Guys, we are NOT paying attention to you...

|||




[ Edited by Velcro_SP 19.04.2011 - 15:54 ]

> woe unto us all if your latest 1000-word mindfuck is "getting to
> the point."

As you obviously missed it in your typical ignorance, start reading between

"To get to the point:"

and

"...are the phrases of his comments which include the MID 3G (highlighting added by me)."

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 18.04.2011 - 19:12 ]

Wow - loads of SPAM in this thread! Pathetic!

[ Edited by Zylesea on 2009/9/25 3:02 ]

> I saw the one where you bolded "etc."

Fine, that one's a beginning. What about the other 6? Not seen? Then look again, they're there, really.

> So your answer in part to "In other words, do or do not his
> comments in those discussions include the device I linked, the
> MID 3G?" is "yes, because it includes the word "etc.""

It's not *the* answer, it's a tiny part of the answer (1/7th, to be precise). If you look closer, you'll discover the other 6/7th. But then again, even 1/7th would be sufficient to answer your question positively. So my answer is 600% overloaded. How's that?
As for the "etc.": He talks about his LimePC offerings, naming the "NoteBooks", the "TV" and the "X1's" explicitly. So it's obvious that "etc." means all his other LimePC offerings he didn't name explicitly, including the MID 3G.

> You're fooling less and less people all the time.

I didn't fool anyone in the beginning, I don't fool anyone now. That's not "less and less" but rather constant.

|||



[ Edited by Velcro_SP 18.04.2011 - 19:10 ]

> You knew that when I asked you if the links you dropped after my
> comment about the MID-3G included the MID-3G that I was not asking
> you if they contained "groups which include the MID-3G."

No, I didn't know that you were asking if these links contained the word "MID-3G". Groups of things include the things they consist of by definition.

> That's just a bended, specious, convenient, and intentional
> misinterpretation.

No, it's simple logic.

> If I asked if your link included "cats," would you say yes because
> it was a general discussion of animals and a cat is an animal?

Exactly. Dare to answer my question from 10 days ago? It went like:

One can talk about Genesi PPC mainboards refering to Pegasos I, Pegasos II and Efika only with mentioning the hypernym term "Genesi PPC mainboards". Would you really claim this didn't include either Pegasos I, Pegasos II or Efika just because these terms are not explicitly mentioned?

> Of course not, that's idiotic.

No, that's simple logic.

> I'll believe Titan when it's actually released.

A step closer:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6268&forum=11&start=60#65841

Addendum:

> the e700 route isn't pursued by Freescale anymore for a long time.

Funnily, in the following presentations from February 2010 the e700 is listed under "future" products:

http://www.power.org/events/designcon10/B1._Power.org_DesignCon2010_Power.org_Busienss_Panel_BF-W3_Behmann.pdf (page 10)
http://www.power.org/events/designcon10/E1._DesignCon2010_Power.org_Power_Architecture_Advanement_Fawzi_Behmann.pdf (page 7)

And this presentation from June 2010 also lists the e700:
http://www.freescale.com/files/ftf_2010/Americas/FTF_ENT_F0770.pdf (page 65)

> Also power.org's Power Architecture Silicon Roadmap doesn't mention it anymore.

This roadmap has been updated in March 2010. As expected, the e700 hasn't returned though ;-)

Edit: added another PDF file.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf on 2011/3/4 13:51 ]

Can be "power.org" really trusted?

> Can be "power.org" really trusted?

While I don't know exactly how to take that question let me say that I normally wouldn't trust anyone claiming in 2010 that there'll be an e700 coming, especially if that person held the position of Director of Strategic Marketing for Freescale's Networking Systems Division from March 2001 to April 2009 and thus simply *must* know about the cancellation of Freescale's e700, which took place long before he left the company.
From then on being Power.org's Director of Marketing & Strategic Advisor he has some semi-interesting things to say:

http://www10.edacafe.com/video/flv_data/video_192.flv (DesignCon 2009)
http://www10.edacafe.com/video/flv_data/video_1737.flv (DesignCon 2010)

Unfortunately no mention of e700 in these interviews, though ;-)

Addendum:

> This roadmap has been updated in March 2010.

