PDA

View Full Version : Low PowerMac 1.42 Stock




MacRumors
Jun 7, 2003, 01:09 AM
Distributers have very low to no stock of PowerMac 1.42GHz machines. Restock dates rate from late June to early July.



joelc
Jun 7, 2003, 01:12 AM
Let's just hope they aren't replaced with another G4

Nermal
Jun 7, 2003, 01:18 AM
970! :D

Sorry... :)

I've been thinking that maybe once the 970s come out, there might still be a G4 at the low end. But if they're running out of G4s, maybe they'll all go 970.

synthetickittie
Jun 7, 2003, 01:33 AM
ah dam Im not gonna have the "top of the line" for much longer. I got a 1.42 when they were first annouced but even if I new this was gonna happen I wouldnt of changed my mind because nothing can make up for all the work Ive done in the past few months and I NEEDED a new computer and deffinitly couldnt wait and any longer.

scem0
Jun 7, 2003, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by joelc
Let's just hope they aren't replaced with another G4
I would cry and roll around on the ground in agony if this was the case. Apple is too smart to do this though..... right?...... right?!?!?!


- scem0

joelc
Jun 7, 2003, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by scem0
I would cry and roll around on the ground in agony if this was the case. Apple is too smart to do this though..... right?...... right?!?!?!


- scem0

We hope...

ibookin'
Jun 7, 2003, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by scem0
I would cry and roll around on the ground in agony if this was the case. Apple is too smart to do this though..... right?...... right?!?!?!


- scem0

I wouldn't mind another G4 as long as it is as fast as the PPC 970 is supposed to be...

Who cares what it's called, just as long as it's fast!

NicoMan
Jun 7, 2003, 02:09 AM
Originally posted by ibookin'
I wouldn't mind another G4 as long as it is as fast as the PPC 970 is supposed to be...

Who cares what it's called, just as long as it's fast!

Amen.

That's one of the most sensible posts EVER!! ;)

NicoMan

Nermal
Jun 7, 2003, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by ibookin'
Who cares what it's called, just as long as it's fast!

I don't see this happening, but what if Apple release a 970 and still call it a G4? Steve announces a new "G4" at the keynote and we all fly into a rage before he can mention that it's a 970 :p

ZildjianKX
Jun 7, 2003, 02:28 AM
Originally posted by Nermal
I don't see this happening, but what if Apple release a 970 and still call it a G4? Steve announces a new "G4" at the keynote and we all fly into a rage before he can mention that it's a 970 :p

LoL, that would be so stupid if they did... the whole point of a new name is to make the product stand out as being new and innovative... besides, it has a whole new architecture anways... but I know you were joking :)

WannabeSQ
Jun 7, 2003, 02:59 AM
his "and one more thing" could be just that. Spend a lot of time showing off the new case, connectivity etc. then say and one more thing, they have IBM 970 PowerPC processors in them. That would probably cause a riot!

Sol
Jun 7, 2003, 03:00 AM
I hope new G4s will be offered in Cube-like enclosures. The 970 belongs in PowerMacs and XServes but until the operating system and the applications are optimized for it a low-price G4 computer (with no fan) would be the better deal.

fukuhela
Jun 7, 2003, 03:01 AM
Originally posted by scem0
I would cry and roll around on the ground in agony if this was the case. Apple is too smart to do this though..... right?...... right?!?!?!


- scem0

All we've Know/ "heard" about the 970 so far is rumors. It reminds me alot of MWSF 02 where everybody was convinced that we would see the new G5 from Motorola.

Even Apple people in my small country (Denmark) talked (off the record) about how fats they would be. Some reports/rumors even said that the OS crashed because of how fast they were.....

All I'm trying to say is: Maybe the 970's aren't ready yet. According to IBM's own schedule it's supposed to be ready late '03 or beginning '04. And if the 970 isn't ready then Apple really don't have a choice...

maradong
Jun 7, 2003, 04:14 AM
i m praying for the PPC 970...
who is not ? :rolleyes:

mislabeledstar
Jun 7, 2003, 04:49 AM
sweet deal...... now to see what happens late june

silvergunuk
Jun 7, 2003, 05:29 AM
I think Apple should just come out and admit that the 970s are coming..no stock of g4s and so many rumors of the 970s..just save us the misery steve and tell us if were getting the ibm chips or not

will
Jun 7, 2003, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by Macrumors
Distributers have very low to no stock of PowerMac 1.42GHz machines. Restock dates rate from late June to early July.

