 PM

We've been using IBM chips for awhile now. When I used to work@IBM and used a Powerbook to do all my work, I used to catch a lot of flack from my colleagues who used Aptivas or Thinkpads. I would often joke back by telling them that my Apple computer had more IBM made parts then an IBM PC had IBM parts.

MindFad · Oct 17, 2004, 10:02 PM

IBM CPUs have been used in Macs for a long time now. They made G3s and G4s for awhile. I know the iBooks used to have IBM G3s.

This is a good thing, because IBM makes a bad-ass processor. (See: G5.)

d4nth3m4n · Oct 17, 2004, 10:03 PM

Originally posted by the_glassman:
We've been using IBM chips for awhile now. When I used to work@IBM and used a Powerbook to do all my work, I used to catch a lot of flack from my colleagues who used Aptivas or Thinkpads. I would often joke back by telling them that my Apple computer had more IBM made parts than an IBM PC had IBM parts.

Than'd.

but good job puttin them fools in their place.

MindFad · Oct 17, 2004, 10:06 PM

Damn, I totally missed that one.

MacGorilla · Oct 17, 2004, 10:07 PM

IBM also made the 603 chips. These puppies are still used in embedded systems.

d4nth3m4n · Oct 17, 2004, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by MindFad:
Damn, I totally missed that one.

you're losing your edge there 'Fadder.

the_glassman · Oct 17, 2004, 10:17 PM

Originally posted by d4nth3m4n:
Than'd.

but good job puttin them fools in their place.

Their really is no call for that!

Lancer409 · Oct 17, 2004, 10:23 PM

ibm needs to start ramping up production..

Geezus_Aach · Oct 17, 2004, 11:00 PM

too funny, the_glassman! Did you make it a point to be seen by your supervisors?? lol!

Well, I know the new G5 are IBM CPUs, but I didn't know they also did G3 and G4s... how can you tell what CPU you have? Doesn't my iMac have a Motorola CPU? My friend has an "old skool" B&W G3 tower that has a Motorola CPU... What made them switch or was Apple in bed with both Motorola and IBM at the same time? Or was there a performace issue between the 2?

spiky_dog · Oct 17, 2004, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
too funny, the_glassman! Did you make it a point to be seen by your supervisors?? lol!

Well, I know the new G5 are IBM CPUs, but I didn't know they also did G3 and G4s... how can you tell what CPU you have? Doesn't my iMac have a Motorola CPU? My friend has an "old skool" B&W G3 tower that has a Motorola CPU... What made them switch or was Apple in bed with both Motorola and IBM at the same time? Or was there a performace issue between the 2?

apple has used both since both are part of the powerpc alliance, and both have had supply problems at one point at another.

Lateralus · Oct 17, 2004, 11:18 PM

Read and learn Geezus_Aach.

Earth Mk. II · Oct 17, 2004, 11:20 PM

Except that IBM never put their own chips in their PC's.

The first IBM PC used an Intel 8088 for its CPU. It was the IBM PC's proprietary BIOS (basic input/output system) that people had to worry about compatibility for. Everything else was either trivial or available "off the shelf," so to speak.

Lateralus · Oct 17, 2004, 11:23 PM

If I recall correctly, IBM had been planning to go with Motorola and the 68000 for their first personal computer but they felt that the 68000 was unnecessarily powerful for the consumer market.

We'd be living in a different world had IBM gone with Motorola.

James L · Oct 17, 2004, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
too funny, the_glassman! Did you make it a point to be seen by your supervisors?? lol!

Well, I know the new G5 are IBM CPUs, but I didn't know they also did G3 and G4s... how can you tell what CPU you have? Doesn't my iMac have a Motorola CPU? My friend has an "old skool" B&W G3 tower that has a Motorola CPU... What made them switch or was Apple in bed with both Motorola and IBM at the same time? Or was there a performace issue between the 2?

The link above proably tells it all, but the PPC chip was developed by the AIM Consortium, which stands for Apple, IBM, and Motorola. This goes back a long ways.

Earth Mk. II · Oct 17, 2004, 11:31 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
If I recall correctly, IBM had been planning to go with Motorola and the 68000 for their first personal computer but they felt that the 68000 was unnecessarily powerful for the consumer market.

We'd be living in a different world had IBM gone with Motorola.

I'm not sure I ever heard that, but I do know that the 8086 was more powerful than the 8088, and preceded it on the market.

But, IBM figured that they only needed an 8-bit chip and the 8086's 16-bits would cost too much.

Lateralus · Oct 17, 2004, 11:33 PM

I can't remember where I read it, but I've read it a few times. Probably in one of the books I've read on Apple and IBM.

Earth Mk. II · Oct 17, 2004, 11:38 PM

Yeah, I don't doubt it - if there's any one word I'd use to describe IBM, especially in IBM in that era, it's "cautious." They probably looked at everything they had available to them at least twice.

Either way, they're both archaic chip architectures.

Geezus_Aach · Oct 18, 2004, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Read and learn Geezus_Aach.

impressive, thanks for the history lesson! Wow, macs sure came a long way...I've also been reading some old articles from Apple's website as well as some newer model ones. Yet, even though I'm still a few models behind most of ya'll, I love my imac just the way it is!

Eriamjh · Oct 18, 2004, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Read and learn Geezus_Aach.

Sigh. I hate reading history articles that mention stuff that never happens.

IBM demo'ed a 1.1 GHz (1100 MHz) PowerPC G3 which will be in prodution by 1999.

