PDA

View Full Version : 90nm PowerPCs Arrive


MacRumors
Jan 6, 2004, 04:02 PM
As previously mentioned, Apple introduced the G5 Xserves today. (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040106143200.shtml)

Of interest, according to the Xserve Technical Overview PDF (http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0f03b/www.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf) found on Apple's Xserve product page (http://www.apple.com/xserve/), the new systems utilize "single or dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 processors using 90-nanometer process technology".

Up until this point, the PowerMac G5s have used 130nm PowerPC 970s. The new 90nm 970 PowerPC chips have reportedly been in production (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/12/20031205132410.shtml) and more information should become available in February (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/11/20031113110834.shtml) when IBM presents the 90nm PowerPCs at the 2004 ISSCC.

While no PowerMac updates were announced today, readers are reminded that Apple has recently broken its pattern of releasing only at expos. Last year's January PowerMac revision came 2-3 weeks after MWSF. Indeed, PowerMacs are promised to reach 3GHz by late summer of 2004, which would place an interim update within the next couple of months.

pb1212580
Jan 6, 2004, 04:06 PM
yay faster!!!

Phil Of Mac
Jan 6, 2004, 04:06 PM
90 nm, yet it still requires gaping air intakes at the front? Looks like there's quite a bit more work to be done before the G5 is ready for PowerBooks.

dongmin
Jan 6, 2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
90 nm, yet it still requires gaping air intakes at the front? Looks like there's quite a bit more work to be done before the G5 is ready for PowerBooks. Yeah, you won't be seeing dual 2 ghz PBs anytime soon. But what about solo, say 1.8 ghz???

8 fans in the new Xserves:

Mr.Hey
Jan 6, 2004, 04:16 PM
yay they deleted my post and replaced it with yay faster!! :rolleyes: . Good catch and it seems like you're the first to report this news which is huge.

MorganX
Jan 6, 2004, 04:22 PM
Gotta take my hat off to IBM on this one. Great news for Mac-lovers and the XBox Next:D

ITR 81
Jan 6, 2004, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
Yeah, you won't be seeing dual 2 ghz PBs anytime soon. But what about solo, say 1.8 ghz???

8 fans in the new Xserves:

I doubt the PB needs 2 processors to begin with and I believe the Xserves user 8 fans because they need to stay alot cooler then say your normal PB or PM since they are probably in use about 60+% of the time.

bobindashadows
Jan 6, 2004, 04:28 PM
I'm willing to put my money on some kind of update on January 24th... Probably the G5s, but something bigger. I don't buy that their 20th anniversary product is a poster.

CalfCanuck
Jan 6, 2004, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by Macrumors
While no PowerMac updates were announced today, readers are reminded that Apple has recently broken its pattern of releasing only at expos. Last year's January PowerMac revision came 2-3 weeks after MWSF. Indeed, PowerMacs are promised to reach 3GHz by late summer of 2004, which would place an interim update within the next couple of months.
I seem to remember from the transcript of the braodcast that Steve mentioned 2004 would be an exciting year for hardware.

We'll see if he keeps his promise!

Sayhey
Jan 6, 2004, 04:30 PM
So, does this mean in a few weeks to a month we get the speed bumps in the PowerMacs? How about 90nm G5s in the iMacs?

sw1tcher
Jan 6, 2004, 04:32 PM
So with the new 90nm procs we'll see new updated PowerMacs and hopefully (crosses fingers) G5 PowerBooks sometime very very soon.

A G5 PB is what I've been waiting for so I can finally switch back to a mac full time.

I mean, Jobs did say that this year was going to be an exciting year for Apple, what with all the new products that'll be announced.

Rustus Maximus
Jan 6, 2004, 04:33 PM
Well...he said within a year we'd see 3Ghz...but we can always be hopeful that it's sooner. At the very least some cool products announcements. GarageBand will be the app of discussion for the next little bit I'd say. Quite alot of power for basically 10 bucks.

Ling
Jan 6, 2004, 04:41 PM
Woah! That machine is hot! Finally a G5 Xserve.

Now...how bout some new Powermacs and a some bigger LCDs... I'm on the market for a new desktop machine!

Grimace
Jan 6, 2004, 04:44 PM
Can we please stop *crossing our fingers* for a G5 Powerbook until the summer?? There is at least a hope for that timeframe.

swissmann
Jan 6, 2004, 04:49 PM
I still think that Steve might wait until Fall for any PowerMac upgrades and go right to the 3 GHz as promised.

ITR 81
Jan 6, 2004, 04:51 PM
Noticed the new 90mm G5's support hyper-transport protocol's now so this should help speed few things up since more and more apps are now using it.

cb911
Jan 6, 2004, 04:51 PM
cool. good to see something being made with the 90nm 970's! :D

hopefully it will be an exciting year for hardware.... i can almost feel the new PowerBook G5!!! :D :)

jdang
Jan 6, 2004, 04:52 PM
did i hear wrong or did he say that they license XServe out to Mac OS X Server, Windows XP Pro, Windows Server 2003, and Yellow Dog Linux? What exactly does this mean? Can you run all of these operating systems on this Server?????

iomar
Jan 6, 2004, 04:54 PM
Well, I hope that is true. I was hoping to see new faster G5s today.

ITR 81
Jan 6, 2004, 04:56 PM
AI is saying new products from Apple are expected on Jan 20th or just shortly thereafter. This could be new G5's in 90mm form??

segundo
Jan 6, 2004, 04:57 PM
I think Powermac G5 updates are just around the corner. Remember, at a smaller process IBM can manufacture more processors at a lower cost so both IBM and Apple have an incentive to move to the smaller chips. This is a "good thing" indeed. I think the real question is whether or not we will see a G5 in a consumer level system in the near future.

Sun Baked
Jan 6, 2004, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by ITR 81
Noticed the new 90mm G5's support hyper-transport protocol's now so this should help speed few things up since more and more apps are now using it. Ooops, you're mixing this up with Intel's Hytperthreading.

Hyper-transport is chip connect technology, similar to Rapid I/O, that is a lot like a packet switch network for the motherboard -- compared to the old parallel cables holding the chips together.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 6, 2004, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by jdang
did i hear wrong or did he say that they license XServe out to Mac OS X Server, Windows XP Pro, Windows Server 2003, and Yellow Dog Linux? What exactly does this mean? Can you run all of these operating systems on this Server?????

That's not the Xserve, that's the Xserve RAID.

ITR 81
Jan 6, 2004, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked
Ooops, you're mixing this up with Intel's Hytperthreading.

Hyper-transport is chip connect technology, similar to Rapid I/O, that is a lot like a packet switch network for the motherboard -- compared to the old parallel cables holding the chips together.

My mistake.
But they do look similar...maybe they should start using a word other then hyper.

ShnikeJSB
Jan 6, 2004, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by sw1tcher
So with the new 90nm procs we'll see new updated PowerMacs and hopefully (crosses fingers) G5 PowerBooks sometime very very soon.

A G5 PB is what I've been waiting for so I can finally switch back to a mac full time.

I mean, Jobs did say that this year was going to be an exciting year for Apple, what with all the new products that'll be announced.

Yeah, but do we not all remember "The Year of the Laptop" wasn't all that memorable, so "an exciting year for Apple" might now be so "exciting" in the end... Though I ALSO hope for Powerbook G5's by the fall semester, so I can replace this aging G4/667 TiBook I am using now (and have a REAL graphics chip -- 16 mb is nowhere NEAR enough anymore -- Radeon 9800 XT mobility anyone LOL!).

Silencio
Jan 6, 2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by ShnikeJSB
Yeah, but do we not all remember "The Year of the Laptop" wasn't all that memorable, so "an exciting year for Apple" might now be so "exciting" in the end... Though I ALSO hope for Powerbook G5's by the fall semester, so I can replace this aging G4/667 TiBook I am using now (and have a REAL graphics chip -- 16 mb is nowhere NEAR enough anymore -- Radeon 9800 XT mobility anyone LOL!).

Thank Motorola for making "The Year of the Laptop" a little less memorable than we hoped. Well, they've rained on their last parade. I have a lot more faith in IBM to deliver the goods this time around.

dukemeiser
Jan 6, 2004, 06:52 PM
I think we can expect PowerMac updates in the very near future. Steve usually doesn't announce speed bumps in his keynotes, only new form factors. Don't forget the rumors Apple Insider has been giving us.

As for the vents, I'd say Apple is probably playing it safe. It's bad karma to have your Xserves die because they got too hot. And just because it has 8 fans, doesn't mean they all run full speed. They are probably low speed fans to keep the server quiet.

sjonni
Jan 6, 2004, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Sayhey
So, does this mean in a few weeks to a month we get the speed bumps in the PowerMacs? How about 90nm G5s in the iMacs?

If they put it in the iMac by next fall im sold, as for lots of other i think!:D

swmooretiger
Jan 6, 2004, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by ShnikeJSB
Yeah, but do we not all remember "The Year of the Laptop" wasn't all that memorable, so "an exciting year for Apple" might now be so "exciting" in the end... Though I ALSO hope for Powerbook G5's by the fall semester, so I can replace this aging G4/667 TiBook I am using now (and have a REAL graphics chip -- 16 mb is nowhere NEAR enough anymore -- Radeon 9800 XT mobility anyone LOL!).