Apple's UK Store has them shipping same day, they must still have some stock. I hope that we get same day shipping when the new machine arrives. ;)

Dont Hurt Me
Jun 7, 2003, 07:43 AM
I dont see apple keeping a g4 powermac at the lower level when they come out with the 970. If they did this the g4 would look lame next to the 970's. also i dont see them making a motherboard to fit the new computer only to hold a stagnating g4 in it. Hate to say this but they should have had a 1.4 single g4 powermac allready but couldnt do to the fact the best they could do is dual 1.42. No when the new machines roll out the current style powermac will be gone. I dont expect a $599 cube either. My Crystal Ball says new powermacs 970's and powerbooks 970. I saw rumored pictures of this machine and if true think of xserve looking powermac. Darn i wish someone could post those pictures and i never realized at the time that what i was seeing was the real thing. It didnt show a side view. Anyways low stock of the 1.42 can only mean 1 thing!

Stella
Jun 7, 2003, 07:53 AM
:->

Seriously, remember that poll "do rumour sites damage apple" from this week.

We've (most of us) have been hoping, hyping ourselves up for 970 processor at the developers conference on the 23rd June....

If Apple come up with another G4 line of processors, we are going to be *so* disappointed.

Everyone on these forums 'hyping' each other up - "970 coming, I can feel it", "It must be coming, I've got my credit cards ready". etc.


God, are we going to be gutted.... if its a no show!

A few weeks ago, there was an article about Apple are going to have a minor upgrades to PowerMacs? I can't find the link... if this was correct, then there will be no PowerMacs for a couple of months. 6 months for PowerBooks if they remain G4 after the refresh.

Personally, on balance, I don't see 970 happening this month... :-(

I *really* hope I'm wrong..

Dont Hurt Me
Jun 7, 2003, 08:07 AM
Stella you are simply wrong, that was a minor update for the powermacs to keep em in line with all the stuff 10.3 can and will do. the truth of the matter is another round of g4 bumps would kill powermac sales. another truth is the channels are drying up of powermacs, 970's are being produced, the 970 does have altivec( who uses that other then Apple?) the g4 has stagnated(motorola) etc etc. How you going to run a 64 bit panther on a 32 bit computer? only in 32 bit mode. No when panther comes out they will have to have a machine that can use it. Repeat after me---- their will be 970's----------there will be new powermacs----------and there will be increased sales for Apple. Now dont you feel better!

Stella
Jun 7, 2003, 08:21 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
[B]Stella you are simply wrong[B]
[QUOTE]
We shall see :-). I hope I am wrong. I don't think 970 processors will come around in June.

However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.

I totally agree, G4 processors in new PowerMacs will kill sales, but I wouldn't put it past apple to do something like this!

Indeed the 970's do have Altivect. But read my original post again - i said i don't think 970 processors will be here this month. They *will* arrive at some point.

Dont Hurt Me
Jun 7, 2003, 08:28 AM
I saw the post and got a little off, but i really think the 970 will show at WWDC with the new models coming at the end of this month or july. Production on the 970 has gone very well from what i have heard,read,saw. I will be very disappointed if steve does not show off a new O.S. with new Hardware and so will a lot of stockholders.

yzedf
Jun 7, 2003, 08:50 AM
Lack of 1.42 does not mean much. They could be on the chopping block just because they are such a waste of time...

*sigh*

970 is but a dream so far....

MacFan25
Jun 7, 2003, 09:18 AM
Lets hope this means the 970 is coming at WWDC. :)

Dont Hurt Me
Jun 7, 2003, 09:22 AM
Mac History has shown when the channels dry up you better start looking for that new Mac.

QCassidy352
Jun 7, 2003, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by yzedf
Lack of 1.42 does not mean much. They could be on the chopping block just because they are such a waste of time...


such a waste of time? What do you mean? We may not be satisfied with it, but the 1.42 is still the fastest mac there is... how is that a waste of time?

maradong
Jun 7, 2003, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by Stella
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
[B]Stella you are simply wrong[B]
[QUOTE]
We shall see :-). I hope I am wrong. I don't think 970 processors will come around in June.

However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.

I totally agree, G4 processors in new PowerMacs will kill sales, but I wouldn't put it past apple to do something like this!

Indeed the 970's do have Altivect. But read my original post again - i said i don't think 970 processors will be here this month. They *will* arrive at some point.
stella you have to reclose the quote with the [/*Quote] ( withouth the *, )command instead of the [Quote] command

Lanbrown
Jun 7, 2003, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by Stella
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
[B]Stella you are simply wrong[B]
[QUOTE]
We shall see :-). I hope I am wrong. I don't think 970 processors will come around in June.

