PowerBook 970s at WWDC? [Archive]

MacRumors

Jun 10, 2003, 01:21 AM

MacWhispers updates (http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000071.php) with notes regarding upcoming PowerMac and PowerBook revisions.

Of interest, MacWhispers is the only site claiming that 15.4" PowerBook 970's are currently in the works. According to the site, 970 PowerBooks are just beginning production, suggesting they are soon to be released and inventory will be "substantial" by WWDC.

They also offer notes on single processor 970 PowerMacs with new alumnium cases and some form of handles.

MacWhispers only substantial scoop (http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000045.php) was first mention of a Firewire/USB cable which appears to be utilized in with new iPods... however, has had a rocky start with previous misteps (http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000032.php) as well as initial expectations of 15" Powerbook updates (http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000003.php) in Jan/Feb 2003.

nagromme

Jun 10, 2003, 01:47 AM

I do think the AlBooks are anodized--with a clear layer, not colored. So it's the natural Al color, but still anodized for a durable coating.

I can believe that the 15" might get a 970 before the 17"--it's the "main" model--but the 17" would have to follow soon after. And I think that getting ANY 970 Macs before late summer is wishful thinking, much less both towers AND laptops. But I'll cross my fingers anyway!

And for me, it was the Micronauts Rocket Tubes set that I craved! (What a crushing disappointment when they didn't acually work like on TV!)

mxpiazza

Jun 10, 2003, 01:55 AM

so now it seems certain that we'll see powerbook 970's at WWDC (no, i don't have that much faith in macwhispers, but this is all the confirmation i need because i was pro-pb970's all along), here is my dilemma: i need to buy a laptop for school this year. however, i don't want all the problems associated with rev. A product. but if i get one of these price-dropped PB's that are out now, they aren't going to be optimized for 10.3 like the 970 is... so are the benifits of getting the rev. A 970 worth the problems that may come along with it, or should i take advantage of the low cost and reliability of the current g4 lineup? help meee!

foniks2020

Jun 10, 2003, 02:03 AM

Originally posted by arnette

Anyway, I'm inclined to doubt MacWhispers. I think they spouted off some bullarkey about the new iPods having video capabilities.. or color screens... I don't remember. [/B]

Actually there are definite plans by Apple to use OLED (organic LED) screens in the near term which would indeed bring color AND fast enough refresh to allow for video.

Thinksecret posted some rumors regarding this, though they aren't really rumors as much as future factual speculation... meaning that everyone is doing research on OLED... th iPod using it is just common sense. Small screen == earlier date, since yield and cost for smaller screens are a given.

foniks2020

Jun 10, 2003, 02:05 AM

QCassidy352

Jun 10, 2003, 02:05 AM

I still don't believe it... the powermac line is the one that's really hurting, so I have to believe that the 970s are going there first. Sure, they *could* be doing both at once, but I bet all the R and D money went in to the powermacs, and we won't be seeing 970 PBs until Q1 2004.

nagromme

Jun 10, 2003, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by mxpiazza so are the benifits of getting the rev. A 970 worth the problems that may come along with it, or should i take advantage of the low cost and reliability of the current g4 lineup?

I think you'll have to wait and see what the real-world speeds and price of the 970 'Books are when they come out--and G4s should be on clearance pricing around then anyway. (Which could be next May, I wouldn't be surprised! Towers sooner for sure, though--August/September?)

As for Rev A vs. B, I share those concerns. But many/most of the Rev A problems that get fixed are with the physical casing, and that will be Rev B or beyond (well, other than the 15" maybe) when the next 'Books arrive.

I plan my next computer to be the second version of a 970 PowerBook 17". But if the first 970 version isn't until next year, I'll go for that and not wait for rev B.

QCassidy352

Jun 10, 2003, 02:09 AM

hey, this is interesting:

"In closing, we want to address the performance of the new PPC 970 machines, as we do have direct information on this topic, and we consider that information to be highly reliable. Despite the recent flurry of confusing claims published by eWeek and others, we stand by our report that the new Power Mac and Powerbook have overall performance approximately 1.25 to 1.5 times that of a similarly clocked G4 on non-Altivec optimized applications. On Altivec optimized tasks, these machines have as much as 2 to 2.5 times the through performance as a similarly clocked G4. Our understanding is that this performance is occurring using bone-stock OS X 10.2.6 on pre-production single processor PPC 970 machines... an OS with none of the optimization now being rumored as being needed for supporting the PPC 970's performance potential."

So until Panther comes along, the 970 will be fast, but not *that* fast. 1.25 to 1.5x a similarly clocked G4 is good, but not really all that I'm hoping for.

neutrino23

Jun 10, 2003, 02:10 AM

Originally posted by mxpiazza
so now it seems certain that we'll see powerbook 970's at WWDC (no, i don't have that much faith in macwhispers, but this is all the confirmation i need because i was pro-pb970's all along), here is my dilemma: i need to buy a laptop for school this year. however, i don't want all the problems associated with rev. A product. but if i get one of these price-dropped PB's that are out now, they aren't going to be optimized for 10.3 like the 970 is... so are the benifits of getting the rev. A 970 worth the problems that may come along with it, or should i take advantage of the low cost and reliability of the current g4 lineup? help meee!

This is really funny. We've been waiting years for an uber-powerbook like this and now when we are hopefully, finally on the verge of seeing it doubts are surfacing as to whether we should wait for the next revision.

Actually, my wife was telling me the same thing. I said I would order one Sunday night 6/22 in the hopes that it would be relased at the Monday keynote to get a jump on the crowd. She said I should wait till fall. Personally, I want this one so bad I'd be happy to have serial number 0000001.:cool:

mim

Jun 10, 2003, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by cb911
from the article:

"a front panel "mostly made with the same anodized aluminum surface" as the newest Powerbooks."

that's interesting that they say that. i thought that the current AlBooks were raw (not anodized) aluminium.

Yer, it's called 'natural' anodising. Same process, just minus the dye's. This is what's used on the powerbooks.

vwcruisn

Jun 10, 2003, 02:16 AM

please please please... 970 powerbooks... ive been waiting for a couple months now.. and i REALLY need a laptop... PLEASE apple... release a 970 powerbook!!!! for me! :p

MovieGuy

Jun 10, 2003, 02:20 AM

PowerMac, almost certain a release of some sort. Powerbook...I am skeptical. I think that Apple may mention plans to upgrade, but there is a tough situation; why would Apple devalue their just released 12 and 17 inch models. I see an entire line upgrade by x-mas and ibooks becoming iBook G4s.

Porshuh944turbo

Jun 10, 2003, 02:30 AM

I just can't see it.. I can hardly see the Powermacs being ready for shipment, much less "sizable" quantities of 970 Powerbooks.

I predict a repeat of the much hoped for G5 2 years ago... we were all sure and then got let down...

cb911

Jun 10, 2003, 02:31 AM

Originally posted by mxpiazza
so now it seems certain that we'll see powerbook 970's at WWDC (no, i don't have that much faith in macwhispers, but this is all the confirmation i need because i was pro-pb970's all along), here is my dilemma: i need to buy a laptop for school this year. however, i don't want all the problems associated with rev. A product. but if i get one of these price-dropped PB's that are out now, they aren't going to be optimized for 10.3 like the 970 is... so are the benifits of getting the rev. A 970 worth the problems that may come along with it, or should i take advantage of the low cost and reliability of the current g4 lineup? help meee!

you don't have to worry about the current TiBooks, or any Macs with G4's not being optimised. sure 10.3 will have certain optimizations for the 970's, but i'm sure that it will also have some speed increases on G4's. after all, even with the 970 a big part of Apple's line will still be G4 & maybe even G3.

and on the subject of anodizing... i recall reading that if you anodize something like a PB case, then contact with the skin will mean that eventually the coating will corrode and wear away. this can't be the case with the current AlBooks, right? i might be getting a bit technical here, but is it only anodizing with dye that makes it corrode with skin contact... or is there a different process that the AlBooks go through?

marcsiry

Jun 10, 2003, 02:33 AM

...they are using apparently reliable information, but from a very small part of the product development chain.

Anyone who has worked in product development (I did, at Mattel Toys, among other places) knows that for every released product, there are several that may make it all the way to prototype or even preliminary production before being spiked.

Additionally, a supplier may be asked to produce a run of relatively cheap parts (like a cable, or a connector) that ends up being discarded at the last minute due to unexpected changes in the "master product." That could skew reports that draw conclusions based on those parts.

I read MacWhispers and take it as one piece of information among others. It's their prerogative to make guesses, regardless of how informed they are, based on the information they dig up; just as it's your prerogative to choose to believe or not.

In any case, I can only see people getting upset about inaccurate rumors if they are basing important business decisions on them... and that's not sound judgment, in my opinion.

mislabeledstar

Jun 10, 2003, 02:55 AM

Originally posted by QCassidy352
hey, this is interesting:

So until Panther comes along, the 970 will be fast, but not *that* fast. 1.25 to 1.5x a similarly clocked G4 is good, but not really all that I'm hoping for.

Just don't forget that thats 1.25 to 1.5x on similar clocked machines, but the 970's are supposed to be coming out with a higher clock speed than what we have now in the g4s.

mim

Jun 10, 2003, 02:56 AM

Originally posted by cb911
you don't have to worry about the current TiBooks, or any Macs with G4's not being optimised. sure 10.3 will have certain optimizations for the 970's, but i'm sure that it will also have some speed increases on G4's. after all, even with the 970 a big part of Apple's line will still be G4 & maybe even G3.

and on the subject of anodizing... i recall reading that if you anodize something like a PB case, then contact with the skin will mean that eventually the coating will corrode and wear away. this can't be the case with the current AlBooks, right? i might be getting a bit technical here, but is it only anodizing with dye that makes it corrode with skin contact... or is there a different process that the AlBooks go through?

10.3's bound not to be 'just for ppc970'. There'll be a host of improvements that make the current G4's plenty fast enough for most people (bar gamers...:rolleyes: ).

So, Mxpiazza - 10.3 isn't going to make the G4's redundant. It'll proabably make them even better (more altivec optimisations).

The anodising is effectively a layer over the aluminium, but it actually changes the top layers of the material - it's not really a coating. It's an oxidised layer - unless your skin is especially acidic (heh heh, post rude jokes here...) you're not likely to wear it off anytime soon. You can scratch though the anodising, but I'd suspect the Powerbook case is anodised pretty deeply.

nagromme

Jun 10, 2003, 03:15 AM

I don't think that even with Panther, the first 970s will be the MASSIVE speed boost some would like to see. But they will still be nicely faster than G4s, and more price/performance competitive with Wintel. They will be a great step.

But then the real benefit of the 970 decision will come as 970s keep getting faster--and then the 980 (Power 5 derived) follows. I do think the PowerPC line is likely to be the top-performing desktop CPU in the end.

In other words, the first 970s are only the beginning.

suzerain

Jun 10, 2003, 03:23 AM

Originally posted by MovieGuy
why would Apple devalue their just released 12 and 17 inch models. I see an entire line upgrade by x-mas and ibooks becoming iBook G4s.

I just wanted that they already devalued the 12" notebook -- by $200. Apple pretty much never lowers prices just for the hell of it; it's almost always because new products are coming.

