PowerMac G5 Cooling/Sensor Issues?

[MacRumors]

Appleinsider points to (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=417) sensor issues causing delays in the PowerMac G5 updates.

According to a "reliable" Appleinsider source, "Apple was recently forced to completely rework the internal temperature sensors inside the current G5 case design to accommodate the new 90 nanometer G5 processors."

The information is somewhat consistent with early rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/03/20040301135938.shtml) of cooling issues with the new PowerMac revisions.

[swissmann]

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

[five04]

this might be the problem, but hasn't apple had a while to deal with issues like this?

[Gherkin]

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

The article said the chips WERE cool, but the sensors were misreading the temperature and thus made the fans go wild. Supposedely that's fixed now, but there are just supply issues at this point.

[g30ffr3y]

if this is true and apple has been holding back Rev. B's which probably wouldve been up to 2.4gig processors will they release what "wouldve been" between the dual 2's and the 3's [dual's or single's] or just skip ahead to what probably wouldve been Rev. C three gig'ers...???

doesnt seem like the summer is shaping up the way steve-o had hoped...

long live the apple digital music corp...

[Soire]

The real question is why should we believe this or care? Either they're coming out soon, or they're not.

And I agree that this sounds strange given that the new chips are supposed to run much cooler. The only explanation would be a case reworking which has lead to a heat up inside. But hey- as long as they come out soon I couldn't care less if they had to use ultra-poisonous freon to cool them. ;)

[thogs_cave]

I wonder if this ties in at all to the drive bay cooling issues as well. I know that 10.3.3 has made a decided difference in my G5 DP (2x160G), but that the essential design had a bit of a flaw.

Just musing.

[siliconjones]

Why is this a problem? If the g5 case in its current configuration runs fine cooling the 130 nm chips, why are the smaller 90 nm chips which are supposed to be cooler a problem? Actually did they ever say anything about being cooler or did they simply say require less power?

[Mr.Hey]

If the current case can cool the old chips why couldn't it cool the newer and cooler chips? Or don't I understand something?

It has to do with the sensor and not the issue of cooling; it could be that since the new chips aren't as hot, the current temp sensor are relatively useless. ;) :p :)

[numediaman]

Why is this a problem? If the g5 case in its current configuration runs fine cooling the 130 nm chips, why are the smaller 90 nm chips which are supposed to be cooler a problem? Actually did they ever say anything about being cooler or did they simply say require less power?

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

[bennetsaysargh]

maybe since the newer chips are smaller, they couldn't use the same sensors because of the size difference? it could either be making the fans not going on enough, or too much.

[klaus]

The article says it's the sensors that screw things up, the temp of the processor itself is fine! you guys need to read the source article a bit better before saying something..

If they can't yield the processor consistently, that means no consistant supplies of processors, and if that's not the case, than Apple can't release the products, cause of the possibility of another delay between ordering and shipping. And they had that same problem with the Xserve, so I bet they don't want this to happen to the PowerMac too.


If this story is true, than the question is, what are they going to do with this revision. I suspect they already have put a lot of work into this one, and to just throw this one away, and go to the rev C (3ghz) that would be a rather drastic measure... But the article says nothing about pending releases or releases at wwdc, or whatever..

[MacFan25]

Well, this seems like a good explanation as to why we have seen some delays. Hopefully this issue will be resolved soon, if it hasn't already been, and we'll see the updates in a timely fashion.

But, I certainly don't like the sound of this in the article:
though sources say that low processor supplies may have acted to compounded the delays.

So hopefully IBM can keep up with the demand...

[goof_ball]

This doesn't make that much sense....lets say the fans ran at speeds made for the 130nm chips...big deal...they'd be running faster than they'd need to, but the same as rev A models. This of course assumes the 90nm chips are cooler.

If this rumor is true, I think its good news in terms of G5 progress. That means that once they get the fans issue resolved, we'll hopefully see a few series of updates in the next little while.

oops.....whats this about Ibm falling behind?

[Macmaniac]

The alarming news in the article is the fact that they are having problems achieving speeds even close to 2 ghz, if this is true what a step back!!

[CrackedButter]

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

I'm sure they could if they overclocked either the 130nm ones? Why was production on these stopped, couldn't they run both types of processors at the same time to allow for scalability and a fallback, what if the older ones could go faster than 2Ghz? They did it with G4's.

[Dont Hurt Me]

What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me. :)

[klaus]

What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me. :)

DHM, you always seem to find a way to blame these things on apple execs, you said it yourself, it's IBM that's having problems, damn dude, get yourself together, and stop bitching already, it's getting annoying to read all these same posts from you.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one

now back on topic

[Windowlicker]

finally we get even possible answers concerning the delay. this doesn't really affect my life in any way since i'm not buying a desktop for quite a while. anyway it would be nice if they actually reached the 3ghz by july so that steve wouldn't have been overhyping this like he pretty much is used to. (uh oh, quite a long sentence ;)

[Koodauw]

Could this have anythinng to do with the Fan Control Update that Apple released for the G5's about a month ago?

[Dont Hurt Me]

DHM, you always seem to find a way to blame these things on apple execs, you said it yourself, it's IBM that's having problems, damn dude, get yourself together, and stop bitching already, it's getting annoying to read all these same posts from you.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one

now back on topicPlease stay on topic address the thread, your post has 0 to do with the thread and it is the executives fault for such a poor tier structure. 1 Product holding up the whole line up for 3/4 of a year? inexcusable.

[SFNE Freak]

And why are we still posting rumors from AppleInsider?

[swissmann]

Thanks for straightening me out that it is a sensor thing and not a heat thing. I still ask why is this a problem. As others have stated shouldn't Apple have this worked out by now. Time is quickly running out for an incremental upgrade if it hasn't run out already. Maybe the jump straight to 3 is what is going to happen. I am sure Steve would hate to have to say, I know that we promised 3 but... suppliers missed, uh ... heat problems ... uh 9 fans now ... uh. So much is behind controlling all those fans (my G5 is way quieter than my G4s luckily) but I am wondering if liquid cooling would simplify things and improve things? My bet for the future. WWDC we see Dual 3 GHz G5 with liquid cooling.

[klaus]

1 Product holding up the whole line up for 3/4 of a year? inexcusable.

How can you be sure that's the case? It's just an assumption, as all of these news/rumor posts are...

[TyleRomeo]

I really wonder what Steve is going to say at the WWDC 2004. He openly made a promise that we would see 3GHZ G5s in 12 months. That really gives him until september to deliver since the dual 2GHZ didn't ship until then. So he better announce dual 3GHZ G5s on june 28th and let us know that they will ship in 2-3 months. He already seems to have failed on his 100million ITMS promise, that I don't mind, but give us dual 3GHZ g5 this summer, please.

Tyler

[numediaman]

Could this have anythinng to do with the Fan Control Update that Apple released for the G5's about a month ago?
Guys. It's all in the article. The new chip sits differently, so the sensor did not function properly. The sensor misread the heat level causing the fans to wail. Eventually, the sensor would shut down the system.

But it is now OK. Apple engineers figured it out. You can all rest easily.

On the other hand, IBM can't seem to make a chip that goes faster than 2.0. Therein lies the problem. Stevie Boy can't introduce a 3.0 G5 until IBM figures out how to make a chip that goes faster than 2.0.

Looks like all those people who bought dual 2.0s will have the fastest Mac for quite some time to come.

Of course, this all just a rumor. It could be that Apple is now going to use the 8MHz 68000 in all its new computers.

[Dont Hurt Me]

IN response to SFNEFreak-Because we have nothing else to talk about since Apple hasnt done much in the way of anything but pods. Rumor sounds good to me and would explain a good many things concerning Powermac,Imac and Emac.

[macer1]

let apple and ibm figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a ROMOR SITE. hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if steve shows it to the world

unless any of you want to go back to the motorolla days where 33mhz increase was HUGE.

everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can use a windows comp.

[BornAgainMac]

That is a terrible to hear about problems even reaching 2.2 Ghz. I hope that is just with the G5 and not the G6. Maybe we are at the point of technology to just introduce new Powermacs every few years instead of once a year. Or change the case color or design every year. I am so depressed now. Even the Win/Intel side seems to be stuck too. No place to run.

At least we received an O/S update every year instead of every 3+ years.

[DMann]

Since the new 970 FX G5 chips use a different
daughter-board which shifts the location of the
chip itself, the sensors are not able to "read"
the accurate temperature. I would imagine
the sensors could be adjusted to reach
the processor without too much of a
re-design.......... With IBM's challenges,
heat/sensing issues, and the impending
aluminum shortage, it would be miraculous
to see new machines before WWDC....

[numediaman]

let apple and ibm figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a ROMOR SITE. hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if steve shows it to the world

unless any of you want to go back to the motorolla days where 33mhz increase was HUGE.

everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can use a windows comp.

That's not true -- only 80% of the stuff I write is fiction. I trust the stuff everyone else writes to 100% true.

By the way, if you were on a Mac it would have caught those four typos. ;)

[MarkCollette]

What everyone seems to be missing from this article is IBM is having problems above 2.0. please remember the Xserve fiasco and the fact that it was advertised for a moment at 2.3 then changed to 2.0 Sounds like IBM may have problems on the 90nm process but i would guess the controler. were they not going to integrate that into the chip instead of on the motherboard like 970s? anyways since Apple uses the HORRIBLE tier structure for its line up. If Powermac isnt going faster then they cant release a Imac G5 and if they cant release a Imac G5 then they cant update Emac. I wonder how many Apple executives along with Steve Job can fit into a VW bug? cause they are looking like a bunch clowns to me. :)

I always look forward to your daily bitching about Apple marketing, it's executives, etc.

Puts a touch of reality into the forumns.

Unfortunately, with or without your comments, this situation has remained long enough, that the buzz we all felt is slowly dying.

It's like Steve et al just don't get it. This is how it should work:

1. They don't screw up like assclowns, and deliver
2. We get excited
3. We tell others
4. They switch

So far Apple is failing to provide #1. People are annoyed at you because it looks like you're failing to provide #2, but you and I know better.

[MarkCollette]

let apple and ibm figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a ROMOR SITE. hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if steve shows it to the world

unless any of you want to go back to the motorolla days where 33mhz increase was HUGE.

everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can use a windows comp.


Let your husband figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a GOSSIP COLUMN. Hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if your husband says he never beats you.

Unless any of you want to go back to your ex-boyfriend where a broken arm was the usual.

Everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can move out and live on the streets.

[numediaman]

Let your husband figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a GOSSIP COLUMN. Hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if your husband says he never beats you.

Unless any of you want to go back to your ex-boyfriend where a broken arm was the usual.

Everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can move out and live on the streets.

Wow, even google couldn't translate this for me. Anyone else what to take a stab at it?

[Dont Hurt Me]

I always look forward to your daily bitching about Apple marketing, it's executives, etc.

Puts a touch of reality into the forumns.

Unfortunately, with or without your comments, this situation has remained long enough, that the buzz we all felt is slowly dying.

It's like Steve et al just don't get it. This is how it should work:

1. They don't screw up like assclowns, and deliver
2. We get excited
3. We tell others
4. They switch

So far Apple is failing to provide #1. People are annoyed at you because it looks like you're failing to provide #2, but you and I know better.I wish I had a buzz cause mine has left me a long long time ago. Anyways like i said earlier because of the TIER structure Apple uses this would explain why its been such a barren 10 months. I would bet this rumor has validity to it.

[CrackedButter]

How can you be sure that's the case? It's just an assumption, as all of these news/rumor posts are...

What other machine has been bumped up significantly in terms of Mhz since the G5 PowerMac was released other than the Xserve?

