Apple to a G5?

[MacAztec]

Hey guys, I know its a little early to say this, but it seems to me as if Apple will be moving their Pro Line to a G5. They have 2 machines that are cheaper, and better for the money than the Pro Line, and it seems to me as if consumers (even Pros) are not interested in that line of computers.

[eyelikeart]

either a much faster processor or a new processor would have to be the next step up for Apple...

think about it right now....aside from the iBook....all of their machines host a G4 processor...and I'm sure there are lots of pissed off people who feel they aren't getting the "professional line" system they are paying for when the same processor (well almost) is available in 3 different systems...

but then there's the talk of no G5 for a while...but again it's all just "rumors"...so I don't know what to believe or think at this point...

I just want a new TiBook...he he he :p

[Pants]

with the eMac (very apt name for an osX machine... ;) ) running a g4, and at such a low price, I wouldnt mind betting something is in the not to distant pipeline...

Question really is though - have moto really got their house in order? Apple seems to become increasingly reliant on a supplier that has been a bit slack on coming up with the goods. At least Apple could look to IBM for a short term fix, but they seem to be increasingly frozen out...

[iGav]

With Apples recent form of releasing without Expos, and with radical machines such as the new iMac or secret release of a completely new machine like the eMac or the stealthy issue of the Dual Ghz machine, I think it's going to be even harder to predict with any accuracy what Apples next move is going to be.... :p

That said though, the release of an Education specific machine, sporting a G4 could suggest that the G5 maybe is not as far off in the future as some people have been suggesting....

I'm not convinced it will be at MWNY..... but in all honestly..... I don't know anymore..... it just makes life alittle more fun...... compare the site this week to last week.... when people were really in their favourite strait-jackets and rubber wall paper'd rooms going insane with the lack of mac rumors knocking around......

Things can certainly turn around quickly in the world of the mac...... :p

[Hemingray]

So here's the current status:

Consumer/Education Line:
iBook = G3
iMac = G4
eMac = G4

Pro Line:
PowerBook = G4
PowerMac = G4

Next move is without a doubt the G5 for PowerMacs. Of course the only question is... when. I'd like to think July, but who knows...

now the eMac, a computer that will make it into elementary schools, is almost as powerful as the PowerMac used by professionals (in the eyes of the general public). BIG clue. Marketing-wise, Apple MUST move to the G5.

[mc68k]

Originally posted by Pants
with the eMac (very apt name for an osX machine... ;))

Plural of eMac? eMacs. Or emacs on an eMac. The possibilities are endless. :)

[Hemingray]

Yep, the name is like a reincarnation of the Newton eMate. :)

[Hemingray]

Sorry for the double post, guys... :(

[MacAztec]

Its 999 if you are a school purchasing agent, and you buy it for the school. Otherwise, its 1249

[mcrain]

Originally posted by Hemingray
Next move is without a doubt the G5 for PowerMacs.

Not to be a smart*ss or anything, but I'm pretty sure they won't skip to a G6...

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by mcrain


Not to be a smart*ss or anything, but I'm pretty sure they won't skip to a G6...

You are being a smart *ss. We are saying that Apple won't be giving the PowerMac line any more updates MHz wise, but only a new chip!

[Macmaniac]

This has to happen soon, we know a G5 chip is out there, I am very sure that Apple will put a G5 into Powermacs at MWNY. 1.4ghz would be nice or 1.6! Oh the possibilities! See you at MWNY!

[3rdpath]

i think we're gonna see the new G5 in july.

we know the g4 chip has room to grow-perfect for the other applications( why put a maxed out chip in the new ti, emac etc...)

and we know the pro-users want a pro-line thats superior to the consumer models both in form (racks, please) and function ( 1.6Ghz, DDR, Rapid io)
i think we'll also have a price differential to support the different lines:eek:
they may even leave the g4 tower line availabe for the pro-sumers...

so far the predictions have been extremely accurate-spymac not withstanding:D

all the pieces are starting to fall into place and its looking mighty good.

[Hemingray]

Originally posted by mcrain


Not to be a smart*ss or anything, but I'm pretty sure they won't skip to a G6...

Hehe... well true, but think about it:

Apple could come out with PowerBook AND PowerMac G5 at once.

or...

Apple could come out with PowerBook G5 first.

But due to the fact that the PBG4's just got an update, if the G5 scenario is really true then we'll see the PowerMacs first. That's what I was saying...

[Pentium Killer]

would not be too bad either with the G4´s running at 1.4 Ghz .:D

[spuncan]

Around MWSF there were all kinds of "leeks" about the G5 then after they weren't released abd the Dual 1GHZ. came out everything went quiet. generally a hush means somethings happening and it'll be big.
(like the iLamp release) So I wouldn't be suprised if the G5 comes out sooner then the rumors are speculating. Especially with this all systems G4 movement. Oh no now Im starting to beleive UGH.

[Pentium Killer]

some people will always be disappointed."What,only 1.6 GHz G5.Intel already has 2.2 bla bla bla." :rolleyes:

[Mr. Anderson]

One thing you might not be thinking about. Say they update the Mobo first, with a G4, DDRRAM, faster bus etc.

AND how about a quad G4?!?

This would extend the life of the G4 until MWSF '03 and also produce a kick@ss machine.:D

[3rdpath]

quads are peachy with me. if thats all they updated it would still be great-and hey, none of that first rev. fear..... :)

[imamacguy17]

what we are seeing here is the extermination of G3 machines. Apple will have the proline of G5s done right for us at MWNY if that late. i would hope we see it next week on the 6th but what would that leave us for macworld?

things are big 2002 is the year of the mac.