So, I will say that there are DEFINITELY new 12" and 15" powerbooks on the way very soon, and WWDC seems as likely a place as any other.

The only puzzling thing is that they didn't lower prices of the 17", and that model has to be the fastest.

My opinion? I'm feeling optimistic today: They didn't lower the price of the 17" because it's a luxury item anyway and they don't maintain a large inventory. Therefore, the entire PowerBook line will be updated at the end of the month with 970s.

iBooks and iMacs will move to 970 in fall/winter.

I think Apple has a very good reason to stop using the G4 ASAP: Motorola wants to sell the CPU division. What guarantee would Apple have that the future owner will want to continue making G4s?

Sun Baked

Jun 10, 2003, 05:01 AM

Darn, my Magic 8-Ball must be broken... :(

cb911

Jun 10, 2003, 05:08 AM

the news item about this on the main page looks like it has been updated and refers to the MacBidouille news from May. MacBidouille said that new 970 PowerBooks would be here around March 2004, but considering that Moto may not be making G4's for much longer... (good point suzerain, i didn't think of the news about Moto selling the semiconductor dept. in that way.)

Since MacBidouille's info is old... way back from May, and considering that Mac Whispers info would be very current, and also considering recent developments like Moto putting the semiconductor dept. up for sale... from looking at all of those things i'm more confident that the 15.4" 970 PowerBooks will be here at WWDC.

and as a bonus, if Moto or anyone else isn't producing G4's then Apple might be forced to move the iBook and iMac lines to the 970 sooner as well. :D

porovaara

Jun 10, 2003, 05:22 AM

Everyone needs to remember nothing is known about the power saving capabilities of the 970.

Chimaera

Jun 10, 2003, 05:39 AM

true, but we do know that it draws less power... which means less heat and battery battery life off the bat (yes I know there are a lot of other variables).

AppleMatt

Jun 10, 2003, 05:53 AM

Originally posted by Chimaera
true, but we do know that it draws less power... which means less heat and battery battery life off the bat (yes I know there are a lot of other variables).

So we stick in faster hard-drives! They draw lots of power and give out lots of heat!

Then everyone feels at home.

AppleMatt

wwworry

Jun 10, 2003, 06:52 AM

ok this is stupid but
overall performance approximately 1.25 to 1.5 times that of a similarly clocked G4 on non-Altivec optimized applications

1.8 GHz 970 x 1.5 = 2.7 speed
1.4 Ghz dual G4 = 2.8 speed

so why no dual processor configurations?

what's stupid is my processor math (full of holes) but still it would be nice to have dual 970s.

SuzanneA

Jun 10, 2003, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by cb911
that's interesting that they say that. i thought that the current AlBooks were raw (not anodized) aluminium.
[/B]

The AlBooks are 'Aircraft Aluminum' (at least, thats what was said at release, the apple site just refers to it as Aluminum Alloy now) which is actually an alloy of a variety of things, not just 'raw alumin[i]um', I believe it (often [1]) even includes some titanium to lend it some strength.

Either way, it would have to be clear/natural anodized, beacuse even in an alloy, alumin[i]um oxidizes fast. Your nice 'shiny' AlBook would be dull and blotchy within a few days :)

[1] 'Aircraft Aluminum' is a very generic term, there are a few thousand different alloys of aluminum used in aircraft manufacture, and apple's choice, like any other 'Aircraft Aluminum' could be any of them.

The Shadow

Jun 10, 2003, 08:29 AM

Here's a summary of the major "informant" type rumors and facts I can remember over the past 3 months:
_A tender for new PM motherboards was put out in March
_IBM has been producing PPC 970 chips since April
_Suppliers are producing new PM cases
_The mainstay Powerbook, the 15" has strangely not been updated yet. The new look is anticipated any time with a 15.4" screen, possibly with a PPC970?
_The WWDC was put back a month ostensibly to give a better demo of Panther - which we all expect to be optimised for the PPC970.

The rhetorical question on everybody's lips "How better to demo the 970 optimised Panther than on a 970 powered PowerMac?"

Whether the new hardware is actually available (which I doubt) or release dates announced as in the past, one could be forgiven for thinking that it's all starting to come together.

zac4mac

Jun 10, 2003, 08:39 AM

To my limited experience, there are two basic types of anodizing Aluminum, hard and soft. Soft would be used for corrosion resistance, but not contact durability. I've seen hard anodized Al chip and rip teeth off a carbide saw blade - it's really tough, on the surface. Once you break thru the top layer, it cuts very easy. The process is kinda similar to case hardening steel, giving an extremely hard surface. I would expect Apple chose the hard process and the AlBooks should be much more durable than their Ti cousins. Like having a built in Halliburton case.

Hope Jack's right here, he sounds pretty sure of this info...

Z

gezzas525

Jun 10, 2003, 08:42 AM

970's in powerbooks you must be joking? In order for that to happen IBM will have to move to 90nm production and even then we will have to wait a few months after that for apple to prepare the machines. 90nm for Intel will be in mass production nov-dec iam guessing IBM will also be at a similar timeframe with 970's based powerbooks ariving feb-april 2004. This is assuming no delays and with the extra complexities in the 64-bit architechture, it may also take longer. One more thing THERE IS NO PORTABLE DDR400 MEMORY CHIPS !!!! WITH REGISTERED/ECC DDR400 IS CURRENTLY PENDING APPROVAL BY JEDEC.

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH 970's TO GO ROUND, HENCE THEY WILL ONLY BE FOUND IN THE HIGHEND POWERMAC DESKTOPS PERIOD!! THEY WONT BE CHEAP EITHER MY GUESS THE SINGLE 1.8 WILL BE NO LESS THEN $3000-$4000 AND WILL PROBABLY COME WITH 2-4GB OF RAM AS STANDARD, SCSI, FX5900/9800.

KLEOS

gezzas525

Jun 10, 2003, 08:47 AM

DUAL 1.8 will be very expensive and so will most likely be not available until there is a good yield/supply of 970's my guess >$5000 when comapring a DUAL 1.8 OPTERON with a DUAL SUN 1.2Ghz USPARQ 3 machine coming in at $14000 !!! WOHA

KLEOS

arn

Jun 10, 2003, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by cb911
the news item about this on the main page looks like it has been updated and refers to the MacBidouille news from May. MacBidouille said that new 970 PowerBooks would be here around March 2004, but considering that Moto may not be making G4's for much longer... (good point suzerain, i didn't think of the news about Moto selling the semiconductor dept. in that way.)

Since MacBidouille's info is old... way back from May, and considering that Mac Whispers info would be very current, and also considering recent developments like Moto putting the semiconductor dept. up for sale... from looking at all of those things i'm more confident that the 15.4" 970 PowerBooks will be here at WWDC.

I added MacBid's info for contrast to this rumor. You have to remember that MacWhispers has been very wrong in the past. They were confident about iPod revisions, as well as previous Powerbook revisions. Those did not come to pass.

They do appear very confident about this information - and it is "unique" info... no other sites believe this to be true - 15" 970 PowerBooks. These are reasons it's been posted.... but we'll have to see how it turns out....

arn

JBracy

Jun 10, 2003, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
970's in powerbooks you must be joking? In order for that to happen IBM will have to move to 90nm production and even then we will have to wait a few months after that for apple to prepare the machines. 90nm for Intel will be in mass production nov-dec iam guessing IBM will also be at a similar timeframe with 970's based powerbooks ariving feb-april 2004. This is assuming no delays and with the extra complexities in the 64-bit architechture, it may also take longer. One more thing THERE IS NO PORTABLE DDR400 MEMORY CHIPS !!!! WITH REGISTERED/ECC DDR400 IS CURRENTLY PENDING APPROVAL BY JEDEC.

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH 970's TO GO ROUND, HENCE THEY WILL ONLY BE FOUND IN THE HIGHEND POWERMAC DESKTOPS PERIOD!! THEY WONT BE CHEAP EITHER MY GUESS THE SINGLE 1.8 WILL BE NO LESS THEN $3000-$4000 AND WILL PROBABLY COME WITH 2-4GB OF RAM AS STANDARD, SCSI, FX5900/9800.

KLEOS

Originally posted by gezzas525
DUAL 1.8 will be very expensive and so will most likely be not available until there is a good yield/supply of 970's my guess >$5000 when comapring a DUAL 1.8 OPTERON with a DUAL SUN 1.2Ghz USPARQ 3 machine coming in at $14000 !!! WOHA

KLEOS

1) Actually the 970 is cheaper than the G4.
2) According to IBM there are plenty of 970's to go around
3) Ram speed is set by the BUS not the processor. There is no reason that Apple couldn't use slower RAM in their PowerBooks - as they already do due to heat issues - the 17" is the only PB with a 167mHz bus.
4) Why 90nm? The chip is already only very slightly larger than a G4 and runs cooler at the same mHz.
5) Apple are not in the same market as Sun Workstations. They could get there, but why? It's an even smaller market than they are alrady in.
6) SCSI?

Jason

gezzas525

Jun 10, 2003, 09:45 AM

Cheaper err I dont think so? Its a 64-bit chip, much higher transister count definetly not cheaper. And wheres the other 512Kb of cache? I want the FULL 1Mb!! its suppose to be a workstation chip for gods sake !!

Enough to go round thats what IBM says, maybe but not enough fot the chips to be used in both the desktops and powerbooks?

Why use slower memory? You want to create bottlenecks DUH!!
It has 6.4Gb/s bandwidth YOU HAVE TO USE DDR 400 AND IN PAIRS FOR DUAL CHANNEL OPERATION!!!

90nm need for lower power and feasible use in a portable platform.

Sun was an example!!

SCSI would be likely, why would you want to use IDE in a 64-bit workstation? Again your creating bottlenecks.

utilizer

Jun 10, 2003, 10:01 AM

Phill Schiller stuck his foot in his mouth with what he said in that MWSF intro video showcasing the PowerBook, by saying something along these lines:
"With the largest and smallest full-featured notebooks ever made, you'll have a hard time remembering why you ever needed a desktop."

Now, the delay in the 15 in. PowerBooks and with this being the year of the notebook, not to mention on-going updates to the PowerBook 17/12 in models, we are going to see some movement here with Motorola being totally out of the picture. What better way to distribute reciprocity: Kick them while they're down, right in the gut, just like they did Apple!

970s will be in the Powerbooks before the year is out. In the words of Justin Wilson: "I guar-ran-tee!"

Ensoniq

Jun 10, 2003, 10:29 AM

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, but an informed opinion is what's best.

Multiple sources over the last few months have indicated the following without being contradicted by any reliable source:

1 - IBM has been in full scale production of the PPC 970 for a number of months.

2 - IBM's yields have been far greater than expected...both in higher speeds, and quantity of chips.

3 - A PPC 970 @ 1.2 GHz is cooler and draws less power than the 1 GHz G4 being used in PowerBooks today.

4 - IBM is able to sell the PPC 970 to Apple at a cost below what Apple pays Motorola for the G4 chips.

If someone has a source that absolutely contradicts the above, feel free to share it with us. Otherwise, no matter how much you pound the table claiming the above details are false, you're doing no more than "guessing" and have no weight to your argument.