However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.

I totally agree, G4 processors in new PowerMacs will kill sales, but I wouldn't put it past apple to do something like this!

Indeed the 970's do have Altivect. But read my original post again - i said i don't think 970 processors will be here this month. They *will* arrive at some point.

Stella,

The 64-bit bit from Intel is called the Itanium, or Itanic as many call it. It has been available for sometime, getting a system is a different story as the manufacturers don’t seem to want to sell them, but nonetheless, the chip is released. The AMD is currently not available.

Microsoft is one company, Intel is another, as is AMD and then add in all the peecee manufacturers, Microsoft is in the software (OS) group, Intel and AMD are in the processor group and the manufacturers are in the third group. So when Intel and AMD decided to use 64-bit processors, they had to get the other two groups to buy into them. Lets look at Apple. They are the OS group and the manufacturer and they deal with one processor company. Why would Apple waste the money to create a 64-bit OS? No one else could use it and it would be a waste of time and money to create just to let it get stagnant. Others have done this, like Sun Solaris of Itanic. It was created but has yet to be sold.

kris251069
Jun 7, 2003, 12:13 PM
I am very thrilled and excited to introduce the new Powermac 1.44 G4 :D :p :D

springscansing
Jun 7, 2003, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
Stella,

The 64-bit bit from Intel is called the Itanium, or Itanic as many call it. It has been available for sometime, getting a system is a different story as the manufacturers don?t seem to want to sell them, but nonetheless, the chip is released. The AMD is currently not available.

Microsoft is one company, Intel is another, as is AMD and then add in all the peecee manufacturers, Microsoft is in the software (OS) group, Intel and AMD are in the processor group and the manufacturers are in the third group. So when Intel and AMD decided to use 64-bit processors, they had to get the other two groups to buy into them. Lets look at Apple. They are the OS group and the manufacturer and they deal with one processor company. Why would Apple waste the money to create a 64-bit OS? No one else could use it and it would be a waste of time and money to create just to let it get stagnant. Others have done this, like Sun Solaris of Itanic. It was created but has yet to be sold.

Actually its much simpler than that. The itanium is a server chip, period. The Power4 is a server chip, period. The 970 is a desktop/laptop/mini-server chip. There is no Itanium worth sticking in a desktop now. There is a 970 though.

visor
Jun 7, 2003, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by fukuhela
All I'm trying to say is: Maybe the 970's aren't ready yet. According to IBM's own schedule it's supposed to be ready late '03 or beginning '04. And if the 970 isn't ready then Apple really don't have a choice...

they're ready. Question is if all the stuff that goes around them are ready as well...

visor
Jun 7, 2003, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by silvergunuk
970s..just save us the misery steve and tell us if were getting the ibm chips or not

the question is not 'if', but 'when'. and of course, which plattform. at what price.

noverflow
Jun 7, 2003, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
Stella,

The 64-bit bit from Intel is called the Itanium, or Itanic as many call it. It has been available for sometime, getting a system is a different story as the manufacturers don?t seem to want to sell them, but nonetheless, the chip is released. The AMD is currently not available.




Sorry this is wrong.
the Itanium will not run on 64xp.

MS made this os for a real, now-shipping, 64bit cpu from AMD called the opteron. http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/index.html


http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8825,00.html


this is the hammer chip that everyone has be waiting for, except in a xeon like status. when they ship the consumer level ones, all they will have diff is the cache.

sad part is; it is slow, and already gets its ass handed to it by the xeons.

Zen Crane
Jun 7, 2003, 02:26 PM
At the risk of restating a point made earlier by fukuhela, there is something that I think needs to be made clear here, before we all start making blood pacts against Apple if the 970 doesn't show.

There is an old adage that goes something like: "Hope for the best, plan for the worst."

Remember the G5.
Remember the 17" iMac.
Remember the Flat Panel iMac.
Remember the the PBG4.
All items that were thought in the can for so long and then never materialized until much later (or never in one case). Maybe my history is a little questionable, but I seem to recall that these all were considered givens at one show or another, only to get replaced by a solid, though not dramatic, upgrade which had a lot people (namely those frequenting rumor sites and taking them as absolute truth, amongst others) upset with Apple. Upset with them for doing no more or no less than they said they were going to do.

