• Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 10681 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > April2 did not fix all the bugs - my Peg1 still had DMA hangs from time to time.

    Interesting. My April2-fixed Peg1 did not. Where can I read more about those remaining bugs, preferably from people who know what they're talking about (like bplan engineers, Linux developers, MorphOS developers)?

    > it wasn't slightly lowering performance - the April chip bottlenecked the whole system

    April2 lowered the FSB from 133 MHz to 100 MHz. Of course, it's debatable whether a 25% bus speed decrease is a slight decrease or a significant decrease and I can easily accept any opinion favouring the latter view.

    > and made RAM speeds ridiculously poor, and AGP not even worth having.

    You mean compared to the Eyetech AmigaOnes which had the FSB running at full 133 MHz? I mean, wasn't even the Peg2's fake AGP x1 faster than the Eyetech AmigaOnes' "real" AGP x2 that was not hampered by April2 in speed?

    >> The low amount of RAM on the Efika 5200B is not a bug.

    > it made it incredibly unsuitable for desktop. The 5200B was aimed
    > more at fixed kiosks.

    Absolutely, and thanks for confirming that it is not a bug.

    >> virtually nothing of this mess has been caused by hardware bugs

    > They were untested CPUs

    No, they were not. Not one single type of CPU in any Apple, bplan/Genesi, ACube or Varisys/A-Eon PPC hardware was untested. And I'm confident enough to even extend this list to all the CPU types used in MAI/Eyetech hardware. Most of these CPU types are/were used in high-reliability systems in various fields of application for many years, which was for a reason.

    > ballasted by untested chipsets

    ...in case of the Peg1. Can you name the other "untested chipsets" used in Apple, bplan/Genesi, ACube or Varisys/A-Eon PPC hardware?

    > mounted on untested board logic.

    Untested Apple boards? You must be joking. The lists of bugs of "untested" Apple, bplan/Genesi, ACube or Varisys/A-Eon PPC boards must be huge compared to the list of bugs of tested x86 boards. Where can I find these lists?

    > Almost nobody else in the world used them.

    Not true. For instance, Apple purchased less than 5% of the PPC CPUs produced by IBM, so the other customers together used about 20 times as many IBM PPC CPUs as Apple did. That's certainly not "almost nobody". And then there's Motorola/Freescale who also sold the major quantities of their "desktop class" PPC CPUs to customers other than Apple. These non-Apple customers of IBM and Motorola/Freescale also used the PPC-specific, non-Apple support chipsets. The Apple chipsets and boards were used by all Apple users of the PPC era, which is a significant number. And most chipsets on bplan/Genesi, ACube and Varisys/A-Eon boards have been deployed on x86 boards as well.

    > Anyone who tried would learn the bugs the hard way.

    That's true for all hardware developments exceeding a certain complexity and involving complex circuits, regardless of ISA.

    > Of course part of the mess was caused by hw bugs.

    A part that amounts to virtually nothing compared to the parts of the mess caused by other things, and a part that's not significantly bigger than the counterpart in the x86 world.

    > Why won't you ever accept that PPC is dead because of these problems?

    Because bugs is simply is not why PPC is dead. It's dead because of various reasons, but none of them is bugs in CPUs, chipsets or boards.

    > You continue to argue forever while the world moved on 20 years ago.

    That's because you continue your attempts at rewriting history. PPC may be dead, but facts shouldn't be changed after the fact (if you pardon the pun), no matter the time passed.
  • »26.02.19 - 23:11
    Profile