May 18th? G5 Updates?

[MacRumors]

One unsubstantiated rumor submission claims that PowerMac G5 updates will be seen on May 18th.

Few other hints at PowerMac updates have been reported.

[Dippo]

I doubt it, and even if they do come out, they won't be shipping till August :D

[otter-boy]

It does seem like a very awkward time. If they release a product, it needs to be the 3 GHz. Otherwise, a lower clocked model would seem to indicate no 3+ GHz models until after the summer--many people would be quite unhappy with that.

[gekko513]

It does seem like a very awkward time. If they release a product, it needs to be the 3 GHz. Otherwise, a lower clocked model would seem to indicate no 3+ GHz models until after the summer--many people would be quite unhappy with that.
Maybe we'll just have to realise that there will be no 3GHz model this year.

[wordmunger]

It does seem like a very awkward time. If they release a product, it needs to be the 3 GHz. Otherwise, a lower clocked model would seem to indicate no 3+ GHz models until after the summer--many people would be quite unhappy with that.

I disagree. They should release new models as soon as they are ready. I suspect the 3 GHz models will not be ready before the end of summer (though they might be announced at WWDC), so if we can get a bump now, let's do it. That's at least four months of 2.4 + GHz. Why hold it back?

[.a]

somehow i do not care about 3ghz ... whatever comes i'll get it - i simply have to update my dual g4 450 mhz ... well, people will be "disapointed" - though a 2.4 ghz machine for sure is great !!! especially if you have 8 gb of ram !!! this will scream !!!
.a

[AppleJustWorks]

Well heres to May 18th updates...I was kind of surprised when I saw that there wasn't any iPod updates today....
Ooh Well

[phonic pol]

I would much rather apple didn't release updates soon. We've gone long enough now without rev b's that it seems a waste to release new models soon without crossing the 3 ghz boundary. I would prefer to see monsterously fast machines (3 to 4 ghz) released later in the year with major impact to continue the g5 envy syndrome experienced over the last year. Along with a signicant case redesign, obviously not from scratch but just enough to get people talking again - besides my trusty g4 can wait as long as it has too :)

[SuperChuck]

This makes no sense at all for a number of reasons.

1) What in the heck would they debut at WWDC? A revamped iMac? WWDC is not the ideal venue for such an announcement. Especially if the update doesn't hit 3 Ghz (which it almost certainly wouldn't), as Steve would be dining on crow while he tried to get a bunch of power users excited about a consumer-grade product.

2) The Brilliant Savings promo ends at WWDC. It doesn't take a degree in marketing to know that promotional incentives do not usually accompany a hotly anticipated product release.

3) Apple would be in the tail end of displaying their wares at drupa (a graphic design super-expo that runs May 6-19). If the rumor was that it would be debuted on the 6th or 7th, it might make a little sense, but not much.

4) Apple quietly released the new PB and iBook lines. It is not Apple's style to quietly update major product lines twice in a row, especially when one of them has the widest profit margin of anything on offer. That's what the other guys do.

5) There will be an announcement of 3 Ghz PMs at WWDC. Of course they won't ship for an eternity, but it will happen regardless. Why, you may ask? Steve doesn't like to eat crow if he can possibly avoid it. And he has no problem whatsoever announcing products that won't arrive anywhere near the scheduled release. As Oscar Wilde once said, "punctuality is the thief of time." I imagine Steve wholeheartedly agrees.

[Borg3of5]

I really hope Apple does update the G5, and quickly. It would be great to get a discount on the Dual 2.0 GHz, and be able to take advantage of the Brilliant Savings promotion, which alone is worth it to get an 'older' G5.

The 23" HD Cinema display rocks; and, I still, for the love of G*d do not understand why folks are so uptight about Apple revising the current display schemes to 'match' the G5s' aluminum motif.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, matching is out, combining dissimilar products are in for the fashion world, and in general. The current clear plastic displays DO match the aluminum G5's. Anyone who says they are an eyesore is on crack.

[aswitcher]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, matching is out, combining dissimilar products are in for the fashion world, and in general. The current clear plastic displays DO match the aluminum G5's. Anyone who says they are an eyesore is on crack.

:D Now don't hold back there :p

[SuperChuck]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, matching is out, combining dissimilar products are in for the fashion world, and in general. The current clear plastic displays DO match the aluminum G5's. Anyone who says they are an eyesore is on crack.

I second that. I, for one, do not want an aluminum display. The current design is breathtaking and more functional (you can remove the hinge on the back to hang it on the wall or attach it to an ergonomic arm). Also, I suspect the aluminum version will be heavier, but I could be wrong. The industrial look of the G5 is sexy in its own way, but I am not a big fan.

[Laslo Panaflex]

The 23" HD Cinema display rocks; and, I still, for the love of G*d do not understand why folks are so uptight about Apple revising the current display schemes to 'match' the G5s' aluminum motif.


Here here. I picked one up last weekend from my local apple retail store. I love the thing, its the best purchase I have ever made (aside from my G5). I got hooked up too, even though I bought my G5 in october, I was able to get the 500 discount on my display. I really don't think that they don't match, and to tell you the truth, I think I like it better than I would a metal bezel display, OS X already hs enough metal. For those contemplating getting the 23", do it, I am very happy. Now if I could only sell my old e540's. . .

[Bhennies]

--many people would be quite unhappy with that.That hasn't stopped apple before.

[mklos]

I really hope Apple does update the G5, and quickly. It would be great to get a discount on the Dual 2.0 GHz, and be able to take advantage of the Brilliant Savings promotion, which alone is worth it to get an 'older' G5.

The 23" HD Cinema display rocks; and, I still, for the love of G*d do not understand why folks are so uptight about Apple revising the current display schemes to 'match' the G5s' aluminum motif.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, matching is out, combining dissimilar products are in for the fashion world, and in general. The current clear plastic displays DO match the aluminum G5's. Anyone who says they are an eyesore is on crack.

They do match the current PowerMac G5's, but they've used this design for the past 3 to 4 years now and its getting a little old. Plus I believe the 23" Cinema Display's technology is older than the 20" Cinema Display. It would also be nice for Apple to release a 17" widescreen display. I still can't understand why Apple doesn't use the 17" widescreen display thats used in the iMac/PowerBook. Its a beautiful display that is crisp and has an awesome backlight. They need also need to have a little more flexibility when it comes to adjusting it. If Apple could somehow get it to adjust like the flat panel iMac then that would be great. Right now the current displays you can either move it up or down and not very much. So display updates are way over due in my opinion.

[Bhennies]

I really hope Apple does update the G5, and quickly. It would be great to get a discount on the Dual 2.0 GHz, and be able to take advantage of the Brilliant Savings promotion, which alone is worth it to get an 'older' G5.
The problem is is that the "old" g5's are having lots of problems. I'm waiting for rev. B- I don't care what speed they are- I just want one that's more reliable. For a pro audio guy who needs silence- I simply cannot accept the chirping noises and fan control problems- and yes, these faults are very widespread. If they were quality machines, I would snatch that offer in a second- I don't care about matching displays either!

[numediaman]

The problem is is that the "old" g5's are having lots of problems. I'm waiting for rev. B- I don't care what speed they are- I just want one that's more reliable. For a pro audio guy who needs silence- I simply cannot accept the chirping noises and fan control problems- and yes, these faults are very widespread. If they were quality machines, I would snatch that offer in a second- I don't care about matching displays either!

I'm waiting for a rev b, too. But May 18th? Sounds like a date pulled out of a hat. Besides, I thought the date was March 23rd?

[jwdawso]

I'll believe it when I start see Xserve ship dates get to < 1 week.

[edesignuk]

Maybe we'll just have to realise that there will be no 3GHz model this year.
In which case we'll all know that Apple is in fact full of ****, and doesn't keep very public promises, and that IBM is just as good as freakin' moto :rolleyes:

[thehuncamunca]

apple really needs to update the G5's ASAP, even if they're not a whole lot faster cut the prices up the video RAM to 128MB standard 256MB on the 9800, add some higher end graphics options, include bluetooth and AE standard like on the new powerbooks

[x86isslow]

In which case we'll all know that Apple is in fact full of ****, and doesn't keep very public promises, and that IBM is just as good as freakin' moto :rolleyes:

The thing is, IBM actually made the effort to get chips out when they said they would (xServe), but blew it by trying to add TWO new technologies at one at the same time as shrinking the process to 90nm.

Moto/freescrap, i doubt ever moved technology.

IBM could probably have delivered 2.3Ghz G5s for the xServe in time, provided they be at the old 130nm design. But people are reporting that finally, the Dual 2Ghz xServes are arriving, so this is good news.
----
As for the 3s. Apple will probably go dual 2.4 and 2.8, and then have the Dual 3s show up after the summer ends- provided Fishkill is up to capacity on the 90nm by then. (crosses fingers)

V.

[Jag31X]

I was planning on getting a new G5, but should I wait for an update?

[g30ffr3y]

As for the 3s. Apple will probably go dual 2.4 and 2.8, and then have the Dual 3s show up after the summer ends- provided Fishkill is up to capacity on the 90nm by then. (crosses fingers)

V.


that could work... it may be a little anti-climactic... but apple could release 2.4 and 2.8 [or similiar]... keep the 2.0 at the low end, and then when they are indeed ready... add the 3.0 to the top and drop the 2.0... sort of like what they did with the dual 1.8... just sneaking it in a little later...

i dont know though... i think glory hog steve wants to VERY publicly announce his new monster dual 3 gig G5 with at least 2 gigs ram standard... along side sexy new aluminum displays...

to dream...

[Trowaman]

new G5s in the middle of a quarter before WWDC leaving nothing huge for WWDC?

YEAH RIGHT! *laughs myself silly of the chair.

[TRiPod]

The problem is is that the "old" g5's are having lots of problems. I'm waiting for rev. B- I don't care what speed they are- I just want one that's more reliable. For a pro audio guy who needs silence- I simply cannot accept the chirping noises and fan control problems- and yes, these faults are very widespread. If they were quality machines, I would snatch that offer in a second- I don't care about matching displays either!
so get a dual 2. the audio problems were with dual 1.8

[crankcase]

Actually My question is the same as one of the above...is there any reason to wait longer? I keep hearing tales of buzzing whining and screeching fans...Thanks in advance for any of your advice.
crank!

[invaLPsion]

I was planning on getting a new G5, but should I wait for an update?

I was planning on getting an updated G5.....

Then I got a 17 inch powerbook.

Man this thing kicks ass....

[thatwendigo]

apple really needs to update the G5's ASAP, even if they're not a whole lot faster cut the prices up the video RAM to 128MB standard 256MB on the 9800, add some higher end graphics options, include bluetooth and AE standard like on the new powerbooks

You know, it's not that simple. Apple can't just drop cards in and pretend that they're going to work. They need ADC soldered onto the board, drivers written for the cards, additions to the frameworks of the OS to reference everything... Even though I agree with you that the graphics cards should be updated in a very serious way, that doesn't mean it will be easy or cheap for Apple to do so. Economies of scale still apply.

I just wish they'd get the Wildcats and FireGLs back in the game. I think the G5 would scream on some of those benchmarks we're starting to fall behind in if they'd just get pro cards again.

My dream for WWDC is to see dual 3.5ghz G5s running an NV6800, with a top-specced dual PC alongside it. The obvious outcome, since this is a dream, is the total trouncing of the PC world's best, and an announcemnt of the PowerPC 980 for the next summer, by which time Apple will have transitioned to a whole new batch of chips.

Picture this, if you will, in a year and a half:
The eMac and iBook are running PPC 750vx singles at 2.5ghz in the same form factors and with a heat cost of only 12 watts.
PowerBooks have moved to dual processor 750vx at 2.5ghz, while keeping their heat profile as well.
The iMac as an all-in-one is dead. In it's place, there's a three-step consumer mac running dual 970fx chips at 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 ghz, with limited expansion and a smaller case.
The PowerMac is now running next-generation chips that have been designed from the ground up alongdie their heavier-grade sibling. Dual 980s are under the hood at 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 ghz, accessing DDR2 RAM and providing for the trend Apple has of following emerging markets, like PCI-Extreme and the next revision of IEEE 1394 and 802.11.

Hey, I can lust after it if I want! :D

The thing is, IBM actually made the effort to get chips out when they said they would (xServe), but blew it by trying to add TWO new technologies at one at the same time as shrinking the process to 90nm.

Yeah, pretty much. There's some good information out there about how everyone has gotten their designs hurt by going 90nm, because of leaks, interference, and crosstalk. Nobody expected things to be this severe when the jump was being discussed a year or two ago.

IBM could probably have delivered 2.3Ghz G5s for the xServe in time, provided they be at the old 130nm design. But people are reporting that finally, the Dual 2Ghz xServes are arriving, so this is good news.

It would have gotten a bit warm, though. The G5 at 2.0ghz was right around 45-50 watts, as I recall, and you get decreasing performance for increasing heat past a certain point. That's why the Pentirum 4 is racing to and past 100 watts.

As for the 3s. Apple will probably go dual 2.4 and 2.8, and then have the Dual 3s show up after the summer ends- provided Fishkill is up to capacity on the 90nm by then. (crosses fingers)

I expect them to at least demo 3.0ghz machines at WWDC, actually. I'd love to believe we'll see a quantum jump, though, on the order of a 75% increase in clock from the process shrink and redesigns. Sure, it'll run a little hotter in the end, but who doesn't want a 3.5ghz G5? ;)

[djbahdow01]

I have been waiting and waiting forever, but you know what, i will continue to wait. This will be the first Mac that i have owned and it will be well worth the money when it comes out. If its May 18th thats ok i will have to wait as it is, as i just purchased a Nikon D70. If not no big deal. I just want a G5 with PCI Express and a new form factor display to go with it. That and no more production problems from IBM, so the G5 can make it into the Powerbooks by the time i need a new laptop next summer and before my student discount is up.

[Sun Baked]

Picture this, if you will, in a year and a half:
The eMac and iBook are running PPC 750vx singles at 2.5ghz in the same form factors and with a heat cost of only 12 watts.
PowerBooks have moved to dual processor 750vx at 2.5ghz, while keeping their heat profile as well.
The iMac as an all-in-one is dead. In it's place, there's a three-step consumer mac running dual 970fx chips at 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 ghz, with limited expansion and a smaller case.
The PowerMac is now running next-generation chips that have been designed from the ground up alongdie their heavier-grade sibling. Dual 980s are under the hood at 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 ghz, accessing DDR2 RAM and providing for the trend Apple has of following emerging markets, like PCI-Extreme and the next revision of IEEE 1394 and 802.11.

Hey, I can lust after it if I want! :DI don't think we'll see dual CPU machines based around the G3 anytime soon, the chip lacked the cache coherency protocol that the earlier 604 and the later G4 had.

[SuperChuck]

I was planning on getting a new G5, but should I wait for an update?

Although this particular update rumor is most likely bogus, the answer is YES.

Capital Y-E-S. :D

Unless, of course, you're one of those people who don't care that they pay top dollar for the top-of-the-line machine when they know that it will be a second-rate machine worth a good bit less in a matter of weeks.

[Frohickey]

I'm waiting for a rev b, too. But May 18th? Sounds like a date pulled out of a hat. Besides, I thought the date was March 23rd?

Remember the Paul Mason winery commercial?

Apple will ship no revB G5s, until its time. :p

[&RU]

Unfortunately, at this point in time any G5 updates that do not involve a 3Ghz processor will suffer greatly in the sales department. Even if they are the best Macs ever they will suffer from the old pre-MacWorld sales slump, with everyone waiting for the bigger and better announcement.

As for the displays, Apple needs a monitor with an adjustable design like this:

http://www.eyegonomic.com/page.dsp?page=133

and the the professional color management like this:

http://www.barco.com/corporate/en/products/product.asp?element=2251

That is something alot of proffesionals would pay for.

[javabear90]

As for the displays, Apple needs a monitor with an adjustable design like this:

http://www.eyegonomic.com/page.dsp?page=133

and the the professional color management like this:

http://www.barco.com/corporate/en/products/product.asp?element=2251

That is something alot of proffesionals would pay for.

ooooh..... I like :cool:

[Wonder Boy]

I was planning on getting a new G5, but should I wait for an update?

you've waited this long, another couple months aint gonna kill you. or will it?

