Some interesting news - it looks like [url="http://games.slashdot.org/games/03/11/03/2135220.shtml?tid=109&tid=127&…"]Microsoft are going with IBM instead of Intel[/url]... so the next Xbox will be on a different CPU architecture, and a different brand of graphics chip..
quote:"IBM is likely to modify its most advanced G5 PowerPC silicon, which is being used in Apple Computer's fastest Macintosh desktops, for the embedded market, reducing the cache and cutting power consumption
..
Some interesting comments in the slashdot thread regarding backward compatability (not likely?), and the Xbox losing one of it's developer advantages (easy PC title portability).
I'm probably wrong, but i think the powerpc are RISC cpu's, so coding assembly for them should be an easier task.
Also, the main thing (afaik) that made PC ports to xbox easier had nothing really to do with the cpu, but rather that the xbox api was (a slightly modified) version of directx 8, so as long as the pc title used directx, they didn't have to rewrite the entire render system. The usual issues with console ports, lack of memory (virtual) etc.still apply to the xbox so, i don't think the cpu swap will particularly affect the ability to port that much, as long as xbox 2 still uses a windows/directx based api.
CYer, Blitz
Windows NT used to be available for PPC, MIPS and Alpha as well as x86, so it's really not going to be an issue for them to port the kernel. It seems a bit silly though that the only reason they'd be switching to PPC would be because of people whacking linux on xbox's, as linux runs on pretty much every processor. I'd say it's probably more for performance and thermal reasons than anything.
But really, the biggest issue with this is what about backwards compatibility? You'd think that being Microsoft, ensuring backwards compatability would be paramount. But then the rest of the guts are going to be by ATI, so who knows what they're thinking? I think it's to say though that it'll kick ass. =]
Aven: Why the hell would you want to run Windows on a mac instead of OS X? =] (Yeah, I like them)
Don't worry, I wouldn't. It's just that Windows does have the best app compatability. That's why I don't run Linux. Chances of me buying a Mac a fairly slim anyway (price), so that doesn't really bother me :) I was more thinking long the lines of Microsoft trying to venture along another route. Windows, gaming, consoles.... where to next?
quote:Originally posted by Aven
It must be a large enough market if Microsoft decided to release Office for Mac OS.
That's because Microsoft realised that they actually make money on the Office market rather than the OS market!
So the more OS's that run Office, more people use it, the more "standard" it gets etc. Therefore eventually it will be the only Office package out there etc.
Well yeah I did know that Shplorb, it actually handles the input on the PS2... and there's two of them actually, same as the two sound processors.
And yeah, if the new PowerPC type chip is powerful enough then the x86 instructions could just be emulated, even if there's a small hardware converter.
Now I wonder though if anyone will install MacOSX on the new Xbox?
Reading the article it seems that they are going with the PowerPC chip so that it is not similar to Intel's offerings and so people can't make cheap PC's out of the Xbox. It wouldn't be that different to program for really, since the chip is an equivalent of an Intel type chip (well reversed endian, but yeah), and the graphics / bus will be similar to other offerings.
I'll just wait and see what the official word on this is before I start learning G5 opcodes ;-)
Maybe someone at teh AGDC might know what's going on?