My point is that about the only we can say for sure is coming is some look at 10.3 (Panther). We cannot be sure of anything beyond that. History has taught us this. Nobody's saying that the 970s wouldn't be nice and I do sincerely hope they show up (and hopefully close the speed gap once for all, but again, I not going to declare anything 'till I see benchmarks), but we can't act like they are a given at this point. We simply don't know what state of development they're at.

Temperance, folks.

P.S. -- For the record, I have nothing against rumor sites. I read them every day and I do hang on every post a lot of the time. On the other hand, having read MOSR (http://www.macosrumors.com) before so many keynotes, I've learned to take all rumor sites with a grain of salt. Even Think Secret (http://www.thinksecret.com) has been wrong on occation.

eric_n_dfw
Jun 7, 2003, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by noverflow
Sorry this is wrong.
the Itanium will not run on 64xp.

MS made this os for a real, now-shipping, 64bit cpu from AMD called the opteron. Yeah - that's why http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/techinfo/planning/techoverview/default.asp says the following (my emphasis added):

The 64-bit Microsoft Windows platform will provide high availability, advanced scalability, and large memory support based on the Intel® Itanium™ processor family with its extensive multiprocessing features, powerful floating-point arithmetic extensions and multimedia-specific instructions.
:rolleyes:

Stella
Jun 7, 2003, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
Microsoft is one company, Intel is another, as is AMD and then add in all the peecee manufacturers, Microsoft is in the software (OS) group, Intel and AMD are in the processor group and the manufacturers are in the third group.


No **** sherlock. Please don't patronise me.

vniow
Jun 7, 2003, 02:40 PM
Hmm...MacPrices.com's Power Mac tracker seems to say differently, everything seems to be in stock..maybe they'll update next week or so..

http://www.macprices.com/powermactracker.shtml

cheb712
Jun 7, 2003, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by synthetickittie
ah dam Im not gonna have the "top of the line" for much longer. I got a 1.42 when they were first annouced but even if I new this was gonna happen I wouldnt of changed my mind because nothing can make up for all the work Ive done in the past few months and I NEEDED a new computer and deffinitly couldnt wait and any longer.

I'm in the same boat.
Except I just bought a dual 1.42 EXPECTING the 970s to come out soon. Whatever they say about the 970s when they come out, no one can say that this 1.42 isn't fast. I'm not going to regret getting this machine. Stable, fast, quiet. (warm though)

PLUS I have NEVER had luck with a first generation chip. My 7100 was slower than my quadra 650 and it never ran smooth. Then I got the G4 when it came out and my B&W G3 kicked it's butt on almost every task. That G4 was always giving me problems. I have been very disappointed in each 'new' chip.

I'll get the second generation 970 or a second gen 980 when those comes out. By then most apps should be written for 64bit. Plus the bugs should be worked out by then. (IMO)

I LOVE this dual 1.42! :D
Now I'm off to play some Unreal Tournament 2003 (techdemo)

Durendal
Jun 7, 2003, 03:05 PM
It looks to me like the 970 is a sure thing for WWDC. Here's why:

1. Apple NEEDS something big to boost their sagging powermac sales, and 10.3 aint gonna cut the mustard in that respect.

2. Hasn't IBM said that production was way ahead of schedule? That the chip was complete long before they thought it would be?

3. Why would WWDC be pushed back a month if Apple didn't have something REALLY sweet to announce?

4. Motorola doesn't have anything that's going to be ready by WWDC. Have they ever? Apple needs to kick Motorola to the curb, and they need to do it ASAP. If Motorola doesn't have anything more than an upclocked G4 by WWDC, you can bet your buns Apple will go with the better chip: The 970.

I'm very excited about WWDC this year. Anyone know if there will be a streaming broadcast of the Stevenote?

Flowbee
Jun 7, 2003, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by maradong
i m praying for the PPC 970...
who is not ? :rolleyes:

Me too (athiest thread posts notwithstanding). :D

Lanbrown
Jun 7, 2003, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by springscansing
Actually its much simpler than that. The itanium is a server chip, period. The Power4 is a server chip, period. The 970 is a desktop/laptop/mini-server chip. There is no Itanium worth sticking in a desktop now. There is a 970 though.

WRONG!!!!
http://www.hp.com/workstations/itanium/index.html
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/workstations/
Power4 and Itanic workstations. Sun does the same thing. You have the USIII in a workstation.
http://www.sun.com/desktop/sunblade2000/

The 970 is a cheaper version of the Power 4. Like the IIIi is a cheaper version of the III. The Power4 has a huge amount of cache, which is very expensive. The US III has a large amount as well. So they have their lower end counterparts.