[JamesDPS]

I predict that new Powermacs will appear sooner than that. Probably this coming Tuesday. Maybe even tomorrow. My reason? Just bought a dual 1.8 (was holding out for SOOO long but need it now for a project :-/) So thank me when new ones come out! :)

Got a decent deal, though -- $1999 (it's new, not refurb) -- only regret is not buying it earlier... hope I don't have fan noises, I'll report back with any problems, but so far the thing is awesome -- just ordered 2 gigs of ram so once that goes in it'll be even better (but even with only 512 mb it's still quite the speedy machine)...

[macridah]

Whatever. I'll believe when I see it (our read about it on an apple press release.)

[Bhennies]

so get a dual 2. the audio problems were with dual 1.8Actually, they were also reported on the 2.0 and the single 1.8 as well. Even the single 1.6. Most people just don't notice them.

[alexf]

It amazes me how spoiled everyone is acting. Honestly, who really needs a 3.0 GHz dual processor machine?

In my opinion a 2.4 GHz model at the top end would be more than acceptable...

[mklos]

It amazes me how spoiled everyone is acting. Honestly, who really needs a 3.0 GHz dual processor machine?

In my opinion a 2.4 GHz model at the top end would be more than acceptable...

Yes thats true some people just want bragging rights! On the other hand people who are seriously into Video Editing will really want a dual 3.0 GHz PowerMac G5. I'd just like to have a 1.6 GHz G5. That would more than satisfy my needs.

[djbahdow01]

It amazes me how spoiled everyone is acting. Honestly, who really needs a 3.0 GHz dual processor machine?

In my opinion a 2.4 GHz model at the top end would be more than acceptable...

No matter what comes out when it does i am purchasing the mid level G5 no matter what it is as long as its a dualie. I just need something that will last me for a few years, as i know the rev A G5s will but i don't like to purchase a computer on the first revision. I would like the computer befor i start classes next fall.

[ITMediaCo]

somehow i do not care about 3ghz ... whatever comes i'll get it - i simply have to update my dual g4 450 mhz ... well, people will be "disapointed" - though a 2.4 ghz machine for sure is great !!! especially if you have 8 gb of ram !!! this will scream !!!
.a

Heh, I still have a Dual 450 G4 as well. It works fine but I would love to upgrade. I'm still holding out until Apple releases some updated Cinema displays.

[shadowfax]

Picture this, if you will, in a year and a half:
The eMac and iBook are running PPC 750vx singles at 2.5ghz in the same form factors and with a heat cost of only 12 watts.
PowerBooks have moved to dual processor 750vx at 2.5ghz, while keeping their heat profile as well.
The iMac as an all-in-one is dead. In it's place, there's a three-step consumer mac running dual 970fx chips at 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5 ghz, with limited expansion and a smaller case.
The PowerMac is now running next-generation chips that have been designed from the ground up alongdie their heavier-grade sibling. Dual 980s are under the hood at 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 ghz, accessing DDR2 RAM and providing for the trend Apple has of following emerging markets, like PCI-Extreme and the next revision of IEEE 1394 and 802.11.When Apple puts dual processors in their powerbooks, i'll eat my left lung. after i cook it in my own urine. get real. if you can make a single processor run at 12 watts, putting 2 in will take at least 24 if not more from random overhead. that's a lot of heat for a laptop proc. plus, think about size. powerbooks are small laptops. fitting two CPUs on a single logic board takes loads of space. it's not going to happen. There will be single G5s in the powerbooks, just face it.

[Bigheadache]

When Apple puts dual processors in their powerbooks, i'll eat my left lung. after i cook it in my own urine. get real. if you can make a single processor run at 12 watts, putting 2 in will take at least 24 if not more from random overhead. that's a lot of heat for a laptop proc. plus, think about size. powerbooks are small laptops. fitting two CPUs on a single logic board takes loads of space. it's not going to happen. There will be single G5s in the powerbooks, just face it.

very true, if you ever look a dual CPU logic board you'll see its alot more complex than a normal board. Alot more traces and more densely populated, and thats on a normal ATX size board. I can't imagine them shrinking it that much more to make it fit a powerbook.

[Borg3of5]

Unfortunately, at this point in time any G5 updates that do not involve a 3Ghz processor will suffer greatly in the sales department. Even if they are the best Macs ever they will suffer from the old pre-MacWorld sales slump, with everyone waiting for the bigger and better announcement.

As for the displays, Apple needs a monitor with an adjustable design like this:

http://www.eyegonomic.com/page.dsp?page=133

and the the professional color management like this:

http://www.barco.com/corporate/en/products/product.asp?element=2251



I saw the links to the Eyegonomic website in another thread. Those ARE nice monitors, if I may say so.

[SuperChuck]

It amazes me how spoiled everyone is acting. Honestly, who really needs a 3.0 GHz dual processor machine?

In my opinion a 2.4 GHz model at the top end would be more than acceptable...

I didn't notice anyone acting spoiled. I think that most people just like to get what they are promised.

Of course we don't need a 3 Ghz machine (well, maybe some of us do), but Steve said 3 in under a year. And we're almost there. And 2.4 is not what was promised.

If being excited about getting what Apple promised is acting spoiled, then I'm a royal brat.

Actually, I know I'm a brat regardless, but that is beside the point. ;)

[Bhennies]

I saw the links to the Eyegonomic website in another thread. Those ARE nice monitors, if I may say so.They are amazing- fantastic industrial design! But...they are the most ridiculously overpriced monitors I've ever come across. 4,000 euro for the 24 (23" or 24, can't remember)? Get real. Plus, I called them and they said the monitors aren't recommended for video or color-critical work. What the hell are they for, email and word processing? And we though apple was overpriced.

[Frobozz]

It does seem like a very awkward time. If they release a product, it needs to be the 3 GHz. Otherwise, a lower clocked model would seem to indicate no 3+ GHz models until after the summer--many people would be quite unhappy with that.

I agree. However, I think it seems obvious that 3 GHz Macs, if they do show up by the June-Sept. timeframe, will be staggered. I think we'll see dual 2.5 GHz 970fx PowerMacs in the May timeframe. In late June they will describe the all new 975 based Macs running at 3.0 Ghz, and a ship date of early August. I would assume the new G5 lineup would include a mix of 970fx and 975 G5's.

Seems plausible, yes? Ofcourse I suppose they may just miss the 3 GHz target, too. Nah...

[itsa]

oh so may reasons to wait for the next line!


I WANT TO GIVE YOU THIS CASH APPLE!

[phillymjs]

That's at least four months of 2.4 + GHz. Why hold it back?

Ask the people who bought a Mac IIvx. (http://www.apple-history.com/frames/body.php?page=gallery&model=IIvx) :)

~Philly

[Gyroscope]

I dont care if G5's don't hit 3 ghz any time soon. They probably won't given recent yield problems at IBM's FK plant. Also can't really understand why people are so obsessed with it. Apple needs an update now. Otherwise it' is almost looking like whole initial G4 fiasco (one whole year without single update) 2.4 ghz G5 would be teriffic update and you have to remember that in dual configuration you'd get 800 mhz increase in speed. Thats no slouch by any means. Latest AMD cpu's just recently reached 2.4 ghz and they are wiping floor with almost anything Intel has to offer. Steve should have kept his mouth shut.

[afields]

With all these hardware updates, whats going to happen at WWDC? I'd think they'd save a 3ghz g5 for wwdc.

[Skiniftz]

One unsubstantiated rumor submission claims that PowerMac G5 updates will be seen on May 18th.

Few other hints at PowerMac updates have been reported.
I seem to have heard this one before. Lets see - how does it go - May 18th approaches... arrives... and... passes... with no updates, however on May 19th someone has a "definite feeling" that they will be updated next week.

Face it people there is absolutely no way the RevB G5 is going to be even announced until WWDC, let alone ship. If in the unlikely event it does, I will buy one.

[freddiecable]

I agree! I don't really understand the complaining about CPU...we got the 2 ghz G5 and I guess Apple will release a quicker CPU as soon as they can...even though it has been quite a while now...since the last update. and I agree with you folks arguing that apple could at least lower the price until the new cpu's "surface"

I dont care if G5's don't hit 3 ghz any time soon. They probably won't given recent yield problems at IBM's FK plant. Also can't really understand why people are so obsessed with it. Apple needs an update now. Otherwise it' is almost looking like whole initial G4 fiasco (one whole year without single update) 2.4 ghz G5 would be teriffic update and you have to remember that in dual configuration you'd get 800 mhz increase in speed. Thats no slouch by any means. Latest AMD cpu's just recently reached 2.4 ghz and they are wiping floor with almost anything Intel has to offer. Steve should have kept his mouth shut.

[bertagert]

May 18th is my birthday so I can positively say it won't be on that day. I'm with most on the WWDC release. However, I don't think Apple will be able to give a 3ghz as Steve said. Not his fault. Sometimes things just happen that are out of human control. Shoot an update as early as possible. Even if it only gets to 2.6ghz. At least it would be better than 2ghz.

Second: People that say 3ghz is way too much. Well, I was told that with a 233mhz machine. I still have and use it till this day. However, not much software will run on it at any type of decent speed. So, yes, 3ghz might seem light a lot right now. Give it three or four years and you'll be singing a different tune.

[thatwendigo]

get real. if you can make a single processor run at 12 watts, putting 2 in will take at least 24 if not more from random overhead. that's a lot of heat for a laptop proc. plus, think about size. powerbooks are small laptops. fitting two CPUs on a single logic board takes loads of space. it's not going to happen. There will be single G5s in the powerbooks, just face it.

What's wrong with a processor running at 24 watts? (http://www.silentpcreview.com/article31-page1.html) The Pentium-M "Centrino" at 1.7ghz is running a robust 26-30w when solidly active, then scaling down to 10w when at an idle of 600mhz. This is on a 400mhz FSB (like the 750vx), and typically using PC2700 RAM (which Apple already does).

So, let's extrapolate a moment. A single G5 970fx at 1.8ghz is roughly 22-30w. Instead of having a lower-clock single chip, you could be pumping two higher clocked chips that are (clock-for-clock) competitively specced with the G5 in a lower heat and power profile. A single 750vx runs at 10-15w when going full bore, has power management that scales it down, possesses over twice the RAM bus of the G4, outperforms its predecessor at roughly 35-40% per clock, and is also a full 25% faster than the current G4s to being with.

In short, you get SMP benefits, a high-clock, low-power chip at 2.0ghz and possibly higher (the 750vx is reported to scale at lower power than the G5), and a far better FSB and memory bus than the existing laptops. On top of that, you neither kill the heat nor the battery profile, though you do increase both somewhat, perhaps equal to putting a single G5 under the hood.

I know what I would rather have, and it doesn't end in the number five.

Ask the people who bought a Mac IIvx. (http://www.apple-history.com/frames/body.php?page=gallery&model=IIvx) :

Yep.

Unless Apple wants a repeat of the people whining then the 1.8 was made a dual, only an order of magnitude worse, they're going to roll out all at once with a new line. Bumping, then bumping again in two or three months is just asking for it.

I seem to have heard this one before. Lets see - how does it go - May 18th approaches... arrives... and... passes... with no updates, however on May 19th someone has a "definite feeling" that they will be updated next week.

Actually, this is different. The tone of the rumor is that the update is unlikely, though it's being reported because it would be major if it happened. However, Arn pointed out that there was no reason to believe the source in question. Hence "unconfirmed" in the original notice.

[ssamani]

This makes no sense at all for a number of reasons.
...
4) Apple quietly released the new PB and iBook lines. It is not Apple's style to quietly update major product lines twice in a row, especially when one of them has the widest profit margin of anything on offer. That's what the other guys do.
...

I think you're forgetting last Jan / Feb when Apple released updates to various products every Tuesday for several weeks. I think that's what we're seeing here. eMac, then laptops, then pro software, then iTunes. Next will come the iMac and the PowerMacs and an outside possibility of the iPod getting updated, though I think that will coincide with the global iPod mini release.

For one reason alone iMac and PM updates have to be soon - the eMac SuperDrive is faster than the one on both those models. WWDC is too far off from the eMac release.

Sanj

[Andy B]

Hi,

I'm about to buy a Dual 2gHz G5 for music production. Tripod spoke about Audio Problems with the Dual 1.8, was he talking about external fan noise and is there anything I should be aware of with the Dual 2 gig?

Thanks,

Andy B.
p.s. I've got a Dual 1.25 gHz G4 at the moment at the noise of the fan is INCREDIBLE - someone please tell me that the Dual 2Ghz G5 is nothing like that!

[CmdrLaForge]

The problem is is that the "old" g5's are having lots of problems. I'm waiting for rev. B- I don't care what speed they are- I just want one that's more reliable. For a pro audio guy who needs silence-

Question: do you expect you can do recordings on with a PowerMac G5 in the same room ? I am talking about microphone recorddings (obvious)

Cheers :rolleyes:

[CmdrLaForge]

I seem to have heard this one before. Lets see - how does it go - May 18th approaches... arrives... and... passes... with no updates, however on May 19th someone has a "definite feeling" that they will be updated next week.

Face it people there is absolutely no way the RevB G5 is going to be even announced until WWDC, let alone ship. If in the unlikely event it does, I will buy one.

Second that. Its just a new round of "updates next tuesday!" rumors. Forget it. In the recent past rumors sites had simply no idea whats going on.

[thatwendigo]

eMac, then laptops, then pro software, then iTunes. Next will come the iMac and the PowerMacs and an outside possibility of the iPod getting updated, though I think that will coincide with the global iPod mini release.

You probably ought to move those last two off into the "outside possibility" field, too, unless Apple is planning another round of G4 iMacs. They're not going to blow the marketing opportunity for revealing a product at WWDC, and that's what their two main desktop lines are going to be reserved for. We're already seeing a whole host of new, unexpected things from Apple (xSan? Motion?), so I don't doubt that there will be some major softare announcements. It's just that it would be pretty stupid in a logisitics and pricing sense to roll out PowerMacs now, and then against in August, if they keep the promise about chips.

For one reason alone iMac and PM updates have to be soon - the eMac SuperDrive is faster than the one on both those models. WWDC is too far off from the eMac release.

So? All that says is that Apple has 8x Superdrives in enough quantity that they're moving them across the desktop line. It means nothing in terms of imminent release, because having optical drives doesn't mean that they have the chip supplies to move G5s yet.

[grouse]

May 18th is my birthday so I can positively say it won't be on that day. I'm with most on the WWDC release. However, I don't think Apple will be able to give a 3ghz as Steve said. Not his fault. Sometimes things just happen that are out of human control. Shoot an update as early as possible. Even if it only gets to 2.6ghz. At least it would be better than 2ghz.

Second: People that say 3ghz is way too much. Well, I was told that with a 233mhz machine. I still have and use it till this day. However, not much software will run on it at any type of decent speed. So, yes, 3ghz might seem light a lot right now. Give it three or four years and you'll be singing a different tune.

Except of course that it's my birthday as well on May 18th as well as the pope's if he lives till then

x

[wrldwzrd89]

I seem to have heard this one before. Lets see - how does it go - May 18th approaches... arrives... and... passes... with no updates, however on May 19th someone has a "definite feeling" that they will be updated next week.

Face it people there is absolutely no way the RevB G5 is going to be even announced until WWDC, let alone ship. If in the unlikely event it does, I will buy one.
I couldn't agree more. This seems like just a random G5 update rumor started purely due to lack of rumors on G5 updates recently, with no basis in fact. Therefore, I am NOT expecting G5 updates on May 18.

[denm316]

I will still place my bets on WWDC for new Power Mac Rev's

[dieselg4]

I will still place my bets on WWDC for new Power Mac Rev's

THis just makes sense to me. Apple and Steve get a lot more free press at an event like WWDC than some phooey date like May 18th (no offense to the birthday people, mine ine May 12th!)

[numediaman]

Hi,

I'm about to buy a Dual 2gHz G5 for music production. Tripod spoke about Audio Problems with the Dual 1.8, was he talking about external fan noise and is there anything I should be aware of with the Dual 2 gig?

Thanks,

Andy B.