[mcrain]

Originally posted by MacAztec
You are being a smart *ss.

I know that. That's the point of saying "Not to be a smart*ss."

If I wanted to predict the future for apple, the easiest thing to say would be that the next chip will be the G5. That's painfully obvious.

The question we really are asking is not what's next, but when's next.

Yes, I also know that the G5 may not be next if you consider updated mobos, ram, etc... but those things really aren't feasible due to the G4's inability to support DDR ram. Oh, and a quad system? Wouldn't that really really be targeted to a very small pro market, and wouldn't the software that utilizes it be minimal?

As for me, I'd like a better chip (G5) that by itself is hot, and in a duel setup is really really hot.

Gimme gimme gimme.

Macaztec, I've got an odd sense of humor, and your young, so just bear with me. ok?

[alex_ant]

Why are you all drooling over the G5? Do you want another chip from Motorola that is going to see nothing but slight speed bumps every few months as the G4 currently is? At 1.6GHz it will be obsolete upon its introduction, only to fall even further behind over time.

No, I think Apple has something much better up its sleeve than the G5. Say it with me: IBM POWER.

Alex

[Ifeelbloated]

I was watching a TV news piece about new processors in the works from IBM. They had some seriously powerful stuff running in their labs but it's all still in the R&D phase and introducing it to the market now would make their cost be astronomical. I think the CPUs were running on a molecular level if you can believe that.

[barkmonster]

I think the increase of 166MHz everytime they bring out a new line is a little slow but intel are only increasing by 200Mhz and you know how meaningless 200Mhz is to a Pentium 4 concidering it's high clock speed to start with. The Althlon is only increasing in 66Mhz increments, As for the G4, well we know we can expect at least a 1.2Ghz next. Someone overclocked their 1Ghz mac to 1.2 shortly after it was released. If we can jump 400Mhz this time and have the rumoured G4s with the G5 memory system I think we'll have something to look forward to this summer!

[SPG]

hypothetically....What if the G4 is as good as it gets?

What would happen if there is no G5, or the G5 isn't able to be manufactured?
I don't think that's the case, but it's been a damn long time coming. It's gonna be 3 years soon.

[mc68k]

Originally posted by mcrain
Yes, I also know that the G5 may not be next if you consider updated mobos, ram, etc... but those things really aren't feasible due to the G4's inability to support DDR ram. Oh, and a quad system? Wouldn't that really really be targeted to a very small pro market, and wouldn't the software that utilizes it be minimal?

As for me, I'd like a better chip (G5) that by itself is hot, and in a duel setup is really really hot.

Gimme gimme gimme.

As I understand it, the symmetric multiprocessing is supposed to be split up at the kernel level. With previous Mac OS's, you had to have special software/extentions to specifically take advantage of both of the processors. With OS X, as I understand it, EVERYTHING takes advantage of the extra processor(s). So quad might not be as niche as you think.

The 1MB L3 cache is DDR, and helps tremendously with many extra GB's of thouroughput. I don't think that DDR will see that much of an improvement over SDRAM. Only when coupled to a next-gen processor might you be able to see some definite changes.

I just get the feeling that evryone around here is unhappy (like people selling their PB G4's today) with what they currently have, and are always looking to the future for revisions and new product lines. Just wait. Good things will come in due time.

[eirik]

I agree with Alex_ant that the Power4 would make for a powerful CPU. However, I do not think that Apple would go with it unless IBM coupled it with AltiVec because so much code is written to take advantage of vector processing.

The Power4, as we know it, is a superscalar processor. All of the code written in vector/matrix operations would no longer realize any added benefits from coding in that manner. If I were such an application developer, I'd be pissed!

There's a problem with this though, a big one! As earlier posts are showing, Apple is moving more and more of its product line to the G4. Unless IBM starts manufacturing the G4's, producing Power4 AltiVecs for Apple would represent a miniscule volume to IBM. I doubt Apple could generate enough volume to make this worthwhile to IBM.

On the other hand, if a Power4 AltiVec were also employed by one or more of the major game box makers (Sony, Nintendo, hell the Xbox), then the volume would make such production worthwhile for IBM.

I suspect that part of Apple's rationale for moving its low-end machines to Motorola's G4 is to increase volume to Motorola to gain more influence on Motorola, to make it more worthwhile for Motorola to pour more resources into development and manufacturing development. If so, Apple is placing a hefty bet on Motorola.

I don't buy the x86 talk for Apple; I'll leave the explanation alone in this post.

Motorola has some other CPU's that might be employed but I doubt Apple would utilize them either.

It looks to me as though Motorola either has incrementally faster G4's so that Apple can further differentiate its PowerMac's with the consumer Mac's. And that, Apple is soon ready to announce a new motherboard with a much improved bus and I/O control/performance. Alternatively, I can see this motherboard employing the long-fantasized G5. I fear the former is more likely, however. I wish the later would be so, though.

I want a G5 that will "Hammer" the competition. Clap your hands if you believe!!!