Well, if you watched the Keynote, at the beginning when Jobs talked about this being an exciting year, he seemed very sincere. Not like it was just some catch phrase, but that he really meant it. I don't know, that's something I thought I noticed. It also seemed like he really was pumped about how Apple is doing which leads me to believe that Dec. was a really good month for them and that sales are increasing....and not only with ipods. The G5 Xserve will fly off "the shelves" so to speak when schools start to figure out that in 15 racks they could have a top 5 supercomputer. (I think it only takes 13 to match the VT computer? 84 processors per 42U rack...). If I were a research institution (I'm at one) I'd buy those NOW.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 6, 2004, 07:26 PM
The Virginia Tech supercomputer has 1100 dual 2 GHz G5's.

It would take 47 racks to fit 1100 dual 2 GHz G5 Xserves, with space left over. With RAIDs, UPS's, and such included, you can easily see a 50-rack job or more.

100 racks would be a nice job :D

Bregalad
Jan 6, 2004, 07:32 PM
When the next generation G5 chip arrives, the PPC 980, we'll see G5 PowerBooks. The current chip, the 970, is a modified server chip with performance as the number one priority. The 980 is going to be an intelligent CPU, one that can slow or even shut off execution units that aren't in use. That should cut the power consumption and heat generation in half.

At the same time the 980 includes performance improvements in both subtle design areas and brute force ones like the amount of on-chip cache. Early reports from IBM insiders suggest the 980 is 50% faster than the 970 at the same clock speed. If true that means the 980 will be a bigger step up from the current G5 than the G5 is above the G4. Wow!

swmooretiger
Jan 6, 2004, 07:34 PM
so what does it mean when apple says there are 42U racks? that doesn't seem too far fetched. 1U=1.75" so that's 6.125' tall. So if you can fit 42 Xserve G5's in one rack, and with 2 processors per Xserve, that's 84 processors per rack. So 1100/84 is 13.09. That translates to 13 Racks and 4 extra 1U slots. So 14 Racks would hold the VT cluster. Now that's a compact SOB.

phampton81
Jan 6, 2004, 07:56 PM
How bout that old rumor that ibm was producing 90nm 970's at 2.0, 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6Ghz , this could turn out to be true, the 2.2 would then hopefully become the low end PowerMac since the 2.0 went into the xserve. This falls right in line with 3Ghz by summer. 2.6 Ghz would deifinitely keep us on track to our ultimate goal of making Intel and AMD look like the pinto of the CPU market.

Phil Of Mac
Jan 6, 2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by swmooretiger
so what does it mean when apple says there are 42U racks? that doesn't seem too far fetched. 1U=1.75" so that's 6.125' tall. So if you can fit 42 Xserve G5's in one rack, and with 2 processors per Xserve, that's 84 processors per rack. So 1100/84 is 13.09. That translates to 13 Racks and 4 extra 1U slots. So 14 Racks would hold the VT cluster. Now that's a compact SOB.

The Virginia Tech cluster has 1100 *computers*, all of which are dual-processor. That leaves us with 2200 processors. The correct math is 1100/42, or 2200/84.

jamdr
Jan 6, 2004, 08:04 PM
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one. This MacWorld was the most disappointing I can ever remember. They released nothing that most people will be interested in. The new iPods are a ridiculous rip-off. $249 for only 4gb or $300 for 15gb? That's a no-brainer! What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!? At the most, it should cost $199, and $149 would have been even better.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either. What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers. So the only thing of interest at Macworld is bad news--now I have to pay for iPhoto! Yippee! Way to go Apple. I only use two of your iApps, iTunes and iPhoto, and now I have to pay for a whole suite of useless junk like GarageBand and iDVD just to get one program I want. At least sell them separately for $10 or something.

manitoubalck
Jan 6, 2004, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by Ling
Woah! That machine is hot! Finally a G5 Xserve.

My hands go together with the introduction of a 90nm core for the G5 Xserve. Yes that machice is very hot, hence the large amout of fans. Also just remember that you don't just have 1 xserve, but a whole stack, hence a whole lot more heat.

Come on AMD the Bar has been Raised.

Also that means that Apple have chips on 180nm, 130nm and 90nm cores.

swmooretiger
Jan 6, 2004, 08:11 PM
haha, oh yeah, duh! i always forget something. Well, still, that's only 28 racks....hmmmm, not bad!

kenaustus
Jan 6, 2004, 08:30 PM
Xserve got the 90 nm first so they could fill that gap. 90 nm production is less than a month old and now is not the time to kill current inventories with a system wide G5 announcement.

I think the PM (and, hopefully, iMac) will get the 90 nm as soon as production is ramped up and sufficient quantities are available for assembly - and old inventory reduced.

I have a feeling that IBM has been working very hard with Apple to maximize their G5 business and will be making some sweet deals in order to shift as much as possible to the G5.

~Shard~
Jan 6, 2004, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by dongmin
Yeah, you won't be seeing dual 2 ghz PBs anytime soon. But what about solo, say 1.8 ghz???

I think dual G5 PBs is overkill and not necessary right now - a single G5 would be more than powerful enough. The current line up of G4 PBs is actually quite impressive and have plenty of power to burn.

~Shard~
Jan 6, 2004, 08:35 PM
Now that 90nm is out, I'm thinking we'll see PM updates in the upcoming weeks for sure. And this paves the way for G5 iMacs and G5 PBs, probably this spring or summer - can't wait!

Dont Hurt Me
Jan 6, 2004, 08:55 PM
Jamdr is right nice that Xserve got a G5 how many of those are going to be sold this year compared to how many G5 Imacs could be sold if they had one? Consumers outnumber the pro's by 100-1. Apple should focus on selling to the consumer but instead they focus on not stepping on other Macs they make toes so in effect they try to market old technology( slow old G4's, geforce 4mx,slow busses,1/2 used ram, non upgradeable machines to the consumer and then they wonder why they are still at 5% market share. Great they are a leader in MP3 players, what about consumer computers? In Feb 2001 you could buy a Imac with the same speed as Powermac 500mhz. i guess Imac/Emac can look for more hand me downs and Apple will make sure those hand me downs will be reduced in some ways so again they dont compete with Powermacs or Much else. 90nm 970's are Great but the Machine that needs them the most is Imac. Just give it the 2.0 G5. Oh well maybe they will get this one day. Here's to waiting.

NeatGekko
Jan 6, 2004, 08:56 PM
3 GhZ G5's are coming before feb. Cheers

Dont Hurt Me
Jan 6, 2004, 08:58 PM
you told me they would be out today, fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me. How is that hand your munching on?:eek:

KLFloyd
Jan 6, 2004, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by bobindashadows
I'm willing to put my money on some kind of update on January 24th... Probably the G5s, but something bigger. I don't buy that their 20th anniversary product is a poster.

Anyone else notice Steve said our FIRST 20th Anniversary product is a poster.

What's the second? :)

sososowhat
Jan 6, 2004, 09:36 PM
I never thought I'd see this, so something must be mistaken: Either

a) there's an error somewhere, or
b) Apple's selling memory chaper than Crucial. yeah, right!

Single Processor Version & Cluster Node:
XServe with 4x1Gig RAM: add $1700
XServe with 6x1Gig RAM: add $1950
XServe with 8x1Gig RAM: add $2350

so 4x1Gig = $650

Crucial sells each 1Gig for $399, so 4x1Gig = $1596

Dual Processor Version (more base RAM):
XServe with 4x1Gig RAM: add $1450
XServe with 6x1Gig RAM: add $1700
XServe with 8x1Gig RAM: add $2100

acj
Jan 6, 2004, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by Macrumors
These new chips should offer faster speeds and lower heat production, and are widely expected to power the next revision of PowerMacs.


Must be why they are now a blazing 2.0 GHz and only require 4 cooling fans per CPU, comapred to the previous 2 per CPU.

Rower_CPU
Jan 6, 2004, 09:52 PM
Originally posted by acj
Must be why they are now a blazing 2.0 GHz and only require 4 cooling fans per CPU, comapred to the previous 2 per CPU.

Those blowers are for the whole system. Keeping everything cool in a chassis that small is no small task.

Look at it this way, there's one less fan than in the PowerMac G5. ;)

Also, note that this appears to be the first version of these chips. The "should" in that post refers to future chips.

acj
Jan 6, 2004, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by swmooretiger
so what does it mean when apple says there are 42U racks? that doesn't seem too far fetched. 1U=1.75" so that's 6.125' tall. So if you can fit 42 Xserve G5's in one rack, and with 2 processors per Xserve, that's 84 processors per rack. So 1100/84 is 13.09. That translates to 13 Racks and 4 extra 1U slots. So 14 Racks would hold the VT cluster. Now that's a compact SOB.

Not much space for about a quarter million watts of generated heat. And the VT nodes have two cpu's, too. So 27 racks, not 14.

acj
Jan 6, 2004, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Those blowers are for the whole system. Keeping everything cool in a chassis that small is no small task.

Look at it this way, there's one less fan than in the PowerMac G5. ;)

Also, note that this appears to be the first version of these chips. The "should" in that post refers to future chips.

Yeah, I'm being facetious. But I think it actually does have 9 fans. One for the PSU.

Rower_CPU
Jan 6, 2004, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by acj
Yeah, I'm being facetious. But I think it actually does have 9 fans. One for the PSU.

