PowerMac G5 Updates - March 23rd?

[MacRumors]

French site, MacPlus.org (http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5716), reports that according to their source, 3 new PowerMac G5 models will be released on Tuesday, March 23rd.

According to their information, the new machines will come in at the following specs:

Dual 1.8GHz G5, 256MB DDR400, 80GB HD, GeForce 5200 Ultra
Dual 2.2GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600
Dual 2.4GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600

MacPlus.org does not frequently publish rumors, but has published (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021107015529.shtml) an accurate release date in the past.

[mymemory]

Good I didn't buy a G5 2 weeks ago.

[yoman]

not as fast an upgrade as I had hoped but good news none the less.

[russed]

bring on march 23rd then :)

[johnnyjibbs]

Look a little on the conservative side to me. No graphics card update and it's about time they made 512MB RAM standard on all models, how about a gig on the top end? Is that really too much to ask?

But then, maybe they'll get the date right, but a few of the details may be sketchy.

[the_mole1314]

Seems more solid than other rumors. I can't wait!

[off/lang]

The return of an all dual line up. Interesting.

[hob]

not as fast an upgrade as I had hoped but good news none the less.

An upgrade is an upgrade is an upgrade! Don't be too disapointed - it's still only another rumor!!

[ickoonite]

I'd have like to have seen ATI Radeon 9800s, to be honest, at the very least in the top model (although, as MacPlus notes, a 9800 is available as a Build To Order option).

Otherwise, though, this is a Good Thing.

iqu :)

[lalcan]

Well, i guess the recent rise in the Apple stock reflects some insider info leaking into the financial market! That, more than the small speed increase, are good news!

Any pricing info? :confused:

[hvfsl]

The new R420 and NV40 cards will be out then (next generation Radeon and Geforce cards). So I dont think those specs are correct. I would expect the R9600pro to be the low end and the R420 or NV40 in the high end. Plus I thought IBM had chips running at 2.5 Ghz now.

[edesignuk]

Look a little on the conservative side to me. No graphics card update and it's about time they made 512MB RAM standard on all models, how about a gig on the top end? Is that really too much to ask?
I agree 100%. These machines are not cheap, but memory is. There is no reason why 512MB should not be minimum accross the line, topping out at 1GB (stock). 256MB in a Power Mac is just a joke!

[gwuMACaddict]

WOOHOO!!!!

http://www.cripplefight.com/smileys/punk.gifhttp://www.cripplefight.com/smileys/banana.gif

[Foxer]

So they're downgrading the RAM and HD in the dual 1.8? Interesting. At least the whole line is dual processors. Should have been that way all along. I hope these machine fit into the same price structure that the current line-up does.

[miloblithe]

I agree, 256MB is too little for a powermac these days. That should be the minimum for all macs. OSX simply doesn't work on 128MB (or work tollerably).

higher end graphics cards will at least be an option.

It does sound like a pretty solid lineup. And if the Powermacs are all duals it clears the way for single G5s in iMacs . . .

I'm such an optimist.

[Stelliform]

Would that still put Apple on schedule to release the 3.0 Ghz as hoped? (What was it Steve said? Next year? Did that mean December 31st, 2004?)

[agreenster]

WOW. About friggin time!

About the videocard thing, it really isnt Apple's fault. Have to blame ATI, nVidia, etc etc...

Wow. I'm startin to drool. Hope this is true.

STELLIFORM:

I think the rumor target month for 3 ghz models is August...

[McMike]

Why put a dual 1.8 GHz as the basic model? I think even for the image it would be better to run just 2+ GHz models... Apart from that the present PMs have a 200 MHz gap between each of them! So I would bet on dual 2, 2.2, 2.4 GHz. How's that?

[Kid Red]

Where is the dual 2.0? I'm surprised they would drop that and keep the 1.8gz model.

[Dippo]

I don't understand why they only have the Radeon 9600???

[Sabbath]

Seems liek not as high numbers as many would have hoped, but that bottom of the line dual sure seems interesting to me. I wonder if it means that well see an iMac G5 soon, with the fact powermacs are dual separating the two lines.

That is of course if its true :rolleyes:

[MattG]

Are you ready to rock?

I SAID ARE YOU READY TO ROOOOCCCCKKKK????!?

[DTG]

I agree 100%. These machines are not cheap, but memory is. There is no reason why 512MB should not be minimum accross the line, topping out at 1GB (stock). 256MB in a Power Mac is just a joke!

If Apple can keep the low-end prices down by skimping on the RAM, then so be it!

A dual 1.8Ghz G5 for just $1799? - Yes please.

[johnnyjibbs]

Mind you, I wonder if they should keep a low end single proc G5 as the "headless iMac". The current 1.6 G5 is more powerful than the iMac and doesn't have a screen, but, apart from that, serves the same function. Make it way cheaper and there you go. Then have the top two (or even three models) as duals.

[Mudbug]

So they're downgrading the RAM and HD in the dual 1.8? Interesting. At least the whole line is dual processors. Should have been that way all along. I hope these machine fit into the same price structure that the current line-up does.

I don't see any reason why they wouldn't - they tend to keep at least a relative price structure to the current (old) models, so there's not quite so much sticker shock.

And I too am glad to have at least a target date to shoot for - we began "discussions" again at the office about a new machine, and I just knew I'd get the green light to buy about a week before new models showed up. :rolleyes: Now I can wait with a small smile on my face. :)

[edesignuk]

If Apple can keep the low-end prices down by skimping on the RAM, then so be it!

A dual 1.8Ghz G5 for just $1799? - Yes please.
But memory is so cheap, another 256MB wouldn't cost hardly anything, especially with the kind of bulk buy orders they can put through.

[Savage Henry]

That'll be on my lady's birthday! I hope I don't get too excited about one of those events that I forget the other!

Face it, it's about due, so there's no real surprise. My guess after that is the top end PM will get another lift in Aug-Sep time along with the PB range. Then a G5 iMac by Christmas and a chocolate coated iBook in time for Valentines.

Ignoring all of that puff though, I was expecting a better graphics card. Perhaps that'll be later.

[Sabbath]

Where is the dual 2.0? I'm surprised they would drop that and keep the 1.8gz model.

Maybe they dont have enough of those chips for the xserve G5 and the powermac. It seems there has been much larger demand for the xserve G5 than Apple were expecting. More likely just to differentiate the models though I guess. Dual 2 to Dual 2.4GHz wouldnt be a very wide spread for the product line, many people would maybe just plump for the dual 2 and stack up the RAM and graphics card rather than go for the top of the line, I sure would.

[Dippo]

If Apple can keep the low-end prices down by skimping on the RAM, then so be it!

A dual 1.8Ghz G5 for just $1799? - Yes please.


Somehow I doubt.

I do find it interesting that they are all duals, this might be to distance them from the new G5 iMAC!

[i_wolf]

Where is the dual 2.0? I'm surprised they would drop that and keep the 1.8gz model.

Yup this surprises me. I woudl imagine that dual 2GHz will be the bottom line.
However, again I'm a bit surprised about such a "small" speed bump. Especially since we know that the 970FX is scaling well to 2.5GHz and beyond according to IBM whitepapers. Also Steve's promise last Summer that this Summer we would be seeing 3GHz PowerMacs now looks a bit off the mark. I think if this is the update that is due, its a bit disappointing. Also AMD is due to hit 2.4 to 2.6GHz if you believe roadmaps shown by the inquirer in the April May time frame. To remain an x86 killer the G5 needs that extra oomph.
I think its good the G5 is getting a speed bump, but if this rumor holds through, it would mean that a 3GHz G5 is a lot longer off than this Summer and more than likely the end of the year. I just had my hopes up is all!

[rog]

No big boost on the mid and top of the line, but the entry DP 1.8 is nice. Hopefully they can deliver it at $1599 like the DP G4 867 was when that was the low end. At that price, I'd bite! But 400 MHz or 20% after 7 months on the high end is pretty sad. You'd also think a top of the line machine would have more than 512MB RAM and 160GB HD. I think the weird thing about this rumor is that it overlaps with the current RAM promotion, unless there is some specific wording in that offer about what macs it applies to by model #. It will be an even bigger disappointment if these don't ship immediately. I'm beginning to think that when Jobs said the G5 would be at 3GHz in year last June, he meant within IBMs labs, just as the G5 was a 2GHz that time last year, but took another 4 months to ship in volume. I think October is now probably a good bet for the 3GHz G5. Also, remember the new 90nm G5 has more pipeline stages so don't look for proportionate scaling (i.e. like the G4 733 was only marginally faster than the older G4 version 533).

[markjones05]

The return of an all dual line up. Interesting.

Interesting indeed, i sense a G5 imac in the near future.

[Photorun]

Yay! Now where the hell are the new monitors? :rolleyes:

[Sabbath]

But memory is so cheap, another 256MB wouldn't cost hardly anything, especially with the kind of bulk buy orders they can put through.


Many people who aren't so tech savy and comapnies who want warranty cover from one company no other troubles, may just let apple install the extra ram and hence it's probably a nice money earner for them.

[Mr. Anderson]

Sounds good (was hoping that a 2.3 would be the mid range and 2.5 the upper)

Also, what about a pro video card? And the displays.....hopefully there will be more available soon in terms of rumors to back this up.

D

[IndyGopher]

The timing seems about right, but the specs look a little strange to me. If these are correct, then Apple will not be selling any machines with 2.0GHz processors, starting in only 2 weeks. That would suggest there should be a lead time on the current dual 2Gigs as purchasing would stop and production would wind down. You don't run full-tilt and then suddenly stop making an item.

So, either Apple has nerves of steel and will risk simply not having any 2GHz's for sale between the time they run out and the time they release the new ones, or we should see wait times on the 2's grow in a fairly linear fashion between now and then.

Another couple possibilities would be an education-only version with a single 2GHz CPU, or perhaps the rumor is just off on the specs and the low ends will be 2's instead of 1.8's. (I hesitated to point this out, frankly, because someone will absolutely pipe up with the notion that Apple will be putting the 2GHz CPUs in Powerbooks... Hope springs eternal)

[Mac-Xpert]

So what happened to the 2.5/2.6 Ghz we heard of before? Could it be they tried them but couldn't get them to run cool enough?

Anyway, if they are immediately available on the 23rd I'll be happy, then I can finally upgrade from my noisy Dual 867 windtunnel. :)

[ThomasJefferson]

WOOHOO!!!!

http://www.cripplefight.com/smileys/punk.gifhttp://www.cripplefight.com/smileys/banana.gif

Exactly how I was feeling about it.
Tho I want Apple to keep the same price framework.
I like the headlessMac alternative to the iMac at that entry level price point.
I suspect the price on the entry PowerMac will go up now.

[Some_Big_Spoon]

Are you ready to rock?

I SAID ARE YOU READY TO ROOOOCCCCKKKK????!?

with 256 RAM, it'll be a rod stewart kind of rocking..

[BornAgainMac]

I am glad I didn't wait when they were introduced. I have fully enjoyed by G5 since September. Hopefully it will come down in price so every Mac lover could own one.

[Dippo]

with 256 RAM, it'll be a rod stewart kind of rocking..


Well the 256 RAM would be the same amount of RAM as the 1.6 PowerMac has now....so maybe it's just to push the lowest system's price even lower.

[Foxer]

Whenever these new powermacs show up, I also hope there are display updates. It would be nice to have them fit the aluminum theme.

[MrToast]

Frankly, I'm glad that they will have (if they come out) such a low amount of memory. Apple gouges consumers on memory. Take a look at the apple store. To upgrade to the full 8GB of memory on a PMG5 costs more than the computer itself (US$4,950)! Why not just head over to www.coastmemory.com and get the same 8GB of memory for US$2,152? That's less than HALF the price! For the same freakin' memory!

[uzombie]

Always one to be hopeful, but I am waiting to see it.
All the rumors have pointed to Macworld. Then to February. Then to March. Then some point to the Developers Conference (maybe the 3.Ghz).

Well, its been 10 months since the first G5 was announced and I hope the delays are justified. (Was it held up due to QC? Was it help up because of nVidia or ATI card production? Is the latest 10.3.3 seed the OS for the new machines? Will we see 8x DVDR?)

Crossed fingers here.

[lasuther]

So, either Apple has nerves of steel and will risk simply not having any 2GHz's for sale between the time they run out and the time they release the new ones, or we should see wait times on the 2's grow in a fairly linear fashion between now and then.

Another couple possibilities would be an education-only version with a single 2GHz CPU, or perhaps the rumor is just off on the specs and the low ends will be 2's instead of 1.8's. (I hesitated to point this out, frankly, because someone will absolutely pipe up with the notion that Apple will be putting the 2GHz CPUs in Powerbooks... Hope springs eternal)

You could also see a G5 2GHz in a 20" iMac and G5 1.8GHz in the 17" iMac. Hope springs eternal. :)

lasuther

[27407]

Don't forget that the 2 Ghz would still be sold in the xServe.

[omnivector]

Frankly, I'm glad that they will have (if they come out) such a low amount of memory. Apple gouges consumers on memory. Take a look at the apple store. To upgrade to the full 8GB of memory on a PMG5 costs more than the computer itself (US$4,950)! Why not just head over to www.coastmemory.com and get the same 8GB of memory for US$2,152? That's less than HALF the price! For the same freakin' memory!

sheesh. i couldn't agree more. some of us are geeks who know how to buy our own parts and put things together. i wish apple has a configuration like this: Processor, Motherboard, Case, Power Supply. I know where to buy the hard disk, ram, and burner myself for half the cost of all their parts.

[macnews]

Yay! Now where the hell are the new monitors? :rolleyes:

I agree! At least some update on the monitors would be nice, if just a change in look to match the G5. But, at least this update is coming before April (if true). This would still put them on track for a 3Ghz machine to be shipped by Sept. Now, if these are annonced on March 23 but don't ship until May, that would be a problem.

Time line:

2.0 G5 announced July (late June) shipped Sept.

2.4 G5 announced March (6 months from last Sept.)

3.0 G5 announced July (late June WWDC) ships Sept.??

[Mac-Xpert]

Maybe they limit the speed to 2.4 Ghz on purpose now, so when they introduce the 3.0 Ghz it will look like a nicer upgrade.

Early rumors of the rev B going all the way to 2.7/2.8 Ghz would make the introduction of the 3.x Ghz machine in August/September a less impressive update, while going from 2.4 to 3.0 of maybe even 3.2 will be great.

[csimmons]

I think its good the G5 is getting a speed bump, but if this rumor holds through, it would mean that a 3GHz G5 is a lot longer off than this Summer and more than likely the end of the year. I just had my hopes up is all!

Steve never said "3.0 GHz by the Summer 2004", he said "3.0 GHz within a year". This was back in September when he said that (though the first G5's didn't actually ship until October), and it's March now, so it looks like Apple could be on track with their 3GHz claim, boosting CPU speed every 6 months.

[MegaSignal]

sheesh. i couldn't agree more. some of us are geeks who know how to buy our own parts and put things together. i wish apple has a configuration like this: Processor, Motherboard, Case, Power Supply. I know where to buy the hard disk, ram, and burner myself for half the cost of all their parts.

I seemed to have had bad luck with the cheap memory: whether it's due to things like "yields" or some other aspect of quality control, the Apple branded memory seems to work completely without kernel panics or system freezes.

That being said, here's hoping for a G5 in an iMac soon!

[Foxer]

Steve never said "3.0 GHz by the Summer 2004", he said "3.0 GHz within a year". This was back in September when he said that (though the first G5's didn't actually ship until October), and it's March now, so it looks like Apple could be on track with their 3GHz claim, boosting CPU speed every 6 months.

I beleive he said that in May (possibly June). It was at the WWDC.

[IndyGopher]

Don't forget that the 2 Ghz would still be sold in the xServe.
I thought about that, but the XServes use different CPU's.

[DeusOmnis]

Look a little on the conservative side to me. No graphics card update and it's about time they made 512MB RAM standard on all models, how about a gig on the top end? Is that really too much to ask?

But then, maybe they'll get the date right, but a few of the details may be sketchy.


You are so incredibly right, I would never let a person get 256 mb ram, that's horrible.

[FMGreen]

I imagine they are being conservative with the dual 2.4 as the top model right now so they can really make a big splash when they release the 3.0s by the end of summer, especially if they are dual 3.0s

And this date seems as though it would be directly at the halfway point between the previous update and Jobs' statement of 3.0 by the end of summer.

November 18 - March 23 - July ??, Anyway, late July is certainly the middle of summer.

[delete]

So is there a huge difference in the Nvidia board from the 9600 for doing 2D/Photoshop work?

[IndyGopher]

You could also see a G5 2GHz in a 20" iMac and G5 1.8GHz in the 17" iMac. Hope springs eternal. :)

lasuther

I suspect the close quarters in the iMac would pretty much require using the 90nm CPU's that one finds in the G5 XServes. I would love to see a G5 iMac, and I'm sure we will.. but that's down the road a way I think.

[vanmonkey]

Translation into english please?

[MrToast]

I seemed to have had bad luck with the cheap memory: whether it's due to things like "yields" or some other aspect of quality control, the Apple branded memory seems to work completely without kernel panics or system freezes.

That being said, here's hoping for a G5 in an iMac soon!

I've never had a problem upgrading my own system with non-Apple parts. Just turn off, install, and reboot.

[AirUncleP]

That'll be on my lady's birthday! I hope I don't get too excited about one of those events that I forget the other!

Face it, it's about due, so there's no real surprise. My guess after that is the top end PM will get another lift in Aug-Sep time along with the PB range. Then a G5 iMac by Christmas and a chocolate coated iBook in time for Valentines.

Ignoring all of that puff though, I was expecting a better graphics card. Perhaps that'll be later.

Get your lady a new G5 for her birthday and then tell us all about her reaction.

[gop007]

I am very skeptical of this report.

To me it is more like guessing by some site and we all jump on it like it is confirmed.

Dual 1.8 as base makes little sense, since it is already available.

I forsee a 2.0 Single at $1999, 2.4 Dual at $2799, and a 2.6 Dual at $3399.
The reason I feel optimistic about these numbers is because they would follow a pattern seen in the past with upgrade and IBM is now involved. Steve will shock us with a system pastt 3 ghz come July.

The only part I would hope is true about this report is the release date.

[eizzumdm]

Come on, guys. When Steve said "3.0 GHz within a year," he did not necessarily mean a Terran year.