...and once more in April:

http://www.power.org/resources/devcorner/roadmap/Power_org_PA_Roadmap_2010_.pdf

Addendum:

> I normally wouldn't trust anyone claiming in 2010 that there'll be an e700
> coming [...] Unfortunately no mention of e700 in these interviews, though ;-)

I found some interesting notes suggesting that there was indeed real work put into the development of the e700:

------------------------------
Circuit Design Engineering Manager
Freescale Semiconductor
[...]
e700 single-core multi-shreading SoC chip on-chip L2 Tag Array(65nm SOI)
------------------------------
http://www.linkedin.com/in/shayanzhang

------------------------------
Engineering Rotation Program Participant
Freescale Semiconductor
[...]
Design verification of the completion block for a Power Architecture core in the networking and computing systems advanced technology division (e700 core).
------------------------------
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/chad-coburn/0/b53/561

> being Power.org's Director of Marketing & Strategic Advisor he has some
> semi-interesting things to say:
> http://www10.edacafe.com/video/flv_data/video_192.flv (DesignCon 2009)
> http://www10.edacafe.com/video/flv_data/video_1737.flv (DesignCon 2010)

New interview where he presents the most recent Power Architecture roadmap revision, which is not yet published on power.org website:

http://videos.cache.magnify.net/HYS8JG0X56WGX7G3-PowerOrg_DAC_483_336_384x216.mp4 (Design Automation Conference 2010)

Quite disturbingly, he claims the XBox360 and the Wii to be powered by the Cell CPU. And as a minor head scratcher he presents the QorIQ P1 and P2 families to be based on e500mc core (while in reality based on e500v2).

Reply to myself:

> as a MorphOS user I have mixed feelings about the QorIQ. The variants matching an
> OS that is not SMP capable are of no use due to the incompatible FPU implementation,
> and the variant matching the way FPU support is implemented in the OS is an overkill
> eight-core beast. [...] A single-core e500mc based CPU [...] would be nice, though.

Seems the 2+ GHz e5500 core ("e500mc64") based QorIQ P5010 could appear as a good match for MorphOS. It's single-core, can run in 32bit mode and contains a traditional FPU running at full core clock rate (as opposed to e500mc based P3 and P4 families where the FPU runs only half-clocked) as well as SATA2 controllers.

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6313&forum=11#74079

Quote:

From the core yes. But there are pretty many other things within the package for real high end networking (several 10 Gb controllers, packet inspector, buffers, security stuff). Not that MorphOS gets hindred by these compounds, but I guess they are rather bad for the wallet. On teh other hand the other QorIQs have also some fancy stuff on board and are not too expensive.
And - unfortunately the 5500 has not Altivec. Still if someone would try to build new hardware for MorphOS now I would still rather recommend MPC 8610 or 8640.

The P5010 could be a good alternative to the ibm 476 (which I also still consider interesting)

> several 10 Gb controllers

No, just one.

> Not that MorphOS gets hindred by these compounds, but I guess they are
> rather bad for the wallet.

Yes, probably. We'll see what the price tag for the P5010 is going to be.

> On teh other hand the other QorIQs have also some fancy stuff on board
> and are not too expensive.

I wonder how the price of the P5010 will compare to the one of the eight-core P4080, which Freescale sell currently for as much as 380 USD.

> unfortunately the 5500 has not Altivec.

Yes, that's sad. If it would implement Power ISA 2.06's VSX at least...

> if someone would try to build new hardware for MorphOS now I would
> still rather recommend MPC 8610 or 8640.

Yes, reasonable choice. But that train left the station, I fear.

> The P5010 could be a good alternative to the ibm 476

Do you mean the LSI Axxia? After all, the IBM PPC476 ist just a core while the P5010 is a complete SoC CPU. If yes, I think the dual-core P5020 to be a better alternative to the dual or quad-core Axxia because the P5010 is only single-core.

Quote:

Easy: $45.5 (that's 380/8, cheapest joke ever - me ducks).