Without pulling one apart, all I can go on is what's listed on Apple's site. Do they count the PSU fan on the PowerMac?

acj
Jan 6, 2004, 10:17 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Without pulling one apart, all I can go on is what's listed on Apple's site. Do they count the PSU fan on the PowerMac?

Yes they count the PSU in the 9 total fans on the powermac.

I dug in some, and you're right, there are just 8 fans in the new Xserve

EDIT: There are 10! 7 for the CPUs, 1 for the PCI, and 2 for the PSU.

ITR 81
Jan 6, 2004, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one. This MacWorld was the most disappointing I can ever remember. They released nothing that most people will be interested in. The new iPods are a ridiculous rip-off. $249 for only 4gb or $300 for 15gb? That's a no-brainer! What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!? At the most, it should cost $199, and $149 would have been even better.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either. What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers. So the only thing of interest at Macworld is bad news--now I have to pay for iPhoto! Yippee! Way to go Apple. I only use two of your iApps, iTunes and iPhoto, and now I have to pay for a whole suite of useless junk like GarageBand and iDVD just to get one program I want. At least sell them separately for $10 or something.

Why do you have to answer for everyone?

First a lot of people care about the Xserves. Any businesses or universities and schools care about these. Local University here just put in a buy order for 5 top of the line G5 Xserves and 5, 3.5 terabytes.

First anyone looking at iPod mini is someone that doesn't want the bigger iPod. They want small and compact and are willing to pay for it. The Rio Nitrus is the same price at 4GB. So this is what Apple is competeting against and the high end flash market which bought $200 Flash Rio's all last yr.

I have feeling your not interested in Garageband because you do not play a musical instrument, but I do and I'm insterested. I'm that HALF SJ was talking about.

Daveman Deluxe
Jan 6, 2004, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by manitoubalck
Also that means that Apple have chips on 180nm, 130nm and 90nm cores.

Apple hasn't had a chip on a 180nm core since the PPC750cxe was dropped in favor of the PPC750fx for G3-branded computers. I think that was in early-to-mid 2002.

Chryx
Jan 6, 2004, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by Daveman Deluxe
Apple hasn't had a chip on a 180nm core since the PPC750cxe was dropped in favor of the PPC750fx for G3-branded computers. I think that was in early-to-mid 2002.

Um, all the G4's Apple were using in Powermacs were 0.18 micron, the G4's in the iBook are (as far as I can tell) 0.18 micron, ditto the emac and imac

the only .13 G4's Apple have used to my knowledge are the ones in the current Powerbooks

~Shard~
Jan 6, 2004, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one.

Well, I care about the xServes, as does the corporation I work for, so guess what - your ignorant comment has just been proven completely false.

Originally posted by jamdr
What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!?

I guess we'll see when sales figures are reported in the next quarter. I guess be your comment that these mini iPod sales figure will be a direct representation of how many idiots there are. :rolleyes: Once again, a narrow-minded, insulting comment. Well done.

Originally posted by jamdr
I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either. What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers.

Really? Well I care about garage band, so guess what - you've been proven wrong yet again. Well done. A waste of time? Yah, I'm sure there are going to be a lot of people who agree with you on that one. :rolleyes:

It's fine to state your thoughts and opinions, but quite generalizing - just because you don't like something doesn't mean everyone else won't as well. Quit bashing these new apps, and indirectly bashing the people who like them and will use them.

Congratulations on writing the most narrow-minded, ignorant post I have read on these forums in quite some time. I'm not even going to take time to respond to rest of your narrow-minded bashing - it's not worth my time or effort.

Catfish_Man
Jan 6, 2004, 11:19 PM
The really interesting thing about this chip is the die size. 66mm^2. That makes sense, since it's half (roughly) of the old die size, but normally something (more cache, for example) would be added to it to bring it back up to the original size. I have to wonder why they need such a small chip (trying to get the price down, perhaps).

Daveman Deluxe
Jan 6, 2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
Um, all the G4's Apple were using in Powermacs were 0.18 micron, the G4's in the iBook are (as far as I can tell) 0.18 micron, ditto the emac and imac

the only .13 G4's Apple have used to my knowledge are the ones in the current Powerbooks

According to Motorola, the MPC7445/55 and the MPC7447/57 are all 130-nanometer chips. The PPC750cxe was the last 180-nanometer chip in Apple's lineup.

SiliconAddict
Jan 6, 2004, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the

YADA YADA YADA YADA..............


Impressive jamdr. You know the ins and out of apple's hardware development. Please enlighten us on the steps they use for developing products, testing them for bugs, and quality assurance. I've always wondered. Oh I'm sorry you DON'T know this info do you?

And of course you KNOW for certain that everyone else in the Apple community is concerned with exactly the same things you are. Wow. Oh sorry maybe you ARE mistaken. Maybe there are musicians that are salivating at GarageBand. Maybe there are companies that are salivating at the though of upgrading their aging server. This once again earmarks my point that a certain percentage of Mac users, as agent smith would say, are concerned about ME ME ME ME ME.

Think beyond your own little world for one dang second. The updates to the server line has been a long time coming. The updates to the iLife apps will hopefully bring massive improvement to the apps and you know what? If you don't like paying for them then don't spend the money. What is $50? $50 is a couple computer games. $50 is a DVD series set. $50 is a couple tanks of gas and $50 is a set of applications that up til now Apple has been handing out to the Apple community for FREE. Boo hoo I'm sorry that people expect everything on a silver platter. R&D, coding, and the like aren't free. You ARE given a choice here. Either cough up the cash and get the new apps or be happy with what you have. Simple no?

ffakr
Jan 7, 2004, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one. wow, I know someone who's buying half a dozen. I work with him. I'm going to ask for one... I expect that without asking, I know a dozen people at my University who will be managing at least one of these within 6 months.

This MacWorld was the most disappointing I can ever remember.

Apple lurks in these forums so I'm sure SJ will be very disappointed to hear you weren't sufficiently entertained by the semi-annual corporate marketing love fest
They released nothing that most people will be interested in. The new iPods are a ridiculous rip-off. $249 for only 4gb or $300 for 15gb? That's a no-brainer! What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!?

I'm touched by the warmth. I own a 10GB Gen2 iPod and I'd prefer a mini. the MUCH smaller size is more important to me in the gym than the larger capacity.

At the most, it should cost $199, and $149 would have been even better.
too bad they didn't negotiate a better deal with you. Apparently you can get the components cheaper.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either. What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers.
That's funny, I was about to drop hundreds of dollars for audio software that does MUCH less than garageband. In fact, everyone I talked to around the office thought Garageband was the coolest thing they've ever seen. I've got a guy who plays instruments who said "I'm gonna have to buy a Mac now", and a guy who used to play guitar a while ago say "I've always wanted to teach myself piano.. I'll have to buy a Mac now"
These were Unix Admins who use OS X at work, but own linux/windows boxes at home. These are people who actually feel compelled to purchase a home Macintosh now.

What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers.

thanks for your insightful commentary. You should stop by Apple's web site. They have a feed back submission email that you should use.. before they become "beleagured" and go out of business.

thatwendigo
Jan 7, 2004, 12:21 AM
Shard and SiliconAddict beat me to it, and DHM is at his same rant once more.

Why is it that so many mac users are completely, utterly focused on their own wants, but don't care one whit about what's keeping the company afloat. Research, design, fabbing, new deals with suppliers, and all the other aspects of creating the machines we all know and love does not come for free. When a company creates a sytem from the ground up, and not just a box that runs someone else's code, that takes a whole lote more effort than some pick-and-choose PC clone vendor's hackneyed part storm.

Yes, there are more choices on the PC side of the fence, and I could probably have a faster machine than I currently do for the same money (eMac 700 and iBook 600, for those who don't know). The difference between what sits on my desk and travels around with me is that they both run the single best operating system I have ever purchased. OS X makes the mac experience for me, even more than any previous version has, and I've been in the Apple game since I was three years old. I cut my teeth, literally, on an Apple IIe that cost my parents roughly $2000-2200 dollars, came with two 5.25" floppy drives, and had no HD. That was in 1984, people... Adjust that for inflation, and I could buy one PC-stomping G5 dualie for the $4500-$6000 that money would represent now. Yet you want to complain that there aren't cheap enough iPods, when the competition just barely matches a totally new product from Apple?

Pshaw!

I say that Jobs is doing, for lack of a better word, his job. The company is stronger than it's been in a decade, we're riding the technological forefront once more, and things like iTMS and the G5 are going to keep costing Cupertino the big bucks. Let's quit griping, or go vote with your dollars. All that's going to matter is if you buy, and I sure as hell am going to keep on spending my cash on the latest and greatest.

TW & family currently own:
2x iMac 15" 800/512/60/SuperDrive
eMac 700/512/40/SuperDrive - bought new
2x iBook 12" 600/640/14/Combo - bought used, upgraded
iBook 12" 500/640/20/Combo - bought new, upgraded
PowerMac "Sawtooth" 1.4/832/120 SATA/CD-RW - bought new, upgraded later
iMac Graphite 600/320/40/CD-RW - bought new
iMac DV Ruby 400/320/10/CD - bought new
iMac Grape 333/288/6/CD - bought new
iMac Bondi 233/160/4/CD - bought new
2x iPod 5GB - bought new
1x iPod 20GB - bought new
Panther
Airport Base Station
4 Airport cards

I'll spare you the clones and even older machines. We love Apple, have always loved Apple, and frequently adopt new tech as it comes out. If it weren't for money concerns, my dad and I would both have shelled out for G5s when the dualie 1.8s came out. Pay for what you get, people, otherwise there isn't an Apple to keep passing us such wonderful computers. No matter how many times DHM says that I'm wrong, my eMac and iBook 600 are both perfectly serviceable for what I do. I'd just like to have that beautiful aluminum tower to play some games in high resolution. :D

thatwendigo
Jan 7, 2004, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by ffakr
I'm touched by the warmth. I own a 10GB Gen2 iPod and I'd prefer a mini. the MUCH smaller size is more important to me in the gym than the larger capacity.