[sharky2313]

everyone is right, the most disturbing part of the article is the low yields above 2.0 This does not bode well for hitting up to 3 which would require a significant and sustained chip yield, from my limited understanding of chip fab process.

I suspect that the g6 is becoming a closer reality on the sooner rather than the later.

:(

[Bhennies]

Awesome! I can't wait to get a NEW UPDATED dual 2.0 g5!

[Stella]

Sounds like Moto all over again!

Quote:
Reportedly, IBM's Power PC G5 970FX chip has failed to yield even the baseline 2.0 GHz mark on a consistent basis, preventing Apple from introducing faster machines.

[PowerMacMan]

The real question is why should we believe this or care? Either they're coming out soon, or they're not.

And I agree that this sounds strange given that the new chips are supposed to run much cooler. The only explanation would be a case reworking which has lead to a heat up inside. But hey- as long as they come out soon I couldn't care less if they had to use ultra-poisonous freon to cool them. ;)

Tipping or picking up your G5 FREON can result in a poisonous spill and may be harmful or deadly to the victim... Please refrain from picking up your G5 FREON and make sure it is steady on the ground...

[form]

Having problems going past 2 ghz? I haven't read about that anywhere, until this thread. Such an eerily similar pattern straight from g4 history makes me laugh, and makes me curious, too...It seems as if Apple has picked the g4, and now the g5, because of some significant initial improvement over previous technology, while either ignoring or not accurately predicting the long-term scaling. That's a guess, of course, and it gives rise to another one: Have they been choosing new processors out of fear, rather than wise tactics?

Then there's always the idea of conspiracy against Apple, where all the companies claim to have such great potential, until Apple signs on, at which time they proceed to have lots and lots (and lots) of "setbacks."

I apologize for being off-topic, but this is the first place I've heard about IBM's speed bump problems...maybe they need new struts.

On-topic, I think that the heating sensor issue is/was just a menial excuse for any delays, and will probably serve as another hollow bone for the anxious mac-fanatics.

[ThomasJefferson]

Wonder if there are any job openings on the Apple website for a "sensor-dude"?

[PRØBE]

Let your husband figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a GOSSIP COLUMN. Hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if your husband says he never beats you.

Unless any of you want to go back to your ex-boyfriend where a broken arm was the usual.

Everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can move out and live on the streets.





I'm as baffled as you are Numedian. Oddly refreshing to read the occasional unintelligible post though. Looks to me like it was mistakenly posted here instead of at "Domestic violence anonymous".

Anyway, if IBM are having such trouble with the 2+ chip yield, I wish Apple would do themselves a favour (and me too) by shoving a load of 1.6 chips into some 20" imacs and dropping the single 1.6 tower/making it a dual until they sort this mess out. If IBM don't pull their finger out soon they will become known as "If...But...Maybe..."

[Frisco]

It's not IBM's fault. It's Apple fault for not going with AMD or Intel. I guess this is one time where Apple shouldn't have "Think Different."

Apple has had so many problems, so much frustration with their Chip Makers, that this is getting so old already. Apple is a company that needs to focus its resources elsewhere. Chip Speed should be the concern of others--not Apple.

I think it may be time for OS X to be moved over to X86. Apple doesn't need to compete in the processor/speed market! They are having enough trouble competing on the OS front, with Linux and Windows getting better every day.

[BornAgainMac]

The real news...
IBM won't produce any chips over 2 Ghz unless Apple hands over the iTunes Music Store and iPod technologies to IBM. Introducing the IBM Music Store.

[cait-sith]

what's the reason they can't they get past 2.0 GHz? heat?

having this much trouble cooling the chip with convential methods would tend to indicate they may have made some poor decisions designing the G5, and are now facing the music. they may have been so rushed to get the G5 out that they did not consider how difficult it would be to break the 2 billion mark.

they shouldn't be having this much issue with heat. one of the intial turn ons with risc chips was that they ran a lot cooler than their cisc counterparts.

there are more ways to make an archetecture faster, including optimizing the compiler (and therefore the system software) for one.. our software still (for the most part) hasn't caught up with the hardware, or is inefficient and wasteful.

but everyone wants higher numbers, more and faster. poor apple. hope they iron out their bugs.

[form]

I think you're misunderstanding; as far as I can see, the cooling sensor problem is not related to the processor speed issue. One is Apple hardware, and the other is IBM manufacturing.

[cait-sith]

It's not IBM's fault. It's Apple fault for not going with AMD or Intel. I guess this is one time where Apple shouldn't have "Think Different."

The only real advantage to Intel is that Microsoft makes Windows. The chip itself is NOT impressive.

Apple has had so many problems, so much frustration with their Chip Makers, that this is getting so old already. Apple is a company that needs to focus its resources elsewhere. Chip Speed should be the concern of others--not Apple.

Apple is one of the largest computer companies in the world. Larger than most companies that use Intel products.

I think it may be time for OS X to be moved over to X86. Apple doesn't need to compete in the processor/speed market! They are having enough trouble competing on the OS front, with Linux and Windows getting better every day.

Bite your tongue. Apple may be somewhat lagging on upping their numbers, but their OS is still one of the best marriages of power and usability on the market.

OSX already exists for x86, it's called FreeBSD. You don't get a nice aqua interface (which is 50% of the reason the OS is so great) but you can always use windowmaker, right? (yea, i'm aware it's engine parts aren't entirely freebsd, but you get the point)

Imagine the entire frontend of osx rewritten for intels. The horrors. I would dust off my ultra 5 and start using solaris the next day.

[windowsblowsass]

Let your husband figure this out and the rest of you quit ragging on it, concidering this is a GOSSIP COLUMN. Hell 90% of the stuff here is fiction. Trust it to be true if your husband says he never beats you.

Unless any of you want to go back to your ex-boyfriend where a broken arm was the usual.

Everyone can wait and quit there complaining, and if they have a problem they can move out and live on the streets.
ahh.... drugs are bad mmmkay maybe you dhould go see a therapist or the cops if you know abut an abusing boyfriend that breaks peoples arms and whats this about someone living on the streets please keep your dilusions to yourself or at least explain what the hell you are talking about and how it has any relevance toward power macs

[128KMac]

.... why is Apple at $28+ today? We read rumors sites. I wonder what the Apple stock buyers are reading....

[numediaman]

what's the reason they can't they get past 2.0 GHz? heat?


No heat problem, it was the sensor.

[I feel like John Belushi. Instead of "no Coke, Pepsi", it's "no heat, sensor".]

[PowerMacMan]

.... why is Apple at $28+ today? We read rumors sites. I wonder what the Apple stock buyers are reading....

Uh... Tomorrow's Tuesday! :eek:

Yeah Right.... I know, not until WWDC :mad:

[blackfox]

I wish I had a buzz cause mine has left me a long long time ago. Anyways like i said earlier because of the TIER structure Apple uses this would explain why its been such a barren 10 months. I would bet this rumor has validity to it.
Not that I don't think your point about the tier structure has validity, but just what would you suggest in place of it? Are you complaining about the use of the structure itself or Apples' implementation of it? Even w/o speed bumps to the PM (b/c of chip issues), would an implementation of G5s in the upper-ranged iMacs and PBs satisfy?(say 1.4 - 1.6 ghz)Personally I think Apple could buy itself some time here...assuming they can figure out cooling issues for spaces that small...anyway, just curious...thanks

[Dont Hurt Me]

It's not IBM's fault. It's Apple fault for not going with AMD or Intel. I guess this is one time where Apple shouldn't have "Think Different."

Apple has had so many problems, so much frustration with their Chip Makers, that this is getting so old already. Apple is a company that needs to focus its resources elsewhere. Chip Speed should be the concern of others--not Apple.

I think it may be time for OS X to be moved over to X86. Apple doesn't need to compete in the processor/speed market! They are having enough trouble competing on the OS front, with Linux and Windows getting better every day.I agree, it would have cost less money and they would allways be running with the PC crowd and wouldnt have to worry about "special video cards" or failed Cpu makers. Plus they wouldnt have to get companies to make a special Mac version of software. Following the last 5 years of motorola has shown this was a mistake. I still think this was one of the worst moves ever made sticking with Moto & LowPowerPC. Im sure IBM will work it out but a Year of stagnation after all those motostagnation years is just very very sad for the Mac user.

[form]

.... why is Apple at $28+ today? We read rumors sites. I wonder what the Apple stock buyers are reading....

replace Reading with Taking.

[zelman]

does anyone know a good dentist? I think steve needs one since he's kicking himself for putting his foot in his mouth last year.

maybe they'll add more processors instead of faster ones? a nice quad-g5 system would make everyone happy, even if they can't hit 3ghz.

[Penman]

Having problems going past 2 ghz? I haven't read about that anywhere, until this thread. Such an eerily similar pattern straight from g4 history makes me laugh, and makes me curious, too...It seems as if Apple has picked the g4, and now the g5, because of some significant initial improvement over previous technology, while either ignoring or not accurately predicting the long-term scaling. That's a guess, of course, and it gives rise to another one: Have they been choosing new processors out of fear, rather than wise tactics?

Then there's always the idea of conspiracy against Apple, where all the companies claim to have such great potential, until Apple signs on, at which time they proceed to have lots and lots (and lots) of "setbacks."

I apologize for being off-topic, but this is the first place I've heard about IBM's speed bump problems...maybe they need new struts.

On-topic, I think that the heating sensor issue is/was just a menial excuse for any delays, and will probably serve as another hollow bone for the anxious mac-fanatics.

The speed issues that IBM are having make more sense if you give credit where it's due. Chips are hard to make and Intel make more of them than anyone (microprocessors - not memory chips). They're really - really good at it. They still run 20 year old code with all its design limitations as fast as the best clean-sheet designs their competitors are capable of.

I'm a car fan. Though there's something beautiful about small manufacturers like Ferrari and Apple they have real problems until they hook up with the biggest suppliers and focus on what they do best (which in Apples case is industrial design and interfaces.)

I'd love to see Apple use Intel in a parrallel line of OSX machines. With all things being equal - and the ability to swap out a chip whenever Intel or AMD released a speedbump - I know a lot of people would go for them.

The superficial superiority of RISC architecture is a niche desire. For the PhotoShop and Word crowd (that's me) - it makes little real difference.

OR - revamp the architure to handle up to 8 or more processors. We could build little grids and get power that way. Music software's doing this now - graphics software's allowed it for ages. As a company that's aimed at creative Pro's it seems obvious. I'd buy an 8-way G4 with two factory processors for $1800 in a heartbeat. Charge me a couple of hundred for each new brain and I'd hand over another $1,200 with a smile.

Finally - IBM's problems are probably something dumb like air quality, power supplies or the qualiy of their silicon crystals. They'll fix it. Chips are tiny. If their yeilding any the technology's sound - it's the process they need to work on.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Not that I don't think your point about the tier structure has validity, but just what would you suggest in place of it? Are you complaining about the use of the structure itself or Apples' implementation of it? Even w/o speed bumps to the PM (b/c of chip issues), would an implementation of G5s in the upper-ranged iMacs and PBs satisfy?(say 1.4 - 1.6 ghz)Personally I think Apple could buy itself some time here...assuming they can figure out cooling issues for spaces that small...anyway, just curious...thankscrippling game is no way to sell computers, if you have to have seperation do it with qty of CPUs and features slots etc. cant tell you how many people wouldnt even look at Imac or Emac because there isnt a videocard,pci slot or forces monitor on them so Apple tells these folks you Must buy a Powermac and then they do this thing again by not allowing a person to get the fastest cpu. If they do they must get 2 and a bigger harddrive so they Force them up the tier or, or they go buy a PC. marketshare tells us this is what is going on. Apple in essence pushed them away. Have a pro line and consumer line and let the user configure the machine. stop the crippling and stop the forcing and bend to the consumers or pro's needs. its really simple.