Noverflow,

Name one major manufacturer selling Operton workstations?


Stella,

You said this “However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.”

Why would Apple create a 64-bit OS only too have it sit around??????? Answer, they won’t. That is a lot of effort spent on nothing. So if you don’t want to be patronized, don’t ask a stupid question.

See above for availability to the consumer.

3.1416
Jun 7, 2003, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by Durendal
It looks to me like the 970 is a sure thing for WWDC. Here's why:

1. Apple NEEDS something big to boost their sagging powermac sales, and 10.3 aint gonna cut the mustard in that respect.

2. Hasn't IBM said that production was way ahead of schedule? That the chip was complete long before they thought it would be?

3. Why would WWDC be pushed back a month if Apple didn't have something REALLY sweet to announce?

4. Motorola doesn't have anything that's going to be ready by WWDC. Have they ever? Apple needs to kick Motorola to the curb, and they need to do it ASAP. If Motorola doesn't have anything more than an upclocked G4 by WWDC, you can bet your buns Apple will go with the better chip: The 970.


1. Yep. Recall Steve's statement at the stockholder meeting that they were aware performance was a major problem and would be discussing their relationship with Motorola.
2. As far as I know, IBM hasn't publicly said anything since last year, when they said the 970 would be available in the second half of 2003. That's a wide range and they'd only have to be slightly ahead of schedule for Apple to be able to ship 970 Macs at WWDC.
3. Agreed. This is the strongest evidence in my opinion. Delaying WWDC solely for Panther just doesn't make sense.
4. Motorola is gone at the high end. If not at WWDC, as soon as possible.

As it stands now I think there's a 75% chance that the 970 will be announced at WWDC, and a 50% chance at least one model will be available immediately.

3.1416
Jun 7, 2003, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by fukuhela
According to IBM's own schedule it's supposed to be ready late '03 or beginning '04. And if the 970 isn't ready then Apple really don't have a choice...

Last I saw IBM said the 970 would be available in the 2nd half of 2003, which is rather vague and possibly deliberately so. But your point is well taken; it's more up to IBM than Apple as to when we'll see 970 Macs.

Stella
Jun 7, 2003, 05:46 PM
Lanbrown, Please, READ MY POST CORRECTLY !!!!!

FIRSTLY, I said, I don't expect 970 THIS month. However, I expect them to arrive at some point. Apple are creating a 64bit operating for forthcoming 970 machines.

SECONDLY I *NEVER EVER* said that they won't arrive at all.

THIRDLY I NEVER asked ANY QUESTIONS!!! I was commenting.

Originally posted by Lanbrown

Why would Apple create a 64-bit OS only too have it sit around??????? Answer, they won?t. That is a lot of effort spent on nothing. So if you don?t want to be patronized, don?t ask a stupid question.

See above for availability to the consumer.

job
Jun 7, 2003, 07:01 PM
Simple Question:

Do we know 10.3 will be 64-bit aware?

I've read so many posts in this thread with people screaming that 10.3 will be a 64 bit OS therefore the 970 must be on it's way.

Has it even been *confirmed* that 10.3 will bring 64 bit to the Mac desktop?

Marble
Jun 7, 2003, 07:14 PM
My question, exactly.

bignumbers
Jun 7, 2003, 07:37 PM
Not sure about the accuracy of this... Everywhere I checked lists a fair number of all models, including the dual 1.4's. (Fewer 1.4's than the others, but it is the top-end model.)

Online right now, Clubmac lists 215 in stock. (Probably at their distributer rather than in their own warehouse.)

Hopefully they're running low elsewhere and the G5 (or whatever its called) is coming quite soon.

Chef Ramen
Jun 7, 2003, 09:20 PM
i think theres a workshop at WWDC about 64-bit stuff.....something like that

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 8, 2003, 01:45 AM
2. Hasn't IBM said that production was way ahead of schedule? That the chip was complete long before they thought it would be?

cough cough FATE cough

Hate to bust and bubbles but from Apple's own PR site:

CUPERTINO, California?March 21, 2003?Apple® today announced that it has rescheduled its 2003 Worldwide Developers Conference in order to provide developers with a more complete preview release of the next version of Mac® OS X, code named ?Panther.? Originally scheduled for May 19-23 in San Jose, the conference will now be held June 23-27 at San Francisco?s Moscone Center.

Granted if you're a hard core rumormonger you take "more complete preview" to mean hardware to back the software :-D.

