> Or is it that his phrase ends up forty years later that it starts?

Rather twenty years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Multia (1994)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64 (1996)

More info:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit_computing#64-bit_address_timeline

> the key is "for super computers", so nothing like "people's homes".

Huh? "Home computers and gaming consoles" very much sounds like "people's homes".

Quote:

Don't know about the majority, but I liked the idea of an ultra small notebook for years. I am not at home quite often, a netbook is just tiny enough to get carried with you all the time. Think about those ppl who don't drive trucks, SUVs or the likes, but rather go by train or bicycle. Size does matter The pocket mony price is another plus.
I was hoping for an ultracheap mini ppc laptop when I heard about the 5200 years ago, but this was a while b4 Asus came along with their Eee. Manwhile the market has changed a lot and getting a foot between the door became more diffucult. And an 300/400MHz definitely leads nowhere today. An e300/800 could be still okay today, but only if really dirt cheap. I would focus on QorIQ.
I am still a bit sad about the 86xx. The 8610 would have made a nice netbbok, but e600 seems to be EOL - well, who knows maybe Freescale rediscovers Altivec one day. At least ppc got a bit of momentum again recently.

> maybe Freescale rediscovers Altivec one day.

I fear that won't happen. Regarding Power Architecture it's all about VSX today:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6196&forum=11&start=140#74094
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltiVec#VSX

But I don't know enough about VSX to make a proper comparison to AltiVec/VMX. Feanor?

Quote:

Yes, like, say, absurd demands like HD video in a four inch screen, powered by batteries. The worst thing is that now it IS actually possible!

(Am I the only one who still remembers when one had to wait for a computer to finish something?)

Quote:

I replied to "It sounds like 64 bit processors were at people's homes by the time The Mamas and the Papas were still on the road...". I agree that now 20+ years after, 64-bit is the norm.

Quote:

Difficult to say, no access to Power7 hardware, but from the _very_ few docs out there that I could find, it looks like a mix of Cell SPU and AltiVec. Some instructions are the same, others -esp the double fp or the decimal fp support- have no Altivec equivalents. No idea how it performs really. It probably is quite powerful, but there are virtually no benchmarks out there, IBM sure does a crap job of promoting its technologies.

Update: this is the only doc I found with actual specs/performance info for VSX.

[ Edited by feanor on 2010/7/5 16:04 ]

[ Edited by feanor on 2010/7/5 16:10 ]

Quote:

Zylessa, trains and bicycles, man that's so European! I don't drive a truck or and SUV, but train service in my State is extremely limited (blame the US government for short sighted transportation policies) and a bicycle trip to work (for me) would be 80 miles round trip.

And I think I could get used to a netbook, even with a small display and keyboard, if the screen resolution was better (say 1024X768 or at least 800X600) and there was more processing power (you're right 300 to 400 Mhz doesn't cut it these days).

Andreas' minimum works, but again I'll agree with you that a QorlQ processor would be better. And it is a shame that the e600 core is EOL'd. I spent a lot of time studying apps for the 86xx processors.

Still, small Apple G4 notebooks start with a 12" screens, so that's fairly compact (not quite a netbook, but not stupid sized like many laptops on the US market). We should eventually have support for those.

And I'm glad a few people here have noticed to increase in PPC development. A consumer PA Semi based motherboard, AM titan based processors, the new e5500 64bit core - all welcome developments.

Hopefully, I'll still be able to use MorphOS on fairly decent hardware for some time to come.

Quote:

Offtopic perhaps, but, IIRC, AMD owns xenon production lines nowdays (the Power chip of xbox 360).

That I didn't know, but by AMD you now mean Global Foundries don't you (since AMD has spun off production facilities).

And don't worry about Andreas' comment, he knows perfectly well that none of the three companies I mentioned produce PPCs. However, AMD and Intel may actually be the first to introduce processors with decent on die GPUs (but it hasn't happened yet, all current processors offering this feature have horrible GPU performance).

>> ATI/AMD do Power Architecture CPUs?

> IIRC, AMD owns xenon production lines nowdays

With the merger of Chartered into GlobalFoundries last year AMD became *minority* stockholder of the Xenon production business (ATIC being the majority one).
Anyway, with "do" I actually meant "develop", not "manufacture". A chip being manufactured by GlobalFoundries doesn't make it a GlobalFoundries chip, the same way it didn't make it a Chartered chip before :-)

> I replied to "It sounds like 64 bit processors were at people's homes by the time The Mamas
> and the Papas were still on the road...". I agree that now 20+ years after, 64-bit is the norm.

Then you seem to have missed the actual question: "Or is it that his phrase ends up forty years later that it starts?", where the answer would simply be: Yes, it does (with the small correction that it's rather twenty years, not forty) :-)

> from the _very_ few docs out there that I could find, it looks like a mix of Cell SPU
> and AltiVec. Some instructions are the same, others -esp the double fp or the decimal
> fp support- have no Altivec equivalents.

Thanks for information. My main question would be if VSX is backwards compatible to VMX/AltiVec by itself or if POWER7 supports both by having both implemented separately. Or similarily put: Does a CPU implementing VSX automatically support VMX/AltiVec, i.e. is VSX a strict superset?