[iMeowbot]

maybe since the newer chips are smaller, they couldn't use the same sensors because of the size difference? it could either be making the fans not going on enough, or too much.

Placement is everything for those parts. If the CPU assembly is a different shape or mounted dofferntly than in the older model, the warmer and cooler spots will be different, and it can take a lot of testing to figure out what the best points are (& how many points need to be measured) to obtain useful readings. Then, the software needs to be modified to do something useful with the data (what fans get turned on, what speeds, blah blah).

[Koodauw]

Wow, people are really testy about this. Relax guys (and gals.) They will come out when the finished product is ready to be released. It will get done, trust me.

Everyone take a deep breath.... now let it out.... Repeat.....ahhhh Doesn't that feel better?

[rdowns]

Apple is one of the largest computer companies in the world. Larger than most companies that use Intel products.


True, but they are also the only (current) customer for the G5. Intel has hundreds, maybe thousands of customers for their processors.

[rdowns]

Not that I don't think your point about the tier structure has validity, but just what would you suggest in place of it? Are you complaining about the use of the structure itself or Apples' implementation of it? Even w/o speed bumps to the PM (b/c of chip issues), would an implementation of G5s in the upper-ranged iMacs and PBs satisfy?(say 1.4 - 1.6 ghz)Personally I think Apple could buy itself some time here...assuming they can figure out cooling issues for spaces that small...anyway, just curious...thanks

I'll bite. It is common belief that Apple won't upgrade their iMac and eMac lines so they don't come too close in performance to the PM line. Personally, I coin this "head up your ass" marketing. There is already enought diffrentiation in the Imac vs. PM line to put G5s in iMacs....

Dual vs. single processor
RAM slots
Expansion slots
FireWire 800
Drive bays
Video card
Could do slower optical drives in iMac- 4x vs. 8x
Hard drive size

In my mind, that is plenty to diffrentiate the lines. If you need expandability/upgradability, go PM, if not, go iMac.

As for the notion that a G5 can't go in the iMac before the PB, also "head up your ass" marketing. The users and markets for both are dissimilar. Desktop vs. portable.

[jjmaximum]

What are your thoughts on this speed/heat issue as far as the PowerBook updates...which is what many of us are truly waiting for?

[mccoma]

I agree, it would have cost less money and they would allways be running with the PC crowd and wouldnt have to worry about "special video cards" or failed Cpu makers. Plus they wouldnt have to get companies to make a special Mac version of software.ollowing the last 5 years of motorola has shown this was a mistake. I still think this was one of the worst moves ever made sticking with Moto & LowPowerPC. Im sure IBM will work it out but a Year of stagnation after all those motostagnation years is just very very sad for the Mac user.

Well, we would still need a special version of the software (OS X not Windows).

I am glad Apple didn't go with Intel at the time since we would of ended up with the Itanium2 which according to Intel's website runs at 1.50 GHz, 1.40 GHz, 1.30 GHz (http://www.intel.com/products/server/processors/server/itanium2/index.htm) and from recent news on Intel's change of heart about 64-bits might have left us stranded.

AMD would have been a little more promising with 2.2 GHz (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_9240,00.html) although we would need the low power 30w version (EE).

[iGuy]

I would dust off my ultra 5 and start using solaris the next day.

I've always liked Solaris. It's a pity Sun hasen't being doing that well lately but that 1.6 Billion $US from Microsoft should help.

I've always thought that just as Apple and Sony would make a good team on the entertainment gadget front, Apple and Sun would make a good team on the Unix enterprise front. If only Adobe would port FrameMaker to OSX!!

With respect to the future of the PM, I'm wondering if we've simply hit a technology wall at dual 2.0. If so, eventually Apple and their suppliers will overcome it.

In the meantime perhaps the solution lies in distributed processing. As someone mentioned in another thread, they were in no hurry to purchase a new PM tower. They would rather build a cluster of headless XServes.

What I'm suggesting is that instead of sinking all of their R&D into a faster standalone box, Apple may serve us better by making existing technology cheaper. Imagine an XServe cluster where adding an additional processor was as cheap as adding memory is now. That individual processor wouldn't have to be fastest available, just cheap so even the home user could afford them in quantity.

Just thinking out loud, please don't beat me up or be rude. :)

~iGuy

[fussball]

delays delays delays, tuesday tuesday, no new macs

[Toreador93]

It's not IBM's fault. It's Apple fault for not going with AMD or Intel. I guess this is one time where Apple shouldn't have "Think Different."

Apple has had so many problems, so much frustration with their Chip Makers, that this is getting so old already. Apple is a company that needs to focus its resources elsewhere. Chip Speed should be the concern of others--not Apple.

I think it may be time for OS X to be moved over to X86. Apple doesn't need to compete in the processor/speed market! They are having enough trouble competing on the OS front, with Linux and Windows getting better every day.

I totally agree. When you're the only major buyer of a chip, the chip manufacturer can put you on the back burner if they feel it's not worth their time (Motorola). The advantage of Intel and AMD is: That is their business! If they don't produce newer and faster chips, they go out of business! There is competition, and there is a will to sustain. Isn't that how economy works?

To the person commenting on how Apple DOESN'T have trouble competing with their OS:
A major factor why people don't buy Macs (besides hardware), is the lack of software or incompatibility of software they've already bought. This is my also my biggest concern. I know Apple has the basic stuff, but when you search google for a program to do something, you can usually find it for Windows. The software for d/ling programs to my phone doesn't exist for macs. I think this is a problem. Perhaps if apple was more competitive, and had a bigger marketshare, more people would write programs for Macs.

How many people here could live without touching a PC? That is, no gaming rigs, no specialty software (game cracks :) ), and very little freeware. Until 90% of you can say yes, I think Apple has some work to do.

[aswitcher]

I will be interested to see what they might say about the revb G5 at Wednesdays Financial meeting...

[avkills]

I agree, it would have cost less money and they would allways be running with the PC crowd and wouldnt have to worry about "special video cards" or failed Cpu makers. Plus they wouldnt have to get companies to make a special Mac version of software.

You have no idea how computers work do you?

For one, yes the video cards would have to be different because Apple would not be using stock motherboards and they also like designing their own system controller chips. ATI and nVidia could make video cards that work in both, but they don't because it does not make sense money wise. Sure they make Mac cards, but the bleeding edge is with PCs, so that is what they focus on first. Case in point, Black Magic Design makes PCI based uncompressed SD cards that work in both Mac and Windows.

Software would have to be written specifically for OS X's API sets. You think magically going to x86 or AMD and we could install windows software, uhhh no. Windows and OS X use completely different API sets.

Carry on.

-mark

[gensor]

The yield issue is confirmed by the fact that 2 months ago Digitimes reported that Nvida was moving production from IBM back to TSMC because of yield issues.

[reorx]

The speed issues that IBM are having make more sense if you give credit where it's due. Chips are hard to make and Intel make more of them than anyone (microprocessors - not memory chips). They're really - really good at it. They still run 20 year old code with all its design limitations as fast as the best clean-sheet designs their competitors are capable of.

I'm a car fan. Though there's something beautiful about small manufacturers like Ferrari and Apple they have real problems until they hook up with the biggest suppliers and focus on what they do best (which in Apples case is industrial design and interfaces.)

I'd love to see Apple use Intel in a parrallel line of OSX machines. With all things being equal - and the ability to swap out a chip whenever Intel or AMD released a speedbump - I know a lot of people would go for them.

The superficial superiority of RISC architecture is a niche desire. For the PhotoShop and Word crowd (that's me) - it makes little real difference.

OR - revamp the architure to handle up to 8 or more processors. We could build little grids and get power that way. Music software's doing this now - graphics software's allowed it for ages. As a company that's aimed at creative Pro's it seems obvious. I'd buy an 8-way G4 with two factory processors for $1800 in a heartbeat. Charge me a couple of hundred for each new brain and I'd hand over another $1,200 with a smile.

Finally - IBM's problems are probably something dumb like air quality, power supplies or the qualiy of their silicon crystals. They'll fix it. Chips are tiny. If their yeilding any the technology's sound - it's the process they need to work on.

Just because you produce a lot of a product doesn't mean you are any good at it. Look at GM and Ford. Just beacause Intel makes a lot of chips doesn't mean they produce the fastest/best chips. Intel's best new chip, the Pentium M wasn't even designed in-house.

BTW, RISC design is not a "superficical superiority". All modern X86 CPUs have a huge instruction decode process to turn the original crappy mem-to-mem operands of the X86 asm into a pseudo RISC instruction stream. Without it, they'd never be able to sustain the pipeline depth that they currently enjoy. RISC designs allowed for a far better use of multiple parallel execution units, which is how the current CPUs get superscalar execution that is not normally possible if you're using the original X86 instructions.

The problem is software: Most software developers nowadays are barely capable of understanding true parallel execution theory, much less the nuance of implementing it correctly. This is why its only used in very specialized cases.

For the typical computer "user", most issues of "percieved speed" are absolutely gone given today's hardware with enough memory and gigahertz class CPUs. If the UI is responsive, the computer is "fast", which is an area where Apple currently blows the pants off its nearest OS rivals.

I agree that IBM will fix yields and speed in the near future. They *were* the first to implement this process on this scale, so they were bound to have some kinds of issues to iron out. It'll get better.

[reorx]

True, but they are also the only (current) customer for the G5. Intel has hundreds, maybe thousands of customers for their processors.

It didn't stop them from releasing Itanium 2 and the wonderful i960 back in the day... :D

[Parikh1234]

blah blah blah..... heat this, aluminum shortage that....all i hear is excuses. Just make the damm thing like dual 5 Ghz,, a wind tunnel, and armor plate with steel. Ship some Bose Noise Canceling headphones with it and make it an awesome promotion and just give us what we want. Let the people around you using windows machines go deaf. Who cares, atleast we will be happy with our pmacs. Stop making stupid excuses apple.

[reorx]

It's not IBM's fault. It's Apple fault for not going with AMD or Intel. I guess this is one time where Apple shouldn't have "Think Different."

Apple has had so many problems, so much frustration with their Chip Makers, that this is getting so old already. Apple is a company that needs to focus its resources elsewhere. Chip Speed should be the concern of others--not Apple.

I think it may be time for OS X to be moved over to X86. Apple doesn't need to compete in the processor/speed market! They are having enough trouble competing on the OS front, with Linux and Windows getting better every day.

First off, if you change CPUs, yet again, you break binary compatibility and throw away all the time your software manufacturers spend optimizing to your platform. OSX is nice because it works only on Apple hardware, which is touted as having far fewer defects/problems than most mass-produced crap from Dhell and others. Plus, they'd be under serious pressure from the consumer market to release OSX for hardware which is not theirs and they'd subsequently go out of business. Tell me how well Solaris sells for X86 hardware: I thought so. As the story goes: Good is the enemy of Excellent.

They are a niche company, selling SOLUTIONS to their customers. That's why they've gotten into the application market. Make the best product possible, that runs on very specific hardware that you sell. If its better than the competition, and you get buy-in, then you have a sustainable business model that works in the long-run. If you're just hardware or just software, you lose. IBM figured this out early-on with the mainframe with CICS and IMS running on MVS. A complete end-to-end business solution for a specific markets that has no real competition, even today...

Different hardware is GOOD for Apple, trust me...

[SiliconAddict]

Ummm this sucks. But once again Apple is held by the throat of one company. In this case IBM. As much as I and everyone else were hoping that IBM would bring about a fast and furious hardware campaign it looks like, at least for now, that dream is a dud.