IMHO I think we're looking to see WWDC as a starting point for 64-bit. Developers need to be coding 32/64-bit Hybrid apps now (since most of them are too lazy to code more altivec like they should) and Apple plans to SHOW (not ship, not off a DEVELOPERS CONFERENCE) their 64-bit solution, which is a 64-bit Project Builder suite, which i wonder if it will compile 64-bit code on a 32-bit machine. Hmm. But show off their 970s running 64-bit apps, not actually sell them at that time. Apple could've shown off 970s at WWDC if it was last month if they wanted to enough, Apple has had semi-stable (demo-able) 970s since early this year around 1.2ghz i estimate. Moto's 85xx series is already unimpressive and it's not out yet, clearly Moto plans to move towards 100% imbeedded where their crappy slow chips belong.

So: WWDC: see panther, want panther, see 970s, want 970s. You won't get either unless you bring a DVD-R and/or pay off some apply employee to take a walk ;-)

mangoman
Jun 8, 2003, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
2. Hasn't IBM said that production was way ahead of schedule? That the chip was complete long before they thought it would be?

cough cough FATE cough

Hate to bust and bubbles but from Apple's own PR site:

CUPERTINO, California?March 21, 2003?Apple® today announced that it has rescheduled its 2003 Worldwide Developers Conference in order to provide developers with a more complete preview release of the next version of Mac® OS X, code named ?Panther.? Originally scheduled for May 19-23 in San Jose, the conference will now be held June 23-27 at San Francisco?s Moscone Center.

Granted if you're a hard core rumormonger you take "more complete preview" to mean hardware to back the software :-D.

IMHO I think we're looking to see WWDC as a starting point for 64-bit. Developers need to be coding 32/64-bit Hybrid apps now (since most of them are too lazy to code more altivec like they should) and Apple plans to SHOW (not ship, not off a DEVELOPERS CONFERENCE) their 64-bit solution, which is a 64-bit Project Builder suite, which i wonder if it will compile 64-bit code on a 32-bit machine. Hmm. But show off their 970s running 64-bit apps, not actually sell them at that time. Apple could've shown off 970s at WWDC if it was last month if they wanted to enough, Apple has had semi-stable (demo-able) 970s since early this year around 1.2ghz i estimate. Moto's 85xx series is already unimpressive and it's not out yet, clearly Moto plans to move towards 100% imbeedded where their crappy slow chips belong.

So: WWDC: see panther, want panther, see 970s, want 970s. You won't get either unless you bring a DVD-R and/or pay off some apply employee to take a walk ;-)

Ahhh, the voice of reason, IMO. MasterX, I'm with you, baby.

dongmin
Jun 8, 2003, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
So: WWDC: see panther, want panther, see 970s, want 970s. You won't get either unless you bring a DVD-R and/or pay off some apply employee to take a walk ;-)

As discussed much before, the 970 does not require a 64-bit OS X to make it worthwhile. It'll run plenty well on existing 32-bit OS and apps. In fact many rumors have reported that the initial batch of 970-powered PMs will ship with 10.2.x

cubist
Jun 8, 2003, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by springscansing
Actually its much simpler than that. The itanium is a server chip, period. The Power4 is a server chip, period. The 970 is a desktop/laptop/mini-server chip. There is no Itanium worth sticking in a desktop now. There is a 970 though.

And the current Itaniums only run at 800MHz!

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 8, 2003, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by mangoman
Ahhh, the voice of reason, IMO. MasterX, I'm with you, baby.

Don't call me baby. Ever.


As discussed much before, the 970 does not require a 64-bit OS X to make it worthwhile. It'll run plenty well on existing 32-bit OS and apps. In fact many rumors have reported that the initial batch of 970-powered PMs will ship with 10.2.x

Granted, but If Panther really is 64-bit and was pushed back a month before it's initial public view AND Apple has 64-bit pre-production 970s wouldn't it make sence for them to at least show what Panther can do on a 64-bit platform?

mangoman
Jun 8, 2003, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
Don't call me baby. Ever.

Easy, Nick. It's just an expression. Sorry -- didn't mean to get your undies in a twist pattern.

:p

ethan
Jun 8, 2003, 06:45 PM
The 970 is not going to be the "be-all, end-all" miracle that the masses on this board think. Just wait, you'll see.