One Martian year (1.88 Earth years) should be more than enough time to reach 3 GHz. :D

[centauratlas]

I beleive he said that in May (possibly June). It was at the WWDC.
What he said was two things at two times (June 23, and Sept 16, 2003):
"We've committed before the end of next summer" to get the Power Mac G5 to 3GHz. That was September 16, 2003, see links below. June 23, 2003, he said (http://www.macrumors.com/wwdc2003.html) it would be at "3ghz within 12 months." I was never clear if he meant 12 months from then or 12 months from release. Given his Sept 2003 statements, I think it meant from release (or they just realized by Sept 2003 that late June/early July 2004 would be too soon and revised his meaning).


Sept 16 links: http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/09/16/liveupdate/index.php?redirect=1078732421000
and:
http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/16/appleexpo2
and:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=6904

[Steven1621]

i believe that is the day that the memory promotion ends. that might make sense. it will help clear out the old inventories.

[deepkid]

French site, MacPlus.org (http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5716), reports:

Dual 1.8GHz G5, 256MB DDR400, 80GB HD, GeForce 5200 Ultra
Dual 2.2GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600
Dual 2.4GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600


Hey all,

Speculation:
First of all, keep in mind that this is speculation. This is not an official release by Apple.

CPU and other gains:
Some of you seem to think that a 400Mhz CPU speed increase is mundane. Are you nuts?? If the rumored line-up is true, the top end machine would boast of an incredible speed increase not only in terms of raw CPU speed, but a faster system bus and likely improvements. Think about total system improvements, over just raw CPU gains. Forget the Mhz myth.

Complaints about low RAM:
Often times Apple will release machines with low memory configurations in order to give resellers a selling opportunity to bundle free RAM. I'm sure it's a small concession. If you're buying directly from Apple, don't waste your time buying memory from them. Check out pages like ramseeker.com for more sensible pricing.

iPod mini click wheel, stupid headless iMac, never-ending and pathetic PDA rumors:
You have to give it to Bill Palmer for articulating how stupid these never-ending headless iMac and PDA rumors are. Please, just let them die. Come up with something much more interesting to ponder than rumor remakes. A note of interest and I've not seen anyone mention this... but do you remember the patent filing that was discussed a while ago that had the rotating, clicking wheel? Many thought that this was a new Apple pro mouse, but I've not seen anyone link this to the new scroll wheel on the iPod mini.

3.0Ghz powermacs, when?:
Apple has a few months left to deliver these machines. And if they're late, so what? Look at the tremendous gains that the company has made in the last two years. A stronger alliance with IBM has completely changed the pro landscape. Honestly, there are few of us on these boards who really *need* a dual 3.0Ghz, so let's cut Apple some slack. However, I would love one of those to render video for a feature length film. :D

[joemama]

i believe that is the day that the memory promotion ends. that might make sense. it will help clear out the old inventories.

Apple has always takenm advantage of people on memory, but if this rumor is true, what a shame..

So you pay $1799 (at least that) for a computer with 256MB Ram...?

Just another open door for PC-users to take a crack at us....

[Frobozz]

French site, MacPlus.org (http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5716), reports that according to their source, 3 new PowerMac G5 models will be released on Tuesday, March 23rd.

And that would mean the most likely date for the release (not announcement) of Dual 3.0 Ghz macs would be September of this year... aren't most releases 6 months apart?

I'll be waiting for the dual 3.0, since I already have a dual 1.0.

[garybooberry]

If the dual 1.8 get's near 1700.00 with an educational discount, I'm buying. :D

[paulypants]

The new R420 and NV40 cards will be out then (next generation Radeon and Geforce cards). So I dont think those specs are correct. I would expect the R9600pro to be the low end and the R420 or NV40 in the high end. Plus I thought IBM had chips running at 2.5 Ghz now.

Thats what i was thinking and I hope it to be true
because the graphics cards in the G5s need to be better

[wizard]

Hi Johnny;

My thoughts exactly, it is not like RAM cost Apple any more than any other manufacture. So one has to wonder why they can't do better, especially when they now have an OS that can make use of it. There is nothing worst than throwing something on the market that can not reach its potentials because you are to cheap to buy contemporary components. This is one thing about Apple that drives me crazy.

Beofre anybody response saying they can get RAM cheaper I have to say no you can't. Apple may over charge for their REM expansions but in a base machine they are getting the RAM cheaper than you will ever get it as a retail customer. Apples stingyness with RAM is a clear indicator that they value milking their customers over offering value. It is not like 1gig of RAM is going to impact the price of the top of the line machine that much!

As to the other rummored features I have to say topping out at 2.4 GHz is rather sad. It is nto the increase that Apple needs if they want to remain market leaders. It might be all they can give us, but this does have shades of Motorola about it. Considering the rated temperature range of the 970fx Apple should be delivering everything that IBM can offer, which publicly is 2.5GHz.

All of this is of course rumor, but I'm begining to believe that Apple needs consumers on there design commitees. Either that or they need to look at the retail market in a differrent light. At the moment they appear to be followers instead of leaders, it is no wonder their market share is dropping like a rock.

Thanks
Dave

Look a little on the conservative side to me. No graphics card update and it's about time they made 512MB RAM standard on all models, how about a gig on the top end? Is that really too much to ask?

But then, maybe they'll get the date right, but a few of the details may be sketchy.

[Grimace]

I'm wondering what is going to differentiate the mid-level PM from the top model. Just CPU??

FASTER SUPERDRIVES PLEASE!!

[jamilecrire]

Well, i guess the recent rise in the Apple stock reflects some insider info leaking into the financial market! That, more than the small speed increase, are good news!

Any pricing info? :confused:

Wrong. The Mini iPod sellout is what spurred the stock jump. I'm a big Apple fan but their ROI is crap. There are significantly better companies to invest in for growth and long term appreciation.

Picking stocks based on what's cool and not on financials is like picking women soley on breast size, nice to start with but then you've got to talk to her.

[kilometer31]

This thought just sent chills down my spine (not in the good way):

Some have thought the 1.8 base model is odd -- why not 2.0? And the overall specs on the 1.8 are more modest (other than dual CPUs).

I would HATE it if the base model did not have the update 970 FX chip, and was just continuing with the original 970.

[mpopkin]

Ah when an idiot cant see, NVidia has not even announced the NV40 and Ati the R420, March 23rd is two weeks away, i almost guarentee that you wont see an nv40 in the next g5, maybe the r420 for the high end, but not the 9600 pro as the bottom end for sure
Grow up, think logically and do not be stupid


The new R420 and NV40 cards will be out then (next generation Radeon and Geforce cards). So I dont think those specs are correct. I would expect the R9600pro to be the low end and the R420 or NV40 in the high end. Plus I thought IBM had chips running at 2.5 Ghz now.

[wizard]

Well if I was a stock holder I'd be disappointed!! This reflects just a 20% rise in clock rate, no increase in video capabilities to speak of and stingyness with memory. It is not a machine that will change Apples market share condition.

The only way to save this machine would be to drasticlly lower the price of the line. That is like $1200, $1700 & $2200, otherwise it would be foolish to even consider them in non traditional roles. Acceptability in non traditional roles is the only way for Apple to show significant market share gains.

Thanks
Dave


Well, i guess the recent rise in the Apple stock reflects some insider info leaking into the financial market! That, more than the small speed increase, are good news!

Any pricing info? :confused:

[deepkid]

Well if I was a stock holder I'd be disappointed!! This reflects just a 20% rise in clock rate, no increase in video capabilities to speak of and stingyness with memory. It is not a machine that will change Apples market share condition.

The only way to save this machine would be to drasticlly lower the price of the line. That is like $1200, $1700 & $2200, otherwise it would be foolish to even consider them in non traditional roles. Acceptability in non traditional roles is the only way for Apple to show significant market share gains.

Thanks
Dave

Why would you be? This isn't an official release. You'd be over reacting based on no fact. There are no spec sheets, etc.

Also, drastically lowering the price on the powermacs would INFURIATE ME as a stockholder, because it would slim margins, which would lead to less profits. These machines are selling well, no need to freak out and have a fire sale to attract a demographic that probably hasn't the budget for a machine in its category.

I did not pick to invest in Apple, hoping that they'd turn into the Payless Shoes of computer companies. Considering the overall design, the powermacs are a bargain. The use of an elegant and powerful OS is the cake and the machines are the icing.

[ImAlwaysRight]

I am very skeptical of this report.

To me it is more like guessing by some site and we all jump on it like it is confirmed.

Dual 1.8 as base makes little sense, since it is already available.

I forsee a 2.0 Single at $1999, 2.4 Dual at $2799, and a 2.6 Dual at $3399.
The reason I feel optimistic about these numbers is because they would follow a pattern seen in the past with upgrade and IBM is now involved. Steve will shock us with a system pastt 3 ghz come July.

The only part I would hope is true about this report is the release date. gop007, the report reprinted by Macrumors sounds very reasonable. Apple's past history is to take the previous middle Power Mac and make it the low end for a speed bump. So dual 1.8 for the base makes a lot of sense. Apple has dropped a dual to a single processor in the past, so it would not suprise me if the low end was a single 1.8, but I have no reason to doubt the dual base model as reported.

Your optimistic configurations are based on what? It is much more logical to believe this rumor that may be based on inside information opposed to a consumer's wishful thinking.

[Earendil]

Maybe they dont have enough of those chips for the xserve G5 and the powermac. It seems there has been much larger demand for the xserve G5 than Apple were expecting. More likely just to differentiate the models though I guess. Dual 2 to Dual 2.4GHz wouldnt be a very wide spread for the product line, many people would maybe just plump for the dual 2 and stack up the RAM and graphics card rather than go for the top of the line, I sure would.

While I agree with you point, I must ask- When did 400mhz become a "small" gap? That's 1/3 my current proc :(
It's also more mhz than 3 other computers in our house combined :D

Tyler
Earendil

[RichardCarletta]

Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 Combo drive Powermacs - $1500
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2000
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2700

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 15 " iMac - $1300
Single 2.0 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac - $2000
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac - $2300

Single 1.25 GHZ G4 12 " iBook - $1200
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 14 " iBook - $1500

Single 2.0 GHZ G5 15 " Combo drive Powerbook - $2000
Single 2.2 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook - $2500
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook - $3000

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac - $1000
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac - $1299

[wizard]

Why is it that everytime someone points out that APPLE is basically screwing their customers with BASE ram installations, we end up hearing the crap that is quoted below?? Come on people I'd really like to know.

Apple is paying the same $$$ as any other major PC manufacture for memory, what they get for expansion memory is another issue. When Apple ships machines with 128 or 256 meg of RAM, when the rest of the industry standardized years ago on 512meg of ram, they are being stingy. Further they are not doing enough to give their customers a good experience with their initial puchase. Being the trailer when it comes to base memory is one of the reasons that Apples market share is shrinking so fast.

Look at it this way, a customer walks into a store and sees a Apple machine with a slower clock and asks the clerke about it. It is certianly fairly easy to explain the difference in processors. Now the customer asks about the RAM installed, how does the clerk deal with that and remain honest. The fact is that a 128 or 256 meg of ram is an extreme disadvantage relative to the possibilities of 512 meg or 1gig of memory. There is no way to over come this disadvantage by honest marketing.

In my mind the memory issue, along with other key problems, is just driving Apple into the dust left by former great companies. No company can afford to ignore market share; in the case of memory it is almost as if Apple is thumbing its nose at market share.


Thanks
Dave

Frankly, I'm glad that they will have (if they come out) such a low amount of memory. Apple gouges consumers on memory. Take a look at the apple store. To upgrade to the full 8GB of memory on a PMG5 costs more than the computer itself (US$4,950)! Why not just head over to www.coastmemory.com and get the same 8GB of memory for US$2,152? That's less than HALF the price! For the same freakin' memory!

[Trowaman]

Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 Combo drive Powermacs - $1500
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2000
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2700

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 15 " iMac - $1300
Single 2.0 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac - $2000
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac - $2300

Single 1.25 GHZ G4 12 " iBook - $1200
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 14 " iBook - $1500

Single 2.0 GHZ G5 15 " Combo drive Powerbook - $2000
Single 2.2 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook - $2500
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook - $3000

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac - $1000
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac - $1299

mmm, not bad. eMacs and iBooks might be a little fast considering who is buying them. 1.0 and 1.25 ibooks and 1.25 and 1.5 eMacs. iMacs seems a little expensive (but knowing apple, not unlikely), but not bad guesses overall.

[RichardCarletta]

Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 Combo drive Powermacs - $1500
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2000
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2700

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 15 " iMac - $1300
Single 2.0 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac - $2000
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac - $2300

Single 1.25 GHZ G4 12 " iBook - $1200
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 14 " iBook - $1500

Single 2.0 GHZ G5 15 " Combo drive Powerbook - $2000
Single 2.2 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook - $2500
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook - $3000

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac - $1000
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac - $1299

[VincentVega]

Translation into english please?

Here you go:


Our anonymous Anglo-Saxon insider reconsiders a possible release date of Apple's next professional range of computers.

According to his information, it appears from the internal roadmap of the Cupertino labs that the green light has been given for the range to be announced on Tuesday 23rd March 2004 with immediate availability, though with a delay of one month for the rest of the world for the 2.4Ghz model.

If this rumour is confirmed, this will undoubtedly be the nature of these releases.

As for the content of the updated range (I emphasise again: this is a rumour, continue to take it with a pinch of salt) the following machines will be released:

1. Entry to the range - a Power Mac G5 with dual 1.8Ghz CPUs, 256Mb of DDR400 (no longer DDR333), a 80Gb Serial ATA hard drive, three PCI-X slots (instead of the "traditional" PCI slots of the current model) and a GeForce 5200 Ultra video card with 64Mb of RAM.
2. Middle of the range - a Power Mac G5 with dual 2.2Ghz CPUs, 512Mb of DDR400, 160Gb Serial ATA hard drive and a Radeon 9600 video card with 64Mb of VRAM.
3. Top of the range, a Power Mac G5 with dual 2.4Ghz CPUs, 512Mb of DDR400, 160Gb Serial ATA hard drive and a Radeon 9600 video card with 64Mb of VRAM.

And finally, a BTO (built to order) option, the possibility of a Radeon 9800 Pro video card, currently sold for $350 USD.

If this rumour proves to be true (you never know) we would note that only the entry-level model of the range changes to any great degree, and would thus to my mind possess the best price-quantity ratio if the current prices are not changed. These are the rumours, now wait patiently to see what the Apple labs are preparing for us for spring.


This is a human translation (i.e. by me, not by Google/Babelfish) and my French is a little rusty, but the basic gist of the article is there.

Edit: fixed typo ("quantity", not "quality", i.e. bangs per buck).

[MrSugar]

I am glad someone mentioned that the Pmac 2ghz and the Xserve 2ghz are different chips, don't forget that. That means that the current 2ghz Pmacs are going completely bye bye.

But this makes sense, look at the current lineup, we have a 1.6 followed by a dual 1.8. To keep a nice gap between mid and low line a dual 2.2 would make sense.

I am curious to what other updates we will see, faster DVD super drive, new HD spaces, another optical drive slot, maybe new HD's? Really, there has to be something beyond what this report says. In the past it always seems that Apple never just updates the processor, they always have a few neat nice tricks they throw in. I'm EXCITED!

[3.1416]

I would HATE it if the base model did not have the update 970 FX chip, and was just continuing with the original 970.

AFAIK the only advantage of the 970FX is that it's smaller and cooler than the original 970, allowing it to run at higher clock speeds. It doesn't do more per cycle, so it really doesn't matter which version the hypothetical 1.8 would use.

[3.1416]

But this makes sense, look at the current lineup, we have a 1.6 followed by a dual 1.8. To keep a nice gap between mid and low line a dual 2.2 would make sense.

Exactly. It's clear that the iMacs have to get G5s very soon, and the obvious way to differentiate the towers is to make them all dual. Given that, Apple doesn't want to have the low end too close to the midrange. They've almost always arranged the tower lineup so that the midrange has the best price/performance ratio, leaving the low end for the budget-conscious and the high end for those who need every bit of performance.

[MrSugar]

Exactly. It's clear that the iMacs have to get G5s very soon, and the obvious way to differentiate the towers is to make them all dual. Given that, Apple doesn't want to have the low end too close to the midrange. They've almost always arranged the tower lineup so that the midrange has the best price/performance ratio, leaving the low end for the budget-conscious and the high end for those who need every bit of performance.


BOOYA!!!! nicely said.

[wizard]

Hey all,

Speculation:
First of all, keep in mind that this is speculation. This is not an official release by Apple.

CPU and other gains:
Some of you seem to think that a 400Mhz CPU speed increase is mundane. Are you nuts?? If the rumored line-up is true, the top end machine would boast of an incredible speed increase not only in terms of raw CPU speed, but a faster system bus and likely improvements. Think about total system improvements, over just raw CPU gains. Forget the Mhz myth.

The above is totally bogus. We are talking about the same CPU family, clock rate increase are everything in this case. And yes 400Mhz increase is sad taken in the context that it has been stated that we will hit 3GHzin a year.

There also is some concern that IBM/Apple are stuck with the ebus clock rate and that we are not likely to see a FSB increase that allows a 2:1 ratio all the way up to 3GHz. If this is true (remember it is a rumor) then that is a real perofromance concern. Being only able to hit 2.4 GHz could be an indication of ebus problems. OR maybe not but if Apple is not scaling the machines becuase of ebus then it is worth noting.


Complaints about low RAM:
Often times Apple will release machines with low memory configurations in order to give resellers a selling opportunity to bundle free RAM. I'm sure it's a small concession. If you're buying directly from Apple, don't waste your time buying memory from them. Check out pages like ramseeker.com for more sensible pricing.

Same old crap about Ram. People PLEASE realize that Apple does not pay list or retail prices for anything it installs in the MAC's. Further the RAM is the same as the equivalent going into i86 PC's, if the PC manufactures can offer a reasonable RAM installation there is no reason Apple can't on their machines. What is so frustrating about this is that Apple has an OS that really can make use of the RAM and provide a better user experience.


iPod mini click wheel, stupid headless iMac, never-ending and pathetic PDA rumors:
You have to give it to Bill Palmer for articulating how stupid these never-ending headless iMac and PDA rumors are. Please, just let them die. Come up with something much more interesting to ponder than rumor remakes. A note of interest and I've not seen anyone mention this... but do you remember the patent filing that was discussed a while ago that had the rotating, clicking wheel? Many thought that this was a new Apple pro mouse, but I've not seen anyone link this to the new scroll wheel on the iPod mini.