There's also something else that these guys are ignoring about a high-end flash player. It's not prone to head-crashes, like an HD-based player would be, and so is much more resilient a machine for people who are actually active and want more than 256, 512, 1024, or however many MB of music you're going to squeeze out of Rio or Creative.

I think this is the first time I've seen anyone complain about Apple only being price-competitive with the rest of the market. How dare they sell something that's better at the same price as their weaker competition (Rio), or even less expensive than others (Creative)? :rolleyes:

jamdr
Jan 7, 2004, 12:49 AM
It's interesting to see the responses to my comments. Admittedly, the post was a bit rash, but I was only reacting to a very disappointing Macworld keynote. Now for my defense...

Are the XServes important? Of course. I know many businesses and universities will be interested in them. However, that doesn't change the fact that the focus of the keynote should have been Apple's primary consumer--the average computer user. Apple sells many, many more PowerBooks, iMacs, and PowerMacs than it does XServes. Their most important product is the personal computer. Period. You think their market share is small in the PC sector? Look what it is for servers. Thus, I think they should use the SF keynote, with all of the free advertising that goes along with it, to introduce products that their primary consumer will be interested in.

Apple's PowerBooks have sold extremely well in the last year, so why not eke out a little more performance, possibly a 1.25/1.4 for the low/high end, to put them back in the spotlight? No matter how small the upgrade is, you can bet it will be on the evening news and the front page of the business section of the SF Chronicle the next day. So, yes--personally, I don't care about the XServes, but neither do most of Apple's customers. And that's a fact.

As for GarageBand, I don't see how the few users on this forum that say "I want to buy it, so that makes it worthwhile for Apple" are any different than me saying that it was a waste of development resources. I'm sure a few musicians out there are happy, but only a very specific audience will buy this app. True, as Jobs said, there are many musicians out there. But how many of them use Macs? And how many of them are at the level that GB appeals to? And of those, how many are going to spend $50 on it? I'm a musician (albeit, not a very serious one), I do use Macs, and I'm probably even at the level where I could make some use of GB. But I still don't want it. I'm just saying Apple is going to have a tough time selling this thing to the masses, which is exactly who the other iApps appeal to. Everyone.

Thanks for listening.

uberman42
Jan 7, 2004, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
Jamdr is right nice that Xserve got a G5 how many of those are going to be sold this year compared to how many G5 Imacs could be sold if they had one? Consumers outnumber the pro's by 100-1. Apple should focus on selling to the consumer but instead they focus on not stepping on other Macs they make toes so in effect they try to market old technology( slow old G4's, geforce 4mx,slow busses,1/2 used ram, non upgradeable machines to the consumer and then they wonder why they are still at 5% market share. Great they are a leader in MP3 players, what about consumer computers? In Feb 2001 you could buy a Imac with the same speed as Powermac 500mhz. i guess Imac/Emac can look for more hand me downs and Apple will make sure those hand me downs will be reduced in some ways so again they dont compete with Powermacs or Much else. 90nm 970's are Great but the Machine that needs them the most is Imac. Just give it the 2.0 G5. Oh well maybe they will get this one day. Here's to waiting.

G5 xserve is very important. they need to entrench themselves in the enterprise space. This is high profit margin territory that apple needs to capture. This drives mindshare of CIOs and IT buyers. And eventually this drives their procurement of Mac desktops in the corporate environment. And if suit and ties are using macs as desktops, then they will probably buy a mac when it comes to a home computer.

I think there is something in store for End of January (Superbowl). The stars are aligning. iMac gone...something in it's place. Maybe THE Machintosh.

McMike
Jan 7, 2004, 01:52 AM
I have to agree with some of you out there this was the most boring keynote for... a while. I barely could stay awake :(

BUT this is just my point of view! I don't need a Xserve although I think it's great they went G5. I don't want the iPod mini I'd rather spend 50$ more for the 15GB but I quite sure SJ wouldn' t have introduced them if he wasn't sure they're going to sell! About the iApps: I hope the updates still will be free because I wouldn't be particularly happy if I had to pay for them but I will if I have to! Maybe just to play one day with GB although I'n not a musician.

So despite all my concerns I'm happy for the people who liked the keynote and need the products!

Maybe there will be something for me at WWDC... or even earlier :cool:

thatwendigo
Jan 7, 2004, 02:29 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Admittedly, the post was a bit rash, but I was only reacting to a very disappointing Macworld keynote. Now for my defense...

Disappointing for you, perhaps. For some of us, it was a sign of a healthy, forward-looking Apple.

Apple sells many, many more PowerBooks, iMacs, and PowerMacs than it does XServes. Their most important product is the personal computer. Period.

Perhaps, and perhaps not.

Let's spin out a scenario, shall we? Take the unprecedented success of Big Mac, the attention paid to it, and the sudden appearance of a cluster node at the Apple store, add a dash of institutional behavior, season with increasingly compatible xserve RAID, and allow to simmer. What you might have at the end is the rise of Apple-powered clusters at large bodies (universities, corporations, national laboratories, etc.), where they'll be hiring/training IT people to support OS X. These IT people will probably want to standardize, won't they?

Glory of glories, that 30,000 student university now needs laptops /desktopsfor incoming freshmen (my first university did this)! Who do the techs turn to but the same company they already have powering their big, shiny cluster... Apple then sells 8000 ibook/imac units to this place a year.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Apple's PowerBooks have sold extremely well in the last year, so why not eke out a little more performance, possibly a 1.25/1.4 for the low/high end, to put them back in the spotlight?

Pardon me while I laugh!

You want Apple, who has just been thoroughly screwed for years by Motorola, to rely on them for a hihg-profile event? What, exactly, is in it for them, when there's IBM and the 970/980, 750vx, 300-derived portable chip, and other actually exciting possibilities?

A bump of 100mhz in the G4 laptop? Ho-hum. Making a portalbe player that's the size of a thin stack of business cards, market-competitive, and as stylish and simple as any Apple product? I think we see who's missed the boat here...

As for GarageBand, I don't see how the few users on this forum that say "I want to buy it, so that makes it worthwhile for Apple" are any different than me saying that it was a waste of development resources.

How does it make it the opposite of waste? They're paying money for it, or will be, and they know other people who'll be sheling out, too. That's the definition of a good use of resources, since people are actually buying it.

I'm sure a few musicians out there are happy, but only a very specific audience will buy this app. True, as Jobs said, there are many musicians out there. But how many of them use Macs?

Well, that's it, guys! Someone call Apple and tell them to sell off Logic, FinalCut, Shake, DVD Studio, and anything else even vaguely related to content creation... While you're at it, get Adobe, Quark, and all the others on the line. Macs aren't insanely strong in design shops, production houses, advertising, and music, after all.

And how many of them are at the level that GB appeals to? And of those, how many are going to spend $50 on it?

This is the one place you have a solid point, and that's only because of all the whiners who won't drop $50 for an ipod that costs $249 instead of $199. :rolleyes:

Chryx
Jan 7, 2004, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by Daveman Deluxe
According to Motorola, the MPC7445/55 and the MPC7447/57 are all 130-nanometer chips. The PPC750cxe was the last 180-nanometer chip in Apple's lineup.

* goes to Motorola *

by jove, that's what they're saying.

trust me on this, that's a new thing, I can only presume '7455' now means 'G4e with 256KB L2', and it explains the cool running nature of the ibook g4's

Motorola didn't have a .13 G4 out there until the 7447 however, this means they've transistioned the 7455 to a new process, not that the 750CXe was the last .18 chip to see the light of day.

CalfCanuck
Jan 7, 2004, 03:39 AM
At first, like most of us, I greeted the speech as pretty boring - not too much of interst other than the servers, and an mini iPod that seemed a little too pricey.

But on further reflection, I think Steve (and his speechwriters) knew exactly what they were doing - trying to regain the focus on the great things of the Mac OS and platform.

1. I think Steve wanted to downplay new hardware because Apple has screwed up all it's new hardware releases the last 6 months. The G5 release was a fiasco - remember all the posts here 4 months ago, screaming at Apple and the way that the supercomputer cluster got bumped to the head of the line. And what about the Powerbook 15" screen.:rolleyes:

2. Steve wanted to use the stage to continue to press that OSX finally has great software (remember all the old OS9 holdouts?) and continues to innovate in terms of ease of use. Someone mentioned earlier the "Apple love-fest". Now he's got a room with a bunch of reporters who'll write stories on Apple and it's plans for 2004. Jobs wanted to again hit home that you need a Mac OS (with iApps) to handle all the new digital devices that overwhelm people like my Mother.