(The masses can get off their knees now at the Job Shrine.)

unreg
Jun 8, 2003, 08:43 PM
In the long run it doesn't matter if the 970 is released June 28,2003 or Dec 28, 2003, these chips and motherboards will be much better than the present systems. The 970 may not be the holy grail, but the road map for the Power series desktop derivitives looks very good because IBM is using the same chips in their new desktops. Think German federal government, Russian federal government, US$7-9 billion and linux.
A hint - Germany and Russia no longer use MSWindows on their governmental computers and US$7-9 billion is what IBM got paid to do the conversion.
Ibm is in desktops for the long haul and Apple will ride their coattails.

970 now 980, 990 etc. Be happy, don't worry.javascript:smilie(':)')

mathiasr
Jun 8, 2003, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by 3.1416
3. Agreed. This is the strongest evidence in my opinion. Delaying WWDC solely for Panther just doesn't make sense.
Only two weeks to go, and Apple has still 4 WWDC sessions to fill tuesday morning:
http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/tuesday.html
These must be placeholders for a yet unannounced technology.

MasterX (OSiX)
Jun 8, 2003, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by ethan
(The masses can get off their knees now at the Job Shrine.)

It's the "jobs shrine"

how dare you....

dabeatles
Jun 8, 2003, 09:11 PM
Hell, if y'all are worrying about what to call the PPC 970, I'm all for Apple releasing a computer called the "G4.5."

nagromme
Jun 9, 2003, 12:09 AM
If the 970s aren't ready in volume--which they weren't supposed to be until September--then Apple can't ship 970 macs yet. It's nothing to do with them being smart or not, or not WANTING to ship them sooner.

And if new CPUs for PowerMacs can't come until late summer/fall, then Apple may well need to bump the G4s a little between now and then. They may not be great sellers, but simply standing still with the current Mhz for half a year isn't a great idea either.

If higher-MHz G4s are available as a stopgap, and 970s just aren't ready, then Apple should sell new G4s for a few months. That's not ideal, but the company will survive until IBM can provide the chips.

I'd love to be surprised by the 970 being ready in volume early, but it will be just that: a surprise!

jettredmont
Jun 9, 2003, 02:42 AM
Originally posted by MasterX (OSiX)
So: WWDC: see panther, want panther, see 970s, want 970s. You won't get either unless you bring a DVD-R and/or pay off some apply employee to take a walk ;-)

Um, no. As the PR said, Apple is sending developers home with a (pre-release) copy of Panther, just like they did last year with Jaguar.

970's probably aren't included in the pass price, though, unfortunately :)

andyduncan
Jun 9, 2003, 05:34 AM
Low stocks of machines are almost as good a predictor for new macs as my grandpa's trick knee going out is for bad weather... Storms a brewin' Betty, get the hogs in the barn!

andyduncan
Jun 9, 2003, 05:46 AM
Originally posted by nagromme
I'd love to be surprised by the 970 being ready in volume early, but it will be just that: a surprise!

It's pretty important to have 64bit hardware if you are going to be developing for a 64bit OS. So all the ifs together now: if Apple is going to release 64bit machines this year, ideally they are going to want to get them in the hands of developers at the same time or before they give developers a seed of said 64 bit OS. So if Panther is in fact the 64bit-aware OS, it makes sense they would release the machines at WWDC. Sure you could run a 64-bit virtual-machine and run a copy of Panther on it... but thats not very elegant... or fast...

Another possibility that I haven't seen mentioned is that Apple might not have a full-production run available. It's possible they could release the first couple-thousand of these machines only to developers. Get them started on the apps while they ramp up production.

Black Badger
Jun 9, 2003, 07:32 AM
My thoughts on what will happen at WWDC regarding new machines and beyond:

- Apple introduce new 970 based machines at WWDC
- These are immediately available at WWDC to registered developers, so they can 1:Get to grips with Panther, 2:Get to grips with the new architecture/processor.
- Joe Public (non-registered developers) can pre order their machine for shipping in early Sept by which time they will come preloaded with 64-bit optimised Panther. This give Apple the biggest marketing edge ever, the first supplier to use a 64-bit processor in their desktop machines along with being the first to supply a fully optimised 64-bit OS for general use.

Lots of mileage to be had.

Also by delaying shipping til Sept, it buys everybody some time, IBM (to produce a healthy stockpile of processors), Apple (to monitor the initial demand by preorders, to tidy up Panther, build a reasonable level of inventory), developers (to tune & take advantage of new developments in HW & SW)

sedarby
Jun 9, 2003, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
WRONG!!!!
http://www.hp.com/workstations/itanium/index.html
http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/workstations/
Power4 and Itanic workstations. Sun does the same thing. You have the USIII in a workstation.
http://www.sun.com/desktop/sunblade2000/

The 970 is a cheaper version of the Power 4. Like the IIIi is a cheaper version of the III. The Power4 has a huge amount of cache, which is very expensive. The US III has a large amount as well. So they have their lower end counterparts.