I strongly recommend spending time on the Apple discussion boards -- the G5 area. There are several issues with the G5s, but the Power Supply is the biggest issue -- though freezes, fan noise and sound output issues are common, as well.

Once you are thoroughly familiar with whatever can arise you should be ready to jump in.

I do a lot of page layot and photo work -- and the G5 is ready now. But I also do some audio and video work -- so at this point I'd rather wait for a rev. b than spend 3 grand on a machine I might end up kicking across the room.

[iReilly]

I predict that new Powermacs will appear sooner than that. Probably this coming Tuesday. Maybe even tomorrow. My reason? Just bought a dual 1.8 (was holding out for SOOO long but need it now for a project :-/) So thank me when new ones come out! :)

Got a decent deal, though -- $1999 (it's new, not refurb) -- only regret is not buying it earlier... hope I don't have fan noises, I'll report back with any problems, but so far the thing is awesome -- just ordered 2 gigs of ram so once that goes in it'll be even better (but even with only 512 mb it's still quite the speedy machine)...


James... How did you get the base price tag of $1999? That is a very reasonable price and I may want to purchase today if I can get that deal too! :p

thanks,

iReilly

=================================
Dell 3.2 but waiting with cash for my G5...

[otter-boy]

It amazes me how spoiled everyone is acting. Honestly, who really needs a 3.0 GHz dual processor machine?

In my opinion a 2.4 GHz model at the top end would be more than acceptable...

A 2.4 GHz would be more than acceptable (as in more than is available now), but it would not be near matching the 3 GHz that Jobs promised by the end of the summer. Since he promised 3 GHz, people will expect it and not be content with a machine operating at 80 percent of that speed.

[aggemam]

Plus, I called them and they said the monitors aren't recommended for video or color-critical work. What the hell are they for, email and word processing? And we though apple was overpriced.

Eyegonomic monitors are essentially Samsung LCDs with a nicer design. Isn't that the same Apple does?

[Borg3of5]

Eyegonomic monitors are essentially Samsung LCDs with a nicer design. Isn't that the same Apple does?

I was under the same impression. Although Leo Laporte from TechTV's "The Screensavers" said, that he knew for a fact that Apple subcontracts from LG for their LCD's. Apple just slaps on the clear plastic.

As soon as I heard that, I scoured the Internet for LG's website, and found out that their 23"+ display is $3,000. That is why I think that by buying a G5 now, and a 23" HD CD, one is getting a great deal, especially in light of the Brilliant Savings promotion.

[shadowfax]

What's wrong with a processor running at 24 watts? (http://www.silentpcreview.com/article31-page1.html) The Pentium-M "Centrino" at 1.7ghz is running a robust 26-30w when solidly active, then scaling down to 10w when at an idle of 600mhz. This is on a 400mhz FSB (like the 750vx), and typically using PC2700 RAM (which Apple already does).

So, let's extrapolate a moment. A single G5 970fx at 1.8ghz is roughly 22-30w. Instead of having a lower-clock single chip, you could be pumping two higher clocked chips that are (clock-for-clock) competitively specced with the G5 in a lower heat and power profile. A single 750vx runs at 10-15w when going full bore, has power management that scales it down, possesses over twice the RAM bus of the G4, outperforms its predecessor at roughly 35-40% per clock, and is also a full 25% faster than the current G4s to being with.

In short, you get SMP benefits, a high-clock, low-power chip at 2.0ghz and possibly higher (the 750vx is reported to scale at lower power than the G5), and a far better FSB and memory bus than the existing laptops. On top of that, you neither kill the heat nor the battery profile, though you do increase both somewhat, perhaps equal to putting a single G5 under the hood.

I know what I would rather have, and it doesn't end in the number five.I never said there wouldn't be advantages to it, but you're still dead wrong if you think it will ever happen. there's still the physical space issue--apple will not put 2 CPUs on a logic board that small--there just isn't room, even with a small chip like that. another issue is that going back to a G3, even if you got better performance, is a marketing disaster.

IBM is working on making the 970s run cooler and faster. they're making headway, although they really screwed up on the latest batch. before long they will have a feasible chip for a laptop, and that is what apple will use.

you should know that people have always been clamoring for DP powerbooks. i have heard it over and over. there's a reason they're always page 2 type rumors.

[iriejedi]

I've been watching the referb list daily and the G5s come and go quickly (but to date ALL are still 10.2.7 OS machines (with free update 10.3 CD)... BUT what I have noticed is that the 4X DVD media has been in the close out section for a long, long time.... this to me states that when they DO update the G5 it will use 8X DVD drives.

THe G5 rumors have been so weak lately - but I wanted to but in my 2 cents!
just to pass the time

:cool:

Irie

You probably ought to move those last two off into the "outside possibility" field, too, unless Apple is planning another round of G4 iMacs. They're not going to blow the marketing opportunity for revealing a product at WWDC, and that's what their two main desktop lines are going to be reserved for. We're already seeing a whole host of new, unexpected things from Apple (xSan? Motion?), so I don't doubt that there will be some major softare announcements. It's just that it would be pretty stupid in a logisitics and pricing sense to roll out PowerMacs now, and then against in August, if they keep the promise about chips.



So? All that says is that Apple has 8x Superdrives in enough quantity that they're moving them across the desktop line. It means nothing in terms of imminent release, because having optical drives doesn't mean that they have the chip supplies to move G5s yet.

[StudioGuy]

I strongly recommend spending time on the Apple discussion boards -- the G5 area. There are several issues with the G5s, but the Power Supply is the biggest issue -- though freezes, fan noise and sound output issues are common, as well.

Once you are thoroughly familiar with whatever can arise you should be ready to jump in.

I do a lot of page layot and photo work -- and the G5 is ready now. But I also do some audio and video work -- so at this point I'd rather wait for a rev. b than spend 3 grand on a machine I might end up kicking across the room.

Good advice for Andy B! I am also waiting to see what OTHER folks say about the next gen of G5s, since folks with Digi002 systems for example had major noise coming out their outputs, possibly caused by the firewire connection., etc. No need to reiterate here, but studio folks, research first! People have gotten around the issues with additional external hardware, however, and other processor settings. It's more than just the fan noise...

[thatwendigo]

I never said there wouldn't be advantages to it, but you're still dead wrong if you think it will ever happen. there's still the physical space issue--apple will not put 2 CPUs on a logic board that small--there just isn't room, even with a small chip like that. another issue is that going back to a G3, even if you got better performance, is a marketing disaster.

Once again, if anyone in the industry would do something this revolutionary, it's Apple. I have faith that they could do it, even if it's only in the larger designs like the 15 and 17-inch powerbooks. Oh, and you say that nobody (http://www.intel.com/products/mobiletechnology/index.htm?iid=ipp_note+mobiletech&) would ever use an older processor that's been updated with new technology? Funny, but it looks like a very popular processor on the other side of the fence is a previous-generation that's been heavily redesigned to have certain features.

IBM is working on making the 970s run cooler and faster. they're making headway, although they really screwed up on the latest batch. before long they will have a feasible chip for a laptop, and that is what apple will use.

They already have one, and it's called the 750vx. Lower power per clock, lower FSB, higher performance than the G4... Sounds like a real knockout for a laptop chip.

you should know that people have always been clamoring for DP powerbooks. i have heard it over and over. there's a reason they're always page 2 type rumors.

Market forces weren't strong enough to make it a reality. They are now.

I've been watching the referb list daily and the G5s come and go quickly (but to date ALL are still 10.2.7 OS machines (with free update 10.3 CD)... BUT what I have noticed is that the 4X DVD media has been in the close out section for a long, long time.... this to me states that when they DO update the G5 it will use 8X DVD drives.

I tried that route, but it turned out to be about a month or two off on the powerbook refreshes. I fully believe we'll see 8x across the board in desktop machines at the next revision, and that's not what I was arguing against. I just don't think that we're going to see G5s before WWDC.

It doesn't make sense at this point.

[shadowfax]

Once again, if anyone in the industry would do something this revolutionary, it's Apple. I have faith that they could do it, even if it's only in the larger designs like the 15 and 17-inch powerbooks. Oh, and you say that nobody (http://www.intel.com/products/mobiletechnology/index.htm?iid=ipp_note+mobiletech&) would ever use an older processor that's been updated with new technology? Funny, but it looks like a very popular processor on the other side of the fence is a previous-generation that's been heavily redesigned to have certain features.What are you talking about? they just used the name Centrino there. It still uses the Pentium M processor, one of intel's most innovative NEW processors, ever. sure it's BASED on old stuff, just like the G5 is BASED on PPC architecture present in the G3 and G4... but no, you're mistaken if you think that's just a slightly revamped centrino processor in those notebooks. Furthermore, I'm not saying that no one would ever revert to an old processor, never said that. Just not apple.They already have one, and it's called the 750vx. Lower power per clock, lower FSB, higher performance than the G4... Sounds like a real knockout for a laptop chip.maybe so... but why would they waste ALL that work to make a whole new laptop architecture to house the new 750vx and it's snazzy system bus when they are ultimately and soon going to need to put better, cooler running 970 processors in when they arrive in around a year or 18 months? it's foolish, just foolish.Market forces weren't strong enough to make it a reality. They are now.There you go talking about market forces... there's more to technology than market forces for one thing, and for another thing, no, they aren't. There is not one single popular laptop anywhere that has 2 CPUs. we will not see dual processors in laptops till they put dual core single CPUs in them, which is probably 2-3 years around the corner. market forces can't make you fit a camel in a needle's eye... and there's really no need to.

[thatwendigo]

What are you talking about? they just used the name Centrino there. It still uses the Pentium M processor, one of intel's most innovative NEW processors, ever. sure it's BASED on old stuff, just like the G5 is BASED on PPC architecture present in the G3 and G4... but no, you're mistaken if you think that's just a slightly revamped centrino processor in those notebooks.

I think it's my turn to ask what you're talking about here, shadow.

Ars (http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/pentium-m/pentium-m-1.html) talks about the Pentium-M "Centrino" processor, which I think you're getting confused with the Celeron when you say "you're mistaken if you think that's just a slightly revamped centrino processor in those notebooks."

To put it in short, sweet terms:
The Centrino is a P6-architecture chip (the line that drove everything from the Pentium Pro to the Pentium-III) with enhancement from P7-architechture (the Pentium-IV). To quote the reviewer at Ars, "Intel's standard line about the PM is that they took what they learned from the P4 and mixed it with the PIII, and that's true in a certain sense. But the best way to look at the PM is as an evolutionary advance of the P6 microarchitecture."

The Centrino is a modified Penitum-3, with added features and redesigned core, intended as a low-power, scalable mobile chip. It performs as well as the mainstream desktop chips on most applications because of the new additions you were loosely referring to. However, so does the 750vx.

Do you get it now?

Furthermore, I'm not saying that no one would ever revert to an old processor, never said that. Just not apple.maybe so... but why would they waste ALL that work to make a whole new laptop architecture to house the new 750vx and it's snazzy system bus when they are ultimately and soon going to need to put better, cooler running 970 processors in when they arrive in around a year or 18 months?

:confused:

Who says that they "need" to put a 970 in the laptops at all? If anything, a lower-power solution is definitely the way to go, and it's almost always a better solution to take the Centrino route (start low-power and build up) than it is to try to force a desktop solution into the laptop. This is why the Centrino even exists, really... Apple was killing the PC market on low-power, small formfactor laptops because the P4-M is a power hog, and so is the Athlon-M and Athlon 64-M.

As it stands now, the Centrino is competitive in most areas, better in some, and shows that "backwards" isn't always bad. Hell, even Intel ate crow and had to start trying to dispell the megahertz myth.

So, once more... Why is the 970 necessary in a laptop?

it's foolish, just foolish.There you go talking about market forces... there's more to technology than market forces for one thing,

Incorrect. In technology, the only thing that really matters is market forces. You can have the best product in the world, but that doesn't mean you'll rule the roost.

Take a look at Apple, if you don't believe me.

and for another thing, no, they aren't. There is not one single popular laptop anywhere that has 2 CPUs.

Five years ago, there wasn't a single computer that used USB. Two years ago, there wasn't a mac that was nearly as across-the-board competitive with the PC world as the G5. Last year, there wasn't a mac that ran at 2.0ghz.

What will this year bring?

we will not see dual processors in laptops till they put dual core single CPUs in them, which is probably 2-3 years around the corner.

680k ought to be enough for everyone? That nobody's done it yet doesn't mean it can't be or won't be done soon.

market forces can't make you fit a camel in a needle's eye... and there's really no need to.

Oh, like the G5? It's not a laptop chip, was never intended to be a laptop chip, and you're trying to "fit a camel in a needle's eye" when you insist that big, sweaty dromedary should go in that tiny space.

Why not thread it with something intended for the job?

[gopher]

I disagree. They should release new models as soon as they are ready. I suspect the 3 GHz models will not be ready before the end of summer (though they might be announced at WWDC), so if we can get a bump now, let's do it. That's at least four months of 2.4 + GHz. Why hold it back?

Releasing new products as soon as they are "ready" is a recipe for disaster. Don't rush it Apple. Iron out the bugs before people start complaining of so many lemons you have change your name to Lemon.

[ThomasJefferson]

After waiting for the Powerbook updates for so long, I am now immune from getting my hopes up. :rolleyes:
.
.
You will not tempt me with the promises of hardware updates.
Really. :confused:
.
.
I wonder if it could be the 3 GHz? :D

[ERayFree]

.

[duany]

One significance to the May 18th date, that I don't think people know about is a printing industry show in germany called drupa. It happens every for years and is a hugh event for anyone even remotely connected to printing industry. Companies plan entire product development cycles around this event. I know my company has.

[Blackheart]

After waiting for the Powerbook updates for so long, I am now immune from getting my hopes up. :rolleyes:
.
.
You will not tempt me with the promises of hardware updates.
Really. :confused:
.
.
I wonder if it could be the 3 GHz? :D

Yeah, I've been waiting for PM updates since MWSF 2004 in January and still nothing. Every other tuesday is rumored to be a "magic steve day." But instead, nothing shows. I quit believing the rumors by now.

[PowerMacMan]

Yeah, I've been waiting for PM updates since MWSF 2004 in January and still nothing. Every other tuesday is rumored to be a "magic steve day." But instead, nothing shows. I quit believing the rumors by now.

I'm so depressed... Need G5 3Ghz...

Words of inspiration?

[centauratlas]

Of course we don't need a 3 Ghz machine (well, maybe some of us do), but Steve said 3 in under a year. [/B]


:) When I got my Apple ][+, I got an extra 16K card with it. The sales guy said "what are you going to do with all that extra memory?" You won't need more than 32K let alone the 48K it comes with, let alone another 16K. That was a 1mhz machine. :) Oh and you could do disc ][ or tape. Disc was such a luxury. When we got a Trustor 10MB hard drive drive, that was nirvana.

No matter how much space in memory or on the drive and no matter how fast, you get new uses which use it all up.

I just got my 2GB RAM, 1.5ghz, 80GB drive 17 inch Powerbook today. 20 years from now we'll be saying: "We made do with 1.5ghz and 2GB RAM, and only 80GB of storage." "I remember when Apple was going to introduce their 3ghz machine and people were saying 'no one needs 3ghz'."

Ha ha ha. I am just pointing out how perspectives change...and boy do they change, but gradually enough so you don't really notice it until you look at what was state of the art 5 years or 10 years or 20 years before.

And there are plenty of things that dual 3GHz processors would be good for, we just aren't used to them yet. For example, could you have a snappy, graphical interface on a 1mhz 6502 (in the Apple ][, ][+)? Probably not. But the 68000 (in the 128k Mac) could handle one, but nothing like what we have now - it was black and white, small display, uni-Finder etc.

Same here, perhaps an improved voice interface or other improvements that will only be possible when we have even more CPU cycles to burn. Just like iMovie wasn't possible pre-PowerPC. Ditto for iDVD. Extra power means new applications.

I guess the point is that just because the current interface metaphor doesn't require it doesn't mean we won't have something better that does.

:)

[centauratlas]

My bet is that there will be a slight speed bump with the addition of faster superdrives. It'll be to the speeds that are as fast as IBM can reliably make them quantity. E.g. probably 2.4 (perhaps 2.5 if we're lucky), 2.2 and 2.0. That will be sooner rather than later, but probably WWDC or before.