3. Steve DID release new machines - the servers. A speed bump is NOT a new machine. While a speed bump is important to us (esp. since we've fallen so far behind over the last few years), it seems like an act of desparation on Apple's part to focus only on that. Could you image the outrage on this website if Dell held a major press event for it's fiscal year and only speedbumped an existing line of computers? We'd all be LOL at them for not innovating ...

4. When the new G5 speed bumps occur in a few weeks, we'll forget all about the fact they were missing at Macworld. Apple wants to move boxes, and they understand that the early adopters have bitten - now it's time to catch those of us waiting for the revised model that everyone knows is coming.

arn
Jan 7, 2004, 04:00 AM
To answer to those calling out "why didn't Apple bump the PowerMacs".... The answer is simple. They aren't ready. Period.

If they were ready, then they would have announced them. If they could simply will things into existance, then why don't they skip the PowerMac G5s and announce PowerMac G6s?

Obviously, you get my point.

I've forgetten how bitter people get after Expos. This one wasn't even particularly hyped... and we basically knew what was going to be announced (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040101213714.shtml)

arn

Matty P
Jan 7, 2004, 05:21 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one. This MacWorld was the most disappointing I can ever remember. They released nothing that most people will be interested in. The new iPods are a ridiculous rip-off. $249 for only 4gb or $300 for 15gb? That's a no-brainer! What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!? At the most, it should cost $199, and $149 would have been even better.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either. What a waste of time and money for Apple engineers. So the only thing of interest at Macworld is bad news--now I have to pay for iPhoto! Yippee! Way to go Apple. I only use two of your iApps, iTunes and iPhoto, and now I have to pay for a whole suite of useless junk like GarageBand and iDVD just to get one program I want. At least sell them separately for $10 or something.


I'm with you!!!!!!!!

Samir 3.0
Jan 7, 2004, 07:06 AM
Originally posted by arn
To answer to those calling out "why didn't Apple bump the PowerMacs".... The answer is simple. They aren't ready. Period.

arn

Or maybe Apple is just trying to release them flawless...

That is what we are expexting from Apple after a year full of compliant on nearly all of their products

ipiloot
Jan 7, 2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks?

Very simple. G5 is just selling fine right now. Xserve is not. I does not make any harm to announce a G5 XServe SHIPPING IN FEBRUARY because it does not kill any significant current sales. But it does make a lot of harm to announce a replacement for well-selling product which ships only one month away. I think that the speed announcements for G5 come in line with XServe shipments.


I totally agree with you regarding new ipod.

suzerain
Jan 7, 2004, 08:12 AM
Everyone is saying that "the 90 nm 970s are here", but in fact, the new XServe doesn't ship until next month, and he didn't necessarily say early in the month.

So, in reality the 970s are right on schedule (reports late last year said that the 90nm 970s were coming in February or so.

Obviously, Power Mac upgrades will be forthcoming, and I am patient for those.

Even with that pragmatic approach, this was a lame Macworld keynote. He should condense the time of it if he doesn't really have much to talk about.

The Garage Band demo in particular was brutally long, and then they made us sit through what seemed like an eternity of videos featuring some obnoxious idiot from MTV telling us how great iLife is, which we already know.

Then, the entire thing was punctuated by overpriced small iPods which look well-crafted, but which aren't priced to hit the target market that Jobs said he wanted to get. (The difference between $249 and $199 is mnore than $50; if they had hit the magic sub-$200 price point, my guess is they'd sell a significantly large percentage more.)

So, I guess my only point about keynotes is: make them shorter, especially if there's nothing to say.

As for the 970s, I'm ecstatic that IBM appears to be right on schedule, and my guess is these are the exact same chips we'll see going to 2.4 Ghz, probably within a month or two.

Lanbrown
Jan 7, 2004, 08:17 AM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
90 nm, yet it still requires gaping air intakes at the front? Looks like there's quite a bit more work to be done before the G5 is ready for PowerBooks.

Not exactly. Sun has lower power chips then Intel and their servers have a lot of ventilation as well. For one, servers are designed to run at heavy loads, which generate more heat. Three internal drives can also create a lot of heat. Some PCI cards can get very hot as well and processors run at the peak when they are cooler. Just because they have a lot of ventilation doesn't mean that they run very hot. This also allows an upgrade path down the road with just a chip replacement and maybe a board revision while the rest of the system can stay the same.

If you look at Apple's site, it said 6 to 8 weeks for a new X-serve. I would expect to see new PM's by then.

Lanbrown
Jan 7, 2004, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one.

Look at the wait times for an Xserve; 6 to 8 weeks. They released one product because it was a redesign. The PM's will get the new processor as well, but why announce something that probably won't be available right away. While they have done this in the past, they have typically not done that for an update.

ktlx
Jan 7, 2004, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by suzerain
Even with that pragmatic approach, this was a lame Macworld keynote. He should condense the time of it if he doesn't really have much to talk about.

The Garage Band demo in particular was brutally long, and then they made us sit through what seemed like an eternity of videos featuring some obnoxious idiot from MTV telling us how great iLife is, which we already know.

I felt the same way. I did not find the product introductions bad or disappointing at all. However, it did seem like Steve fit 80-90 minutes worth of material into a 120 minute slot.

The Garage Band demo was like slow death. It is a neat product but not a market shaper. I am not sure dual G5 processor iBooks would justify that much time. :D

NicoMan
Jan 7, 2004, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Catfish_Man
I have to wonder why they need such a small chip (trying to get the price down, perhaps).
Maybe better yields per waffer? The smaller the chip the lower the chance of getting a dud because of impurities in the waffer. Does that make sense?

Rocketman
Jan 7, 2004, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by jdang
did i hear wrong or did he say that they license XServe out to Mac OS X Server, Windows XP Pro, Windows Server 2003, and Yellow Dog Linux? What exactly does this mean? Can you run all of these operating systems on this Server?????

I believe they meant that X-serve G5 coexists on all of those types of networks and talks to all of those flavors of machines. If you go to the X-serve page at www.apple.com you will see a similar description.

Clearly the rmachines are BUNDLED with OSX server and only the cluster node even has a reduced license version reducing its effective cost by $500+.

I hope to see desktop speed demons buying one X-serve and 3 cluster nodes and using THAT as their desktop machine.

Rocketman

Rocketman
Jan 7, 2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Seriously, what is wrong with Apple? If the 90nm chips are ready, why the **** did they not release updated PowerMacs or PowerBooks? Who cares about the XServes? I know the answer--no one.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either.

The better answer is "very few" but those few have $5m a pop!

The X-serve is both a premium price line and a prestige line now that the VT supercomputer is #3 (in theworld). This clearly means Apple has received feelers for "me too" people/organizations who want to become #2 or #1 or just duplicate the VT expereince on a "nearly as good" scale.

The opportunity to install several CLUSTERS of macs is hard for Apple to ignore and if all Steve has to do is set aside the chips rated at a mere 2.0 Ghz for that project, fine!

The ones that are specially tested to go to higher speeds can go into single and mere dual processor desktop macs for CONSUMERS.

PROSUMERS will want an X-serve and 3 cluster nodes on (near/under) their desk of course.

As for the Keynote and Garage Band and iPods, this was the first exclusively "consumer product" keynote. They are going after 50% of the market through the back door - music.

Then they released the X-serve (after the Keynote) WITH 90um 970 a NEW CHIP. They seem to be paying attention sir.

Rocketman

alandail
Jan 7, 2004, 11:02 AM
GarageBand - the question with this isn't who's going to spend $50 for it, it's how many musicians and aspiring musicians will now buy a Mac just to run GarageBand. It looks to me like a new "killer application". I bet they sell a ton of macs to musicians, sell a ton of iLifes to musicians who already own a mac, and sell a ton of the $99 Jam Packs.

redeye
Jan 7, 2004, 11:35 AM
This is disappointing.
I just want a reliable G5 sans kernal panics and black monitors. If something isn't out by the end of the month, we'll be forced to pick up a G4, and in this economy, that will be our hardware upgrade for a couple of years.

whooleytoo
Jan 7, 2004, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by alandail
GarageBand - the question with this isn't who's going to spend $50 for it, it's how many musicians and aspiring musicians will now buy a Mac just to run GarageBand. It looks to me like a new "killer application". I bet they sell a ton of macs to musicians, sell a ton of iLifes to musicians who already own a mac, and sell a ton of the $99 Jam Packs.

I agree, I think Garage Band is iLife's killer app. I never use the rest - apart from iTunes - but this is the first time I'd definitely be willing to shell out money for the bundle. Well, actually I'd pay the money just for Garage Band, but it's no harm getting the others as 'accessories'! :D

I know lots of (non musicians) who are starting to buy decks, mixers etc. I think Apple's tapping into a rapidly expanding market with this app (not to mention the other, high end audio apps they offer).

rueyeet
Jan 7, 2004, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Who cares about the XServes?....personally, I don't care about the XServes, but neither do most of Apple's customers. And that's a fact....the focus of the keynote should have been Apple's primary consumer--the average computer user.

But if Apple doesn't make an effort in the enterprise space, they'll never have any customer base except consumers. Given the recent info and rumors surrounding Apple's enterprise efforts, giving that side of things some keynote time makes sense, especially when you consider that this guarantees them press that a non-Expo announcement probably wouldn't. The message to enterprise: Macs aren't just consumer toys or creatives' playthings.