A headless IMac is about the only hope that Apple has of recovering makret share. Letting this speculation die along with the pressure it puts on Apple is to let the corporation itself die. Apple simply can not afford to continue to ignore market demand and the corresponding lost of market share. Moving only 200,000 units per quarter is pathetic and not sustainable.

Apple needs new machine that open up new markets. Currently the PowerMac is only selling well into a dying market share. What good is that?


3.0Ghz powermacs, when?:
Apple has a few months left to deliver these machines. And if they're late, so what? Look at the tremendous gains that the company has made in the last two years. A stronger alliance with IBM has completely changed the pro landscape. Honestly, there are few of us on these boards who really *need* a dual 3.0Ghz, so let's cut Apple some slack. However, I would love one of those to render video for a feature length film. :D

Well being late would not be an issue if it weren't for the fact that there has been a commitment made to the market. Mis to many commitments and the market response like a spurned wife.

Besides who are you to say that we don't need dual 3.0GHz machines. Frankly the current G5 only perform well in "tests" that target specific feature of the processor. Many of us want all around good performance. We also don't ant to buy a machine today that chokes on software released tomorrow.

The last organization that needs to be cut any slack is Apple. They have had years of excuses allowed, it is time for them to put up or shut up. The problem is that I believe that they can put up if they really want to, especially with IBM on the team. The question is can they or are they being guided by other issues.

[Soire]

:confused:

Could somebody educate me as to how soon the updated PowerMacs would ship? The posting of the french article said "immediate availability" for the US. Are most new products available right away? Or if this update even occurs are we going to be stuck waiting awhile, much like the Xserves. What's the dilly-yo?

[mac-in-fool]

Although I read these forums almost daily waiting for the new G5, I resisted the urge to become a GULP...member. The march 23rd release date rumor seems close to what may actually occur, with a few caveates. March 23 is a tuesday, which from what I have read, is a traditional release day for Mac, (And for CD Music releases). However it is also a week before their RAM promo ends. The next logical tuesday is March 30th, the tuesday after the RAM promo ends. As for the line up, The Dual 1.8, Dual 2.2 and dual 2.4 make sense. If you take the current price of the 1.6, and 256 of mac ram and a 160GB hard drive it comes up to $1,999.00 the exact price of a current re-furbished Dual 1.8 mac. They can't really offer a Dual 2ghz on the lowend, they will be burning clients who recently purchased a dual 2ghz as a top of the line model. ,

[wizard]

Why would you be? This isn't an official release. You'd be over reacting based on no fact. There are no spec sheets, etc.

Well you did notice the if didn't you. Sure this is not official but that doesn't mean that we should not be shocked and extremely idsappointed iwth the data. Using your logic I should be satisfied if this hwere official Apple documentation. The point I'm trying to make is that the offered cofigurations are unacceptable and should be unacceptable to anybody that sees them.


Also, drastically lowering the price on the powermacs would INFURIATE ME as a stockholder, because it would slim margins, which would lead to less profits. These machines are selling well, no need to freak out and have a fire sale to attract a demographic that probably hasn't the budget for a machine in its category.

What should infuriate you is the continual decline in market share due to extremely high prices. Especially considering that the prices Apple charges are for configurations that should have been on the market a year or two ago.

As a stock holder you have to realize that market share is important but an even begger concern is the continual decline in unit shipments. The evidence is pretty clear that the machines are not selling well I'm not sure where you get the idea that they are.

In any event I'm not talking about fire sale prices, I just want to see Apple in acompetitive position. If you believe that $1200 dollars is a fire sale price then you really need to look at the PC market. The hardware does not need to be expensive to be profitable!


I did not pick to invest in Apple, hoping that they'd turn into the Payless Shoes of computer companies. Considering the overall design, the powermacs are a bargain. The use of an elegant and powerful OS is the cake and the machines are the icing.

I'm not sure how a reasonable person could ever make the statement above. If they where the bargain that you describe we would see much better sales by Apple. We would also see sales to non traditional markets in much larger numbers.

I look at the current configurations of the the PowerMac and I see just the opposite. I see a huge rip off. I see a machine that instead of being configured with leading edge hardware is populated with second string components and sold at leading edge prices. So guy but there is no bargain here.

[morkintosh]

Well, i guess the recent rise in the Apple stock reflects some insider info leaking into the financial market!

I suspect the stock price increase reflects recent success in the online music sector, trivial hardware updates aren't going to have a noticeable impact on stock price.

[whooleytoo]

The above is totally bogus. We are talking about the same CPU family, clock rate increase are everything in this case. And yes 400Mhz increase is sad taken in the context that it has been stated that we will hit 3GHzin a year.

I don't follow..

A 20% speedbump in March, another 25% speedbump in 6 months, and we have 3GHz PowerMacs a year from the original release.

(edit oops! fixed typo)

[a17inchFuture]

I don't believe that Apple will update the imac's with a g5 any time soon. Maybe early 2005, but I doubt before that. ANd for those projected specs someone gave for all comp models, I think that is way off as far as imacs are concerned. There is no way the imacs will match the powerbooks in every facet. Not gonna happen. The new motorola g4's will be in the imacs and ibooks for a year, I feel.

As far as the updated models, didn't a new release for pm's happen in november that everyone kinda ignores? And wasn't it somewhat mundane as well? So couldn't this mean that this update will be slightly mundane in favor of the great 3.0 unveiling at the end of the summer? Me thinks so.

Finally, I would like to say, that powerbooks need SO much more attention that powermacs, its ridiculous. Apple is the pioneer, and yet there pbooks are painfully behind, with the potential for weak updates on the horizon? Please. Apple, this is pathetic. Put the damn 970FX in pbooks, and then we'll see if the xserves' or the g5 pbooks' sales are the ones holding up the line.

I think most would agree it wouldn't be the Xserves.

[dongmin]

Why do people sound so surprised and disappointed? Apple is still on target to hit the 3 ghz mark by the end of the summer (mid-September).

2.0 --> 2.4 ghz (20% increase)
2.4 --> 3.0 ghz (25% increase)

2.0 --> 2.5 ghz (25% increase)
2.5 --> 3.0 ghz (20% increase)

Apple is following the same old pattern they've always followed: 20-25% upgrade every six months with the middle dropping down to the low-end. These new specs would basically fall in line with their pattern.

Now I agree that the graphics specs aren't too exciting, but the report seems pretty vague in that regard.

Remember that the 2.2 and 2.4 ghz will be the new 970fx. The 1.8s may be the old 970s leftover. They're probably skipping the 2.0s because there aren't too many of them around or they're saving them for another model.

[MadMan]

Well if I was a stock holder I'd be disappointed!! This reflects just a 20% rise in clock rate, no increase in video capabilities to speak of and stingyness with memory. It is not a machine that will change Apples market share condition.


Well, I AM a AAPL stock holder and am happy as a clam.

I think those folks that are complaining about "just a 20% rise in clock rate" have VERY short memories! "Shades of Motorola"? No way!

It took MOT YEARS to get a 20% speed bump on the G4, yet IBM (by the looks of it) will do at least 20% in 6 months. That's a 400Mhz speed bump!!

When was the last time Moto (ever) did a 400Mhz speed bump?

I understand being a bit disappointed, because 2.5 is half way to 3, but please stop bashing this bump... You could always stick with a G4 :rolleyes:

MM

[blackfox]

I am curious to what other updates we will see, faster DVD super drive, new HD spaces, another optical drive slot, maybe new HD's? Really, there has to be something beyond what this report says. In the past it always seems that Apple never just updates the processor, they always have a few neat nice tricks they throw in. I'm EXCITED!
In relation to this, what are the chances of a case revision already? I have no problems w/ it now, but to possibly accomodate another drive slot or to handle cooling the cpu differently...might this happen? I do not remember Apples' history on this...personally, if it was to happen, I believe it would be with the next revision...but they have had the better part of a year (since rev a release) to put something together...
On a different note, I know everyone wants speed, but a 400MHz boost (800, if you count both processors)in a revision is spectacular for Apple (when was the last time that happened)...also, it is approximately halfway to 3GHz halfway through the year...assuming listed specs, so why is everyone dissapointed? I am thoroughly pleased...

[Frobozz]

Dual 1.8GHz G5, 256MB DDR400, 80GB HD, GeForce 5200 Ultra
Dual 2.2GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600
Dual 2.4GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600


I see this line up as a little strange. Why is there a 400 MHz gap between the low end and middle machines, but only a 200 MHz gap between middle and top end?

Seems to me that it should be either:

-- dual 2.0, dual 2.2 dual 2.4, or
-- dual 1.8, dual 2.2 dual 2.6.

I know it's minor, but gives me pause about the validity. They may be mostly right... but if I've seen it once I've seen it a hundred times. Rumors usually have a grain of truth and a little embellishment on them. I think the processor speeds were guesses based on solid facts. That doesn't mean they're accurate, though.

[Veldek]

256 MB RAM in a DP Power Mac? Can't be true, think about it. As the DP Power Mac needs two RAM chips, this would mean two 128 MB RAM chips. I can't believe Apple would do this!

[Bakafish]

Ah when an idiot cant see, NVidia has not even announced the NV40 and Ati the R420, March 23rd is two weeks away, i almost guarentee that you wont see an nv40 in the next g5, maybe the r420 for the high end, but not the 9600 pro as the bottom end for sure
Grow up, think logically and do not be stupid

Um, a sign of maturity is not to call people stupid for expressing their thoughts. But I digress... It is my feeling that this is exactly what has been holding up the release of new G5 machines. PCI Express is the new serial based high speed expansion architecture that will replace AGP for graphics cards. PCI Express will also provide ridiculous amounts of throughput for other expansion cards, and since Intel is switching all of their new chip-sets to no longer support AGP, it is a good idea to start supporting it now rather than later. Apple has always been an early adopter of cutting edge technology standards, and with ATI announcing recently widespread adoption of native PCI Express support (no PCI translator chip) I think Apple will be releasing the rev2 G5's with ATI R420 series cards. Not to start an unrelated flamewar, but nVidia has not been competitive as of late, and I very much doubt that Apple would trust them to ship anything on time at this point.

So the big question has always been, "Why, with faster 970fx chips in the pipeline, has Apple not announced upgrades?" They must have had enough volume of the chips in inventory, as Apple would never have wanted IBM to make announcements about the 970fx without having a good supply on hand or in production.

The delay could be due to a couple of things:

1) The 970fx chip availability could be constrained.
2) The lower heat output allowed Apple to redesign the internal layout, reducing heat sink size and providing more space for additional drives or an additional Optical drive unit.
3) New PCI Express motherboards are waiting for ample supply of ATI graphics cards.

Although, I could be talking out my ass. I am going through the 10.3.3 seed with strings (a Unix tool that finds human readable text in binaries) looking for 'PCI Express' as that would be a smoking gun for my theory. We'll see what comes of this...

[clr900]

If Apple makes the dual 1.8 the entry model for 1800 I would highly consider buying it. I would also be interested as to what the discontinued dual 2.0 would sell for, maybe 2000? It would be great if the dual 2.0 were the entry model then it would still qualify for the edu discount and I would buy that instantly. However, I do not think Apple would do that, It would be a huuuuge price drop from the current 3000 it sells for. I really hope these rumors are true.

[daveL]

Also, remember the new 90nm G5 has more pipeline stages so don't look for proportionate scaling (i.e. like the G4 733 was only marginally faster than the older G4 version 533).
Not true. It's exactly the same CPU, except PowerTune has been added. This is a die shrink. There's nothing changed in the pipeline stages. Where did you get this information?

[sethypoo]

Hey, March 23 is my birthday!

The big 1-9.

[sosumi]

Although, I could be talking out my ass. I am going through the 10.3.3 seed with strings (a Unix tool that finds human readable text in binaries) looking for 'PCI Express' as that would be a smoking gun for my theory. We'll see what comes of this...

I wouldn't expect code comments to get compiled into the binaries. Maybe if it's the name of a function, though... I hope you're right btw.

[Rocketman]

French site, MacPlus.org (http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5716), reports that according to their source, 3 new PowerMac G5 models will be released on Tuesday, March 23rd.

According to their information, the new machines will come in at the following specs:

Dual 1.8GHz G5, 256MB DDR400, 80GB HD, GeForce 5200 Ultra
Dual 2.2GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600
Dual 2.4GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600

MacPlus.org does not frequently publish rumors, but has published (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021107015529.shtml) an accurate release date in the past.

That makes this post as close to news as you are going to get pre-release. People can at least start planning purchases accordingly.

If true that makes the low-end far more desireable than the G5 debut release was.

Rocketman

[Gaffa Bug]

Um, a sign of maturity is not to call people stupid for expressing their thoughts. But I digress... It is my feeling that this is exactly what has been holding up the release of new G5 machines. PCI Express is the new serial based high speed expansion architecture that will replace AGP for graphics cards. PCI Express will also provide ridiculous amounts of throughput for other expansion cards, and since Intel is switching all of their new chip-sets to no longer support AGP, it is a good idea to start supporting it now rather than later. Apple has always been an early adopter of cutting edge technology standards, and with ATI announcing recently widespread adoption of native PCI Express support (no PCI translator chip) I think Apple will be releasing the rev2 G5's with ATI R420 series cards. Not to start an unrelated flamewar, but nVidia has not been competitive as of late, and I very much doubt that Apple would trust them to ship anything on time at this point.

So the big question has always been, "Why, with faster 970fx chips in the pipeline, has Apple not announced upgrades?" They must have had enough volume of the chips in inventory, as Apple would never have wanted IBM to make announcements about the 970fx without having a good supply on hand or in production.

The delay could be due to a couple of things:

1) The 970fx chip availability could be constrained.
2) The lower heat output allowed Apple to redesign the internal layout, reducing heat sink size and providing more space for additional drives or an additional Optical drive unit.
3) New PCI Express motherboards are waiting for ample supply of ATI graphics cards.


Hopefully, you're right. Currently the G5 has a 133MHz PCI-X (1.0) bus, hopefully, they choose to go with the 2.0 spec and adopt 533MHz PCI-X.

Here's a link to the PCI-X Roadmap. It's pretty interesting.
http://www.digi.com/pdf/prd_msc_pcitech.pdf

[jettredmont]

I wouldn't expect code comments to get compiled into the binaries. Maybe if it's the name of a function, though... I hope you're right btw.

Hardware identifies itself using ASCII strings, most of the time (at least, with most modern hardware). I'm not sure if this is true of PCI Express or not, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it were.

If there is special code for dealing with "PCI Express" then most likely that code will contain the identifier "PCI Express" to compare against the hardware ID. Also, if the software is to report a readable string to the human (ie, via System Profiler), then that string would be in the UI's strings list.

OTOH, I'm not sure what precisely this would mean ...

[Bakafish]

I wouldn't expect code comments to get compiled into the binaries. Maybe if it's the name of a function, though... I hope you're right btw.

Yep, 'sudo find . -type f -exec strings -o {} \; | grep -i express' gave no love. It was worth a shot though.

[johnnyjibbs]

The point about RAM is that the extra customer satisfaction of having twice as much RAM is worth much more to Apple than the pennies they lose in including the extra RAM - this would not increase the price of the machine. It would not hurt crucial's sales either: people would still buy that extra RAM chip but their RAM ceiling would be higher and thus their Mac would be faster and they would be happier. It will also help switchers as most low-end Dells have 512 at least these days.

If we do have a dual 1.8 low-end I would expect it to have the current 970 chip, not the new one. Apple has frequenly done this in the past. Why is it a chilling thought? The main advantage of the new chip is that it allows the clock speed to be increased - not a factor when the current chip can handle 1.8 GHz fine in a PM case. You would not notice the difference between the old and new chip in the 1.8 (except overclocking potential that never really works anyway). Keeping the current chip in the low-end machine (or a mixture of old and new) would help combat possible supply shortages on the new chips also.

[Rower_CPU]

One point about Apple RAM "gouging"...it's not just Apple.

Dell charges similar markups on RAM that far exceed market price. The rule of thumb for any computer is to buy your own RAM and install it yourself.

[27407]

I thought about that, but the XServes use different CPU's.

I thought the new G5's were going to use the 970FX's? Wouldn't that be the reason for the clock speed increase?

[_bnkr612]

I purchased a G5 1.6 ghz last Thursday. After reading the "rumor" I feel like I should not even open my G5 (which arrived today) and send it back and wait for this rumor to filter out. Maybe the same price will be for the Dual 1.8.

I do webdesign and graphic design and I didn't think a Dual would even be needed for what I do. But if I can get a Dual 1.8 then maybe I should send it back before I open the box!

Can anyone offer me some suggestions?

Cheers,
Bnkr :confused:

[IndyGopher]

I thought the new G5's were going to use the 970FX's? Wouldn't that be the reason for the clock speed increase?
That's kind of the point. Unless they can be used in the same motherboards, they have to switch over the production.

[deepkid]

The above is totally bogus. We are talking about the same CPU family, clock rate increase are everything in this case. And yes 400Mhz increase is sad taken in the context that it has been stated that we will hit 3GHzin a year.

Again, if you consider an alleged raw CPU speed increase of 400Mhz small, you must be dialing in from utopia. Overall system improvements are key, not bowing to the Mhz myth. I think there are more legitimate things to complain about. This certainly isn't one of them.

There also is some concern that IBM/Apple are stuck with the ebus clock rate and that we are not likely to see a FSB increase that allows a 2:1 ratio all the way up to 3GHz. If this is true (remember it is a rumor) then that is a real perofromance concern. Being only able to hit 2.4 GHz could be an indication of ebus problems. OR maybe not but if Apple is not scaling the machines becuase of ebus then it is worth noting.

Based on hearsay and fear. What's factual? Apple and IBM were able to bring to market a revolutionary new chip and Apple was able to materialize an incredible new powermac which shipped last fall. The machine was able to help Va. Tech rank in the top 5 supercomputer class. Those are facts.

Rival chip makers would love to only achieve a 400 Mhz increase over the previous version of a chip. Again, we don't know because nothing official has been announced, so relax.