Eirik

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by barkmonster
I think the increase of 166MHz everytime they bring out a new line is a little slow but intel are only increasing by 200Mhz and you know how meaningless 200Mhz is to a Pentium 4 concidering it's high clock speed to start with. The Althlon is only increasing in 66Mhz increments
Both Intel and AMD are advancing by these increments, as you say, but - correct me if I'm wrong - they're doing it more rapidly than Motorola is with the G4, and they're also continually enhancing their chips' architectures, unlike Motorola.
As for the G4, well we know we can expect at least a 1.2Ghz next. Someone overclocked their 1Ghz mac to 1.2 shortly after it was released. If we can jump 400Mhz this time and have the rumoured G4s with the G5 memory system I think we'll have something to look forward to this summer!
It's something to look forward to, but isn't Intel supposed to be at 3GHz with the Pentium 4 by early next year? MHz Myth be damned, a 1.6GHz G4, AltiVec aside, will still be slower than the current fastest P4s and Athlons. Even moreso when you consider that it won't be coming for another three months, in which time Intel and AMD will be able to get even faster. By early 2003, the G5 will be obsolete. I think if it doesn't come this summer - and perhaps even if it does - we're in for yet another game of Catch-Up-To-X86. This has been happening ever since the mid-'90s and I'm quite tired of it. I want to start seeing Apple wiping the floor with PCs, not just in those lame Photoshop benchmarks, and not just in those "we have more gigaflops" statements. I want to see some good results in benchmarks that matter, like SPEC and Linpack and so on... sadly I don't think Motorola is capable of this.

Alex

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by eirik
I agree with Alex_ant that the Power4 would make for a powerful CPU. However, I do not think that Apple would go with it unless IBM coupled it with AltiVec because so much code is written to take advantage of vector processing.
Motorola hasn't patented the vector processor... for all anyone cares, it could be called the PowerVec unit. :) Even without an onboard vector processor, the POWER4 whips (or at least comes very close) to anything AltiVec can do thanks to its awesome floating-point capabilities. Also, that's double-precision floating point. For that reason I don't think Apple would have a need for AltiVec anymore. I'm not saying Apple would be using the POWER4 itself, as I think that's a bit too much chip for the desktop at the moment. But the technology is there.

The Power4, as we know it, is a superscalar processor. All of the code written in vector/matrix operations would no longer realize any added benefits from coding in that manner. If I were such an application developer, I'd be pissed!
It doesn't really matter, though - would application developers abandon Apple just because they're mad at Apple for doing away with vector processing (if they indeed did)? Developers could just as easily see the dropping of AltiVec as a big plus - they no longer have to maintain separate vectorized code only for Apple, and their job becomes easier.
There's a problem with this though, a big one! As earlier posts are showing, Apple is moving more and more of its product line to the G4. Unless IBM starts manufacturing the G4's, producing Power4 AltiVecs for Apple would represent a miniscule volume to IBM. I doubt Apple could generate enough volume to make this worthwhile to IBM.
I think it's possible, as long as Apple uses what already exists (a POWER without AltiVec). If IBM is not keen on this for some reason, perhaps Apple could strike some sort of a deal with IBM. Is there anything Apple has that IBM could use? "Hey IBM, you're already making POWERs for your servers - why not bake a few more wafers for us, eh? *Wink wink, nudge nudge*" :)

But you're right - I think this is the biggest problem...

On the other hand, if a Power4 AltiVec were also employed by one or more of the major game box makers (Sony, Nintendo, hell the Xbox), then the volume would make such production worthwhile for IBM.
Or anyone else, for that matter... Cisco for example could use a nice new fast PPC-compatible chip in their top of the line.

I suspect that part of Apple's rationale for moving its low-end machines to Motorola's G4 is to increase volume to Motorola to gain more influence on Motorola, to make it more worthwhile for Motorola to pour more resources into development and manufacturing development. If so, Apple is placing a hefty bet on Motorola.
I agree. Perhaps it's only temporary - milking the last few drops of life out of what Apple needs from Motorola before dropping them and courting someone else instead. Or perhaps not.

I know my whole IBM POWER conspiracy theory is probably not very plausible. But at least it's fun. And if by some small chance I turn out to be right, I will be the psychic Miss Cleo of Macrumors! The fame! The glory! OK, time for bed.

Alex

[jasonpaul75]

I am far more interested in system and processor advances beyond just speed. I was running a Blue and White when the G4 was released...the speed differentials were clearly there...but the velocity engine and other seriously evolutionary changes were even more amazing. These message boards pulsed with activity like a brain on adrenaline..."gigaflops"..."floating point processes" These words were candy for the ears. A few months after my first G4 I added another to my office...this one with 2 processors (a marvel of technology I would hardly notice until OSX arrived) I still use that G4 Dual 450...and while my coworkers have been blessed with some of the newer Quicksilver models...I find it to be the single best machine I have ever used.
The patient few that have held out for a truly new design will be extremely well rewarded. Imagine the first time you drove a car with fuel injection or the similiar advance...the magic will be in the details. I can't be sure but I bet we will see few of those details coming...expect some of them to hit you like a freight train.

Oh yeah...finally don't think for a second that it is a coincidence that OSX 10.2 isn't here until the release of the next step in computing hardware arrives. (and you will be paying for this upgrade) I am betting that it will be a photofinish for the release of these two eagerly anticipated monsters. Big storms are a churning on the horizon...huge.

I wouldn't expect the new processor to be named G5 either...after the G3..the G4...and now a 24 hours video game networked called G4...it may be time to retire this moniker. It is no fault of Apples that the brand has become muddied...but it has. Besides the rest of the computer industry needs something new to rip off...take offs of "X" and "titanium" are embarrassing.
Shame on microsoft and intel for a complete lack of originality.

[mmmdreg]

Check this article about upcoming IBM PowerPC processors...its here (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/18691.html) ...
A little quote is "So, the next generation of PowerPCs from IBM will be based on a multi-core architecture designed for symmetrical multiprocessing (SMP). IBM's 32- to 256-bit Crossbar CoreConnect bus will be used to tie these multiple processor cores - all on a single CPU die - together.