Also consider how little time it's been since everything was last speed-bumped. They'll want sales to drop off a bit before announcing G5 redesigns or further speedbumps.

What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!?

I gotcher idiot right here. :cool: No, seriously: the smaller size is really making me think about an iPod mini. I only have 1111 songs on my 10 GB iPod anyway, and at least some of those are one-star throwaways. A Mini would be even more concealable and portable than my 2nd gen iPod, which is becoming an ever bigger consideration for me--heck, I haven't replaced my worn-out winter coat yet, because I can't find one that both looks nice, and has an inside pocket for me to hide the iPod in. And I carry that little sucker every day, so that's important! If the buttons and battery life meet my requirements too, I think I might sell off the 10 GB and buy a blue iPod mini.

I don't care about GarageBand, and I'm pretty sure not very many other people will, either...Apple is going to have a tough time selling this thing to the masses, which is exactly who the other iApps appeal to.....True, as Jobs said, there are many musicians out there. But how many of them use Macs?

Actually, from what I've heard, most professional musicians who use computers for music at all use Macs. And many people a few years back thought the masses wouldn't be doing digital video or DVD authoring, either, so it may be unwise to make predictions just yet. But I'd say GarageBand IS for the masses: for everyone who's listened to electronic music and said, "heck, if I had the equipment, I could do that," but thought it would be too complicated, or all the DIY bands who wish that recording could be cheaper, or even all those people putting up animation clips and Quicktime movies on the web.

Really, have you listened to any electronic music lately? So much of it is just: Start with a beat/add a sound/repeat for some multiple of four measures/add another sound/repeat for another multiple of four measures/repeat this cycle until it's time for the chorus/do something different for the chorus and bridge=tada! I can't tell you how many times I've thought to myself, well heck, any idiot can put something like that together, it's just that real musicians have all that expensive and complicated equipment. And GarageBand eliminates at least some of that advantage.

I think GarageBand could surprise us.....music is the universal language, and this allows the masses to do more than just listen to what the elite have made: it allows them to speak the language themselves, at least a little. Is it just me that loves music so much as to make this exciting?

jamdr
Jan 7, 2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by thatwendigo
Well, that's it, guys! Someone call Apple and tell them to sell off Logic, FinalCut, Shake, DVD Studio, and anything else even vaguely related to content creation... While you're at it, get Adobe, Quark, and all the others on the line. Macs aren't insanely strong in design shops, production houses, advertising, and music, after all.

You really need to try to understand my point better. It's great that Apple produces this software for creative professionals. Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Shake, etc. are all significant pieces of Apple's software lineup. However, none of them is included in the iLife suite for this very reason--they are for professionals, not the average computer user. Would you be happy if Apple bundled iTunes, iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, and Final Cut Pro together and then charged you $1000 for all five? Of course not! I feel that Apple is doing just this, although to a lesser degree, with GarageBand. MOST MAC USERS WILL NOT USE GARAGEBAND. Who doesn't listen to music? Who doesn't take photos of friends and families? Who doesn't want to make short home videos and then want to put them on a DVD? Everyone does these things. But then ask the question--who wants to make digitally-synthesized music? Umm...maybe some of us, but certainly not everyone who uses the other iApps will want to use GB as well. So perhaps my initial response ("it is a waste of development resources") was a little incendiary, but my main point is just that is should not have been demoed so long, and it should not be part of iLife. Why not sell it separately for $49?

As for the 970s, arn and a few others make a good point. I guess they would have announced the updated PowerMacs had they been ready to ship immediately, but it is silly to effectively halt sales of the current generation if they won't be able to ship for a month or so. I just hate to see Apple waste such a valuable platform as the SF Keynote.

Rocketman
Jan 7, 2004, 11:59 AM
Originally posted with purely accidental insight by jamdr
You really need to try to understand my point better. . . . with GarageBand. MOST MAC USERS WILL NOT USE GARAGEBAND. Who doesn't listen to music?

I just hate to see Apple waste such a valuable platform as the SF Keynote.

I agree! Most Mac users (currently) will NOT use Garage band (enough to matter).

What WILL happen is as users start using Garage Band they will tell their friends and viral marketing will take over in a "Garage band" niche for Mac sales. It might be a bigger niche than "Spaceward Ho!" was.

Well, maybe by far.

Rocketman

isgoed
Jan 7, 2004, 12:19 PM
At first i was a bit worried that the G5 XServe only was at 2Ghz. This meant that any announcements of powermac Upgrades had to wait for at least 2.

The 90nm fab is great news. Now it is possible that upgraded powermacs will ship in 2 months.

Having said that, i am really one of those guys that is waiting for a G5 imac. The way i picture it is:

XServe: G5 - 512kb - 2 Ghz
PMac: G5 - 1mb -2Ghz - 2.4Ghz

I think that when the 2.6 Ghz Pmac is released the G5 iMac will be launched. (june?)

PMac: G5 - 1mb - 2.6Ghz
iMac: G5 - 512kb - 2Ghz

See how i differentiate in cache and Ghz.

sw1tcher
Jan 7, 2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by arn
To answer to those calling out "why didn't Apple bump the PowerMacs".... The answer is simple. They aren't ready. Period.

If they were ready, then they would have announced them. If they could simply will things into existance, then why don't they skip the PowerMac G5s and announce PowerMac G6s?

Obviously, you get my point.

I've forgetten how bitter people get after Expos. This one wasn't even particularly hyped... and we basically knew what was going to be announced (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040101213714.shtml)

arn

Well, I prefer to think of it this way.... Even if the new G5's were ready, it would have been (IMO) a bad move to announce them because it would have taken the spot-light off of the G5 servers, the iPod mini, the new iLife apps, etc. (though I'm aware some people could care less about these things).

Additionally, announcing too many products at one time can (may) confuse or overwhelm some people, which might lead some to forget about the other products. It's about focus.

Without new G5 PowerMac's, people will discuss/talk about the other products instead. Also, holding off on some product launches/announcements until later helps to keep Apple in the spot-light/public conscious as there will be products to talk about/get exicted about later in the year. Basically, if everything was released now, then there won't be any other products to announce later in the year. No new products = (many?) people forgetting about Apple until next year or whenever new products are announced.

tortoise
Jan 7, 2004, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Bregalad
Early reports from IBM insiders suggest the 980 is 50% faster than the 970 at the same clock speed.


This is quite possible. While the PPC970 is reasonably efficient per clock cycle, it definitely has room for improvement. For example, while the PPC970 shares clock speed and process parity with the AMD64 processors, processors like the Opteron are significantly more efficient on a clock for clock basis than the PPC970 for anything that isn't DSP-like (i.e. most everything).

AMD and IBM have active technology sharing arrangements, and this will create something akin to technology convergence over the long run, which is good for both architectures.

ddtlm
Jan 7, 2004, 01:04 PM
If these really are 90nm chips and not some typo, then they sure are a dissapointment. Still 2.0ghz, still 512k L2, apparently no architecture improvements (because the transistor count didn't noticably change). Does IBM plan on making a 90nm G5 with a meaningfully-sized L2, and if so, why didn't Apple use it in their servers?

wizard
Jan 7, 2004, 02:03 PM
90 NANO is nice and all but it is rather disappointing that nothing more was apparently done to improve the processor. Obviouslly more details will follow and I do have more reading to do, but this looks like nothing more than a process shrink. Maybe Apple just waiting for IBM to officially launch some of what we suspected was to be in this rev of the 970. I did not see any references to Power Tune or any other suspected improvement in the 970.

This leads me to suspect that a Power Tune processor may still be off in the wings. I'm also bothered by what appears to be Apple and IBM taking the easy way out and doing nothing more than a process shrink. As one goes up in frequency the size fo the L2 cache becomes more important. I was really expecting an improved L2 cache especially if this is the processor to move us to 3GHz. As good as the Eleastic bus is, it will not make up for the slower rate of performance increases seen in main memory.

Over all I'm glad to see 90 NANO on the market but not to happy that we as the users are not benefitting in a bigger way.

Thanks
Dave

P.S.
The new XServe implementation is rather interesting but does seem to have lost some flexibility. What mainly bothers me is the missing AGP slot. It does not appear that this machine will be as flexible as the old XServe when attempting to implement solutions other that the traditional server. On the other hand it is a machine optimally optimized for server duty.
DAve

Originally posted by Macrumors
As previously mentioned, Apple introduced the G5 Xserves today. (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/01/20040106143200.shtml)

Of interest, according to the Xserve Technical Overview PDF (http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0f03b/www.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf) found on Apple's Xserve product page (http://www.apple.com/xserve/), the new systems utilize "single or dual 2GHz PowerPC G5 processors using 90-nanometer process technology".

Up until this point, the PowerMac G5s have used 130nm PowerPC 970s. The new 90nm 970 PowerPC chips have reportedly been in production (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/12/20031205132410.shtml) and more information should become available in February (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/11/20031113110834.shtml) when IBM presents the 90nm PowerPCs at the 2004 ISSCC.

While no PowerMac updates were announced today, readers are reminded that Apple has recently broken its pattern of releasing only at expos. Last year's January PowerMac revision came 2-3 weeks after MWSF. Indeed, PowerMacs are promised to reach 3GHz by late summer of 2004, which would place an interim update within the next couple of months.

Grimace
Jan 7, 2004, 02:41 PM
Thanks for keeping in mind that Apple has moved away from releasing a ton of new products at MacWorld - the new G5s will come in the next month or so.