I'm wondering what is the possibility of AMD designing a PowerPC because unless IBM gets their collective act together soon they are going start looking like Moto. I'm not going to scream Moto-itus just yet but its not looking good. :(

[SiliconAddict]

Different hardware is GOOD for Apple, trust me...

Tell that to the people looking for PowerMac, PowerBook, and iMac upgrades. Different is only good when a company can deliver on the goods and Apple sure as heck isn't delivering.

[mklos]

I totally agree. When you're the only major buyer of a chip, the chip manufacturer can put you on the back burner if they feel it's not worth their time (Motorola). The advantage of Intel and AMD is: That is their business! If they don't produce newer and faster chips, they go out of business! There is competition, and there is a will to sustain. Isn't that how economy works?

To the person commenting on how Apple DOESN'T have trouble competing with their OS:
A major factor why people don't buy Macs (besides hardware), is the lack of software or incompatibility of software they've already bought. This is my also my biggest concern. I know Apple has the basic stuff, but when you search google for a program to do something, you can usually find it for Windows. The software for d/ling programs to my phone doesn't exist for macs. I think this is a problem. Perhaps if apple was more competitive, and had a bigger marketshare, more people would write programs for Macs.

How many people here could live without touching a PC? That is, no gaming rigs, no specialty software (game cracks :) ), and very little freeware. Until 90% of you can say yes, I think Apple has some work to do.

Well I think your way off base here. What do you think IBM's major business is? Its to make processors! They spend billions of dollars per year designing processors. Apple isn't the only vendor for the G5 or the PPC processor either. PPC chips are in a lot of things you don't realize. IBM would loose billions of dollars if they didn't make processors. IBM isn't a Motorola and if Apple didn't think they could produce the goods then they wouldn't of made a partnership with them.

As far as software goes, well there are over 10,000 Mac OS X applications out there for Mac OS X and thats not counting the hundreds of thousands of freeware/shareware apps for OS X. If you doing a Google search for Mac shareware apps then thats why your not finding any! Look on places like versiontracker.com and download.com. You will find the same things on the Mac as you will on the PC!

I could live without touching a PC. My mac runs games very good. I'm not into stealing software like you can voiding the license agreements by installing a crack for the software. Those are things that most PC people are very interested in. I have everything I need for my Mac and I've never had a problem find a freeware/shareware app that I need. You need to rethink your thoughts here! Why don't you just go back your little $499 POS PC!

[avkills]

Jesus, everyone is making out like the current G5s are too slow or something. Trust me on this, the Dual 2Ghz is fast. In fact it is very fast. Yes I want to see Apple release faster hardware, but the current hardware is damn fast as it is. In fact if you look at the complete hardware landscape, the G5 looks very good. And I'm talking FSB speeds, point to point architecture, SATA, Dual Channel 400Mhz memory, Firewire 400 and 800, Gigabit Ethernet, Independent FSB for each processor... The Dual G5s are monsters. Video and Audio apps just rip like a mother on these things.

-mark

[SiliconAddict]

Well I think your way off base here. What do you think IBM's major business is? Its to make processors! They spend billions of dollars per year designing processors. Apple isn't the only vendor for the G5 or the PPC processor either. PPC chips are in a lot of things you don't realize. IBM would loose billions of dollars if they didn't make processors. IBM isn't a Motorola and if Apple didn't think they could produce the goods then they wouldn't of made a partnership with them.

Errr. CPU design is a small peice of the IBM puzzle. Do you have ANY idea how large IBM is. Seriouly. Do you have any notion. Hell IBM uses AMD and Intel CPU's in some of their own server lines. And as for G5 sales. Please. I'd be willing to bet their yearly earnings are made up of less then 5% of G5 sales. Actually I'd be suprised if it was even 2%.



I could live without touching a PC. My mac runs games very good. I'm not into stealing software like you can voiding the license agreements by installing a crack for the software. Those are things that most PC people are very interested in. I have everything I need for my Mac and I've never had a problem find a freeware/shareware app that I need. You need to rethink your thoughts here! Why don't you just go back your little $499 POS PC!

And yet I'm willing to bet you've never touched a $499 PC. So how is it you can pass judgment and make claims on a product you have probably never used? Hypocrite. :rolleyes:

[PowerMacMan]

Jesus, everyone is making out like the current G5s are too slow or something. Trust me on this, the Dual 2Ghz is fast. In fact it is very fast. Yes I want to see Apple release faster hardware, but the current hardware is damn fast as it is. In fact if you look at the complete hardware landscape, the G5 looks very good. And I'm talking FSB speeds, point to point architecture, SATA, Dual Channel 400Mhz memory, Firewire 400 and 800, Gigabit Ethernet, Independent FSB for each processor... The Dual G5s are monsters. Video and Audio apps just rip like a mother on these things.

-mark

Yes, they are, but faster is always better... I wanna see hardcore PCers cry, weep, and bow down to Apple :cool:

[mac-in-fool]

And why are we still posting rumors from AppleInsider?

We are still posting rumors from AppleInsider because it is one of the few sites posting ANY rumors, good or bad. This site has turned into one big reader forum, discussing rumors from other sites and not generating any information on it's own. You should read the As the apple turns web site, at least it's funny and well written.

[ktlx]

Intel's best new chip, the Pentium M wasn't even designed in-house.

That is not true. The Pentium M was designed by Intel's Israeli team. Please see http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.html?i=1800&p=2.

[PowerMacMan]

Hey ktlx,

You're from Naperville, IL; I'm from St. Charles, IL...

Sorry, Just thought that was interesting, You don't see to much of that...

[reorx]

Errr. CPU design is a small peice of the IBM puzzle. Do you have ANY idea how large IBM is. Seriouly. Do you have any notion. Hell IBM uses AMD and Intel CPU's in some of their own server lines. And as for G5 sales. Please. I'd be willing to bet their yearly earnings are made up of less then 5% of G5 sales. Actually I'd be suprised if it was even 2%.


You are correct, CPU sales to outside parties are probably very low. IBM mostly uses their processors for their hardware. Its the win-win situation of hardware/software sale that I was speaking of. Of course IBM is very opportunistic and would sell you toasters if they thought it would add to the bottom line... :D


And yet I'm willing to bet you've never touched a $499 PC. So how is it you can pass judgment and make claims on a product you have probably never used? Hypocrite. :rolleyes:

I'm imminently qualified to speak here, having built quite a few $499 PCs in my lifetime... What do you want to know about them? That they require constant end-user maintenance? That they SUCK for today's games? That PC vendors are still selling them with not enough memory and sub-par components? (Have you LOOKED at a $499 PC monitor? Holy Crappola!)

[reorx]

That is not true. The Pentium M was designed by Intel's Israeli team. Please see http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.html?i=1800&p=2.

I stand corrected... Thanks for researching it... I knew it wasn't designed in the US, but didn't know it was still an Intel office. :o

Yippee! I'm no longer a newbie! :D

[avkills]

Yes, they are, but faster is always better... I wanna see hardcore PCers cry, weep, and bow down to Apple :cool:

You and me both brother. :D

Although if you look at the entire machine as a whole, I imagine some of them are weeping. ;)

-mark

[phillymjs]

Remember when the Power Macs were hobbled because the CPU vendor couldn't produce faster chips quickly enough, and it was a PR nightmare for Apple?

I'm sure glad those days are over. :(

~Philly

[Evan_11]

but the current G5's still have thermal problems. I just returned a refurb dual 2.0 to Apple because the fans ran at a consistent full blast. The mother sounded like a 747 taking off. I just placed an order for a 'new' dual 2.0. Why? Because I need it. The current top of line is plenty powerful. Yes a bit steep in price but it runs X pretty damned smooth and outperforms all but the very top of the line PC's in video rendering. I think why most of you have your panties bunched up is because of Steve's supposed promise of 3.0 ghz by this summer. Yes it was just a pipe dream. I however have little doubt that we'll see 3.0 by years end. Yes in seven months time.

Meanwhile you little wannabe windozers can piss and moan all you want while the true pros get work done, make money and get some tang on the side. :o

[avkills]

I have no problems at all with my G5. Running FCP 4, After Effects, Photoshop, Lightwave 3D. It rips in all of them. Mucho Fast-o.

:D No complaints here. That sucks about your refurb. :confused:

-mark

[jwhitnah]

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

Then they should drop the G5 like a bad habit and go directly to the modified Power5. What is it going to be, the 980 or something?

[e-coli]

What do you think IBM's major business is? Its to make processors!

You're making incorrect assumptions. IBM's chip making business is a fraction of their overall business. IBM is primarily a services company, not a chip manufacturing company. And FYI, they actually lose money on their hardware and chip making business. It's not profitable in the least.

[greenstork]

You guys need to read the article. It is not a heat issue, it is a sensor issue. The new chip sits differently and gives out the same amount of heat, but sensor was forcing the machine to shut down. It's a minor issue that the article claims is fixed now.

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

BINGO, this is the real news in this article. Where's the exclusive story for this rumor, or would that be blasphemous?

Personally, I think 2.0 GHz is fast enough for my needs (and most other people's too) but that might whip the jackals on the rumor boards into a frenzy, perhaps that is why this juicy rumor was overlooked.

[jwhitnah]

BINGO, this is the real news in this article. Where's the exclusive story for this rumor, or would that be blasphemous?

Personally, I think 2.0 GHz is fast enough for my needs (and most other people's too) but that might whip the jackals on the rumor boards into a frenzy, perhaps that is why this juicy rumor was overlooked.

2.0 GHz WAS fast enough last year. If you are not moving up, you are moving out.

[aswitcher]

BINGO, this is the real news in this article. Where's the exclusive story for this rumor, or would that be blasphemous?

Personally, I think 2.0 GHz is fast enough for my needs (and most other people's too) but that might whip the jackals on the rumor boards into a frenzy, perhaps that is why this juicy rumor was overlooked.

Its a rumor...but if its true then its not a good sign for a solid rise in processor speeds for Apple.

If they are having this many problems with the PowerMac then I have serious concerns about the appearance anytime soon of the PowerBook G5. Damn :(

[Bhennies]

It seems to me that Apple's really in a pinch. Not only is the g5 screwed up, but so is the ipod mini (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=67420). Guess which product gets priority?

[jwhitnah]

It seems to me that Apple's really in a pinch. Not only is the g5 screwed up, but so is the ipod mini (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=67420). Guess which product gets priority?

FUn while it lasted though.

[reorx]

2.0 GHz WAS fast enough last year. If you are not moving up, you are moving out.

That's nice, in theory... Scuse me while I go get into my 2000 hp, 3000 ft/lb truck, because you always need more horsepower and torque. If you're not moving up, you're moving out. :rolleyes:

Every technology has a plateau where a good cost/benefit is reached. I think the PC market has reached it... People need faster internet connections, not faster PCs. I think that you should know this (seeing your current hardware). My fastest machine is a 1.7 Pentium 4M (not M4). Works perfectly fine with 1G memory, even with all the Anti-virus software sucking cycles off everything...

[bubbagump]

I do not understand why everyone is starting to doubt IBM. IBM is well, IBM. You want the most powerful computer in the world, IBM is probably the best company to build it for you. They seem to be using the power4/5 as the keystone of their mainframe lineup. Hence, they also have a lot riding on the same chip family. However, with mainframes, sometimes speed is not as important, since one can simply add more processors. Still, I doubt Microsoft would sign up to use a G5-like processor in the new Xbox if yield was as horrible as people imply. It is my understanding that IBM also does fab work for AMD, so all of this collective experience makes IBM better at increasing yield. I say lets just wait until NAB and until WWDC and if nothing comes out of them, well then I might short Apple stock.