Then at the end of the summer (meeting his promise of September 2003, which revised his June 2003 "1 year" to be "1 year from Sept 2003's shipping of the G5") they'll do another bump even if they are shipping "in 6 to 8 weeks" meaning shipping in 8 to 10 weeks in any quantity. They might even just do: 3.0 (shipping 6-8 weeks), 2.6 (immediately) and 2.4 (immediately).

Apple knew last Sept that there was no way they'd hit 3.0 by June 2004 so Steve revised his statement to say "end of summer 2004" for 3ghz- e.g. late September.

Waiting from June 2003 to Sept 2004 to announce an update (besides the dual 1.8 or whatever) would be *way* out of character for Apple. That is 13 months, PLUS they'd have another 1-3 months to ship them. That would total 14 to 16 months which is so far out of the normal range that it is highly unlikely.

They'll do something between now and WWDC for sure. And it will be in the 2.4-2.2-2.0 area.

[wdlove]

Releasing new products as soon as they are "ready" is a recipe for disaster. Don't rush it Apple. Iron out the bugs before people start complaining of so many lemons you have change your name to Lemon.

I agree with you gopher, well said. ;) That seems to be exactly the reason why the wait has been over six months. You should respect Steve's decision on waiting. I still think that hew will not disappoint us.

[shadowfax]

I think it's my turn to ask what you're talking about here, shadow.

Ars (http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/pentium-m/pentium-m-1.html) talks about the Pentium-M "Centrino" processor, which I think you're getting confused with the Celeron when you say "you're mistaken if you think that's just a slightly revamped centrino processor in those notebooks."

To put it in short, sweet terms:
The Centrino is a P6-architecture chip (the line that drove everything from the Pentium Pro to the Pentium-III) with enhancement from P7-architechture (the Pentium-IV). To quote the reviewer at Ars, "Intel's standard line about the PM is that they took what they learned from the P4 and mixed it with the PIII, and that's true in a certain sense. But the best way to look at the PM is as an evolutionary advance of the P6 microarchitecture."

The Centrino is a modified Penitum-3, with added features and redesigned core, intended as a low-power, scalable mobile chip. It performs as well as the mainstream desktop chips on most applications because of the new additions you were loosely referring to. However, so does the 750vx.

Do you get it now?yes, damn intel and their stupid words, i confused Celeron and Centrino again. i think your point is still moot though. the M is based off the P3, but it's still got an assload of improvements that make it a very very different processor. the reason that intel reverted back to the P3 "philosophy" if you will is much more because the pentium 4 was a very misguided idea for a processor. you can't take it much further than they are, now up around 100 watts and what not.
Who says that they "need" to put a 970 in the laptops at all? If anything, a lower-power solution is definitely the way to go, and it's almost always a better solution to take the Centrino route (start low-power and build up) than it is to try to force a desktop solution into the laptop. This is why the Centrino even exists, really... Apple was killing the PC market on low-power, small formfactor laptops because the P4-M is a power hog, and so is the Athlon-M and Athlon 64-M.When I say 970, i don't mean the one that you'll find in the Powermac. i am talking about future revisions wherein better power consumption will be a feature. IBM is committed to making the 970 a low power processor. they are developing power saving technologies and putting it on a smaller process already. That is the low power solution apple will use. Intel had to get centrino in because they were making 70+ watt processors in laptops. Apple does not have this problem.As it stands now, the Centrino is competitive in most areas, better in some, and shows that "backwards" isn't always bad. Hell, even Intel ate crow and had to start trying to dispell the megahertz myth.It doesn't show that backwards isn't always bad. it's a totally new processor. it's based on some older technology, but make no mistake that it is a very, very different processor. it's not called the Pentium 3M. it's the Pentium M.So, once more... Why is the 970 necessary in a laptop?read forum posts online. talk to powerbook users. everyone wants a G5 powerbook. that's why it's necessary. those are the market forces you're talking about.Incorrect. In technology, the only thing that really matters is market forces. You can have the best product in the world, but that doesn't mean you'll rule the roost.of course the market can ******* you over if you have an existing product, but market forces can't conjure new things into existence.Take a look at Apple, if you don't believe me.I see apple. they pioneer new markets, but jobs very very very very often refused to enter markets that would seem to be very doable: think of Newton, for a nice example. 680k ought to be enough for everyone? That nobody's done it yet doesn't mean it can't be or won't be done soon.very nice altruism!Oh, like the G5? It's not a laptop chip, was never intended to be a laptop chip, and you're trying to "fit a camel in a needle's eye" when you insist that big, sweaty dromedary should go in that tiny space. Why not thread it with something intended for the job?The 750vx is not a laptop chip either. the 970 isn't even intended as a desktop chip. it's supposed to go in Blade servers and things like that. the G3 itself is a chip for imbedded devices like switches. why put that in a laptop? it's not specifically designed for one!

surprise! blad servers, like imbedded devices, use passive cooling. they have to have very low power chips. that's why the 750vx is ideal for a laptop. that's why the 970 will be before too long. that's why apple is going to hang onto the G4 and save their design money till they can spend it on making a G5 laptop that everyone wants, rather than making a dual processor laptop that would be schnazzy, but would still ultimately require them to redesign the powerbook yet again in a short period of time when the 970s become much better for laptops. then when we get Power5 derivatives in, maybe we'll have dual core CPUs. that's when we'll see "dual processor" laptops.

[Blackheart]

Then at the end of the summer (meeting his promise of September 2003, which revised his June 2003 "1 year" to be "1 year from Sept 2003's shipping of the G5") they'll do another bump even if they are shipping "in 6 to 8 weeks" meaning shipping in 8 to 10 weeks in any quantity. They might even just do: 3.0 (shipping 6-8 weeks), 2.6 (immediately) and 2.4 (immediately).

Apple knew last Sept that there was no way they'd hit 3.0 by June 2004 so Steve revised his statement to say "end of summer 2004" for 3ghz- e.g. late September.


When did he revise his statement? Because i distinctly remember jobs saying at WWDC 2003 "Within 12 months". That means June-June, not "whenever we ship those damn boxes till another 12 months".

Sorry if I sound annoyed but I'm frustrated about Apple's "pu55y-footing" about the subject and am starting to doubt their ability to fulfill the 3GHz promise.

[centauratlas]

When did he revise his statement? Because i distinctly remember jobs saying at WWDC 2003 "Within 12 months". That means June-June, not "whenever we ship those damn boxes till another 12 months".


I've posted something similar about a dozen times, but here it is again:
:)

Steve did indeed say "within twelve months" at WWDC (June 23, 2003). On June 23, 2003 he also said "we're at 2ghz now" when they really weren't at 2ghz until Sept. But, then he revised it at the G5 shipping and said "by the end of next summer" and that was on September 16, 2003.

In short, what he said was two things at two times (June 23, and Sept 16, 2003):
"We've committed before the end of next summer" to get the Power Mac G5 to 3GHz. That was September 16, 2003, see links below. "End of Summer" is roughly Sept 21-22, 2004. June 23, 2003, he said it would be at "3Ghz within 12 months."

It was never 100% clear if he meant 12 months from then or 12 months from release. However, given his Sept 2003 statements, and the fact that he said "we are at 2Ghz today", I think it meant from release. Clearly they were *not* at 2GHz in June 2003, they were announcing shipments of 2GHz coming in August-September. Anyway, he revised it to say "end of summer [2004]" in Sept of 2003.

June 23, links:
(http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/06/23/keynote/index.php?redirect=1082291566000 http://www.macrumors.com/wwdc2003.html)

Sept 16 links:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/09/16/liveupdate/index.php?redirect=1082291467000
and:
http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/16/appleexpo2
and:
http://www.macworld.com/2003/09/features/powermacg5nextgeneration/

[mattmack]

One unsubstantiated rumor submission claims that PowerMac G5 updates will be seen on May 18th.

Few other hints at PowerMac updates have been reported.
Wow that's a nice birthday present for me :D

[ddtlm]

thatwendigo:

I definately agree with shadowfax on the G5 vs dual G4 laptop debate.

A single 750vx runs at 10-15w when going full bore, has power management that scales it down, possesses over twice the RAM bus of the G4, outperforms its predecessor at roughly 35-40% per clock, and is also a full 25% faster than the current G4s to being with.
Could you point out someplace where IBM has confirmed this 750vx? I can only find rumor sites talking about it, but perhaps Google is just being dense. In the absence of confirmation, to me this looks like just a daydream made up by people who thought IBM could do no wrong.

Who says that they "need" to put a 970 in the laptops at all? If anything, a lower-power solution is definitely the way to go, and it's almost always a better solution to take the Centrino route (start low-power and build up) than it is to try to force a desktop solution into the laptop.
Unlike Intel, IBM cannot afford to agressively develop two separate processor lines for these two markets (mobile, not mobile). I do not expect to see any significant upwards development of the 750 line, partly because the target market is small, partly because the 970 can fill in parts of that market, and partly because Moto has perfectly fine products established in that market already.

Additionally, the 400mhz DDR FSB you say the 750vx has would be exactly what Apple doesn't want: another FSB to design chipsets for.

[rdowns]

Mr. MacPhisto posted this in the Motorola Roadmap thread:

Problem is that the people I know at IBM have said the VX project was dumped by Apple in January - due to IBM not being able to ramp up 90nm and the new offerings Motorola would have before the VX would see production (pushed back to late summer with the delays). The VX project is dead. IBM and Apple are working on a SOC project, but that may also be cancelled before the year is out.

[ddtlm]

rdowns:

Yeah but I actually don't believe it ever existed. :) Seems to me that someone probably made it up, then someone went ahead and "cancelled" their fiction. Everything I've read about the 750vx just doesn't make sense, reads like someone's wishful thinking, instead of a business plan. In my hunble opinion, it grew out of Moto-hating, out of G3-worship, and probably to some degree out of boredom. :D

[.a]

One significance to the May 18th date, that I don't think people know about is a printing industry show in germany called drupa. It happens every for years and is a hugh event for anyone even remotely connected to printing industry. Companies plan entire product development cycles around this event. I know my company has.

so, that's very interesting. though it would be something new to apple if they would release new powermacs for a european event (well okay, they did before with other products @ expo paris but not with that big impact).
for me, apple looks like a company that pushes its market in the usa extra strong and kind of forget the rest of the world. very sad ...

.a swiss guy waiting for its g5 rev.b

[ssamani]

So? All that says is that Apple has 8x Superdrives in enough quantity that they're moving them across the desktop line. It means nothing in terms of imminent release, because having optical drives doesn't mean that they have the chip supplies to move G5s yet.

I have to disagree. How often does Apple put higher spec components in their lower spec machines? Also if you hang out in these forums, everyone always asks for faster this and faster that, but I've never heard a call for faster SuperDrives in the eMac. They could have left a 4x one in the eMac updates and no-one who have batted an eyelid. You can burn a DVD faster on an eMac right now than you could an iMac and the specs, apart from the monitor are not that far apart. The already poor iMac sales will get completely hammered if it isn't updated soon. If iMac updates weren't imminent (and I didn't suggest that it would be an iMac G5, it could just be a G4 upgrade) then I don't see why Apple wouldn't hold off the eMac update or just include a lower spec SuperDrive.

The least I expect is an imminent iMac G4 update including 8x SuperDrives and a simple switch to 8x SuperDrives in the PM's, however I suspect it will be more and hope for the sake of their poor desktop sales that there will be an iMac G5 which they need and can do much more quickly than a PB G5.

[thatwendigo]

yes, damn intel and their stupid words, i confused Celeron and Centrino again. i think your point is still moot though. the M is based off the P3, but it's still got an assload of improvements that make it a very very different processor. the reason that intel reverted back to the P3 "philosophy" if you will is much more because the pentium 4 was a very misguided idea for a processor.

Incorrect.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_M) says:
The Pentium M represents a radical departure for Intel, as it is not a low-power version of the desktop-oriented Pentium 4, but instead a heavily modified version of the Pentium III design (itself a modified form of the Pentium Pro. It is optimised for power efficiency, a vital characteristic for extending notebook computer battery life. Running with very low average power consumption and much less heat output than desktop processors, the Pentium M runs at a lower clock speed than the contemporary Pentium 4 desktop processor series, but with similar performance (e.g. a 1.6 GHz Pentium M can typically attain or exceed the performance of a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4).

Essentially, the Pentium M couples the execution core of the Pentium III with a Pentium 4 compatible bus interface, an improved instruction decoding/issuing front end, and twice as much cache: 64k primary (as compared to the PIII's 32k, the P4's 8k or the Athlon's 128k) and 1MB secondary (as compared with the 256k or 512k in the PIII, P4 and Athlon). The usually power-hungry secondary cache uses an innovative access method to avoid switching on any parts of it not actually being accessed. Other power saving methods include dynamically variable clock frequency and core voltage, allowing the Pentium M to run slowly (typically 600 MHz) when the system is idle in order to conserve energy.

It's the Penitum-3 core with a different frontend and a reworked cache.

you can't take it much further than they are, now up around 100 watts and what not.

Hence Dothan, or Centrino Revised.

When I say 970, i don't mean the one that you'll find in the Powermac. i am talking about future revisions wherein better power consumption will be a feature.

Then you're talking about something and using the wrong name for it. The PowerPC 970 is a distinct chip, as is the 970fx, and any further revisions will also be altered. There are strong rumors that we'll see a leap to the Power5 chips by next summer. Are those "970s," too?

IBM is committed to making the 970 a low power processor. they are developing power saving technologies and putting it on a smaller process already. That is the low power solution apple will use.[quote]

So we're waiting a while, then, until some magical innovation drops the 970 or the 970fx to 12-20 watts, brings the bus heat down equal with the G4's 133-167mhz, and also doesn't eat the battery alive. The G5 is best in dual processor configurations, and the single isn't a whole lot better than the G4 without the code being more optimized for it.

[quote]Intel had to get centrino in because they were making 70+ watt processors in laptops. Apple does not have this problem.

Which is so unlike the 50watts that a 2.0 970 originally put out! :rolleyes:

The G5 is faster the the G4, and it's a nice design because it scales more easily, but don't think it's the wonder chip. It has issues, just like any other design, and one of those is heat output. For a PowerPC, it's pretty toasty.

It doesn't show that backwards isn't always bad. it's a totally new processor. it's based on some older technology, but make no mistake that it is a very, very different processor. it's not called the Pentium 3M. it's the Pentium M.

See above. I could call a G3 the G6, but that doesn't mean it's new, even if it were the 750vx and had similar improvements to the Centrino (which is actually not a bad comparison).

read forum posts online. talk to powerbook users. everyone wants a G5 powerbook. that's why it's necessary. those are the market forces you're talking about.

Firstly, it's irrelevant that "everyone" wants a G5 if it can't be done with the current standards at Apple. Also, most of the G5 fever is coming from people who don't really understand the differences at all, and who aren't really qualified to be saying what will and won't make their computer faster. Yes, it's a newer design, but it also chews power like no tomorrow. Those desktops have 600w power supplies, heat pipes on the ASIC, and even the 970fx 2.0ghz chips are still pulling 30-40w.

Secondly, those are not the market forces I'm talking about. I mean things like supply-side issues, economies of scale, and the need for Apple to find a cost-effective solution to the problem of Intel having stepped up and provided a halfway decent alternative for people who want light, fast, and power-efficient laptops.

I see apple. they pioneer new markets, but jobs very very very very often refused to enter markets that would seem to be very doable: think of Newton, for a nice example.

The Newton was killed around the rise of Palm, who has since been supplanted by other companies in many senses. Apple knows better than to compete in the lowend markets, because other people can always do things cheaper.

very nice altruism!The 750vx is not a laptop chip either. the 970 isn't even intended as a desktop chip. it's supposed to go in Blade servers and things like that. the G3 itself is a chip for imbedded devices like switches. why put that in a laptop? it's not specifically designed for one!

The 750vx, because of its increase in performance and price efficiency over the G4, makes a better choice than the hotter, more technologically demanding 970 or 970fx. For the kinds of laptops Apple makes, heat is the biggest concern, followed shortly after by battery draw, and both are answered better right now by the 750vx than the 970 or its derivatives.

This could change, but it hasn't yet.

that's why apple is going to hang onto the G4 and save their design money till they can spend it on making a G5 laptop that everyone wants, rather than making a dual processor laptop that would be schnazzy, but would still ultimately require them to redesign the powerbook yet again in a short period of time when the 970s become much better for laptops. then when we get Power5 derivatives in, maybe we'll have dual core CPUs. that's when we'll see "dual processor" laptops.

Please explain... How is a single G5 better than a dual processor machine that outperforms the previous duals? The G4 single 1.5ghz nearly matches the single G5 1.6ghz in some tasks, and the 750vx would be a full 25% higher clock on both of its processors. Start at the numbers for Final Cut renders (http://www.barefeats.com/fcp4.html) that BareFeats published recently. A single 1.6 G5 is only 71% of the performance of a dual G4 1.42ghz, and the single 1.8 is 86% of the same processor. Now, expand the performance figures by an additional 25% (on FCP, it looks like the scale is roughly linear) for the extra clock, and then another 30% for clock-over-clock improvements. The result? A number that beats (362) the dual 2.0ghz G5 (514), without even factoring in that the faster RAM that the chip will be accessing.

To be fair, let's take 20% off of those numbers just to reflect design compromises in laptops and power management. You still get a very respectable result (523), which puts the portable on par with the desktops right now. What does a single 1.6 or 1.8 get on the same test? Respectively, they're 1123 and 938.

To go off in a different direction... Let's say that Freescale releases the e600 dual-cores. For the sake of argument, let's also say that they linearly scale and have no extra performance enhancements. That would mean the dual-core 2.0ghz e600 would pull down a respectable score of 562, which is still on par with the current top of the line desktops.

So, I still ask... Why a single processor laptop, if low-power duals could do so much more?

[thatwendigo]

Broken into two posts, because it wouldn't let me make it all one unit.

I definately agree with shadowfax on the G5 vs dual G4 laptop debate.

Interesting.

Where did I say anything about a dual G4?

Could you point out someplace where IBM has confirmed this 750vx? I can only find rumor sites talking about it, but perhaps Google is just being dense. In the absence of confirmation, to me this looks like just a daydream made up by people who thought IBM could do no wrong.

Kind of like the Motorola "roadmap" that claims all kinds of things that they've historically been unable or unwilling to deliver?

Unlike Intel, IBM cannot afford to agressively develop two separate processor lines for these two markets (mobile, not mobile).

2003 Revenues:
IBM $89,131,000,000
Intel $30,100,000,000

2003 Net Income:
IBM $7,584,000,000
Intel $3,100,000,000

Who doesn't have what?

I do not expect to see any significant upwards development of the 750 line, partly because the target market is small, partly because the 970 can fill in parts of that market, and partly because Moto has perfectly fine products established in that market already.

Ah, right... So the most successful PC chipmaker shouldn't have developed the Centrino, because the Penitum4-Mobile could fill in the laptop market? IBM looks to be getting serious about leveraging the PowerPC, and not just as an embedded processor as it's traditionally been.

Additionally, the 400mhz DDR FSB you say the 750vx has would be exactly what Apple doesn't want: another FSB to design chipsets for.

That makes absolutely no sense. Technology advances, things get faster, and you need to design around them. It wouldn't be another FSB, so much as the one that would supplant the one that's choking the G4 as it stands. If you rid yourself of a chip in favor of another, then you merely replace its needs with the newer ones.

Besides... Moving the G5 to the powerbook means a bus redesign, too. How is this at all relevant?

Mr. MacPhisto posted this in the Motorola Roadmap thread:

Problem is that the people I know at IBM have said the VX project was dumped by Apple in January - due to IBM not being able to ramp up 90nm and the new offerings Motorola would have before the VX would see production (pushed back to late summer with the delays). The VX project is dead. IBM and Apple are working on a SOC project, but that may also be cancelled before the year is out.

Hey, rdowns... What makes that any more credible than the rumors that the 750vx exists? Does MacPhisto have a record of reliable IBM information that would make him a good source, or is this just speculation, like what the rest of us are tossing around?

[rdowns]

Hey, rdowns... What makes that any more credible than the rumors that the 750vx exists? Does MacPhisto have a record of reliable IBM information that would make him a good source, or is this just speculation, like what the rest of us are tossing around?

Not a damn thing. It is no more credible than the mythical 750vx even existing.

[RandomDeadHead]

we will not see dual processors in laptops till they put dual core single CPUs in them, which is probably 2-3 years around the corner. market forces can't make you fit a camel in a needle's eye... and there's really no need to.

I beg to differ, I would give my left nut for a dual processor 17 inch PB, G4, G5, doesn't matter to me, just give me a second cpu.

Ahh, photoshoping while on the toilet, that would be the life!:p

Also, the other one thing, their will be NO new powermacs before WWDC, cuz Mr. Charlie told me so.

[Patmian212]

Honestly i dont see new g5's before wwdc and i got a frien at apple consulting who said they will be ready in mid may but wont be announced until wwdc. He also said there might be a G5 imac but nothing is sure yet.

I hope a g5 imac come out soon!!!

[PowerMacMan]

Honestly i dont see new g5's before wwdc and i got a frien at apple consulting who said they will be ready in mid may but wont be announced until wwdc. He also said there might be a G5 imac but nothing is sure yet.

I hope a g5 imac come out soon!!!

This seems like good information, since of the supply problems maybe they're gathering up all the rev B G5's so that when they announce them they can ship them, and have enough so the ship dates aren't 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5 weeks.

[DaveClarkOne]

I really hope Apple does update the G5, and quickly. It would be great to get a discount on the Dual 2.0 GHz, and be able to take advantage of the Brilliant Savings promotion, which alone is worth it to get an 'older' G5.

The 23" HD Cinema display rocks; and, I still, for the love of G*d do not understand why folks are so uptight about Apple revising the current display schemes to 'match' the G5s' aluminum motif.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, matching is out, combining dissimilar products are in for the fashion world, and in general. The current clear plastic displays DO match the aluminum G5's. Anyone who says they are an eyesore is on crack.

If I catch your meaning, you have a preference for the existing cinema displays? :) Actually, I agree. A very modest refresh of the displays would be ok, but don't underestimate Apple's ability to move the bar higher than where the current displays set it (very high).

[ddtlm]

thatwendigo:

2003 Revenues:
IBM $89,131,000,000
Intel $30,100,000,000

2003 Net Income:
IBM $7,584,000,000
Intel $3,100,000,000

Who doesn't have what?
Consider the money that IBM takes in from processors and clearly Intel is larger. It might even be the case that IBM is loosing money on their CPU division. On the other hand, despite Itanium, despite Prescott, despite P4's in general, despite AMD's best efforts, Intel is raking in profits.

Ah, right... So the most successful PC chipmaker shouldn't have developed the Centrino, because the Penitum4-Mobile could fill in the laptop market?
Intel can afford multiple, specialized processor lines. IBM can't.

That makes absolutely no sense. Technology advances, things get faster, and you need to design around them. It wouldn't be another FSB, so much as the one that would supplant the one that's choking the G4 as it stands. If you rid yourself of a chip in favor of another, then you merely replace its needs with the newer ones.
Going to G5's without this 750vx involved saves Apple one FSB to design for. Presumably the G5-compatible chipset for a PBook is much like one for an iMac.

[Borg3of5]

If I catch your meaning, you have a preference for the existing cinema displays? :) Actually, I agree. A very modest refresh of the displays would be ok, but don't underestimate Apple's ability to move the bar higher than where the current displays set it (very high).

I do like the current displays. They go well together with the aluminum of the G5's design. I don't doubt, however, that Apple will 'wow' us with something revolutionary with displays. I have a friend in graphic design, who says he'd love to have a 30" display. I think the 23" is humongous already.

The only thing I hope is that even though the Brilliant Savings promo ends the day before WWDC, when the new G5's will be announced, the $500 price cut will hold for future purchases of the 23" display. I'd love to get a dual 2.0-2.4, 8x DVD-/+R drive, or Dual-Layer burner, with the current 23" display. I know that's just wishful thinking.

We'll see. Next February I'll be able to visit the SF Apple Store. The bastards only opened it a few weeks after my visit. I about fainted when I went walked past the the Virgin Megastore off Market and Stockton, and saw the white Apple logo. Woo-hoo!!!

[thatwendigo]

Consider the money that IBM takes in from processors and clearly Intel is larger.

No, not really. IBM as a company is enormous and has some of the mosst prodigious resources in the world. They file for more patents per year than any other company, and as I recall, also hold the single highest number. Saying that you should only consider IBM's chip section is like saying that you should only compare Microsoft's Office department to any competitor. There's nothing to keep them from rolling money in off off other sources if they decides to.

How do you think HP and Sony sell their computers relatively cheaply?

I might even be the case that IBM is loosing money on their CPU division. On the other hand, despite Itanium, despite Prescott, despite P4's in general, despite AMD's best efforts, Intel is raking in profits.

And AMD is gaining, so is IBM, and if the stories are true, they've got Freescale nipping at their heels in the embedded market while also preparing a chip that could very well swing into the laptop market.

Intel/Microsoft have made a lot of people uhappy over the years. Some of them are now working together, and the fruits of that labor are still in the making.

Intel can afford multiple, specialized processor lines. IBM can't.

Based on what? IBM has far more money to throw around than Intel does.

Going to G5's without this 750vx involved saves Apple one FSB to design for. Presumably the G5-compatible chipset for a PBook is much like one for an iMac.

What in the world would make you say that? The iMac has more than a few luxuries that the PowerBook doesn't, not the least of which is a steady, constant power supply that doesn't drain out, and a larger, more open form factor to pack the parts into.

Apple is far better off with a low power chip in the portables, unless you'd like to see PowerBooks that weigh ten pounds.

[ddtlm]

thatwendigo:

No, not really. IBM as a company is enormous and has some of the mosst prodigious resources in the world. ... Saying that you should only consider IBM's chip section is like saying that you should only compare Microsoft's Office department to any competitor. There's nothing to keep them from rolling money in off off other sources if they decides to.
In the real world, companies operate to make money. This means that IBM won't be dumping cash into their CPU division, at the expense of their other divisions, just to wage a silly war so that Apple can win. Which is really what everyone seems to think IBM should be doing. In this "real world", if IBM doesn't see a way that designing a 750vx is going to make them a profit one way or another, they won't do it. What someone here needs to do is establish some way that this 750vx has a snowball's chance in hell of turning a profit, despite being heavily redesigned (R&D cost), despite its new FSB and the logic board and system controller changes that requires, despite going into low-margin computers and embedded devices, and despite going directly into a market that Moto is supplying with a reasonably compeditive product lineup. People talk about how IBM could do this, and could do that, but they don't step back and consider what actually makes sense. Someone needs to make a case why the 750vx makes sense.

Based on what? IBM has far more money to throw around than Intel does.
Consider how good it is for IBM that people aren't up there "throwing around" money to wage strange personal wars.

What in the world would make you say that? The iMac has more than a few luxuries that the PowerBook doesn't, not the least of which is a steady, constant power supply that doesn't drain out, and a larger, more open form factor to pack the parts into.
Sheesh, you act like a little system controller chip is some kind of massive obsticle to packaging. There is nothing keeping Apple from making a system controller suitable for a PBook and then putting the same exact thing in an iMac. Most of their requirements are the same: one FSB interface, one DDR RAM interface, one AGP interface, lots of integrated periphrials, small packaging requirement.

Apple is far better off with a low power chip in the portables, unless you'd like to see PowerBooks that weigh ten pounds.
Uh, the system controller is not all that hot.

[thatwendigo]

In the real world, companies operate to make money. This means that IBM won't be dumping cash into their CPU division, at the expense of their other divisions, just to wage a silly war so that Apple can win.

It's not just between Apple and Microsoft at this point, and you misunderstood me if you at all got that impressions. Micrososft and AMD, at the very least, are interested in taking some serious shots at the Wintel hegemony, and Apple certainly wouldn't mind soaking up some the fallout. In fact, one might say that certain characteristics of Apple's recent strategy look like preparations for opening shots across the bow:

1) Open source development channels, where the core of the OS is freely available on both platforms, minus certain proprietary technologies.
2) Replacement of Microsoft's key products in several areas - OS, Safari, Mail, etc.
3) Aligning with companies that are working LotD (linux on the desktop).

IBM now has all the parts necessary to give a serious run at PowerPC LotD, if they can just get a distribution that would be workable for others. They have a competitive chip, the manufacturing wherewithall to do the assembly. All that's lingering on the backburner is an OS that could be thrown at the corporate world a little more easily than current incarnations of Linux.

Darwin with a graphical layer, perhaps?

In this "real world", if IBM doesn't see a way that designing a 750vx is going to make them a profit one way or another, they won't do it. What someone here needs to do is establish some way that this 750vx has a snowball's chance in hell of turning a profit, despite being heavily redesigned (R&D cost), despite its new FSB and the logic board and system controller changes that requires, despite going into low-margin computers and embedded devices, and despite going directly into a market that Moto is supplying with a reasonably compeditive product lineup.

According to MacPhisto, Apple was footing the R&D bill. As such, IBM loses nothing in the process, and gains new IP with the chip design and the process, not to mention the option to use the processor for whatever they decide to throw it in.

How is this a losing situation, again?

People talk about how IBM could do this, and could do that, but they don't step back and consider what actually makes sense. Someone needs to make a case why the 750vx makes sense.

It lets IBM fab their own laptop chip to be used when they take a shot at Intel/Microsoft. That's all the argument that needs to be made.

Consider how good it is for IBM that people aren't up there "throwing around" money to wage strange personal wars.

It's neither strange, nor personal, though there is some degree of the latter. Microsoft screwed IBM on OS/2 about fifteen years ago, and the company has been steadily churning along since then as a mostly hardware and enterprise company. I think they're just about ready to drop a bomb in the next few years, though, one that could very well shake the MS foundations pretty hard.

Sheesh, you act like a little system controller chip is some kind of massive obsticle to packaging. There is nothing keeping Apple from making a system controller suitable for a PBook and then putting the same exact thing in an iMac.

Cost? The fact that the ASIC in G5 towers has a heatpipe on it, on top of the nine fans? That it's as hot as the G4 that's currently in the laptops? That a "heavily redesigned (R&D cost), ... new FSB and ... logic board and system controller" are all things that will jump the heat profile like crazy and most likely require even more engineering than the VX?

Nah.

Most of their requirements are the same: one FSB interface, one DDR RAM interface, one AGP interface, lots of integrated periphrials, small packaging requirement.

Yes, and one is low-power, low-heat and scales even lower. The other, however, is still having to be worked on just to get the processor down to what the whole processing budget for the laptop is. A 1.6 G5 hardly does better than the 1.5 G4 at the moment, and yet it's quite a bit hotter and uses much hotter components for FSB, memory, and processing.

Uh, the system controller is not all that hot.

Let me reiterate: It has it's own heatpitpe.

You know what my eMac uses? One heatpipe. My processor, GPU, and Superdrive all cool off of a single fan and one pipe, which is what Apple had to stick on the ASIC for the G5.

[oingoboingo]

Cost? The fact that the ASIC in G5 towers has a heatpipe on it, on top of the nine fans?

I've been taking a look at this G5 pull-apart:

http://homepage.mac.com/dabaer/PhotoAlbum8.html

trying to figure out how the ASIC cooling system might actually work. The G5 ASICs are mounted on the back-side of the system board (ie: on the opposite side to the CPUs, PCI slots, RAM slots etc). From examing the two attached images (the back and front sides of the G5 system board), it looks like there is a major chip located just back from, and mid-way between the two banks of RAM slots, which is covered by a heatpipe assembly. There is another chip further down and back, just forward of the AGP and PCI slots which is covered by a passive heatsink. And then directly above the AGP slot and just behind one of the CPU connectors, there is another chip, with a 9-blocked passive heatsink attached. From cross-checking the front and back photos, I'm not sure there is anything major mounted under the large flat part of the heatpipe assembly, located right between the two RAM banks. There is some kind of ferrite core on the front side of the board and some patch wires running *through* the board, so maybe this is something to do with power regulation.