Regarding the 15" PowerBook speculation:

Apple introduced the 12" and 17" PowerBooks in January...the 15" should have been updated shortly thereafter. All 3 Aluminum PowerBooks would have been designed simultaneously. Apple probably planned to put the 15" into production last so that they could get rid of Titanium stock first. But there's no doubt that the DESIGN of the 15" Aluminum PowerBook was done BEFORE the 12"/17" were announced.

Now 5 months later, nothing. What can explain that? Why would Apple leave the middle child stuck looking different with lesser features than it's siblings for so long? The ONLY thing that makes any sense is that just as Apple was getting ready to put the 15" into production, IBM informed them that PPC 970 production was far exceeding expectations. And that caused a dilemna (albeit a good one) for Apple.

They'd just released new PowerBooks they expected to last for a year. Now they find out that if they want, the PPC 970s will be available much sooner. So do they spend all the money to begin production on the planned 15" G4 upgrade, or do they retool and spend the money redesigning the 15" to take the PPC 970? Yes...it will cause a delay that won't make sense...UNTIL the 15" with PPC 970 is released to an unsuspecting crowd.

But wait...if the PPC 970 is way ahead of schedule, and Panther is not (because Apple thought they had a whole year) then their programmers need to kick some serious butt to push Panther along. So what does Apple do? Out of the blue, they push back WWDC for TWO months, stunning everyone who had already made plans to go.

If Apple found out in January that IBM could let them release PPC 970 machines 6 months ahead of schedule, they would have needed to scramble to do hardware redesigns and software upgrades they thought they had until January of 2004 to complete. Previous rumors line up with that...Panther and new machines not until 2004. But IBM changed all that by being successful in production. So Apple changed plans, and that is why the 15" update that MacWhispers said was coming didn't happen. NOT because MacWhispers was wrong, but because IBM made Apple change their own plans.

There are too many things happening at once...the "planets are aligning", as they would say. Even if the majority of you reading this don't believe a single word, at least I have explained in detail my position, and there is a flow of logic to it whether you agree with the end result or not.

I'd like to see others who insist on discounting the simultanous release of new PowerMacs and PowerBooks at least attempt to be as logical and thorough as I have. :)

-- Ensoniq

pyrotoaster

Jun 10, 2003, 10:37 AM

Originally posted by AppleMatt
So we stick in faster hard-drives! They draw lots of power and give out lots of heat!

Then everyone feels at home.

AppleMatt
Exactly! We've gotta burn our palms on something... :p

Seriously, I've heard that the lower-speed (i.e. 1.2, 1.4 GHz) 970s use less power than the existing G4s. They'd be perfect for laptops.

BTW, if anyone cares... MacUnderground (http://macunderground.blogspot.com/) is predicting Powerbook 970s, and has been for over a month now.

StuPid QPid

Jun 10, 2003, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
Cheaper err I dont think so? Its a 64-bit chip, much higher transister count definetly not cheaper. And wheres the other 512Kb of cache? I want the FULL 1Mb!! its suppose to be a workstation chip for gods sake !!

Since when has the 970 been a workstation chip?
The IBM Power 4 and soon to be Power 5 chips are workstation chips, and cost about the prices you're suggesting. The 970 is a 'lite' version, specifically made for lower end desktop machines and servers, if you can call an Apple powered 970 machine 'low end'...
Check your facts before you post!

Postal

Jun 10, 2003, 10:41 AM

gezzas525:

Whoa, cool down, please!

One thing to remember is that the actual speed of the system bus is 1/4 the speed of the processor itself, at least from what I've seen about the PPC 970 online. You only have (and need) that 6.4 GB/sec bandwidth on the 1.8 GHz chip.

So if the raw speed of the system bus on a 1.8 GHz PPC 970 is 450 MHz (450x2 is where we get the 900 MHz DDR bus), then the raw speed of the 1.2 GHz system's bus would be about 300 (effectively 600, since it would be DDR).

At that clock speed, you could easily get away with using DDR333 memory.

While I'm personally diminishing the likelihood of PPC 970 PowerBooks at WWDC or even this year, we don't actually know the power management features of the 970 - or whether Apple even cares that those features exist.

Oh, and as for the SCSI thing: if you go to the Apple Store online, notice how Apple doesn't actually offer any PowerMacs with SCSI hard disks at the moment; you just have the option of a SCSI card, and this is even true on the Xserve (which is supposed to be the server-class system). Apple is most likely going to choose ATA133 or Serial ATA for storage.

MetallicPenguin

Jun 10, 2003, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by Ensoniq
Everyone's entitled to an opinion, but an informed opinion is what's best.

Multiple sources over the last few months have indicated the following without being contradicted by any reliable source:

1 - IBM has been in full scale production of the PPC 970 for a number of months.

2 - IBM's yields have been far greater than expected...both in higher speeds, and quantity of chips.

3 - A PPC 970 @ 1.2 GHz is cooler and draws less power than the 1 GHz G4 being used in PowerBooks today.

4 - IBM is able to sell the PPC 970 to Apple at a cost below what Apple pays Motorola for the G4 chips.

If someone has a source that absolutely contradicts the above, feel free to share it with us. Otherwise, no matter how much you pound the table claiming the above details are false, you're doing no more than "guessing" and have no weight to your argument.

Regarding the 15" PowerBook speculation:

Apple introduced the 12" and 17" PowerBooks in January...the 15" should have been updated shortly thereafter. All 3 Aluminum PowerBooks would have been designed simultaneously. Apple probably planned to put the 15" into production last so that they could get rid of Titanium stock first. But there's no doubt that the DESIGN of the 15" Aluminum PowerBook was done BEFORE the 12"/17" were announced.

Now 5 months later, nothing. What can explain that? Why would Apple leave the middle child stuck looking different with lesser features than it's siblings for so long? The ONLY thing that makes any sense is that just as Apple was getting ready to put the 15" into production, IBM informed them that PPC 970 production was far exceeding expectations. And that caused a dilemna (albeit a good one) for Apple.

They'd just released new PowerBooks they expected to last for a year. Now they find out that if they want, the PPC 970s will be available much sooner. So do they spend all the money to begin production on the planned 15" G4 upgrade, or do they retool and spend the money redesigning the 15" to take the PPC 970? Yes...it will cause a delay that won't make sense...UNTIL the 15" with PPC 970 is released to an unsuspecting crowd.

But wait...if the PPC 970 is way ahead of schedule, and Panther is not (because Apple thought they had a whole year) then their programmers need to kick some serious butt to push Panther along. So what does Apple do? Out of the blue, they push back WWDC for TWO months, stunning everyone who had already made plans to go.

If Apple found out in January that IBM could let them release PPC 970 machines 6 months ahead of schedule, they would have needed to scramble to do hardware redesigns and software upgrades they thought they had until January of 2004 to complete. Previous rumors line up with that...Panther and new machines not until 2004. But IBM changed all that by being successful in production. So Apple changed plans, and that is why the 15" update that MacWhispers said was coming didn't happen. NOT because MacWhispers was wrong, but because IBM made Apple change their own plans.

There are too many things happening at once...the "planets are aligning", as they would say. Even if the majority of you reading this don't believe a single word, at least I have explained in detail my position, and there is a flow of logic to it whether you agree with the end result or not.

I'd like to see others who insist on discounting the simultanous release of new PowerMacs and PowerBooks at least attempt to be as logical and thorough as I have. :)

-- Ensoniq

Very nice...but do you think we will see 970's in 12" PowerBooks? And do you think the prices will go up back to their normal place or stay down? This whole thing is getting interesting....

Sun Baked

Jun 10, 2003, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by Ensoniq
Regarding the 15" PowerBook speculation:

Apple introduced the 12" and 17" PowerBooks in January...the 15" should have been updated shortly thereafter. All 3 Aluminum PowerBooks would have been designed simultaneously. Apple probably planned to put the 15" into production last so that they could get rid of Titanium stock first. But there's no doubt that the DESIGN of the 15" Aluminum PowerBook was done BEFORE the 12"/17" were announced.

Now 5 months later, nothing. What can explain that? Why would Apple leave the middle child stuck looking different with lesser features than it's siblings for so long? The ONLY thing that makes any sense is that just as Apple was getting ready to put the 15" into production, IBM informed them that PPC 970 production was far exceeding expectations. And that caused a dilemna (albeit a good one) for Apple.

-- Ensoniq Everybody is reading WAY too much into a marketing decision by Apple, if it was a production decision they would not have left a legacy OS 9 bootable PowerBook, PowerMac, and iMac in the lineup -- and announce at the last major keynote that OS 9s death would now be moved June 2003, because of that darn application everybody was waiting for.

Everybody was trying to fit Apple's schedule to a juicy rumor of their choice, and there have been a lot.

Then there is the decision to speed bump the iBook and eMac instead of updating them to DDR and eliminating OS 9 bootability.

Too many data points point to reasons other than -- hey let's stuff a 970 into these beasties for the heck of it, and not introduce the 15" Powerbooks for this reason.

pyrotoaster

Jun 10, 2003, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
970's in powerbooks you must be joking? In order for that to happen IBM will have to move to 90nm production and even then we will have to wait a few months after that for apple to prepare the machines. 90nm for Intel will be in mass production nov-dec iam guessing IBM will also be at a similar timeframe with 970's based powerbooks ariving feb-april 2004. This is assuming no delays and with the extra complexities in the 64-bit architechture, it may also take longer. One more thing THERE IS NO PORTABLE DDR400 MEMORY CHIPS !!!! WITH REGISTERED/ECC DDR400 IS CURRENTLY PENDING APPROVAL BY JEDEC.

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH 970's TO GO ROUND, HENCE THEY WILL ONLY BE FOUND IN THE HIGHEND POWERMAC DESKTOPS PERIOD!! THEY WONT BE CHEAP EITHER MY GUESS THE SINGLE 1.8 WILL BE NO LESS THEN $3000-$4000 AND WILL PROBABLY COME WITH 2-4GB OF RAM AS STANDARD, SCSI, FX5900/9800.

KLEOS
No, no, no... The 970 is cheaper for Apple to produce. The new Powermacs will probably cost no more than the existing models.

And there are plenty of 970s to go around. IBM has been producing them for at least a month now, and possibly longer.

And I seriously doubt that Apple's going to start shipping machines with 2-4 Gigs of RAM. Most people aren't willing to pay Apple's outrageous RAM prices.

Powerbook 970s aren't unreasonable. I don't think MacBidouille has any info regarding them (perhaps their source is only close to the Powermac or Xserve production). And since they've got no info, they just made some assumptions and pushed the released date into next year.

Apple's laptops might be superior now, but in eight months, they won't be. Apple needs to push the Powerbook (and the iBook) ahead now, so they're still ahead later.

DrGonzo

Jun 10, 2003, 10:48 AM

So i'm crossing my fingers for this to be true, as i'm sure all you are doing. Also, just because it's 64-bit doesn't mean you have to have some SCSI hard drive. Gezza, you act like there's going to be some insane system performance that warrants some good SCSI setup when infact most ide systems are adequate, and if you want faster/cheaper/larger that's comparable with SCSI go ide raid.

Also, would it be possible to sand down to the aluminum and get a nice mirror finish on it and then clear coat it a few times?