In addition, these 1GHz+ chips will support the RapidIO bus, which brings to chip-to-chip communication a data throughput of 10Gbps, and, as IBM's roadmap puts it, an "integrated SIMD engine". That has to be a reference to Motorola's AltiVec vector processing system, called Velocity Engine by Apple."...
which brings me to my question..since these so called G3 1-2GHz+ by IBM are so different from the originals, after a bit more tweaking, could they be rebranded as G5's and used by Apple instead of Motorola's processors? This is assuming these IBM processors have a chance of existing...

[sparkleytone]

i support that the g5 is coming crazy soon. think about it.

G4's for $999, even if its only for universities at that price, thats crazy low.

Powerbooks on par with at least one G4 tower.

New Hi-Def screen seemingly built for something that doesnt exist yet.

Rumored new Video Chat software in the summer that uses the brushed metal "pro" look (a-la DVD Studio Pro 1.5) that is rumored to require the 10.2 update.

10.2, which is supposed to be the update that gives OS X 64-bit support, is being previewed next week. Also the beta DevTools are out.

G4's and SuperDrives in the iMacs, the consumer Apple line.

[Mr. Anderson]

Something has to give.

The G4s are almost standard across all lines right now, and they released the newest machines a week before Jobs Keynote at WWDC. Is is possible that we might see something then?

You know there are going to be a lot of questions about what's going on with the pro line.

[j763]

Quad G4 PowerMacs?

No Way!!!

Sure, it'd be cool to have 4 chips in the one machine :D but I think it's time we see a new chip. I really hope Apple has something up their sleves this time. The iMac in Jan was cool, the dual ghz pm was cool, the emac is cool for an entry level mac and with a bit of luck we'll see a truly "Awesomely Great" new chip (hopefully manafactured by anyone BUT motorola... although I sorta doubt it). Where's my AMD G5?? :D (ibm is perfectly acceptable too ;) )

[ericb88]

quad G4's os completely ridiculous. The price would be tremendous. The only reason why duals are possible is because the G4 costs around 270$ multiply that by 4 and you get 1080$ just on processor. And currently no programs would take advantage of it, and it wouldn't be worth it for a company to develop support for it when only a couple hundred users would be able to take advantage of it.

[Hemingray]

Originally posted by mcrain
If I wanted to predict the future for apple, the easiest thing to say would be that the next chip will be the G5. That's painfully obvious.

Ah yes, but that's NOT what I said. Go re-read my reply.

[thedude]

well, I don't know if you can rule out quads. It makes some sense in the grand scheme of things. For one, there was a post earlier this month about apple talking with CG facilities and asking them what they wanted in a machine. The all said duals are the minimum, quads would be nice. So, with the g4 running up and down the product line, wouldn't it make sense for apple to pop out a quad machine, (albiet a little expensive) for the high end, a couple of dual configs for the middle range and a couple of single procs for the bottom of the line? This would make Moto think twice about screwing with apples timeline with all the investment in g4's they'll have.

[jefhatfield]

Originally posted by Pants
with the eMac (very apt name for an osX machine... ;) ) running a g4, and at such a low price, I wouldnt mind betting something is in the not to distant pipeline...

Question really is though - have moto really got their house in order? Apple seems to become increasingly reliant on a supplier that has been a bit slack on coming up with the goods. At least Apple could look to IBM for a short term fix, but they seem to be increasingly frozen out...

i hope motorola has their house in order because the wintel world is probably winning converts faster than the mac world

and with nearly half of all americans without a computer, there is still a lot at stake in this high tech industry

anyone who thought the age of personal computers is dead is still caught up in "wishful thinking"...yeah, it would be nice to have a computer one could wear that would do everything you want it to simply be talking to it

those are the people who probably thought bin laden would get caught in a week

motorola is under pressure as intel and amd cross the 2 ghz mark

[Onyxx]

I think we have to step away from the chip for a second and take a look at the other possibilites. We all know that the mobo of the g4 has been basically unchanged since that of the B&W g3's and that a revamp is definately due. However, you hav to remove yourself from the hype to really take a look at what is offered. I'm going to take a "sweet and wheat" style approch to my statement (frosted mini wheats have a sweet "extreme, happy go lucky side" and a "sensible" wheat side.... Or so the comercial says ).

Wheat---->
too often some one says "intel has xchip at xmhz! oh no! i'm behind" or "my system bus is only 133 mhz! Damnit, I want 400 mhz like my pc buddies!". Why? What advancement does it give you? Can that intel chip run Final Cut pro?

Well what ever happened to updated pci buses, firewire 2, rapid io, and agp 8x? Processor is one thing, but you cant just sit a chip on your desk, plug it in and start animating the next CG masterpiece. It would be like pulling a yugo's engine and poping in an air-cooled porshe masterpiece. It wouldnt do any good.

So lets say that apple follow this thinking and builds a vastly superior mobo that included a faster bus, rapid io, faster pci, firewire 2, support for 4 gigs of memory, and 2 agp 4x slots. What do you think is going to be in that? A G5? Why would they test a brand new Chip in a Brand new board? If something goes wrong how do you know who the culprit is, the board or the chip?

The quick silver is one such example. Redesigned board with the same series G4 chip as the previous graphite models. Then out came the new apollo chips using the now proven board with the new chip.

In my own (hopefully wrong :D ) opinion, we will see one more rev of pro G4's with a brand spanking new motherboard. The only flaw in this hypothesis is that the current G4s are not designed to operate at higher bus speeds. But hey, this is just a prediction right? Besides I would much rather apple take their time perfecting the G5 than rushing to put it out there and leaving it so full of bugs, that it's basically useless.