[Maxx Power]

My roomate has a G5, the CPU is cool, but the hard drives are hot as barbeque grilles. I read up a thread on xlr8yourmac.com dealing with specifically this issue, and the problem was with the location of the heat sensor, which is directly above the hard drive, where the air moves slowly across the drive pushed by the middle fan and hence doesn't read accurate temperatures. The drives were operating somewhere in the 80 celsius range (100 is boiling water). Instead of having premature drive failures like many have experienced according to that particular thread, we took the effort to relocate the sensor by attaching it to the drives themselves on the side. Problem solved, the fans run faster, and the drives are now operating much much cooler, at least they don't burn the back of my fingers upon contact with the sides.

-Good tip to all G5 users as well

[jwhitnah]

That's nice, in theory... Scuse me while I go get into my 2000 hp, 3000 ft/lb truck, because you always need more horsepower and torque. If you're not moving up, you're moving out. :rolleyes:

Every technology has a plateau where a good cost/benefit is reached. I think the PC market has reached it... People need faster internet connections, not faster PCs. I think that you should know this (seeing your current hardware). My fastest machine is a 1.7 Pentium 4M (not M4). Works perfectly fine with 1G memory, even with all the Anti-virus software sucking cycles off everything...

Can't really compare trucks to computers. My iMac 400 still screams on 9.2.2 but chokes on 10.3.3. For the OS and other software to evolve, faster hardware MUST be developed. PC's are not reach a plateau so the Mac had better keep up. By the way, faster internet connections will come. Heard of Internet 2? No matter how much faster you can make a car, you still must stay within the speed limit.

[gop007]

Well of these rumors are close to being true, then I would expect Apple Stock to take a big dip in the next few months. Sales of the G5 should be in the toilet about now. They better come up with a pretty big speed bump or they will continue to be in the toilet. Just glad I sold it when it wa still close to 27.

[aswitcher]

Well of these rumors are close to being true, then I would expect Apple Stock to take a big dip in the next few months. Sales of the G5 should be in the toilet about now. They better come up with a pretty big speed bump or they will continue to be in the toilet. Just glad I sold it when it wa still close to 27.

We will have to see how the financial chat goes tomorrow...

[reorx]

Can't really compare trucks to computers. My iMac 400 still screams on 9.2.2 but chokes on 10.3.3. For the OS and other software to evolve, faster hardware MUST be developed. PC's are not reach a plateau so the Mac had better keep up. By the way, faster internet connections will come. Heard of Internet 2? No matter how much faster you can make a car, you still must stay within the speed limit.

Software is way-far-behind the curve in terms of real advancement... I'm just saying that the typical user will not see the difference in a 1GHz vs a 2GHz for 90% of all their applications on current hardware. It wasn't always the case. I'm guessing that lack of memory is the major problem with older PCs with newer operating systems. This little Dell laptop with ~400 MHz Celeron and 256M memory runs great for posting on this board... Its perceptably much faster than it was when I had win ME on it a couple years ago...

I think you will find that Intel has reached a plateau at its current yields on P4.... This is a good thing. Maybe software development will catch up to the current hardware and deliver rock-solid, high-performance apps, optimized for the hardware its on.

Internet 2 is designed to improve routing in a high-speed network infrastructure... It does nothing for joe six-pack with his 56k modem.

Finally: Physics has a speed limit, too... ;)

[jane doe]

Something is wrong with this. The G5 does not use a sensor to measure heat from the heat sink. It has a thermostat on the chip. I cannot remember exactly what pin it is.

[jwhitnah]

Software is way-far-behind the curve in terms of real advancement... I'm just saying that the typical user will not see the difference in a 1GHz vs a 2GHz for 90% of all their applications on current hardware. It wasn't always the case. I'm guessing that lack of memory is the major problem with older PCs with newer operating systems. This little Dell laptop with ~400 MHz Celeron and 256M memory runs great for posting on this board... Its perceptably much faster than it was when I had win ME on it a couple years ago...

I think you will find that Intel has reached a plateau at its current yields on P4.... This is a good thing. Maybe software development will catch up to the current hardware and deliver rock-solid, high-performance apps, optimized for the hardware its on.

Internet 2 is designed to improve routing in a high-speed network infrastructure... It does nothing for joe six-pack with his 56k modem.

Finally: Physics has a speed limit, too... ;)

If all this is true, no one needs a 3 GHz. Shame on Job's for wetting my appetite for something that I will never need. How Orwellian. As a Mac geek, I too frequently make excuses when Apple doesn't deliver.

[bar italia]

And why are we still posting rumors from AppleInsider?

If it wasn't for AppleInsider, this site would have no content at all.

[bathysphere]

If it wasn't for AppleInsider, this site would have no content at all.

seriously.
this is what, the fifth or sixth different reason for the g5 delays? they have a new reason every week, literally. seeing how easy it seems to be for ibm to make 2ghz g5's, i doubt it would be significantly more difficult for them to make 2.2 or 2.4ghz. possibly more difficult on the 90nm chip, but if so they would have been aware of this difficulty probably a year ago, and would have proceeded accordingly. so i think this whole thing is crap. macrumors needs to stop posting this junk from appleinsider, each rumor they have contradicts the previous rumor.

[jackieonasses]

Jesus, everyone is making out like the current G5s are too slow or something. Trust me on this, the Dual 2Ghz is fast. In fact it is very fast. Yes I want to see Apple release faster hardware, but the current hardware is damn fast as it is. In fact if you look at the complete hardware landscape, the G5 looks very good. And I'm talking FSB speeds, point to point architecture, SATA, Dual Channel 400Mhz memory, Firewire 400 and 800, Gigabit Ethernet, Independent FSB for each processor... The Dual G5s are monsters. Video and Audio apps just rip like a mother on these things.

-mark

well done! that is how you say something. Still Apple needs something big to get back on track!

[aussiemac86]

To all the other aussies out there,
i am in the market for a new G5, and was just wondering if anyone knows what the usual delay between a PM release and when they are available down here is?


-Cheers

[aswitcher]

To all the other aussies out there,
i am in the market for a new G5, and was just wondering if anyone knows what the usual delay between a PM release and when they are available down here is?


-Cheers

It can be a while. It might just be a few weeks but more realistically it might be a couple of months...

[alexf]

Jesus, everyone is making out like the current G5s are too slow or something. Trust me on this, the Dual 2Ghz is fast. In fact it is very fast. Yes I want to see Apple release faster hardware, but the current hardware is damn fast as it is. In fact if you look at the complete hardware landscape, the G5 looks very good. And I'm talking FSB speeds, point to point architecture, SATA, Dual Channel 400Mhz memory, Firewire 400 and 800, Gigabit Ethernet, Independent FSB for each processor... The Dual G5s are monsters. Video and Audio apps just rip like a mother on these things.

-mark

AVKills, thank you for bringing some sense into all of this!

Amazing how most people will never be satisfied no matter what; always need more, more, more... especially Americans.

[rendezvouscp]

AVKills, thank you for bringing some sense into all of this!

Amazing how most people will never be satisfied no matter what; always need more, more, more... especially Americans.

That's so sad, but true. I have a dual 2, and it's an amazing machine. Almost more than what I could ever use it for. But in my country, everyone wants more. That's why McDonald's had to bring out fries with less fat (although it was very unhealthy anyways) just because of the lawsuits. People just want more, at least in America.

–Chase

[MarkCollette]

I'm as baffled as you are Numedian. Oddly refreshing to read the occasional unintelligible post though. Looks to me like it was mistakenly posted here instead of at "Domestic violence anonymous".


To clear the confusion, I was illustrating how his posting about putting up with Apple's failures was similar to how one would rationalise remaining in an abusive relationship.

But, I can that you're all still in denial :D lol

[MarkCollette]

what's the reason they can't they get past 2.0 GHz? heat?


I'm not sure if this will shed any light into IBM's situation, but the reason why Intel has not been able to ramp up speeds and cut power consumption in their switch to 90 nm, is that things have gotten so small, that current leakage is a big problem. So, either the chip doesn't work properly, or it takes up even more power with the smaller size.

I had thought that IBM was more advanced, with SOI, strained silicon, etc., and so might not have the same problems, but maybe they still are. Who knows?

[PRØBE]

To clear the confusion, I was illustrating how his posting about putting up with Apple's failures was similar to how one would rationalise remaining in an abusive relationship.

But, I can that you're all still in denial :D lol








You "can" what?

[rabatjoie]

That's so sad, but true. I have a dual 2, and it's an amazing machine. Almost more than what I could ever use it for. But in my country, everyone wants more. That's why McDonald's had to bring out fries with less fat (although it was very unhealthy anyways) just because of the lawsuits. People just want more, at least in America.

–Chase

i don't think that it is specifically american to "always want more". when referring to computers & software, i think it is because of the rapid development and improvements that you very soon get the feeling that your equipment is out of date. one could say that in computers there is something like an ideology of the new, or more specific: of the latest update and the fastetst software. this does not only apply to americans, but to all computer users whatsoever...

[rendezvouscp]

i don't think that it is specifically american to "always want more". when referring to computers & software, i think it is because of the rapid development and improvements that you very soon get the feeling that your equipment is out of date. one could say that in computers there is something like an ideology of the new, or more specific: of the latest update and the fastetst software. this does not only apply to americans, but to all computer users whatsoever...

Very true. With computers, and technology in general, it is different. But, I was just adding on to what alexf said. But I know you knew that :) .
–Chase

[Krizoitz]

To clear the confusion, I was illustrating how his posting about putting up with Apple's failures was similar to how one would rationalise remaining in an abusive relationship.

But, I can that you're all still in denial :D lol

How exactly is it a failure to have to solve a problem? I really think some people need to take some time to seriously think about how things are made. Its not like Apple sits down and says we'll make this and it works right away. You have to build prototypes and fix problems and come up with better designs. Engineering is a process, its not magic.

[Michael Vance]

Are the prices for the G5's still the same as when they were introduced? I'm guessing there will be no new machines until the end of the year, if then. I was going to buy a dual G5 back in December but some Mac friends convinced me I should wait. (thanks alot for the advice guys) So now I've waited for nothing, obviously, but I still need a Mac to run FCP. So I'm back in the market for a Mac, but I would feel a lot better about it if there was some discount for these old machines.

[Hyde]

Hey guys - I have a Dual 500Mhz G4 tower with 1.5GB of RAM. It is faster than my TiPB 1Ghz G4 with 256MB of RAM. I am a musician (Logic user) who has been holding out on purchasing a new Mac until the Dual 3's come out. With all the information (rumored info anyway) you guys have come across - should I go to buy a Dual 2 tomorrow or wait until WWDC? I CAN wait but if you think it's not gonna hit the Dual 3 mark or even if it does - be some hurried and crappy iteration thereof (which just gets 'fixed' in another revision soon thereafter) - should I just get the Dual 2?

Sorry to post here but it's where I felt that most people waiting for info on the Dual 3's would be.

Hyde
------
12•21•12 = 46&2...

[klaus]

Hey guys - I have a Dual 500Mhz G4 tower with 1.5GB of RAM. It is faster than my TiPB 1Ghz G4 with 256MB of RAM. I am a musician (Logic user) who has been holding out on purchasing a new Mac until the Dual 3's come out. With all the information (rumored info anyway) you guys have come across - should I go to buy a Dual 2 tomorrow or wait until WWDC? I CAN wait but if you think it's not gonna hit the Dual 3 mark or even if it does - be some hurried and crappy iteration thereof (which just gets 'fixed' in another revision soon thereafter) - should I just get the Dual 2?

Sorry to post here but it's where I felt that most people waiting for info on the Dual 3's would be.

Hyde
------
12•21•12 = 46&2...

There will be updates at or around the timeframe of WWDC (or else Apple will be in deep **** I think). But if they are 3.0 or "just" 2.5, none of us know.

If i would buy a Powermac now, i'd buy a refurb..nice discount for the same machine.

