From: coolidge@sirius.aux.apple.com (John L. Coolidge)
Subject: Re: IBM SUCKS!
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:09:07 GMT
Reply-To: coolidge@apple.com
Organization: Open Systems Development, Porting&I/O Group, Apple Computer, Inc.

sfuller@tamsun.tamu.edu (Steve Fuller) writes:
>In article <6161.2ad576d0@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>>In article <FISCHER.92Oct6031152@steiner.iesd.auc.dk>, fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars Peter Fischer) writes:
>>> If IBM sucks, how come Apple is going to use their chips and is
>>> developing their new OS with 'em? Does this mean that 3 years from
>>> now, "Apple suck" will be true?
>>
>>* Apple isn't using IBM's chips. They are using Motorolas chips. Motorola is

>Sorry Bill, You are wrong. The PowerPC 601 is an IBM. Motorola is licencing
>the architecture. The later models (603,604,620) will come from both. 

To echo what Bill and Mike have said: the PowerPC architecture is
different from the POWER architecture. All PowerPC processors have a
common architecture (the 601 included). The PowerPC architecture is
based on POWER, but it is not the same. A number of instructions have
been deleted and others added. Much of the VM and I/O infrastructure
has been redesigned. Parts of the floating point support have been
changed. 64-bit extensions have been added (while the 601 will not be
a 64-bit chip, many or all of the follow-on chips will be). Most of
the changes are intended to remove performance bottlenecks and/or
make the entire architecture implementable (with high performance) on
a single chip (unlike POWER, where all but one design -- the slowest
-- is multi-chip).

Note also that the PowerPC architecture is being jointly developed by
Apple, IBM, and Motorola, with Motorola doing the bulk of the actual
chip layout (especially for 603+; 601 steals from a lot of IBM design
work). The PowerPC architecture is "open", in the sense that (like
the SPARC and others) there is a procedure for licensing the
architecture; it is possible that other vendors will eventually
produce PowerPC compliant processors. Also, there is a group (the
PowerPC Association) of vendors who plan on using the PowerPC; this
group currently includes IBM, Apple, Motorola, Siemens, Bull, and
(some Japanese manufacturer, possibly Hitachi or Fujitsu) (and there
may be others I've forgotten; the membership has been changing a bit).

>>  basing their chips on IBM's architecture. In actuality, the PowerPC
>>  is a simplified version of the RISC 6000 architecture. And tons faster.
>pssst. The Power architecture (ie R/S 6000) is pure IBM.  

The POWER architecture is indeed pure IBM; however, the PowerPC is
different and is neither a proper superset nor subset of POWER. Also,
IBM is continuing to develop POWER into POWER-2 for some high-end
workstations.

--John

        Communists, dictatorships, democracies, hypocrisies
        Ask not what your country can do? To a one world governmental zoo
                -- Extreme, "Politicalamity", _III_Sides_To_Every_Story_

+++John L. Coolidge++++++++++++++++coolidge@apple.com+++++++++++++++++++++++
I speak for myself, not for Apple Computer. Copyright 1992 John L. Coolidge.
Copying allowed only if attributed, and if all copies may be further copied.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy