PDA

View Full Version : IBM Announces New Chip Making Method


MacRumors
Feb 13, 2004, 07:31 AM
IBM officially announced (http://www.forbes.com/technology/newswire/2004/02/12/rtr1259718.html) that it is producing the PowerPC 970FX today based on "a new method of manufacturing to make microprocessors that consume less power".

The new manufacturing process for the new chips includes silicon-on-insulator, strained silicon and copper wiring based on a 90nm chip making process. The resulting chip "which can process vast amounts of computer memory compared with a standard 32-bit chip, can either run at faster speeds or use less power".

According to Richard Doherty, research director at Envisioneering, "It's logical that Apple would select the flexibility of this chip for a next-generation notebook computer."

The incorporation of both Silicon-on-insulator and strained silicon gives credence to this early rumor report (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/11/20031121150200.shtml) which claimed that IBM was producing chips using a new SSOI (strained silicon on insulator) manufacturing process. Previous expectations had placed this technology at a later date.

The new chips are already being used in the Xserve G5s. More information should become available at the ISSCC 2004 conference this next week.

captain kirk
Feb 13, 2004, 07:34 AM
Whoo Hoo G5 powerbook next month then

jazzkids
Feb 13, 2004, 07:35 AM
When I hear "low power", I think laptop. Could this be the much anticipated G5 laptop? If they are developing it now, I can't image that it would be available sooner than the Fall. sigh :-(

Thank goodness Apple is getting rid of the Motorola chips.

Thanks IBM!

~Shard~
Feb 13, 2004, 07:38 AM
Bring on the G5 PowerBooks, G5 iMacs, and throw in some 3 GHz PowerMacs as well please! Ah, what the hell, be generous, give the eMacs and iBooks G5s as well! What the hell, G5s for all!!!! :cool:

applekid
Feb 13, 2004, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by Macrumors
According to Richard Doherty, research director at Envisioneering, "It's logical that Apple would select the flexibility of this chip for a next-generation notebook computer."[/B]

Well there we go. We'll have PowerBook G5s soon enough.

It's interesting that my dad heard about this earlier than MacRumors reporting it since he usually doesn't care about what happens to Apple! But ever since the G5s were released, he's been hoping to see a PowerBook G5 soon. Hmmmm, maybe he'll buy me one.

yoman
Feb 13, 2004, 07:43 AM
these are promising times for apple. It is seeming more possible that SJ's promise of many great things to come this year might be a reality.

numediaman
Feb 13, 2004, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by Macrumors
next-generation notebook computer

Best news I've heard in a long time. This should give us G5 "notebooks" by the end of the year, maybe a little sooner. Bye bye Motorola.

Belly-laughs
Feb 13, 2004, 07:48 AM
Apple designed and launched the Xserve G5 before the chip was made official, so maybe there really is hope for a G5 PB anytime soon?

MacsRgr8
Feb 13, 2004, 07:50 AM
Hmmm... wonder when we are able to welcome the G5 Xserves.
After that the road is wide open for:
a) High clock speeds PowerMac G5s
b) PowerBook G5
c) iMac G5

WOW... this could be a gr8 year!!!

Photorun
Feb 13, 2004, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by ~Shard~
Bring on the G5 PowerBooks, G5 iMacs, and throw in some 3 GHz PowerMacs as well please! Ah, what the hell, be generous, give the eMacs and iBooks G5s as well! What the hell, G5s for all!!!! :cool:

Why not, G5s for the iPod Mini!

JtheLemur
Feb 13, 2004, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by yoman
these are promising times for apple. It is seeming more possible that SJ's promise of many great things to come this year might be a reality.

The things He has promised will come to pass. Indeed, this is truly God's country.

;)

(sorry i couldnt help it, what's with everyone sounding like Apple is a religion lately? i'm a huge fan of course, but come on... )

arn
Feb 13, 2004, 07:53 AM
I think people should not overlook what appears to be a remarkable use of technology in these new chips. The SOI/strained silicon seems to be a big step in actual implementation.

This was targeted in 2005.

arn

Steven1621
Feb 13, 2004, 07:57 AM
when do you think these new g5 chips will make it into the powerbook?

(we have to get the new rumors going further...)

MacsRgr8
Feb 13, 2004, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by arn
I think people should not overlook what appears to be a remarkable use of technology in these new chips. The SOI/strained silicon seems to be a big step in actual implementation.

This was targeted in 2005.

arn

Is this implementation the reason why the G5 can make it up to 3 GHz?
Or is this the reason that the G5 can be fitted in a PowerBook.

If this is the reason why the G5 can run at speeds up to 3 GHz, then Steve's 3 GHz -promise "This time next year" was a dangerous one to say the least. Odds were pretty much against it then....
If it is a processor primarily used by Apple for the PowerBook then this is just absolutely gr8! PowerBooks G5 coming before expected!
Talk about something new
;)

ipiloot
Feb 13, 2004, 08:13 AM
The sweetest thing about this news is that this is news, not rumors.

Intel is starting to run in to some big headaches. They don't have SOI, IBM is not keen on licencing the tech to them and on top of that IBM comes out with strained silicon directly on insulator. I think that the tech will soon be licenced to AMD and nVidia.

Armed with 64bit, SOI and SSDOI IBM and AMD start to be really threatening. The only advantage that Intel has today over AMD is their 300mm wafer. But IBM has that-one too. So, it's really getting interesting.


The fight is going on on the other fronts as well. SCO is starting to lose ground, M$ code leaks in to Internet, IBM is planning their own Blue Linux with good GUI as well as Sun is shining around with their Looking Glass demos. Add here stronger and stronger Linux presense on desktop, possible Linux API-s friendly OSX 10.4 and slowdown of Longhorn, mix, stir and you get very strong alterenate front against both monopolies.

I hope it's not wishful thinking.

takao
Feb 13, 2004, 08:14 AM
good news for apple
bad for intel

sounds like updates coming soon... and more "next tuesday or i will gnaw off my hand" threads ;)

KC9AIC
Feb 13, 2004, 08:15 AM
I think there's even a possibility that PowerBook G5s will be in Rev. B in a year, when I plan to buy one. Then I could get an awesome Rev. A on close-out.

Viv
Feb 13, 2004, 08:19 AM
ARE YOU READING THIS MOTOROLA?

This is how a real company makes chips! they keep updating them, they keep moving forwards.

For those of you who have forgoten motorola or are to new to know about them, they were the feckless bunch that consigned Apple to the sidelines for years as they could not get their act together and keep upgrading the G3/G4s

Thank god for IBM

Now how soon till we can start the Powerbook G5 rumors?

JW Pepper
Feb 13, 2004, 08:22 AM
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by jazzkids
When I hear "low power", I think laptop. Could this be the much anticipated G5 laptop? If they are developing it now, I can't image that it would be available sooner than the Fall. sigh :-(

Thank goodness Apple is getting rid of the Motorola chips.

Thanks IBM!

90-nm chips have been available since the middle of last year, but just now they are coming to the market. Sample chips is what was available last year, which means low volume. The article says that IBM is producing those chips, which means production pieces, not samples are coming off the line. Apple has had samples for sometime now so that they have already started/finished the design work.

a17inchFuture
Feb 13, 2004, 08:28 AM
So if these chips are already in G5's, then one would assume that Apple has known about the abilities of these chips for a while. One might also assuem that if they did, they have had G5 PB plans for it.

Please, let there be some confirmed news about PB's soon.

ipiloot
Feb 13, 2004, 08:38 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

Depressing.

Khmm. Not that big deal as it seems.

If you mean Coral chemical (www.coral.com - then i don't see a major problem here ;) ). If you mean canadian software company Corel - maker of Corel Draw, than keep in mind that Corel Draw didn't get a stron hold on mac market anyway. Most of the designers on macs use either illustrator or freehand.

Palm is not a big problem as well because there's very high possibility that necessary support will be built in to the iSync.

Adobe dropped Mac support on applications where it's beaten on Mac market. Notably Premiere, which is lagging behind Final Cut.

the printer driver problem is a problem of course.

iggyb
Feb 13, 2004, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

Yes, it is. Marketshare is pathetically low, and that drives software developers away. However, I'm still hoping that things are on the upswing for the Mac (hopeless optimism? we'll see).

Once the G5 is pervasive in other products (notably the PowerBooks), there might be some turnaround coming.

Keeping my fingers crossed....

mum
Feb 13, 2004, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by ipiloot
Most of the designers on macs use either illustrator or freehand.

The good ones, anyway.

Viv
Feb 13, 2004, 08:43 AM
Originally posted by ipiloot
Khmm. Not that big deal as it seems.

If you mean Coral chemical (www.coral.com - then i don't see a major problem here ;) ). If you mean canadian software company Corel - maker of Corel Draw, than keep in mind that Corel Draw didn't get a stron hold on mac market anyway. Most of the designers on macs use either illustrator or freehand.

Palm is not a big problem as well because there's very high possibility that necessary support will be built in to the iSync.

Adobe dropped Mac support on applications where it's beaten on Mac market. Notably Premiere, which is lagging behind Final Cut.

the printer driver problem is a problem of course.

Most of the Epsom printers are supported except for postscript printing and that was always an arse with Epsom any way.

And the cure for that is to use ghostwriter and ghostprint, works a treat even from apllications like architects cad design.

Viv

3-22
Feb 13, 2004, 08:45 AM
Well I said before and I'll say it again... Good Riddance Motorola... Gone are the days of insignificant "speed-bumps" from Motorola, instead we are getting new pioneering technology that will keep Intel scrambling. Yeah, IBM.

leenoble
Feb 13, 2004, 08:45 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral (Coral who?) have dropped mac support

(Beleaguered) Palm have dropped mac supporrt[sic]1

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's[sic]2 range (where it couldn't compete with Apple).

Companies like Epson havn't[sic]3 bother[ed]4 to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers (but Apple have kindly bundled a bunch of free ones with OSX and my 1520 works a charm).



And there are a lot of new companies in the enterprise and scientific area coming to the Mac who wouldn't have considered it even 2 years ago.

Rest assured the Mac share is increasing and there will come the day when these companies post job positions looking for Mac developers when they realise what they're missing.

1,2,3,4 And you're a governor?

jrv3034
Feb 13, 2004, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by ipiloot
The fight is going on on the other fronts as well. SCO is starting to lose ground, M$ code leaks in to Internet, IBM is planning their own Blue Linux with good GUI as well as Sun is shining around with their Looking Glass demos. Add here stronger and stronger Linux presense on desktop, possible Linux API-s friendly OSX 10.4 and slowdown of Longhorn, mix, stir and you get very strong alterenate front against both monopolies.

I hope it's not wishful thinking.

I agree. I don't think this spells the END OF INTEL, as I'm sure they have some awesome stuff cooking behind closed doors. But this does feel like a huge leap forward for Apple, IBM, and anyone interested in toppling the Wintel monopoly.

I don't think it's wishful thinking at all. ;)

groovebuster
Feb 13, 2004, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

Exactly my thoughts. Apple will have a hard time to survive, no matter how "cool" their computers might be right now! The best platform is worth nothing without Software! And that also includes mainstream software! I am worried that it is too late for Apple meanwhile to turn this, no matter how fast their computers are or how good their OS is...

We'll see what's gonna happen! :(

Greetings from Berlin,

groovebuster

.a
Feb 13, 2004, 08:50 AM
warming up my credit card :) i do expect the announcement of these new powermac g5s in march. and i just hope, they will be available pretty soon afterwards.

and those powerbook g5s in the end of the year. i'll get one of'em, too!

what else could i buy? :)
.a

coolkamio
Feb 13, 2004, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

No One buys Corel Graphic Suite because it really sucks, I can buy Freehand & FireWorks for a similar price...
The only good software of Corel is KnockOut & Painter, buyed from MetaCreations..
Corel IS DIYING!

There is no Palm company, there is PalmSource or PalmOne..
PalmSource has never offered support for mac, PalmOne did.
PalmSource only makes de OS and the Palm Desktop suite...
PalmOne can support the mac or not.. No one knows that..
I use a Clié and Sony never supported the Mac...

Adobe hasn't dropped Mac support, they have dropped Premiere on the Mac.. Why? because No One in the industry use it, Avid, Final Cut, Media 100...

Some Epson printers have good Os X drivers some not.. But all drivers developed by Epson sucks.. On *ANY* platform..
HP, Lexmark, brother..
Did u know what is a print server? all airport xt base stations have one... And you can buy one for less than 25$ it'll make all your printers work with any os..

"many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. "

Can u explain to me, Why the mac comunity represents 40% of Maya sales? or Photoshop? Dreamweaver? Fireworks? Indesing? Quark? and a lot of SoftWare?
Are Mac users buying 3 copies of every soft they use?

//Sorry for my english... I'm Spanish//

leenoble
Feb 13, 2004, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by .a
warming up my credit card :) i do expect the announcement of these new powermac g5s in march. and i just hope, they will be available pretty soon afterwards.

and those powerbook g5s in the end of the year. i'll get one of'em, too!

what else could i buy? :)
.a

I wish people would just stop speculating on these things and look the other way.;)
A watched pot never boils.
Every day there's some speculation that the announcment is coming 'any day now'.
I'm sure Apple are just not releasing anything out of spite. The sooner everyone stops looking or expecting anything the sooner we'll get our fix of goodies.
So stop it, stop it now.
There is n o t h i n g coming ;) ;) :D

groovebuster
Feb 13, 2004, 08:57 AM
Originally posted by jrv3034
But this does feel like a huge leap forward for Apple, IBM, and anyone interested in toppling the Wintel monopoly.

How does that help Apple? It doesn't make more people buying a Mac. The hardware might be one part of the equation, but people who were not interested in Mac before will not buy one just because Apple is using PPC970FX processors. If Intel is tumbling AMD will take over. Their processors are head to head with the PPCs in performance and probably will stay like this. So no real reason for Windows/Linux users to switch platforms. For that the performance gap would have to be really significant to be the reason for switching.

Even though Apple sold more units, they didn't increase market share. That's because the Computer industry is growing anyway at the moment. I am very sceptical about the sales numbers Apple will present for this quarter.

groovebuster

CalfCanuck
Feb 13, 2004, 08:57 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.
As a developer in educational software (for university students) I guess you need to understand that these things go in waves. While Mac sales have slumped for a number of years, the upturn in Mac's fortunes will probably help the educational sector.

We all forget the YEARS that Apple spent trying to shift people onto OS X from their old legacy OS. Now it's a done deal, and apps continue to pour out for OS X.

Much of the exisiting educational software market seems to be legacy garbage, that would be just as well chucked anyway. The new push for web / java apps inside a school's network are one wave of the future that works back in Apple's favor.

As for your comments about firms dropping the Mac, let's be honest. Corel (who I assume you mean) was always very weak on the Mac side. It competed on price on the PC side, but against Adobe Photoshop for the Mac or now Photoshop Elements (on the low price end) it can't hold it's own.

As for Adobe dropping support, I hardly think they'll drop the Mac. Sure they're pissed off at Apple for FCP, but Premiere was getting ANCIENT and becoming a real dog. And while Adobe may have dropped Pagemaker, they did that on both platforms. So Adobe is NOT going to stop shipping Mac applications anytime soon.

As for drivers, some companies are faster at updates than others. HP is notorious for having old updated drivers even for their Windows printers (hardly a small market for them). But don't expect these to give up on Macs either.

I hear your frustrations, but now back to the thread. Hopefully in a couple of years we'll have even more things to be happy about than these cool new chips, but they are a GREAT step for all Mac users, professionals and school kids alike.

the_mole1314
Feb 13, 2004, 08:58 AM
This is great news. And Intel seems to be screwed over with Presscot. HURAH!

ClimbingTheLog
Feb 13, 2004, 09:00 AM
I've avoided buying a PowerMac since I got my B&W G3 years back. The G4 line was always a compromise in one way or another. The first G5, while admirable, was still a rush job when you look at the component diagram.

That's not to say Apple was wrong - it needs to have new products to sell; it's just that from an engineering perspective it was a Volvo, not a Benz.

This chip changes everything. This really signals the emergence of Apple as providing the best personal computer chip on the planet. Wow, I'd like at least two in my new PowerMac.

dongmin
Feb 13, 2004, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by groovebuster
Exactly my thoughts. Apple will have a hard time to survive, no matter how "cool" their computers might be right now! The best platform is worth nothing without Software! And that also includes mainstream software! I am worried that it is too late for Apple meanwhile to turn this, no matter how fast their computers are or how good their OS is...

We'll see what's gonna happen! :(

Greetings from Berlin,

groovebuster Yes the marketshare is not good but I think the software situation is improving, if not as dramatically as some would hope. I think the suite of consumer apps available on the Mac is WAY better than anything on the PC side, thanks to Apple. Yes, we don't have the quantity, but we do have the quality. And some pro markets are also much better on the Mac side, thanks to Apple. I admit that maybe if Apple's marketshare was bigger, we'd get more niche markets opening up to Macs. I'm still waiting for AutoCAD to be ported (I have less and less hope everyday.)

sorry about the digression...

Daner
Feb 13, 2004, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

I find it depressing that you can be so aware of certain bits of the situation and yet so mistaken about the implications. You are the one dismissing things with very little substantive information to back up your assertion that there is no software available for educational use in GB in accordance with the syllabus (not sylabilus, governor). Please explain exactly what functionality is lacking and how that would make it impossible to use Macs in your schools. What information do you have about the situation that the state of Maine, Henrico County and VA tech might have missed?

Counterfit
Feb 13, 2004, 09:03 AM
*sniff sniff* That smell is familiar...
*sniff* I know! NEW POBWERBOOKS!

Still have that smell on mine...

tkulla
Feb 13, 2004, 09:04 AM
Losing Corel is not a big deal because so few Mac users use it, but let's get real for a minute. In their current forms, CorelDraw is superior to Illustrator, which has grown bloated and buggy (and hence has no speed or stability advantage over CorelDraw). Adobe has been sloppy with its near monopoly on the segment and Illustrator has paid the price. The only difference between the two is the feature set at this point, and CD has always been superior in that area. And yes, I am a professional designer (and a very good one, if I may say so myself) that uses both programs on both platforms. Five years ago, no contest - AI was fast and stable compared to CD. Mac users never warmed to CD simply because it started as a PC app. Not invented here, so forget it. Not that any of that matters at this point. I'm still waiting for a legit competitor to PhotoShop, which is vastly overpriced (and with the CS version getting slower). Maybe Apple will do it if Adobe leans more towards PCs.

whooleytoo
Feb 13, 2004, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by JtheLemur
(sorry i couldnt help it, what's with everyone sounding like Apple is a religion lately? i'm a huge fan of course, but come on... )

"lately"???

Where have you been for the last 20 years?

:D

groovebuster
Feb 13, 2004, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by coolkamio
No One buys Corel Graphic Suite because it really sucks, I can buy Freehand & FireWorks for a similar price...
The only good software of Corel is KnockOut & Painter, buyed from MetaCreations..
Corel IS DIYING!

There is no Palm company, there is PalmSource or PalmOne..
PalmSource has never offered support for mac, PalmOne did.
PalmSource only makes de OS and the Palm Desktop suite...
PalmOne can support the mac or not.. No one knows that..
I use a Clié and Sony never supported the Mac...

Adobe hasn't dropped Mac support, they have dropped Premiere on the Mac.. Why? because No One in the industry use it, Avid, Final Cut, Media 100...

Some Epson printers have good Os X drivers some not.. But all drivers developed by Epson sucks.. On *ANY* platform..
HP, Lexmark, brother..
Did u know what is a print server? all airport xt base stations have one... And you can buy one for less than 25$ it'll make all your printers work with any os..

"many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. "

Can u explain to me, Why the mac comunity represents 40% of Maya sales? or Photoshop? Dreamweaver? Fireworks? Indesing? Quark? and a lot of SoftWare?
Are Mac users buying 3 copies of every soft they use?

//Sorry for my english... I'm Spanish//

So what did you try to prove here? Actually you just confirmed what he said.

That Corel sucks might be, but in the PC world many people are using it. A program that is missing is a reason for most people not to switch. And especially for semi-professional and private users Coral offers a lot of templates and stuff. On the Mac you don't have anything that addresses the needs of users like that. To use Freehand you need to be an artist to get satisfying results. (No discussion about the quality of stuff that people are doing with Corel please, that's not the subject!)

Now to Premiere... Why does nobody use Premiere on the Mac? Because Adobe didn't go on optimizing and developing it for years. The result was a buggy and slow software. That doesn't change that Premiere is still widely used in the PC world...

That creative software has a share of 40% on the Mac is just because Apple was always strong there. But you shouldn't forget that this share is decreasing every year. And this market is a very small niche. How many people are graphic designers or video editors compared to the rest of the crowd that buys a computer? Let me tell you... not many. And for other things Macs are hardly used anyway. So for most software companies it doesn't make sense to develop software for a 1% market!

And Maya? I know someone who is a really good 3D artist and won many international prices already for his work. He works on a PC! And you know why? Because he doesn't get all the little plug ins for the Mac that make daily life in production easier. That was always the main reason why he didn't switch and still won't! The sales numbers of Maya don't tell the whole story...

So far so good.

groovebuster

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by the_mole1314
This is great news. And Intel seems to be screwed over with Presscot. HURAH!

I agree. With Intel's Prescott line of Pentium 4s not showing performance improvement (they're actually SLOWER than the previous generation at current clock speeds) and IBM's PowerPC 970FX looking more efficient/faster than the regular PowerPC 970, plus having the PowerPC 975 (and other PowerPCs too) in development, the future looks far brighter for IBM than for Intel. Another thing that holds Intel back (but not IBM, thanks to SOI and SSOI) is their inability to get any significant power consumption drop on their move from a 130 nm to a 90 nm production process.

bennyek
Feb 13, 2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by Viv
ARE YOU READING THIS MOTOROLA?

This is how a real company makes chips! they keep updating them, they keep moving forwards.

For those of you who have forgoten motorola or are to new to know about them, they were the feckless bunch that consigned Apple to the sidelines for years as they could not get their act together and keep upgrading the G3/G4s

Thank god for IBM

Now how soon till we can start the Powerbook G5 rumors?

uhhh.... The G3 was produced by IBM.....

Kenny Pollock
Feb 13, 2004, 09:18 AM
IBM has been in the news much lately, and they're doing a great job. Apple will be huge(er) eventually, if they're smart and stay with IBM.

eric67
Feb 13, 2004, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
The trouble is ...

That Coral have dropped mac support

Palm have dropped mac supporrt

Adobe has dropped Mac support from part of it's range.

Companies like Epson havn't bother to support many of their hardware products under OSX - no OSX drivers.

I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

It seems just as Apple have started to produce a really decent product, that works, is virus free, etc etc many software companies have decided that 3% just isn't worth the bother any more. I don't know how Apple can turn this around. It must be so depressing to work at Apple developng these fantastic products that are just dismissed.

Depressing.

yes I agree with you, but Adobe decided to drop Premiere for exampel due to competition by Apple's Final Cut Pro.
I guess we will see more and more Apple developping software, because third party softwares do not exist, or are not updated frequently enough.
iLife, etc... are probably the results of this absence of third-party softwares for the Mac, I personaly think that it sucks, but business-wise it could be interesting for Apple, providing hardware, and highly optimized software solutions.
Now, if Apple's hardware keeps doing well as introduction of the G5 iniated it , then do not worry, we will see suddenly plenty of software companies changing their minds and porting their applications to OSX.

yoman
Feb 13, 2004, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by Counterfit
*sniff sniff* That smell is familiar...
*sniff* I know! NEW POBWERBOOKS!

Still have that smell on mine...

What are POB-WER-BOOKS?

a new line of novels from the author Pob Wer.?

:D

eric67
Feb 13, 2004, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
I agree. With Intel's Prescott line of Pentium 4s not showing performance improvement (they're actually SLOWER than the previous generation at current clock speeds) and IBM's PowerPC 970FX looking more efficient/faster than the regular PowerPC 970, plus having the PowerPC 975 (and other PowerPCs too) in development, the future looks far brighter for IBM than for Intel. Another thing that holds Intel back (but not IBM, thanks to SOI and SSOI) is their inability to get any significant power consumption drop on their move from a 130 nm to a 90 nm production process.
more important is not only performance, it is also production yield.
Intel has now delaied its road map for prescott for almost 6 month now, originally a prescott 4GHz was planned by the end of 2004, now it is rather Q1 2005, with 3.6GHz at the end of 2004...
so it is not only the performance which are lower than expected, it is also the way it will move on...

impierced
Feb 13, 2004, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by JW Pepper
I have three children at different schools and I am a governor of a fourth and there is no way any of these would go the Mac route, there simply isn't any software available for educational use in GB in accordance withthe sylabilus.

First, good job in not helping to increase Apple's market share.

Second, I suppose a good word processor and simple Epson printer aren't enough for a student today? Yeah, better get that PC so you can run Corel DRAW, Adobe Premiere and sync the bevy of PALMs you apparently own.

Third, how about a little wine with that cheese. I use a Mac professionally and personally and it fits my needs quite well.

Ah... I feel much better now. Thanks.

splashman
Feb 13, 2004, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by MacsRgr8
If this is the reason why the G5 can run at speeds up to 3 GHz, then Steve's 3 GHz -promise "This time next year" was a dangerous one to say the least. Odds were pretty much against it then....


. . . Only if Steve had no clue what was going on. Given the close relationship Apple has with IBM, and given how clear his promise was, I'd say he had been clued in as to what to expect.

spencecb
Feb 13, 2004, 09:30 AM
I always hate when people come in these forums that are negative toward the Mac, and will even put up replies to posts to futher defend their negativeness...In reality, market share doesn't matter as much as you guys think it might. Maybe we won't gain market share to over 10% (or even 5%), but, Apple has an installed base of users. There are always new generations that fall in love with Apple, and they become the younger installed base. Once someone buys an Apple, they are customers for life. You don't see people freaking out all the time that Mercedes-Benz only holds 3% of the market...its because they know a few people will always buy their cars...same holds true for Apple: they are the cream of the crop in the computer industry...a mix of outstanding software, a killer OS, awesomely designed computers and loyal users.

Bilba
Feb 13, 2004, 09:30 AM
To me a more interesting question is what will Apple's strategy be? Will it wait for updates until the G5 is ready to roll on the pbook? will it introduce a final speed bump on the G4? Or will it discount the current model?
Apple will take the computing world by surprise if it will introduce a G5 in the next month or so, but I think it is very unlikely that they will be able to introduce it before fall.

let the rumors begin already :)

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 09:31 AM
Originally posted by eric67
more important is not only performance, it is also production yield.
Intel has now delaied its road map for prescott for almost 6 month now, originally a prescott 4GHz was planned by the end of 2004, now it is rather Q1 2005, with 3.6GHz at the end of 2004...
so it is not only the performance which are lower than expected, it is also the way it will move on...

This can only mean that Apple, paired with IBM, will succeed in catching up to and passing Intel in the so-called MHz race. Apple one-upping Intel in BOTH processor speed AND raw performance? That's something Mac users haven't seen since the G3 days; maybe even that's a stretch. I would love to see this - it would give Mac users something to be proud of.

eric67
Feb 13, 2004, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by .a
warming up my credit card :) i do expect the announcement of these new powermac g5s in march. and i just hope, they will be available pretty soon afterwards.

and those powerbook g5s in the end of the year. i'll get one of'em, too!

what else could i buy? :)
.a
PMG5 (based on PPC970fx, with the new chipset FSB 1.4GHz, max CPU clock=2.8GHz) at WWDC
PBG5 at MacWorld (JUly, avaialble august)
new PMG5 based on PPC975 by the end of the year, early2005
(update of the new chipset for PPC970fx+Power5-based PPC 975, starting at 3GHz)

iggyb
Feb 13, 2004, 09:37 AM
Originally posted by spencecb
I always hate when people come in these forums that are negative toward the Mac, and will even put up replies to posts to futher defend their negativeness...In reality, market share doesn't matter as much as you guys think it might. Maybe we won't gain market share to over 10% (or even 5%), but, Apple has an installed base of users. There are always new generations that fall in love with Apple, and they become the younger installed base. Once someone buys an Apple, they are customers for life. You don't see people freaking out all the time that Mercedes-Benz only holds 3% of the market...its because they know a few people will always buy their cars...same holds true for Apple: they are the cream of the crop in the computer industry...a mix of outstanding software, a killer OS, awesomely designed computers and loyal users.

Why does everyone use the stupid car analogy? Computers need software developers. Cars don't. Yes, Apple has a strong base of users (me being one since '93). But think about it....what if (in a very extreme case) Adobe drops software for the Mac? If you're a graphic designer that uses Photoshop all the time, would you buy a Mac the next time around? Hardly.

The Mac (in my biased opinion) is a better computer than anything Wintel has to offer. But if I can't get the software, then it's a very expensive paperweight.

I'm not spelling doom for the platform...in fact, I think marketshare will start to rise. But to say that marketshare is not important doesn't hold water for me. If Macs held 10% of the market or so, I think you would see much more software to choose from, and choice is great.

billyboy
Feb 13, 2004, 09:39 AM
Well scratch my bald patch, it is so wierd how stories change and emphasis shifts.

Last week Apple sucked because nothing seemed to be happening. Mac software was great but the hardware was slow.

Now it seems the hardware is going to fly, Apple are amazing because the great things hinted at by Steve Jobs are actually likely after all. But wait, suddenly the software is crap and insufficient even for schoolkids.

Funny old game.

spencecb
Feb 13, 2004, 09:41 AM
I'm not spelling doom for the platform...in fact, I think marketshare will start to rise. But to say that marketshare is not important doesn't hold water for me. If Macs held 10% of the market or so, I think you would see much more software to choose from, and choice is great.

I never said market share DOESN'T matter...I said it doesn't matter as much as some people think...read what people type before you comment!!!

iggyb
Feb 13, 2004, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by spencecb
I never said market share DOESN'T matter...I said it doesn't matter as much as some people think...read what people type before you comment!!!

Fine. To imply that marketshare is not as important as many people think is overlooking the importance of software developers measuring cost to products sold.

That work for you?

ipiloot
Feb 13, 2004, 09:47 AM
I really hope that rumors of OSX 10.4 supporting Linux UI API-s out of the box comes true. this wuld eliminiate a lot of software barriers for Apple.

There's lot of small pieces of niche applications that are holding customers back from mac platform. I for example have to keep at least one wintel box in house because of the aviation-specific (I'm a soaring pilot) applications that I use. Yes, the partly work via virtualPC, but only partly.

So this is a real problem, not a hoax. I really hope that Apple solves that equation soon.

MacEyeDoc
Feb 13, 2004, 09:49 AM
{The new manufacturing process for the new chips includes silicon-on-insulator, strained silicon and copper wiring based on a 90nm chip making process. The resulting chip "which can process vast amounts of computer memory compared with a standard 32-bit chip, can either run at faster speeds or use less power".}

This chip seems to be a special version that is designed to run at variable speeds and power, presumably to run cooler and more efficiently. That would seem to make it ideal for the smaller enclosure of a Xserve or PowerBook (or iMac), but what about the PowerMac? They have so many fans, cooling zones, etc., does it really need a cooler running chip? And if the 970FX maxes out at 2.5GHz, what chip will be used for the 3GHz PowerMac promised for later this summer? Just wondering, because I want a Rev. B PowerMac . . .

silvergunuk
Feb 13, 2004, 10:00 AM
What I don't understand is that if Steve Jobs knew about these cooler chips, why did they make the G5 tower so big? Maybe....dare I say it? Quad machines?

On a different note, I hope Coral doesn't give up on the Mac as i've grown really fond of Painter 8 with my Wacom Tablet and when it comes down to art and traditional drawing and painting, it runs circles around Photoshop.

agreenster
Feb 13, 2004, 10:01 AM
THEY'RE FOR THE XBOX2!


Just kidding. Wanted to see how high I could get ya'lls blood pressure! ;)

Of course, this is great news. Man, getting a G5 Powerbook and a 3ghz desktop by the end of the year would just be great. Good for Apple. They are certainly positioning themselves to be real players in the 3d industry.

Projected 2005 technology in the computers of today. Someone over at IBM is getting a raise.

nighthawk
Feb 13, 2004, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by MacEyeDoc
This chip seems to be a special version that is designed to run at variable speeds and power, presumably to run cooler and more efficiently. That would seem to make it ideal for the smaller enclosure of a Xserve or PowerBook (or iMac), but what about the PowerMac? They have so many fans, cooling zones, etc., does it really need a cooler running chip? And if the 970FX maxes out at 2.5GHz, what chip will be used for the 3GHz PowerMac promised for later this summer? Just wondering, because I want a Rev. B PowerMac . . .

A cooler running chip for the PowerMac simply means that they are able to push it to faster clock speeds to produce a similar amount of heat as the old 130nm process.

Mr. Anderson
Feb 13, 2004, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by agreenster
Projected 2005 technology in the computers of today. Someone over at IBM is getting a raise.

But lets see these things soon! :D

It would be nice to see no semblance of foot dragging on getting these to market....its been quite a while since the first G5 PowerMac was announced.....

D

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
I agree. With Intel's Prescott line of Pentium 4s not showing performance improvement (they're actually SLOWER than the previous generation at current clock speeds) and IBM's PowerPC 970FX looking more efficient/faster than the regular PowerPC 970, plus having the PowerPC 975 (and other PowerPCs too) in development, the future looks far brighter for IBM than for Intel. Another thing that holds Intel back (but not IBM, thanks to SOI and SSOI) is their inability to get any significant power consumption drop on their move from a 130 nm to a 90 nm production process.

You do realize that Intel packed the processor with more transistors, right? Any space they saved by the die shrink, they decided to use it. IBM kept the chip pretty much the same during a die shrink. The Pentium 4 was slower in some areas then the Pentium III, clock for clock.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
You do realize that Intel packed the processor with more transistors, right? Any space they saved by the die shrink, they decided to use it. IBM kept the chip pretty much the same during a die shrink. The Pentium 4 was slower in some areas then the Pentium III, clock for clock.

Yes, I do realize this. However, what Intel completely failed to do with their manufacturing process revision was reduce their ridiculously high power usage figures for the Pentium 4 (the Itanium is even worse). Do you bring up the fact that the Pentium 4 was slower initially than the Pentium III to illustrate that this is to be expected from Intel? If so, all the better for IBM/Apple!

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by eric67
PMG5 (based on PPC970fx, with the new chipset FSB 1.4GHz, max CPU clock=2.8GHz) at WWDC
PBG5 at MacWorld (JUly, avaialble august)
new PMG5 based on PPC975 by the end of the year, early2005
(update of the new chipset for PPC970fx+Power5-based PPC 975, starting at 3GHz)

The bus on the PB will most likely not be half what the processor speed is, like the current G5's. I say it will be a third or a quarter. A 3GHz G5 could be a third as well. You eventually get to a point where the speed doesn't matter as you have so much throughput that you can't fill it. Then all it does is create more heat.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
The bus on the PB will most likely not be half what the processor speed is, like the current G5's. I say it will be a third or a quarter. A 3GHz G5 could be a third as well. You eventually get to a point where the speed doesn't matter as you have so much throughput that you can't fill it. Then all it does is create more heat.

You're right, Lanbrown. The current G5s already have trouble keeping their high-speed system buses saturated with data. Newer, faster G5s, including those in the future PowerBook G5, will only make the bandwith problem worse. This is the exact opposite situation than that the G4s had, i.e. a system bus that couldn't keep up with main memory and all the other components. Now, the memory and everything else are too slow for the system bus!

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by iggyb
Fine. To imply that marketshare is not as important as many people think is overlooking the importance of software developers measuring cost to products sold.

That work for you?

Even if their market share doesn't increase, they still grow. If Apple has a 3% share and the whole industry sold one million systems, Apple would sell 30,000. If the industry sells 10 million and Apple still has 3%, that is 300,000. Their market share has stayed pretty much the same, but they are selling more and more systems every year. There are companies that see their market share slip a little each year, but yet their sales are higher year over year.

Supa_Fly
Feb 13, 2004, 10:28 AM
The Trouble is....

Well I agree. PalmSource is making a huge mistake....and to correct someone Palm made Apple support NOT PalmOne, PalmOne is ONLY the hardware design & manufacturing arm of the split company, managed independantly. PalmOne can still license conduits for its products but it doesn't code them itself.

How can Apple change recent software & hardware companies from limiting or reducing their support? Well by teaming with IBM, and designing new hardware & software as they've done thus far. The ball is in OUR court now. Use your hard earned cash to buy new 3 Ghz PowerMac G5s. If too expensive then be satisfied with Dual 1.8/2.0 GHz machines, and buy that kid of yours or the one down the block, you know the bright one that isn't well off one. Increase Apples sales. Invite those weenies at work/shcool whom think Macs suck to see your Mac in action for 1 hour.

Lets not get too ahead of ourselves with PowerBook G5 hopes just yet. These new chips, as impressive as they are, were designed for reduction in power consumption and heat. I'm the amount of fans in the Xserve I'm betting that the former was more a priority. unless Apple already has a prototype design waiting for a motherboard according to that design needs then I don't expect PowerBook G5's until after October 2004.


Good job IBM, great show!

Motorola your days are numbered. Get out by sundown.

Photorun
Feb 13, 2004, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by spencecb
You don't see people freaking out all the time that Mercedes-Benz only holds 3% of the market...its because they know a few people will always buy their cars...same holds true for Apple: they are the cream of the crop in the computer industry...a mix of outstanding software, a killer OS, awesomely designed computers and loyal users.

Yep. The car analogy, not just old... very lame. What if GM (or more like Fiat) owned the other 97% of the market and most consumers (car buyers) thought that was the only game in town. THEN imagine, and follow me on this, that GM was going to develop it's own highways, and it's own car developments that would be considered "standards." To top that off GM advertised the heck out of their crappy cars ad nauseum so that's all people saw. And GM went to companies and schools and agressively had vaguely illegal contracts binding those places to using their crappy cars agressively. Then GM pays off all the antitrust DOJ judges, it basically can do whatever it wants in the auto industry without repercussions.

Get over the whole "Apple is BMW" or Merecedes or whatever analogy, it's not optimistic, it's dangerous. The car market has many car makers and works on a completely different economic scale, supply and demand scale, and technology scale... there is no comparison between the two.

Apple needs to have market share, needs to expand market share, need competitive pricing, needs to (hello Jobs HELLO?!?!) MARKET themselves (more) aggressively, needs to court more and more developers and be viable, and needs to stay ahead, well ahead, of the (sucky) competition. It's not enough to be a slowly dwindling segment and cling to some arcane silly "we're this or that German car company of computers." Naiveness will lead us to a bleak windoze world, realizing what we have to do will get us to the computer promise land. Amen.

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Yes, I do realize this. However, what Intel completely failed to do with their manufacturing process revision was reduce their ridiculously high power usage figures for the Pentium 4 (the Itanium is even worse). Do you bring up the fact that the Pentium 4 was slower initially than the Pentium III to illustrate that this is to be expected from Intel? If so, all the better for IBM/Apple!

The new 970 is not a new chip compared to the Pentium 4 to the Pentium III. Intel could have reduced the power requirements, but they kept it pretty much the same as its predecessor. Every processor has its strengths and weaknesses. The Pentium 4 needed more clock speed to start surpassing the Pentium III in integer tasks. The longer pipeline was to blame for that. The UltraSPARC III could beat the Pentium 4 at fp at half the clock rate. What makes you think the successor to the 970 won't be a little slower per clock cycle?

CmdrLaForge
Feb 13, 2004, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by coolkamio

//Sorry for my english... I'm Spanish//

I guess thats OK. :D

iggyb
Feb 13, 2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
Even if their market share doesn't increase, they still grow. If Apple has a 3% share and the whole industry sold one million systems, Apple would sell 30,000. If the industry sells 10 million and Apple still has 3%, that is 300,000. Their market share has stayed pretty much the same, but they are selling more and more systems every year. There are companies that see their market share slip a little each year, but yet their sales are higher year over year.

A very good point. And the total number will speak more to companies than marketshare does. However, as unfortunate as it is, dwindling marketshare scares some developers off because they take it as a sign of a dying platform.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
The new 970 is not a new chip compared to the Pentium 4 to the Pentium III. Intel could have reduced the power requirements, but they kept it pretty much the same as its predecessor. Every processor has its strengths and weaknesses. The Pentium 4 needed more clock speed to start surpassing the Pentium III in integer tasks. The longer pipeline was to blame for that. The UltraSPARC III could beat the Pentium 4 at fp at half the clock rate. What makes you think the successor to the 970 won't be a little slower per clock cycle?

The PowerPC 970FX could very well be slower per clock cycle than the PowerPC 970; I don't have a good sense of this and I guess I didn't get this across very well in my previous post.

jouster
Feb 13, 2004, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
.....Do you bring up the fact that the Pentium 4 was slower initially than the Pentium III to illustrate that this is to be expected from Intel? If so, all the better for IBM/Apple!

Have to disagree; though faster chips are always good, the vast majority will nevertheless make their choice based on the OS (as they always have done), not such esoteric (for many) metrics as processor or bus speed.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by jouster
Have to disagree; though faster chips are always good, the vast majority will nevertheless make their choice based on the OS (as they always have done), not such esoteric (for many) metrics as processor or bus speed.

Fair enough. I can understand why computer buyers would make their (Mac/PC) choice based on the operating system they're more familiar with and the software library they have or plan to use. For non-technical people, those measures of processor performance are confusing. Therefore, processor and bus speed get ignored in favor of available software.

Ted13
Feb 13, 2004, 11:02 AM
what if (in a very extreme case) Adobe drops software for the Mac? If you're a graphic designer that uses Photoshop all the time, would you buy a Mac the next time around? Hardly.
If Adobe wishes to go out of business, maybe they will. They get 50% (or more?) of their revenue from their Mac products. They can't afford not to support the Mac.

A couple of years ago AVID tried to stop updating their Mac based video editing products, and the result was a massive consumer backlash, large losses for Avid, and they are now totally committed to the Mac.

On topic: I can't wait for my PB G5! It should be one kick ass computer.

Ted

jouster
Feb 13, 2004, 11:08 AM
I speak from bitter experience. Having spent many days with my wife's family in the boonies, I get a depressing picture of the state of computing that not all AIers share.

When I said that the OS is the most important thing for many, I should have added that many don't even realize that there's a choice. There are millions out there running W95 on their PIIs at 800 x 600. If they've even heard of OS X, they are quite likely to beleive some ludicrous Mac myth. I've had people (in rural PA) tell me they'd never consider a Mac cos they need 'the internet, and macs don't come with that....'

Now, I'm not pessimistic like JW Pepper earlier in the thread, but I would stress that there is still a lot to be done if Apple is to fully penetrate much of the US.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by jouster
I speak from bitter experience. Having spent many days with my wife's family in the boonies, I get a depressing picture of the state of computing that not all AIers share.

When I said that the OS is the most important thing for many, I should have added that many don't even realize that there's a choice. There are millions out there running W95 on their PIIs at 800 x 600. If they've even heard of OS X, they are quite likely to beleive some ludicrous Mac myth. I've had people (in rural PA) tell me they'd never consider a Mac cos they need 'the internet, and macs don't come with that....'

Now, I'm not pessimistic like JW Pepper earlier in the thread, but I would stress that there is still a lot to be done if Apple is to fully penetrate much of the US.

Got any suggestions for Apple as to how to penetrate more of the US market? I'm curious as to whether you have any ideas.

mdriftmeyer
Feb 13, 2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Daner
I find it depressing that you can be so aware of certain bits of the situation and yet so mistaken about the implications. You are the one dismissing things with very little substantive information to back up your assertion that there is no software available for educational use in GB in accordance with the syllabus (not sylabilus, governor). Please explain exactly what functionality is lacking and how that would make it impossible to use Macs in your schools. What information do you have about the situation that the state of Maine, Henrico County and VA tech might have missed?

I read the original poster's comments as a deliberate attempt to sensationalize and drum up gossip. Ala a Troll. People need to determine their own needs requirements and if they are not being met seek out how they can.

JW Pepper
Feb 13, 2004, 11:30 AM
1. I didn't have Epsom printers in mind actually, I was thinking of my rather expensive scanner. There are no twain drivers for it under Panther, they did bring out Jaguar drivers about 8 weeks before Panther, and Panther broke them. Epsom have told me in an email that they have no plans to bring out any more Mac drivers for my scanner.

2. Sorry about the spelling mistakes, I use Firefox and there is no contextual spellchecker in that browser. I can't spell failed o"level english 3 times; I hope that make you all feel much better.

3. I love Macs I have installed them throughout my company and I am going to continue to buy them, but I cannot advocate them to the schools because the software just isn't there. Most schools aren't using word, excel, powerpoint certainly not in pre-prep and most prep schools. Most of the software seems to be aimed solely at the educational market and they are applications that have no other purpose. they are programmes that teach logic/algebra programming, spelling. As non educational users it is difficult to appreciate the extent of specialist software aimed at schools that simply does not exist on Macs. Superlogo is a very popular programme to teach the simple principals of programming for example. Browse this site http://avp.100megs28.com/ and you will see what I mean, of those apps that are listed as pc/mac I doubt that 1 in 10 will be written for OSX.

4. I am sure that Adobe recently dropped another application, premier was dropped a long time ago.

The point is there is a worrying trend despite the improvement in the OS and hardware.

sinisterdesign
Feb 13, 2004, 11:35 AM
my how 20 years makes a difference! one of the best commercials of all time was made as a direct challenge to Big Blue. now they're kicking some serious SSOI butt for Apple. bring on those new 90nm G5 updates, i'm itching to upgrade!

as for companies' support for Apple, i was bummed to hear that Palm dropped us. i'm HOPING iSync will pick up the slack. i like my little Clie (love Sony products, sure wish THEY would support Mac, rat b@$tards).

as someone said earlier, i think it would be suicide for Adobe to cut off Photoshop & Illustrator support. i think they only dropped Premiere b/c they were in direct competition w/ Apple and Final Cut (just like a lot of other little software companies that have been undercut by better Apple software: Audion-->iTunes, Font Reserve/Suitcase-->Font Book, Photoshop Album-->iPhoto, etc). i haven't heard any lack of support from Macromedia, which makes me happy. i'm glad Quark finally updated to X, but i use it reluctantly (still a kludgy program in my opinion). Microsoft has always towed a fine line, i like having Office on my Mac and i LOVE Entourage, but i hate losing Explorer support simply b/c i do web design & i need to test code in IE.

invaLPsion
Feb 13, 2004, 11:40 AM
I hate to say it, but with this chip running so cool we could see 3GHz in new powermacs this month. That would be exactly what NeatGekko said would happen. Everything is happening exactly as NeatGekko has forseen!:D

windowsblowsass
Feb 13, 2004, 11:51 AM
maybe an apple valentines gift but hopefully its not pink or covered with roses

centauratlas
Feb 13, 2004, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Viv
Most of the Epsom printers are supported except for postscript printing and that was always an arse with Epsom any way.


I am pretty sure EpsoM has always supported the Mac. Epsom salt works no matter what computer you use.
:-)

I haven't seen any printers from them though. EpsoN on the other hand is an issue.

daveL
Feb 13, 2004, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by jazzkids
When I hear "low power", I think laptop. Could this be the much anticipated G5 laptop? If they are developing it now, I can't image that it would be available sooner than the Fall. sigh :-(

Thank goodness Apple is getting rid of the Motorola chips.

Thanks IBM!
It doesn't say developing, it says delivering (chips).

painandgreed
Feb 13, 2004, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by CalfCanuck
The new push for web / java apps inside a school's network are one wave of the future that works back in Apple's favor.


I work in the educational/healthcare field and I wish I could say that is true. While the push is there for web/java apps, they are almost all geared specifically and only for IE on the PC.

This is a trend that has been goign on for years, while the doctors and teachers like their Macs and in some cases the software they need to run only ran on Macs, the IT deptartments refused to support Macs. Thus any new apps that were brought in were geared only for Win/IE and thus forced everybody to use such.

The ray of hope is OS X. Previsouly where IT guys hated Macs (usually because they didn't want to bother to have to learn anything about them), now that it's unix and so close to linux, many of the IT guys are sitting aornd with linux servers and their powerbook running OS X. I suspect in the future that this will trickle down into the real world as solutions put forth by IT departments are more geared towards either linux/OS X or all platforms. However there is still a large setiment that "buying MS won't get you fired" in the IT field that is being fought against by the *nix faction.

jouster
Feb 13, 2004, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Got any suggestions for Apple as to how to penetrate more of the US market? I'm curious as to whether you have any ideas.

Heh, I guess if I had some effective way to achieve this, I would be working for Apple!

That said, I think that the strategy should be based around successful consumer electronics devices like the iPod and the other, so far non existent, devices that SJ hinted at at the last couple of Expos. These would seem to me to provide a useable 'back door' entry for Apple into the average Win user's mind. Innovative software helps too, like the iTunes store.

But......despite its iconic status, the iPod is, to an extent, old news. Apple needs to keep coming up with such devices. I am a little surprised that no follow up has yet appeared.

I guess that the idea of Apple shifting away from its core competency might be repugnant to some, but hey, whatever it takes......

You have any ideas for addressing the problem?

(which I look forward to reading after classes are over)

Lanbrown
Feb 13, 2004, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by painandgreed
I work in the educational/healthcare field and I wish I could say that is true. While the push is there for web/java apps, they are almost all geared specifically and only for IE on the PC.

That is because the programmer is using functions that are not really part of Java. While they will work, they are using platform specific calls, which is what Java is supposed to be against. There are a lot of bad programmers out there and that is the work they do. Some write to a specific version of Java as well. In their eyes, if it works then their job is done. If they programmed the way it's supposed to be, then it would work with almost all platforms and probably release independent; obviously if a new feature/call was added, then the user would need the latest to use it.

centauratlas
Feb 13, 2004, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by painandgreed
the IT deptartments refused to support Macs.

Wow! My question for the IT department would be:

***WHO DO YOU THINK YOU WORK FOR???***

Without the others there would be NO need for the IT staff.

Rocketman
Feb 13, 2004, 12:12 PM
1. Apple is sooooo over Motorola
2. This is the holy grail for fan less (cube) and portables (PBG5), and dense servers.
3. IBM hinted at 2005 and delivered 1H2004 :)
4. I love IBM :D
5. The people who selected negative should be shot.
6. The Mhz emphasis is over just in time for Apple to WIN!

The NEW PBG5 speculation should be single or dual processor!

Rocketman

daveL
Feb 13, 2004, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by ipiloot
I really hope that rumors of OSX 10.4 supporting Linux UI API-s out of the box comes true. this wuld eliminiate a lot of software barriers for Apple.

There's lot of small pieces of niche applications that are holding customers back from mac platform. I for example have to keep at least one wintel box in house because of the aviation-specific (I'm a soaring pilot) applications that I use. Yes, the partly work via virtualPC, but only partly.

So this is a real problem, not a hoax. I really hope that Apple solves that equation soon.
OT. If you are talking about flight simulation, have you tried Xplane? Very good and developed on OSX.

centauratlas
Feb 13, 2004, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by daveL
OT. If you are talking about flight simulation, have you tried Xplane? Very good and developed on OSX.

OT, too. I have to agree. Xplane is nice. Not perfect, but nice for flight sim. I like the shuttle sim landing on there too.

What I want though is Hornet like we used to have for OS 9 etc.

daveL
Feb 13, 2004, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
The PowerPC 970FX could very well be slower per clock cycle than the PowerPC 970; I don't have a good sense of this and I guess I didn't get this across very well in my previous post.
Why? It's the same processor on a better (smaller) process. How could it possibly be slower on a per clock cycle basis then the original 970? That doesn't make sense to me.

Titian
Feb 13, 2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by spencecb
I always hate when people come in these forums that are negative toward the Mac, and will even put up replies to posts to futher defend their negativeness...
I understand you very well. It is always hard when someone wakes you up from your wonderful dreams. There are many people who don't like nor do accept critical comments. The best thing would be to eliminate them so that you can continue to live in your colorful world.

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by jouster
Heh, I guess if I had some effective way to achieve this, I would be working for Apple!

That said, I think that the strategy should be based around successful consumer electronics devices like the iPod and the other, so far non existent, devices that SJ hinted at at the last couple of Expos. These would seem to me to provide a useable 'back door' entry for Apple into the average Win user's mind. Innovative software helps too, like the iTunes store.

But......despite its iconic status, the iPod is, to an extent, old news. Apple needs to keep coming up with such devices. I am a little surprised that no follow up has yet appeared.

I guess that the idea of Apple shifting away from its core competency might be repugnant to some, but hey, whatever it takes......

You have any ideas for addressing the problem?

(which I look forward to reading after classes are over)

My first thought is for Apple to revise their advertising campaign. They need to promote the usefulness of Macs more than what processor they use. This in turn will attract buyers who didn't know about Macs, didn't previously consider Macs, and don't care about technical specifications.

edit:

Originally posted by daveL
Why? It's the same processor on a better (smaller) process. How could it possibly be slower on a per clock cycle basis then the original 970? That doesn't make sense to me.

Architectural changes to a processor, like the PowerPC 970, can sometimes have unintended side effects like reduced scalability. I don't understand exactly why this is the case; I suspect electrical engineers would know the answer.

cuneglasus
Feb 13, 2004, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Architectural changes to a processor, like the PowerPC 970, can sometimes have unintended side effects like reduced scalability. I don't understand exactly why this is the case; I suspect electrical engineers would know the answer. [/B]

But there are no architectural changes mentioned anywhere.Certainly no longer pipelines.Everything so far says its just a die shrink.We should know more soon.Dont let this stuff get out of hand or before long the web potatoes will be saying the 970fx is slower than the current model and a new Web legend is born.

porky
Feb 13, 2004, 01:14 PM
I have a pc store in Belgium and I'm personally a Mac user. So, naturally I wanted to sell Mac's too. BUT when I buy Apple I don't make any profit, because I'm no official dealer (really 0% profit). So I asked Apple to become official dealer. Not possible! Because there are already too much dealers in Belgium. (70, and they even want to bring it down to 50!) 99% of the dealers are Mac only dealers. Because I sell also PC, and have a large marketing budget, I bring out a folder every month. And I reach an enormous PC public. But I can't sell Apple, because I don't make profit (dealerprice of me is the same as the end-user price of the Apple store) So don't complain about the market share Apple, you do it yourself.

stingerman
Feb 13, 2004, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
You do realize that Intel packed the processor with more transistors, right? Any space they saved by the die shrink, they decided to use it. IBM kept the chip pretty much the same during a die shrink. The Pentium 4 was slower in some areas then the Pentium III, clock for clock.

That is the point isn't it. Prescott doubled their L1, L2 and has L3 as well, and 13 new SSE3 instructions as well as a 31 stage pipeline (from 20). And get this, it performs slower and hotter than the 130NM Northwood in most operations and just slightly faster than with the new SSE3 media apps. 103W at 3.2GHz.

The 970FX uses half the realestate, adds PowerTune refinements and runs from 20-30% faster at the same clock and uses less than 50% the power and 100% better thermal characteristics. Although the 2.5GHz 970FX is clocked 25% higher, it will operate close to 50% faster than the 2GHz 130NM 970!

So not only is the G5 running at much higher clocks, it is leaping forward in performance while keeping power and heat to a minimum.

yamabushi
Feb 13, 2004, 01:24 PM
Preliminary test data discussed elsewhere on MR seems to show that the 970FX is at least as fast per clock cycle as the 970. There was a typo in the first version of the report that seemed to imply otherwise but has since been corrected.

Viv
Feb 13, 2004, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by bennyek
uhhh.... The G3 was produced by IBM.....

oops forgive:-)

Viv

kenaustus
Feb 13, 2004, 01:32 PM
A lot of people worry about Mac's market share because they compare it to Dell's.

Compare Apple's to the PC business at Gateway or IBM and Apple looks pretty good. Compare the profitability of the PC business at Gateway or IBM and Apple looks VERY good.

As for developers, they sometimes forget that the average Mac buyer has significantly more disposable income than a home PC buyer. The average bloke (Bubba) that goes into a computer shop gets a commission salesman who dumps a $600 PC on them. Bubba ain't a good sales prospect for the developer. And, gee, there are only about 10,000 apps out for the Mac . . .

Apple has a very bright future and this year is going to be exciting. It's fine that Steve J said the G5 would hit 3 Gigs this year. It's more important that an IBM VP then walked on stage and said the G5 would be at 3 Gigs this year - that's a commitment from IBM, not marketing hype.

RogerQ
Feb 13, 2004, 01:35 PM
Overall market-share percentages may make good fodder for bad Wall Street analysis, but an astute software developer doesn't care a whit about them. They care about niches.

Here's why.

Any given software product has a target market. What is important to a developer is how big that market is, and what percentage of that market they can hope to capture.

Most software products are niche products. Accountants don't need Photoshop. Structural engineers don't need ProTools. And on and on.

If I make a unique ProTools plug in, all that matters is the number of folks running ProTools on each platform. And since the music biz is ruled by Macs, I'll make a Mac version. It doesn't matter how many millions of PCs are sold next year to the accounting department at Fingerhut, I can only sell to those ProTools people. So I'm not going to stop making my Mac version.

Same for graphics, and all the other niches. If Mac is strong in the niche, software will be developed.

"Ah! What about non-niche products!" you counter.

Let's say I decide to sell one of the few products which virtually all users use: Word processors, Email programs, and Web browsers.

The market is huge, but the percentage I can hope to capture is very small, thanks to the ubiquity (and lack of interoperability) of MS products.

Here, the fact that Mac users "think different" helps them. If I want to sell an alternative web browser, I know that every PC user has a copy of IE already. Additionally, the vast majority of those users are in a corporate environment and don't make their own software purchasing decisions--the IT department chooses (MS) for them. My likelihood of cracking that market is very small.

But I know most Mac users make their own spending decisions, spend more $ on software, and are willing to spend more $ for a better computing experience. Plus, most Mac users are glad to drop an MS program any time they can.

So even though the # of Mac users in this overall market is small, the % of them I can hope to capture is much higher and than I can of the PC folks. So I may just decide I can make money off a Mac version as well.

And this is why you see a Mac version of Opera, and Mac-only browsers like iCab and OmniWeb.

mpopkin
Feb 13, 2004, 01:46 PM
You all have to be kidding, Do you Honestly believe that because IBM has "Created a new process, that it will be delivered in a month. Forget it, there will no doubt be updates to the Powermac line and Displays maybe. But do not be stupid, they do not have the technology to cool(still) a G5 Powerbook, the technology as of six months ago was still over a year away( i am referring to water cooled Processor technology) i would guess that a new powerbook g5 would launch around August at best. The same goes for a new imac(g5) would have to wait for a cooler chip. As for Emac G5's, don't count on it. I would love to get my hands on a powerbook g5, but i am being realistic.



Originally posted by captain kirk
Whoo Hoo G5 powerbook next month then

wrldwzrd89
Feb 13, 2004, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by cuneglasus
But there are no architectural changes mentioned anywhere.Certainly no longer pipelines.Everything so far says its just a die shrink.We should know more soon.Dont let this stuff get out of hand or before long the web potatoes will be saying the 970fx is slower than the current model and a new Web legend is born.

Isn't the change to 90nm considered architectural? Anyway, you do have a point. Let's stop this discussion of slower PPC970FX right here before it spreads.

ipiloot
Feb 13, 2004, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by daveL
OT. If you are talking about flight simulation, have you tried Xplane? Very good and developed on OSX.

I'm not talking about flight sims. Of course I know about Xplane, but this is not a good soaring sim. The sim that soaring pilots use is SFSPC - www.sfspc.de. Though, it's not as nice as expected nowadays, it's very "real".
But the major application that I use is flight analysis and replication app called SeeYou - www.seeyou.ws

This partly runs in VirtualPC, but not in 3D mode, which is serious setback.

hughdogg
Feb 13, 2004, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by RogerQ


Any given software product has a target market. What is important to a developer is how big that market is, and what percentage of that market they can hope to capture.

Most software products are niche products. Accountants don't need Photoshop. Structural engineers don't need ProTools. And on and on.

So even though the # of Mac users in this overall market is small, the % of them I can hope to capture is much higher and than I can of the PC folks.


This is one of the smartest things I've seen written on here in a long time. Look at Apple's mission statement, it mirrors this idea. "Apple is committed to bringing the best personal computing experience to students, educators, creative professionals and consumers around the world..." Notice the priority they place on students, educators, and creative professionals. Niche markets work. Your never going to convince the Walmart masses that an extra $500 for a computer is worth it...so don't waste your time and effort (read $$$) trying.

Cheers,
hughdogg

neilw
Feb 13, 2004, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by mpopkin
You all have to be kidding, Do you Honestly believe that because IBM has "Created a new process, that it will be delivered in a month. Forget it, there will no doubt be updates to the Powermac line and Displays maybe. But do not be stupid, they do not have the technology to cool(still) a G5 Powerbook, the technology as of six months ago was still over a year away( i am referring to water cooled Processor technology)

I do not claim to know when Apple will grace us with the PowerBook G5. But the power numbers given for the 970FX are quite comfortable for a laptop, and comparable to the G4. All the talk of the Cooligy liquid-cooling stuff was based on the notion that the G5 was a giant power hog, and would require extraordinary cooling measures in a laptop. The 970FX is not a power hog, at least at sub-2 GHz speeds. While Apple may indeed be looking to use the Cooligy technology, it is not inherently a gating item for a G5 PowerBook.

The status of the system controller chip is another matter altogether. Has it been produced at 90nm? What is its power consumption? Has Apple produced a reduced-feature, lower-power version of it for portables and/or consumer machines? Are they waiting for such a device, which is still under development?

We shall see... eventually. :confused:

windowsblowsass
Feb 13, 2004, 02:13 PM
this makes it sound like the same chip could be used in powerbooks and powermacs crazy

york2600
Feb 13, 2004, 02:15 PM
Not that anyone is gonna believe me here, but the G5 laptop protos are out there in numbers or so I hear from a friend with a parent working for Apple.

painandgreed
Feb 13, 2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Lanbrown
That is because the programmer is using functions that are not really part of Java. While they will work, they are using platform specific calls, which is what Java is supposed to be against. There are a lot of bad programmers out there and that is the work they do. Some write to a specific version of Java as well. In their eyes, if it works then their job is done. If they programmed the way it's supposed to be, then it would work with almost all platforms and probably release independent; obviously if a new feature/call was added, then the user would need the latest to use it.

I agree, and such situations have caused many heated meeting and threats of breach of contract issues, however, when it all boils down, we are forced to take what they give us or spend millions all over again to go with another company that will most likely do the same to us.

Wow! My question for the IT department would be:

***WHO DO YOU THINK YOU WORK FOR???***

Without the others there would be NO need for the IT staff.

"Well, we don't have the budget right now to support Macs as well as the larger Windows instalation. If you cede part of your budget over to us for support we'll see waht we can do." If they get the budget it goes to what they want rather than what you wanted and its all OK'd by somebody farther up the chain who doesn't care one way or another and sicne you've given them the money they are in charge of the project and you have to go with what they decide is the best "for the entire organization".

From my experience, both hospitals and universities are not like companies where things go from the top down like a kingdom. Rather they are like a collection of little feifdoms that all fight for budget and power and the larger ones bully the smaller ones and there is no effective ruler to settle such disputes. Even the IT department is its own little feifdom that takes its power and wields it like a stick.

Moonlight
Feb 13, 2004, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by mpopkin
You all have to be kidding, Do you Honestly believe that because IBM has "Created a new process, that it will be delivered in a month. Forget it, there will no doubt be updates to the Powermac line and Displays maybe. But do not be stupid, they do not have the technology to cool(still) a G5 Powerbook, the technology as of six months ago was still over a year away

It is true....look at the G5 server with the 950FX it has huge fan intake holes in the front to help cool it...it might be hard to add those to a laptop without it looking strange :)

windowsblowsass
Feb 13, 2004, 02:23 PM
"chip is expected to consume about 24.5 watts of power when clocked at 2.0GHz, according to internal IBM documents and analysts. This is about half of the power consumed by the PowerPC 970 chip at a slower clock speed."
this makes it very probanle for laptps or desktops at higher speeds

Earendil
Feb 13, 2004, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by mpopkin
You all have to be kidding, Do you Honestly believe that because IBM has "Created a new process, that it will be delivered in a month. Forget it, there will no doubt be updates to the Powermac line and Displays maybe. But do not be stupid, they do not have the technology to cool(still) a G5 Powerbook, the technology as of six months ago was still over a year away

Originally posted by Moonlight
It is true....look at the G5 server with the 950FX it has huge fan intake holes in the front to help cool it...it might be hard to add those to a laptop without it looking strange :)

I don't even need to reply, I just need to quote the front page...

According to Richard Doherty, research director at Envisioneering, "It's logical that Apple would select the flexibility of this chip for a next-generation notebook computer."

Month may be too short, but Apple KNEW these chips were coming, so they could have had time to design a new PB. They ARE feasable for laptops, so if the design is completed, they could stick them in. And if there is ANY year that Apple would surprise the Macintosh community with something amazing, guess what year it would be?

Tyler
Earendil
-Still not placing bets on a G5 before summer...but before Christmas? you bet.

Mav451
Feb 13, 2004, 02:41 PM
yeah this is what confuses me about the possibility of the G5 PBook. Look at the existing athlon64 notebooks! They have been out for a while now, so i see no physical reason for the G5 Pbook not to come in this year (certainly not this Q, maybe late Q2, but more likely Q3of2004).

The athlon64 isn't even that efficient power wise and must throttle down to 800mhz to even have a long battery life. I'm sure Apple will find a way to both use a G5 and have a considerable battery life.

jouster
Feb 13, 2004, 03:07 PM
As I think has been pointed out here before, it might help to remember that technological reasons are almost certainly not the only factors Apple is using to time the release of a G5 PB.

We do not know anything about their contractual arrangements with Mot for example. Or about their existing stocks. Or whether they feel they have passed the point at which the PB G4 is profitable.

Business reasons are important too.

Edot
Feb 13, 2004, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by Earendil
I don't even need to reply, I just need to quote the front page...

According to Richard Doherty, research director at Envisioneering, "It's logical that Apple would select the flexibility of this chip for a next-generation notebook computer."

Month may be too short, but Apple KNEW these chips were coming, so they could have had time to design a new PB. They ARE feasable for laptops, so if the design is completed, they could stick them in. And if there is ANY year that Apple would surprise the Macintosh community with something amazing, guess what year it would be?

Tyler
Earendil
-Still not placing bets on a G5 before summer...but before Christmas? you bet.

I think you all have this backwards. These chips were designed for Apple portables. Apple has major involvement with the G5. They are having IBM make processors for their needs. The G4 was dead over 2 years ago and Apple knew that, so they went to IBM and started working on the G5. They created it to be able to be used in a Workstation and eventually in a portable. Do you think that Apple is just keeping tabs on the G5 and making products based on what IBM comes up with. Apple is centering future products around the G5, not trying to take what IBM throws at them and work it into their current designs. This processor really seems amazing, being able to swap speed for power with the same fab and architecture. They make it sound like a buffet line where you can choose the attributes of the chip based on what your appetite is on a given day. I know power vs. speed is a natural occurrence, but this seems to stand out more than the G4 or P4.

army_guy
Feb 13, 2004, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by ipiloot
I really hope that rumors of OSX 10.4 supporting Linux UI API-s out of the box comes true. this wuld eliminiate a lot of software barriers for Apple.

There's lot of small pieces of niche applications that are holding customers back from mac platform. I for example have to keep at least one wintel box in house because of the aviation-specific (I'm a soaring pilot) applications that I use. Yes, the partly work via virtualPC, but only partly.

So this is a real problem, not a hoax. I really hope that Apple solves that equation soon.

EDA applications are one of these niche markets, the fact is SUN is most dominent here. With the introduction of opteron the EDA companies have completly changed thier roadmaps to rewrite thier toolsets for Opteron, this was due to user demand. If the Linux API is true it wont change anything in my opinion as far as EDA tools are concerned the software would again have to be rewritten, recompiled and recertified right from the begining.

army_guy
Feb 13, 2004, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by silvergunuk
What I don't understand is that if Steve Jobs knew about these cooler chips, why did they make the G5 tower so big? Maybe....dare I say it? Quad machines?

On a different note, I hope Coral doesn't give up on the Mac as i've grown really fond of Painter 8 with my Wacom Tablet and when it comes down to art and traditional drawing and painting, it runs circles around Photoshop.

QUAD machines, er i dont think so, way too expensive and far to speciallist and costly to implement, the cost is not linear to go from 2-4 CPUS but very very high, think $15000++

pjkelnhofer
Feb 13, 2004, 03:27 PM
Any positive knew about the G5 is positive news for Mac users. The sooner they are in the more products the better. So every advancement is good news. I am sure Apple knew they were coming and have already been designing around them. Do you think they wait for IBM to give them a chip and then say, "Hmm... a G5 you call it? We'll see what we can do."?

I was in Target today and I had a brainstorm. Someday soon Apple will release the iMac/eMac in G5 form (be next week or next year). If they can get a models below the $1000 pricepoint, why not use the new added iPod resellers (Target for example) to carry it. Shipped with iLife (and *fingers crossed* 21st century version of AppleWorks) you could sell it as a complete home computing solutions and a "digital hub" into which most of the digital products you already own (camcorder, camera, iPod) perfectly integrate.

Now that would grow market share!

hulugu
Feb 13, 2004, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by jouster
I speak from bitter experience. Having spent many days with my wife's family in the boonies, I get a depressing picture of the state of computing that not all AIers share.

When I said that the OS is the most important thing for many, I should have added that many don't even realize that there's a choice. There are millions out there running W95 on their PIIs at 800 x 600. If they've even heard of OS X, they are quite likely to beleive some ludicrous Mac myth. I've had people (in rural PA) tell me they'd never consider a Mac cos they need 'the internet, and macs don't come with that....'

Now, I'm not pessimistic like JW Pepper earlier in the thread, but I would stress that there is still a lot to be done if Apple is to fully penetrate much of the US.


Apple may not be able to penetrate the US market, this one is fairly saturated with AOL users running Win95 on PIIIs. However, I hope not only does Apple continue to hold onto its choice markets, photo, video, graphic design, but continues to reverse its decline in education, especially colleges. Furthermore, putting an Apple store in the Ginza shopping district and another in London speaks to a much larger and more available market. Europe and Asia could become much greater markets for Apple.
Bobby Joe and Joe Ann down in Greenville aren't buying a new computer right now and that market is not worth persuing in Apple's case because it dominated by the Wal-mart sensibilities of Dell and Gateway which Apple cannot hope to penetrate much.
Furthermore, PalmSource's decision appears based on the fairly useless statistict of market-share.
Market-share does not cover installed base, nor future market-share gains, but rather is an overly simplistic number that I wish everyone would stop using; at least without more data to back up those conclusions. Apple sold more computers last year than they had before, they have 7% market-share in portables a significant increase from the year before. PalmSource and others need to recongize that their target market may not follow the larger trends. In Palm's case professionals are buying their stuff, not those people from Greenville or the cold-call farms who are buying large inventories of Dells.

crees!
Feb 13, 2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by york2600
Not that anyone is gonna believe me here, but the G5 laptop protos are out there in numbers or so I hear from a friend with a parent working for Apple.

I would not be surprised by this.

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 04:02 PM
These advancements are really not a huge surprise. The thing to keep in mind is that the "G5 line" is really just an outgrowth of the Power4 clustering chip. As you may have read from my post over on the VT article response, the original chip Virginia Tech was considering for their super computer was a tossup between the Power4 and Itanium2 (from IBM and Intel respectively) -- the IBM deal fell through due to IBM wanting their new chip to be in 'half U' size racks and they were working on cooling, which put the timeframe beyond that of Tech's. But the obvious point is this:
IBM was working on lowering the Power4's heat and improved cooling methods for it. The G5 is just a 'stripped' Power4... So if IBM masters a new way to cool the 4 then the G5 should be easy to make take advantage of the technology.
So if you want to know what IBM will do with the 5 in the future; look at the server version of the chip. I saw this coming as soon as I saw the new Power4s. (Not trying to do an "I told you so" here, a lot of people have been predicting G5 PowerBooks)

Now; it's not exact but the XServe is 1U, and from what I've seen is about the size of a 17" PowerBook. A lot heavier, true (a LOT heavier) -- but I think that if Mac really wants to make some waves they could try and release a "fully scaled" laptop -- as in introduce a 2.5 GHz dual PowerMac... and a 2.5 GHz dual PowerBook.
The price premium would be doubtlessly high but I still think it might be a nice claim while Intel has all its heat problems with Itanium/Prescot to be able to cool the fastest Desktop PowerPC chip in a laptop.

EDIT EDIT: I just checked, unfortunatly my look at the Serves was limited to height/width and not depth --
Power Book compared to XServe:
1 inch vs 1.73 inch
15.4 inch vs 17.6 inch
10.2 inch vs 28 inch <-- ewww >.<
That's double size so a single proc laptop is reasonable, a dualie while fun wouldn't be as easy as I was thinking. :( ah well.

The G5 is not (and never conclusively was) the fastest Desktop out there; but it could /easily/ be the fastest laptop if they pull this off. The question is if they think the market is there.
Now, I'm a *huge* desktop replacement fan; so I'm heavily in support of this of course. But a lot of PC magazines I've been reading have been talking about the odds of a desktop-replacement becoming the 'big' market. Ultraportables are nice; and have their place, but the replacement is often desired by Gamers, Programmers, Artist, "Rich boys who want toys," and a few other rather large markets (these markets, I might add, are the big pushers for 'stronger, faster, better').

ALoLA
Feb 13, 2004, 04:04 PM
Is it just me, or does that statement "It's logical that Apple would select..." sound like he's defending something that Apple has already done? Which would suggest then, that G5 Powerbooks are indeed on their way. :D

stingerman
Feb 13, 2004, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
The PowerPC 970FX could very well be slower per clock cycle than the PowerPC 970; I don't have a good sense of this and I guess I didn't get this across very well in my previous post.

It's faster, the SSOI process improves transistor performance by 35% on the same process according to IBM. IBM is using faster transistors in their CU-08 process that are about 30% faster anyway. The combination with SSOI should give the transistors near a 50% performance boost. All in all the 970FX is about 20-30% faster than the 970 at the same clock speed. IBM's product brochure bears this out. However SpecInt and SpecFP scores were calculated with the GCC 3.3 compiler and not IBM's high-performance iLC compiler. So there is a lot of cloak and dagger secrecy about the 970FX's real performance, probably due to the Apple relationship. Steve Job's wants to announce this himself at a grand media event to get the most media hype.

stingerman
Feb 13, 2004, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by Stolid
The G5 is just a 'stripped' Power4... So if IBM masters a new way to cool the 4 then the G5 should be easy to make take advantage of the technology.

That's a pretty battle front comment as I have heard, and naive. The 970 is a 'superset' of the Power4 core. It contains additional instructions, it contains a VMX unit that the Power4 does not. It uses faster components and contains better pipelining to take it to a much faster frequency while allowing it to operate at a lower voltage. The new 970FX contains PowerTune extensions that do not exist on the Power4 but are promised for the Power5 later this year.

The difference between the two is the dual core and the Power4's 4 way dual core multy module that allow's for 8 core processors in one module. However one dual 970 G5 is more powerful than a single dual core Power4. The difference is that you will never see a 64-Way 970, but the 970 is able to go to 8-way due to its three coherent interconnects (2^3 = 8).

ktlx
Feb 13, 2004, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by stingerman
The difference between the two is the dual core and the Power4's 4 way dual core multy module that allow's for 8 core processors in one module. However one dual 970 G5 is more powerful than a single dual core Power4. The difference is that you will never see a 64-Way 970, but the 970 is able to go to 8-way due to its three coherent interconnects (2^3 = 8).

You forgot the 32MB of L3 cache. :)

D*I*S_Frontman
Feb 13, 2004, 04:49 PM
When I see these things, I get a little too excited, I guess!

If the system bus improvements are such that now the CPUs/RAM can't push utilize all of the bus bandwidth, why not add two more CPUs? For non-multiple-CPU applications it would be a total waste, but for those programs which can take advantage of it--yikes. Could be a crusher.

No, I am not naive enough to think that this wouldn't take some tremendous rearchitecture to accomplish--mobo, system controller, etc.--but if the heat per CPU can be handled by the enclosure and enough big-name programs could be rewritten to take advantage of it, why not? I'm not talking about thousands of titles, either. Maybe the top twenty video/animation/graphic design/science/math apps currently running on OS X. The marquee players.

More expensive? Of course. But there are plenty of idiots out there who would buy a "render-farm-in-a-box" like this for $4-6k for the base or $10k maxed out w/RAM without blinking an eye. High-end Mac buyers have deep pockets and love to pay the premium to be on the bleeding edge.

Go ahead. I am bracing myself for the inevitable bubble-bursting.

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by stingerman
The 970 is a 'superset' of the Power4 core. It contains additional instructions, it contains a VMX unit that the Power4 does not.

I've not looked too much into the details of the difference; I'm mainly going on what Varadarajan said at NASA (which I quoted almost word for word, he made the comment that it was ironic that a chip designed for supercomputer use was modified for a desktop then that desktop chip was put in a supercomputer, as well as a comment the 970 was 'essentially a subset of the Power4'). The additional parts will, of course, be important to any factor. I didn't say "everything will be immediatly usable" but the vast majority of improvements should still be. The VMX unit was admitably ignored by Varadarajan and Tech (most of the things the cluster is to be used for is double-precision, the VMX is single); and he said they wanted to use it if they could but hadn't tried anything yet.

It uses faster components and contains better pipelining to take it to a much faster frequency while allowing it to operate at a lower voltage. The new 970FX contains PowerTune extensions that do not exist on the Power4 but are promised for the Power5 later this year.

Lower voltage would lower heat (all other things equal); and except in the case of a Power4 optimization on voltage or pipelining (which would either already be in the G5 or have semi decent odds of remaining transferable) I don't see the difference. The fab process is, TTBOMK, the same (or incredibly similar). If the differences in G5 and Power4 are in the Power5 (in favor of G5 similarity) then just replace 'watch the P4' with 'watch the P5'

(back to top of 2nd quote)
Faster components will generate more heat, generally speaking; but as I stated earlier; better cooling and use techniques should still be transferable. I'm talking about better use of things like SoI and whatnot; as IBM is more likely, if you ask me, to put those in their super-computer chips first as those can normally take the 'development cost' hit better.
Certain developments on the Power4/Power5 line would be silly or strange to transfer; such as clock rate increases, and 'multicore' technology. But developments in cooling and power consumption seem - for the most part - to be the same quinessential chip.


Most importantly; I can't see the vector unit inside the G5 making more (and I doubt as much) heat as a 'core' in the Power4s (in terms of watts over area and overall size of chip) -- a Power line of the same generation as the G5 would put out more heat and more/equal heat per square-cm.

I'm not saying the chips are equal; but I'm saying that from a fabrication type (SoI and other IBM techs) and cooling approach (CPU die cooling) the chips are fundamentally very similar. What I'm saying here is admitably somewhat guess-work but I'm going off a combination of the knowledge I have from building my own watercooling systems and the research I did for that and 2 years of Computer Architecture and Design classes. I'm not an expert by any means; but I hope I can at least hazzard a good guess after all that. :P

~Stolid~

wizard
Feb 13, 2004, 05:01 PM
I must say I'm impressed, IBM is delivering far more technology in the 90nm chip than I expected. This is obviously a GOOD THING!!!!!

I do wonder what the executives rational was for declaring that the chip could drive a Laptop. Unless those power usage figures, floating around, are maxiums I still see this chip as being far to hot for a laptop. Maybe it is me but I'd hate to see 30 or 40 watts go out the door to run the north bridge and the CPU at full speed.

Maybe Apple has new battery technology up its sleeve. If not I think some people will be disappointed with any 970 base laptop.

Thanks
Dave

macnulty
Feb 13, 2004, 05:17 PM
Computer / car analogy is closer then anyone thinks - just as a computer needs software to be useful, as does a car need parts. Walk into any auto parts store and ask for an alternator for a Beamer or an air intake manifold for any straight 8 Benz. Chances are they will have it for a GM or Ford product. Software is not the "gas" in the anaolgy.

lind0834
Feb 13, 2004, 05:18 PM
C'mon Apple release new PowerBooks ASAP so that when they hit revB I need/can afford one.

wizard
Feb 13, 2004, 05:25 PM
I have to stronly disagree here. One of the things that has kept me off the MAC platform for the last couple of years has been performance. If Apple can deliver high perfromance hardware at a reasonable price I'm inclined to start looking again.

I'm a Linux user, I can tell you that there are a huge number of dissatisfied Windows customers out there. Most of these people would not be happy with Linux due to its nature at the moment. Thus Apple has potential customers out there. The trick is to draw them in, good performance for the buck is part of that equation.

The thing to consider is just where this will allow Apple to go performance wise that AMD and Intel will have a hard time following them. You can bet on dual core chips and other high integration technologies working there way into the product matrix. Sure
AMD will eventually have a dual core processor but it will be very easy now for Apple to lead the way on this and other future technologies.

Dave


Originally posted by groovebuster
How does that help Apple? It doesn't make more people buying a Mac. The hardware might be one part of the equation, but people who were not interested in Mac before will not buy one just because Apple is using PPC970FX processors. If Intel is tumbling AMD will take over. Their processors are head to head with the PPCs in performance and probably will stay like this. So no real reason for Windows/Linux users to switch platforms. For that the performance gap would have to be really significant to be the reason for switching.

Even though Apple sold more units, they didn't increase market share. That's because the Computer industry is growing anyway at the moment. I am very sceptical about the sales numbers Apple will present for this quarter.

groovebuster

tortoise
Feb 13, 2004, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by stingerman
The difference is that you will never see a 64-Way 970, but the 970 is able to go to 8-way due to its three coherent interconnects (2^3 = 8).


Even though the HT has the interconnects, the 970 does not use the HT interconnect in a fashion that allows it to scale well beyond two processors for most apps. The G5s to date have all been vanilla SMP architectures. HT is capable of NUMA (the Opterons are actually NUMA systems masquerading as SMP and scale almost perfectly out to about 7-8 processors using HT), but the PPC970 systems are not designed in this fashion. Apple would have to re-architect their G5 systems before they would have a quad+ system that was worth the money spent.

As currently engineered, you will get diminishing returns beyond two processors for the PPC970. After that, you'll have serious memory contention issues to deal with. As it is, the PPC970 only gets about 60% of the memory throughput that the Opteron gets in real world tests. (Ironically, the PPC970 gives the best memory performance when using the GCC 2.9x compilers. The IBM XLC compiler falls in the middle and GCC 3.3 gives the worst performance.) This is the standard trade-off between simple SMP and ccNUMA architectures. For dual processors, SMP is cheaper and often faster all other things being equal (which they rarely are), but SMP doesn't scale beyond two processors while NUMA scales very nicely to several.

It does make me wonder what IBMs PPC970 servers will actually look like. I am curious as to whether or not they'll be ccNUMA systems (like Opterons) or SMP (like G5s).

smorr
Feb 13, 2004, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by JW Pepper


3. I love Macs I have installed them throughout my company and I am going to continue to buy them, but I cannot advocate them to the schools because the software just isn't there. Most schools aren't using word, excel, powerpoint certainly not in pre-prep and most prep schools. Most of the software seems to be aimed solely at the educational market and they are applications that have no other purpose. they are programmes that teach logic/algebra programming, spelling. As non educational users it is difficult to appreciate the extent of specialist software aimed at schools that simply does not exist on Macs. Superlogo is a very popular programme to teach the simple principals of programming for example. Browse this site http://avp.100megs28.com/ and you will see what I mean, of those apps that are listed as pc/mac I doubt that 1 in 10 will be written for OSX.


If Apple was really with it, they would develop and package some killer apps designed specifically for teaching/learning that work hand in hand with pedagogy and classroom practices. And bundle these with educational purposes -- It leverages the idea that people buy macs because of the iLife apps. If they could do this for kids and teachers, then they are adding a value to the education market that cannot be purchased at any price on the PC. In anycase -- they must revive HyperCard or something close to it (and bundle it with education purchases). the value of hypercard in education 10-15 years ago could not be understated and it is a shame that it has atrophied.

cspace
Feb 13, 2004, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by wizard
I have to stronly disagree here. One of the things that has kept me off the MAC platform for the last couple of years has been performance. If Apple can deliver high perfromance hardware at a reasonable price I'm inclined to start looking again.

Dave

Just curious Dave, what do you need the performance for? Video editing? Number crunching? Software development?

I'd stay with x86 and Linux if the software suits your needs. Apple isn't really going to give you more unless you value pretty hardware and Apple's software.

tortoise
Feb 13, 2004, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
If the system bus improvements are such that now the CPUs/RAM can't push utilize all of the bus bandwidth, why not add two more CPUs?


The G5 is architected as an SMP system, which means that it won't scale well beyond two processors. Apple would have to do some heavy engineering to make the PPC970 work well as a quad system, which may make it more expensive than it is worth just to say they can. The HyperTransport will scale nicely to quite a few processors if it is used in ccNUMA mode (which is how the Opteron uses it), but 1) the PPC970 currently doesn't know how to do ccNUMA with HyperTransport, and 2) It's memory latency is already so poor in SMP mode that it is arguably not worth the latency hit you would get by converting the architecture to NUMA.

In short, they COULD produce a quad processor PPC970 pretty easily, but it would only give very marginal increases in performance because of the way the system is currently put together and few people would want to spend the money for such meager real-world speed increases. Apple may do NUMA based systems in the future, since the HT works very well for that kind of thing (HT was originally designed for Cray NUMA systems -- tech trivia), but it will probably require a major processor generation upgrade before it would be supported. In other words, you might see it in the PPC980 systems if they re-engineer them to be NUMA friendly, but it will probably never show up in a 970 based chip.

uziemac
Feb 13, 2004, 06:17 PM
PowerBook G5, ooooooh yeah

mpopkin
Feb 13, 2004, 06:27 PM
I believe people need to understand something about processors and this applies to PC's as well. Power does not matter. While the 970fx is an amazing chip in all rumors, i want everyone to find a pic of the Xserve G5, you will notice NO size difference between it and the Powermac G5, I own a Dual 2ghz machine and yes the processors are Huge. In addition to finding a picture of the Xserve G5, take a look at a PowerPC G4 or G3 Chip, back when they were made, what seperated Apple from the Wintel folks so much was, was the very fact that Apple processors were 1/3 to 1/4 the size of their Intel/Amd counterparts, the G4/G3 are tiny, they are smaller in dimension almost than memory(thicker though), you can take apart an imac if you want(g3) or look at a powermac g4. When the G5 was created, it was not rushed per say, but it was made using a larger process because they had SO many more transistors and parts that went into producing it and it was powerful. Even at 90nm(current G5 are 120nm) there are still a pretty big processor. It is clear that the 970FX is not a Mobile processor nor intended to be used in a powerbook( maybe a desktop replace pbook, but that would be going downhill and copying the wintel clunkers). One of the reasons the powerbook is so amazing is its size, power and portability. The only way to incorporate the 970fx is to sacrifice all the portability and qualities that we have come to expect and desire. There is no doubt that there will be a powerbook g5, but i doubt that it will be out soon or maybe even based on the powerpc 970(any version) it is possible that Apple is waiting for the PowerPC 980 which is based on IBM Power5 Processor and is much much more powerful than the g5 currently is and is made on a new die process below 65nm and both using/producing less power/heat than the current g5 or PowerPc 970fx could possibly achieve. It is logical to assume that Apple will release a New Powerbook, IMAC(current generation sales have tanked) and Emac(time is ripe for a new one). But i am simply stating: IT WILL NOT be this month or next month or the month after, rather look for it to be actually shipped around August-September, that is not saying that they will not announce it in May-June. They may very well do so.






Originally posted by neilw
I do not claim to know when Apple will grace us with the PowerBook G5. But the power numbers given for the 970FX are quite comfortable for a laptop, and comparable to the G4. All the talk of the Cooligy liquid-cooling stuff was based on the notion that the G5 was a giant power hog, and would require extraordinary cooling measures in a laptop. The 970FX is not a power hog, at least at sub-2 GHz speeds. While Apple may indeed be looking to use the Cooligy technology, it is not inherently a gating item for a G5 PowerBook.

The status of the system controller chip is another matter altogether. Has it been produced at 90nm? What is its power consumption? Has Apple produced a reduced-feature, lower-power version of it for portables and/or consumer machines? Are they waiting for such a device, which is still under development?

We shall see... eventually. :confused:

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 06:33 PM
maybe a desktop replace pbook, but that would be going downhill and copying the wintel clunkers

How is this downhill? I've been stymied on whether to get a PB or a PM for the very reason that I want a desktop replacement and its not there.

mpopkin
Feb 13, 2004, 06:35 PM
it is downhill because it will be Huge and not a typical powerbook, i dont mean 17 inch book huge, i mean thick 9 pound monster


Originally posted by Stolid
How is this downhill? I've been stymied on whether to get a PB or a PM for the very reason that I want a desktop replacement and its not there.

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 06:41 PM
Nothing stops Apple from making a 'thin' powerbook with all the "classic" features and also a desktop replacement.
A heavy/thick laptop doesn't bug me -- at the moment I'm using an Inspiron 8200 that I love to death and its over 10 pounds. Thin and light might be "sexy" and good advertising but (to metaphore) the army uses tanks as well as James Bond. They both have a place there and they both have a place in a full lineup.
Apple might need to hire a few extra designers (or 'overtime' currents) and the new fabrication of cases and whatnot; but they had to do that for 17" and 12" PBs too -- not a big deal for a large company.

manu chao
Feb 13, 2004, 06:43 PM
Does anybody remember which version of the PPC970 is used in the IBM blades (1U servers) that IBM presented two or three months ago? I only remember that they were clocked up to 1.8Ghz.

EDIT:
Just checked myself, they are dual 1.6Ghz with only two harddrives. I suppose they use the 130nm version, since they were presented already November or Dezember, guess it's two harddrives only because these processors produce more heat.

EDIT EDIT:
The two harddrives are 40GB each, which sounds really small, a Powerbook can have a single 80GB drive. The new XServes look much more attractive compared to them. I wonder what kind of system controller they use, presumably not Apple's.

jj2003
Feb 13, 2004, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by numediaman
Bye bye Motorola.

Yes! "Hello Moto" is becoming "Bye Moto". And not many in the Mac community will miss them. Well at least not as long as IBM delivers :)

rdowns
Feb 13, 2004, 06:57 PM
Originally posted by Rocketman
1. Apple is sooooo over Motorola


Nice bit of premature speculation there. Motorola is in every model Apple makes but one. Reading about these new chips is great, now Apple needs to deliver, and fast. I bet Apple has a really bad quarter. What did they sell?

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by manu chao
Does anybody remember which version of the PPC970 is used in the IBM blades (1U servers) that IBM presented two or three months ago? I only remember that they were clocked up to 1.8Ghz.


Blade's, IIRC, are EXTREMELY processor dense; far moreso than an XServe.

Edit: Blade JS20s meet the specs you gave but are HALF U, not 1U.

rdowns
Feb 13, 2004, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by macnulty
Computer / car analogy is closer then anyone thinks - just as a computer needs software to be useful, as does a car need parts. Walk into any auto parts store and ask for an alternator for a Beamer or an air intake manifold for any straight 8 Benz. Chances are they will have it for a GM or Ford product. Software is not the "gas" in the anaolgy.

I disagree. Since when are Mercedes and BMW owners doing their own service on their cars? Ford and GM parts exist because people demand them. If the demand were there, you'd find parts for BMW and Mercedes.

mpopkin
Feb 13, 2004, 07:21 PM
What do u know
i have an Dell Inspiron 8200 and compared to my other compute( Powermac G5 D 2ghz, it is a piece of crap, low performance lug of a machine, I would not have it accept it was a graduation gift from my parents, Wintel is not Apple. I switched platforms because i am tired of those cumbersome machines which crash all the time. Do not assume that a lug of a machine like the Inspiron 8200 is any bit the equal of a powerbook, my brother has a powerbook g4 1.25 ghz and it creams the Dell 8200 in performance. Smaller does not mean less powerful, but with Apple you get power and size instead of power and Huge.

Originally posted by Stolid
Nothing stops Apple from making a 'thin' powerbook with all the "classic" features and also a desktop replacement.
A heavy/thick laptop doesn't bug me -- at the moment I'm using an Inspiron 8200 that I love to death and its over 10 pounds. Thin and light might be "sexy" and good advertising but (to metaphore) the army uses tanks as well as James Bond. They both have a place there and they both have a place in a full lineup.
Apple might need to hire a few extra designers (or 'overtime' currents) and the new fabrication of cases and whatnot; but they had to do that for 17" and 12" PBs too -- not a big deal for a large company.

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by mpopkin
What do u know
i have an Dell Inspiron 8200 and compared to my other compute( Powermac G5 D 2ghz, it is a piece of crap, low performance lug of a machine, I would not have it accept it was a graduation gift from my parents, Wintel is not Apple. I switched platforms because i am tired of those cumbersome machines which crash all the time. Do not assume that a lug of a machine like the Inspiron 8200 is any bit the equal of a powerbook, my brother has a powerbook g4 1.25 ghz and it creams the Dell 8200 in performance. Smaller does not mean less powerful, but with Apple you get power and size instead of power and Huge.

Amazing... You're comparing a DESKTOP to a LAPTOP.
Wintel is not apple - Amazing revelation there too. I thought they were the same company.
Crash all the time? I do not REMEMBER the last crash my 8200 had. I think it had a series of them; but I was doing some weird stuff on it with kernel level stuff (making fake SCSI devices; not fun stuff)

A G4 1.25 creams the 8200? Okay. By what metric?
By simple 'user feel'? If that's the case then I've got to say that I've got to use a G5 system because I've used a top of the line G4 at a CompUSA and felt a graphical lag just doing something as simple as moving windows around in Photoshop on it, I've never seen that on my 8200. Now I've turned off 'show window while moving' so that's probably why; but it goes to show why 'user feel' isn't a good metric. So if you've got another metric please tell me what it is.
Because this is what I keep seeing:
And this is comparing desktop machines. Though we haven't published specific performance numbers for laptops in this report, we did run a Mac Powerbook and a Dell laptop through a subset of the same tests. The 15-inch Powerbook G4, powered by a G4/1.25GHz processor, was thumped in every test by a Dell Inspiron 8500 and its P4-M processor running at 2.6GHz. Until Apple is able to stuff a G5 processor inside one of its sexy Powerbook cases, portable Macs are likely to remain noticeably slower than their PC counterparts.
- Rob Galbraith

Smaller does not mean less powerful? Then why does a PowerMac have faster procs (and 2 of them no less) than a PowerBook?
I am not advocating completely ignoring size; but I don't see the harm in a desktop replacement being added to the line. Nothing MAKES you buy that system if Apple makes it; just as nothing MAKES me buy what they've got now. Which I might add is the reason I haven't yet; I'm not at all happy with the state of the mobiles and I can't convince myself I'd use a desktop often enough to justify it, I'm just too mobile.
So by what I've seen of your logic; that means I should stop looking at the Apple platform; its far more important they maintain being "sexy" than have customers. :rolleyes:
Sorry if this sounds flamy; but I see claims that a G4 PowerBook is faster than an 8200 and have to shake my head. It's just not justified (unless of course you get a bottom of the line 8200, but then you'd have to compare it to equivilently lower end "MacTops").
And let's try to steer this more on topic in our replies. :P

Parikh1234
Feb 13, 2004, 07:53 PM
i love how theres always 10 people who no matter what the news reply with something on the order of "bring on the new powerbooks" or something. The rumor could be like apple to go bankrupt, and youll have like 10 people post "bring on the g5 powerbooks!"

Stolid
Feb 13, 2004, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Parikh1234
i love how theres always 10 people who no matter what the news reply with something on the order of "bring on the new powerbooks" or something. The rumor could be like apple to go bankrupt, and youll have like 10 people post "bring on the g5 powerbooks!"

I think that's quite telling as to what the audience is wanting. Everyone wants it so everyone expects it.
You have to admit though - the article does have heavy suggestions of laptop application (not nessicarily 'right now' but definatly a tone of it being a concern)

fluidinclusion
Feb 13, 2004, 08:28 PM
To everyone who hates hearing everyone else wish for Powerbook G5's:

We want them. I'm waiting to buy a Powerbook. I don't NEED one, but I want one. Right now, the current models don't cut it for me. Call it perception, ************, whatever you'd like. I would love to buy a 12" G5 Powerbook - and so would MANY other people.

I think this topic just goes to show that this is a major product that consumers are looking forward to buying whenever Apple ends up releasing it. I expect to see a major marketing push from Apple (The world's first 64-bit laptop, etc.).

Mav451
Feb 13, 2004, 09:06 PM
Haha i think it would be Apple's interest not to say that again...then again, saying controversial things always stirs up a commotion.

With the Athlon 64 mobile version already out, Apple would definitely not have the first 64-bit laptop, but the statement would get PC users complaining (and talking, which is big) which then leads to more media attention and of course MORE consumer attention :)

Look at what the G5 did by saying it was the most powerful desktop (and arguably so, even with Opteron/FX-51 in the comparisons).

Perhaps Apple will come out with something out of that coveted R&D department...expect the unexpected.

digitalbiker
Feb 13, 2004, 09:25 PM
Maybe people are speculating on a new G5 PowerBook because it is directly mentioned in the article. Do you think?

According to Richard Doherty, research director at Envisioneering, "It's logical that Apple would select the flexibility of this chip for a next-generation notebook computer."

PHARAOHk
Feb 13, 2004, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by rdowns
I disagree. Since when are Mercedes and BMW owners doing their own service on their cars? Ford and GM parts exist because people demand them. If the demand were there, you'd find parts for BMW and Mercedes.


What? You sir, cannot disagree with what you are quoting. YOU CANNOT DISAGREE. OK?

Supa_Fly
Feb 13, 2004, 10:17 PM
QUOTE]Apple needs to (hello Jobs HELLO?!?!) MARKET themselves (more) aggressively, needs to court more and more developers and be viable, and needs to stay ahead, well ahead, of the (sucky) competition.[/QUOTE] PhotoRun I couldn't have said it better.

I just came back from a friend of mine's college here in Toronto. Let me just say that in Canada PC's are the dominant system with Microsoft. However in just under a full year they've upgraded from 50 Macs (30 of them Blue & White G3's, the rest G4 originals) to now having an additional 20 Quicksilver G4s, 40 PowerMac G5s (Just in Today, and ALL Dual 1.8Ghz), and 5 Xserves (first year Dual G4s). Incredible upgrade, guessing technicians and arts students are in demand of these systems. Then on the bus home I saw someone playing with a PowerBook 12". Wow!

Most software products are niche products. Accountants don't need Photoshop. Structural engineers don't need ProTools. And on and on. RogerQ, good insight, yet I think Accountants of these software companies do have a huge say in cost of goods sold, along with why a company should bring their software to a particular platform other than niche. Return on investment, and other market forces are at play. ALso, what about those software licensing agreements?? Those with unlimited user license is seriously hurting their potential for more revenue, yet with Unix & Linux its a must and its hurting Microsoft even further.

These processors are enough to get Apple noticed and to make further innovative products but they must first, market harder, this is the time.

1) Dramatically reduce inventory on previous G4 PowerMacs; by say $500 US get them outta there, package them with engraved iPods to sweeten the deal and keep income decent, if not undercut cost by 10% just get them out, they'll upgrade in 1 year after enjoying the Mac with new OS X Ocelot/Panther.

2) There is HUGE education potential here in Canada beyond the Grade 4 level especially in major cities. push here.

I find it strange that corporations or the computing industry was huge with Unix some 30 years ago, no??, and now its Microsoft and Linux?? how on Earth did that happen??

IIvan
Feb 13, 2004, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Got any suggestions for Apple as to how to penetrate more of the US market? I'm curious as to whether you have any ideas.

First they have to convince it that they really, truely, deeply care about it. Take it out and spend money on it. Then one night when they are alone they can very carefully p...

mpopkin
Feb 13, 2004, 10:40 PM
Can a Dell Run Final Cut?, No. Does the Dell Inspiron 8500(or 8200) crash. Yes. Does a Powerbook crash. No. Now i am not getting into an argue fest, but i am and will simply state that first there are no accurate tests to judge a computer, but yes why Dell may make a good big laptop, the Powerbook handles what it is designed to handle better than what a Dell is designed to handle. PC's in general, Laptops especially crash often and/or run out of battery power fast. They are designed for games, finance and education. Mac's in general, laptops included handle video, photos and audio better than they do games, there are very few people who buy a Powermac or Powerbook to play games. they also do not crash, have batteries that last more than an hour and are smaller, more agile and portable. No review has been made saying that for what they are designed for Mac's arent better than PC's, because they are. End of story.






Originally posted by Stolid
Amazing... You're comparing a DESKTOP to a LAPTOP.
Wintel is not apple - Amazing revelation there too. I thought they were the same company.
Crash all the time? I do not REMEMBER the last crash my 8200 had. I think it had a series of them; but I was doing some weird stuff on it with kernel level stuff (making fake SCSI devices; not fun stuff)

A G4 1.25 creams the 8200? Okay. By what metric?
By simple 'user feel'? If that's the case then I've got to say that I've got to use a G5 system because I've used a top of the line G4 at a CompUSA and felt a graphical lag just doing something as simple as moving windows around in Photoshop on it, I've never seen that on my 8200. Now I've turned off 'show window while moving' so that's probably why; but it goes to show why 'user feel' isn't a good metric. So if you've got another metric please tell me what it is.
Because this is what I keep seeing:

- Rob Galbraith

Smaller does not mean less powerful? Then why does a PowerMac have faster procs (and 2 of them no less) than a PowerBook?
I am not advocating completely ignoring size; but I don't see the harm in a desktop replacement being added to the line. Nothing MAKES you buy that system if Apple makes it; just as nothing MAKES me buy what they've got now. Which I might add is the reason I haven't yet; I'm not at all happy with the state of the mobiles and I can't convince myself I'd use a desktop often enough to justify it, I'm just too mobile.
So by what I've seen of your logic; that means I should stop looking at the Apple platform; its far more important they maintain being "sexy" than have customers. :rolleyes:
Sorry if this sounds flamy; but I see claims that a G4 PowerBook is faster than an 8200 and have to shake my head. It's just not justified (unless of course you get a bottom of the line 8200, but then you'd have to compare it to equivilently lower end "MacTops").
And let's try to steer this more on topic in our replies. :P

Mav451
Feb 13, 2004, 11:05 PM
uggh that is not entirely true either. The 2.0 G5 in the computer lab not only stalled but kernal panicked today while I tried to open Photoshop. Macs still crash, just like any other computer out there. Maybe not as often, but it is still a complicated physical machine--it will never be without its flaws or weaknesses.

And on productivity? On average the Mac, supposedly by some strange sterotype, is more "creative" than PCs. Well I have a friend who has created and directed a great deal of short films, done flash animations and several websites work. Just because he doesn't use a Mac doesn't mean he's any less creative. That sterotype really needs to be stopped that just b/c you have a Mac, all of a sudden your twice as creative as someone with a PC. It simply isn't so. (that friend that does Flash animations/short films uses a Dell 8600 btw).

WM.
Feb 13, 2004, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by ClimbingTheLog
I've avoided buying a PowerMac since I got my B&W G3 years back. The G4 line was always a compromise in one way or another. The first G5, while admirable, was still a rush job when you look at the component diagram.

That's not to say Apple was wrong - it needs to have new products to sell; it's just that from an engineering perspective it was a Volvo, not a Benz.

This chip changes everything. This really signals the emergence of Apple as providing the best personal computer chip on the planet. Wow, I'd like at least two in my new PowerMac.
Care to elaborate? What does the block diagram tell you about any cost-cutting measures, and how does the 970FX ameliorate that? Judging by the photos I've seen of the G5 mobo, it's truly a work of art--including the backside, which most users will never see.

If by "component diagram" you mean a circuit diagram, which would show every itty bitty capacitor and the like, well, you must be so well-connected that I won't try to question you. But I doubt that, since very few people have access to that kind of thing. :)

WM

WM.
Feb 13, 2004, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by eric67
PBG5 at MacWorld (JUly, avaialble august)
Ain't gonna be a summer Macworld this year--at least, not one where Apple would introduce something as important as a PBG5...

In fact, if I remember right, Apple isn't even exhibiting at the IDG CreativeMacworldPro! World Expo (or whatever) at all.

WM

Sabenth
Feb 14, 2004, 12:05 AM
great now i have to wait and see what happens lol:D

wont be buying a new laptop now cause of this talk of early g5 pb

tsk
Feb 14, 2004, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by rdowns
I disagree. Since when are Mercedes and BMW owners doing their own service on their cars? Ford and GM parts exist because people demand them. If the demand were there, you'd find parts for BMW and Mercedes.

I own both a BMW for myself and a Mercedes for my wife. I do the oil changes and most of the maintenance. In fact quite a few Mercedes and BMW owners do their own maintenance. I'm of course refering to people like myself who buy these cars used. To say that BMW/Mercedes owners are not the type of people who do work on their own cars is totally incorrect.

And while you can sometimes find parts for some of the parts, if it's anything too exotic you're going to have to go to the dealer and quite often wait for them to order it.

And I think the parts analogy is a good one. I don't think just saying Hey Mercedes only has 3% is valid though. Because the 3% Apple has is not 3% of the Wintel market. It's 3% of a totally different market.

Supa_Fly
Feb 14, 2004, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Got any suggestions for Apple as to how to penetrate more of the US market? I'm curious as to whether you have any ideas.

Well I would like to see this new G5 if in a next gen PowerBook advertised as a productive machine, Not as a work of art like all of the other commercials. Remember the older pre-G4 ads that showed the Mac as a true business machine?!!!

Show me the advantages of Mac OS X with MS Office; ability to switch applications via keyboard shortcuts & seperate window within EACH app (This you Cannot do in Windows even today!!!). Show Exposé in which you want that Photo, Music file, document on the desktop under all of that work to put into an email to the boss. Show the world how more productive it is to use the Mac in various settings: Video production, Entertainment (iPhoto/Music), MS Office unique features to the Mac.

Then after slamming this home, then you can show the power of the system. Its one thing to say you don't want to drive, or criticize the Wankel Rotary, its another to drive it! SOrry about the car analogy but to me it's related, creative thinking, more efficient and future proof (hydrogen fuel capable). ANd the power benefits were always there since their first competition into LeMan's 24Hours their were banned do to an "unfair" advantage!!

Mac to me has an unfair advantage for business user's, entertainment, children, education, and webhosting than Windows.:D

Trowaman
Feb 14, 2004, 02:21 AM
so basically, we have all these fun predictions we create but we have no estimated release date for any products these chips may or may not be in, with the XServe exception.

FUN!

Hooray for the rumor site.

sjk
Feb 14, 2004, 02:21 AM
Originally posted by CalfCanuck
We all forget the YEARS that Apple spent trying to shift people onto OS X from their old legacy OS. Now it's a done deal, and apps continue to pour out for OS X.I wouldn't say it's a done deal but there's certainly an evolving interest in OS X. And even more with the G5, which isn't even a year old. Plenty of potential for a new generation of Apple developers, regardless of what's happening with the current generation.

pigwin32
Feb 14, 2004, 02:29 AM
Originally posted by wizard
I have to stronly disagree here. One of the things that has kept me off the MAC platform for the last couple of years has been performance. If Apple can deliver high perfromance hardware at a reasonable price I'm inclined to start looking again.

I'm a Linux user, I can tell you that there are a huge number of dissatisfied Windows customers out there.
I've been reading Secrets and Lies recently in which Bruce Schneier talks (among other things) about security in modern OS's. If I understand him correctly, he suggests a micro kernel architecture is inherently more secure because there is less potential for damaging code to be loaded into the kernel, plus the OS is better able to co-ordinate security. I also read recently Linus Torvalds espousing the Linux kernel and suggesting speed-wise it is far superior to OSX at least in part due to the kernel containing a great deal more code/drivers etc. Now suggesting there is anything insecure about Linux is likely to get me pilloried and I would agree the Open Source development model lends itself to better security in the kernel regardless (possibly one of the reasons Apple has distributed the Darwin source). And of course Windows uses both a macro kernel and closed source development and as everyone knows and Schneier confirms has some fundamental security issues (ASN.1 eg). Microsoft's huge installed base and known weaknesses must also be a reason the platform is subject to so much unfriendly attention.

But there does appear to be a trade-off between speed and security, regardless of the hardware. It will be interesting to see the route Apple takes with OSX, how much is loaded into the kernel, and what impact that will have on speed/stability. Plus Apple is not immune to security issues as evidenced by the recent security patches we've all installed.

sjk
Feb 14, 2004, 02:57 AM
Originally posted by Photorun
The car market has many car makers and works on a completely different economic scale, supply and demand scale, and technology scale...And the automotive industry releases new cars on a predictable yearly cycle, at least in America for as long as I remember. Does anyone recall new cars coming out in the middle of the year? It's always been the same pattern -- next year's models announced a few months before the current year end followed by months of clearance sales... plus the annoyingly sensationalized hype.

manu chao
Feb 14, 2004, 04:21 AM
Originally posted by sjk
And the automotive industry releases new cars on a predictable yearly cycle, at least in America for as long as I remember. Does anyone recall new cars coming out in the middle of the year? It's always been the same pattern -- next year's models announced a few months before the current year end followed by months of clearance sales... plus the annoyingly sensationalized hype.

That yearly release of new models is just a marketing ploy, which, although very common in the U.S., is not generally used in Europe. Car models are sold in general for about five to seven years before they are replaced by a new version. Naturally, it might be four years, or even eight or more for some cars. This cycle, however, has been becoming shorter over the last two decades.

To keep their cars attractive the manufacturers usually do one or two facelifts during that five to seven year cycle, in which the change the design somewhat in order to create the impression of this being a new car, allowing an optical distinction between let's a four year old and a one year old car. These facelifts may also include new engine options, new interior design, new equipment like a rain sensor for the windshield wipers and so on, there can also be slight changes to the suspension system and other small improvements, in general the list of included extras gets longer and so on. These facelifts are then touted as the 'New C-class' or whatever but they are essentially just a refresh. In parallel to these facelifts, all manufacturers constantly change the range of engines they offer, add features like a four-wheel drive option, Xeon headlights and other smaller improvements they usually don't even talk about.

For the U.S., theses small changes and the facelifts are just packaged by marketing in a way to give the impression of a new model every year.
For the Golf for example, there have been just five different models over the last three decades (called the Golf I, II, III, IV and V, with the V having been introduced last year in Germany, don't know about the U.S.). If you put them side by side it is very easy to distinguish them, but you would be hard pressed to differentiate between a 1998 and a 1999 model for example.

hose this!
Feb 14, 2004, 05:02 AM
G5 Powerbooks? Faster G5 PowerMacs? Who cares? I'm just waiting for the new cinema displays to be released alongside PowerMac revs. C'mon already...

Stolid
Feb 14, 2004, 07:11 AM
Originally posted by mpopkin
Does the Dell Inspiron 8500(or 8200) crash. Yes. Does a Powerbook crash. No.

I've crashed something that I was told was a PowerBook running OSX... Was I lied to?

[B}the Powerbook handles what it is designed to handle better than what a Dell is designed to handle. PC's in general, Laptops especially crash often and/or run out of battery power fast. They are designed for games, finance and education.[/B]

I get 200-400 minutes on the laptop depending on what I'm using (Wireless tends to nuke laptops on both sides)
Admitably; I have to carry around a 10+ pound laptop for that capability because I put in two dense batteries. As I already stated, it does crash but it is easily comparable to OS X's crash rate.

I'm in the scenario of really wanting to try the system and being unhappy with my options. I *want* to buy a Mac and can't find one that suits my needs. My reasons are different than most people's; I'm tired of Linux zealotism, it drove me back to Windows on the x86. I knew going in that Apple had been known for a "religious" fan base, but was hoping it wouldn't become blind MS bashing (When I see "M$" I think the author is an idiot, not Microsoft).

Now, this topic has meandered all around so I'm going to pull it back as best I can :P

Mac is in the unique scenario of having a new chip (a /real/ new chip) and thus to do some interesting changes/additions to their laptop line when the chips become suitable; which the article suggest is very easy. I'm really hoping that Apple is willing to try a few new things in the laptop line. Perhaps not "Desktop Replacements" but those are my big hope; but perhaps trying to up the resolution of the 17" screen (15.5" PC laptops with good displays regularly have 1600x1200 resolution, Apple's are lower and their big advantage is in viewing angle and the ability to view them in the sun but those two features I've yet to see advertised unless you read tech specs as advertisements)

Stolid the long winded *blush*

jouster
Feb 14, 2004, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by mpopkin
Can a Dell Run Final Cut?, No. Does the Dell Inspiron 8500(or 8200) crash. Yes. Does a Powerbook crash. No........<snip>

Well, my PB does. Not often, but it does.

I think it's time everyone let go of the Win - crash, Mac - never crash myth. It just isn't the case any longer. My wife's Dell running XP is no less stable in any situation than my TiBook

Now, viruses/worms.....well that's a different matter....


</OT>

macnulty
Feb 14, 2004, 08:16 AM
Since when are Mercedes and BMW owners doing their own service on their cars? Ford and GM parts exist because people demand them. If the demand were there, you'd find parts for BMW and Mercedes.

That wasnt the point, most repair garages get their parts from the local auto parts store. Most car owners don't do their own repairs, no matter what the make. The point is low market share of those high vehicles vehicles limits availablity of their components but not dent their sales. High market share of GM and Ford allows for their components to more widely available especially from 3rd party sources.

rdowns
Feb 14, 2004, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by jouster
Well, my PB does. Not often, but it does.

I think it's time everyone let go of the Win - crash, Mac - never crash myth. It just isn't the case any longer. My wife's Dell running XP is no less stable in any situation than my TiBook

Now, viruses/worms.....well that's a different matter....


</OT>

As much as I hate to admit it, you're right. My work PC, when running 95 and 98 should have been on thre crash test dummy payroll. Since getting a new P4 Dell with Win 2000, I have crashed twice (iTunes caused one) in 17 months. The PC is fast and stable. Of course, I have to spend a lot of time with updates, spyware and the other inherrent Windows deficiencies.

windowsblowsass
Feb 14, 2004, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by mpopkin
[B]Can a Dell Run Final Cut?, No. Does the Dell Inspiron 8500(or 8200) crash. Yes. Does a Powerbook crash. No. Now i am not getting into an argue fest, but i am and will simply state that first there are no accurate tests to judge a computer, but yes why Dell may make a good big laptop, the Powerbook handles what it is designed to handle better than what a Dell is designed to handle. PC's in general, Laptops especially crash often and/or run out of battery power fast. They are designed for games, finance and education. Mac's in general, laptops included handle video, photos and audio better than they do games, there are very few people who buy a Powermac or Powerbook to play games. they also do not crash, have batteries that last more than an hour and are smaller, more agile and portable. No review has been made saying that for what they are designed for Mac's arent better than PC's, because they are. End of story. [/
B] IN case you didnt notice this is a MAC SITE so dont come preaching about how dells are better because no one cares eveyone here aside from you loves apple and they buy them for this purpose nothing short of a gun to my head will m ake me buy windows so shut up im tired of pc users coming in here and bashing apple

rdowns
Feb 14, 2004, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by windowsblowsass
IN case you didnt notice this is a MAC SITE so dont come preaching about how dells are better because no one cares eveyone here aside from you loves apple and they buy them for this purpose nothing short of a gun to my head will m ake me buy windows so shut up im tired of pc users coming in here and bashing apple

Lighten up dude. I hardly see his post as bashing Apple. Take off your rose colored glasses, Macs are great but one can criticize Apple even if they love them.

Based on their current line, Apple deserves criticism. I think Macs are better than Windows based PCs but that doesn't mean I can't see faults in Apple, their product line and marketing.

Stolid
Feb 14, 2004, 10:30 AM
windowsblowass:
First off the post you quoted seemed awfully pro-apple...
But there is a difference between liking something and being a blind follower.
I have really enjoyed watching Mac's develop for the past 2 years or so but have yet to see a machine that both suits my needs and is fast enough to justify over my other PCs (a PowerMac G5 is fast enough; but I really need a mobile system due to my work habits. I'd love to see a desktop replacement; See my post over in the buying advice forum.)
I never said "Dells are better" - I said their desktop replacement laptops are faster than Apple's PowerBooks. It's demonstratable. This isn't Apple bashing; it's me begging Apple to release new PowerBooks (preferably including a 'desktop replacement' type in my case) ASAP.
I don't see why I can't like Apples and Windows at the same time. I see far too many zealots in the Mac and Linux world that are in fumes that I like windows. I've never had a Windows user bash me for liking Macs and Linux; so if you want to scare people like me off of getting an Apple then just say so. I have no reason to help prop up Mac's market share or write Mac software.

And to paraphrase a famous saying:
"Many people are not Mac users because they have never met a Mac user. Many other people are not Mac users because they have."

Dont Hurt Me
Feb 14, 2004, 10:51 AM
It is true we do have those that are blind Apple followers no matter how bad apple screws up, recent examples-ibook bad motherboards-ipod batteries-G4 stagnation(first one at 500 over a year at now the second over another year at less then 1.4) these are 3 large denials by Apple.
IBM is making good on everything and its been way overdue for apple. Lets hope they can get those 970's into new products as soon as possible.

Mav451
Feb 14, 2004, 11:23 AM
I remember my first few posts on this site when i said "MAC" and a few hundred MR members told me to correct it...i had that thing edited in a nano second haha *_*

mjtomlin
Feb 14, 2004, 12:32 PM
To the people complaining about Mac zealotry... I've been a Mac user a long time, since the Mac Plus days and I've had to put up with A LOT of bashing. I'm constantly forced into a position where I have to become some kind of crazed zealot just to try and get my opinion heard. Because I've been such a long time Apple user, I can safely say I trust that Apple is not out to screw anyone over. People today have become so jaded (thanks to Wintel), that they won't give anyone a chance to prove themselves and always think the worst of everything.

Apple has always been attacked by IBM/MS/INTEL cronies. It doesn't matter what they do, they're doomed to fail. And it doesn't matter what your reasoning is, you're an idiot for using a Mac, a toy, a fruit box, etc...

I use a Mac simply because it works for me. I intuitively understand how they work and how to use them. DOS, CPM, Windows, Linux, BSD, System V, BeOS, NextStep, OS2, Mac OS ... whichever you choose to use is your prerogative, be happy with your choice and leave others alone.

That would be a nice world to live in, but it ain't the case... so I will, until that time, continue to defend Apple and my choice to use their computers. After 17 years, I think I know what kind of company Apple is. Regardless of what most people like to think, this isn't blind faith, but is based on experience, so ZIP IT!

And believe me when I say that Apple is not completely infallible. Everyone is prone to making mistakes. But it doesn't mean they were intentional and it doesn't make them evil (unlike Microsoft, which is hell-bent on world dominance LOL).

Now to the topic at hand...

IBM is positioning itself against Intel and has built itself a solid foundation to get started. The facility they built to fabricate these chips is extremely versatile and flexible. Enabling them to scale and advance technologies and manufacturing processes.

And of course the biggest news is that Microsoft is planning on using the PowerPC in the next version of its XBox. Why is this big? Because it breaks a long time partnership between Microsoft and Intel. This sends a huge message to the computer world; Intel isn't producing.

Why is this good for Apple? Two things will happen in the near future that will allow for Apple to finally release an Intel version of OS X and rake in a boat load of money without affecting their own hardware sales;

#1... IBM CPUs will outpace Intel by a huge margin. There will be no doubt who has the faster system. Apple makes more money off high end systems anyway ... sell OS X for cheap Intel boxes.

#2... People will grow weary of waiting for Longhorn's release and even then have to wait a couple more years for a stable and secure version. And the system requirements will send most people "running for the hills" ... i.e. Looking for an alternate OS.

Dont Hurt Me
Feb 14, 2004, 12:43 PM
mjtomlin you are wrong. Apples software is what is moving the hardware. If apple was to release a OSX for wintel that would be worse then allowing clones and you saw what they did about that. releasing osx for wintel would kill the hardware sales. why even bother with mac hardware if you can buy a cheap PC and then run OSX.
the 970fx is the ticket but iam wondering just how long it will take for IBM to be producing enough of these chips to go into powermacs,pro books,imacs,xserves. it could be another year. Apple isnt the fastest with product upgrades if you know what i mean. Still would like to know from a good source how many 970s can be made in a qtr?

rjwill246
Feb 14, 2004, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
why even bother with mac hardware if you can buy a cheap PC and then run OSX.
the 970fx is the ticket

I have agreed with this position until the G5 came along AND Linux started to gain ground. Not now and here's why.

Linux is gaining ground and will be cheaper than the MS product. 400 million PCs are out there. China is encouraging Linux. Add this all up and there might be, very soon, 1 billion PCs (most crappy, some not) that will switch to some sort of UNIX! At say 40 to 100 bucks per OS, if that were Apple revenue it would be stunning. Okay, that makes Apple a software company. It is anyway! Now, remember that OS X on x86 will be okay but on a PPC with all the advances IBM is making, it will be a blow-out. That means that Apple would have at least the minimum hardware sales it now has, but the chances are it will sell more and more replacements for aging PCs in many situations (not in China, at least at current pricing!) perhaps, this is now the time for Apple to make that "heretical' move and not let Linux rule, as it will sometime in the not too distant future, if the momentum keeps gaining.
I think that Apple now has a 'window' of opportunity to really switch people as this sea change is happening. Time to buck the experts on this and go all out to catch this huge new wave! A tsunami is brewing.

mdriftmeyer
Feb 14, 2004, 02:56 PM
Who in their right mind would vote negatively on this? Perhaps a competitor?

mdriftmeyer
Feb 14, 2004, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by rjwill246
I have agreed with this position until the G5 came along AND Linux started to gain ground. Not now and here's why.

Linux is gaining ground and will be cheaper than the MS product. 400 million PCs are out there. China is encouraging Linux. Add this all up and there might be, very soon, 1 billion PCs (most crappy, some not) that will switch to some sort of UNIX! At say 40 to 100 bucks per OS, if that were Apple revenue it would be stunning. Okay, that makes Apple a software company. It is anyway! Now, remember that OS X on x86 will be okay but on a PPC with all the advances IBM is making, it will be a blow-out. That means that Apple would have at least the minimum hardware sales it now has, but the chances are it will sell more and more replacements for aging PCs in many situations (not in China, at least at current pricing!) perhaps, this is now the time for Apple to make that "heretical' move and not let Linux rule, as it will sometime in the not too distant future, if the momentum keeps gaining.
I think that Apple now has a 'window' of opportunity to really switch people as this sea change is happening. Time to buck the experts on this and go all out to catch this huge new wave! A tsunami is brewing.

Apple's opportunity lies with the complete solution and capitalizing on corporations looking to transition and gain a high return on their investment, both from a security standpoint to a vertical solutions standpoint.

Companies switching, in droves, from Wintel to Linux are firstly installing new drives and utilizing pre-existing hardware, plus adding new server infrastructure, when necessary. Mostly, until IBM, HP, Novell and Sun start switching more to AMD you won't see a bunch of Enterprises re-evaluating new hardware.

Once that is done, both OS X and Linux will be the forerunners, while AIX and Solaris provide a more Big Iron solution.

Ja Di ksw
Feb 14, 2004, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by mpopkin
Does a Powerbook crash. No. . . . . [Macs] have batteries that last more than an hour and are smaller, more agile and portable.

Not entirely true. While I love mac to death, I finally convinced my friend to switch from Windows to Mac for her semester long Austria trip, since, as I told her, "they are more reliable, they don't crash, break down as easily, etc." Her battery lasted about an hour, and when she left it (plugged into the wall) on screensaver for a few hours and then came back, it was broken. The screen is just a bunch of different colored strips, makes no noise when she turns it on, won't shut down unless unplugged from the wall, won't turn on unless plugged in, etc. So now her "reliable" computer, with all her contacts, internet, and everything she needs, is just a large paperweight, and she's stuck in Austria completely screwed over. There's one mac convert down the drain. At the exact same time, my own computer back here in the states loses all my preferences every time I turn it off.

Macs are good, and more reliable, but they do break down sometimes for no reason.

chomsky
Feb 14, 2004, 08:29 PM
Good evening.

You may have have noticed tiny dots on your keyboard right below the K and L keys.... oh look, there's one now!

-> .

It's called punctuation, and it's commonly used to break up sentences so that they are coherent.

This one is called a comma:

-> ,

Please learn to use these. They will make our world a better, less incomprehensible place.

Thank you.

Originally posted by windowsblowsass
IN case you didnt notice this is a MAC SITE so dont come preaching about how dells are better because no one cares eveyone here aside from you loves apple and they buy them for this purpose nothing short of a gun to my head will m ake me buy windows so shut up im tired of pc users coming in here and bashing apple

sosumi99
Feb 14, 2004, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by windowsblowsass
IN case you didnt notice this is a MAC SITE so dont come preaching about how dells are better because no one cares eveyone here aside from you loves apple and they buy them for this purpose nothing short of a gun to my head will m ake me buy windows so shut up im tired of pc users coming in here and bashing apple

LOL. Wow, did you even read what you were responding to? The poster was not "bashing" Apple at all. If anything, he was saying things that are much too positive about Apple. If this is considered "Apple bashing" then you must be from the upside-down universe where black is white and Apple is Microsoft. :)

Messiatosh
Feb 14, 2004, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by Stolid
And to paraphrase a famous saying:
"Many people are not Mac users because they have never met a Mac user. Many other people are not Mac users because they have."

Oh, how true it is. I have been responsible for converts as well as making people hate me, thus never buying a Mac. I win more than I lose though.;)

chomsky
Feb 15, 2004, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by Ja Di ksw
Not entirely true. While I love mac to death, I finally convinced my friend to switch from Windows to Mac for her semester long Austria trip, since, as I told her, "they are more reliable, they don't crash, break down as easily, etc." Her battery lasted about an hour, and when she left it (plugged into the wall) on screensaver for a few hours and then came back, it was broken. The screen is just a bunch of different colored strips, makes no noise when she turns it on, won't shut down unless unplugged from the wall, won't turn on unless plugged in, etc. So now her "reliable" computer, with all her contacts, internet, and everything she needs, is just a large paperweight, and she's stuck in Austria completely screwed over. There's one mac convert down the drain. At the exact same time, my own computer back here in the states loses all my preferences every time I turn it off.

Macs are good, and more reliable, but they do break down sometimes for no reason.


Sounds like your friend has learned a painful lesson about voltage conversion.

Jonnod III
Feb 15, 2004, 03:42 AM
Originally posted by chomsky
Sounds like your friend has learned a painful lesson about voltage conversion.
Not so (if I have read your answer right), I would hope (unless Apple have decided to make their powerbooks stick to one country - hardly good sense for selling heavy-weight business laptops)
Quote from specs for powerbook:

Line voltage: 100V to 240V AC
Frequency: 50 to 60Hz

This is off the UK site. As far as I know the desktops have the same options. Though I did have a StyleWriter 2200 once that only did 240 volts...

GregA
Feb 15, 2004, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by jrv3034
But this does feel like a huge leap forward for Apple, IBM, and anyone interested in toppling the Wintel monopoly. I'm wondering - what are IBM's goals? Would they like to compete with (or replace) Intel? They sell Power chips running AIX & Linux, and Apple sells Macs, but can that lead to a quantity of sales to rival Intel?

Originally posted by groovebuster
How does that help Apple? It doesn't make more people buying a Mac. The hardware might be one part of the equation, but people who were not interested in Mac before will not buy one just because Apple is using PPC970FX processors. Exactly. People buy Mac for a quality package. So (on a different tangent to yours) if IBM wants to sell a commodity processor they would have to cover more bases.

The only thing I can think of is IBM encouraging clones.
But what OS? They could ask Apple to sell Mac OS X, but Apple might not want to - and the clone makers would remember Apple's earlier about-face. Or they could sell Linux of course.

Really though, I think Microsoft is their answer. If PPC970 is really as good as it sounds I'm sure Microsoft would be interested. A PPC970 machine running Windows XP, running any Intel binaries in emulation and even faster for native code (they'd be glad they bought Virtual PC!).

None of that would really help Apple. Unless MacOS X was released as a second OS option for clones.

I can really see Microsoft taking that option, and IBM working with them. What I can't see is how Apple might react.

ktlx
Feb 15, 2004, 07:02 AM
Originally posted by GregA
Really though, I think Microsoft is their answer. If PPC970 is really as good as it sounds I'm sure Microsoft would be interested. A PPC970 machine running Windows XP, running any Intel binaries in emulation and even faster for native code (they'd be glad they bought Virtual PC!).

I don't see that happening as it does not benefit anyone but IBM. The PowerPC 970 has not shown to be significantly faster (and in some cases is slower) than the AMD Opteron or Athlon 64. Unless there are tons of customers out there demanding PowerPC 970 support, the processor probably isn't even on the Windows development teams' roadmap.

I find it hard to believe anyone wanting to run Windows is demanding the PowerPC 970 since they already have an AMD 64-bit processor that runs their existing 32-bit applications just fine and Intel will demo an x86-64 solution later this month. Windows XP on a PowerPC 970 does not benefit anyone but IBM now that Microsoft can play AMD and Intel off each other.

stuartea
Feb 15, 2004, 07:20 AM
What I find strange is why aren't the using the much mooted liquid chip cooling like

http://www.cooligy.com/

Anything to get rid of noisy fans from laptops. Or perhaps these new chips won't need either?

kotovasii
Feb 15, 2004, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by leenoble
And there are a lot of new companies in the enterprise and scientific area coming to the Mac who wouldn't have considered it even 2 years ago.

Rest assured the Mac share is increasing and there will come the day when these companies post job positions looking for Mac developers when they realise what they're missing.

1,2,3,4 And you're a governor?

And to add some more to this. I have just converted two of my colleagues at work - both bought G5 Macs, and not regretting. This became available only because of G5 and os X. I cannot see them going back to the Mr Gates Empire. And I would also agree that spelling appears to be a big problem on this forum especially that we are all here educated, artistic etc.

centauratlas
Feb 15, 2004, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by Ja Di ksw
Not entirely true. While I love mac to death, I finally convinced my friend to switch from Windows to Mac for her semester long Austria trip, since, as I told her, "they are more reliable, they don't crash, break down as easily, etc." Her battery lasted about an hour, and when she left it (plugged into the wall) on screensaver for a few hours and then came back, it was broken.

Did she try taking it to get it repaired? Doesn't it come with a warranty in the UK?

Ja Di ksw
Feb 15, 2004, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by chomsky
Sounds like your friend has learned a painful lesson about voltage conversion.

She bought the kit from apple for that, should it have been enough?

CalfCanuck
Feb 15, 2004, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by chomsky
Sounds like your friend has learned a painful lesson about voltage conversion.
If only the world was that easy. There haven't been many single voltage computers or portable periphials for many years other than printers.

I picked up one of the new G4 iBooks 3 days before heading off for an extended trip to Germany, because I couldn't get a 15" PB during the big screen fiasco. On setting down in Frankfurt, I've been experiencing about 1-2 kernel panics a day. After tracking down a set of jewelers' screwdrivers and pulling my 512 MB RAM upgrade, the panics stopped.

So now my choice are running on 128 MB with no crashes, or limping by with the random daily crashes until I can get the RAM replaced on warranty on return to California. And I'm better equiped than almost any traveller, travelling with 2 laptops and external HDs for my software development.

But having hardware failures on the road, esp. in another country, is a major problem for everyone, and can be a nightmare for casual users.

avus
Feb 15, 2004, 02:16 PM
I am kind of disappointed that nobody talks here about IBM's NEW CHIP MAKING METHOD...

Ja Di ksw
Feb 15, 2004, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by centauratlas
Did she try taking it to get it repaired? Doesn't it come with a warranty in the UK?

She has no idea where over there she can take it to be repaired. She has applecare, but had no idea what the phone number is, and couldn't get on the computer to check it. I found it out for her and told her over the phone, but she hasn't been able to get ahold of them yet. I don't know about a UK warranty, she bought it while she was in the US, then went to Austria, so I'm assuming its a US warranty, though it would be covered no matter where she traveled

WM.
Feb 15, 2004, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by CalfCanuck
If only the world was that easy. There haven't been many single voltage computers or portable periphials for many years other than printers.

I picked up one of the new G4 iBooks 3 days before heading off for an extended trip to Germany, because I couldn't get a 15" PB during the big screen fiasco. On setting down in Frankfurt, I've been experiencing about 1-2 kernel panics a day. After tracking down a set of jewelers' screwdrivers and pulling my 512 MB RAM upgrade, the panics stopped.

So now my choice are running on 128 MB with no crashes, or limping by with the random daily crashes until I can get the RAM replaced on warranty on return to California. And I'm better equiped than almost any traveller, travelling with 2 laptops and external HDs for my software development.

But having hardware failures on the road, esp. in another country, is a major problem for everyone, and can be a nightmare for casual users.
True, but you should've found a way to test out your new iBook before going on a long trip, or made sure that you had an acceptable back-up plan in case it was incapacitated (which it has been for your purposes, I assume). If you mean that it was working fine in the US but not in Germany, perhaps your power adapter is slightly messed up and is delivering a too-high voltage to the iBook when it's run off 240; maybe the internal power supply circuitry could pass that on to the RAM and make it flaky. *shrug*

Where did you buy that RAM? Can you get the vendor to replace it overseas under warranty?

WM

~Shard~
Feb 15, 2004, 04:05 PM
So... what does all this have to do with IBM's New Chip Making Method? There are other forums on MacRumors to discuss hardware problems, etc. ;) :cool:

mvc
Feb 15, 2004, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by avus
I am kind of disappointed that nobody talks here about IBM's NEW CHIP MAKING METHOD...

Amen - it's interesting that now that the G5 family of chips look like being equal/increasingly superior to their PC equivalents in speed/performance, many of these naysayers have shifted to the good old you can only get about 30% of all PC software on the Mac therefore they are useless argument.

I personally can live without 70% of all the software out there, a vast percentage of PC software is either utter utter rubbish or a poor duplicate of a better mainstream alternative.

Most solid useful software, with the admitted absence of many games, is available for the mac.

Next they'll be moaning how you can't get Macs in beige boxes.
:p

mjtomlin
Feb 15, 2004, 06:43 PM
[I]Dont Hurt Me wrote:[\I]
mjtomlin you are wrong. Apples software is what is moving the hardware. If apple was to release a OSX for wintel that would be worse then allowing clones and you saw what they did about that. releasing osx for wintel would kill the hardware sales. why even bother with mac hardware if you can buy a cheap PC and then run OSX.

You didn't understand what I was saying ... Yes, I completely agree that CURRENTLY it is the software and OS that's moving the hardware. But you also left out original Apple design, which is also a fairly huge factor. However, in the near future, once the PowerPC starts outpacing anything from Intel by a wide margin, then and only then will Apple find itself in a position to safely open up to a wider user base. If IBM can in fact begin to produce far superior CPUs people will start buying Apple hardware on that merit alone.

You also seem to need a little perspective ... during the "attack of the clones" Apple didn't have much of a software leg to stand on. Today they do. The clones bit into Apple's hardware sales because they were selling hardware that was on par, if not better than Apple's own systems. Apple couldn't offer any incentives to entice people to buy their computers and not a clone. That's why it was a failure. The difference between purchasing an Apple branded PowerPC computer and buying OS X for Intel could be a lot... PowerPC is much faster, original Apple design, bundling of iLife and other software with new computers. Sure Apple probably wouldn't sell millions of more systems, but they would at the very least sell what they're selling now ... and possibly on top of that also sell millions and millions of copies of OS X for Intel/AMD to people who wouldn't buy an Apple computer in the first place (too expensive, blah, blah, blah).

another thing to consider, users becoming weary of Windows/Longhorn will start to move to another OS. Like another poster mentioned, if Apple doesn't offer OS X as an alternative, they will most likely move to Linux. There are a lot of Intel systems out there right now that would be able to run OS X and/or Linux at respectable speeds. And I don't mean buying new computers, but old systems that could be given a new life. Imagine owning a Wintel system for two years and for $129 you can go out and buy OS X and install it. Wouldn't that be worth something to someone? And Maybe, just maybe when it comes time to buy a new system, they'll consider an Apple Computer versus buying another Intel based system.

And just so you don't misunderstand where I'm coming from ... I would NEVER buy OS X for Intel. (except of course to give it as a present to a Windows user) I'm a long time Apple user and will remain that way as long as Apple is around. You highly under estimate the Apple user community/installed base if you think we would simply give up elegant Apple hardware just because I could run OS X on a cheap piece of Intel crap.

cbatt
Feb 15, 2004, 09:06 PM
I know that I'm late to the party, and a fresh face in this crowd, but I thought that I'd put in my two cents.

I made the switch about 8 months ago when I bought a second-hand 1ghz TiBook. I was kinda apprehensive at first, but I quickly got familiar with things and here I am today. Yay.

My PB is a desktop replacement. I'm a developer and IT consultant as well as a graphics hack. My job keeps me moving and I like the flexibility of being able to work anywhere so my machine needs to be powerful yet mobile. And while the PB fits the bill nicely, and OS X is amazing, I wouldn't mind a speed boost.

When I get to down to serious work I usually have a handful of apps and a large bunch of documents open (specs, PP presentations, source files, and graphics). Compilation under those conditions can sometime drag.

Needless to say, I can hardly wait for G5 PBs.

C'mon official announcement!

GregA
Feb 15, 2004, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by mjtomlin
... during the "attack of the clones" Apple didn't have much of a software leg to stand on. Today they do. The clones bit into Apple's hardware sales because they were selling hardware that was on par, if not better than Apple's own systems. Apple couldn't offer any incentives to entice people to buy their computers and not a clone. That's why it was a failure. If Apple's software (Mac OS) wasn't much good, and people went to the clones because Apple hardware wasn't much good either - then the clones would not have died when the Mac OS for the clones was pulled from sale. People wanted Mac software on cheaper (or faster) hardware.

Apple lost money during the clone times, Apple also lost market share. But did the Mac OS lose market share, or just Apple hardware? (See the difference? It's significant, and I haven't seen an answer to this). I'm guessing that less hardware was sold, but more Mac OSes overall. And if Apple underpriced the Mac OS, then that would have cut into their profits.

I don't think Apple should release Mac OSX on Intel anymore. It's too hard to support all the x86s out there. However, PowerPC clones, OR a Mac GUI for UnitedLinux, OR maybe a native AMD64 port, would be interesting. Whatever they do, the price would have to take into account the cost of support, development, and lost Apple hardware sales... then if it was still cheap enough I'd say sell it :)

a17inchFuture
Feb 16, 2004, 12:06 AM
If these chips can run on less power and produce less heat, and if IBM gave them test versions a while ago, which I think i read somewhere, then they could have had enough time to take the pb to the drawing board and figure it out in a timely manner.

After all thats why IBM gives them the test versions, so they can make the processor profitable as soon as possible- and what better way than by putting it in all your computers, and specifically your new pb g5 line, as soon as possible?

I hope they skip the g4 revisions and give us new g5 laptops in may, with sweet metal holes like on the towers!

WM.
Feb 16, 2004, 12:56 AM
Originally posted by cbatt
I know that I'm late to the party, and a fresh face in this crowd, but I thought that I'd put in my two cents.

I made the switch about 8 months ago when I bought a second-hand 1ghz TiBook. I was kinda apprehensive at first, but I quickly got familiar with things and here I am today. Yay.

My PB is a desktop replacement. I'm a developer and IT consultant as well as a graphics hack. My job keeps me moving and I like the flexibility of being able to work anywhere so my machine needs to be powerful yet mobile. And while the PB fits the bill nicely, and OS X is amazing, I wouldn't mind a speed boost.

When I get to down to serious work I usually have a handful of apps and a large bunch of documents open (specs, PP presentations, source files, and graphics). Compilation under those conditions can sometime drag.
How much RAM? I don't think I'd try that kind of stuff without at least 512 MB, and more like 768 MB or 1 GB.

Belly-laughs
Feb 17, 2004, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by mjtomlin
You highly under estimate the Apple user community/installed base if you think we would simply give up elegant Apple hardware just because I could run OS X on a cheap piece of Intel crap.

Wrong. The Apple user community/intalled base would flock to any cheaper pieces of hardware if they could. I bought a Starmax for that reason. Lots of others did too.

As for the thread topic: Stop crying out for those PB´s. We want fanless G5 Cubes, don´t we?

takao
Feb 17, 2004, 07:20 AM
back on topic: IBm cpus:

i found this very intresting link on a german site:

http://php.technobabble.com.au/article328.html
(link is in english)

pretty impressive picture of one of those new power 5

steveh
Feb 17, 2004, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by Mav451
With the Athlon 64 mobile version already out, Apple would definitely not have the first 64-bit laptop

The Athlon 64 mobile isn't the first 64-bit laptop chip either.

Tadpole has already been making 64-bit SPARC laptops for awhile.

army_guy
Feb 17, 2004, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by steveh
The Athlon 64 mobile isn't the first 64-bit laptop chip either.

Tadpole has already been making 64-bit SPARC laptops for awhile.

Apple would still claim to have the 1st real 64-bit laptop nomatter.
Sparc laptops have been around since sparc, however they were either prototypes or custom built unit from a 3rd party they are however very few machines and they cost more than people can imagine. I sould say there is also a few Itanium 2 laptops believe or not.

Counterfit
Feb 18, 2004, 06:21 AM
Originally posted by army_guy
Apple would still claim to have the 1st real 64-bit laptop nomatter. I doubt that.

army_guy
Feb 18, 2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Counterfit
I doubt that.

I dont, they would trust me or they would claim to have the fastest 64-bit laptop.

Remember Apple is good with marketing and people still believe thier lies.

a17inchFuture
Feb 18, 2004, 07:29 AM
I said Goddamn! There are lots fo refurbed Pbooks on the sale page today:

PowerBook G4 867MHz/256MB/40GB/Combo/E/12"TFT - Refurbished Add $1,199.00
PowerBook G4 867MHz/256MB/40GB/SuperDrive/E/12"TFT - Refurbished Add $1,399.00
PowerBook G4 1GHz/256MB/40GB/Combo/E/12"TFT Add $1,349.00
PowerBook G4 1GHz/256MB/40GB/SuperDrive/E/12"TFT Add $1,549.00
PowerBook G4 867MHz/256MB/40GB/Combo/GigE/56K/15"TFT - Refurbished Add $1,499.00
PowerBook G4 1GHz/256MB/60GB/Combo/GigE/15"TFT - Refurbished Add $1,699.00
PowerBook G4 1GHz/512MB/60GB/SuperDrive/GigE/56K/AirPort Card/15"TFT - Refurbished Add $1,899.00
PowerBook G4 1.25GHz/512MB/80GB/SuperDrive/AP Extreme Card/GigE/15"TFT - Refurbished Add $2,099.00
PowerBook G4 1GHz/512MB/60GB/SuperDrive/AP Extreme Card/GigE/56K/17"TFT - Refurbished Add $2,199.00
PowerBook G4 1.33GHz/512MB/80GB/SuperDrive/AP Extreme Card/GigE/17"TFT Add $2,499.00

I swear the last two weeks have been filled with way more of the current PB's than any time in the last three months. Every day for the last three weeks, at 9 am I check their website, and they have practically had the present version of all three sizes almost everyday!

While they may have had them on the site before, I have certainly noticed a huge increase in the number recently. And I have been checking since early november, so i can safely say that there is s significant difference. Whether that means anything, i have no idea, and probably not.

But maybe, just maybe, pb g5's are around the corner for all of us dedicated apple users?

sjk
Feb 18, 2004, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by a17inchFuture
But maybe, just maybe, pb g5's are around the corner for all of us dedicated apple users? Okay, sure, of course they are. Or they're not.

This easily gets my vote as the most over-mentioned, over-discussed, over-reminded, over-hyped, over-speculated, ad nauseum topic on too many Apple forums for too long.

Yawn.

mvc
Feb 18, 2004, 08:11 PM
Originally posted by takao
back on topic: IBm cpus:

i found this very intresting link on a german site:

http://php.technobabble.com.au/article328.html
(link is in english)

pretty impressive picture of one of those new power 5

That thing looks like a drink coaster to me, isn't the background a pub, I'm sure I can see a bottle of beer on the table ;)

iPost
Feb 18, 2004, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by jazzkids
When I hear "low power", I think laptop. Could this be the much anticipated G5 laptop? If they are developing it now, I can't image that it would be available sooner than the Fall. sigh :-(

Thank goodness Apple is getting rid of the Motorola chips.

Thanks IBM!

Yes! Isn't it wonderful that I.B.M. (now stands for: I'm Building a Macintosh) has saved Apple's butt by producing some kicka$$ chips (hmmm... two derriere references in the same sentence).

Anyway... does anyone see the irony in this??? IBM was the original BAD GUY which Apple portrayed as the villain in all of those classic commercials from 20 years ago (the 1984 commercial, the lemmings commercial...) And, it's interesting how we all just celebrated those commercials again on the Mac's 20th birthday.

But look... big (blue) brother has come down off the screen to help out the woman that originally threw the sledge hammer in its face! The world never ceases to amaze me.

Counterfit
Feb 19, 2004, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by iPost
Anyway... does anyone see the irony in this??? Anyone who doesn't must be incredibly dense. :)