Same old crap about Ram. People PLEASE realize that Apple does not pay list or retail prices for anything it installs in the MAC's. Further the RAM is the same as the equivalent going into i86 PC's, if the PC manufactures can offer a reasonable RAM installation there is no reason Apple can't on their machines. What is so frustrating about this is that Apple has an OS that really can make use of the RAM and provide a better user experience.


Pardon? I don't think anyone is arguing other whether or not a corporation gets volume discounts when buying components, etc. As i said before and has been common place, resellers get the opportunity to make a deal sweeter by adding in RAM, printers and other perks. Could Apple load up all of the machines with RAM? Yes. But they wouldn't be able to sell the machines at the fire sale prices you seem to suggest, now would they? Can't have your cake and eat it too.


A headless IMac is about the only hope that Apple has of recovering makret share. Letting this speculation die along with the pressure it puts on Apple is to let the corporation itself die. Apple simply can not afford to continue to ignore market demand and the corresponding lost of market share. Moving only 200,000 units per quarter is pathetic and not sustainable.


Thank God Apple doesn't solely rely upon one specific product in order to survive. Also, with them being debt-free with over 4 billion in cash in the bank, they're in better financial shape than their peers. They're on the right track by pricing their machines sensibly and not at flea market prices. What good is marketshare if you're bankrupting your company? I'm glad they're concentrating on profibility because there's no money in selling cheap crap computers.


Besides who are you to say that we don't need dual 3.0GHz machines. Frankly the current G5 only perform well in "tests" that target specific feature of the processor. Many of us want all around good performance. We also don't ant to buy a machine today that chokes on software released tomorrow.


This isn't fact, but I bet I'm right. Many who complain and whine on here do so for their own self-amusement. Cronic complainers. Again, I don't know what machine you're referencing but in tests and real world performance the new powermacs are not the dogs you're painting them to be.


The last organization that needs to be cut any slack is Apple. They have had years of excuses allowed, it is time for them to put up or shut up. The problem is that I believe that they can put up if they really want to, especially with IBM on the team. The question is can they or are they being guided by other issues.

Put up what? The current offerings by Apple are arguably the best ever. They have one runaway hit after another and you're still bitchin'? Name another computer maker who is doing better? I don't think that you can. There's no other computer maker who has a better OS, hardware, software combination while being debt free and with an attractive balance sheet.

That's all I have to say.

[MacsRgr8]

I purchased a G5 1.6 ghz last Thursday. After reading the "rumor" I feel like I should not even open my G5 (which arrived today) and send it back and wait for this rumor to filter out. Maybe the same price will be for the Dual 1.8.

I do webdesign and graphic design and I didn't think a Dual would even be needed for what I do. But if I can get a Dual 1.8 then maybe I should send it back before I open the box!

Can anyone offer me some suggestions?

Cheers,
Bnkr :confused:

Oh dear....

A (almost) victim of the rumorfactory.

Never base a purchase / or wait for a purchase on rumors.
What if this rumor is false. Coming March 23rd nothing comes... then what?

If you think a purchase is good value, then go for it.

If you can wait, and follow rumor sites, making up your own mind when new PowerMacs arrive, then you can be lucky. It is pretty safe to assume that somewhere in between September '03 and September '04 there would be the first G5 update....But let me tell you that many people have waited longer than a year expecting the G5 "anytime soon" ;)

[a17inchFuture]

you guys are just masturbating with your finger tips. (typing)

You all say the same things over and over with no true and different point, the same fact gets re-written at least several times a page.

Try some conversation, not just posting the obvious that everyone seems to feel the need to point out themselves.

RAM good, Apple price bad.

Now can we move on to more interesting discussions?

P.S. If you can return that 1.6 Ghz PM, you should do it. The difference is quite great, and if it costs you nothing to wait, then you should. Good Luck!

[JamesDPS]

I purchased a G5 1.6 ghz last Thursday. After reading the "rumor" I feel like I should not even open my G5 (which arrived today) and send it back and wait for this rumor to filter out. Maybe the same price will be for the Dual 1.8.

I do webdesign and graphic design and I didn't think a Dual would even be needed for what I do. But if I can get a Dual 1.8 then maybe I should send it back before I open the box!

Can anyone offer me some suggestions?

Cheers,
Bnkr :confused:

My two cents: I've been holding off on a G5 for about 6 weeks now waiting for the upcoming revision. While I'm doing pro audio stuff which DOES require a powerful machine, my advice to you would be to get ready to ship your 1.6 back -- even if you don't "need" the power, by getting a dual 1.8 instead, the useful lifetime of the computer will be extended fairly dramatically (assuming you can hold off for another couple weeks!). I've always found that the rule of thumb of "buy whatever the best you can reasonably afford" saves a lot of money in the long run, and I suppose that applies to "wait a couple more weeks" as well (if it can get you another 6 months to a year out of a machine, why not?) After all, my last Mac purchase was a Pismo Powerbook, and I'm still using it! No WAY one of those "toilet seat" iBooks would have lasted 4 years...

As for the updates, they look pretty reasonable to me. Don't forget the other architectural improvements such as the availability of 3 upgraded PCI-X slots in each machine. As for RAM, it's a tricky issue. I think the "standard" for average consumers should be at least 512 for PM's -- for example, my girlfriend's mom knows nothing of computers and was wondering why her PB with 128mb of ram was really slow! Some people buy these computers not knowing what they need in terms of memory, etc., and people will buy a 1.8 with 256 thinking it should be awesome, and will be disappointed, and "strike 1" against their new mac.

On the flip side, I agree that it would be sweet if they sold "bare bones" G5s (for cheap) with no vid card, no HDs, and no RAM for people that wanted to customize everything (not that it would be good business for Apple, it probably wouldn't). Chances are, if I get a PM it will be with 512 which I will probably either throw away or eBay or something, since I plan to stick 8 DIMMs of 512 in there for around $700 (from crucial or some such "top tier" manufacturer). It's not even worth getting 1gb direct from apple if you know how to plug in some memory (a simple task!), unless their "BTO" prices drop a LOT (as we've seen with these promos). Of course, someone pointed out (correctly) that low memory configurations give apple resellers a bonus in terms of being able to bundle in "free RAM" with their sales (which unfortunately kind of makes academic discounts, at least in CA, a little pointless, because of taxes &c.)

Bottom line? I think 256 in a dual 1.8 is doubtful... 128meg modules are basically worthless in a powermac, and average consumers who didn't know to upgrade would be very disappointed with the performance of their new machine. (especially if they're switchers). bad business, so i don't see why we wouldn't get 512 at the low end, at least in powermacs. I DO agree that 1.8 is fine for the low end (rather than 2.0), to agree with someone who pointed out that apple generally has a greater gap b/n the low and mid level than mid/high, and that the mid-level is generally the best power/cost option, with low end for the extremely frugal, and high end for the power-demanding pros. (As for me, mid-level with tons of RAM should do the trick, probably)


EDIT: people will doubtless point out the inherent contradiction in my advice to ship back the 1.6 -- that i've been waiting 6 weeks, so clearly one shouldn't make purchasing decisions based on rumors... however, i thought SIX WEEKS AGO that a revision would be coming soon, just common sense. i think some time in the next month is nearly a certainty, regardless of ANY rumors. and, btw, if they DO come out this month, i will be glad for having waited this long, i think, even though the original machines seem to be generally stable etc. basic premise: don't want to pay day 1 prices for a 6-month-old (therefore obsolete;)) computer.

[afields]

Zzzzzzzzzzz

[Sabbath]

Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 Combo drive Powermacs - $1500
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2000
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2700

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 15 " iMac - $1300
Single 2.0 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac - $2000
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac - $2300

Single 1.25 GHZ G4 12 " iBook - $1200
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 14 " iBook - $1500

Single 2.0 GHZ G5 15 " Combo drive Powerbook - $2000
Single 2.2 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook - $2500
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook - $3000

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac - $1000
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac - $1299


Nice but very wishful thinking. Also I can't see the processors in powerbooks or iMacs ever being faster than the top of the line powermac, even if thye PMs are duals and the PBs/iMacs are singles. Well unless we all go to portables and never buy another desktop again.

[a17inchFuture]

Waiting is always best, if you can. I have been waiting for a pbook for several months too, and I am willing to wait several more.


I had an idea for new powerbooks that might be bad or good, so tell me what you think: Since people are always complaining that the new pbooks mke your palms sweat, what if apple were to put the new g5 powerbooks grid holes on surface where one would put their hands(assuming they have them like the PM's) ?

Would that be uncomfortable, or could they put it just off to the side off the palm placement for better cooling of that palm issue?

[concentricity]

Somehow I doubt.

I do find it interesting that they are all duals, this might be to distance them from the new G5 iMAC!


Well, looks at this...

• Dual 1.8GHz PowerPC G5
• 512MB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x256
• 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
• 56k V.92 internal modem
• SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English

Subtotal $1,999.00

That's copied and pasted from the U.S. Developer's store. I'm sure they're at least breaking even (probably banking a little something) on these machines. So take away 256MB RAM, 80GB of HD, and you've got a Dual 1.8 for $1799. (Keep in mind the 'old' 1.8's are PPC970's, whereas the new ones would likely use 970fx's which are smaller, therefore cheaper). Also, initial R&D expenses have been recouped by now, adding some more breathing room.

[Moonlight]

you guys are just masturbating with your finger tips. (typing)

You all say the same things over and over with no true and different point, the same fact gets re-written at least several times a page.

Try some conversation, not just posting the obvious that everyone seems to feel the need to point out themselves.



Ahhhh...have you been around here long, that is mostly what we do... ;)

[ZildjianKX]

Ahhhh...have you been around here long, that is mostly what we do... ;)

This would be a very dissapointing update if it were true. The DP G5 was introduced in late June of 2003... then 9 months later the best they have to show is a DP 2.2 GHz G5? Way to pave the road for the DP 3.0 GHz G5...

I thought with the new G5 processors Apple would be making great strives into the future... not baby steps like they did w/ Motorola.

[michaelal]

Maybe they limit the speed to 2.4 Ghz on purpose now, so when they introduce the 3.0 Ghz it will look like a nicer upgrade.

Early rumors of the rev B going all the way to 2.7/2.8 Ghz would make the introduction of the 3.x Ghz machine in August/September a less impressive update, while going from 2.4 to 3.0 of maybe even 3.2 will be great.
:o We sure have come to expect very little from Apple. I really believe this latest powermac update should be at least 3.0 Gig with high end video that is equal to the task of the PC market. Why is it that we have to settle for 2nd best. Sometimes being a MAC person really feels like I'm getting screwed.

[JamesDPS]

Is it just me, or is the macplus.org site down right now? (pls note date and time as of this post)... are they suddenly getting bombarded because of these kinds of "news" posts? if something like this can generate this much network traffic, maybe we shouldn't give it as much credence... ;)

[army_guy]

The new R420 and NV40 cards will be out then (next generation Radeon and Geforce cards). So I dont think those specs are correct. I would expect the R9600pro to be the low end and the R420 or NV40 in the high end. Plus I thought IBM had chips running at 2.5 Ghz now.

Not by the 23rd, ATI and NVIDIA will announce MARCH/APRIL with availability in MAY/JUNE, this is how its allways been, the ultra versions come EXACTLY 6 months later just in time for availability in xmass.

[EggyToast]

:o We sure have come to expect very little from Apple. I really believe this latest powermac update should be at least 3.0 Gig with high end video that is equal to the task of the PC market. Why is it that we have to settle for 2nd best. Sometimes being a MAC person really feels like I'm getting screwed.

So, what's the difference between waiting until the end of the year for the 3ghz machines to come out with no speed bump in between, and getting a speed bump in the middle of the year with those 3ghz machines still coming out at the same time?

I don't really see what the big deal is. It's not like there's any real competition on the PC side -- everyone is still selling basic word processing machines, and the high end machines (look at Alienware's video machines) are significantly more expensive than Apple's machines (and still run Windows).

I tell you one thin g -- the people waiting for 3ghz dual G5s aren't going to be buying anything from this speed bump. People who are looking to buy a mac NOW, though, and don't really care about future developments, will be quite pleased to see new models come out. You can't possibly be saying it's better for Apple to simply continue selling the exact same line they have now until 3 ghz G5s are available, are you?

[Photorun]

Is it just me, or is the macplus.org site down right now? (pls note date and time as of this post)... are they suddenly getting bombarded because of these kinds of "news" posts? if something like this can generate this much network traffic, maybe we shouldn't give it as much credence... ;)

Hmmm, I smell conspiracy theory, a bunch of Job's hit people were sent for a snuff job.

[ionas]

If this is true, many of us should be interested in just one thing, besides prices.

Is the 1.8 dual the actual 1.8 dual but with crappier RAM/GFX?
Or is it also a Rev. B.

I don't want blank screens, fan noise, power supply noise, crappy audio sound noise overlay by power supply and all that sh** ;).

So if the 1.8ers are normal Rev. A, I wont get why people will buy them; further if the prices stay ther same (or at least the rations stay the same) the middle model will about the same bang for the buck with all products (relative to what you spend)

so what do you say; rev a? rev b?

[mclosers]

Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 Combo drive Powermacs - $1500
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2000
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs - $2700

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 15 " iMac - $1300
Single 2.0 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac - $2000
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac - $2300

Single 1.25 GHZ G4 12 " iBook - $1200
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 14 " iBook - $1500

Single 2.0 GHZ G5 15 " Combo drive Powerbook - $2000
Single 2.2 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook - $2500
Single 2.5 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook - $3000

Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac - $1000
Single 1.5 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac - $1299

That is absurd. What are you thinking... This is more realalistic but still not right
March 23rd-ish
Dual 1.8 GHZ G5 super drive Powermacs
Dual 2.2 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs
Dual 2.4 GHZ G5 8X Superdrive Powermacs

May -ish
Single 1.25 GHZ G5 15 " iMac
Single 1.4 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive iMac
Single 1.6 GHZ G5 20 " Superdrive iMac

September-ish
Single 1 GHZ G4 12 " iBook
Single 1 GHZ G4 14 " iBook
Single 1.3 GHZ G4 14 " iBook

September -ish
Single 1.2 GHZ G5 12 " Combo drive Powerbook
Single 1.6 GHZ G5 15 " Superdrive Powerbook
Single 1.8 GHZ G5 17 " Superdrive Powerbook

July ish
Single 1.25 GHZ G4 17 " Combo drive eMac
Single 1.4 GHZ G4 17 " Superdrive eMac

May-ish
g4 (generation not processor) iPod
25-30GB
40GB
60GB
With iPod Mini's Click wheel but slightly larger.

[Grimace]

I had an idea for new powerbooks that might be bad or good, so tell me what you think: Since people are always complaining that the new pbooks mke your palms sweat, what if apple were to put the new g5 powerbooks grid holes on surface where one would put their hands(assuming they have them like the PM's) ?

Would that be uncomfortable, or could they put it just off to the side off the palm placement for better cooling of that palm issue?

There is the big problem of stuff falling into the powerbook. That is less of a concern on a desktop. It would destroy a laptop in a month.

[mdriftmeyer]

I've never had a problem upgrading my own system with non-Apple parts. Just turn off, install, and reboot.

So where would the profit margins be if Apple sold the system without memory, super-drive/cd-rw, video card and RAM?

[3.1416]

Never base a purchase / or wait for a purchase on rumors.

There's a difference between "rumor" and "common sense". These specific predictions and the March 23 date are the former. That there will be a G5 update soon is the latter.

[wrldwzrd89]

I would like to see the Rev. B PowerMac G5s at 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 GHz, and the Rev. C PowerMac G5s at 2.8, 3.0, and 3.2 GHz. If Apple could pull this off, I'd be very happy (not happy enough to buy a G5, though, since I got a 17" iMac in late January and received it in early February).

[JamesDPS]

wow i'm impressed that anyone read my earlier hella-long post in any detail.... (regarding "rumor" vs. "common sense" :D)

[windowsblowsass]

Are you ready to rock?

I SAID ARE YOU READY TO ROOOOCCCCKKKK????!?
( \ / )
\ \ / /
\ \ / /
\ /´¯ | ¯`\ /
/ | | (¯ \
I | | \ \
| I´¯ |´¯ |\ \
\ ` ¯ ¯ ´ /
\ rock on /
hell f#%!ng yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ionas]

If this is true, many of us should be interested in just one thing, besides prices.

Is the 1.8 dual the actual 1.8 dual but with crappier RAM/GFX?
Or is it also a Rev. B.

I don't want blank screens, fan noise, power supply noise, crappy audio sound noise overlay by power supply and all that sh** .

So if the 1.8ers are normal Rev. A, I wont get why people will buy them; further if the prices stay ther same (or at least the price rations stay the same), all models will have about the same price/value relation.

so what do you say about the 1.8;
rev a? rev b?

[bradz_id]

I'd Really Like to see The Radeon 9800XT in the G5. I'd also like to see much lower latency RAM used. RAM is meant to have a good balance of latency and clock speed. G5 RAM's CAS latency is at either 2.5 or 3 but 5 years ago, I had SDRAM with a CAS latency of 2. Recently I bought a PC with DDR500 running at full speed and CL3. It sucked! Next time, I got DDR400 running at CL2 and it WAY outperformed the DDR500!

[Dont Hurt Me]

1.8s are probably rev a dual or single. the bottom line is every darn product they make needs help except the pods. everything is due for a update but I wonder how many fools will keep paying extreme prices for outdated technology.How old are the monitors? seems they were using those when the cube came out. Steve is probably just milking more users. G5 should have been introduced 2 years ago and it wasnt. Im sorry but iam not going to pay a arm and a leg for last years technology or even older. Pods and dual g5s are the only items that warrant the prices. I like Emac but come on they were selling g4s at 1 gig 3 years ago. Hardware still sucks and is still dated and overpriced. I wish they would just sell software that i could stick on some fast Intel machine. They should take all the bonus money from the Hardware guys and give it to the Software guys. Software is the only thing that keeps me a Mac user.

[wrldwzrd89]

1.8s are probably rev a dual or single. the bottom line is every darn product they make needs help except the pods. everything is due for a update but I wonder how many fools will keep paying extreme prices for outdated technology.How old are the monitors? seems they were using those when the cube came out. Steve is probably just milking more users. G5 should have been introduced 2 years ago and it wasnt. Im sorry but iam not going to pay a arm and a leg for last years technology or even older. Pods and dual g5s are the only items that warrant the prices. I like Emac but come on they were selling g4s at 1 gig 3 years ago. Hardware still sucks and is still dated and overpriced. I wish they would just sell software that i could stick on some fast Intel machine. They should take all the bonus money from the Hardware guys and give it to the Software guys. Software is the only thing that keeps me a Mac user.