Sweet------>

The G5 is way past due! However I want this thing to not only be a G5 by name but to be one by mechanics as well. But, my G5 is going to need a companion. I want a fully 64 bit G5 to run a 64 bit os x! A 64 bit G5 is useless without software that runs natively on that processor. You won't see that 64 bit boost untill all of the apps coded to 32 bit are ported over. I've seen many posters here go and drool at the thought of the current g4's running at 2 ghz just so they can say "hey windoze guy, I have lotsa ghz too!" I'll keep my tounge in check untill I see a fully implemented 64 bit g5 @ whatever the mhz runing a 64 bit os (os x) rendering my final cut pro 3 (fcp 3-64?) projects in real time. That is power, not how fast you can send an instant message while playing quake.

It is also possible that the G5 will be out with the new Mobo so coveted by the mac faithful. The current G4 is unable to run at the bus speeds *predicted* for the new mother board. So what's going to be humming away on that puppy, the G5! That way the bus speed can be boosted by two fold, the memory capacity can double, and we will finally breat out of the 66 mhz pci slump.

Apple has opened a big can of worms for macworld with this recent phase out of the G3. Previously, the G4 has been an exclusive "pro" machine chip that came with a price. Now with consumer G4's, the pro label is all but destroyed. To reestablish "pro relations" apple would have to bring out something truely tastey right? Well, another G4 won't do it for marketing (but might for those who know their hardware). Quad machines are not the answer. As mentioned before, quads would be too expensive for the pro-sumer but the software does exist to support them.

Originally posted by thedude
...For one, there was a post earlier this month about apple talking with CG facilities and asking them what they wanted in a machine. The all said duals are the minimum, quads would be nice. So, with the g4 running up and down the product line, wouldn't it make sense for apple to pop out a quad machine, (albiet a little expensive) for the high end, a couple of dual configs for the middle range and a couple of single procs for the bottom of the line? This would make Moto think twice about screwing with apples timeline with all the investment in g4's they'll have.

Right now, the new thing for CG that requires a lot of horsepower, is clustering. I think apple has realized this with their implementation of gig-e accross the pro line. Unlike quad machines, a clustered system would be made up of many seperate systems and could there for be "barrowed" when needed. I can see it now "Hey could you drop by with your ti 800 and daul 1 ghz? yeah i need it for a long render in Cinema 4D."

With all of that said, I would like to see this for the next machine:

Dual or single G5 @ xxmhz (preferebly dual)
266 bus for DDR ram
2 x agp 4x
firewire 2
4 gigs of memory
faster or new pci
osx 64 (along with a 64 bit final cut pro and dvd pro)

Give me this and I'll be happy.

-----------------------------------------
well even though the two sides seemed to overlap at times, you can get the basic picture. The G5 would be great for marketing but right now, there are other factors to be considered. Whatever happens I will probably blow my entire long post to hell. So we'll see in July.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Onyxx
Wheat---->
too often some one says "intel has xchip at xmhz! oh no! i'm behind" or "my system bus is only 133 mhz! Damnit, I want 400 mhz like my pc buddies!". Why? What advancement does it give you? Can that intel chip run Final Cut pro?
I don't think the fact that Apple has Final Cut Pro gives Apple or Motorola license to drag their feet here. Sure applications are a factor in this, but there is a point at which people have to say, "okay, I like Mac software better, but I need to switch anyway, because it's simply not fast enough anymore relative to what I can do on the PC."
Well what ever happened to updated pci buses, firewire 2, rapid io, and agp 8x? Processor is one thing, but you cant just sit a chip on your desk, plug it in and start animating the next CG masterpiece. It would be like pulling a yugo's engine and poping in an air-cooled porshe masterpiece. It wouldnt do any good.
So lets say that apple follow this thinking and builds a vastly superior mobo that included a faster bus, rapid io, faster pci, firewire 2, support for 4 gigs of memory, and 2 agp 4x slots. What do you think is going to be in that? A G5? Why would they test a brand new Chip in a Brand new board?
This is done ALL the time not least by Intel and AMD. The only reason Apple hasn't been doing it is because they've got old chips with no incentive to put them on a new and fresh board at the moment.
If something goes wrong how do you know who the culprit is, the board or the chip?
Well, this is what they teach you in computer engineering school... again, it's not a big deal.

The quick silver is one such example. Redesigned board with the same series G4 chip as the previous graphite models. Then out came the new apollo chips using the now proven board with the new chip.
You've got a logical argument going here, but it's mislead. The Apollos if I'm not mistaken are compatible in every way with the previous G4s, from bus speed to pin count to instruction set. There was no need to upgrade the motherboard, except for trivially minor tweaks.
In my own (hopefully wrong :D ) opinion, we will see one more rev of pro G4's with a brand spanking new motherboard. The only flaw in this hypothesis is that the current G4s are not designed to operate at higher bus speeds. But hey, this is just a prediction right? Besides I would much rather apple take their time perfecting the G5 than rushing to put it out there and leaving it so full of bugs, that it's basically useless.
CPUs in general are quite well-known for having very few bugs. In fact, if a desktop CPU hits the market with any known bug, it's a big deal and it will probably be on CNN (*cough* Intel F00F *cough). CPU designs are tested thoroughly even before the first wafers are baked. I think your worries about rampant bugs are unfounded.
The G5 is way past due! However I want this thing to not only be a G5 by name but to be one by mechanics as well. But, my G5 is going to need a companion. I want a fully 64 bit G5 to run a 64 bit os x! A 64 bit G5 is useless without software that runs natively on that processor. You won't see that 64 bit boost untill all of the apps coded to 32 bit are ported over.
The idea that a 64-bit CPU is inherently faster than a 32-bit CPU is a popular misconception. There is really no speed boost - at least not one that results purely from a processor being 64-bit. A 64-bit CPU will be able to address a larger memory space and deal with integer and FP words longer than 32 bits in length. A 32-bit G5 would arguably serve the Mac just as well, and at a lower cost.