Quote:

Sure but... COuld there be a way to turn this around, and make that train enter the station back? See, perhaps, these chips are about to get veryu cheap soon. Oh, well, that depends if freescale really sells looots of them. Ouch...
Alright, price is not the only hurdle to build a computer around them, but it can only help. See, it's listed at two hundred dollars...

> $45.5 (that's 380/8 [...]).

Not quite. But nice joke :-)

> COuld there be a way to turn this around, and make that train enter the station back?
> See, perhaps, these chips are about to get veryu cheap soon. Oh, well, that depends if
> freescale really sells looots of them. Ouch... [...] it's listed at two hundred dollars...

"Interestingly, feanor revealed to have received a direct offer from Freescale for massively reduced MPC8610 pricing." (quoting myself)
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=6684&start=99

That project is still listed btw:
http://www.powerdeveloper.org/program/mpc8610
http://www.power2people.org/bounty_047.html (82% to go)

With MorphOS being available for G4 Mac mini I'm personally not too much interested in this train turning around because I'm not confident about the extent of real world performance advantage a 1.33 GHz MPC8610 or 1.25 GHz MPC8640 offers over the 1.5 GHz MPC7447A/B (+ Apple northbridge). It would be new hardware, though.

> I normally wouldn't trust anyone claiming in 2010 that there'll be an e700 coming,
> especially if that person held the position of Director of Strategic Marketing for
> Freescale's Networking Systems Division from March 2001 to April 2009 and thus
> simply *must* know about the cancellation of Freescale's e700, which took place
> long before he left the company.

It may be that I did him injustice by mocking his February 2010 claim of the e700 being a future product. See:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7001&forum=3&post_id=74210#74210

Update:

> the most recent Power Architecture roadmap revision, which is not yet published
> on power.org website

It is now:

http://www.power.org/resources/devcorner/roadmap/Power.org_PA_Roadmap_Aug_2010.pdf

Interesting bits (flaws?):
- QorIQ P50xx a 32 bit processor?
- QorIQ P55xx? What's that?


Edit: Adjusted PDF file URL because it was changed.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf on 2010/9/28 1:19 ]

Update:

> he presents the QorIQ P1 and P2 families to be based on
> e500mc core (while in reality based on e500v2).

Today Freescale announced a new QorIQ P2 processor, which is not based on the e500v2 core like the earlier P2 processors but on the e500mc core like both the P3 and P4 families:

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=P2040
http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/fact_sheet/QP2040FS.pdf
http://media.freescale.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=196520&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1462516

A 1.2 Ghz e500 core processor? That's a worse solution than the 86XX processors which were suggested before, and which you are right seem pointless with Mac G4 support.

A quick question here. How is it that the development board for this processor uses the same outdated ULi Southbridge that the 8640 development system uses?

Does someone have a stash of M1575s sitting somewhere? Freescale refers to this as an Nvidia component, but as far as I know it was discontinued when Nvidia bought out ULi.

[ Edited by Jim on 2010/8/25 1:02 ]

> That's a worse solution than the 86XX processors

I only mentioned the P2040 announcement for sake of completeness. As you can see in my self-quote, two months ago I claimed QorIQ P2 to be only e500v2 core based (which was true back then), while Mr. Behmann presented it as being e500mc core based (which was false back then). Now with the new P2040 the QorIQ P2 family has e500v2 core based members as well as (upcoming) e500mc core based members.

> How is it that the development board for this processor uses the same
> outdated ULi Southbridge that the 8640 development system uses?

You mean the P2020/P2010 development board (as I can't find any specs for a P2040 development board yet, and P2040 is not pin compatible to P2020/P2010)?

> Does someone have a stash of M1575s sitting somewhere?

It may even be Freescale themselves having hoarded some ;-)

> Freescale refers to this as an Nvidia component

In fact, Freescale's reference to this part is rather inconsistent: "ULi/nVidia", "nVidia/ULi", "nVidia", "ULi" (and also both names in different combinations of uppercase and lowercase letters).