But you said it yourself, you can wait to wwdc, so you'll get more bang for your bucks

[Michael Vance]

There will be updates at or around the timeframe of WWDC (or else Apple will be in deep **** I think). But if they are 3.0 or "just" 2.5, none of us know.

If i would buy a Powermac now, i'd buy a refurb..nice discount for the same machine.

But you said it yourself, you can wait to wwdc, so you'll get more bang for your bucks


Why do Mac people always say the same thing? New Macs will be out (insert next trade show name here, or nearest Tuesday) so you should wait. The fact is that advice is almost always wrong. Not blaming you. I fell for it myself and now I'm stuck with the option of not buying a Mac at all, or buying one that is nearly a year old with little to no discount. :mad:

[klaus]

Why do Mac people always say the same thing? New Macs will be out (insert next trade show name here, or nearest Tuesday) so you should wait. The fact is that advice is almost always wrong. Not blaming you. I fell for it myself and now I'm stuck with the option of not buying a Mac at all, or buying one that is nearly a year old with little to no discount. :mad:

I understand your point, that's why I told him to get a refurb now, cause that way you get a discount with the latest available hardware. But he said he could wait, so he'll have more bang for his bucks then..

I'm a switcher too, so i'll buy the first new Powermac available, and not any sooner, so It can last at least 2 years! :cool:

[AngryAngel]

Something is wrong with this. The G5 does not use a sensor to measure heat from the heat sink. It has a thermostat on the chip. I cannot remember exactly what pin it is.

I agree- most (all?) recent PowerPC chips can tell their temperture on-chip. A sensor on/near the heatsink is not good enough for critical temperture measurements, because if the heatsink is not designed correctly, the chip could still get very hot for short periods without the sensor knowing anything was wrong.

If I were running a rumor site, and my readers were expecting a speed increase in G5's, I would be able to come up with all sorts of reasons why Apple hasn't released the faster computers.

Maybe Apple is purposefully waiting for significantly faster chips (not being let down by suppliers or having problems with sensors)- you may not agree with their business plan, but I find it more likely than the fact that the "delay" is due to unexpected hheat sensor problems.

To people who buy computers in big organisations, the G5 is still new (we only bought our first last month), and it is still the fastest Mac ever. I always thought (and still do) that they would bump to 3GHz in one go, at WWDC.

[centauratlas]

IBM is having problems above 2.0.

Well, I guess that means PB G5s will be here today (Tuesday). If they can't use all the 970fx's above 2ghz then they'll have a lot to spare. I had to say it, ha ha.
:rolleyes:

[skunk]

Bring back Motorola :D

(ducks)

[sushi]

There will be updates at or around the timeframe of WWDC (or else Apple will be in deep **** I think). But if they are 3.0 or "just" 2.5, none of us know.

Take a chill pill guys. SJ stated that they would have 3Ghz models in a year. It has not been a year yet! Not even close, if memory serves.

No one here knows what will be introduced at the WWDC. It is only speculation at this point.

My suggestion. Get what you need today based on what is available. If what you need is not available, then wait, or choose a lessor alternative today.

My guess is that the day the 3Ghz G5's models are introduced, people will start complaining about the 4Ghz models not being out and that we are behind. The cycle never seems to stop.

Sushi

[Mord]

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!


remember when moto said they did not produce any chips higher than 1ghz when the dual 1.4ghz g4 was the fastest its because apple is buying them all

[Mercury]

It's not just about the "cycle," though. I'm on a G4/733 that I upgraded to a Radeon 8500. My primary purpose is games, in which the video card and processing power are extremely important. It tends to be a long time between computers, since it's usually more effective to buy the best every 3 years (and maybe ugprade the graphics card) than to buy the bottom of the line every 2. The same graphics card that was the top of the line a year and a half ago or so is still the top of the line today...with new G5s, I'm hoping for a newer (hopefully 256 MB VRAM) and better graphics card as well as a significant boost in mhz.

It just feels "wrong" to buy an amazing computer a bit less than a year after it came out and have it replaced within a month or two, especially with the ancient graphics cards. Maybe my primary concern is for a new ATI or NVidia card, but the mhz will help too.

[klaus]

update, it could very well be a code update, fixing some bugs or something. The last time it was down, nothing was updated.. so I wouldn't get my hopes up to early, but then again, it's tuesday..

[NOV]

We'll know more within an hour.....

[Mercury]

Looks up to me, and no updates yet. :|

[proglife]

Updated E-Mac! YAAAAAAAYYYYYYY!!!!!!!! :(

[Trowaman]

Helloooo new eMac . . . .

Not bad, I consider a pretty good machine now. 1.25 GHZ, Superdrive, $1000. I could appreciate that at that price.

[proglife]

Helloooo new eMac . . . .

Not bad, I consider a pretty good machine now. 1.25 GHZ, Superdrive, $1000. I could appreciate that at that price.

You're right, it is a good deal. (Wow, a good deal on an Apple?)

[3-22]

As for the notion that a G5 can't go in the iMac before the PB, also "head up your ass" marketing. The users and markets for both are dissimilar. Desktop vs. portable.

I don't know if it's 100% "head up your ass" marketing but a little technical challenge thrown into the mix. If they can figure out how to cool a G5 for a laptop they can keep cool it in the iMac. The iMac and laptop share a lot of components and share the same heat problem limited space. The G5 case is taken up mostly by heatsinks and fans the iMac has little room for either.

[Trowaman]

ya know, since the eMac is now the same speed as the iMac, I' be willing to venture a guess that iMac speed bumps will come at the latest by WWDC. I mean, when was the last time eMacs and iMacs had the same processor in them?

[oingoboingo]

What other machine has been bumped up significantly in terms of Mhz since the G5 PowerMac was released other than the Xserve?

I have kinda bumped my G5 across a little...I moved it from the left side of the desk to the right side, under a bookshelf. Let's face it, if Apple isn't going to bump the G5s, then the users will have to start doing it.

[Trowaman]

You're right, it is a good deal. (Wow, a good deal on an Apple?)

Yeah, who'da thunk it?

Genius idea. They should market this baby like Dell does for their cheap stuff.

"The affordable Mac, and it does more than all those other cheap computers out there . . ."

[arobasefr]

:rolleyes:

Apple released a marshmallow for keeping us sweet until NAB !

2004-04-13 - Delay of G5
A source tested brings information to us on the causes of the delay of G5. There are 3 of them since January:
* thermal concerns for probes extinguished the machines with 27°C. It was solved during January
* ATI delayed to deliver the video charts. Solved since 3 weeks
* More serious. APPLE was obliged to dismount all the daughter cards of G5 and to return them in factory.
IBM discovered very tardily a problem on PPC 970FX. In the manufacturing process, an adhesive is used to assemble two layers. It is an innovation of process SSDOI. The adhesive used since the beginning of the manufacture of the processors worsens quickly with heat causing the break-in of the CPU. Since they modified the formula and started again the manufacture of the processors. But APPLE will have all to change them on its daughter cards.

http://croquer.free.fr/

[1macker1]

Damn emacs for 1K. Ummm, this is a good. I like good.

Man, it's only 799!!!!

[aswitcher]

:rolleyes:

Apple released a marshmallow for keeping us sweet until NAB !

2004-04-13 - Delay of G5
SNIP
* More serious. APPLE was obliged to dismount all the daughter cards of G5 and to return them in factory.
IBM discovered very tardily a problem on PPC 970FX. In the manufacturing process, an adhesive is used to assemble two layers. It is an innovation of process SSDOI. The adhesive used since the beginning of the manufacture of the processors worsens quickly with heat causing the break-in of the CPU. Since they modified the formula and started again the manufacture of the processors. But APPLE will have all to change them on its daughter cards.

http://croquer.free.fr/

Whoa, so what does this mean. Just delays? What about speed?

[Rustus Maximus]

The real news, though, is that IBM is not able to produce chips faster than 2.0 -- according to AppleInsider. It's not that they can't get to 3.0, they can't get to 2.8, 2.6, 2.4, or 2.2!

Can someone tell me if this statement is in any way backed up by actual fact anywhere? Or is all the panic and IBM badmouthing I see just the result of this rumor? I think this is bovine fertilizer and we will hit 3GHz in stride just as predicted.

[numediaman]

Whoa, so what does this mean. Just delays? What about speed?

The news from the French site and AppleInsider is contradictory. They both agree about several items, but are offering completely different rumors on the CPU front: the French site gave us some very appealing cpu speeds last week, and AppleInsider tells us that IBM can't make anything go faster than 2.0.

If the French site is right we should see new G5s before WWDC -- if AI is right we'll see new G5s after hell freezes over. Then again, they are only rumor sites. (By the way, when was the last time Macrumors had a rumor?)

EDIT: don't blame me for the rumor, Rastus, I was just passing on news from AppleInsider. My prediction was consistently that the new G5 would be announced in March.)

[Patchr]

Doesn't the introduction of the new eMac prove that most of the rumour sites don't really have any "inside" information. We haven't heard anything recently about an eMac update, nor had we heard anything about iBook G4's prior to their release. Just a thought.

[numediaman]

Doesn't the introduction of the new eMac prove that most of the rumour sites don't really have any "inside" information. We haven't heard anything recently about an eMac update, nor had we heard anything about iBook G4's prior to their release. Just a thought.

Kinda sad, isn't it?

[Dont Hurt Me]

Can someone tell me if this statement is in any way backed up by actual fact anywhere? Or is all the panic and IBM badmouthing I see just the result of this rumor? I think this is bovine fertilizer and we will hit 3GHz in stride just as predicted.No facts but we do remember that Xserve was shown at 2.3 somewhere when it first came out and then changed. we also know that we didnt get any bumps after 6 months of production which i thought was very odd. I would say this looks like it could very well be the case. 1 thing that bothers me is the daughtercard issue. why would any parameters change simply on a die shrink? why would sensors read more heat from a cpu thats cooler. why would a duaghtercard need to be changed 970 fx vs 970?. what if Apple is using a dual core cpu or 2 cpu's under each sink? now that would explain a little of the sensor issues and daughtercard modifications. anyone say Quadra?

[aswitcher]

Doesn't the introduction of the new eMac prove that most of the rumour sites don't really have any "inside" information. We haven't heard anything recently about an eMac update, nor had we heard anything about iBook G4's prior to their release. Just a thought.

You know what, your dead right! :D

[Trowaman]

Doesn't the introduction of the new eMac prove that most of the rumour sites don't really have any "inside" information. We haven't heard anything recently about an eMac update, nor had we heard anything about iBook G4's prior to their release. Just a thought.

Ya know, I thought the same thing. But these rumor sites are fun to predict stuff, so ya know, enjoy it but take everything with a little salt. ESPECIALLY RUMORS STARTED WITHIN THE FORUMS!

[eSnow]

Hmm Apple updates the least important (both financially and leadership-imagewise) machine, but does nothing to modernize the towers and notebooks. This is really strange.

And what's with the (alleged) causes of the delay? First GPUs then CPUs, then aluminium supply shortage, then CPUs again. This does not make sense at all.

What's next? Keyboard-paint-shortage? Lack of little rubber feet? QC problems on mounting screws?
:p

[Patchr]

Ya know, I thought the same thing. But these rumor sites are fun to predict stuff, so ya know, enjoy it but take everything with a little salt. ESPECIALLY RUMORS STARTED WITHIN THE FORUMS!

Yeah I get that point, afterall, I visit pretty often myself. It's just that with the impending G5 updates we don't really seem to have any consistent information, which suggests that we don't really have any information.