It is also possible that the G5 will be out with the new Mobo so coveted by the mac faithful. The current G4 is unable to run at the bus speeds *predicted* for the new mother board. So what's going to be humming away on that puppy, the G5! That way the bus speed can be boosted by two fold, the memory capacity can double, and we will finally breat out of the 66 mhz pci slump.
The speed of the PCI bus has nothing to do with the speed of the memory bus, other than having a multiplier setting in common with it. And just to nitpick - a 64-bit CPU will be able to address MUCH more than double the memory of a 32-bit CPU. (2^32)/8 vs. (2^64)/8 bytes.

Alex

[tortus]

Today AMD announced that its new Hammer (being marketed under the Athlon name) and Opteron chips will start at 2ghz or highern They are also going to ship to computer manufacturers at the end of the year and to consumers at the beginning of 2003. The link is below.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-895652.html?tag=fd_top

I just hope that the g5 is out before then. The new AMD chips will set the bar ever higher for high performance desktops and servers and make it more difficult to justify the purchase of a dual 1.x ghz g4 PowerPC. Apple has their work cut out for them. If Adobe ever ports their software to Linux, I can save a lot of money by purchasing a pimped out AMD "Hammer" system running Suse Linux or some ****. But...I think it will be a cold day in hell before Adobe ever commits to the Penguin, so we are all stuck with Windoze or Mac OS 9/X if we want to use our favorite Adobe apps.

[Onyxx]

Originally posted by alex_ant

I don't think the fact that Apple has Final Cut Pro gives Apple or Motorola license to drag their feet here. Sure applications are a factor in this, but there is a point at which people have to say, "okay, I like Mac software better, but I need to switch anyway, because it's simply not fast enough anymore relative to what I can do on the PC."


If you think that adobe primere (I know there are other vid apps out there for the pc but adobe primere is 1. the most common 2. one of the cheapest 3. what fcp is usually compared to ) can do what FCP 3 can do you are on something really powerfull. I'm not giving moto any excuse to drag their r&d @sses around, but software makes ALL the difference. Isnt the mac os why we use macs? Not to mention the low occurence of problems compared to other os's. Remember a fast piece of ***** is still just a piece of *****. Personally I would rather work a little slower (marginally slower at worst) than have a buggy, windows system crash on me every 15 minutes.

Here's a case point. A school buys a brand new video editing system. Dual P3's @ 1ghz, striped and mirrored ultra 160 raid, dvd burner, and a targa 3000 real time card. Now this system is supposed to haul @ss like nothing out there. Only one problem, you can almost set a watch by the frequency of it's crashes. every 7-10 minutes. Since its installation, it has been "serviced" 5 times and still it crashes.
Mean while i am happily editing away on that school's 400 mhz imacs using fcp 2.0 and producing work faster, and easier than the $35k beast.

Soft ware is the factor. There is no other reason to use a machine other than the software it runs. Unless you are the type of person that gets a rush out of saying "hey look what i use!".

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by Onyxx
If you think that adobe primere (I know there are other vid apps out there for the pc but adobe primere is 1. the most common 2. one of the cheapest 3. what fcp is usually compared to ) can do what FCP 3 can do you are on something really powerfull.
I don't doubt any of what you say here...
I'm not giving moto any excuse to drag their r&d @sses around, but software makes ALL the difference. Isnt the mac os why we use macs?
It may be why many of us use Macs, and Indeed I like OS X a lot, but I don't agree that software makes ALL the difference. If software made all the difference BeOS would be the dominant OS on the PC platform and the most popular word processor in the world would be WordPerfect. To use your FCP vs. Premiere example, software doesn't stagnate. Adobe could catch up. If x86 hardware were quite faster than Mac hardware (which it almost is now for this task and which I believe it will be for sure in due time), if Adobe got close to FCP in terms of funcationality and usability, I'll bet FCP would fall out of favor simply because Premiere's greater speed resulted in a net increase of productivity even though some productivity may be lost to inferior functionality and usability. If that makes any sense...
Not to mention the low occurence of problems compared to other os's. Remember a fast piece of ***** is still just a piece of *****. Personally I would rather work a little slower (marginally slower at worst) than have a buggy, windows system crash on me every 15 minutes.
15 minutes? Isn't that kind of an exaggeration? :) I don't like Windows at all, but it is a lot better than it used to be. Quite a few people somehow manage to be very productive using it. As a matter of fact I would imagine that their productivity is not all that far behind the Mac's.