I don't really see any passage of the heatpipe conductors through the board itself to the CPU heatsinks located on the front side of the board, but I could very well be wrong there. When I shine a torch into the front of my own 1.6GHz G5 system, it looks like the distance from the 'back side' (ie: the side of the case which does not open) of the case to the system board is about the thickness of my index finger (ie: roughly 15mm). It appears that the two sets of fins on the heatpipe are in direct, or very close contact with the actual aluminium casing. From feeling my way around the case, the warmest parts of the case certainly correspond to the approximate locations of the heatpipe fins.

That said, the back-side of the case is barely warm to the touch. I don't have any type of contact heat probe here, so I can't be more accurate than that, but 'tepid' might be a good adjective to describe it. Most of the area of the case forward of the Apple logo is almost cool to the touch (the ambient temperature is around 20 degrees celsius).

OK...so my theory is that the G5 ASICs (or whatever the chips are on the rear-side of the motherboard) are cooled by passively dissipating their heat through the actual G5 aluminium case itself, rather than any type of active fan cooling, or by heat-pipe transferring heat through the motherboard over to the CPU heatsinks. Given the very moderate temperature of the back-side of the G5 case (the system has been up and running for about 4 hours this morning), I would also hazard a guess that the amount of heat produced is not excessive.

Any opinions on my amateur analysis?

[thatwendigo]

I've been taking a look at this G5 pull-apart:

http://homepage.mac.com/dabaer/PhotoAlbum8.html

Any opinions on my amateur analysis?

Actually, most of what you've said seems pretty reasonable and consistent with the pictures of that dual 2.0 that's been pulled apart. However, with that being said, I don't exactly have a G5 tower here in front of me that I can test, though I can probably go to the local shop and ask them if they'd open to case and let me look at the board without touching it.

Hmmm.

We need some kind of wattage spec on the ASIC to really get a serious commentary on what it's going to be dissipating, but that's the kind of thing I find it unlikely will ever be published on the web. I know that the things I can find about my systems (MPC7450 under the hood) list the processor as 14-17w at peak, and the SuperDrive is something I'm not sure I'll be able to get a heat figure on. I do know that the two are sandwiching the pipe, though. So, just for the sake of argument, let's say that the pipe is moving 30w of heat to a single exhaust fan.

In a PowerBook, you're not going to have the frame be nearly so useful for dissipation, especially not when you're resting it on a user's lap. The chip itself is going to be 25w (if not more) and the ASIC is going to be another 20-30w (from combining my figures with your guesswork). That's already a doubling of the heat budget in the current Powerbooks, not to mention a doubling of the battery draw.

Not pretty.

[ddtlm]

thatwendigo:

Cost? The fact that the ASIC in G5 towers has a heatpipe on it, on top of the nine fans?
Yeah it makes more heat than most chipsets, but as the Xserve clearly shows no heat pipes are needed to cool it, just a passive heatsink with some air movement, not unlike other chipsets in 1U rackmounts. The nine fans are for the entire system.

That it's as hot as the G4 that's currently in the laptops? That a "heavily redesigned (R&D cost), ... new FSB and ... logic board and system controller" are all things that will jump the heat profile like crazy and most likely require even more engineering than the VX?
The chip in PBooks and iMacs need not be clocked as high (slower FSB's, even 1/3 multipliers instead of 1/2), nor does it need to support two FSB's, nor two channels of memory. These "hot" components are therefore half the size and clocked lower, so obviously heat would come down a lot. More than they would like in a laptop probably, but still a whole heck of a lot less expensive than designing a mostly new processor and the system controller to go with it.

According to MacPhisto, Apple was footing the R&D bill. As such, IBM loses nothing in the process, and gains new IP with the chip design and the process, not to mention the option to use the processor for whatever they decide to throw it in. How is this a losing situation, again?
If Apple is footing the bill I find this no more likely, as I've outlined before. Instead of "why would IBM do it", the question I would ask is "why would Apple do it".

It's been explained by MacPhisto as protection against Moto screwing up, which is about the only justification because obviously a 750vx goes head to head with the 74x7 chips and the upcoming e600. But the 750vx was supposed to show in March, that's what, 6 months behind when Moto delivered? So if Moto slipped more than 6 months from their already slow schedule the 750vx would "save the day". (So... how much did Apple supposedly spend on this?)

But what about this doomsday Apple was saving themselves from possibly encountering? Consider the case where Moto dropped the ball on the 7457 (more than 6 months late) and where they had no 750vx under development. With no more difficulty that they would have designing new motherboards and chipsets for a 750vx, Apple could have been putting G5's into PBooks and iMacs starting as soon as the 970fx was available, Feb 2004 according to schedule I believe. They could leave iBooks with either 180nm G4's or with G3's, and eMacs with 180nm G4's. The G5's in some PBooks (like the 12") would be quite low clocked, but hey we're pretending the 7457 never showed so they'd be replacing slow G4's. So, not a terribly bad situation for Apple if they never funded a 750vx and Moto dropped the ball.

So lets summarize what you're claiming: Apple bankrolled the development of a 750vx that competes as directly as can be with processors Moto was developing, just to make sure that if Moto slipped by more than six months, they could madly scramble together some new chipsets and motherboards and save their hide... from using the 970fx and G3's. Oh and then Apple cut funding, so all that money was wasted. But IBM didn't mind because apparently they didn't have any other customers waiting for this chip, or designing products around its fancy new FSB. Whew, quite a clever plan!

It's neither strange, nor personal, though there is some degree of the latter. Microsoft screwed IBM on OS/2 about fifteen years ago
Try taking that to a shareholder meeting.

IBM now has all the parts necessary to give a serious run at PowerPC LotD
So you figure that PPC/Linux would be compelling enough to defeat x86/Linux and x86/Windows? The only way to do that is to undercut on price because its pretty damn easy to have a "fast enough" desktop system, and people will default to what they already have laying around. Ever look at IBM's desktop prices? Last time I checked Dell had them beat, and they would be all over x86/Linux the second Linux started looking like a desktop money maker. Them and about a zillion other companies, big and small. Your expecting IBM to take on the entire x86-box industry, and defeat them on price, while keeping two processor lines up to date. I'm not seeing the profit.

Oh but maybe IBM has a clever plan to sell expensive PPC/Linux desktops. Heh.

[ktlx]

So you figure that PPC/Linux would be compelling enough to defeat x86/Linux and x86/Windows? The only way to do that is to undercut on price because its pretty damn easy to have a "fast enough" desktop system, and people will default to what they already have laying around.

Even then I cannot see that happening. Everyone I know who uses Linux on the desktop uses either a dual-boot configuration or something like VMware for those times they need to run a Windows application. Given the price/performance of an AMD Athlon XP and the performance of an AMD64, I just cannot see why anyone not stuck on a PowerPC platform would choose Linux/PPC.

[Kid Red]

OK, so since the threads been hi-jacked i figured I'd ask if any new info on the updates has become available?

[thatwendigo]

Yeah it makes more heat than most chipsets, but as the Xserve clearly shows no heat pipes are needed to cool it, just a passive heatsink with some air movement, not unlike other chipsets in 1U rackmounts. The nine fans are for the entire system.

Some air movement? The xServe is nearly constantly blown, active cooling. It was back when there were G4s under the hood, and it's not exactly gotten cooler with the addtion of G5s and the new subsystems. Also, the xServe has no hot GPU, which is getting to be a major factor in many systems.

Unlike the comparison that many people wish to make, the PowerBook is far more cramped and would be using much less available power and airflow. It's not all a proof that you could make a PowerBook when you compare something that's over twice as big, on a wall outlet or other steady power supply, and able to use outside cooling solutions (rack's often have secondary thermal systems).

The chip in PBooks and iMacs need not be clocked as high (slower FSB's, even 1/3 multipliers instead of 1/2), nor does it need to support two FSB's, nor two channels of memory. These "hot" components are therefore half the size and clocked lower, so obviously heat would come down a lot. More than they would like in a laptop probably, but still a whole heck of a lot less expensive than designing a mostly new processor and the system controller to go with it.

And also a whole heck of a lot less performance capable. In case you missed the discussion, I advise you to go look up barefeat's test of the single 1.5 G4 versus the single 1.6 G5 on Final Cut. Here's a hint... It very nearly gets beaten, in a desktop environment with all those things that you're talking about ditching.

So you think they ought to cut performance lower than the current systems, just to have a G5 under the hood with less battery life?

If Apple is footing the bill I find this no more likely, as I've outlined before. Instead of "why would IBM do it", the question I would ask is "why would Apple do it".

Simple. If Freescale doesn't deliver on the e600s or e700s, then Apple has a replacement processor ready to run as soon as IBM can tool a line for them. If they go to tape-out and hold there, with the design ready to go on wafer, they have a backup plan and damage control.

It's been explained by MacPhisto as protection against Moto screwing up, which is about the only justification because obviously a 750vx goes head to head with the 74x7 chips and the upcoming e600. But the 750vx was supposed to show in March, that's what, 6 months behind when Moto delivered? So if Moto slipped more than 6 months from their already slow schedule the 750vx would "save the day". (So... how much did Apple supposedly spend on this?)

Does that really matter (the cost), as long as they're looking out for their customer's interests? People have accused Apple of just taking whatever Motorola hands over, and this looks like a case of their hedging bets against a possible repeat of bad circumstances.

But what about this doomsday Apple was saving themselves from possibly encountering? Consider the case where Moto dropped the ball on the 7457 (more than 6 months late) and where they had no 750vx under development. With no more difficulty that they would have designing new motherboards and chipsets for a 750vx, Apple could have been putting G5's into PBooks and iMacs starting as soon as the 970fx was available, Feb 2004 according to schedule I believe.

Except that it still takes a redesign of logic boards, and a complete redo of their power and heat management scheme. It could even be that the G5 is impossibly at current heat levels and the form factor, and Apple's been known for their sleek laptops. They're not goin to kill that just to wedge in a processor that isn't clearly a better performer in those highly limited circumstances.

Also, it could very well be that the "dropped ball" is what convinced them they needed this backup plan.

They could leave iBooks with either 180nm G4's or with G3's, and eMacs with 180nm G4's. The G5's in some PBooks (like the 12") would be quite low clocked, but hey we're pretending the 7457 never showed so they'd be replacing slow G4's. So, not a terribly bad situation for Apple if they never funded a 750vx and Moto dropped the ball.

Except, you know, the whole G5 not outperforming the G4 thing when you cut the bus and get low enough clock. Even a full-bus, desktop G5 doesn't outrun the 7447A at 1.5ghz by all that much. If Freescale delivers a dual-core 2.0ghz e600 that Apple can use, or the VX debuts at 2.0ghz, and their total heat budget is around 20-30w, that's still far, far better than the 970fx.

So lets summarize what you're claiming: Apple bankrolled the development of a 750vx that competes as directly as can be with processors Moto was developing, just to make sure that if Moto slipped by more than six months, they could madly scramble together some new chipsets and motherboards and save their hide... from using the 970fx and G3's. Oh and then Apple cut funding, so all that money was wasted. But IBM didn't mind because apparently they didn't have any other customers waiting for this chip, or designing products around its fancy new FSB. Whew, quite a clever plan!

Mind not being quite so insulting?

The obvious point of the VX is to have the option to produce it if necessary, because Motorola does have a history of making promises they can't back up. Even if it isn't used right away, Apple could sell the rights to the chip or the IP genereated from it later on, or bring it into play if there are problems in the future. Direct competition is not suicide, as IBM has proved with the G5, and which you have stated already by talking about how the 970 will eventually be some low-power solution that can be used where the G4 is.

Why is the G5 not a stupid investment, then, since it's obviously attacking a market that Motorola has a lock on. Hell, why isn't the PowerPC a stupid investment for desktops? AMD and Intel have that all sewn up, after all! :rolleyes:

So you figure that PPC/Linux would be compelling enough to defeat x86/Linux and x86/Windows?

Take a look at today's announcement from IBM, if you would. Aside from some commodity parts, the entire machine is provided by Big Blue. It's not at all beholden to Intel or Microsoft for anything.

As with all things, it will scale down eventually.

The only way to do that is to undercut on price because its pretty damn easy to have a "fast enough" desktop system, and people will default to what they already have laying around.

Incorrect. Undercutting is one way to do things, but offering a superior product is another. Chevy sells a lot of cars, but so do BMW and Porsche. The only reason I'm using the car analogy is on pricing and features, in this case, not performance, though that's gotten pretty comparable lately.

Ever look at IBM's desktop prices? Last time I checked Dell had them beat, and they would be all over x86/Linux the second Linux started looking like a desktop money maker.

That's buying parts from outside. There's no volume discount like doing your own manufacturing and providing your own processors.

Them and about a zillion other companies, big and small. Your expecting IBM to take on the entire x86-box industry, and defeat them on price, while keeping two processor lines up to date. I'm not seeing the profit.

I'm expecting IBM to start the revolution, with the help of AMD, Apple, and others who have a vested interest in Intel going down. Notice who's working together on HyperTransport, have we? How about the partners in PowerPC and the companies that are buying onto the platform (which IBM owns, incidentally, not Motorola)?

Here's a list for you:
Hypertransport - AMD, Apple, Cisco, Transmeta, Broadcom, Sun, nVidia, ATI, Agilent, VIA, PMC, TexasInstruments, NEC, IBM
PowerPC - Apple, AMD, Sony, Freescale, Nintendo

The PowerPC list isn't immediately as eyedrawing, nor is there an easy-to-find partner list like there is for Hypertransport. However, there is some serious clout behind both movements. Some might say worrying clout, if you're Intel or Microsoft.

Oh but maybe IBM has a clever plan to sell expensive PPC/Linux desktops. Heh.

Why's that so terrible an idea? Linux distributions are increasingly becoming commercial ventures for the companies that provide enterprise-grade support. It could even be argued that OS X is the forerunner of the movement, a graphical *nix that runs on PowerPC hardware and isn't vulnerable to all of the Windows headaches.

[windowsblowsass]

I never said there wouldn't be advantages to it, but you're still dead wrong if you think it will ever happen. there's still the physical space issue--apple will not put 2 CPUs on a logic board that small--there just isn't room, even with a small chip like that. another issue is that going back to a G3, even if you got better performance, is a marketing disaster.

IBM is working on making the 970s run cooler and faster. they're making headway, although they really screwed up on the latest batch. before long they will have a feasible chip for a laptop, and that is what apple will use.

you should know that people have always been clamoring for DP powerbooks. i have heard it over and over. there's a reason they're always page 2 type rumors.
no its not just becuse its g3 based doesnt men theyll call it a g3 a pentium m is a reworked p3 but is it called p3 no

[windowsblowsass]

"magic steve day."
greatest line in the history of the earth :D

[Palador]

How did this thread get so off topic?

Anywho, it is very obvious many people here have too much book knowledge and not enough hands on experience. The G5 is hot. Contrary to popular forum rumor about smaller processes and less watts... the new G5s will be even hotter. Think INSIDE the box on this one. What happens when I put more transistors, pathways, and whatnot into a smaller space at a higher speed? It gets hotter.

One thing that some people do not get is that heat is not something that should delay a new machine. If people are out there overclocking 3.4GHz PressHots running at over 100 watts... and if 3.4GHz desktop processors are already showing up in 8 pound notebooks... well... I think Apple and IBM could figure out SOMETHING. Granted it might not be as small and sexy as we all want it... but something could be done to get these things into a 17" Powerbook. And Im sure they could fit into a 3 foot tower.

Im surprised it wasnt posted here, but I think it was on cnet or slashdot that I read an article about how the 90nm process was getting insane amounts of pathway leakage for every manufacturer out there. Moore's law is about to stall out in the near future unless we move in a new radical direction.

[rog]

I bet they won't be. That will make me cry.

[Blackheart]

I bet they won't be. That will make me cry.

Geez, steve is making people cry now. Give us our magic steve day!