I think it would be pointless for AMD and Intel to "do" anything other than what they're doing right now.
Currently, they're providing virtually all processors used in personal computers (unless you want to include iPad and other compact devices in with PCs).
While some of use seem to be worried about ARM, X86 is the real competitor. Upgraded constantly, originating with a small company building calculator processors, and very luckily picked for IBM first off the shelf consumer oriented computer.
This unlikely architecture has matured to dominate the market.
Would that it weren't true, but AMD and Intel have no reason to "do" anything else.

> I think I could get used to a netbook, even with a small display and keyboard, if the
> screen resolution was better (say 1024X768 or at least 800X600)

7" netbooks easily have been doing at least 1024x600 for years, even PPC based ones:

http://www.limepc.com/book_specs.shtml

> don't worry about Andreas' comment, he knows perfectly well that none
> of the three companies I mentioned produce PPCs.

I guess you just got confused by KimmoK answering to an April comment of mine ;-)

Quote:

Yes, that's true (and I probably should have left out the 800x600 spec), but 1024x600 requires more vertical scrolling than I want to do.

Quote:

Sure? When do you think that the market split between Intel 32 and 64 bit CPUs will turn around? I mean, every computer I see over here is 32 bit, perhaps there's a couple 64 bit, running boring 32 bit software. Is that a "norm"?

Computers grew to double bitness, and yet the world is exactly the same...

All this talk about new PowerPC processots... Has anyone a rough idea about how much building a new PowerPC based computer would cost? It seems everyone and his dog are cooking ARM based 'puters nowadays, why the hell does it have to be so hard with our favourite CPU? Why doesn't freescale play the Beagleboard game? No Andreas, I don't think those "tower" development boards are the same.

Where's bPlan, by the way? Gerald and Thomas got boring jobs? Or became millionaires and live in Bahamas, drinking caipirinhas? Pun intended, for those long time amigans.

Quote:

That's a sweeeeet PowerPC CPU! I was told that, in order to have terrific graphics output, it has the GPU "wired backwards", giving it priority over other general I/O lines. A quick jump to wikipedia would make me learn a lot, but I feel too amigan today.

Quote:

Andreas asking questions? Now the world has turned over Perhaps I should start believing about 64 bit processors being everywhere...

Quote:

You are very right. That also explains how boring this little world of computers became amny years ago. Have you being doing something positively different in your computers for the last ten years?

Quote:

I don't know, perhaps it depends on the environment, for me here, the norm is 64-bit, as I don't really know anyone with a 32-bit PC anymore, unless it is an old laptop, but then again most of my friends are geeks :)

Quote:

It's not easy, The beagleboard was a terrific idea, and this is what I attempted to do with the 8610 board -which is not dead yet, there are some ideas to revive it- and which would be a good ppc alternative, even if the X1000 is released and even if the 8610 is EOL'd.

Quote:

Busy with the EfikaMX :)

Quote:

To me (without bothering to read down into details) it seems that xbox 360 has similar architecture as the xbox1, where the GPU does the memory controlling and CPU get's only what is left over from the GPU.
Like classic Amigas with only Chip RAM.

PPC SOC designs (440ep, 460ex, PA6T) have own memory controllers and they therefore should perform slightly better than chips with external controllers.

I forgot to answer that yesterday:

> AMD and Intel may actually be the first to introduce processors with
> decent on die GPUs (but it hasn't happened yet, all current processors
> offering this feature have horrible GPU performance).

jcmarcos wrote something interesting regarding Xenon 1.5 weeks ago:

"The new version, jsut on sale now, has a new chip with the CPU, the GPU (!) and the RAM (!!!) all stacked in the same component!"
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7186&forum=11&start=18

Wikipedia:

"Introduced in the Xbox 360 S was the XCGPU where Microsoft have integrated the Xenon CPU, the Xenos GPU and eDRAM in the same package."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_(processor)#XCGPU

"...the XCGPU, an integrated CPU/GPU/eDRAM chip using a 45 nm fabrication process."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360#Xbox_360_S

Unfortunately, that chip is only available for Microsoft.

>> Where's bPlan, by the way? Gerald and Thomas got boring jobs? Or became
>> millionaires and live in Bahamas, drinking caipirinhas? Pun intended, for those
>> long time amigans.

> Busy with the EfikaMX :)

What part of it? Hardware development? Firmware development? Hardware production?

> Where's bPlan, by the way? Gerald and Thomas got boring jobs? Or became
> millionaires and live in Bahamas, drinking caipirinhas?

I don't think so (regarding the 'millionaires' part):

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=39467
http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2009/04/cloudcityme.html

> Andreas asking questions?

I consider feanor to be an authority when it comes to SIMD computing. So it's quite naturally for me to ask him on that.

Quote:

Whoops! The first URL leads to something (back in 2008) that looks like bankrupcy filling. The second, about being in the clouds, I don't get it. What's the relation with bPlan?

Quote:

But I almos never see you asking questions, while it's very common seeing you giving answers. Oh, I've just seen your question below...

> The first URL leads to something (back in 2008) that looks like bankrupcy filling.

Carda's personal insolvency filing in October 2008, yes.

> The second, about being in the clouds, I don't get it. What's the relation with bPlan?

Read further down. It mentions Carda as well. Kind of side job maybe? ;-)