Another thing - Windows isn't all that's available on the PC. Linux is gaining some adoption, slowly but surely, and it is faster, more proven and arguably more stable than either OS X or Windows. It's still a niche OS to be sure, but then again the argument could be made that so is OS X.
Here's a case point. A school buys a brand new video editing system. Dual P3's @ 1ghz, striped and mirrored ultra 160 raid, dvd burner, and a targa 3000 real time card. Now this system is supposed to haul @ss like nothing out there. Only one problem, you can almost set a watch by the frequency of it's crashes. every 7-10 minutes. Since its installation, it has been "serviced" 5 times and still it crashes.
Mean while i am happily editing away on that school's 400 mhz imacs using fcp 2.0 and producing work faster, and easier than the $35k beast.
Seems like a pretty selective example. If any computer crashes every 7-10 minutes, there is something seriously wrong with it. I find it very hard to believe that your school's experience is the norm for all PC video editing systems. If such crashes are due to a design flaw, your school should have read a couple reviews of the thing before dropping $35k! And if they weren't, well, Macs fail sometimes just like PCs do.
Soft ware is the factor. There is no other reason to use a machine other than the software it runs.
And the speed at which it runs it.

Alex

[kaneda]

MWNY 2002

Top of the line model G5 1.6ghz - 80GB HD

Middle G5 1.4ghz - 60gb

G4 1.2 ghz or Dual (additional cost for second processor) 60gb

[Geert]

Originally posted by dukestreet
One thing you might not be thinking about. Say they update the Mobo first, with a G4, DDRRAM, faster bus etc.

AND how about a quad G4?!?

This would extend the life of the G4 until MWSF '03 and also produce a kick@ss machine.:D

I must agree with you Dukestreet, G4 is not dead yet, most likely they will update systembus and stuff, and perhaps a quad G4.
(And that way extend the dev stage for G5 a bit until MWSF'03, And then release a quad speed G5 monster :D )

[Onyxx]

the G4 isn't dead but the idea of a quad is. The last time I checked, apollos ran about $250-270 a piece (educated estimate). Wouldn't that make the chip cost of the "Quad G4" just a little high? Not to mention the R&D time that would have to go into designing a mobo and cooling system to accomodate 4 chips all with in the same case.


G3 will be phased out by the g4 in the consumer line
G* will replace the G4 in the pro line along with a new mobo (hopefully)

Just and optimistic prediction

[eirik]

Originally posted by Onyxx
the G4 isn't dead but the idea of a quad is. The last time I checked, apollos ran about $250-270 a piece (educated estimate). Wouldn't that make the chip cost of the "Quad G4" just a little high? Not to mention the R&D time that would have to go into designing a mobo and cooling system to accomodate 4 chips all with in the same case.


A quad PowerMac would be priced out of my budget and probably most of us posters here at macrumors.com. However, if Apple should decide to move forth with a quad, it won't be intended for us. It would be targeting the high-end publishers with deep pockets.

I don't know how much CG and other high-end multimedia folk make per hour. Now if, for example, they made $100/hour, a nice round figure to play with, and if a quad cut rendering time by forty percent, compared to the dual, and if a typical render required one hour (another nice round number), then they would break even for the extra $500 worth of CPU's with 12.5 hours of saved rendering time.

Now to be fair, these numbers are bogus and the model is simplistic. However, even if it took 50 hours to break even because of a lower hourly rate for these folk or for less rendering saved per hour, it would still be economical. So, a quad may not be practical for most of us but it would for those who earn a living off of them and who could be pulling in more revenue if rendering took less time.

As for R&D for motherboard tweaks and cooling, that would be trivial. Apple's Advanced Computing Group could crank one out in a week!!! And, given the volume of quad sales, they wouldn't exactly have to create a huge production line either.

A quad might serve Apple's interests by helping capture more high-end multimedia market share. And, those of us who cannot buy a quad, would eventually enjoy a tirick-down benefit from this as it would enable Apple to make better and better multimedia products with many features and technologies passing down to the lower end Apple products.

G5, I don't know. But, if we see the iBook and old iMac move to the G4 family soon, I wouldn't want to rely solely on a motherboard distinction, if I were Apple, to differentiate the pro line from the consumer line.

Eirik

[mmmdreg]

What makes you think the old iMac will get a G4..? I think it'll stay as is and maybe get a speedboost to 800 or something...there's not much point for them hanging around anymore..

[eirik]

Originally posted by mmmdreg
What makes you think the old iMac will get a G4..? I think it'll stay as is and maybe get a speedboost to 800 or something...there's not much point for them hanging around anymore..

I'm not predicting this per se. However, if Apple NEEDS to increase G4 volume to make serving Apple's interests more profitable to Motorola, then moving the old iMac to the G4 might make sense.

Also, by moving the new iMac to the G4, Apple has radically decreased the G3 volume with IBM. This leaves the iBook and old iMac, albeit two high volume Apple products.

So, if Apple is making a strategic move towards Motorola so a G5 or a super G4 will appear sooner and faster, then even the old iMac could go G4.

With lower G3 volume with IBM, what is the viability of the G3? How much lower can the volume go before IBM forces Apple to either go with G4 or with one of IBM's new CPU's.

How well would these new IBM CPU's perform? Would the muddy the product differentiation of Apple's product line? I don't recall the expected performance of the new IBM CPU's. Remember, though the IBM Power4 is a low clockspeed CPU, it kicks ass on all of the SPEC benchmarks.

Eirik

[eirik]

Originally posted by mmmdreg
What makes you think the old iMac will get a G4..? I think it'll stay as is and maybe get a speedboost to 800 or something...there's not much point for them hanging around anymore..

I'm not predicting this per se. However, if Apple NEEDS to increase G4 volume to make serving Apple's interests more profitable to Motorola, then moving the old iMac to the G4 might make sense.

Also, by moving the new iMac to the G4, Apple has radically decreased the G3 volume with IBM. This leaves the iBook and old iMac, albeit two high volume Apple products.

So, if Apple is making a strategic move towards Motorola so a G5 or a super G4 will appear sooner and faster, then even the old iMac could go G4.