StuPid QPid

Jun 10, 2003, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by mxpiazza
so now it seems certain that we'll see powerbook 970's at WWDC (no, i don't have that much faith in macwhispers, but this is all the confirmation i need because i was pro-pb970's all along), here is my dilemma: i need to buy a laptop for school this year. however, i don't want all the problems associated with rev. A product. but if i get one of these price-dropped PB's that are out now, they aren't going to be optimized for 10.3 like the 970 is... so are the benifits of getting the rev. A 970 worth the problems that may come along with it, or should i take advantage of the low cost and reliability of the current g4 lineup? help meee!

I wouldn't worry about getting a revision A product. I got one of the first "Wallstreet" PowerBook G3's off the production line and (knock on wood/touch wood) it's still going strong. I'm writing this post with it...
Of course a new and better machine will eventually come along (that's the nature of the coputer business), but from my experience the update to a rev. B product is always a little longer than from rev. B to rev. C. Therefore, when you but a rev. A machine, you'll be 'top of the tree' for longest, as it were. Hopefully that makes some sort of sense - i.e. if you've got the cash, just go for it!

pyrotoaster

Jun 10, 2003, 10:51 AM

I think the real question is whether Apple will put 970s in the 12 and 17 inch Powerbooks, too...

soggywulf

Jun 10, 2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Ensoniq
<snip>

There are too many things happening at once...the "planets are aligning", as they would say. Even if the majority of you reading this don't believe a single word, at least I have explained in detail my position, and there is a flow of logic to it whether you agree with the end result or not.

I'd like to see others who insist on discounting the simultanous release of new PowerMacs and PowerBooks at least attempt to be as logical and thorough as I have. :)

<snip>

Thank you for that very well thought-out and argued post.

Especially because it tells all of us exactly what we want to hear. :)

jayscheuerle

Jun 10, 2003, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by StuPid QPid
I wouldn't worry about getting a revision A product. I got one of the first "Wallstreet" PowerBook G3's off the production line and (knock on wood/touch wood) it's still going strong. I'm writing this post with it...
Of course a new and better machine will eventually come along (that's the nature of the coputer business), but from my experience the update to a rev. B product is always a little longer than from rev. B to rev. C. Therefore, when you but a rev. A machine, you'll be 'top of the tree' for longest, as it were. Hopefully that makes some sort of sense - i.e. if you've got the cash, just go for it!

oooh, I don't know about that. Apple's quality control was a lot better back in the Wallstreet days. I think that they're implementing enough new features on this that it would be prudent to wait until the first couple of reviews start coming in. A months wait won't kill anyone and "top of the tree" is a pretty poor reason to make a rash $2000 decision, regardless if you have the cash.

Of course, the rest of us need some suckers to take these babies for test spins and light up the boards with complaints so that we can make educated decisions instead of hypnotized-by-the-reality-distortion-field decisions.

Let the Photoshop showdown begin! :D

arn

Jun 10, 2003, 11:03 AM

rjstanford

Jun 10, 2003, 11:04 AM

Originally posted by QCassidy352
So until Panther comes along, the 970 will be fast, but not *that* fast. 1.25 to 1.5x a similarly clocked G4 is good, but not really all that I'm hoping for.

Think about it from a laptop perspective though. The current peak processor is a 1 ghz G4. Even taking the 1.5 number (IMO 1.25 is very unrealistic, and I've been using IBM's processors for many a year now in their AIX machines), the slowest speed the 970 is aiming for is 1.2ghz. That gives an 80% speed improvement for the powerBooks right there, ignoring any thought of additional improvements because of the overall system architecture, bus speed, et cetera.

I'll take that ... in a heartbeat.

-Richard

GroundLoop

Jun 10, 2003, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by arn
I don't believe any of the above are facts.

The above information is NOT reliably known and while it is not contradicted by any reliable source - NOR is it actually offered as truth by a reliable source. Please cite your references.

#3 may be true, I don't know for sure... do you have a reference?

arn

Here are the facts straight from the documents of their respective developers:

PPC 970:
19W @ 1.2 GHz, 1.1v

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf

(page 14)

MPC7455:
15W (typical) @ 1GHz
22W (Maximum) @ 1GHz

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7455EC.pdf

(page 15)

I hope this settles the discussion once and for all about the power utilization of the processors.

Hickman

JBracy

Jun 10, 2003, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
Cheaper err I dont think so? Its a 64-bit chip, much higher transister count definetly not cheaper. And wheres the other 512Kb of cache? I want the FULL 1Mb!! its suppose to be a workstation chip for gods sake !!

It doesn't matter what you think. It's the truth.

It's not a Workstation chip! It's a desktop chip, the Power4 is a workstation chip.

Originally posted by gezzas525
Enough to go round thats what IBM says, maybe but not enough fot the chips to be used in both the desktops and powerbooks?

How many units do you think Apple ships?

Originally posted by gezzas525
Why use slower memory? You want to create bottlenecks DUH!!
It has 6.4Gb/s bandwidth YOU HAVE TO USE DDR 400 AND IN PAIRS FOR DUAL CHANNEL OPERATION!!!

In a laptop? YES you make compromises in order to reach the best balance of speed, heat and power management. (DUH!!!)

Originally posted by gezzas525
90nm need for lower power and feasible use in a portable platform.

The 970 @ 1.2gHz is already cooler and uses less power than the G4 @ 1.0 gHz

Originally posted by gezzas525
Sun was an example!!

A bad one

Originally posted by gezzas525
SCSI would be likely, why would you want to use IDE in a 64-bit workstation? Again your creating bottlenecks.

Again, because it's not a workstation. If you hadn't noticed Apple dropped SCSI a very long time ago.

bobindashadows

Jun 10, 2003, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by JBracy

It doesn't matter what you think. It's the truth.

It's not a Workstation chip! It's a desktop chip, the Power4 is a workstation chip.

How many units do you think Apple ships?

In a laptop? YES you make compromises in order to reach the best balance of speed, heat and power management. (DUH!!!)

The 970 @ 1.2gHz is already cooler and uses less power than the G4 @ 1.0 gHz

A bad one

Again, because it's not a workstation. If you hadn't noticed Apple dropped SCSI a very long time ago.
Good job. Trolls piss me off, too.

sorry for the bad formatting... too lazy to include gezzas' remarks.

GroundLoop

Jun 10, 2003, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by JBracy
The 970 @ 1.2gHz is already cooler and uses less power than the G4 @ 1.0 gHz
[/B]

At typical CPU utilization the PPC 970 @ 1.2 GHz uses 26.67% more power than the G4. But, the CPU isn't the only source of heat within the laptop case. Does anyone have documented proof of the total heat generated by the PowerBook line?

Hickman

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by wwworry
so why no dual processor configurations?
It could be that they haven't implemented AMD's HyperTransport yet. The difference in complexity between a standard single-processor system board and a dual-processor system board is staggering. In order to make the product release as quickly as possible, it's quite likely that rev. A wouldn't offer dual processors.

nspeds

Jun 10, 2003, 11:42 AM

Someone here said that making a business decision based on rumors is bad.

I remember the most fundamental principle that I learned in AP Ecomomics (in regards to the stock market, of course) was that you should always buy on rumors and sell on facts.

Of course it isn't applicable to the situation since you can't physically buy the 970 powerbook because there's a rumor about it. But what you can do is... WAIT.

And of course, don't sell that new powerbook 970 (g5 or whatever) on the fact, but ah never mind, you get the point

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
THERE IS NO PORTABLE DDR400 MEMORY CHIPS !!!! WITH REGISTERED/ECC DDR400 IS CURRENTLY PENDING APPROVAL BY JEDEC.
You might try turning the Caps Lock key off once in a while ;)

Couldn't they use PC2700 (DDR 333) instead of DDR 400? If I recall correctly, the PPC 970 processor's FSB is exactly half of it's clock speed, so while a 1.8 ghz. PPC 970 has a 900 mhz. FSB, the 1.2 ghz. (which is rumored to be in Powerbooks, due to it's lower power consumption), should only have a 600 mhz. FSB, which could be fed really nicely by two sticks of DDR 333 operating in a dual bank configuration.

In addition, I fully expect the new PPC 970 PowerBooks to utilize a variable speed FSB, similar to the new Intel Pentium-M architecture. During periods of low CPU activity the FSB speed is turned down in 1 mhz. increments, which conserves battery power.

So imagine how great this would be:

15.4" AlBook
PPC 970 clocked at 1.2 ghz
Dual Channel 512MB PC2700 DDR 333 memory
600 mhz. variable FSB
$2499

I know I would buy one right away... :D Now, if it is actually released, I will be one happy man.

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by gezzas525
And wheres the other 512Kb of cache? I want the FULL 1Mb!! its suppose to be a workstation chip for gods sake !!
I just want to point out here that 1MB of L3 cache was really just a hack to get around the pitiful clock speeds of the G4 processor. Most modern consumer processors only have 512k of cache, take for example the Athlon XP (Barton core) and the Pentium IV-C.

And please don't forget that even though the computer it's in might be called a PowerMac, the 970 is most definitely a consumer version of the high-end Power4 processor. Apple is a consumer computer company, as much as they would like to sell high end Unix workstations (the profit margins are excellent in that market segment), they haven't really captured any of that market yet.

solvs

Jun 10, 2003, 11:54 AM

Please don't feed the trolls. :D Although thank you all for posting the truth (at least what we know of it so far) without ripping in to gezzas525 too bad. Even if he is wrong. And you are wrong. I'm sure we can all be wrong sometimes, but please gezzas525 check your facts before making posts like that.

A big DUH!!! right back at you.

porovaara

Jun 10, 2003, 11:56 AM

You guys aren't getting it, when I state nothing is known on the 970s power cabilities I mean power saving modes. There is but a brief mention in one doc on the ability to slow power to parts of the CPU. It doesn't matter if the proc draws less power at the same mhz versus a g4, if there are no provisions for drastic reductions in power then it will eat batteries for lunch.

Also, just because something isn't refuted does not make it a fact.

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Postal
Oh, and as for the SCSI thing: if you go to the Apple Store online, notice how Apple doesn't actually offer any PowerMacs with SCSI hard disks at the moment; you just have the option of a SCSI card, and this is even true on the Xserve (which is supposed to be the server-class system). Apple is most likely going to choose ATA133 or Serial ATA for storage.
You know, I didn't believe it until I saw it, but I just got one of those new 120 GB 7200 RPM, 8MB on-disk cache hard drives with an ATA133 controller, and it performs nearly as fast as a 36GB 10K RPM SCSI Ultra160 drive! With seek times at 8.5 ms this thing really rocks and I can see why people aren't buying SCSI any more. For 5 or 10 times the price, getting an extra 5 % increase on performance is not worth it...

Serial ATA will only make it better, as you can now buy 10K RPM Serial ATA drives.

But seriously, who would ever put SCSI in a laptop? Talk about overkill. We are lucky to get a 5400 RPM hard drive in a laptop.

Y_ME_Y

Jun 10, 2003, 12:05 PM

On November 10, 1997, Apple released the NEW G3 processor in the PowerBook and the Power Mac at the same time. So to the people who are no believers – it already happen once – why not again.

Some people may say “the G4 was out more then a year before they put it in a notebook” – that a good point except the G3 was not too far behind in MHz.

