Xbox to Switch to PowerPC

Post #124,215 by bluke 11/5/03 1:39:44 AM Reply	Xbox to Switch to PowerPC [link\|http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,61065,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1\|Xbox to Switch to PowerPC] "Microsoft's next-generation Xbox will ditch its Intel chip in favor of the same kind of chip used in Apple's Macs -- an IBM PowerPC processor -- IBM and Microsoft announced on Monday. At least one industry analyst thinks the choice may be the first crack in the so-called "Wintel" partnership that has dominated the computer industry for decades. " This is a huge win for IBM, it gives them a lot of volume for the PowerPC. Intel is in a bit of trouble IA-64 has not taken off at all. IBM is slowly but surely starting to dominate the market. IBM now supplies the chips for all the major consoles as well as for Apple.
Post #124,232 by tjsinclair 11/5/03 9:02:26 AM Reply	What about backward compatibility? I've asked around about this and so far have not gotten any satisfactory answer. Okay, I'm not a huge fan of the Redmond crew but I will admit that one of their traditional strong points is making sure older software is not left in the lurch by OS updates. So this move to a completely different CPU platform doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Unless.... Microsoft has a little x86 emulation product called Virtual PC that just happens to run on PowerPC. But will the IBM chip run fast enough to support older XBox games? Tom Sinclair The question seldom addressed is where Medusa had snakes. Underarm hair is an even more embarassing problem when it keeps biting the top of the deodorant bottle. -- (Terry Pratchett, Soul Music)
Post #124,245 by bluke 11/5/03 10:09:19 AM Reply	Re: What about backward compatibility? According to the wired article [link\|http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,61065,00.html\|Xbox to Switch to PowerPC] "... Microsoft will use the Virtual PC technology it acquired from Connectix last year to provide backward-compatibility with the current generation of Xbox games."
Post #124,252 by tjsinclair 11/5/03 10:30:56 AM Reply	So does this mean that XBox 2 games will be PowerPC-native? I still don't get this decision. Maybe I'm just slow. Tom Sinclair The question seldom addressed is where Medusa had snakes. Underarm hair is an even more embarassing problem when it keeps biting the top of the deodorant bottle. -- (Terry Pratchett, Soul Music)
Post #124,254 by orion 11/5/03 10:36:13 AM Reply	Maybe the Xbox 2 will not play Xbox 1 games? Not unless it uses a version of the VirtualPC emulator to do so. Imagine that Microsoft will sell gamers a VPC emulator for Xbox 1 games for $300USD or so? Sort of like when Microsoft made Windows CE, and switched some units to PowerPC or StrongArm processors and eliminated all the MIPS and SH4 based programs. Many got burned on that one. *"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"*
Post #124,255 by SpiceWare 11/5/03 10:39:44 AM Reply	my guess - Intel pissed off Gates combine that with Microsofts support of AMD's 64 bit chip and it looks like Microsoft could be punishing Intel for [link\|http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/os/linux/index.htm\|something]. Darrell Spice, Jr. [link\|http://www.spiceware.org/cgi-bin/spa.pl?album=./Artistic%20Overpass\|Artistic Overpass]\n[link\|http://www.spiceware.org/\|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
Post #124,262 by a6l6e6x 11/5/03 10:50:07 AM Reply	But gave AMD only words, not action. From [link\|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/33748.html\|the Register]: After watching Microsoft cast AMD's 64-bit processor line to the backwoods of the Windows release cycle, you have to ask - did Jerry Sanders do enough? Two weeks ago Microsoft dropped a bomb. It pushed the first Windows Server 2003 Service Pack back to the second half of 2004. And along with the Service Pack go new versions of Windows for both AMD's Opteron (Windows Server 2003) and Athlon 64 processors (Windows XP). This places the Windows for AMD64 release close to nine months behind original expectations, adding risks to an already risky proposition from AMD. With friends like that,... Alex "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." - Henry Kissinger
Post #124,266 by hnick 11/5/03 11:01:56 AM Reply	Probably, but not about linux Intel has dumped a huge amount of money into their Centrino project [link\|http://www.intel.com/products/mobiletechnology/\|http://www.intel.com...mobiletechnology/] . They want to keep control. Not at all curiously, Microsoft also wants to control wireless standards. There is a serious pissing match here.