[awesomebase]

I think the fact that there have been no intermediate updates in the January to March timeline almost guarantees that there will be no 3GHz models available for the G5 until January to March '05. It is not so much about the possibility of doing it, but rather the numbers. Looking at Apple's history, I haven't seen that big a speed bump (i.e. 50%) in their PowerMac lines. However going to 2.4GHz is more likely. What I think Apple has more problems with is being able to bring out speedier processors as a "regular" habit instead of making a big deal out of it at certain times of the year. They should be able to bring out the fastest processors they can for the PowerMacs and as they develop them faster and faster, use the current processors in single units for the iMac lines since by that time the numbers and yields will drive down the costs.
I don't think too many people care about how fast their machine is right now unless they are in very specific scientific arenas. What they want is good value. Apple should save the big events for major design changes and product introductions, not a 10% to 20% speed bump. Here is one suggestion... how about making those G5 machines about 33% smaller so that it approaches something close to what other machines take up in terms of space... now THAT would be cool at just about any speed.

[Frohickey]

Here is one suggestion... how about making those G5 machines about 33% smaller so that it approaches something close to what other machines take up in terms of space... now THAT would be cool at just about any speed.

To paraphrase Yoda...

Speed leads to heat... heat leads to airflow...airflow leads to more space. :D

If you shrink the G5, that would lead to less space, and a more restrictive airflow. That would then lead to faster fans, which lead to a louder machine.

So, do you want small and loud, or big and quiet.

[awesomebase]

To paraphrase Yoda...

Speed leads to heat... heat leads to airflow...airflow leads to more space. :D

If you shrink the G5, that would lead to less space, and a more restrictive airflow. That would then lead to faster fans, which lead to a louder machine.

So, do you want small and loud, or big and quiet.

Well, of course the laws of physics are true, but IBM is also going to a smaller transistor (90nm as opposed to 135nm) which will reduce not just the size of the core, but the power and heat being produced by it. Besides, if Apple continues this trend, yes, we will all have very fast machines, but we'll need a room just to hold the thing! :)
All I'm saying, is that I would be much more enthusiastic about the G5 being redesigned to be smaller than I would be about gaining another 400MHz. Having both would be even better! And besides... they BETTER figure out how to cool this thing quickly because PowerBook sales will only suffer the longer they go without incorporating a G5. They are doing well now, but, if we're still talking about getting a G5 into a PowerBook a year from now, I think sales at that point will be pretty slow... much like the G4 PowerMacs were in the several months before the G5 update came. Well, we can only hope that the physical designs will be good enough to hold the new G5s (hopefully in a smaller case) in both the PowerMacs and (hopefully as well) PowerBooks in about a year from now.

[jane doe]

Anyone know if this date is real?

[Nethawk]

Anyone know if this date is real?

It's not.
Like the other 456² rumors which came up the last 6 months.

[thatwendigo]

Well, of course the laws of physics are true, but IBM is also going to a smaller transistor (90nm as opposed to 135nm) which will reduce not just the size of the core, but the power and heat being produced by it. Besides, if Apple continues this trend, yes, we will all have very fast machines, but we'll need a room just to hold the thing! :)

In general you can have lower heat or higher clock. It generally doesn't happen that you get both, because the increased clock means more transistors in a smaller space, and thus, more heat output. This is why you can look at a first-generation 970 running at 2.0ghz and see it putting out 45-55w at peak, but the redesigned 970fx at 2.0ghz putting out a comparatively balmy 25-35w. Also, I know you're joking on the last part, but please... Serious workstations and server chassis on the PC side of things can be 10-bay monsters that make the G5 look puny.

All I'm saying, is that I would be much more enthusiastic about the G5 being redesigned to be smaller than I would be about gaining another 400MHz. Having both would be even better!

I can't possibly imagine why, unless you're one of the people who thinks that the G5 just needs, needs, needs to go into the PowerBook despite all the of problems with shoehorning the increased support fabric into the form factor. For a desktop processor, IBM and Apple are far better off shrinking the process and using the descreased heat to ramp the clock as high as it can possibly go, because they've already proven that the G5 processors in Apple's enclosure can be cooled quite nicely with a combined heat budget of nearly the same as a single P4 Prescott (i.e. around 100w total processor at peak). If you scale up to keep roughly the same heat but get 600, 800, or even 1000mhz more, then you're doing what really needs to be done in this case.

The 970 is a deeper processor than the MPC74xx series, and so it needs clock to ramp up.

And besides... they BETTER figure out how to cool this thing quickly because PowerBook sales will only suffer the longer they go without incorporating a G5.

Or, you know, they could put a processor intended for small form factors in there and completely bypass the issue of heat from processor, bus, and ASIC until the 980s are ready and, as some have rumored, much cooler and better optimized designs. Or, as we've been increasingly seeing, Apple could go with the VX that they're holding off to give Freescale a chance to come through on the e600/e700 cores.

I'm sorry, but unless the G5 is suddenly going to become massively cooler (like 10-15w at 2.0ghz), then we're better off with a low power processor like the e600 dual-core 2.0ghz. It would allow SMP optimizations, a 400mhz FSB as opposed to the very, very power hungry 800mhz-1ghz bus for the G5, and probably a cooler ASIC than the 970s require. To top it off, you get a power scaling optimized chip that draws 30w at peak to run two cores, not one.

[awesomebase]

In general you can have lower heat or higher clock. It generally doesn't happen that you get both, because the increased clock means more transistors in a smaller space, and thus, more heat output. This is why you can look at a first-generation 970 running at 2.0ghz and see it putting out 45-55w at peak, but the redesigned 970fx at 2.0ghz putting out a comparatively balmy 25-35w. Also, I know you're joking on the last part, but please... Serious workstations and server chassis on the PC side of things can be 10-bay monsters that make the G5 look puny.



I can't possibly imagine why, unless you're one of the people who thinks that the G5 just needs, needs, needs to go into the PowerBook despite all the of problems with shoehorning the increased support fabric into the form factor. For a desktop processor, IBM and Apple are far better off shrinking the process and using the descreased heat to ramp the clock as high as it can possibly go, because they've already proven that the G5 processors in Apple's enclosure can be cooled quite nicely with a combined heat budget of nearly the same as a single P4 Prescott (i.e. around 100w total processor at peak). If you scale up to keep roughly the same heat but get 600, 800, or even 1000mhz more, then you're doing what really needs to be done in this case.

The 970 is a deeper processor than the MPC74xx series, and so it needs clock to ramp up.



Or, you know, they could put a processor intended for small form factors in there and completely bypass the issue of heat from processor, bus, and ASIC until the 980s are ready and, as some have rumored, much cooler and better optimized designs. Or, as we've been increasingly seeing, Apple could go with the VX that they're holding off to give Freescale a chance to come through on the e600/e700 cores.

I'm sorry, but unless the G5 is suddenly going to become massively cooler (like 10-15w at 2.0ghz), then we're better off with a low power processor like the e600 dual-core 2.0ghz. It would allow SMP optimizations, a 400mhz FSB as opposed to the very, very power hungry 800mhz-1ghz bus for the G5, and probably a cooler ASIC than the 970s require. To top it off, you get a power scaling optimized chip that draws 30w at peak to run two cores, not one.

Thanks for the information! Yes, I do agree that getting lower power processors would be quite advantageous, especially where portables are concerned as they are becoming a larger part of the market as time goes on. And of course the G5 is not as big as those workstations with 10 drive bays (I certainly remember what those were like...)
Lets hope those come along sooner than later!

[numediaman]

Things seem to be awfully quiet here on the rumor front (G5 related, that is). Are we in a lull waiting until WWDC? Or later?

What kind of optical drive does everyone think will be in a new G5? And are there any other upgrades you expect?

(Even the French site hasn't been updated since the 27th of April.)

[PPC970FX]

Rev B G5 will come the day that IBM can get the PPC970FX to work at 3Ghz. Or they will wait to the Power 5 light comes PPC975. That will kick ass.

dual dual core 3Ghz G6 :cool:

[tunanut]

If these rumours are true (and a big if indeed) any further rumour mongering about what they'll replace? i'd love to pick up a dual 2 gig for 1999. with that 23" lcd for -500. :D

[iriejedi]

Here is my prediction.

Steve is a showman and he promised 3gigs by this date - and he will deliver. And if there was some delay Steve is not going to announce it or face public humiliation at WWDC - he would have announced/hinted it by now so not to CRUSH the WWDC attendees who paid alot to be happy - not sad. I bet insiders will attest that speed bumps were planned but some radical new idea or paradign shift made it worth while to hold off til June and instead of bump bump upgrades we get a KABOOM upgrade in June.

Time will tell but whenever it does happen I bet we are so amazed that we forget about that little lack of an upgrade in Jan or the one in Feb or the one in march all of which never came.... wait and see new G5s are coming but that is the same as saying California will have an earth quake in the future - both are given but only God and Steve Jobs can answer those questions.

(I bet Billy G was about to answer the earthquake question since Win XP is supposed to be powerful... but some hacker must have deleted that memo - sigh 10.5 is coming - and I'll be safe under my desk with my Mac! - but I guess we will never know... must be due to one of those little security flaws that all the money in the world can't fix!)

LONG Live SASSER - go buy a mac! :eek:

Irie

PS - Sasser is Apples NEW direct marketing campaign - heck with the catalog idea! I love it!

Things seem to be awfully quiet here on the rumor front (G5 related, that is). Are we in a lull waiting until WWDC? Or later?

What kind of optical drive does everyone think will be in a new G5? And are there any other upgrades you expect?

(Even the French site hasn't been updated since the 27th of April.)

[virividox]

dual 3 common give me dual 3

[sethypoo]

In which case we'll all know that Apple is in fact full of ****, and doesn't keep very public promises, and that IBM is just as good as freakin' moto :rolleyes:

Wow, that's jumping to a conclusion, if I ever saw one! :rolleyes:

[dongmin]

This May 18th date is total BS. The Xserve G5s are showing 5-7 week delay. And that's just for 2.0 ghz 970fxs. If they're having hard eough time churning out 2.0 ghz (and I'm assuming the delay has to do with IBM and not Apple), then it'll be a while until they hit anything in the 2.4-2.6 ghz range.

And no matter what some people say, I don't think they will bypass the 970fx, which is rumored to top out at 2.6-2.8 ghz, and go straight to the 975 (or 980?) at 3.0 ghz. Face it, Steve goofed when he said 3 ghz by the end of the summer. People should be happy to have the 2.6 ghzs shipping by WWDC.

[segundo]

Things seem to be awfully quiet here on the rumor front (G5 related, that is). Are we in a lull waiting until WWDC? Or later?

I agree, things are really too quiet. I'm one of the seemingly many waiting for the updates to the iMac and Power Mac G5 lines. What struck me as odd was the recent front page Power Mac G5 banners on the Apple website. Why would they put such an ad up when that spot is usually reserved for larger announcements such as new systems/software? This leads me to believe that something was scheduled to be released then but it just didn't make it.

Furthermore, is Apple going to miss the back-to-school opportunity again? Last year new G5's went to student purchases first because schools were already back in session. With late updates to the iMac and Power Mac lines is this going to happen again this year?

I'd claim the Power Mac's are late due to late delivery of G5 processors. Someone else posted awhile back that we won't see Power Mac G5 updates until the delivery delays for the Xserves goes below 1 week. I agree with that assesment. What makes me nervous is that we are still seeing long delays for Xserves. I expected the next iMac revision to utilize the G5 but I'm starting to believe we could see one more revision of a G4 iMac. I don't have a problem with this at all but I'd like to see some lower prices if that is the case. If updated G5's are late, why not just reduce prices a notch?

What will happen if we have new systems announced at WWDC but with expected deliveries starting months later? This is called a "stock-out" and the largest impact of a stock-out is that your customers start to go elsewhere. We've seen some fairly significant stock-outs from Apple for more than a year now (Power Mac G5's, Xserves, iPod Mini's) and I'd like to see some signs that they are working to resolve these.

Bottom Line: Apple doesn't have a problem with design or marketing, it has a problem with execution.

[hacksaw]

Rev B G5 will come the day that IBM can get the PPC970FX to work at 3Ghz. Or they will wait to the Power 5 light comes PPC975. That will kick ass.

dual dual core 3Ghz G6 :cool:

IBM might be thinking a little differently these days.

http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=EHHZDWX2DW4S2QSNDBGCKHY?articleID=19502091

INTEL could be the only one to scale above 3Ghz.

hacksaw :p

[nek]

May 18th could be iMac updates because it has been about 6 months since the last update hasn't it. In which case it will likely be just an evolutionary change to 1.5GHz G4 and better graphics. But it would be nice if it was a revolutionary change to the iMac G5.

The Powermac will likely have to wait until June 28 for the WWDC. But hopefully the wait will be worthwhile.

[tunanut]

May 18th could be iMac updates because it has been about 6 months ...

ugh, who cares about iMac? is there a real diff to joe casual browsing with a 500mhz iMac and a 1ghz one? now, final cut pro on 3 gigs woudl scream...a bit louder.

[strangelogic]

I fear that they will do something before WWDC - because the last thing SJ wants to do is go out there and announce 'small bumps' to the powermacs.

Inventory seems low to me on the current machines - channel is clearing (which could also be due to lack of interest) - time for some little bumps now, and a big one in the fall.
They are already talking 'Tiger' for the keynote at WWDC.

[aswitcher]

I fear that they will do something before WWDC - because the last thing SJ wants to do is go out there and announce 'small bumps' to the powermacs.




Mmm. That's a reasonable thought. Maybe Paris in September to get the real bumps...

[virividox]

but if september was the date for a major g5 overhaul that would mean its been over 1 year since the introduction of the g5, with no changes to the top model of the line.

[thatwendigo]

IBM might be thinking a little differently these days.

Considering that Intel's the one changing design philosophy soon, I think that you're a bit off on your assertions. IBM has supported the PowerPC for some time. Intel and AMD are the ones moving to more and more RISC-like implementations, with AMD far in the lead of Intel on adopting the philosophy.

INTEL could be the only one to scale above 3Ghz.

At a cost of 100 watts and with no clear performance advantage over the 2.4ghz Athlon 64 FX-53 or the 2.2ghz Opteron 248. Wake me up when they get Jonas working...

but if september was the date for a major g5 overhaul that would mean its been over 1 year since the introduction of the g5, with no changes to the top model of the line.

I think you missed the point. Unless I'm misreading what he's saying, aswitcher thinks that it would be reasonable for Apple to bump the line this month, and then ship the major bumps in September. That would be eleven months from announcement and around eight or nine months sice shipping between updates.

Of coure, I don't think it's likely, and if we do see PowerMac upgrades on the 18th, it's either going to be 3.0ghz and sit there, or it's going to mean no jump to 3.0 for a while. A three to four month cycle would only piss off people who are waiting on the promise for this summer.

[oldpismo]

ugh, who cares about iMac? is there a real diff to joe casual browsing with a 500mhz iMac and a 1ghz one? now, final cut pro on 3 gigs woudl scream...a bit louder.

Some people care about the a G5 iMac. I personally want want so that I can do video/photo editing and I want to do it in the living room where there is no room for a PowerMac etc.

Also I don't want to buy a new Mac that is less powerful than my old PC (even if it does have better software).

Peter

[thatwendigo]

Some people care about the a G5 iMac. I personally want want so that I can do video/photo editing and I want to do it in the living room where there is no room for a PowerMac etc.

Then you've fallen prey to the hype and glitter. The G5 is neither low-power, nor high-performance enough to warrant the kind of noise sacrifice that would have to be made (unless there's something I'm completely unaware of). As I've reiterated to the G5 PowerBook crowd, even the 970fx consumes 25-30w at 2.0ghz, and a single 1.6 isn't much faster than the single 1.5 G4, while using much more heat overall.

The sane thing to do is to either use the Freescale 2.0ghz dual-core e600, which will use less FSB (and hence less heat), allow SMP optimizations, and weigh in at around 25w for the chip is a a whole. Or, if it really does exist, to finished production on the VX and use it, because both of those processors are for more friendly to enclosed spaces, while also being better performers than the G4 of today.

[dieselg4]

ugh, who cares about iMac? is there a real diff to joe casual browsing with a 500mhz iMac and a 1ghz one? now, final cut pro on 3 gigs woudl scream...a bit louder.

For "casual Joe", there is a real difference between a computer that hasn't increased in speed significantly for 9 months. There is also a real differnce between average Joe at the CompUSA deciding between a $1200 consumer iMac @ 1.33 G4 and a $399 consumer emachine/HP/Compaq @ 2.6 Celeron with a $350 flat panel screen. I personally prefer OSX, but "Joe" probably likes the bubbly blue XP interface just as well.