My brain hurts from reading all these rumors – but I just can’t get enough.

jwdawso

Jun 10, 2003, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by Ensoniq

I'd like to see others who insist on discounting the simultanous release of new PowerMacs and PowerBooks at least attempt to be as logical and thorough as I have. :)

-- Ensoniq

Logical! I'm hoping it's true. One thing I would add is that I believe Moto let down Apple one last time with the 7447/57. This was the processor to be in the 12/15/17 PBs last January. Now the 7445/55 is the last Moto in a PB. I also believe that if you are at WWDC and have a high enough limit on your credit card, you can sport a new PB970 or PM970 on June 23. ;) The rest of us will have to get in line. :D

PaisanoMan

Jun 10, 2003, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by QCassidy352
1.25 to 1.5x a similarly clocked G4 is good, but not really all that I'm hoping for.

I think it's fine, but that means we need a clock speed boost (and we need to keep getting them).

I don't think it's really feasible for a chip like this to be something like 3x more powerful than a predecessor at the same clock speed ... not even close.

NeXTDev

Jun 10, 2003, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by illumin8
I just want to point out here that 1MB of L3 cache was really just a hack to get around the pitiful clock speeds of the G4 processor. Most modern consumer processors only have 512k of cache, take for example the Athlon XP (Barton core) and the Pentium IV-C.

You can take any design and call certain things "hacks." It's all a matter of perspective. Obviously you're not an engineer of any sort.

Who says a consumer processor can only have 512k of cache? The Intel Pentium M (http://www.intel.com/products/notebook/processors/pentiumm/index.htm?iid=ipp_note_proc+highlight_pentiumm&) has 1mb of L2 cache on die. So is that a hack?

And please don't forget that even though the computer it's in might be called a PowerMac, the 970 is most definitely a consumer version of the high-end Power4 processor. Apple is a consumer computer company, as much as they would like to sell high end Unix workstations (the profit margins are excellent in that market segment), they haven't really captured any of that market yet.

The Power4 is high end, sure. But it is designed for server use, not for workstation use. Your depiction of consumer is inaccurate at best, a troll at worst. What market are you really talking about anyways? Apple already has a significant if not dominant marketshare of video, music, and publishing workstations. And the sales of Maya for Mac OS X are pretty healthy. Sure, there are market segments that Apple isn't in or isn't doing well in, but Apple isn't big enough to be all things to all people. And it doesn't need to be to have a profitable, successful, and rewarding platform.

gezzas525

Jun 10, 2003, 12:28 PM

There will be no POWERBOOK 970's at WWDC PERIOD!!!

TRUST ME

dongmin

Jun 10, 2003, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by Brian Hickman
Here are the facts straight from the documents of their respective developers:

PPC 970:
19W @ 1.2 GHz, 1.1v

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf

(page 14)

MPC7455:
15W (typical) @ 1GHz
22W (Maximum) @ 1GHz

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7455EC.pdf

(page 15)

You should clarify that the 970 number is for typical @ 1.2 ghz. And it's only an estimate at this point. So, to make a more direct comparison:

PPC970:
16W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz (1.1v)

MPC7455:
15W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz (1.3v)

Also for reference:

MPC7457:
7.5W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz (1.0v)
16.6W (typical) @ 1.3 ghz (1.3v)

Personally, I'm doubting that the 970s will make it into the PBs this round for various reasons (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?postid=337846#post337846). I think we're more likely to see 7457s in short time; they're much better suited for laptops.

MacWhispers, as Arn has noted, has gotten basically one rumor right (dual ipod cables) and pretty much everything else wrong. It hasn't been around that long so the jury is still out. MacBidouille also has a mixed record but, to my memory, has gotten more things right.

Pretty much everything is rumors at this point, including the stuff about IBM being ahead of and 970s costing less than 7455s. Also, it seems pointless to debate the cost of the CPU since that's only a small part of the total cost. The 970 motherboard will most certainly cost more, especially if it has all these new goodies like AGP 8x, Hypertransport, DDR400, etc. as they've been rumored.

Trekkie

Jun 10, 2003, 12:31 PM

Let's see. release the top end processor in your midpoint laptop?

No way. These will be in a PowerMac first, and only for a while. They need to better differentiate the PowerMac from the iMac. They need to let the iMac speed up a bit and they can't kill the 12" and 17" sales by putting a cpu 600MHz and 32bits wider than the surrounding systems.

3G4N

Jun 10, 2003, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by cb911
...but considering that Moto may not be making G4's for much longer... (good point suzerain, i didn't think of the news about Moto selling the semiconductor dept. in that way.)

...also considering recent developments like Moto putting the semiconductor dept. up for sale...

and as a bonus, if Moto or anyone else isn't producing G4's then Apple might be forced to move the iBook and iMac lines to the 970 sooner as well. :D

What if -- after Apple moves to the 970, making a clean break of Moto, and serves the (rumored and deserved) lawsuit papers, with the aim to settle the lawsuit for the chip division. Apple then has a plan B in the unlikely event IBM pulls "a Moto" -- (a tthe very least) all of the IP, patents, tech, etc, to own and license, AND the assets to do top notch R&D and production, should the need arise. All this for the price of a lawsuit.

I admit it is a little far fetched, given Job's "software company" focus and the immense resources required to maintain such a "processor intensive" effort (why Moto is crumbling, and why nobody is itching to buy them).

NeXTDev

Jun 10, 2003, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by illumin8
You know, I didn't believe it until I saw it, but I just got one of those new 120 GB 7200 RPM, 8MB on-disk cache hard drives with an ATA133 controller, and it performs nearly as fast as a 36GB 10K RPM SCSI Ultra160 drive! With seek times at 8.5 ms this thing really rocks and I can see why people aren't buying SCSI any more. For 5 or 10 times the price, getting an extra 5 % increase on performance is not worth it...

Yes, the new ATA designs are pretty quick, but certainly the SCSI and FC solutions are still faster. As with most things in the computer universe, the curve of performance/price is exponential.

The truth is that as a general platform vendor to consumers, single user professional machines and low end servers, Apple probably doesn't see much demand for SCSI solutions. The Xserve is served well with ATA on board and SCSI/FC optional. There are many 3rd parties that can take up the slack, as it should be.

The big move now is Fibre Channel, and Apple's $500 HBA price is amazing. That's about 1/3 to 1/5 the price of everyone else. It would be interesting to see FC on a PowerBook. After all, if you can bypass the slow on-board hard disk when you are at work and can directly tap into the SAN, the PowerBook would be a terrific pro workstation. You just need some background sync process for the local hard disk. Pushing more IEEE-1394 for networking and SAN usage might also be an interesting move.

dongmin

Jun 10, 2003, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by Ensoniq
Regarding the 15" PowerBook speculation:

Apple introduced the 12" and 17" PowerBooks in January...the 15" should have been updated shortly thereafter. All 3 Aluminum PowerBooks would have been designed simultaneously. Apple probably planned to put the 15" into production last so that they could get rid of Titanium stock first. But there's no doubt that the DESIGN of the 15" Aluminum PowerBook was done BEFORE the 12"/17" were announced.

Now 5 months later, nothing. What can explain that? Why would Apple leave the middle child stuck looking different with lesser features than it's siblings for so long? The ONLY thing that makes any sense is that just as Apple was getting ready to put the 15" into production, IBM informed them that PPC 970 production was far exceeding expectations. And that caused a dilemna (albeit a good one) for Apple.

Besides the fact that all of your thinking is based on rumors, you forgot to mention the small detail that the 15" was updated in mid-November. THAT is the reason why you didn't see a new 15" released simultaneously with the 12" and 17", not because of some fiction you've concocted. It has now been 7 months since the 15" was last updated. Yes, an update is due, but 7 months between updates is not without precedent.

GroundLoop

Jun 10, 2003, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by dongmin

PPC970:
16W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz (1.1v)

Also for reference:

MPC7457:
7.5W (typical) @ 1.0 ghz (1.0v)
16.6W (typical) @ 1.3 ghz (1.3v)

Can you post a reference for your PPC 970 @ 1GHz info?

As far as the MPC7457 goes:
Full power mode:
15.8W (typical) @ 1 GHz
22.0W (max) @ 1 GHz
18.7W (typical) @ 1.3 GHz
26.0W (max) @ 1.3 GHz

(page 15)

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7457EC.pdf

Just more facts from the mouths (well docs) of Motorola.

But you were correct, the IBM PPC 970 numbers within that document are estimates as stated below the table in the referenced document.

Hickman

Rocketman

Jun 10, 2003, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by SuzanneA
The AlBooks are 'Aircraft Aluminum' (at least, thats what was said at release, the apple site just refers to it as Aluminum Alloy now) which is actually an alloy of a variety of things, not just 'raw alumin[i]um', I believe it (often [1]) even includes some titanium to lend it some strength.

Either way, it would have to be clear/natural anodized, beacuse even in an alloy, alumin[i]um oxidizes fast. Your nice 'shiny' AlBook would be dull and blotchy within a few days :)

[1] 'Aircraft Aluminum' is a very generic term, there are a few thousand different alloys of aluminum used in aircraft manufacture, and apple's choice, like any other 'Aircraft Aluminum' could be any of them.

We use alot of aluminum in rockets. The most common is 6061-T6 which is a treated material gfor hardness. 7075 is stiffer yet but a bit more brittle. Aluminum can crack under srress.

We also do alot of anodizing. My favorite color is purple but for general consumer products we normally do blue or black or clear. Clear is the issue raised for Appple and it makes sense because when you scratch it it looks less scratched than any other color.

But there are so many alloys of aluminum it is hard to predict what someone "insanely great" might choolse. Probably not good old 6061-T6 like everybody else.

My "avatar" image has us trying to first explode, then bend at Mach 5 some 6061-T6. That stuff survives!

Rocketman

http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/avatar.jpg

freundt

Jun 10, 2003, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by dongmin
Besides the fact that all of your thinking is based on rumors, you forgot to mention the small detail that the 15" was updated in mid-November. THAT is the reason why you didn't see a new 15" released simultaneously with the 12" and 17", not because of some fiction you've concocted. It has now been 7 months since the 15" was last updated. Yes, an update is due, but 7 months between updates is not without precedent.

What was the november update again? Wasn't it a speed bump + cost decrease?

Or have I forgotten something?

Hattig

Jun 10, 2003, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by wwworry
ok this is stupid but

1.8 GHz 970 x 1.5 = 2.7 speed
1.4 Ghz dual G4 = 2.8 speed

so why no dual processor configurations?

what's stupid is my processor math (full of holes) but still it would be nice to have dual 970s.

The second processor in a system hardly ever doubles the performance. I'd call a dual 1.4GHz G4 something around 2.1 speed at most (I remember someone writing in another thread that the second G4 gives a ~50% performance gain, and a second 970 would give a ~75% performance gain)

mactastic

Jun 10, 2003, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by freundt
What was the november update again? Wasn't it a speed bump + cost decrease?

Or have I forgotten something?

November was the introduction of the 1ghz tibook, along with the radeon 9000 mobility w/64mb. Oh and the superdrive in a laptop option was introduced then too i believe.

crayzaysean

Jun 10, 2003, 01:33 PM

if i'm not mistaken, those specs are for the 7457 aimed toward embedded uses, right? Wouldn't the power usage be different when the altivec units are enabled and used as well as whatever other changes go into making it the desktop version. Also, apple would be able to drop the system controller with the 970 right?

stompy

Jun 10, 2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by freundt
What was the november update again? Wasn't it a speed bump + cost decrease?

Or have I forgotten something?

I believe the Radeon 9000 was also added in Nov., up from the 7500.

Edit: Right on both Mactastic. (Also, min. HD went up from 30 to 40 GB)

Hattig

Jun 10, 2003, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by gezzas525
Cheaper err I dont think so? Its a 64-bit chip, much higher transister count definetly not cheaper. And wheres the other 512Kb of cache? I want the FULL 1Mb!! its suppose to be a workstation chip for gods sake !!

Enough to go round thats what IBM says, maybe but not enough fot the chips to be used in both the desktops and powerbooks?

Why use slower memory? You want to create bottlenecks DUH!!
It has 6.4Gb/s bandwidth YOU HAVE TO USE DDR 400 AND IN PAIRS FOR DUAL CHANNEL OPERATION!!!

90nm need for lower power and feasible use in a portable platform.

Sun was an example!!

SCSI would be likely, why would you want to use IDE in a 64-bit workstation? Again your creating bottlenecks.

Hello Mr I WILL USE CAPS TO SHOUT MY ARGUMENT, HOWEVER BADLY FORMULATED.

The 1.8 GHz 970 has 7.2 GB/s of bandwidth, 6.4GB/s effective. The concensus is that the processor interconnect runs at half the clock speed of the processor, and a 1.2GHz 970 (19W power use) would therefore have a 600MHz bus, which is 4.8GB/s of bandwidth, or around 4GB/s effective bandwidth. Dual channel PC2100 would handle that without a problem in a new PowerBook, or single channel PC3200 would be adequate enough (you do not have to match memory speeds with bus speeds).

The 970 is rumoured to be cheaper than the G4 - mainly because the G4 is currently very expensive. It also runs cooler - another advantage of using 130nm manufacturing. The 7457 130nm G4 is not going to be available until Q4 this year either.

I would fully expect Apple to use FibreChannel before SCSI.

copperpipe

Jun 10, 2003, 01:51 PM

If this rumor is true I wil ***** diamonds. But I'm not counting on that happening.

fpnc

Jun 10, 2003, 02:13 PM

I suspect that the only new hardware that will be introduced between now and the end of WWDC __will__ be a 15.4" PowerBook. But, it will have a G4 not a PPC970. The keynote will go something like this:

"Good morning...The year of the notebook...the 17" PowerBook, still the one and only...the 12" PowerBook the smallest PowerBook ever...our new 15.4" PowerBook redefines the notebook product space once again... the new gold standard...and now our developer preview of Panther..."

And that's it. No PPC970's at WWDC. I believe that many people are setting themselves up for a major disappointment if they think PPC970-based Macs are going to be introduced at WWDC. So in two weeks I'll either be eating crow (and admitting it) or thinking -- perhaps saying -- I told you so.

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by NeXTDev
You can take any design and call certain things "hacks." It's all a matter of perspective. Obviously you're not an engineer of any sort.

Who says a consumer processor can only have 512k of cache? The Intel Pentium M (http://www.intel.com/products/notebook/processors/pentiumm/index.htm?iid=ipp_note_proc+highlight_pentiumm&) has 1mb of L2 cache on die. So is that a hack?

FYI, my post was not meant to be a troll, just a statement of my personal opinion...

You bring up a very good point about the mobile Pentium-M which Intel is now using in notebooks.

Intel actually found that battery life was much better when the processor was clocked down at 1.4, 1.6, or 1.8 and the L3 cache was increased to 1MB. But also, the Pentium-M was a completely redesigned chip and was designed to take advantage of things like variable FSB.

I personally believe that Intel looked at the PowerBooks and realized they were getting their ass handed to them in that market, and copied a lot of the power saving features from the PowerBooks.

Of course they added a new one, that variable FSB, which I hope to see in the next iteration of the PowerBooks as well. Competition is a good thing... ;)

illumin8

Jun 10, 2003, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by dongmin
The 970 motherboard will most certainly cost more, especially if it has all these new goodies like AGP 8x, Hypertransport, DDR400, etc. as they've been rumored.
All of those features you mentioned as arguments that the PowerBook will not receive a 970 processor yet are features that will only be in a desktop computer in the first place.

Let me debunk them one by one, as you seem so fond of doing:

1. First of all, AGP 8X is only necessary for high-end desktop graphics cards. AGP 4X is considered the high end of the notebook markets, and there are several existing chipsets that support it.
2. Hypertransport is only necessary on dual processor motherboards as a way of maintaining cache-coherency between processors and allowing each processor to access the other processor's dedicated banks of memory. Therefore, it is a desktop only feature, unless you believe the unlikely rumor that we will see dual processor notebooks.
3. As mentioned many times before, dual channel DDR400 is only necessary for the 1.8 ghz. 970 processor with a 900 mhz. FSB. Dual channel DDR333 should feed the 600 mhz. FSB of a 1.2 ghz. PPC 970 just fine.

I think it is very feasible that Apple could quickly retrofit the 15" PB's system board with a simple 970 chipset and a dual DDR 333 memory configuration. This would not require any of the HyperTransport chipset or AGP 8X.

RHutch

Jun 10, 2003, 02:36 PM

I think that it would make some sense to introduce the 970 in the 15" PB's now. It's time for them to be updated, but it would also add a distinguishing feature (a very big one) to the PB line. If the big screen is what you want, you have to buy the 17". You could wait until the 17" gets a 970 as well, but who knows when that will be? Same thing for the 12". The size (and other features, perhaps) of those two models might be enough reason for people to continue buying them now. Putting a 970 in the 15" would be a reason for people to buy the 15 incher NOW.

astray

Jun 10, 2003, 02:48 PM

fpnc, i came across this at macuser uk

"A MacUser.co.uk source reports that WWDC will be the 'biggest ever' and will feature significant hardware announcements"

almost everybodys source is saying the 970 will appear at wwdc. Whilst this is not fact, there is alot of convergence in the rumours, for people to fully discount them.

soggywulf

Jun 10, 2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by illumin8
I personally believe that Intel looked at the PowerBooks and realized they were getting their ass handed to them in that market
<snip>

Uhh...in what sense?

Sales? I kind of doubt that. Does anyone have recent laptop sales figres for Apple and, say, Dell?

Performance? I kind of doubt that too.

3.1416

Jun 10, 2003, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by fpnc
And that's it. No PPC970's at WWDC. I believe that many people are setting themselves up for a major disappointment if they think PPC970-based Macs are going to be introduced at WWDC.

I'm up to 90% certainty that 970s will be announced. The recent C&Ds from Apple just about clinch it. And I still firmly believe that Apple didn't push WWDC back a month and move it to Moscone so they could have a slightly more complete Panther.

So in two weeks I'll either be eating crow (and admitting it) or thinking -- perhaps saying -- I told you so.

Likewise :)

tcolling

Jun 10, 2003, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by Rocketman
We use alot of aluminum in rockets. The most common is 6061-T6 which is a treated material gfor hardness. 7075 is stiffer yet but a bit more brittle. Aluminum can crack under srress.

We also do alot of anodizing. My favorite color is purple but for general consumer products we normally do blue or black or clear. Clear is the issue raised for Appple and it makes sense because when you scratch it it looks less scratched than any other color.

But there are so many alloys of aluminum it is hard to predict what someone "insanely great" might choolse. Probably not good old 6061-T6 like everybody else.

My "avatar" image has us trying to first explode, then bend at Mach 5 some 6061-T6. That stuff survives!

Rocketman

http://www.v-serv.com/-upload/avatar.jpg

It's just a case. Hey, you know we're not talking rocket science here...oh, wait, I guess we are :p :p :p :p :D

yzedf

Jun 10, 2003, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by cb911
you don't have to worry about the current TiBooks, or any Macs with G4's not being optimised. sure 10.3 will have certain optimizations for the 970's, but i'm sure that it will also have some speed increases on G4's. after all, even with the 970 a big part of Apple's line will still be G4 & maybe even G3.

and on the subject of anodizing... i recall reading that if you anodize something like a PB case, then contact with the skin will mean that eventually the coating will corrode and wear away. this can't be the case with the current AlBooks, right? i might be getting a bit technical here, but is it only anodizing with dye that makes it corrode with skin contact... or is there a different process that the AlBooks go through?
Here:

Anodizing is produced by electrochemical conversion. The anodizing process, usually performed on aluminum for protection and cosmetic purposes, builds up both on the surface as well as into the metal. Thin coatings, 2 µm to 25 µm (100 µin to 1000 µin) can be coated on most aluminums. Thick coatings from 25 to 75 µm (1000 to 3000 µin) are more durable and abrasion resistant than above chemical conversion oxide coatings. This oxide layer can be made in different colors depending on the post chemistries that are employed. The anodized parts are quite durable and do not tarnish and maintain their cosmetic appearance for a long period of time. Anodized coatings are usually dielectric in nature.

http://www.efunda.com/processes/surface/conversion_coatings.cfm?search_string=anodize

Human contact (oils and such) will not harm a good anodized material, or the finish for that matter.

ZildjianKX

Jun 10, 2003, 03:54 PM

All the powerbooks and power mac are still shipping same day except the dual 1.42... doesn't look good...

JBracy

Jun 10, 2003, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by ZildjianKX
All the powerbooks and power mac are still shipping same day except the dual 1.42... doesn't look good...

Yes but Apple are selling almost their entire line (Except 17"PB, 12" PB and 1.42 PM) to employees at ridiculous prices - to clear them out before WWDC. (including iMacs, eMacs, iBooks, PBs, PMs and Displays)

moosecat

Jun 10, 2003, 04:45 PM

It is very interesting that this thread/item remains up, while another thread, concerning some chip to be included in some computer and announced at some event has been removed at the request of Apple legal.

What does that say about the reliability of this one?

ColoJohnBoy

Jun 10, 2003, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by gezzas525
There will be no POWERBOOK 970's at WWDC PERIOD!!!

TRUST ME

Why should we? What position of omniscience and authority do you hold that enables you to state with such surety that not a chance exists for such an introduction to take place?

I personally hope PPC970 PowerBooks will be introduced, but I'm not completely expecting it. I do expect some sort of announcement regarding the PPC970, but not necessarily anything specific. Again, I merely hope. ;)

Visit Blue Pudding!
http://bluepudding.1hwy.com

alia

Jun 10, 2003, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by moosecat
It is very interesting that this thread/item remains up, while another thread, concerning some chip to be included in some computer and announced at some event has been removed at the request of Apple legal.

What does that say about the reliability of this one?

I'm in agreement with you Moosecat. The veracity of this particularly rumor is certainly questionable after the recent pulling of other rumor posts! It's a real shame too, because I'm hoping to get a new 15" powerbook this summer after the next revision, but now I'm worried it will be completely outdated in a few months!

Alia

fpnc

Jun 10, 2003, 07:22 PM

Apple's apparent attempt to control the PPC970 rumors does not necessarily mean that the rumors are true. In fact, I think it is more likely that these legal moves are a tacit admission that the rumor are __false__ (i.e. there will be no PPC970 introduction at WWDC). Apple won't officially comment on unannounced products, so we shouldn't expect them to state openly that the rumors are false.

However, if the rumors are true and they persist the worse that could happen is that G4 desktop sales slow slightly for the next two weeks and then when the PPC970 announcement is made there is a flurry of buying. Net result would be the delay in some sales and a few days of extra inventory on the G4 PowerMacs.

However, if the rumors are false and there is no PPC970 introduction then the net effect could be several orders of magnitude worse for Apple. This could easily happen because after WWDC the rumors will likely continue (Well, it was delayed for a month, wait until July. What, delayed again? Wait until next month, etc.). Thus my explanation for the cease and desist requests from Apple legal is that the rumors are indeed false and Apple is trying (rightly so) to protect future PowerMac G4 sales.

Of course, we're all just playing mind games here. What I purpose is that we all exercise some caution in handling these rumors. After all, in two weeks time we can meet back here and determine who were the real men and women in these discussions and who were the boys and girls. ;-)

pyrotoaster

Jun 10, 2003, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by fpnc
Of course, we're all just playing mind games here. What I purpose is that we all exercise some caution in handling these rumors. After all, in two weeks time we can meet back here and determine who were the real men and women in these discussions and who were the boys and girls. ;-)
Ooohhh... :rolleyes:
Actually, you sort of have a point. Apple isn't going to exclusively plug accurate rumors. At the same time, Apple isn't going to exclusively plug bogus rumors, either.

In order to keep pre-expo sales up (they've still got computers to sell, you know), Apple just creates confusion. For all we know, the folks at Apple Legal are reading each rumor and then just flipping a coin to decide whether to take it down or not. :p

We shouldn't look at a story being pulled as either confirmation or denial. The AppleInsider G5 rumor was pulled from Mac Rumors but not AppleInsider itself. Sounds like confusion to me...

3.1416

Jun 10, 2003, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by fpnc
I think it is more likely that these legal moves are a tacit admission that the rumor are __false__ (i.e. there will be no PPC970 introduction at WWDC).

Interesting theory. Has Apple ever demanded that sites remove information that turned out to be false? I don't recall any instances, but perhaps they have. It would seem odd though, since the usual rationale that Apple uses to shut down stories is that they have improperly obtained trade secrets or copyrighted material (such as images). This obviously wouldn't apply to *false* rumors...

fpnc

Jun 10, 2003, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by 3.1416
Interesting theory. Has Apple ever demanded that sites remove information that turned out to be false? I don't recall any instances, but perhaps they have. It would seem odd though, since the usual rationale that Apple uses to shut down stories is that they have improperly obtained trade secrets or copyrighted material (such as images). This obviously wouldn't apply to *false* rumors...

But I'm pretty certain that there are laws against publishing false information about companies that could affect their business plans, sales, and stock price. In fact I would expect that the punishment for something like that could be greater than just stating the truth, where the only violation might be that someone may have broken a confidentiality agreement. Which is "worse," a truth or a falsehood when they are __both__ just rumors? I'm sure that a lawyer could argue either way and the laws covering this may not be completely logical (for a layperson), but I would think that sustaining a false rumor that could harm a company could also result in legal actions.

3.1416

Jun 11, 2003, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by fpnc
Apple won't officially comment on unannounced products, so we shouldn't expect them to state openly that the rumors are false.

They have however specifically said "no new hardware" before other major events when there was speculation that there would be. They could easily dispel the 970 rumors with a similar announcement.

Thus my explanation for the cease and desist requests from Apple legal is that the rumors are indeed false and Apple is trying (rightly so) to protect future PowerMac G4 sales.

It's possible, but I don't think it's likely. G4 sales are already in the tank, and they're going to stay there until better hardware arrives regardless of what Apple legal does or doesn't do. The 970 rumors are already widespread and Apple's actions have drawn even more attention to them.

What I purpose is that we all exercise some caution in handling these rumors. After all, in two weeks time we can meet back here and determine who were the real men and women in these discussions and who were the boys and girls. ;-)

Sound advice. (There are women here?)

I would think that sustaining a false rumor that could harm a company could also result in legal actions

That could be. But as I said, I don't recall Apple ever going after incorrect rumors. Ah well, 13 more days of uninformed speculation...

GulGnu

Jun 11, 2003, 08:58 AM

I doubt there is legal basis for going after "false speculation" (After all, it's impossible to prove that these are malicious lies being spread...) about the company. After all, such speculation is a legitimate part of the investors and customers trying to forsee the company's future. Now, squelching the spreading of trade secrets on the other hand...

Regards / GulGnu

-Stabil som fan!

The Shadow

Jun 11, 2003, 09:46 AM

Hickman ridiculously refuting Arn's observation that we don't know for sure if PowerBooks can currently be produced to run cool enough with a PPC970 CPU:

Originally posted by Brian Hickman
Here are the facts straight from the documents of their respective developers:

PPC 970:
19W @ 1.2 GHz, 1.1v

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A1387A29AC1C2AE087256C5200611780/$file/PPC970_MPF2002.pdf

(page 14)

MPC7455:
15W (typical) @ 1GHz
22W (Maximum) @ 1GHz

http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7455EC.pdf

(page 15)

I hope this settles the discussion once and for all about the power utilization of the processors.

Hickman

Respectfully, the discussion is only settled when others have all had an opportunity to express their "opinions".

Mr HicKman should check his alleged "facts". The slide presentation he refers to could hardly be referred to as a technical "white paper" and does not employ any academic discipline. And nowhere is the word "maximum" used in reference to voltage. So does it refer to an average? Does it refer to a minimum? Or, is it really a marketing document disguised as a technical document? (Aside: Slide presentation? Facts? Common!)

Which brings us to the next point. Namely science is about TESTING the claims of others. When you've done that, over several experiments and get the same results, then you have evidence! One source, possibly released by the IBM marketing department is hardly sufficient to stand up to academic scrutiny.

Third, how are any of these "facts" relevant anyway, as wouldn't it seem UNlikely that Apple would go with a 1.2GHz chip? Therefore aren't these "factual" voltage figures ikely to be understated? According to these statistics, were they to be accepted, a 1.4 GHz 970 could run hotter than a G4 1 GHz, which is really pushing the heat envelope.

Finally, Mr Hickman goes on to contradict himself in a later post by citing additional heat considerations:

Originally posted by Brian Hickman
At typical CPU utilization the PPC 970 @ 1.2 GHz uses 26.67% more power than the G4. [HUH? SEE ABOVE COMMENTS - SHADOW] But, the CPU isn't the only source of heat within the laptop case. Does anyone have documented proof of the total heat generated by the PowerBook line?

Oops!:p

Arn was right. We won't know anything for sure till the WWDC.

I can't believe anyone would attempt to seriously argue against that proposition.

S

NicoMan

Jun 11, 2003, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by The Shadow
Arn was right. We won't know anything for sure till the WWDC.

I can't believe anyone would attempt to seriously argue against that proposition.

S

Do you mean that we will know because official white papers about the 970 will be distributed, allowing us to compare? If you think that we will know because some of us will have in their hands early samples of the Powerbook G5, I think you (and me too, in a way) will be disappointed.

I believe we won't see PBG5 at WWDC.

NicoMan

NicoMan

Jun 11, 2003, 11:43 AM

I think all these discussions about the 970's heat dissipation are somewhat irrelevant, because I don't think the criteria is heat, it's more to do with having enough experience with the chip and chipset to produce a Mobo optimized enough for a laptop. After all, we are talking about Hypertransport, fast DDR, etc... which are quite revolutionary, as far as Apple are concerned. If the 970 is as fast as we would like to hope, you have enough margin of manoeuvre (in terms of computing power) to lower the voltage to get to an acceptable power consumption. The problem, with the G4, is that Apple need to push it as far as they can to achieve decent level of performance (as well as breaking that 1GHz-in-a-laptop barrier), hence the heat dissipation problem.

NicoMan

Frobozz

Jun 11, 2003, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by copperpipe
If this rumor is true I wil ***** diamonds. But I'm not counting on that happening.

LOL. Somebody get a pooper scooper STAT.

adamfilip

Jun 11, 2003, 12:33 PM

to many dreams..

so after WWDC we will have

New Ibooks running on G4's

New Imacs running Low end 970's
New PowerBooks running 970s

New Towers running mid to high end dual 970
same with the Xserves

oh yeah i cant wait for the next Ipod with dual 970's and a Serial ata 10,000 Rpm 100gig 1.8" hard drive and build in GPS navigation.. :)

dongmin

Jun 11, 2003, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Brian Hickman
Can you post a reference for your PPC 970 @ 1GHz info?

As far as the MPC7457 goes:
Full power mode:
15.8W (typical) @ 1 GHz
22.0W (max) @ 1 GHz
18.7W (typical) @ 1.3 GHz
26.0W (max) @ 1.3 GHz

OK we're approaching the ad nauseum point with this line of discussion but I'll briefly address some questions you brought up.

I'm no computer scientist but I'm pretty sure the heat dissipation increases linearly with the frequency given the same voltage. So I got the 1.0 ghz 970 figure by simple multiplication.

The 7457 comes in two voltages, at least according to this (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/MPC7457FS.pdf) and this Moto document (http://e-www.motorola.com/brdata/PDFDB/docs/PPCSALESFACT.pdf). The low-power version does 7.5W @ 1.0 ghz.

Originally posted by illumin8
All of those features you mentioned as arguments that the PowerBook will not receive a 970 processor yet are features that will only be in a desktop computer in the first place.
I was actually referring to the rumor recently put out by MacWhispers which claims that because of the cheaper cost of the 970, Apple is more likely to go 970 across its entire lineup than have a mix of 970s and G4s. I was not talking specifically about putting the 970 in a PowerBook.

DrGonzo

Jun 11, 2003, 01:50 PM

I think releasing a 15" AluBook w/ a G4 along with a ppc970 Powermac launch would actually hurt AluBook sales a lot. If i see this badassed processor in a desktop that will eventually (probably?) be in the notebooks there's no way i'd "waste" my money on a new 15" unless it had some serious horsepower out of the G4. I'd much rather pay ~$2000 for an "older" 1ghz superdrived 15" than a newer slightly updated 15.4" and then upgrade later (but i don't want to, i want ppc970 PBs this month, as i'm sure we all do)

Even if Apple doesn't release a ppc970 notebook they should at least let us know when it will be upgraded to a new processor so those of us that don't want to "waste" our money can hold onto our precious lupins and save it for that day when the powerbook gets the almighty upgrade.

freundt

Jun 11, 2003, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by DrGonzo
Even if Apple doesn't release a ppc970 notebook they should at least let us know when it will be upgraded to a new processor so those of us that don't want to "waste" our money can hold onto our precious lupins and save it for that day when the powerbook gets the almighty upgrade.

Why would thery do that? If they say nothing, then chances are, you will break down and buy an exisitng one. Hence money in the pocket. And if you don't break down, then they'll get your money anyways when the new 970's come out.

Also, if they did that, then very few pb sales would happen until the date the 970's were previously announced to be released.

Basically, if the 970's aren't released at WWDC, then I'm screwed, because I've been waiting since jan to buy a 15". And I don't want to get a G4 knowing the 970's will will be 4 months or so later. So I'll wait even longer. GRR...

Powerbookless

Jun 11, 2003, 02:48 PM

Ok, after steamrolling through five pages of threads about the PPC 970 showing up in Powerbooks this month... I have a need to make some small comments.

#1 - We can argue the power differences between the mobile G4 and the PPC 970, but the simple fact is whatever Apple puts in to the laptop will still give us our 5hr approx battery life. And considering any Intel or AMD based laptop out there, any Powerbook will stomp on it for Power Management features.

#2 I read a bit back that some people thought that FC would be a great idea in the laptop. What have you been smoking??? There is no cost effective measure that would allow any company to do that. The gains of FC are only realized in systems where there is a chance that the installed hardware can saturate the north and south bridge chips. Laptops don't have that type of throughput. So unless you need major performance, keep your unholy laptop idea away from this thread and gargle your bong water elsewhere.

#3 If there is a PPC 970 in any Powerbook, there is a good chance that Apple would keep in reserved for the high-end 15.4" Powerbook Config. The standard config could very well stick to an upgraded G4 @ 1GHz.

So anyways there is my piece... Roast me if you will.

Cheers
Powerbookless

rmac

Jun 11, 2003, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by freundt

Basically, if the 970's aren't released at WWDC, then I'm screwed, because I've been waiting since jan to buy a 15". And I don't want to get a G4 knowing the 970's will will be 4 months or so later. So I'll wait even longer. GRR...

Same here. Except that I have a time constraint of sorts. Will be able to get educational discounts for a month or so after WWDC. If I can't get a new powerbook within that window have to buy it normal price. And then after the summer I'll be in Germany, where the prices are even higher. :(

The Shadow

Jun 11, 2003, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by NicoMan
Do you mean that we will know because official white papers about the 970 will be distributed, allowing us to compare? If you think that we will know because some of us will have in their hands early samples of the Powerbook G5, I think you (and me too, in a way) will be disappointed.

I believe we won't see PBG5 at WWDC.

NicoMan

No I didn't mean anything of the sort Nico. The statement you ascribe to me is exactly the hysteria I was arguing against.:)

I just meant we won't know what's going to happen at the WWDC until the WWDC. Nothing more, nothing less.

S

P.S. In case anyone hasn't noticed, this site is called MacRumors, not MacFacts! Some people in this thread are having a hard time distinguishing between the two concepts!

MacKid

Jun 11, 2003, 09:51 PM

MacKid

Jun 11, 2003, 09:55 PM

Originally posted by wwworry
ok this is stupid but

1.8 GHz 970 x 1.5 = 2.7 speed
1.4 Ghz dual G4 = 2.8 speed

so why no dual processor configurations?

what's stupid is my processor math (full of holes) but still it would be nice to have dual 970s.

You over-looked the keyword: performance. I hate to bring this age-old-mac-defending-topic, but MHz doesn't equal speed or performance. It is simply a spec of a computer that contributes to the speed. So, unfortunately, in the computer world, 2x2?4

leicaman

Jun 12, 2003, 01:42 AM

Originally posted by zac4mac[i] I've seen hard anodized Al chip and rip teeth off a carbide saw blade - it's really tough, on the surface. [/B]

I looked up anodizing a while back and found that the product that's used in anodizing alumnium most of the time is also the same chemical composition as corundum. A certain color red of corundum is ruby. The rest are sapphire or fancy sapphire.

On the Mohs scale of hardness, corundum is a 9. Synthetic mossanite, also known as carborundum when it's not gem quality, is a diamond simulant (as opposed to synthetic diamond which is the same as natural diamond in chemical composition) is 9.5 and diamonds of course are 10. So anodized aluminum has an extremely hard surface if it's the "hard" kind.

The Moh's scale is not linear. 10 is about 10,000 times harder than 9. The curve is pretty vertical starting around 9. (Talc is 1).

Diamonds being pure carbon for the most part have an ideal molecular structure for hardness. It's the hardest known natural substance.

(I help produce the leading text books on gemstones.) :cool:

NicoMan

Jun 12, 2003, 03:03 AM

Originally posted by The Shadow
No I didn't mean anything of the sort Nico. The statement you ascribe to me is exactly the hysteria I was arguing against.:)

I just meant we won't know what's going to happen at the WWDC until the WWDC. Nothing more, nothing less.

S

P.S. In case anyone hasn't noticed, this site is called MacRumors, not MacFacts! Some people in this thread are having a hard time distinguishing between the two concepts!

Sorry, I wasn't very clear in my post. I was really asking for your opinion (and others', obviously).

NicoMan

rjstanford

Jun 12, 2003, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Powerbookless
We can argue the power differences between the mobile G4 and the PPC 970, but the simple fact is whatever Apple puts in to the laptop will still give us our 5hr approx battery life. And considering any Intel or AMD based laptop out there, any Powerbook will stomp on it for Power Management features.One question. Have you checked out the new Centrino models? Its easy to bash a company based on prior experience with them, but there are now several shipping intel models running ~1.6 (+/-) ghz P4M chips with 5-7 hours of battery life. Attack them for being clunky, or bash the OS, or whatever, but the 2 hour battery life of the original P4 (non-M) systems isn't really an issue any more.

Combine that with the prices (below), and the intel notebooks are fast becoming a very appealing threat. Take the Dell D800 for example...
1.6ghz intel with Centrino
15.4" high-resolution widescreen
NVIDIA GeForce4 4200
DVD/CDRW combo
802.11 a/b/g combo
3 year warranty
Bluetooth
1gb RAM
40gb HD

The price? $2,774 according to the quote I got yesterday. Don't get me wrong, I would pay a premium to get the design quality and OS compatibility of an Apple notebook. But saying that the intels don't have what it takes from a checklist viewpoint is just pure FUD these days.

-Richard

ps: In case you hadn't checked recently, that's about $50 less than the current 15" tiBook firesale price (1gb, combo drive, APP). Except that that doesn't have 802.11a/g, bluetooth, or a high resolution screen. And has about half the processing power (which isn't (or shouldn't be) a big deal to some people, but is to others (including, incidentally, myself)).

JBracy

Jun 12, 2003, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by rjstanford
One question. Have you checked out the new Centrino models? Its easy to bash a company based on prior experience with them, but there are now several shipping intel models running ~1.6 (+/-) ghz P4M chips with 5-7 hours of battery life. Attack them for being clunky, or bash the OS, or whatever, but the 2 hour battery life of the original P4 (non-M) systems isn't really an issue any more.

Combine that with the prices (below), and the intel notebooks are fast becoming a very appealing threat. Take the Dell D800 for example...
1.6ghz intel with Centrino
15.4" high-resolution widescreen
NVIDIA GeForce4 4200
DVD/CDRW combo
802.11 a/b/g combo
3 year warranty
Bluetooth
1gb RAM
40gb HD

The price? $2,774 according to the quote I got yesterday. Don't get me wrong, I would pay a premium to get the design quality and OS compatibility of an Apple notebook. But saying that the intels don't have what it takes from a checklist viewpoint is just pure FUD these days.

-Richard

ps: In case you hadn't checked recently, that's about $50 less than the current 15" tiBook firesale price (1gb, combo drive, APP). Except that that doesn't have 802.11a/g, bluetooth, or a high resolution screen. And has about half the processing power (which isn't (or shouldn't be) a big deal to some people, but is to others (including, incidentally, myself)).

Actually that's $125 MORE than the 15" PB with SuperDrive, BT, AP, 60GB HD, 512MB RAM. Check the AppleStore. $2,649

pyrotoaster

Jun 12, 2003, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by adamfilip
to many dreams..

so after WWDC we will have

New Ibooks running on G4's

New Imacs running Low end 970's
New PowerBooks running 970s

New Towers running mid to high end dual 970
same with the Xserves

oh yeah i cant wait for the next Ipod with dual 970's and a Serial ata 10,000 Rpm 100gig 1.8" hard drive and build in GPS navigation..:)
I don't who told you we'd see iMacs, but we definitely won't see PowerPC 970 iMacs until next year at the earliest.

As for iBooks, I'm going to provide two corrections:
1. We probably won't see them at WWDC. Although they are due for an update and would make an awesome One more thing...
2. The iBook will probably go to the G3 GOBI (or Mojave, depending on who you talk to) processor, not the G4. You can read more about the GOBI here (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/g3gobi.html).

Lol about the iPod, though. :D

rjstanford

Jun 12, 2003, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by JBracy
Actually that's $125 MORE than the 15" PB with SuperDrive, BT, AP, 60GB HD, 512MB RAM. Check the AppleStore. $2,649 I did. Check my comments. First, I spec'd 1GB of ram (add $300 to your pricing). Yes, you can get 3rd party RAM but a) that's not exactly a valid comparison of pricing, and b) for business use, its very convenient to be able to use one company for failures, warrantee work, et cetera.

Now add the 3 year APP (as I mentioned). Yes, all $350 of it. Makes a pretty good price difference, and it merely gets the coverage up to what Dell's including. Apple doesn't even offer the onsite service that Dell does (which is why I didn't include it in my quoted quote). As the price goes, you're already over $500 more than the Dell offering.

Whoops, we didn't catch the 802.11 a/g cards (to be fair, now add the price of a combo PCMCIA card to the apple quote). Or the extra 32mb of graphics memory. Etc. And we're still dealing with an 867mhz G4 machine at these numbers (yes, its only $250 more for the 1ghz, but I was trying to get a true feature/price comparison before).

Look, I like the PowerBooks. I think they're great machines. I recently bought a 12" for my future in-laws to use around the house. Put a decent resolution LCD and a 1.2ghz 970 in one and I'll buy it today (double the expected specInt makes a big difference when it comes to compile times). But going around claiming either that the intel-powered offerings are very inferior (which they're not these days), have poorer battery life, or are more expensive (hardly) doesn't help anyone. Slanted comparisons don't really help much either.

-Richard

JBracy

Jun 12, 2003, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by rjstanford
I did. Check my comments. First, I spec'd 1GB of ram (add $300 to your pricing). Yes, you can get 3rd party RAM but a) that's not exactly a valid comparison of pricing, and b) for business use, its very convenient to be able to use one company for failures, warrantee work, et cetera.

Now add the 3 year APP (as I mentioned). Yes, all $350 of it. Makes a pretty good price difference, and it merely gets the coverage up to what Dell's including. Apple doesn't even offer the onsite service that Dell does (which is why I didn't include it in my quoted quote). As the price goes, you're already over $500 more than the Dell offering.

Whoops, we didn't catch the 802.11 a/g cards (to be fair, now add the price of a combo PCMCIA card to the apple quote). Or the extra 32mb of graphics memory. Etc. And we're still dealing with an 867mhz G4 machine at these numbers (yes, its only $250 more for the 1ghz, but I was trying to get a true feature/price comparison before).

Look, I like the PowerBooks. I think they're great machines. I recently bought a 12" for my future in-laws to use around the house. Put a decent resolution LCD and a 1.2ghz 970 in one and I'll buy it today (double the expected specInt makes a big difference when it comes to compile times). But going around claiming either that the intel-powered offerings are very inferior (which they're not these days), have poorer battery life, or are more expensive (hardly) doesn't help anyone. Slanted comparisons don't really help much either.

-Richard

OK I didn't catch the Apple Care, but really I wouldn't bother. I'd get the top end 15" upgrade to 512MB/1DIMM, add BT, and buy 3rd party RAM to bring it to 1GB for less than the price of your Dell and with a SuperDrive.