Sheesh! You're awfully negative. First of all, the PowerPC G4 is not as 'sucky' as you make it out to be. My 17" iMac boots in just 30 seconds; it's got one of those PowerPC G4s in it. Sure, Macs are expensive. I think they're MORE than worth it since they come with Apple's high quality software. Secondly, I don't think Apple ever will or even wants to target the extreme low-end market. The eMac is pretty much at the bottom of their price range. Oh, and regarding Intel hardware? Apple would be out of business quickly if that happened.

[MacRAND]

Is it just me, or is the http://www.macplus.org site down right now? (pls note date and time as of this post)... are they suddenly getting bombarded because of these kinds of "news" posts? if something like this can generate this much network traffic, maybe we shouldn't give it as much credence... ;)NO, it is NOT just you, JamesDPS. You're in California and I'm in Arizona and I have the same problem. Yes, definately a conspiracy because they are not having problems in UK or SC (no, "Carolina" not Southern California)

FORGET ABOUT LOOKING At THE ARTICLE
(besides it was in French)
[however, we always have Translation in Sherlock]

It had been Temporarily Missing ! ! !
(But it is back. Probably hard to load, too much traffic initially.)

** See good English Translation from French at post #83 **
Look inside Quote Box, not in Post Itself
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=63427&page=4&pp=25
If you just bought a G5 - it may be time to TAKE IT BACK for a refund.
NOTE: price of 3 new models is purely speculative, even "release" info is pure rumor.
But, it may soon be an EARLY

G 5 PowerMac 2.4GHz
C H R I S T M A S
o n
M a r c h 2 3 r d, 2 0 0 4
For all good little
MacGIRLS & MacBOYS

If this link does NOT work for you:
http://www.macplus.org

Try this: (compliments of arn; he is a god, knows everything! :p)
http://62.233.44.223/ or
http://62.233.44.223/magplus/sommaire.php

arn says it is a DNS problem with our ISP (whatever that REALLY means :) ) He also, later told me the Article has been "pulled".

[billyboy]

As a stock holder you have to realize that market share is important but an even begger concern is the continual decline in unit shipments. The evidence is pretty clear that the machines are not selling well I'm not sure where you get the idea that they are.

In any event I'm not talking about fire sale prices, I just want to see Apple in acompetitive position. If you believe that $1200 dollars is a fire sale price then you really need to look at the PC market. The hardware does not need to be expensive to be profitable!



Well if you are into low profits high turnover, that is correct. Unfortunately it is a stupid self destruct policy for a company with a bomb-proof niche market.

Work out what market your company is in, their share of the market, who is running the company, prospects for future growth, profit margins, and assorted financial indicators, and then invest accordingly. Apple scores quite well on many points these days.

[JamesDPS]

1.8s are probably rev a dual or single. the bottom line is every darn product they make needs help except the pods. everything is due for a update but I wonder how many fools will keep paying extreme prices for outdated technology.How old are the monitors? seems they were using those when the cube came out. Steve is probably just milking more users. G5 should have been introduced 2 years ago and it wasnt. Im sorry but iam not going to pay a arm and a leg for last years technology or even older. Pods and dual g5s are the only items that warrant the prices. I like Emac but come on they were selling g4s at 1 gig 3 years ago. Hardware still sucks and is still dated and overpriced. I wish they would just sell software that i could stick on some fast Intel machine. They should take all the bonus money from the Hardware guys and give it to the Software guys. Software is the only thing that keeps me a Mac user.

You have to remember: Apple is fundamentally a hardware company. It just so happens that their Macintosh operating system only runs on Apple computers (and, for a short period of time, some clones like my PowerCenter), and that OSX is one of the best OS's ever put together, so you need to buy Apple hardware to run it and the applications designed for it. Apple is NOT primarily a software company, it just happens that the design of their OS has led to some of the best software innovations ever made, which everyone on the wintel side tries to copy a little while later ;). I think to call the hardware "sucky" is pretty severe, and on that note it's probably largely due to the "non-sucky-ness" of the iPod that wintel types are suddenly looking at Apple as a contender for their hardware needs. I understand what you mean about taking time bringing new hardware to the users (I'm still waiting for a new G5, and using a Pismo in the mean time!) but when it IS available, it's solid on reliability (and long-lasting), amazingly designed from practical and aesthetic points of view, etc. etc. This is a mac site so I'm preaching to the choir, obviously :D

[Opteron]

Look a little on the conservative side to me. No graphics card update.

What are you planning to update the graphics cards with?
PCI-Express is not due for release until mid to late april.

[JamesDPS]

btw looks like the macplus.org site is (at least sort of) back up -- i wonder if they're recovering from the secret attack...? :cool:

[Dave00]

Two points, in an already overcrowded discussion:

(1) The iMac G5 would seem to be very unlikely anytime soon. If you look at the cooling system required for the powermacs, it's obvious you could never use the original G5 chips in an iMac. And I, for one, wouldn't expect them to debut what are bound to be limited supplies of the 970FX in the supposedly consumer-level iMac.

(2) A 20% increase in clock speed does not equal a 20% increase in performance. Rather, performance tends to scale faster than processor speed. This is easily verifiable on speed tests previously published.

Dave

[Dont Hurt Me]

G4 is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.

[cheapnis]

I have to agree that Apple aren't doing themselves any favours with the RAM they're supplying as well as in other areas. I've been "evangelising" Macs for 15 years - but it gets hard when a friend is faced with the option to get a PC with XP Pro, a 1.8 Ghz processor Combo drive and 512MB of RAM for as little as £350 to tell them they should spend twice or three times that much to buy a Mac... normally the comparison is with iMacs not G5 towers here but its the same dilemma to the punter faced with confusing numbers...bigger MUST be better in their eyes and most of the time they're not wrong!

and YES YES YES I have ALL the counter-arguments at my finger tips and I often succeed despite this... most often because (feeling smug that I won't have to do much) I'm happy to say I'll hold their hands and help out IF they buy a Mac.

But these are NOT people who can or even want to deal with objective information about relative processor speeds...you try telling anyone that a smaller number is *really* better than a bigger one and you have a tough time. It doesn't matter whether the potential buyer is wondering why they only have one mouse button when all their friends computers have (at least) two or why as soon as they take delivery of their new Mac I'm insisting that they spend a bit more money and get some extra RAM.

Apple have to realise that the vast majority of people out there are NOT the kinds of people who read these forums, they're the kind of people who look at a Mac, think "wow that's cool" and then walk over and compare NUMBERS not having the first clue what those numbers mean except bigger is better than small...that's what they're bombarded with day in day out in advertising and marketing in all areas of life as consumers. Does Apple really think that they're suddenly going to stop thinking that way just cos they're looking at a Mac???

So if Apple only want to sell their machines to technical savvy "pro" users who know how to add additional RAM then they're going the right way... and yes I know how ridiculous it is to say that adding more RAM is 'technical', but for most people out there its just WAY to scary to undo the lid on their Mac. They just assume they'll fry something... and hey they don't have to take the back off their TV or DVD so why should they with their new computer?

What infuriates me is that the things that would make that point of sale decision go Apple's way time and again ARE so damn cheap to sort out! Even at RETAIL prices an extra 256 of RAM and a two button mouse with a scroll wheel are less than £50 for the RAM ... AND a useable two button mouse!

It just doesn't make sense... it cannot be justified and its ultimately DUMB for Apple to continue with this policy. I accept that most people buying G5's are shelling out for a top spec machine and probably DO know what they want and why they're buying it... but this kind of change in marketing has to happen from the bottom of a companies range of products up. How absurd would it be for an iMac to come with 512 or even better a GB of RAM as standard but not a G5?

ok rant over... it just hurts when I see a company doing stupid things for absolutely no good reason. I want to evangelise not apologise and 95% of the time Apple have made doing that pretty damn easy with their superb machines, such a shame to see it spoilt for so little.

C

[MrSugar]

G4 is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.

What?!

Yeah, it's outdated, somewhat slow sometimes, but in general the G4 is nice. You can't live on this one track mind, the g4 is not the only thing in Apple computers, right now I would take a 1.25 pbook over ANY LAPTOP PC IN THE WORLD. It runs fast enough to get work done, and with the other compliments it's still the best machine. Yeah, it's not the fastest chip in the world anymore but it works just fine, it's not a like g4 crawls. You have to look at other things.

I guess maybe if you just compared pure CPU power the g4 is the worst, but if you did that then you are throwing out everything. Other hardware, casing, cooling, looks, functionality, price, software, and OS. And guess what, when it comes to Apple, all those things are easily as important, if not MORE important than processor. Yes, I want to see g5's all around, but don't make rash comments that aren't ligament.

[silvergunuk]

I just went to their website and it seems they've removed the info. Well on my browser anyway....

False alarm my browsers just being gay.

[Opteron]

G4 is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.

Why'd you stop you were on such al roll:D, and I totally agree.

[clr900]

NO, it is NOT just you, JamesDPS. You're in California and I'm in Arizona and I have the same problem. Yes, definately a conspiracy because they are not having problems in UK or SC (no, "Carolina" not Southern California)

If this link does NOT work for you:
http://www.macplus.org

Do 2 things:
1. Report by REPLY here that the MacPlus.org URL -- DOES NOT WORK IN: what STATE you are in; and
2. Try this: (compliments of arn; he is a god, knows everything! :p)
http://62.233.44.223/ or
http://62.233.44.223/magplus/sommaire.php

arn says it is a DNS problem with our ISP (whatever that REALLY means :) )

Where it works: SC, UK, ...
Does not work: CA, AZ, ...
Just checked the link, works for me. I'm in New Hampshire.

[Dont Hurt Me]

look we Pay BMW prices for a Yugo product. G4 is at the bottom of the Cpu Pile, Amd kicks its butt, Intels P4 gives it a wooping and we should be happy with this 5 year old Cpu that has spent another year at stagnation,still crippled by its Fsb, using half Of DDR and then be satisfied for paying double waht it should cost? Im sorry but if you want to charge BMW prices I expect a BMW not a Yugo. Every comment i have made is the truth. G4 is old slow outdated obsolete and overpriced that is the fact MrSugar. I wonder how much longer they can keep selling G4s from 3 years ago? Apple is making money true but the new marketshare is getting smaller and smaller every qtr. wonder why? G4 is like a P3. 2 G5s are matching 1 3.2 P4 from benches i have seen so please lets not get some more spin on Apples Hardware. It still is slow and overpriced.

[ThomasJefferson]

G4 is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.

Yes, considering it is now 2004 and we are still seeing G4 1.0 and 1.2 in iMacs and PowerMacs with a 167 FSB - the verdict is in - they officially bite. Debate is not acceptable, they just bite.

When Apple is G4/Moto free, we need to have the biggest dang intercontinental, extracontinental, multigalactic, prophylactic - bring your own alien love slave - MeetUp.com party the planet has ever seen.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I would like to slap Mr Jobs and Ives with a G4 cpu wafer! Moto just announce a 1.5 G4 Wow throw a party for the piece of crap. they should have G5s in a lot more products then one. Apples Hardware division sucks as bad as Moto's G4. The laptops are nice but still overpriced but for a computer thats on your desk the line up is very screwed. every one they make is crippled except for dual G5 and again it still takes 2 cpu's to match 1 little Intel.

[Dave the Great]

is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.
Why'd you stop you were on such al roll:D, and I totally agree.

Yeah, I second that!!

[gop007]

gop007, the report reprinted by Macrumors sounds very reasonable. Apple's past history is to take the previous middle Power Mac and make it the low end for a speed bump. So dual 1.8 for the base makes a lot of sense. Apple has dropped a dual to a single processor in the past, so it would not suprise me if the low end was a single 1.8, but I have no reason to doubt the dual base model as reported.

Your optimistic configurations are based on what? It is much more logical to believe this rumor that may be based on inside information opposed to a consumer's wishful thinking.

Well if we simply look back not too long ago we went from a top system of 1.25ghz to a low end system of 1.6ghz. My optimistic figures are based on the same speculation that this report is based on. The report may sound reasonable but Macrumors has posted inaccuarte stories before no matter how good the sources were.

Well we will just have to wait and find out. Either way I am buying the mid-level system regardless of speed.

[ThomasJefferson]

Look out now, Steve may still have a warehouse full of those old 500 MHz chips waiting for the next update. He may only change the color to ... , oh well, nevermind.

[rdowns]

It does sound like a pretty solid lineup. And if the Powermacs are all duals it clears the way for single G5s in iMacs . . .

I'm such an optimist.

Hear, hear. Slap a 2GHz chip in that puppy and let me upgrade my damn computer already.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I think Apple signed a contract 5 years ago with Moto that said we will buy G4s until you or we go out of business. In the 5 years we had 1year of no progress at all, and we just had another year of no progress at all. the good years we had small almost nothing incremental bumps of G4. What the Hell is Apple doing? Dont they see what has killed marketshare the past 5 years? they are dragging their butts with G5 when they should be doing a crash program to replace G4s in every Desk top machine. My wife and I could both get new computers for the price of 1 mac and have performance that would come close or beat a dual G5. I love the software but whats the point when Hardware just simply sucks.

[rdowns]

I seemed to have had bad luck with the cheap memory: whether it's due to things like "yields" or some other aspect of quality control, the Apple branded memory seems to work completely without kernel panics or system freezes.

That being said, here's hoping for a G5 in an iMac soon!

Don't buy cheap RAM. Buy competitively priced, quality RAM from crucial.com or Kingston.

[rdowns]

Hey all,

Speculation:

Some of you seem to think that a 400Mhz CPU speed increase is mundane. Are you nuts??

Agreed, it wasn't long ago that the fastest Mac ran at 450 MHz.

[neonart]

I've never had a problem upgrading my own system with non-Apple parts. Just turn off, install, and reboot.
<OF TOPIC>
Same here.

Don't buy the cheapest junk you can find. Just be a smart consumer and you can save a bunch by getting easy to replace items yourself. RAM is one of those items that is way to easy to buy and install yourself.
www.crucial.com has good prices, usually free shipping, and great quality. I've never had a problem in any of my Macs using Crucial RAM- and I've bought Gigabytes and Gigabytes of it.
<OF TOPIC>

In any case, I'm very excited about this Rumor! The low end machine would make a great Gaming machine with 2GB of RAM and a 9800! I'm so there!

Let's see of this holds true...

[cheapnis]

Yeah I third the comments about G4's... it needs to be said that the release of the dual 3 Ghz G5's - whenever that happens - marks the point at which Apple finally catch up. It therefore cannot happen soon enough (since by then they'll have to catch up all over again!)

The comparison to BMW prices is a very fair one... unless you happen to live in germany you can't actually USE the engine in even a 3 series let alone the 5, 7 and 8's but that doesn't stop people from buying them BECAUSE its BMW.

Apple need to be SUPER over achieving with the speed hikes they give their machines, not because most people need that processing power but because while they're being told (by Apple) that the G5 is the "BMW" of the computer world other people are successfully selling them "Ferrari's" for a fraction of the price.

Actually it would be fairer to say that they're being sold a kit car with ridiculous amounts of BHP that will be a dead duck inside a year or two - with a Ferrari badge on it. But fairness, sensible deliberation of genuine need and "ecological" concerns however desirable and worthy havent sold any NEW computers to date... people who think that way (like me) go and buy their cars and their computers secondhand and then keep them til they die. (performa 450 still running fine!)

Like I said before - and this is the LOWEST common denominator - when Apple release a two button mouse with a scroll wheel as standard THEN I will believe that their marketing people know their ass from their elbows. If you can't get something that basic right what chance with marketing/selling even the most beautifully fast machines?

I want Macs to be around ten years from now. I love 'em and thats why I want them to get it right and get it right yesterday. They need to make a quantum leap, get the 3Ghz Macs out in the summer and then kill the competition with something outrageous before 04 is out... and that means G5's across the board with desktops.
C

[MacRAND]

Just checked the link, works for me. I'm in New Hampshire.FORGET ABOUT LOOKING
FOR THE MacPlus.org
"New G5 2.4GHz" ARTICLE
(besides it was in French)
[however, we always have Translation in Sherlock]

It HAD been P U L L E D ! ! !
(OOPS! It's back up. Guess the Cat's out of the Bag:D)

Well, guys & gals, we do have the info, that cannot be pulled.

If you just bought a G5 - time to TAKE IT BACK.
Because, according to the ETHERNET BUNNY we will soon have an EARLY

G 5 PowerMac 2.4GHz
C H R I S T M A S
o n
M a r c h 2 3rd, 2 0 0 4
For all good little
MacGIRLS & MacBOYS

[daveL]

Well, I just visited the site for the first time (i.e. can't be cached) and the article is still there.

[appleface]

alright. i know we're talking pm updates and ram scandals, and many of you spit at the thought of apple making ipods and other keyboardless hardware. however, i have question that is not relevant to pmacs, but it is about ipods. when and what company is going to produce wireless earbuds for the pods? is it feasible?

[windowsblowsass]

when Apple release a two button mouse with a scroll wheel as standard THEN I will believe that their marketing people know their ass from their elbows. If you can't get something that basic right what chance with marketing/selling even the most beautifully fast machines?

I want Macs to be around ten years from now. I love 'em and thats why I want them to get it right and get it right yesterday. They need to make a quantum leap, get the 3Ghz Macs out in the summer and then kill the competition with something outrageous before 04 is out... and that means G5's across the board with desktops.
C
two button mouse blaspemy

[Frobozz]

Agreed, it wasn't long ago that the fastest Mac ran at 450 MHz.

Well, yes... but you're comparing two different things. Apple will increase overall speed in the neighborhood of 20-25% every 6 months. A 50 MHz speed increase at 400 MHz is proportionally no so crappy. I do agree with you that 400 MHz is just fine as an update... though I was hoping for 2.5 or 2.6. Neither the marketplace nor reality support any more. Let's face it-- once the G5 is in consumer products Apple will no longer have lame duck's stinking up their nice pro lines.