Noverflow,

Name one major manufacturer selling Operton workstations?


Stella,

You said this “However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.”

Why would Apple create a 64-bit OS only too have it sit around??????? Answer, they won’t. That is a lot of effort spent on nothing. So if you don’t want to be patronized, don’t ask a stupid question.

See above for availability to the consumer.

When did Apple EVER say that 10.3 (Panther) was going to be 64 bit?

Tim Flynn
Jun 9, 2003, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Stella

However, Microsoft have ported XP to 64 bit. Where are all the amd/intel 64 bit processors? They aren't here yet available to consumers, so the existence of a 64 bit OS doesn't mean availability of 64 bit processors.


Microsoft has said they will port to AMD 64. The 64 bit version is only in Alpha stage.

mathiasr
Jun 9, 2003, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by andyduncan
Another possibility that I haven't seen mentioned is that Apple might not have a full-production run available. It's possible they could release the first couple-thousand of these machines only to developers. Get them started on the apps while they ramp up production.
And drivers... since I'm still looking for a 64 bits kernel able to run kernel extensions (.kext in Mac OS X) in 32 bits mode (for instance AIX requires 64 bits kernel extensions when run in 64 bits mode).

We will probably not see a lot of apps ported to 64 bits, they could be recompiled to fit the 970 instruction sheduling/caches size but still stay 32 bits apps.
Some very optimized apps that pick a different AltiVec code whether they run on a 7400 or a 745x would need some tuning...

JBracy
Jun 9, 2003, 02:01 PM
I posted this in another thread, but thought it might go down well here as well:

Originally posted by JBracy
A friend just sent me Apple's quarterly employee promos (huge price drops - usually items they want to clear out before new items replace them) Included are:

all 15" PB's
all iBooks

all displays

1 gHz PowerMacs
dual 1.25 gHz PowerMacs

CRT iMac
combo and superdrive eMacs
15" iMacs

It looks like Apple are trying to reduce inventory across the board (all the items I looked at were between $200 - 400 less than current AppleStore prices). The only items not listed are 12 & 17" PB 1.42 PM and 17" iMac. If my assumption is correct, then the reason these items are not on sale is because they are selling well and Apple is assuming that they can clear the chanel at current prices.

macnews
Jun 11, 2003, 02:17 AM
I think this could be good news for a 970 release.

seamuskrat
Jun 12, 2003, 07:48 AM
I did a quick look see at the local inventory in SoCal while tracking down a USB to parallel cable on Wednesday.
CompUSA in Burbank = ABUNDANT stock of Macs
Apple Store in Northridge = Abundant supply
Apple Store in Glendale= Abundant supply
MacMall/Creative Computers Santa monica= Abundant supply
Fry's Burbank- moderate supply of Powerbooks, Abundant supply of PM.

So, in the Los Angeles region, there seems to be no supply issues. Maybe some vendors ahve a problem with distribution, but the major retail players in this area have plenty of stock. The folks at Fry's said sales have bee stagnent on the Powermacs and slowing on Powerbooks. iMac are lower than last summer but still 1 to 2 units a day. They said its common to not sell a Powermac for a week at a time. (They sell 25 to 45 PCs a day and more on weekends).

Dont Hurt Me
Jun 13, 2003, 05:52 PM
nice post, but the powermac figures are no surprise, come on a 1 gig for $1500 bucks. G4's are way overpriced. Maybe a new machine may help but this is why they need a new machine or rather CPU. g4's at 1 gig aint getting it done. Now how about a 1.8 ghz 970 imac. that would get it done, oh yeah forgot cant be as fast as the powermac game again.:eek:

solvs
Jun 15, 2003, 12:06 AM
Most of the smaller places I've checked have little to no stock. Towers AND PowerBooks. Order from Apple online and they're listed as Same Day. Unless you BTO, then it changes to 1-3 days or more. I wouldn't be surprised if CompUSA still has a large stock. The local one here in Tacoma still has older Macs listed as new. Like 700 MHz iBooks and eMacs.

I have way too much time on my hands lately.

Farve
Jun 18, 2003, 10:21 AM
Apple Store sweden willl not ship 1Ghz & dual 1.25 Ghz PowerMac untill 3-5 weeks but dual 1.42Ghz are still shipping.
Could this mean that there is a production stop on all current PowerMacs but still have some dual 1.42's to clear out?