Post #124,269 by Andrew Grygus 11/5/03 11:16:36 AM Reply	Software Intel has announced their products will depend a lot more on software for "value add" from here on out. That's Intell software. The last time they dabbled in software Microsoft forced them to back down. They look more resolute this time. Of course Microsoft is taking a major risk here too. IBM makes chips, but IBM isn't a chip company. They're in a much better position to play hardball over pricing than a chip company would be. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #124,302 by inthane-chan 11/5/03 1:37:58 PM Reply	I'm kind of surprised with the direction... IBM apparently has fab resale rights for AMD's Athlon 64 processor - it would have been easier for Microsoft to pick up an Athlon 64 proc for their next gen box, and keep backwards compatability. In that final hour, when each breath is a struggle to take, and you are looking back over your life's accomplishments, which memories would you treasure? The empires you built, or the joy you spread to others? Therin lies the true measure of a man.
Post #124,307 by Another Scott 11/5/03 1:59:15 PM Reply	Lots of info/musings in this story at TheInq. [link\|http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12523\|Here]. One ring to rule them all. <evil laugh!> Cheers, Scott.
Post #124,310 by inthane-chan 11/5/03 2:24:39 PM Reply	I (don't) like the Cell angle.
Post #124,390 by a6l6e6x 11/5/03 9:43:15 PM Reply	The best part is that Intel get "bobkas". :) (That's Yiddish for beans.) My prediction would be that Xbox will be AMD-64 based for compatibility reasons and some initial uncertainties that will come with Cell. Alex "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." - Henry Kissinger
Post #124,407 by FuManChu 11/5/03 10:50:37 PM Reply	'Zat the origin of the word bupkis? [link\|http://home.mn.rr.com/wwftd/abc.htm#bupkis\|http://home.mn.rr.co...td/abc.htm#bupkis]
Post #124,413 by a6l6e6x 11/5/03 11:18:55 PM 11/5/03 11:19:10 PM Reply	I would not doubt it. 'p' and 'b' being the same sound, except that 'b' is voiced. Vowels tend not to carry much if any information. Alex "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." - Henry Kissinger Edited by a6l6e6x Nov. 5, 2003, 11:19:10 PM EST Expand All History
Post #124,256 by a6l6e6x 11/5/03 10:40:08 AM Reply	It's possible the new games will have two executables. One would be x86 and one PowerPC. That is unless they want to obsolete the old boxes. Alex "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." - Henry Kissinger
Post #124,258 by Arkadiy 11/5/03 10:44:12 AM Reply	Old box was what, 500MHZ? New one will be 1.5 MHZ (?) and a better architecture. Emulation/JIT should be plenty sufficient. -- The rich, as usual, are employing the elected. -- [link\|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/\|http://unfit2print.blogspot.com/]
Post #124,260 by tjsinclair 11/5/03 10:47:28 AM Reply	Another possibility I understand that the PS2 has a PS1 chip inside to support PS1 games. Though in the XBox situation, that would be somewhat self-defeating. However, the idea of 'fat binaries' is certainly not a new one. When Apple switched to PowerPC, some developers offered binaries with both 68K and PowerPC code inside. Tom Sinclair The question seldom addressed is where Medusa had snakes. Underarm hair is an even more embarassing problem when it keeps biting the top of the deodorant bottle. -- (Terry Pratchett, Soul Music)
Post #124,259 by pwhysall 11/5/03 10:46:35 AM 11/5/03 10:54:44 AM Reply	Easy peasy. The XBox is a not-very-fast P3 700 on a not-very-fast NVidia graphics card; the PPC/ATI combo (which is not a million miles away in spirit from what's in the GameCube, btw) of a couple of years hence will easily be able to handle that via emulation. With a nice fixed platform like that, you can optimise the living behoobers out of the emulator. While XBox (and PS2, and GameCube) games look impressive when they're displayed on a domestic telly, I'm willing to bet that they'd look decidedly shonky on my 1280x1024 flat panel. The comparision is even more marked when you consider that my current rig can handle UT2K3 with everything maxed out in 32 bit colour at 1280x1024 and 4x antialiasing, without missing a beat. (Yes, it looks wonderful). To answer Tom's question, yes, XBox 2 games will be PPC-native. Norm, please read the thread before posting. Alex, fat binaries are a possibility but I'd say not. In short, I think you'll be able to play your old XBox games on XBox 2. Here's hoping they hire someone other than a 14-year-old boy to do the case design this time :) Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Blog] Edited by pwhysall Nov. 5, 2003, 10:54:44 AM EST Expand All History

Welcome to IWETHEY!