No later than September, I would expect Apple to be on target for:
Dual 3.0 GHz PowerMac G5
1.6 GHz to 1.8 GHz PowerBook G5's
1.6 GHz iMac G5
1.5 GHz iBook G4

[sethypoo]

I suspect the close quarters in the iMac would pretty much require using the 90nm CPU's that one finds in the G5 XServes. I would love to see a G5 iMac, and I'm sure we will.. but that's down the road a way I think.

I agree. When the new G5 iMacs get here, though, they will surely be met with much resentment from some Mac Rumors members (i.e.-You can't detach the screen! Waahh!!!!!)

:p ;)

[Dont Hurt Me]

I agree. When the new G5 iMacs get here, though, they will surely be met with much resentment from some Mac Rumors members (i.e.-You can't detach the screen! Waahh!!!!!)

:p ;)I wonder how many people that wanted to switch said the heck with it because they had a monitor that was just fine? I wonder how many said the heck with it because of no Pci slot or the heck with it because video sucked and cant be upgraded. Apple continues to find smaller and smaller market. wonder why? anyone got a Alienware because iam thinking of one since i can get one to suite me and they give you all kinds of options and I wont have to play Apples game anymore.

[Naimfan]

iMac--I just told a friend of mine to forget the iMac and get a basic Power Mac--she already has a perfectly good monitor. She also has 4 (!) PCs in the house, all of them apparently give her headaches...

I agree with those that say Apple needs SOME kind of affordable consumer machine. Desperately, in fact. But only if they're serious about getting people to switch.

Best,

Bob

[windowsblowsass]

I think that apple has lost sight of what the company really is/was supposed to be about apple is supposed to be making "a computer for the rest of us" but were no longer doing tht apple is becoming to technical and not as easy for people to understand so their scared away were comparing ourselves to bmws when we should be comparing our selves for chevys a car everyone can use and afford to use. Apples website praises that pros use the computers but is that a good thing? yes and no yes its good the computers are good for profesionals but shouldnt we be showing normal people who never knew how to use a computer using one easily making it truly for the rest of us?

[Photorun]

I wonder how many people that wanted to switch said the heck with it because they had a monitor that was just fine? I wonder how many said the heck with it because of no Pci slot or the heck with it because video sucked and cant be upgraded. Apple continues to find smaller and smaller market. wonder why? anyone got a Alienware because iam thinking of one since i can get one to suite me and they give you all kinds of options and I wont have to play Apples game anymore.

Then leave Dont Hurt Me and stop your incessant whining on these forums, get an Alienware and be happy. I share much of your frustation with Apple, couldn't find their asses with both hands and love shooting themselves in the feet (both) but overall they may be coming around.

[Photorun]

FORGET ABOUT LOOKING
FOR THE MacPlus.org
"New G5 2.4GHz" ARTICLE
(besides it was in French)
[however, we always have Translation in Sherlock]

It has been P U L L E D ! ! !
(as in - NOT THERE anymore, gone - blank)

Well, guys & gals, we do have the info, that cannot be pulled.

If you just bought a G5 - time to TAKE IT BACK.
Because, according to the ETHERNET BUNNY we will soon have an EARLY

G 5 PowerMac 2.4GHz
C H R I S T M A S
o n
M a r c h 2 3rd, 2 0 0 4
For all good little
MacGIRLS & MacBOYS

I know one shouldn't feed the trolls but WTF are you talking about? Not xmas you so and so, they're coming out this month!

[rdowns]

I agree. When the new G5 iMacs get here, though, they will surely be met with much resentment from some Mac Rumors members (i.e.-You can't detach the screen! Waahh!!!!!)

:p ;)

When the new G5 iMacs get here, I may be a former Apple user. One can take so much frustration after 18 years as an Apple user.

[rdowns]

iMac--I just told a friend of mine to forget the iMac and get a basic Power Mac--she already has a perfectly good monitor. She also has 4 (!) PCs in the house, all of them apparently give her headaches...

I agree with those that say Apple needs SOME kind of affordable consumer machine. Desperately, in fact. But only if they're serious about getting people to switch.

Best,

Bob

To hell with affordable, I want a consumer machine that doesn't have a 3 year old CPU, a system bus that my grandmother can outrun and bastardized features.

[rdowns]

I know one shouldn't feed the trolls but WTF are you talking about? Not xmas you so and so, they're coming out this month!

Lighten up dude, did you read what he wrote?

G 5 PowerMac 2.4GHz
C H R I S T M A S
o n
M a r c h 2 3rd, 2 0 0 4

Is March 23rd not this month?

[ionas]

1. Everyone with a working brain can extract most of the information even if that page is written in Frensh
2. Getting the IP of a DNS is a task of 5 seconds and nothing Godly, though I want to thank Arn for all this and his work :)
3. Brining Back your Mac is a stupid idea; if you got no Problems you wont see any real difference, so trading in your actual PM G5 does only make sense if you got any kinds of trouble.
4. The article on macplus is not pulled (at the writing of this post: 3:00 AM CET / GMT + 1)
5. I don't want to see Webpages (if those exist) designed by you ;p (my eyes still burn from your trolly styled post)
6. Sorry for my negativ pessimistic destructive view onto the world; no go and eat lots of meat and shot some people ;p /me hides.

[clr900]

I know one shouldn't feed the trolls but WTF are you talking about? Not xmas you so and so, they're coming out this month!
I think he's trying to say theres going to be a christmas in March because they are coming out. by the way if this is true I will be an extremely happy little boy.

[MacRAND]

Is it just me, or is the macplus.org site down right now? (pls note date and time as of this post)... are they suddenly getting bombarded because of these kinds of "news" posts? if something like this can generate this much network traffic, maybe we shouldn't give it as much credence... ;)Well, the Article was pulled, now it is back. Here's a translation a la Sherlock.

Futures PowerMacintosh G5? (Rumour)
March 5, 2004 - 23:42
Our anonymous advisor of Anglo-Saxon extraction* reconsiders a possible date of output (release date) of the next machines of the professional range APPLE. According to its information, it would seem that roadmap (note: the passenger waybill) intern of the laboratories of Cupertino (Apple Computers) gave the green light so that the range (of computers) is (to be) announced as of Tuesday March 23, 2004 for an immediate availability, and with a deadline of 1 month for the rest of the world concerning the model 2,4GHz.
Décidemment (decidedly), that would become really a practice these outputs shifted if this rumour were confirmed... (it's a change in Apple's release practice)

Concerning the contents of the updated range, we would have right (correct)
(I specify again, it is a RUMOUR, thus continue to save! :) )
according to him with the following machines:

1) entry level, PowerMac G5 bi-processors
dual 1,8 GHz,
256 Mo of DDR400 (and either 333), a
hard disk of 80 Go Serial ATA,
three sites PCI-X(instead of the NCV "traditional of the current modeèle) and the
card video GeForce 5200 will utlra 64 Mo of Vram

2) middle level, PowerMac G5 bi-processors
dual 2,2 GHz,
512 Mo of DDR400, a
hard disk of 160 Go Serial ATA, the
video card Radeon 9600 64Mo of Vram

3) top level, PowerMacintosh G5 bi-processors
dual 2,4 GHz,
512 Mo of DDR400, a
hard disk of 160 Go Serial ATA, the
video card
Radeon 9600 64 Mo of Vram

And finally, in option BTO (Built to order), the possibility of integrating
Radeon 9800 Pro currently sold to (sells for) 350$ USD.

If this rumour proves to be (well) founded, one never knows, we would note that only the modèle entrée de gamme would have relatively in-depth changes, and possibly the best quality-price ratio thus with my direction of this range; if the current tariffs (prices) do not change. But good, that remains "supputuesque" calculation, therefore (let us) quietly wait to see what the laboratories of Apple (have) prepared us for the spring-cleaning!
MacGregor

* Anglo-Saxon extraction meaning English speaking (non-French); unless, the author really means some Brit from the UK working for Apple Laboratories in America.

This petty "Anglo-Saxon" reference shows how today's French can have such an amazing fixation on English History, especially before the Norman-French Conquest over 1066 A.D. England.

In 1066, King Edward died (of old age) and initially the Anglo-Saxon Witan (Great Council) chose Harold II as their king. However, Harold's cousin, Prince William of Normandy (northwestern coast of France) objected, claiming his blood right to the crown. Therefore, William invaded England with his army, landed without opposition at Pevensey, near Hastings, slew cousin Harold, Earl of Wessex, during the Battle of Hastings on Oct. 14, 1066 (an arrow shot in the eye :eek: ) thereafter, he was crowned King William the Conqueror before Christmas that year. William's victory and long rule introduced Norman-French words (like "beef" to eat, instead of "cow" to milk) into the heretofore pure Anglo-Saxon language, which eventually became modern ENGLISH...but, of course. As King of England, he was also in effect King of both England AND Normandy, along the coast of France, not an endearing situation for the "King of France", who had to tolerate the uneasy situation.

Besides the Anglo-Saxon hatred for their Norman invaders (presaging Anglo-Saxon Robin Hood, Earl of Locksley's [or, possibly the Earl of Huntingdon] conflict 300 years later with Norman King John and the Shire Reeve of Nottinghamshire), the Normans and the French-French have disliked each other for over a thousand years. This is because the Normans come from hearty Norse ancestory (including flaming red hair), and have more than once beaten up on the "real" French and their King. The Normans, for much of their existence, had refused to recognize the French King as their sovereign...until the French Revolution settled everything, when the king became irrelevant (along with his head).
Ah, can you hear sweet strains of Celtic music;
but please, no River Dance.

If the author is in fact "MacGregor",
then a French Anglo-Saxon Scot of Danish/Norwegian (Norse) ancestory may have written this article... one never knows. :)

[Naimfan]

To hell with affordable, I want a consumer machine that doesn't have a 3 year old CPU, a system bus that my grandmother can outrun and bastardized features.

LOL! Hilarious!

But if Apple is serious about getting people to switch, affordable IS key.

Then again, I do think the iPod and Mini are all about getting people to switch--even if not immediately, then down the road. I know several folks who have bought iPods etc and then bought their first Mac...

Best,

Bob

[clr900]

So has the article been pulled or not? I don't speak french...where is it located on that website if it has not been pulled?

[invaLPsion]

I'm sorry, but the graphics cards for the new powermacs must be incorrect. Almost no update and with a measely 64mb of vram? That source is wrong! I can't believe that Apple would stay with the same graphics and video ram! That is a slap in the face to all mac gamers! :mad:

I still maintain my belief that the next update will be upwards of 3 GHz, despite what one Frechie says. :rolleyes:

[MacRAND]

alright. ... when and what company is going to produce wireless earbuds for the pods? is it feasible?YES it is. You want Mono or (STE REO) ?
Cell phone industry already has it.
Soon, Mr. Belkin, Mr. Botts, soon.

[MacRAND]

So has the article been pulled or not? I don't speak french...where is it located on that website if it has not been pulled?YES it was pulled, (arn is my witness) and now it is BACK.
The translation is in Post #181 above. ¿Comprende, compadre?

[MacRAND]

I know one shouldn't feed the trolls but WTF are you talking about? Not xmas you so and so, they're coming out this month!Hey, you gotta read all of it. And, don't blame me, I was just quoting the ETHERNET BUNNY.

[nightcap965]

I make it a firm rule never to feed trolls. Since a disproportionate number of postings on this topic appear to have their origins under bridges or other dank, dark spaces, I'm just going to have to start a thread of my own.

If my high school French is correct, this is very good news indeed. A 400 MHz speed bump is fantastic, particularly if the pricing structure remains the same. The dual G5 is not a machine for my Aunt Chloe, it's a machine for people like me, who appreciate fine design, attention to detail, and raw, brute, merciless power. If my particular applications will run better with more RAM, I know where to find it. Aunt Chloe probably doesn't need more than 256 MB to run Safari and Mail.app.

If this rumor is true (hear my prayer, O gods!), I shall be standing in line at my local Apple Store with credit card clutched in my sweaty little hand in fifteen days.

-- Guillaume

[ultrafiel]

Going to the RAM issue, sure Apple charges a lot for more RAM but that doesn't matter, I'll buy it elsewhere. The thing that bothers me is that there are 8 slots for RAM, and since you have to install in pairs, 2 will be used. 128 MB chips are pretty lame and almost seem a waste to hold slots. I'll be buying a cool Gb (2x512) from Crucial or somewhere to start and then add another gig later. I'll either get the low or mid model depending on the final specs, and hope the vid card is new. It seems strange to me though that this French site lists that the 9800 will possibly be a BTO option, why wouldn't it be? It already is a BTO option on current PowerMacs, so it would be strange if it disappeared! Maybe they mean the 9800XT, but if that were the case then all the cards would be updated. Oh well, I would have bought a new G5 for 5 weeks now, so a couple more may pass. There won't be anything better sitting on my desk once I get it reminding me of why I should be doing freelance work to earn money than playing games.

Forgot to add, I'm sure the new Superdrives will be 8x. I haven't seen old Pioneer models for sale for months now. You can get the 107 for $128 shipped. That's why I'll get a combo drive save $180, install a new drive, and sell the combo drive. It's just good economics.

[photohead]

Please Please Please, Apple I've been waiting to give you $4000.00. Its been waiting in a small bank account collecting very horrible interest. Please feed my need for speed!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
N

[reorx]

Why the heck would anyone buy a computer with an LCD screen for games? They are *way* too slow for any of the FPS genre games, making the comparison to anything with a mobile pentinum CPU just silly, because no one would seriously use a laptop for gaming.

Most people (read consumers) don't use the MHz they have. They just want a machine that is easy to use and works. For the record, I'm posting this from my wife's old latop (300MHz Celeron), remoting to my "Ancient" 1GHz AMD. Works just great for all the basic software that I run at home (You know corporate programmers don't write code at home if they don't have to). :D

That being said, I'm going to bite off on a new Mac in the March/April timeframe. I'm still debating getting a Powerbook or a G5. Don't really need the G5 speed-wise, but it'd be nice for insanely fast builds of my favorite open-source stuff. I remember when compiling the Linux kernel took over 45 minutes... Fun, interesting days.

Good thing most Mac users don't execute benchmarks as their primary jobs, or they'd be unemployed! Sometimes a computer is just a computer. (Sorry Sigmund!)

G4 is sucky in any product sitting on a desk, its ok for laps but it gets its butt handed to it by all kinds of cpu's that cost half as much. This is fact. Name one bench were a G4 1.25 can keep up with a P4 2.2,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.8,3.0,3.2,3.4 G4s suck ,they are old,they suck at gaming,the FSB is hindered to a 167 mhz while cheapo Pcs at $500 have them 3 or 4 times as fast. DDR is half used I still dont know why they even bothered with DDR in G4s. might as well kept using Sdram. G4 does suck yet they are still pushing these old and slow obsolete cpus in every darn product but Powermacs and then charging twice what they are worth. Motorolas G4 SUCKS and we all KNOW it. They are fine for web surfing and getting grandmas Email but so is a G3 for that matter.

[non fiction]

2.2 and 2.4 seem too close together. I am sure they are coming, but I doubt these are the upper configurations - hopefully 2.5 or 2.6 as the top machine

[wizard]

Honestly because Apple is still in catch up mode. The G5 while a good machine does not perform as well as some at Apple would like us to believe. I really want Apple to sell the fastest PC available, a 20% increase in performance wimply will not give us a PC that could be reasonably considered fast.

The disappointment comes from wanting to see Apple stay around a little longer as a viable PC manufacture. If they can not produce equipment that is competitive then they won't be around long. I realize that this is almost a constant concern in the Mac market place and has yet to bear fruit, but frankly Apples market share has never been so bad. Apples eroding market share is due to one issue that is the lack of value in there machines. If Apple can overcome the value issue with hardware that actually performs like winning hardware then they may be able to reaquire some of that market share.

Really anybody that would like to see Apple selling PC's three years from now should be disappointed. We can only hope that the information posted was pulled out of somebodies behind.

Thanks
Dave

Why do people sound so surprised and disappointed? Apple is still on target to hit the 3 ghz mark by the end of the summer (mid-September).

2.0 --> 2.4 ghz (20% increase)
2.4 --> 3.0 ghz (25% increase)

2.0 --> 2.5 ghz (25% increase)
2.5 --> 3.0 ghz (20% increase)

Apple is following the same old pattern they've always followed: 20-25% upgrade every six months with the middle dropping down to the low-end. These new specs would basically fall in line with their pattern.

Now I agree that the graphics specs aren't too exciting, but the report seems pretty vague in that regard.

Remember that the 2.2 and 2.4 ghz will be the new 970fx. The 1.8s may be the old 970s leftover. They're probably skipping the 2.0s because there aren't too many of them around or they're saving them for another model.

[mattmack]

French site, MacPlus.org (http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5716), reports that according to their source, 3 new PowerMac G5 models will be released on Tuesday, March 23rd.

According to their information, the new machines will come in at the following specs:

Dual 1.8GHz G5, 256MB DDR400, 80GB HD, GeForce 5200 Ultra
Dual 2.2GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600
Dual 2.4GHz G5, 512MB DDR400, 160GB HD, Radeon 9600

MacPlus.org does not frequently publish rumors, but has published (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021107015529.shtml) an accurate release date in the past.
Just in time for my tax refund :p

[mattmack]

That is a slap in the face to all mac gamers! :mad:
:Yeah like we're not used to that :rolleyes:

[ethernet76]

2.2 and 2.4 seem too close together. I am sure they are coming, but I doubt these are the upper configurations - hopefully 2.5 or 2.6 as the top machine

200 mhz is too close? P4s difference between the top of the line is 200 mhz, and they're at something like 3.4. Maybe I'm the only one that remembers the days of 16 and 25 mhz jumps?

[MrSugar]

Honestly because Apple is still in catch up mode. The G5 while a good machine does not perform as well as some at Apple would like us to believe. I really want Apple to sell the fastest PC available, a 20% increase in performance wimply will not give us a PC that could be reasonably considered fast.


Apple will be around in 3 years, they are earning money.

The G5 is extremely competitive, even the current model. We aren't talking G4 here... seriously I don't even understand how you can post this, really it makes no sense. What do you mean a 20% increase in performance will not gives us a PC that can be considered reasonably fast?!?! The Dual G5 is already INSANELY fast, I dunno what you are talking about but I have used one first hand many times, and run many different programs. To give you an idea I run a really nice PC right now and the G5 handles just as fast if not faster. Please.... back up what you are saying... blah

[qazwsxedc30]

This is not right apple has a memory upgrades deal through March 27, 2004. Check the apple store website

[mattmack]

they should have G5s in a lot more products then one. ummm it's two isn't it

[wizard]

Again, if you consider an alleged raw CPU speed increase of 400Mhz small, you must be dialing in from utopia. Overall system improvements are key, not bowing to the Mhz myth. I think there are more legitimate things to complain about. This certainly isn't one of them.

Again you failed to explain what the MHz myth has to do with Apples product line updates. Here MHz means everything unless you move to a new PPC chip that is not derived from the 970. Those are coming but I'd be surprised if we see them in the next update.

The problem with 400MHz is that even this increase will not result in a competitive machine relative to the i86 world. The sound of that last blurb may hurt the ears of some committed Mac users but it is the truth. Apple palys around with 6 to 9 month updates cycles but unfortunately has their machines eclipsed in a matter of months by the continuous growth of i68 hardware.

Based on hearsay and fear. What's factual? Apple and IBM were able to bring to market a revolutionary new chip and Apple was able to materialize an incredible new powermac which shipped last fall. The machine was able to help Va. Tech rank in the top 5 supercomputer class. Those are facts.

Rival chip makers would love to only achieve a 400 Mhz increase over the previous version of a chip. Again, we don't know because nothing official has been announced, so relax.

I'd love to see Apple/IBM match the continual improvements that AMD is able to apply to their chips!

I'm rather relaxed because I know I won't be sinking my money into this mistake if it comes to pass.



Pardon? I don't think anyone is arguing other whether or not a corporation gets volume discounts when buying components, etc. As i said before and has been common place, resellers get the opportunity to make a deal sweeter by adding in RAM, printers and other perks. Could Apple load up all of the machines with RAM? Yes. But they wouldn't be able to sell the machines at the fire sale prices you seem to suggest, now would they? Can't have your cake and eat it too.

NO one has suggested Apple sell anything at fire sale prices I just want them to be competitive. If I was interested in fire sale prices I would have suggested a base model at $800.

There is no reason whatsoever to keep Apple form selling a machine with a decent amount of RAM. The cost relative to the rest of the machine is nothing and would go far to erasing the perception that Apple machines are valueless.


Thank God Apple doesn't solely rely upon one specific product in order to survive. Also, with them being debt-free with over 4 billion in cash in the bank, they're in better financial shape than their peers. They're on the right track by pricing their machines sensibly and not at flea market prices. What good is marketshare if you're bankrupting your company? I'm glad they're concentrating on profibility because there's no money in selling cheap crap computers.

No one is asking Apple to bankrupt the company, we just want them to offer hardware that is not a rip off. The problem with Apple not relying on computers for their profits is that they tend to loose focus on the computer product. If you can't produce a machine that consumers want then you slowly and continually sell fewer and fewer units until suddenly those units sold are not relavent to the company. At that point Apple says by by to he Mac market and goes on to other things.

If you think Apples prices are sensible and sales of 20000 or fewer Towers per Quarter is good how do you expect the Mac market place to expand and become significnat agian. Significant to the point that new and unique software comes out on the Mac because there is a market for it.




This isn't fact, but I bet I'm right. Many who complain and whine on here do so for their own self-amusement. Cronic complainers. Again, I don't know what machine you're referencing but in tests and real world performance the new powermacs are not the dogs you're painting them to be.

I have to disagree here. The PowerMacs when they where first released could be best described as machines that held parity with i86 hardware that was on the market at the time. That is no longer the case. IN any event they have never been outstanding performers in general and only provide a beneift to a small segment of users for certain classes of applications. If this was a dog race Apple would only be winning on special purpose tracks!

Put up what? The current offerings by Apple are arguably the best ever. They have one runaway hit after another and you're still bitchin'? Name another computer maker who is doing better? I don't think that you can. There's no other computer maker who has a better OS, hardware, software combination while being debt free and with an attractive balance sheet.

The only run away hits that Apple has had recently are the iPods which by the way have nothing to do with the Macs. The Power Mac G5 are just barely meeting Apples public sales goals, there is no way they can be considered a runaway success.

Apple may be attractive but it certianly is not for its sales of macs.


That's all I have to say.

[wizard]

Frnakly I'm not sure how you can say that a G5 is extremely competitive. Have you noticed that Apple never compares them with Opterons?

The G5 can look good when the perosn doing the comparison wants them to look good, that is not what Apple needs though. They need a computer that no one can reasonably deny is fast. The current G5 is not that machine.

It is all about Apples survival and takeing a reasonable shot at increasing market share. Apple will not have a chance of doing that, increasing market share, if there are reasonable questions about the performance of its machines. The concerns are reasonable as the G5 is not a universal winner when it comes to performance, which is something an objective mind has to admit to. I want to see Apple introduce a machine that even a biased viewer would have to admit is fast if not the fastest.

Apple will be around in 3 years, they are earning money.

The G5 is extremely competitive, even the current model. We aren't talking G4 here... seriously I don't even understand how you can post this, really it makes no sense. What do you mean a 20% increase in performance will not gives us a PC that can be considered reasonably fast?!?! The Dual G5 is already INSANELY fast, I dunno what you are talking about but I have used one first hand many times, and run many different programs. To give you an idea I run a really nice PC right now and the G5 handles just as fast if not faster. Please.... back up what you are saying... blah

[neonart]

I think that apple has lost sight of what the company really is/was supposed to be about apple is supposed to be making "a computer for the rest of us" but were no longer doing tht apple is becoming to technical and not as easy for people to understand so their scared away were comparing ourselves to bmws when we should be comparing our selves for chevys a car everyone can use and afford to use. Apples website praises that pros use the computers but is that a good thing? yes and no yes its good the computers are good for profesionals but shouldnt we be showing normal people who never knew how to use a computer using one easily making it truly for the rest of us?

Dude! There's like no punctuation in this post! :) It's was just weird reading it.

You have some good points. Alot of us are tech savvy, but there are many people who just want the basics. I think this is why the imac, eMac, and iBook are still a huge part of the game regardless of how technologically advanced they are... or aren't).

[edenwaith]

IF this rumor does prove to be true (or at least reasonably correct), I am glad to see an all dual processor line for all PM models. The last time they did that was several years ago. If they have a 1.8 DP for under $2000, I think I would be in the market for that.

I've come to the conclusion that reviewers and critics will NEVER be happy with the amount of RAM Apple puts in their machines. To them, it will never be enough. I remember just a few years ago being delighted when I had a machine up to 64 MB of RAM! Now 256 MB is looking too small. And we'll all soon be there when 1 GB of RAM just doesn't seem to be enough. Personally, if I get a cheaper computer with less RAM, I'll go for that, since Apple always over charges for its RAM. I just go to ramseeker.com and find cheap RAM. Because of cheap RAM prices, I have 896 MB of RAM in my machine. Wonderful. :)

But March 23 sounds reasonable. Add about six months, and that will put us in September, which is still in the summer (for the the northern hemisphere, of course) for the most part, so the promise that the G5s will hit 3GHz by summer 2004 can still happen and appear reasonable.

[reorx]

All this whining and moaning about MHz jumps being too small is just irritating. If you need an el-cheapo render farm, buy 1U servers at the lowest bid and stack them until you can't afford the power bill... If you're constantly jealous of the 3+ GHz Intel CPUs running XP Game Edition, by all means, go play there. Apple is not going to compete for your dollars, and they shouldn't. You are the same fickle people who blow $350+ on a video card with to play a game for 6 months until your video card is eclipsed and made obsolete by the next $350+ 300fps space heater in 6 months. I guess ATI and NVidia know their customer well.

[MrSugar]

Frnakly I'm not sure how you can say that a G5 is extremely competitive. Have you noticed that Apple never compares them with Opterons?

The G5 can look good when the perosn doing the comparison wants them to look good, that is not what Apple needs though. They need a computer that no one can reasonably deny is fast. The current G5 is not that machine.

It is all about Apples survival and takeing a reasonable shot at increasing market share. Apple will not have a chance of doing that, increasing market share, if there are reasonable questions about the performance of its machines. The concerns are reasonable as the G5 is not a universal winner when it comes to performance, which is something an objective mind has to admit to. I want to see Apple introduce a machine that even a biased viewer would have to admit is fast if not the fastest.


It is extremely competitive, look at bench marks anywhere. Maybe the opteron edges it out but the G5 is right there on the top of the list. Plus it's a PC for the future, think about it, it's a 64 bit processor that is running 32bit programs and OS, it's not even being fully utilized yet. You are nuts to think that this machine is not competitive in the high end market.

[aswitcher]

SNIP

But March 23 sounds reasonable. Add about six months, and that will put us in September, which is still in the summer (for the the northern hemisphere, of course) for the most part, so the promise that the G5s will hit 3GHz by summer 2004 can still happen and appear reasonable.

Yep, not an unrealistic scenario.

Now I wonder if those frenchies have news about the G5PB...

:p

[Sol]

A dual low-end PowerMac again? That would sell more PowerMacs for the next year than any before but not as many mid and high end configurations would be sold, maybe. The low-end configuration would likely be more expensive than the current 1.6 GHz PowerMac.

[LinuxLover]

what is really funny about this whole site... is that you people actually spend your time talking about the future. Here is a Hint: It will happen when it happens. Looking at message boards and leaving nerdy notes to one another will change nothing. But if I must go with the flow... "Man, I really can't wait for the G6! I am sure it will be really fast, maybe as fast as the P3!"

The Future is Open... and unpredictable.

[alamar]

I seemed to have had bad luck with the cheap memory: whether it's due to things like "yields" or some other aspect of quality control, the Apple branded memory seems to work completely without kernel panics or system freezes.

That being said, here's hoping for a G5 in an iMac soon!

Dude,
http://www.everymac.com/
http://www.crucial.com/
http://www.transintl.com/

between these three sites you can find safe ram, for MUCH less than Apple is hawking it. With the money you save you can buy some 300 dollar grounded boots and still come out on top. Or just keep in contact with the power supply for the entire install.

There are staving kids in many 3rd world who would kill you and your entire family (and likely a few members of their own) for the cash you've been wasting on RAM.

A G5 iMac sounds like a pipe dream to me.

[NicoMan]

A dual low-end PowerMac again? That would sell more PowerMacs for the next year than any before but not as many mid and high end configurations would be sold, maybe. The low-end configuration would likely be more expensive than the current 1.6 GHz PowerMac.

Apple selling more of the low-end config is better, I think. Supposedly, the G5 wafers are yielding more 1.8GHz-rated chips than 2.2 or 2.4. So there is less chance of having supply problems (like they did with the Dual 2.0). Besides, I'm not sure that they making more money selling the high-end configs...

[chinamac]

Apple selling more of the low-end config is better, I think. Supposedly, the G5 wafers are yielding more 1.8GHz-rated chips than 2.2 or 2.4. So there is less chance of having supply problems (like they did with the Dual 2.0). Besides, I'm not sure that they making more money selling the high-end configs...

What the market wants seems to be just the other way around. I can tell you that the distributors in most of Asia quotes a ratio of 70% dual 2s and 30% for the other two combined. For whatever reason, this seems to be the case in Asia. This could be the reason for the shortfall -big demand, rather than yield.

[NicoMan]

What the market wants seems to be just the other way around. I can tell you that the distributors in most of Asia quotes a ratio of 70% dual 2s and 30% for the other two combined. For whatever reason, this seems to be the case in Asia. This could be the reason for the shortfall -big demand, rather than yield.

Hmm the thing is, the current line-up is not a good example, because the low-end is a single-CPU config and the difference between the dual 1.8 and the the dual 2.0 is not that big (in terms of price). Hence the majority of interest in the dual 2.0, IMHO.
I feel the rumoured line-up would prove different.

[Trimix]

Somehow I doubt.

I do find it interesting that they are all duals, this might be to distance them from the new G5 iMAC!

That would be so cool, a G5 iMAC with a 20'screen.
My Amex is beginning to itch

[NicoMan]

That would be so cool, a G5 iMAC with a 20'screen.
My Amex is beginning to itch
Even though I like that prospect too, I think we can expect a different form factor for the iMac G5. The 'lamp' iMac hasn't been a success story. Too expensive and too slow (though a G5 in it would help...).

[blepo2000]

So is there a huge difference in the Nvidia board from the 9600 for doing 2D/Photoshop work?

Nope! The only place you will notice a difference between hi and low end graphics would be in 3d apps and games. Also a few people on this board are screaming for 9800s as stock cards. That's the most stupid thing I've heard in a long time, as the price would go up significantly for all costumors, but only a fraction of those do really need a card like that.

[GroundLoop]

Apple are getting just as bad with patches and updates now. 70mb for 10.3.3?? The last one was hefty too. Or don't these count?

Is there nothing Apple could do that you won't apologize for? :rolleyes:


Remember that the 70MB also includes updates to quite a few applications and not just the core OS. Updates to Safari, Mail, Disk Utility, etc. I am happy that it is a large update. I would rather get all of this stuff now, for free, rather than wait for 10.4.

Hickman

[Dont Hurt Me]

ummm it's two isn't it 1 shipping model line we are still waiting for Xserves and millions of consumers are still waiting for a decent consumer model with a current CPU.
I was checking out the Alienware which looks pretty good except for the software and all the video cards had 128 mb of ram or 256. Even low life Fx5200 had 128. Very impressive features, colors,and can option the machine to be perfect for you. I wish Apple would follow some of these Pc makers. One thing I did notice was no superdrive or dvd burning but come to think of it I have never needed to burn a dvd. combo should be fine.
Iam now thinking a dual G5 1.8 if we see them reduced or going to the Pc side with a 3.2 Intel or 3200 AMD machine with 9800. The AMD is 64 bit just like G5.
A Imac G5 with at least a 9600 in it would be good but I just cant wait another year for Apple to get off its G4 ars and make one. Where are the rumors of a new Imac? or is Apple just interested in Pods? :mad:

[klaus]

I don't think the new models will ship with the same videocards as the "older" ones. Ati has the R420 in the pipeline, and it will still have an agp bus, the r423 will have the PCI-express bus. Therefore I think the march revisions will have new videocards (ati's r420) and maybe the 3ghz G5 will be the first to incorporate the PCI-express buses into their complete system.

The article says 'with a month delay for the rest of the world" => does that mean we europeans will only see those machines in our store a month later, say april, begin may? if true, that sucks..., why must there be such a difference in availability between us and europe?


Klaus

[MacRAND]

... One thing I did notice was no superdrive or dvd burning but come to think of it I have never needed to burn a dvd. combo should be fine.Just because the Combo is "standard" for the Dual G5 1.8GHz machine, does not mean anything:

A. Apple Store will be happy to upgrade to a SuperDrive, just make sure the speed (8x) and the price are well worth it before you CLICK the Option button, or

B. It is so simple to pull the Combo Drive out (and then sell it), and
replace it with a state-of-the-art 8x DVD burning Pioneer DVR-A07 DVD/CD±R/RW SuperDrive for way under $200 by yourself - 4 screws, in and out, that's about all there is to it.
http://www.pioneerusa.com/pio/pe/images/portal/cit_3442/48224579DVR-A07.gif
Sell the Combo to a MacBuddy in your neighborhood, or auction it off over eBay so it offsets the cost of your SuperDrive. Or, you can always buy a solid FireWire enclosure from FirewireDirect.com or someone, keep the Combo and double up for speedier copying.

(This weekend, I condensed (7) CDs full of photo clip art I use with Keynote into (1) DVD; now I don't have to "Insert CD 4" etc. each time I want a full size image, and the dual laser drives saved lots of time. Actually, I had 3 going at once (there are benefits to being ADD and multi-tasked), an super-fast external CD drive (Yamaha) and an external SuperDrive (LaCie d2) feeding sequential CD discs burned to my new 8x internal SuperDrive. Roxio's Toast 6 made it easy, especially since I used their "Disk Image" capability to fool the Photo Clip Art Application into thinking I was mounting 7 separate CDs on my desktop, when it was just one DVD.)

Besides being able to backup 4.7GB of data to one DVD-R/RW, there is editing DV clips with iMovie, and burning DVD home movies with iDVD...
Isn't a SuperDrive the center of a Mac's "digital hub"?
Burn baby, burn (or, toast ;) ).http://www.pioneerusa.com/pio/pe/images/portal/cit_3442/48224579A07-box.gif
In February when I got my 8x DVD burner at Fry's, I thought their street price of $199 was pretty good since it had just dropped $30 from $229 list, so with Pioneer's $30 mail-in rebate (expires 3/31/2004) I figured $169 was good. Wrong, online I later (after my purchase) found cyber street prices (no tax) were as much as $20 to $30 lower than Fry's. :( Oh, well.
But, I can still count on selling my old 2x Pioneer SuperDrive for at least $90 (yep, already got a buyer). ;)
So, prices are getting gooder and gooder (yes, I know "gooder" is not a word; dah!).

I predict that Apple will not only announce the 3 new G5s on March 23rd, they will have
8x SuperDrives in them, and Apple will have
8x DVD-R Media 5-packs (rare still) for either $14.99 ($3 each) or $19.99 ($4 each).
4x is currently $9.99, and 2x (if you can find them anymore) are $7.99.
When will Dual Layer DVD-R[DL] become available? That's anyone's guess.
No Steve, I do not have an insider, except maybe the Anglo-Saxon Intern we've all been reading about in the French News forum MacPlus.org. Nah, just kidding...arn was the one who told me.:eek:

[wrldwzrd89]

1 shipping model line we are still waiting for Xserves and millions of consumers are still waiting for a decent consumer model with a current CPU.
I was checking out the Alienware which looks pretty good except for the software and all the video cards had 128 mb of ram or 256. Even low life Fx5200 had 128. Very impressive features, colors,and can option the machine to be perfect for you. I wish Apple would follow some of these Pc makers. One thing I did notice was no superdrive or dvd burning but come to think of it I have never needed to burn a dvd. combo should be fine.
Iam now thinking a dual G5 1.8 if we see them reduced or going to the Pc side with a 3.2 Intel or 3200 AMD machine with 9800. The AMD is 64 bit just like G5.
A Imac G5 with at least a 9600 in it would be good but I just cant wait another year for Apple to get off its G4 ars and make one. Where are the rumors of a new Imac? or is Apple just interested in Pods? :mad:
I'm not sure that Apple has full control over when they are going to release a G5 iMac. I suspect that supply issues at IBM's end may be holding things up. Another possibility is that Apple wants to release the PowerMac G5 updates first before G5 iMacs, and that supply issues with the G5s destined for the PowerMacs are by extension holding up G5 iMacs (and possibly also G5 PowerBooks). What makes you think an ATI Radeon 9600 should be in an iMac? Serious gamers will go for the PowerMacs, not the iMacs. Most other people will avoid the Mac completely and get a PC and/or a console for gaming. Plus, putting a better graphics card in the iMac now makes no sense until the PowerMacs get better graphics cards as standard, which looks unlikely at this point.