And that was in 1998. 5 Years later and the last G3 iBook only made it to 900MHz.

Peter · Oct 18, 2004, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
Doesn't that seem ironic?? Hmmm, so who's the IBM clones now!?!

no

Lateralus · Oct 18, 2004, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
Sigh. I hate reading history articles that mention stuff that never happens.

And that was in 1998. 5 Years later and the last G3 iBook only made it to 900MHz.

I blame Apple for that more than IBM. The G3 was available in higher speeds than the G4 was for a very long while, but Apple expressed zero interest in using them at their potential because they wanted to keep the G4 as their flagship desktop chip. I'm sure this caused IBM to slow down on development.

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Oct 18, 2004, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
Doesn't that seem ironic?? Hmmm, so who's the IBM clones now!?!

The whole idea of there being �genuine IBM� PCs and everything else being an �IBM clone� (implying inherent inferiority to the �real thing�) was little more than a quickly-obsolete marketing ploy to begin with. Just as the idea that IBM the company=PC and therefore would always play the role of �til death� arch-rival to Apple, was a (platform zealot-created) fantasy as well. The only thing I find ironic, is how effective beyond anyone�s expectations these early calculated ploys actually were, by the fact that their long outdated remnants still linger.

Oct 18, 2004, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
The whole idea of there being �genuine IBM� PCs and everything else being an �IBM clone� (implying inherent inferiority to the �real thing�) was little more than a quickly-obsolete marketing ploy to begin with. Just as the idea that IBM the company=PC and therefore would always play the role of �til death� arch-rival to Apple, was a (platform zealot-created) fantasy as well. The only thing I find ironic, is how effective beyond anyone�s expectations these early calculated ploys actually were, by the fact that their long outdated remnants still linger.

I still get asked by people if I use an Apple or IBM - usually by novices that have used computers a long time but never really learned anything about them.

Geezus_Aach · 02:55 PM

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
Quote: IBM demo'ed a 1.1 GHz (1100 MHz) PowerPC G3 which will be in prodution by 1999.
And that was in 1998. 5 Years later and the last G3 iBook only made it to 900MHz.

I was gonna' ask...what the heck is that thing that guy is holding...I didn't see the caption. I thought it was a speaker! Can they make it any larger? LOL!

About a year ago, I remember reading a PC tech article about Intel. They have a CPU running at 10gHz in development, not ready for the market yet, but even if it was ready for release, they wouldn't cause they'd be cutting out the all CPUs clocked from 4-9gHz. Plus, who would need something that fast!??

macaddict0001 · Oct 18, 2004, 03:00 PM

mostly people in the film business
many animation prog's take 2 minutes to render a single frame.

olePigeon · Oct 18, 2004, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
About a year ago, I remember reading a PC tech article about Intel. They have a CPU running at 10gHz in development, not ready for the market yet, but even if it was ready for release, they wouldn't cause they'd be cutting out the all CPUs clocked from 4-9gHz. Plus, who would need something that fast!??

Ah, yes. The famous "core" demonstrations. Back in the late 90s IBM also had CPU cores running at those speeds. Two problems: One, they're just proof of concept and actually don't do anything (you still have to add cache, controllers, etc.) Two, they're more of a stress test and run under very controlled conditions, mostly just a sales-pitch for what might be available in the future.

Often the demonstrations is just a single transistor capable of tens of gigahertz (if not hundreds.) But when you pack millions of those suckers in a 2cm square, you run into some serious heat issues

djohnson · Oct 18, 2004, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by Geezus_Aach:
I was gonna' ask...what the heck is that thing that guy is holding...I didn't see the caption. I thought it was a speaker! Can they make it any larger? LOL!

About a year ago, I remember reading a PC tech article about Intel. They have a CPU running at 10gHz in development, not ready for the market yet, but even if it was ready for release, they wouldn't cause they'd be cutting out the all CPUs clocked from 4-9gHz. Plus, who would need something that fast!??

Who needs more than 16k of memory

bradoesch · Oct 18, 2004, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by djohnson:
Who needs more than 640k of memory

Fixed� (For real, actually).

Superchicken · Oct 18, 2004, 07:15 PM

I used to joke with people that my iBook was more IBM than their "IBM". I like IBM it's a good company. Actually they make the proc for the GameCube which is essentially a G3 with a VMX unit strapped on which is essentially a G4 (I think Moto was the only official maker of the G4 or am I wrong? I can't think of a Mac that had one, though I'm not sure maybe the newest iBooks but I think they're still Moto).

IBM is a huge pusher of the PPC, I'm waiting for the day they try and market PPC linux boxes to consumers.

olePigeon · Oct 19, 2004, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by Superchicken:
...Actually they make the proc for the GameCube...

...and PlayStation 3, and the XBox 2.

I think IBM's positioned itself extremely well.

brapper · Oct 19, 2004, 12:22 AM

ibm in macs?
say it ain't so steve! say it ain't so!

tooki · Oct 19, 2004, 12:49 AM

PPC601: IBM
PPC603: Motorola, IBM
PPC604: Motorola
PPC750 (G3) 233-333MHz, aluminum: Motorola
PPC750 (G3) series 300+MHz, copper: IBM
PPC74xx (G4) series: Motorola
PPC970 (G5) series: IBM

IBM has never manufactured G4 chips, and Motorola hasn't made G3 chips for Apple for years.

IBM-manufactured PowerPC chips have been used in Macs since the very first Power Mac, it's nothing new.

tooki