With lower G3 volume with IBM, what is the viability of the G3? How much lower can the volume go before IBM forces Apple to either go with G4 or with one of IBM's new CPU's.

How well would these new IBM CPU's perform? Would the muddy the product differentiation of Apple's product line? I don't recall the expected performance of the new IBM CPU's. Remember, though the IBM Power4 is a low clockspeed CPU, it kicks ass on all of the SPEC benchmarks.

Finally, the more G4's powering LOW-END Mac's, the more it would appear that a G5 is near.

Eirik

[mmmdreg]

ooh..double posting...

[eirik]

Originally posted by mmmdreg
ooh..double posting...

I don't have "permission" to remove the double post.

My cable modem access went down for awhile. In the confusion, I must have double-posted. Sorry.

Eirik

[Grokgod]

Yes, Pcheese does crash alot! Every 15 minutes? I dont think so.

Yet, the scenario was in the context of video editing.
I would have to say that IMHO Pcheese crashes even more.
That the video scenario for Pcheese was totally correct. I have direct experience.
What I do not understand is when I am forced to build pcheese video units for clients and I call to get video editing cards for them, why do all the salesmen tell me that everyone os using Pcheese and not macs, thats why there are so few cards for mac and so many < that dont work > for Pcheese.
I totally agree about non working units that cost vs the slow but steady wins the race.

I would love to hear some opinions on this, despite the fact thats its a divergence from the content of this thread.

So I will add, No G5 coming yet, apple can still milk the g4.
My evidence is the 800 speed bump in the Ti.
They could have put in the 1 ghz easily!
But Nooooo must milk it for every penny!

[alex_ant]

What is pcheese?

[King Cobra]

I am going to say that Apple will probably use the G4 for a long time. But Apple might also use the G5 soon.

Don't forget, the eMacs and the iMacs (say that five times fast, eMacs iMacs) already have the G4 chip, since OS X needs the Velocity Engine (as others have said). The iBook should move to a G4 soon, since the high speeds of the G3 are overpriced (credit to whoever said that first) and that 500MHz G3 will get you almost nowhere with common applications, such as Photoshop. So the iMacs and eMacs may go up to three more years with a G4 before Apple moves up another step.

I am 50:50 on a G5 at July. I just cannot be the one to make that guess. If there was a poll, I would click on YES and NO just to be right on at least one occasion :)

I will be waiting for New York.
__________________

Any time is a great time for iPod.

[eirik]

Originally posted by alex_ant
What is pcheese?

pcheese is a discusting cheese-like substance, a by-product from the interface of Microsoft Windows and x86 hardware.

Bioengineers are studying this noxious substance for potential use as a means to inflict lab rats with Alzheimers and other various forms of dimensia. A supply of such lab rats is crucial to finding a cure.

Extreme environmentalists have been known throw containers of pcheese into offshore oil drilling equipment to gum it up and discourage technicians from getting close enough to the equipment to repair it.

Harvesting pcheese from Windows x86 computers is hazardous because accessing the crevices within the computer box generally causes one to cut one's fingers. Not only can blood contamination by this substance lead to forms of dimensia but it can also lead to a mindless devotion to asthetically heinous computer systems.

Eirik

[SPG]

Originally posted by Grokgod

Yet, the scenario was in the context of video editing.
I would have to say that IMHO Pcheese crashes even more.
That the video scenario for Pcheese was totally correct. I have direct experience.
What I do not understand is when I am forced to build pcheese video units for clients and I call to get video editing cards for them, why do all the salesmen tell me that everyone os using Pcheese and not macs, thats why there are so few cards for mac and so many < that dont work > for Pcheese.
I totally agree about non working units that cost vs the slow but steady wins the race.

I would love to hear some opinions on this, despite the fact thats its a divergence from the content of this thread.

I'll back you up on the PC video systems crash rate. I know a small film producer who almost lost his company because his PC edit system fried twice making his movie come to market so late.
Another producer literally threw his out a third story window and filmed it for the credits. He then went down to the local Mac shop, bought a system, and had his short film re-edited in half the time it took to do the same on the PC.

[King Cobra]

Originally posted by eirik


pcheese is a discusting cheese-like substance, a by-product from the interface of Microsoft Windows and x86 hardware.

Bioengineers are studying this noxious substance for potential use as a means to inflict lab rats with Alzheimers and other various forms of dimensia. A supply of such lab rats is crucial to finding a cure.

Extreme environmentalists have been known throw containers of pcheese into offshore oil drilling equipment to gum it up and discourage technicians from getting close enough to the equipment to repair it.

. . .

Eirik

LMAO!

If that is real, post a photo.

On second hand, never mind!

Actually, I used the phrase PCheese or something like that when I posted from class on a PC snce there were no active Macs. How daring and how honorable I am. :)
__________________

Any time is a great time for iPod.

[ftaok]

Originally posted by King Cobra
The iBook should move to a G4 soon, since the high speeds of the G3 are overpriced (credit to whoever said that first) and that 500MHz G3 will get you almost nowhere with common applications, such as Photoshop. So the iMacs and eMacs may go up to three more years with a G4 before Apple moves up another step.
I'll take credit for suggesting that the Sahara's might be more costly than the current G4s.

As for G5s, I'm not sure if they'll be ready for MWNY. And I'm not sure if they'd be by Motorola or IBM. And I'm not sure if they'd be called G5 or XR4Ti or whatever. The only thing that I am sure about is that they won't be made by AMD and that they won't be called the GS-5 (for Granny Smith).