I remember that before the G5's initial release we had lots of information that was of a similar nature from lots of different rumour sites (and it was from quite early too). We don't seem to have had much accurate 'intelligence' for a while now, so perhaps the sources have dried up? ;)

[DWKlink]

When i was looking through the specs on the new eMac, it lists an 8x Superdrive... this is the first of its kind for apple, no?

[Zaty]

You know what, your dead right! :D

Yeah, but with hindsight, the eMac update is not a complete surprise, I mean they really had to update it. SDRAM and only USB 1.1 was so 2002. It's intresting though why no rumours have appeared. That's why I said in anohter thread that we would need substantial rumours and not just guessing or dreaming.

[uzombie]

its eCrap.

The history of the eMac is littered with poor quality control. I wouldn't take one even if every G5 purchase came with one free.

And i feel the same about rebates. They should be outlawed.

oops. Wrong forum! :o

[sushi]

Doesn't the introduction of the new eMac prove that most of the rumour sites don't really have any "inside" information. We haven't heard anything recently about an eMac update, nor had we heard anything about iBook G4's prior to their release. Just a thought.
Cha Ching! :-)

Sushi

[klaus]

its eCrap.

The history of the eMac is littered with poor quality control. I wouldn't take one even if every G5 purchase came with one free.

And i feel the same about rebates. They should be outlawed.

oops. Wrong forum! :o


oh yes, you are soo right :) that's funny if you come to think of it, the 'slowest' model of all the mac computers has the FASTED superdrive.

[dex22]

This rumor doesn't make sense.

A sensor will detect heat. A processor will make heat. A sensor cannot detect heat more than it is exposed to, and the processor isn't getting hot. No matter how you reposition or wrongly position the sensor, you can only get a false _low_ reading, not a false _high_ one.

It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. This rumor is false.

[Evan_11]

means we might see the iMac G5 soon. There is just too little difference between the iMac and eMac now to justify the price difference. The eMac itself is a nice machine. I checked one out yesterday and the screen is just fine; very clear compared to most crt's that I have seen lately. I think they would sell even better if Apple went back to the different colors.

While the iMac is a sharp looking machine (the store demos don't do it justice, it needs to be seen on a home desktop preferably something Danish or glass) it needs a G5 now. Regardless of the Powermac speed barrier that IBM is currently handling they should put a 2.0 G5 in the 20" iMac. Outfit it with a 120Gb HD and 2 Gb of ram and you'd have a nice 'Anniversary' Mac.

[Evan_11]

are extremely finicky and more complicated than you would imagine. If Apple just cooled the thing like they did with the windtunnel G4's it wouldn't be a problem. However I've heard what a 'windtunnel' G5 sounds like and it is impossible to live with.

No the real problem seems to be IBM's inability to get the G5 past 2 ghz. This might take a re-iteration of the processor which of course will mean that we won't see an update until WWDC.

[Dont Hurt Me]

This rumor doesn't make sense.

A sensor will detect heat. A processor will make heat. A sensor cannot detect heat more than it is exposed to, and the processor isn't getting hot. No matter how you reposition or wrongly position the sensor, you can only get a false _low_ reading, not a false _high_ one.

It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. This rumor is false.what if there are 2 Cpu's under that one heat sink and the Cpu's are cool but the heat sink isnt?

[Rustus Maximus]

No the real problem seems to be IBM's inability to get the G5 past 2 ghz. This might take a re-iteration of the processor which of course will mean that we won't see an update until WWDC.

Again...there is no evidence of this and alot of folks are addressing this rumor as though it were fact. There is no proof that IBM can't go beyond 2GHz. That is total hooey. At the worst I think what has happened here are problems with new innovative case design, new innovative cooling systems, etc.. These are problems to be expected I am sure when you are pushing the envelope of industrial design as Apple tends to do.

[mrwheet]

Well... my source is pretty good, and he says new G5s are being unveiled at NAB: Dual 2.0, 2.4, 2.6. I think it makes sense. I'd imagine Apple would rather just get new G5s out than wait to deliver on the 3 HGz "promise". The 3 GHz will be a PPC 975 thing, so it will likely show up toward the end of the year. What I'm hoping for are solutions to the noise issues... though it would be nice to see them adopt PCI-Express, since it looks like that's the way the industry's going -- it's been a rumor around the 975-based machines, so, who knows?
I won't, however, be able to resist the dual 2.0 at the entry-level!! At last we'll be squarely beating the wintel world in bang-for-the-buck! Not only that, but I'll have some budget left over for all that RAM... ;)

[tsk]

I'm imminently qualified to speak here, having built quite a few $499 PCs in my lifetime... What do you want to know about them? That they require constant end-user maintenance? That they SUCK for today's games? That PC vendors are still selling them with not enough memory and sub-par components? (Have you LOOKED at a $499 PC monitor? Holy Crappola!)

As opposed to the eMac's that ship with enough RAM? Or hell, the PowerMacs for that matter. An $1800 machine selling with 256MB (and no monitor if you want to go there)?

[aussiemac86]

Well... my source is pretty good, and he says new G5s are being unveiled at NAB: Dual 2.0, 2.4, 2.6. I think it makes sense. I'd imagine Apple would rather just get new G5s out than wait to deliver on the 3 HGz "promise". The 3 GHz will be a PPC 975 thing, so it will likely show up toward the end of the year. What I'm hoping for are solutions to the noise issues... though it would be nice to see them adopt PCI-Express, since it looks like that's the way the industry's going -- it's been a rumor around the 975-based machines, so, who knows?
I won't, however, be able to resist the dual 2.0 at the entry-level!! At last we'll be squarely beating the wintel world in bang-for-the-buck! Not only that, but I'll have some budget left over for all that RAM... ;)


You will forgive us all of being just a little skeptical at this claim considering all the other rubbish that has come up in forums as of late, do u care to elaborate on who this "pretty good source" is?

also PPC975? I havent heard of that yet, will that still be classified as a G5 or as a G6 perhaps?

[mrwheet]

I'm not saying too much... but he's a tech in the post-production world. He's going to NAB, on the company.

The 975 could potentially be called a G6, though they'll probably leave that for the 980.

[aussiemac86]

....Intriguing

Well we shall see, ifthey do i will be the first person to place an order on the apple aus site for a dual 2.6, this imac rev b (233) is starting to get really sloooooooww

Also does your source have anything to say about new displays, surely they are due for an update.

[mrwheet]

the only other rumor he had was of a hardware device... speculation is on a controller for Final Cut...

[ImAlwaysRight]

At least we received an O/S update every year instead of every 3+ years.
Yeah, they have to make money somehow since they aren't making any money on new hardware sales, since new hardware does not exist! :(

[form]

What about video/audio processing for larger files? And what about 3d? Maybe some of you are content to wait hours or days for big 3d renders, or for large movies to be assembled frame-by-frame, but I'm not. 3d render speed is a choke-hold on creativity for me; the slower it is, the fewer features I can take advantage of, and the less detailed the models will have to be. I want apple to be more competitive in 3d, and I want 3dsmax to come out for mac, along with all the plugins.

[dex22]

what if there are 2 Cpu's under that one heat sink and the Cpu's are cool but the heat sink isnt?

How can the heatsink be hotter than the heatsource? Also, Apple has never placed a sensor on a heatsink.

[dex22]

OK OK! The heatsink CAN be hotter than the source if you use a peltier element to forcibly move the heat. However, Apple don't do this.

[form]

I have no problems at all with my G5. Running FCP 4, After Effects, Photoshop, Lightwave 3D. It rips in all of them. Mucho Fast-o.

:D No complaints here. That sucks about your refurb. :confused:

-mark

Lightwave 3d doesn't have any cursor issues, or crashing problems on your g5? That sounds singularly abnormal...What OS version are you running?

[Dont Hurt Me]

How can the heatsink be hotter than the heatsource? Also, Apple has never placed a sensor on a heatsink.easy you have 2 cpus giving off heat so though each processor isnt that hot the heat sink is grabbing heat from both and if the sensor is reading heat sink temp that would explain it. it also would answer why redesign the daughtercard in the first place if its only a die shrink. just grabbing for straws thats all.

[wdlove]

Well... my source is pretty good, and he says new G5s are being unveiled at NAB: Dual 2.0, 2.4, 2.6. I think it makes sense. I'd imagine Apple would rather just get new G5s out than wait to deliver on the 3 HGz "promise". The 3 GHz will be a PPC 975 thing, so it will likely show up toward the end of the year. What I'm hoping for are solutions to the noise issues... though it would be nice to see them adopt PCI-Express, since it looks like that's the way the industry's going -- it's been a rumor around the 975-based machines, so, who knows?
I won't, however, be able to resist the dual 2.0 at the entry-level!! At last we'll be squarely beating the wintel world in bang-for-the-buck! Not only that, but I'll have some budget left over for all that RAM... ;)

I'm still not sure that I agree with the upgrade at NAB. If this Rev. B is released at NAB, does that mean that if we purchase a 23" Cinema Display that will still get $500 rebate? Will the memory deal apply to this Rev. B?

[JoeG4]

easy you have 2 cpus giving off heat so though each processor isnt that hot the heat sink is grabbing heat from both and if the sensor is reading heat sink temp that would explain it. it also would answer why redesign the daughtercard in the first place if its only a die shrink. just grabbing for straws thats all.

Unlike PowerMac G4s, the PowerMac G5 dual CPU models do not share heatsinks between processors.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Unlike PowerMac G4s, the PowerMac G5 dual CPU models do not share heatsinks between processors.thats not my point, my point is what if there are 2 cpu's under each heat sink, the sink is hot but the cpu's are not. a machine with 4 cpu's? Quadra. anyways its all just rumors and guesses and a lot of hot air started by A.I.

[dex22]

thats not my point, my point is what if there are 2 cpu's under each heat sink, the sink is hot but the cpu's are not. a machine with 4 cpu's? Quadra. anyways its all just rumors and guesses and a lot of hot air started by A.I.

It just doesn't work that way. Heat always moves from the hotter body to the cooler body. Since the heat is being generated in the processor, it always moves from the processor to the heatsink, and less so from the heatsink to the processor. No matter how many heat sources you have, in a balanced (closed) system, the processor will always be hotter in use than the heatsink. Period.

The Laws of Thermodynamics have a good primer here:

http://www.cchem.berkeley.edu/~chem130a/sauer/outline/firstlaw.html

[iriejedi]

Sigh - there has to be a light at the end of the tunnel.... I just hope it is not a train!

Upgrading eMacs.... tempted to buy one for the DVD and 80 gig drive so I can back up my old mac....but this picture reminds me... to a jedi,patients is a virtue. Yadda Yadda Yadda - Where is my G5.1

:p

[djbahdow01]

Sigh - there has to be a light at the end of the tunnel.... I just hope it is not a train!

Upgrading eMacs.... tempted to buy one for the DVD and 80 gig drive so I can back up my old mac....but this picture reminds me... to a jedi,patients is a virtue. Yadda Yadda Yadda - Where is my G5.1

:p


Lets just hope that graphic is the inended idea for WWDC, as it is coming up quickly and no updates have been announced for the PM. Could it be a jump from 2.0 to 3.0 with no update in between, sounds very unlike motorola and intel for that matter. I just hope the prices are about the same as i will be purchasing a mid end G5 with a 20, or 23" LCD, which ever is in the mid price range as well.

[iMeowbot]

This rumor doesn't make sense.

A sensor will detect heat. A processor will make heat. A sensor cannot detect heat more than it is exposed to, and the processor isn't getting hot. No matter how you reposition or wrongly position the sensor, you can only get a false _low_ reading, not a false _high_ one.

It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. This rumor is false.