[sedarby]

Exactly. It's clear that the iMacs have to get G5s very soon, and the obvious way to differentiate the towers is to make them all dual. Given that, Apple doesn't want to have the low end too close to the midrange. They've almost always arranged the tower lineup so that the midrange has the best price/performance ratio, leaving the low end for the budget-conscious and the high end for those who need every bit of performance.

Has Apple in all of history EVER allowed the iMac to outclass the Powerbook? I don't believe you will see a G5 in an iMac until it has been released in a PowerBook first. They may break tradition but why would they?

[Dont Hurt Me]

you guys are right Apple instead of making the best product plays all these stupid games between one product line and another. just like you said cant give imac a G5 until powerbook and cant give powerbook one until powermac gets the new smaller etc and before you know it another year has gone by. To many darn games by Apple instead of just letting market decide winners and loosers.they are to busy stumbling over themself while the Pc world has gone right on by. I like my mac but the G4 is way to slow for decent gaming(1.47 G4) and if I go Pc Ill use it for everything. I need to do a little research. One thing I do know is that the Hardware on the otherside is way above the scraps we get from Apple, Ati etc. I really thought we would at least have had a all in wonder ati product now. Pc world has a 9600 and 9800 all in wonder.Video cards on the otherside makes me want to cry. The more I look the more I see the otherside just running away from the scraps we get from Apple and its smaller and smaller marketshare.. Itunes now works in Wintels world what will be next? Apple is becoming a very fringe player in my H.O.

[MacRAND]

Has Apple in all of history EVER allowed the iMac to outclass the Powerbook? snipWell, you cannot get a 20" LCD in a PowerBook, and none is likely. But, you do have a 20" iMac. No big deal.
http://a272.g.akamai.net/7/272/51/4a1ab63f29b21c/www.apple.com/imac/images/index_head102803.jpg

[wrldwzrd89]

you guys are right Apple instead of making the best product plays all these stupid games between one product line and another. just like you said cant give imac a G5 until powerbook and cant give powerbook one until powermac gets the new smaller etc and before you know it another year has gone by. To many darn games by Apple instead of just letting market decide winners and loosers.they are to busy stumbling over themself while the Pc world has gone right on by. I like my mac but the G4 is way to slow for decent gaming(1.47 G4) and if I go Pc Ill use it for everything. I need to do a little research. One thing I do know is that the Hardware on the otherside is way above the scraps we get from Apple, Ati etc. I really thought we would at least have had a all in wonder ati product now. Pc world has a 9600 and 9800 all in wonder.Video cards on the otherside makes me want to cry. The more I look the more I see the otherside just running away from the scraps we get from Apple and its smaller and smaller marketshare.. Itunes now works in Wintels world what will be next? Apple is becoming a very fringe player in my H.O.
Hey DHM, Isn't Apple already a fringe player as far as global marketshare goes? That means that you wish to follow the marketshare for Apple vs. Microsoft as far as computers you own goes? Hmm, how very interesting. What kind of games do you play that a G4 would be too slow for? I play realMYST; it plays smoothly on my (G4) 17" iMac even at maximum resolution, color depth, and detail (my iMac has an nVidia FX 5200 Ultra with 64 MB of video RAM). Sadly, I don't have any other games that tax a 3D graphics card as much (or little) as realMYST does. Before I got the iMac, I had a PowerBook 667 whose video card had only 16 MB of VRAM. Ouch, was realMYST slow and jerky on that hardware.

[johnnyjibbs]

iMacs are desktops, PowerBooks are laptops. Therefore, it doesn't matter whether one is more powerful than the other because they are DIFFERENT markets. If they have G5-ready iMacs, release them. Don't wait for PowerBooks.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Fps and simulaters, ut2003,ut2004 Doom3 when it comes Halo Nascar etc. I know gaming is only for the Pc crowd. I was looking at a alienware notebook and it was getting 70+ frames running ut2003 at 1024x 768. then i thought my god my G4 1.47 & geforce3 is only getting like 31 at 800x 600 so a pc notebook blows away my desktop mac. Also looked at MacAddict Magazine and Pc's were smoking the dual G5 in everything but 1 old game quake 3. everything else wasnt even close. All those other benches put the PC even with the dual G5. Notice those fastest computer commercials are gone from Apple? It was a another Lie.
Nice picture of the 20" Imac but one problem, all they did is slap a big monitor on a still stale G4 that was handicap by removing L3(cant have that because other stuff has it). Apple stagnation is starting to get to me.

[csimmons]

Anyone else see the irony here? :D




Apple are getting just as bad with patches and updates now. 70mb for 10.3.3?? The last one was hefty too. Or don't these count?

Is there nothing Apple could do that you won't apologize for? :rolleyes:

...apple usually releases a patch or fix BEFORE anything catastrophic happens, which cannot be said for Microsoft, who does it after the fact.

[wrldwzrd89]

Fps and simulaters, ut2003,ut2004 Doom3 when it comes Halo Nascar etc. I know gaming is only for the Pc crowd. I was looking at a alienware notebook and it was getting 70+ frames running ut2003 at 1024x 768. then i thought my god my G4 1.47 & geforce3 is only getting like 31 at 800x 600 so a pc notebook blows away my desktop mac. Also looked at MacAddict Magazine and Pc's were smoking the dual G5 in everything but 1 old game quake 3. everything else wasnt even close. All those other benches put the PC even with the dual G5. Notice those fastest computer commercials are gone from Apple? It was a another Lie.
Nice picture of the 20" Imac but one problem, all they did is slap a big monitor on a still stale G4 that was handicap by removing L3(cant have that because other stuff has it). Apple stagnation is starting to get to me.
Maybe you should get a PC, at least for gaming. I don't play 3D shooters, and for that matter don't have very many games right now for my Mac. It seems to me that a PC is in fact the best choice for you. That being the case, I'd suggest you do some research before making a purchase. PC configurations are much more variable than Macs; thus the price also varies quite a bit. You won't get Apple's iLife or other Mac-only software when you go PC, but if you don't use most of it anyway, it's the best thing for you to do.

[pjkelnhofer]

Has Apple in all of history EVER allowed the iMac to outclass the Powerbook? I don't believe you will see a G5 in an iMac until it has been released in a PowerBook first. They may break tradition but why would they?

Actually, I am quite sure that when the Flat Panel iMac first came out, it was faster than any of the availible PB at the time. Also, the original iMac was close to if not the same processor as the PB of it's day.

The iMacs have been around for only five years. That is less than half as long as the PB and one fourth of the Mac's lifetime. There isn't really that much tradition on which to base upgrade cycles. It is really only recently (the last year or so) that the iMac has fallen behind the PB.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I really have been a Mac supporter but I think a Pc for Gaming is the way to go. Only thing will be is if I get a Pc then i will switch everything to Pc music and photos and business. Im not going to spend 2 grand on a new Pc and still use a Mac just like I dont want to spend 2 grand on a Mac and not be able to game. Mac Hardware is killing its great software. Who knows maybe they will start selling ilife for windows. :) this waiting for decent hardware has gotten so old. thanks for the replys.

[FatSweatyChimp]

...apple usually releases a patch or fix BEFORE anything catastrophic happens, which cannot be said for Microsoft, who does it after the fact.


I never said Microsoft were perfect but come on....another 70 mb?! Dial up people are going to love that.

And some recent Apple updates did more harm than good to some people (losing ethernet, firewire drives etc) so you can't say Apple are perfect.

[the future]

I really have been a Mac supporter but I think a Pc for Gaming is the way to go. Only thing will be is if I get a Pc then i will switch everything to Pc music and photos and business.
Choose worms. Choose viruses. Choose spy-ware. Choose dialers. Choose butt-ugly hardware. Choose a clumsy OS with planet-sized security holes and a hideous GUI. Choose cheapness. Choose monoculture. Choose conformity. Choose trusted computing. Redmond will take good care of you.

[the_mole1314]

Who knows maybe they will start selling ilife for windows. :)

That'll happen when Hell de-thaws and they burry Jobs in the dirt in Hell, then it MIGHT happen.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Choose worms. Choose viruses. Choose spy-ware. Choose dialers. Choose butt-ugly hardware. Choose a clumsy OS with planet-sized security holes and a hideous GUI. Choose cheapness. Choose monoculture. Choose conformity. Choose trusted computing. Redmond will take good care of you.Lets not be so hard, Alienware is cool looking as ever and will hook up to 7.1 surround sound so whats the best on Mac? so butt ugly is wrong and so is cheapness when they have machines that will smoke any Mac. The clumsy Os and the virus issues do have me concerned but stale ass hardware selling for twice what its worth has had me concerned on the mac side for years and have just about enough of it with lack of software and video cards and anything else. Mac has only 1 thing that is a Great Os. Hardware wise they still suck and im sick of it and Steve Jobs pushing his darn stale obsolete G4 machines. Alienware has had some very good reviews and even Mac world had to admit the dual G5 wasnt the fastest. see Decembers issue.

[invaLPsion]

A Imac G5 with at least a 9600 in it would be good but I just cant wait another year for Apple to get off its G4 ars and make one. Where are the rumors of a new Imac? or is Apple just interested in Pods? :mad:


If you want to see a rumor of a new iMac G5. Apple Insider posted one yesterday, stating that the development stages of the computer are over and prototypes are already circulating at 1.6 GHz.

Happy? :p

[Earendil]

You all act as if Apple has direct control over what ghz chip gets released whenever and that Apple is completely happy and smug about releasing it.

Must it be pointed out that IBM is making the chips? You all act as if Steve is on the phone with IBM saying
"Honestly, we don't want you in production 3.5 ghz chips right now, we are sticking to 3ghz at summer. actually, want to send us a batch of 2.4ghz chips for the helluv it?"

When it comes to chip speed, it is up to IBM to stay competative with Intel and AMD, not Apple. And the only way for Apple to actually have the fastest chip, is to USE the fastest chip. Do you really want to see an AMD chip in your next PM?

I'm still inclined to think two things:
A: Apple will do everything they can to stay competitive, they aren't out to spite us.
B: They have people that, while prone to mistakes as all humans are, are a helluva lot smarter than 99.99% of us, and probably 100% smarter than the whiners on this board.

We have been talking about and expecting a 3ghz PM by summers end, correct? And we have all talked about an update in between, right? so what **** did you think they would release? a 2.9ghz machine? For peats sake, get a grip on reality.

Tyler - who would love a 2.4ghz PM, but wouldn't be able to use it to its full potential for many years.

[garybooberry]

Why would anyone pay $3,000 to play games?

I'll buy an X-Box and a G5 for that money. :D

[invaLPsion]

This is a very sad time for Apple Computer. This is the only time that I can remember where their ENTIRE consumer line is in need of a major update.

[daveL]

YES it was pulled, (arn is my witness) and now it is BACK.
The translation is in Post #181 above. ¿Comprende, compadre?
You're a piece of work. First, the article was never pulled. As Arn pointed out, there seemed to be a dns problem with some ISPs. Second, a person that knows French fairly well translated the article and posted a number of pages back in this thread. I guess you don't bother with that silly reading part :)

[pgwalsh]

Hey DHM, Isn't Apple alreadyWhat kind of games do you play that a G4 would be too slow for? I play realMYST; it plays smoothly on my (G4) 17" iMac even at maximum resolution, color depth, and detail (my iMac has an nVidia FX 5200 Ultra with 64 MB of video RAM). Sadly, I don't have any other games that tax a 3D graphics card as much (or little) as realMYST does. Before I got the iMac, I had a PowerBook 667 whose video card had only 16 MB of VRAM. Ouch, was realMYST slow and jerky on that hardware.My sister doesn't play games on her 17" iMac 800. She's a lawyer and just plays with pictures, email and a little video. She's told me numerous times that her iMac isn't fast enough and it's response is a let down. Two things I'm pushing her to do.

1. Upgrade to Panther. I hope it makes a difference.
2. Install System Optimizer X. It's made a difference for me.

She just ordered the new iLife and is hoping it makes a difference with her iApps. She's been disapponited. She loses her network address and some other minor issues. I'm afraid when it's time for an upgrade she may go back to intel.

Though it's not directly related to my above post. Don't Hurt Me made a very good point. Apple plays too many games within it's product line. They should put the best equipment they can into all their product lines. Put a 2 Ghz G5 in an iMac. If you can't, redesign it so you can. Let the best products rule.

[the future]

1. Upgrade to Panther. I hope it makes a difference.
2. Install System Optimizer X. It's made a difference for me.
3. Get some RAM.

[a17inchFuture]

This is a very sad time for Apple Computer. This is the only time that I can remember where their ENTIRE consumer line is in need of a major update.

That is pretty sad, but as no one will admit, powerbooks are the saddest. Sure PM's are a little behind, but pbooks are WAY behind.I wish they skip the pmac update and give the new g5 powerbook a shot.

[wrldwzrd89]

My sister doesn't play games on her 17" iMac 800. She's a lawyer and just plays with pictures, email and a little video. She's told me numerous times that her iMac isn't fast enough and it's response is a let down. Two things I'm pushing her to do.

1. Upgrade to Panther. I hope it makes a difference.
2. Install System Optimizer X. It's made a difference for me.

She just ordered the new iLife and is hoping it makes a difference with her iApps. She's been disapponited. She loses her network address and some other minor issues. I'm afraid when it's time for an upgrade she may go back to intel.

Though it's not directly related to my above post. Don't Hurt Me made a very good point. Apple plays too many games within it's product line. They should put the best equipment they can into all their product lines. Put a 2 Ghz G5 in an iMac. If you can't, redesign it so you can. Let the best products rule.
Hmm... Why does my 1.25 GHz 17" iMac seem so fast and her 800 MHz 17" iMac seem so slow??? Perhaps the 425 MHz difference in CPU speed is to blame; also, a video card with a low amount of VRAM (less than 32 MB) will slow down Mac OS X considerably (it's particularly bad if your video card has 8 MB or less of video RAM, because in that case Quartz Extreme is turned off). I don't think Apple has the necessary supply of processors from IBM to release a G5 iMac right now, even if they wanted to update it today. Apple wants to separate their professional products from their consumer products; I believe this is the reason we haven't seen more PowerPC G5-powered products yet. Is this separation what pgwalsh and Don't Hurt Me see as Apple's games with their product lines?

[pgwalsh]

Hmm... Why does my 1.25 GHz 17" iMac seem so fast and her 800 MHz 17" iMac seem so slow??? Perhaps the 425 MHz difference in CPU speed is to blame; also, a video card with a low amount of VRAM (less than 32 MB) will slow down Mac OS X considerably (it's particularly bad if your video card has 8 MB or less of video RAM, because in that case Quartz Extreme is turned off). I don't think Apple has the necessary supply of processors from IBM to release a G5 iMac right now, even if they wanted to update it today. Apple wants to separate their professional products from their consumer products; I believe this is the reason we haven't seen more PowerPC G5-powered products yet. Is this separation what pgwalsh and Don't Hurt Me see as Apple's games with their product lines?I guess I was pointing out that my sister, an regular consumer, is disappointed wither he Apple purchase. There was faster hardware at the time, but it didn't make it into her computer. She bought the best iMac at the time, but the PowerMacs were faster.

Oh and she did get a ram upgrade and .Mac. etc etc. Just isn't happy after a couple years... It's too bad...

Yes it is the separation. The PowerMac have duals and they can be expanded. That's why I'd buy one. iMacs don't have duals and can't be expanded, except for ram.

[3.1416]

Has Apple in all of history EVER allowed the iMac to outclass the Powerbook? I don't believe you will see a G5 in an iMac until it has been released in a PowerBook first. They may break tradition but why would they?

Because iMac sales are in the tank, and won't get better until they get G5s. No doubt Apple would prefer to introduce G5 iMacs and PBs simultaneously, but if they can't, it would be idiotic to keep a G4 in the iMac any longer than necessary.

[aswitcher]

Because iMac sales are in the tank, and won't get better until they get G5s. No doubt Apple would prefer to introduce G5 iMacs and PBs simultaneously, but if they can't, it would be idiotic to keep a G4 in the iMac any longer than necessary.

Yep, although the new form factor could be holding things up. Apple seem to have problems getting things out with the recent X-serve heat problem. Now the iPod hotcake minis are drying up, and they haven't even hit the foreign markets yet. Well at least we have these boards to commiserate ;) :p

[Mr Maui]

What he said was two things at two times (June 23, and Sept 16, 2003):
"We've committed before the end of next summer" to get the Power Mac G5 to 3GHz. That was September 16, 2003, see links below. June 23, 2003, he said (http://www.macrumors.com/wwdc2003.html) it would be at "3ghz within 12 months." I was never clear if he meant 12 months from then or 12 months from release. Given his Sept 2003 statements, I think it meant from release (or they just realized by Sept 2003 that late June/early July 2004 would be too soon and revised his meaning).


Sept 16 links: http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/09/16/liveupdate/index.php?redirect=1078732421000
and:
http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/16/appleexpo2
and:
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=6904


Just for note: The "end of next summer" is officially September 20 or September 21, 2004. (summer begins June, ends September)

Therefore, a September 2004 release for 3.0 GHz Mac is right in line with all previous comments.

[Rower_CPU]

Let's try a little harder to stay on-topic, folks. Off topics posts have been, and will continue to be, deleted.

Thanks :)

[yakirz]

What's the purpose of releasing two identical machines, except for 200 MHz per processor? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a low-end PM, at dual 1.8, 512, 120GB, and a dual 2.4, 1GB, 250GB, and dump the 2.2?

[pgwalsh]

What's the purpose of releasing two identical machines, except for 200 MHz per processor? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a low-end PM, at dual 1.8, 512, 120GB, and a dual 2.4, 1GB, 250GB, and dump the 2.2?It does seem a bit odd. I'm surprised about the 1.8, but I'm not taking it seriously. I'd imagine some hd specs and other things will be slightly different. The two top speeds seem about right, but that's about it.