Remember LAST YEAR??? Every friggin Tuesday there was something new.

:D

alandail
Jan 7, 2004, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
You really need to try to understand my point better....MOST MAC USERS WILL NOT USE GARAGEBAND. ...Who doesn't want to make short home videos and then want to put them on a DVD? Everyone does these things. But then ask the question--who wants to make digitally-synthesized music?

I would suspect that quite a few people who aren't musicians, but who do make short home movies would use GarageBand to make some custom music for those movies. Right now, Apple sells SoundTrack for this purpose. GarageBand allows a non-musician to create music and allows a musician to have their own recording studio. This app will sell a ton of Macs and be used by a lot more people than you expect.

As for PowerMac G5 upgrades, the speculation of January 24th makes some sense. No reason to announce speed bumps until they CPUs are closer to ready.

sjk
Jan 7, 2004, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
That's a no-brainer! What kind of idiot would buy the new iPod?!?Idiots who want to save $50, prefer the smaller form factor, and don't need the extra capacity.

The price will drop in a few months and/or a 2GB model will be announced.

sjk
Jan 7, 2004, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by rueyeet
I think GarageBand could surprise us.....music is the universal language, and this allows the masses to do more than just listen to what the elite have made: it allows them to speak the language themselves, at least a little. Is it just me that loves music so much as to make this exciting? Ahh, 'tis a pleasure reading something from someone who "gets it". I'm inspired by this, too.

And seeing GarageBand reminded me of Jaron Lanier's "... musical instruments being the musical instruments are the only good user interfaces that have ever been designed" comment in The Future of Virtual Reality: Part Two of a Conversation with Jaron Lanier (http://java.sun.com/features/2003/02/lanier_qa2.html).

Enjoy!

manitoubalck
Jan 7, 2004, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by Chryx
Um, all the G4's Apple were using in Powermacs were 0.18 micron, the G4's in the iBook are (as far as I can tell) 0.18 micron, ditto the emac and imac

the only .13 G4's Apple have used to my knowledge are the ones in the current Powerbooks

Thank you:D

manitoubalck
Jan 7, 2004, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by tortoise
AMD and IBM have active technology sharing arrangements, and this will create something akin to technology convergence over the long run, which is good for both architectures.

That's what I leke to hear.

thatwendigo
Jan 7, 2004, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
Would you be happy if Apple bundled iTunes, iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, and Final Cut Pro together and then charged you $1000 for all five? Of course not! I feel that Apple is doing just this, although to a lesser degree, with GarageBand. MOST MAC USERS WILL NOT USE GARAGEBAND. Who doesn't listen to music? Who doesn't take photos of friends and families? Who doesn't want to make short home videos and then want to put them on a DVD? Everyone does these things. But then ask the question--who wants to make digitally-synthesized music?

Actually, I use about half of the current iLife suite, and I'd get more use from GarageBand than I would from iMovie and iDVD. I don't burn DVD movies on my machine, since I don't have a camcorder that would make doung that worthwhile. Hell, I use Apple everything when given a choice. I use mail, Safari, iTunes, AppleWorks, iPhoto, and so on...

Umm...maybe some of us, but certainly not everyone who uses the other iApps will want to use GB as well. So perhaps my initial response ("it is a waste of development resources") was a little incendiary, but my main point is just that is should not have been demoed so long, and it should not be part of iLife. Why not sell it separately for $49?

Because iLife has been selling at something like $49 for a while now, because of iDVD? Did you complain like this when they added that feature, too?

Sayhey
Jan 7, 2004, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by carletonmusic
Thanks for keeping in mind that Apple has moved away from releasing a ton of new products at MacWorld - the new G5s will come in the next month or so.

Remember LAST YEAR??? Every friggin Tuesday there was something new.

:D

Macworld is a very big deal in the realm of mac users, but not so big a forum for the rest of the world. Let me see, if I was Steve and wanted to make the biggest splash for a new equivalent of the mac of 20 years ago, where would I announce it? Same damn place as they did 20 years ago - in front of the largest viewing audience available! I betting on a 90nm G5 iMac, at least, to be announce during the Superbowl. Along with all those Pepsi iTunes ads this going to be a very mac kind of end to the football season.

jade
Jan 7, 2004, 04:10 PM
I think garage band will be a huge hit.

Do you guys listen to the radio? With half of that music out there, I know most of you can do a bettter job and come up with a better song. Garage Band will give you your chance. And if there is a way to mix with it, all the aspiring djs will have an easy option too!

Phil Of Mac
Jan 7, 2004, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by CalfCanuck
1. I think Steve wanted to downplay new hardware because Apple has screwed up all it's new hardware releases the last 6 months. The G5 release was a fiasco - remember all the posts here 4 months ago, screaming at Apple and the way that the supercomputer cluster got bumped to the head of the line.

That was 1100 machines out of half a million. That was vastly overrated. There were very few real delays in shipping, they just gave conservative ship dates in case something slipped. People were just anxious because of the multi-month gap between announcement and ship date so they kind of went crazy. Hey, I would too if I was waiting for the Power Mac G5!

Originally posted by CalfCanuck
And what about the Powerbook 15" screen.:rolleyes:

Yeah, I have one of those. Guess what? It's fine. I have white spots, but I don't care. I could get them fixed, but they aren't a big deal to me. It wasn't a fiasco.

Originally posted by jamdr
Of course not! I feel that Apple is doing just this, although to a lesser degree, with GarageBand. MOST MAC USERS WILL NOT USE GARAGEBAND. Who doesn't listen to music? Who doesn't take photos of friends and families? Who doesn't want to make short home videos and then want to put them on a DVD? Everyone does these things.

You know, that's hilarious. Before iMovie, no one wanted to their home videos on the computer and burn them to DVD. It was a crazy idea until it was easy enough for mere mortals. Making music (especially for said home videos) is gonna be the same.

Originally posted by carletonmusic
Remember LAST YEAR??? Every friggin Tuesday there was something new.

New Powerbooks on Tuesday.

uberman42
Jan 7, 2004, 07:51 PM
1st half- New Macintosh

halftime - G5 powerbook

2nd half - New G5 Powermac

strangelogic
Jan 7, 2004, 08:27 PM
So if the G5 Xserve is shipping in 6-8 weeks. That seems a reasonable timeframe for updating the Powermacs. And why announce the updates now when the inventory of the existing ones is pretty high.
No point in pushing tomorrow's product when you need to sell what you have today. And if they announce it 2 months before it's available - then you'll have all those folks whining about how long they have to wait.

ffakr
Jan 7, 2004, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by strangelogic
So if the G5 Xserve is shipping in 6-8 weeks. That seems a reasonable timeframe for updating the Powermacs. And why announce the updates now when the inventory of the existing ones is pretty high.
No point in pushing tomorrow's product when you need to sell what you have today. And if they announce it 2 months before it's available - then you'll have all those folks whining about how long they have to wait.

New products from Apple ALWAYS list 6-8 weeks shipping time. They need shipping data to base ship times off of. When they haven't shipped anything, the software engine doesn't have anything to make estimates off of so it just defaults to 6-8 weeks.

Xserves are due to ship in Feburary. That's 3-7 weeks by the calendar.
:-)
I'm thinking they'll ship soon, early Feb.. but I may be acting hopeful. I think the Towers will magically be announced and ship at the same time as the servers.

~Shard~
Jan 7, 2004, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by ffakr


Xserves are due to ship in Feburary. That's 3-7 weeks by the calendar.
:-)
I'm thinking they'll ship soon, early Feb.. but I may be acting hopeful. I think the Towers will magically be announced and ship at the same time as the servers.

I agree - makes sense to me! Start pumping out the last of the 2.0 GHz G5s in the xServes and then bring on the 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 GHz G5s! :cool:

jamdr
Jan 7, 2004, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
You know, that's hilarious. Before iMovie, no one wanted to their home videos on the computer and burn them to DVD. It was a crazy idea until it was easy enough for mere mortals. Making music (especially for said home videos) is gonna be the same.

Sorry, you're wrong. People have always wanted a way to edit their home videos, and before iMovie, many people had to pay professionals or use two VCRs to do it. iMovie just made it a lot easier for people to do it themselves. There is no preexisting need like that for GarageBand.

Originally posted by thatwendigo
Because iLife has been selling at something like $49 for a while now, because of iDVD? Did you complain like this when they added that feature, too?

True, but you could still download iPhoto and iMovie for free, so it didn't really matter. You were basically paying the $49 for iDVD only. I only use iTunes and iPhoto, so it was never a problem. Now I have to pay for a bunch of applications I don't want and will never use, just to be able to update the programs that I have been using for free for years.

sjk
Jan 7, 2004, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by ~Shard~
Start pumping out the last of the 2.0 GHz G5s in the xServes [...]I don't follow what you mean since the 2.0GHz Xserve G5 uses the new 90nm processor.

alandail
Jan 7, 2004, 11:46 PM
Originally posted by jamdr
Sorry, you're wrong. People have always wanted a way to edit their home videos, and before iMovie, many people had to pay professionals or use two VCRs to do it. iMovie just made it a lot easier for people to do it themselves. There is no preexisting need like that for GarageBand.


Oh, sure there is - people editing their home movies would like to add music to them.

sjk
Jan 7, 2004, 11:51 PM
I've resisted 'til now, but...
Originally posted by jamdr
Now I have to pay for a bunch of applications I don't want and will never use, just to be able to update the programs that I have been using for free for years. And you want someone besides yourself to feel pity for you? Maybe consider giving your tired argument a rest? Unless there's something new to add it seems hopelessly redundant to keep making it.

AFAIK it hasn't been confirmed by Apple whether or not certain iApps will remain downloadable. Now that would be new news...

alandail
Jan 7, 2004, 11:52 PM
One thing that is unbelievable to me in all of these post keynote discussions is how many people complain that Apple wants to get paid for all of the work they put into programs like iPhoto, iMovie, etc.

Apple is developing innovative software like they never have before. Pay them a little money and watch them use that for more innovation.

ffakr
Jan 8, 2004, 12:12 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Sorry, you're wrong. People have always wanted a way to edit their home videos, and before iMovie, many people had to pay professionals or use two VCRs to do it. iMovie just made it a lot easier for people to do it themselves. There is no preexisting need like that for GarageBand.

You sound like someone who is interested in editing movies, but not interested in playing an instrument or making music. That's OK. It's not a problem.
The problem is that you are making arguments based on your inability to understand that other people want different things.

Jobs pointed out that 50% of households have one person in it that _currently_ plays some instrument. That seems high to me, but I know it's got to be a pretty significant percentage. I was always amazed (as a guitar player) at how many guys know how to play some guitar. Nearly everyone dreams of being a rock star at some point.
So, Jobs says there is a huge market for this product. I can say that from my experience, there seems to be a large existing audience. Now figure in all the people who wanted to learn an instrument but never got around to it.. My freaking wife's uncle just bought a keyboard and is taking lessons.. and he's nearly 60. He used to play guitar 20 years ago and he always wanted to play piano! He'd love this product (and he's a PC user).

But wait, there's more. Apple's been working on this for 2 years. They have always been tied into the music industry to a high degree. You don't think that Apple did some market research before they dumped a bunch of money on this?

No wait.. you never commented when I posted that I ran across two people within 10 minutes of the end of the keynote who actually told me, seriously told me 'now I have to buy a Mac for the house'. One of these guys never used a mac till he started working with me 6 months ago.. he's a unix/linux admin. The other is an old school Mac guy who long ago gave up Apple for Unix/Linux. He's got a powerbook from the office so he had Zero need to actually buy a home mac. Even HE want's to buy a desktop for the home based on the release of GarageBand.
These people aren't rabid mac fans. They like the Apple's they use now, but they had no plans to buy one themselves. They didn't even watch the keynote, I had to tell them what was released. 2 out of the first 4 people I ran across want to buy macs now because of GarageBand.

I think you just don't get it. This is really revolutionary software. It is easy to use, Extremely cheap, and it has the features of multiple other apps that cost hundreds each.

True, but you could still download iPhoto and iMovie for free, so it didn't really matter. You were basically paying the $49 for iDVD only. I only use iTunes and iPhoto, so it was never a problem. Now I have to pay for a bunch of applications I don't want and will never use, just to be able to update the programs that I have been using for free for years.
You don't have to pay for anything.
iPhoto will still work. iTunes will still work. iDVD and iMovie will still work.
You pay if you want to upgrade all the apps. $50 for 5 excellent apps.. one entirely new. It's only $29 for anyone in Edu (or if you know someone in Edu).
BTW.. iTunes will still be updated for free. You're forgetting that they give it away to windows users too... they have to provide the updates gratis. Of course you can get all the iApps bundled with any new machine.

I think Apple did a terrible job of spoiling it's users with the iApps. They really are the MS Office for your life. I use iTunes and iPhoto individually more than the whole Office suite. The same would be true of iMovie, iDVD if I had a DV camera.. and I'll certainly use the hell out of GarageBand.
So, Apple gave away all these great apps (they have all had quirks, but they really are great apps) and people just got spoiled. How much does MS charge for an update to Office? How much would you pay for these apps from other vendors? Jobs put a price on competing products at around $300 didn't he?

I could just take these from a new machine when it comes in.. but I appreciate the work. I'm buying a copy of iLife for myself because I can't wait till I get the new G5 this summer.
It really kills me. People bitch about how Apple's market share is low.. how they have to pay too much for hardware (to cover all that R&D) but when it comes to paying $29 to $49 for something like iLife, they bitch and moan. That's less than or as much as ONE game, something that people buy and use for 10, maybe 20 hours before they finish it or move on.
I think iLife is a deal. I'm happy to toss a bit of cash back to Apple for the hard work.

Apple, thanks for GarageBand.

~Shard~
Jan 8, 2004, 06:48 AM
Originally posted by sjk
I don't follow what you mean since the 2.0GHz Xserve G5 uses the new 90nm processor.

Oh yah, I forgot. My mistake. ;) Thanks for the reminder!

~Shard~
Jan 8, 2004, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by jamdr
Sorry, you're wrong. People have always wanted a way to edit their home videos, and before iMovie, many people had to pay professionals or use two VCRs to do it. iMovie just made it a lot easier for people to do it themselves. There is no preexisting need like that for GarageBand.


No, sorry YOU'RE WRONG. There IS a pre-existing need for GarageBand by many people, as you keep reading over and over on these forums. When will you realize your broad generalizations are incorrect and not truly representative of the interests of people here? It is one thing to say "I will not use GarageBand" but to say "There is no need for it" and that it is a stupid app that absolutely no one will buy (or words to that effect in your previous, much-quoted post), is ignorant and is simply making false statements about the Mac-using community and what their interests are.

Have fun continuing to read all the posts and replies to your comments here that over and over, prove YOU are the one who is WRONG.

eazyway
Jan 8, 2004, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by ktlx
I felt the same way. I did not find the product introductions bad or disappointing at all. However, it did seem like Steve fit 80-90 minutes worth of material into a 120 minute slot.

The Garage Band demo was like slow death. It is a neat product but not a market shaper. I am not sure dual G5 processor iBooks would justify that much time. :D


There was almost no keynote address this year. So I agree the address was stretched out a bit.

Garageband could however by "the iPod App" for Apple. It will likely generate mid range iMac product sales especially when they are upgraded.

No new speed bump upgrades obviously because they are not ready or they want EOM the current line.

I am guessing expect the next upgrade to the iMac line with G5's and then PowerMac speed bumps (maybe the 90 nm chip) and then for sure the PB line with 90 nm chips. I bet the iMac is the 20 th anniversery complete with a new Design ...Part of the Super Bowl ad ...Wouldn't that be key. So I would venture Feb 1 as the next big Apple announcement. It fits into their scheme of things.

eazyway
Jan 8, 2004, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by NicoMan
Maybe better yields per waffer? The smaller the chip the lower the chance of getting a dud because of impurities in the waffer. Does that make sense?

The road map is from 130 to 90 to 60 to 45 nm chips. For speed , heat , reliabity and raw power.

The next BIG improvement to come out will be a huge speed boost for all Apps when the new IBM compiler is functional. (still in alpha or beta not sure which.)

eazyway
Jan 8, 2004, 07:47 AM
At the present time we do not know the cost of upgrading your software.

We know that iLife will be a $49 upgrade to the existing version. Now you will get all the new versions + garageband.

Will iTunes upgrades still be free...yes

Will iPhoto and iMovie still be free ...we don't know


When the versions are ready in a couple of weeks and we run our updaters we will know.

Of course all macs bought in 2004 and on will include iLife or you can get it for a $19.95 fee.

Will it be part of the next OS release ..Again we don't know .

whooleytoo
Jan 8, 2004, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by ffakr
So, Apple gave away all these great apps (they have all had quirks, but they really are great apps) and people just got spoiled. How much does MS charge for an update to Office? How much would you pay for these apps from other vendors? Jobs put a price on competing products at around $300 didn't he?

My only peeve is that Apple doesn't seem to want to sell the iApps separately: I only use iTunes (though I can't wait to get my hands on GarageBand). But given that they cost $49 in total - and I'd willingly pay that for GarageBand alone - I'm not too worried!

NicoMan
Jan 9, 2004, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by ddtlm
If these really are 90nm chips and not some typo, then they sure are a dissapointment. Still 2.0ghz, still 512k L2, apparently no architecture improvements (because the transistor count didn't noticably change). Does IBM plan on making a 90nm G5 with a meaningfully-sized L2, and if so, why didn't Apple use it in their servers?
I think the whole point was to achieve the same performance for less power (to be able to put the G5 in the XServe). Now it doesn't mean that we won't get faster, more powerful G5s in the PowerMac relatively soon. They already have a new chip in the pipeline (PPC980) if we believe the rumors, so the point is to milk the current design as much as they can.

NicoMan
Jan 9, 2004, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by whooleytoo
My only peeve is that Apple doesn't seem to want to sell the iApps separately: I only use iTunes (though I can't wait to get my hands on GarageBand). But given that they cost $49 in total - and I'd willingly pay that for GarageBand alone - I'm not too worried!
Agreed.
Don't get me wrong, I'd be lying if I said I don't mind at all the fact iLife'04 won't be free...
BUT
we need to put all this into perspective: 4 quality apps (5 minus iTunes - free) for $49... $49!!! That's about $12.5 per app. Compare this with the countless useless shareware programs that people pay for without blinking because it's only $10-15...