It's not that simple. There is also a delay between when the heat source (CPU) and the energy travels to the measurement points. If the timing curve is miscalculated, you can end up with cooked components (because the cooling ramp up far too late) or an obnoxious oscillating effect (full blast fans when the temp starts rising faster than the fans were attempting to control, then reducing speed/shutting off when too much cooling has been applied). If the sampling points aren't chosen correctly, there won't be good enough information to get a reasonable balance across the operating range.

[Michael Vance]

Lets just hope that graphic is the inended idea for WWDC, as it is coming up quickly and no updates have been announced for the PM. Could it be a jump from 2.0 to 3.0 with no update in between, sounds very unlike motorola and intel for that matter. I just hope the prices are about the same as i will be purchasing a mid end G5 with a 20, or 23" LCD, which ever is in the mid price range as well.

I can tell most of you haven't been following Apple for very long. There is no chance in hell that a 3 gig chip will ship from Apple this year. Not a snowball's chance in hell. 2.4 tops imo, but maybe not even that.

[ingenious]

Please stay on topic address the thread, your post has 0 to do with the thread and it is the executives fault for such a poor tier structure. 1 Product holding up the whole line up for 3/4 of a year? inexcusable.


Just buy Alienware and leave the rest of us alone! I personally like the tier structure because it provides some stability in models, unlike Dells or other PCs, where everything is so different, you really don't have a "model." You have a model number but no one really cares because they all look the same and do basically the same things. Apple on the other hand, IMO has a great idea. make a computer for each group of users. While right now that plan may not be perfect with the new eMacs faster or as fast as every other computer except PM G5s, and there not being updates in forever or a corprate machine, its a good plan, they just need to continue to tweak it. :rolleyes:

[Geetar]

Michael Vance-I'll bet you $1000 (that's a thousand dollars) that we see at least 2.6GHz, shipped by year's end (that's Dec 31st 2004). Want to take me on in front of witnesses?

[aswitcher]

Michael Vance-I'll bet you $1000 (that's a thousand dollars) that we see at least 2.6GHz, shipped by year's end (that's Dec 31st 2004). Want to take me on in front of witnesses?

Interesting... ;)

[aussiemac86]

Michael Vance-I'll bet you $1000 (that's a thousand dollars) that we see at least 2.6GHz, shipped by year's end (that's Dec 31st 2004). Want to take me on in front of witnesses?


Id have to agree with Geetar, i would be very surprised if we didnt get at least 2.6 but remember there is like 6 months after WWDC, plenty of time for 3 to come out, if it doesnt come out at WWDC that is ;)

[dex22]

It's not that simple. There is also a delay between when the heat source (CPU) and the energy travels to the measurement points. If the timing curve is miscalculated, you can end up with cooked components (because the cooling ramp up far too late) or an obnoxious oscillating effect (full blast fans when the temp starts rising faster than the fans were attempting to control, then reducing speed/shutting off when too much cooling has been applied). If the sampling points aren't chosen correctly, there won't be good enough information to get a reasonable balance across the operating range.

Which is not relevant to the rumor, which is that the processor runs cool, but the system reports it is hot, spins up the fans, and shuts down. The rumor is false.

I'm just demonstrating the rumor is false, and you're violently agreeing with me :)

[Michael Vance]

Michael Vance-I'll bet you $1000 (that's a thousand dollars) that we see at least 2.6GHz, shipped by year's end (that's Dec 31st 2004). Want to take me on in front of witnesses?

I'll bet you a thousand dollars that Steve's prediction of 3Gigs within 12 months does not come true. I'd love to find a way to actually make money by betting against Apple and Job's lies. This bet is contigent upon finding a suitable 3rd party to hold the money that we both can agree on.

[Rower_CPU]

I'll bet you a thousand dollars that Steve's prediction of 3Gigs within 12 months does not come true. I'd love to find a way to actually make money by betting against Apple and Job's lies. This bet is contigent upon finding a suitable 3rd party to hold the money that we both can agree on.

Quoting this for posterity. We'll see what happens in the next 2 and a half months...

[form]

He's probably right, you know; It's not apple's style, or within their power, from what I can see, to meet such a deadline as the 3ghz, and it is doubtful that they would even come close by the end of the year, at this rate..

By the way, avkills, I'm still waiting for a reply about that lightwave subject..

[Geetar]

I can tell most of you haven't been following Apple for very long. There is no chance in hell that a 3 gig chip will ship from Apple this year. Not a snowball's chance in hell. 2.4 tops imo, but maybe not even that.


This is what I said I was prepared to bet against. You may be right about the "1 year/3GHz", but against your earlier statement, you're backtracking a little now, aren't you? ;)

[Parikh1234]

I'll bet you a thousand dollars that Steve's prediction of 3Gigs within 12 months does not come true. I'd love to find a way to actually make money by betting against Apple and Job's lies. This bet is contigent upon finding a suitable 3rd party to hold the money that we both can agree on.

I will honestly hold the money for like 20 bucks or free lunch or something. Powerbooks are accepted also.

[Michael Vance]

Michael Vance-I'll bet you $1000 (that's a thousand dollars) that we see at least 2.6GHz, shipped by year's end (that's Dec 31st 2004). Want to take me on in front of witnesses?

A thousand dollars is too much considering 2.6GHz is possible, even if very unlikely. I would be willing to make a more gentlemanly bet of say $100 that Apple does not deliver a 2.6Ghz machine by the end of the year. Of course there is still the issue of who holds the money.

[dex22]

[QUOTE=Michael Vance]I'd love to find a way to actually make money by betting against Apple and Job's lies.[QUOTE]

I believe the correct terminology is "forward looking statements." :)

[Geetar]

A thousand dollars is too much considering 2.6GHz is possible, even if very unlikely. I would be willing to make a more gentlemanly bet of say $100 that Apple does not deliver a 2.6Ghz machine by the end of the year. Of course there is still the issue of who holds the money.


You, Sir, are a gentleman.

I'll take your wager.

Now who's going to hold the money.........? I'm none too sure about Parikh1234; I've a feeling he'd spend it on cappuccinos, Thai takeout or something.........


[Oh, yes, by the way I'm off to the Dallas Vintage Guitar Show tomorrow, and I'll be computer-less until I get back on Tuesday. Any other Macrumors members going there?]

[Parikh1234]

You, Sir, are a gentleman.

I'll take your wager.

Now who's going to hold the money.........? I'm none too sure about Parikh1234; I've a feeling he'd spend it on cappuccinos, Thai takeout or something.........


[Oh, yes, by the way I'm off to the Dallas Vintage Guitar Show tomorrow, and I'll be computer-less until I get back on Tuesday. Any other Macrumors members going there?]

If you guys are in the NJ area I would totally be down for holding your bets.

[mrwheet]

boooo.... well, I have to retract my dual 2.0, 2.4., 2.6 rumor for NAB... source says it's not likely. Oh well. On the bright side, he says they're shooting straight for a 2.4, 2.8, and 3.0 GHz at WWDC. dunno. We'll have to see. The other tasty bit is that, apparently, there will be a move to PCI-Express graphics cards. This is good news, since all the major manufacturers are phasing out AGP. Makes it pretty much a no-brainer.

Bummer to have to wait, but I can't afford to buy right now anyway.... :(

[aswitcher]

boooo.... well, I have to retract my dual 2.0, 2.4., 2.6 rumor for NAB... source says it's not likely. Oh well. On the bright side, he says they're shooting straight for a 2.4, 2.8, and 3.0 GHz at WWDC. dunno. We'll have to see. The other tasty bit is that, apparently, there will be a move to PCI-Express graphics cards. This is good news, since all the major manufacturers are phasing out AGP. Makes it pretty much a no-brainer.

Bummer to have to wait, but I can't afford to buy right now anyway.... :(

Ok Mrwheet, guess we will have to wait 2.5 months to see if you and your source are good...but its nice to think they are shooting for 3GHz and PCI-Express.

[klaus]

Well,

When ordering Xserve's from the AppleStore, a minimum shipping delay is noted from about 5 to 7 weeks. Well, since the conference call last night, we are now sure that the only holdup for these machines is that IBM cannot produce enough G5's at 90 nm, to furfill apple's production needs. They are ramping up production, and will be ok further in this quarter. Since the new Powermac line will use the same 90nm processors, but at even higher speeds, we won't see actual rev B powermacs for at least 2 months.

The sole thing they can do (which I doubt) is announce the powermacs, and say they are not shipping until a certain date. They won't be doing that again, so I don't think that's an option.

Sooo, delay of 2 months, today 14th of april.
A simple calculating leads us to right about... WWDC (approximately)

So my estimated guess is we will have powermac updates at WWDC, and then they will be ramping up the production at ibm a little bit further, to be able to announce G5 laptops at MSWF or an event at a related date.

Don't know about you, but i'm waiting for WWDC, rev B, here I come

Klaus

[aswitcher]

So my estimated guess is we will have powermac updates at WWDC, and then they will be ramping up the production at ibm a little bit further, to be able to announce G5 laptops at MSWF or an event at a related date.

Klaus


NOoooo not MSWF for G5PBs...surely the lower clocked chips are more plentiful for exactly the PBs (given what other have said about how things are manufactured). Damn. :(

[klaus]

NOoooo not MSWF for G5PBs...surely the lower clocked chips are more plentiful for exactly the PBs (given what other have said about how things are manufactured). Damn. :(

They won't use the lower clocked 970 processor, which is currently in the lower models of the powermac, because the 90nm needs far more less energy, and produces less heat. So the 970 processor is no option.

The only thing that could happen is that IBM is only having problems producing 90 nm processors > 2 ghz, and they have a separate production line for lower clocked 90 nm processors (1,5-1,8), which isn't having the above mentioned problems.

Sorry to burst your bubble..

[aswitcher]

The only thing that could happen is that IBM is only having problems producing 90 nm processors > 2 ghz, and they have a separate production line for lower clocked 90 nm processors (1,5-1,8), which isn't having the above mentioned problems.

Sorry to burst your bubble..

Thats exactly what I am hoping. Someone said a few days back that when they produce chips they test them, some are faster than others. So I hazard to say that they may have been producing quite a few sub 2GHz 90nm chips, which would be perfect for the PBs. Since heat and watts are on par or lower than the G4 (I think???) then an upgrade in new form factor is possible...but I wonder how long Apple have been actually working on the PBs new rev and how long such a form factor change would take...

[Telomar]

Thats exactly what I am hoping. Someone said a few days back that when they produce chips they test them, some are faster than others. So I hazard to say that they may have been producing quite a few sub 2GHz 90nm chips, which would be perfect for the PBs. Since heat and watts are on par or lower than the G4 (I think???) then an upgrade in new form factor is possible...but I wonder how long Apple have been actually working on the PBs new rev and how long such a form factor change would take...Unfortunately the chips that are typically taken for low power form factors actually tend to be the more difficult to produce since they also lower the operating voltages.

[MarkCollette]

This situation is probably nothing more than since there aren't many 970FX chips, Apple is finishing the Xserve rollout, then doing the PowerMac rollout later. In the mean time, some guy probably made some offhand remark about how the sensors needed to be retuned, and it's been misunderstood and made to be some reason for the delay.

Or, it's the end of the world ;) Bwahaaahaaaa

[Soire]

Y'know with all this talk of Portable updates, the PowerMac rumors have been neglected.

So what's the word, still WWDC if we're lucky? I think PB updates are gonna be like salt in an open wound to me... :(

[aswitcher]

Y'know with all this talk of Portable updates, the PowerMac rumors have been neglected.

So what's the word, still WWDC if we're lucky? I think PB updates are gonna be like salt in an open wound to me... :(


Well some as yet unknown reliability person claims next week

General vague hope that WWDC would be appropriate

French board rumors September / and Paris Expo is then as well

Jobs said before the end of 2004

Pessimists say January 2005 (possibly just the announcement...)

Jimmy hasn't spoken...