These processors are probably pretty equivalent in a lot of ways, but its very difficult for someone who doesn't read alot of bboards to really think that he'll get equal performance and value between a 1.33 processor over a 2.6 processor.

[thatwendigo]

For "casual Joe", there is a real difference between a computer that hasn't increased in speed significantly for 9 months. There is also a real differnce between average Joe at the CompUSA deciding between a $1200 consumer iMac @ 1.33 G4 and a $399 consumer emachine/HP/Compaq @ 2.6 Celeron with a $350 flat panel screen. I personally prefer OSX, but "Joe" probably likes the bubbly blue XP interface just as well.

These processors are probably pretty equivalent in a lot of ways, but its very difficult for someone who doesn't read alot of bboards to really think that he'll get equal performance and value between a 1.33 processor over a 2.6 processor.


"Casual Joe" is not likely to appreciate AMD, either, then. All he wants is a cheap computer with big numbers, and that's what he's going to get. Intel has shot themselves right in the ass on this particular point, though, when it comes to laptops. Thanks to "Casual Joe," the P4-M and Celeron are both outselling the Centrino in some markets.

Also, your statement that it's "very difficult" is patently false. There are scores of benchmarking and information sites out there that can tell you about machines, and there's even Consumer Reports for the really computer illiterate. This is laziness, not a lack of informational availability, and Apple shouldn't pander to it.

[wdlove]

Mmm. That's a reasonable thought. Maybe Paris in September to get the real bumps...

If if turns out that no update at WWDC. Then I can still hold out for a Steve Keynote at MacWorld Boston. He can show us that the East coast market is important to Apple. Come on Steve we are waiting.

[numediaman]

I fully expect an update at WWDC -- the issue is it an update worth writing home about? Just as Apple has "refreshed" its laptop lines, they are not going to wait forever to update the PowerMac. For one thing, they can put in new optical drives, update the FW and Power Supply. These may seem minor, but they are definitely worth doing in an update.

If they only fixed outstanding issues and upgraded many of the components, and did not increase the speeds, I would probably go ahead and buy. If they do nothing, sales will just inch along.

(Forget about any annoucements for Macworld Boston, of course.)

[aussiemac86]

I think they could still dramatically improve the overall output speed of the PM's without updating the processors by much, if any at all.

The bus and rest of the architecture is still slowing the system as a whole down, the chip is not the underperforming part of the system, maybe if they update the rest of the architecture throw in the newest video card upgrade the standard ram etc and advertise the speed increases that will make up for lack of 3GHz ( thats if they cant get a 3 out, either way they should spend some time on the rest of the architecture)

[thatwendigo]

I think they could still dramatically improve the overall output speed of the PM's without updating the processors by much, if any at all.

I can name four things they could do:
1) SATA RAID with 10,000 RPM Drives.
2) Move to PC4200 Dual-Channel RAM, because it's not much more expensive than PC3200.
3) Work on new deals with ATI and nVidia to get top-end GPUs on simultaneous release.
4) Up the ASIC frequency and move to a 1.5:1 or 1:1 ratio.

The bus and rest of the architecture is still slowing the system as a whole down, the chip is not the underperforming part of the system,

Actually, the chips can be loaded up. You just have to use enough RAM to avoid disk access. That's the big advantage of 64-bit addressing, after all. The slowest part of the system as it stands (and this is true on the PC side, as well) is the hard drive and the optical drive.

[BakedBeans]

I can name four things they could do:
1) SATA RAID with 10,000 RPM Drives.
2) Move to PC4200 Dual-Channel RAM, because it's not much more expensive than PC3200.
3) Work on new deals with ATI and nVidia to get top-end GPUs on simultaneous release.
4) Up the ASIC frequency and move to a 1.5:1 or 1:1 ratio.



Actually, the chips can be loaded up. You just have to use enough RAM to avoid disk access. That's the big advantage of 64-bit addressing, after all. The slowest part of the system as it stands (and this is true on the PC side, as well) is the hard drive and the optical drive.


Points 1 2 and 3 are just a must really aint they???
i fully agree with you on that one.....
ati should release product for apple on the same day that they do for pcs

[IBSNOWEDIN]

Come on dual 3.5ghz *figure Crossed*

While we are dreaming how about a trip to the moon on my spaceship i built in my backyard. :D

[wazime]

I don't know if this means anything, I ordered a G5 1.6 last week and it was supposed to ship yesterday (May 7th) but I got an email telling me that the date for shipment has been pushed back til the 17th of May. I called Apple yesterday and told me everything was on track for it to be shipped yesterday, but no shipmen. Now I know that this may mean nothing, but it could also mean that the rumor is true and that they will be updating on the 18th. All I know is that if updates are coming soon I am going to cancel me order and wait till they do update.

Wazime

[wdlove]

I fully expect an update at WWDC -- the issue is it an update worth writing home about? Just as Apple has "refreshed" its laptop lines, they are not going to wait forever to update the PowerMac. For one thing, they can put in new optical drives, update the FW and Power Supply. These may seem minor, but they are definitely worth doing in an update.

(Forget about any announcements for Macworld Boston, of course.)

I not yet ready to give up on a Steve Jobs appearance at MacWorld Boston in July. Still believe in never say never, at least no definitive message has come from Steve that I'm aware.

[FFTT]

I can't imagine any serious G5 update without use of the IBM970FX processor.
All the major G5 problems I hear of currently are related to heat.
The reports I've read indicate that this new improved processor runs not only much cooler, but also uses about half the power.

We can only hope that Apple will continue it's ability to boast
"The Fastest Computer " ratings.

3 GHz Processor speed AND the highest quality in graphics cards will surely be a major consideration if Apple wants to provide the best system available.

Anything less would be a major disappointment.


Personally, I still hope to see major improvements in A/V as well.

Both CPU's and displays should be updated to include HDTV/CPU I/O and picture in picture capabilties.

I would also hope for any A/V model to include at least a 2 channel A/D interface to support audio recording applications.



"Never Hurts To Dream"

[thatwendigo]

I can't imagine any serious G5 update without use of the IBM970FX processor.

You're not trying too hard, then. ;)

By that, I mean that there are all kinds of things that could happen under the "G5" name. It's just a marketing label, after all, and the G4 used in different models just this year isn't the same chip, let alone when compared to past processors. I'm hoping for the debut of 975/980s (whatever they call the Power5-derived chip).

All the major G5 problems I hear of currently are related to heat.
The reports I've read indicate that this new improved processor runs not only much cooler, but also uses about half the power.

In consumer electronics, the heat/power figures are roughly the same. A 60 watt lighbulb puts out a certain amount of displaced heat and draws that many watts, as does a 60 watt computer processor. The original 970 at 2.0ghz drew 50w or thereabouts, and has been cut in half by the die shrink to 90nm.

We can only hope that Apple will continue it's ability to boast
"The Fastest Computer " ratings.

These have been removed because of lawsuits.



Did you read the thread before posting? I'm starting to get the impression you didn't.

[quote]Both CPU's and displays should be updated to include HDTV/CPU I/O and picture in picture capabilties.

I would also hope for any A/V model to include at least a 2 channel A/D interface to support audio recording applications.

Actually, there is no A/V-specific macintosh computer, though one could probably argue that the PowerMac towers are intended for the creative space. However, I'm not really sure what you think that you're talking about... Monitors are already more than capable of HDTV resolutions, and the CPUs can manipulate it. That's what the releases at NAB were all about, really, new HD content codecs and tools, like FinalCut HD.

[FFTT]

I suppose that my views may differ from some users and what I posted here was more of a wish list based on the best technology available.

After spending more than $3500 on the original purchase and upgrades
to my G3/300 A/V tower, I'm going to be damn careful about my next purchase.
There is no question that my new system will be Apple, but only
WHEN I feel that the system they offer will meet my needs for a very long time.

I can't complain about overall quality, since this old machine has never failed me,
but I still see room for improvement in the G5's configuration.

I'm not at all comfortable with a system that requires 9 cooling fans.
What I have read about the 970FX makes me feel that there will be a
better alternative soon.

I'm also hopeful that available choices for graphic and sound cards will improve in the near future.

Displays are a matter of the users needs.

Personally, I will prefer a display that can handle both my CPU input
as well as the signal from my satellite dish. AND allow me to view both
at the same time if I so choose.

These displays are already available, so I can't imagine buying one without these features.

I'm sure all of us hope that Apple will announce something new and exciting in the G5 lineup.

To most of us, it's only a matter of when.

[windowsblowsass]

might not be g5 but im expecting something from freescale at e3 their newsletter is hintin g at something and e3 is the 11-14. so maybe an announcment by freescale there at then an apple anouncement latter that week.

[thatwendigo]

After spending more than $3500 on the original purchase and upgrades to my G3/300 A/V tower, I'm going to be damn careful about my next purchase. There is no question that my new system will be Apple, but only WHEN I feel that the system they offer will meet my needs for a very long time.

I can't complain about overall quality, since this old machine has never failed me, but I still see room for improvement in the G5's configuration.

You spent $3,500 around, what, 6 or 7 year years ago? Adjusting for inflation, you'd probably spend around $4,000-4,200 today, and yet even $3,500 gets you more than ten times the machine. I'm sorry, but what you're about to experience is the effect that a more serious chip design firm can have on update cycle.

I'm not at all comfortable with a system that requires 9 cooling fans. What I have read about the 970FX makes me feel that there will be a
better alternative soon.

I guess it's a good thing that there are nine fans in order to make the machine quiet, rather than out of necessity. I don't know who your sources are or what their agenda is, but the simple fact of the matter is that Apple puts two processors under the hood and equals or beats the PC heat budgets.

I'm also hopeful that available choices for graphic and sound cards will improve in the near future.

Graphics will almost certainly be bumped, but I doubt that you're going to see much of a change in audio. The onboard system for Apple's machines offers more options than most add-on cards for PCs.

Personally, I will prefer a display that can handle both my CPU input
as well as the signal from my satellite dish. AND allow me to view both
at the same time if I so choose.

These displays are already available, so I can't imagine buying one without these features.

So buy one already. There are a million consumer electronics devices, and many of them would make one user or another's life easier, but that doesn't mean Apple could, would, or even should pursue their manufacture. They are a software and computing company before they're anything else. Even when people piss and moan about the iPod being the focus, it doesn't and almost certainly won't, equal the mac in revenue.

If the device exists, then buy it from someone who makes it. If it doesn't, start lobbying companies that build similar ones. It's not like Apple controls the graphics and audio add-on market, nor does it rule the display arena, so your hopes are better aimed at people who spend most of their budget on doing such things.

[FFTT]

The idea of an open forum is to allow people to express their opinion.
I hope you will forgive me for wishing that Apple continues to offer
the finest products available.

[thatwendigo]

The idea of an open forum is to allow people to express their opinion.
I hope you will forgive me for wishing that Apple continues to offer
the finest products available.

Um. Right.

You see, my whole goal was to stop you from commenting, rather than offering competing opinions and logical replies. It had nothing at all to do with pointing out that other companies exist solely to manufacture displays and that they're more likely to do what you want... :rolleyes:

[invaLPsion]

The idea of an open forum is to allow people to express their opinion.
I hope you will forgive me for wishing that Apple continues to offer
the finest products available.

Some people come down on others too much in these forums... :(

[FFTT]

I never intended to cause such a stir with my comments.
I'm also perfectly fine with a good old fashioned heated debate. :-)

It may have been better for me to post my comments to the wish list thread.

I will however stand my ground hoping that Apple does make improvements to the G5 series before I make such a serious investment.

In all fairness, I did a bit of research on the specifications of some
of the available HDTV/CPU displays and did note that the Apple 23"
display far exceeds anything in it's price range for resolution quality.

Even so, I can't ignore the very cool feature of being able to monitor
what's going on in your CPU on a 23" wide screen display,
while watching a big game or your favorite show. And being able to do so for nearly $600.00 less.

I must also keep in mind that Apple hardware is NOT purely Apple.
New improved products will continue to rely on the technology provided
by other manufacturers such as IBM, Motorola, Sony, Pioneer, ATI and so on.

Our loyalty to Apple is for what they provide in the sum of all parts
in a very attractive package.

[Composer]

2004-05-10 - Prochains G5: PPC975

La gamme de G5 prévue initialement prévue pour Janvier sera tout simplement sauté, effacée des roadmaps. On se dirige tout droit vers des G5 bi-3.2 GHz (PPC975 - dont la production en chaîne débute bientôt - + DDR400) pour la WWDC.

IBM a décidé également de changer de fournisseur de waffers pour palier aux problèmes d'impuretés trouvés dans ceux utilisés en gravure à 0.13 um qui ne pardonneront pas à 0.09 um.


original posted on http://croquer.free.fr

altavista translate:

2004-05-10 - Next G5: PPC975 The range of G5 envisaged initially scheduled for January quite simply will be jumped, erased roadmaps. One moves straight towards of G5 Bi-3.2 GHz (PPC975 - whose production in chain begins soon - + DDR400) for the WWDC. IBM also decided to change supplier of waffers for stage to the d'impuretés problems found in those used in engraving with 0.13 um which will not forgive with 0.09 um.

[uzombie]

....
3 GHz Processor speed AND the highest quality in graphics cards will surely be a major consideration if Apple wants to provide the best system available.
...
Anything less would be a major disappointment.
...
"Never Hurts To Dream"

I hope its only been "rumors" of what the real reason for the delay in an updated G5. I tried contacts at IBM and nobody is peepn.

I must ask though, after reading about a possible OSX on Intel/AMD rumor, and since NeXTstep used to run fairly well...what is the line that a G5 is made up of more "PC" parts than it used to? You have SATA, DVR-IDE, PC2100~PC3200, bluetooth, 802.11g, USB2.0, (ok IEEE1394 is Apple), Gigabit ethernet, ... Other than board level management and the G5, its almost (gasp) a PC!

So we have to wait some more, huh?

Cars & Computers are (generally) not an investment item.

/fire away gridly!

[thatwendigo]

I must ask though, after reading about a possible OSX on Intel/AMD rumor, and since NeXTstep used to run fairly well...what is the line that a G5 is made up of more "PC" parts than it used to? You have SATA, DVR-IDE, PC2100~PC3200, bluetooth, 802.11g, USB2.0, (ok IEEE1394 is Apple), Gigabit ethernet, ... Other than board level management and the G5, its almost (gasp) a PC!

The biggest difference in any system is the part that you're downlplaying, otherwise thought of as the "brain" of the computer - processor and motherboard. The rest is just cost saving and standardization, and nothing more. To have expended what Apple has on the PowerPC, only to jump to Intel as the OS is warming to the hardware... Suicide. Pure and simple.

If Apple went to x86, they would be crushed by Microsoft and the combined force of piracy and inability to compete in the budget market.

[numediaman]

2004-05-10 - Prochains G5: PPC975

La gamme de G5 prévue initialement prévue pour Janvier sera tout simplement sauté, effacée des roadmaps. On se dirige tout droit vers des G5 bi-3.2 GHz (PPC975 - dont la production en chaîne débute bientôt - + DDR400) pour la WWDC.

IBM a décidé également de changer de fournisseur de waffers pour palier aux problèmes d'impuretés trouvés dans ceux utilisés en gravure à 0.13 um qui ne pardonneront pas à 0.09 um.


original posted on http://croquer.free.fr

altavista translate:

2004-05-10 - Next G5: PPC975 The range of G5 envisaged initially scheduled for January quite simply will be jumped, erased roadmaps. One moves straight towards of G5 Bi-3.2 GHz (PPC975 - whose production in chain begins soon - + DDR400) for the WWDC. IBM also decided to change supplier of waffers for stage to the d'impuretés problems found in those used in engraving with 0.13 um which will not forgive with 0.09 um.

I was just about to post this myself -- glad I checked to see if anyone else would beat me to it.

This site has a mixed record. But they have managed correct "rumors" in other areas -- maybe they are right here, as well.

[seasley]

I am a newbie lurker who gave up waiting for the G5, and got the new 1.5 Mhz Powerbook instead - sweet machine (and my first mac)! I will probably also get a G5 - but now the need is not so urgent. I wanted to thank the posters here for information, so the first person that emails me at easleystephen@yahoo.com with their dot.mac address will be my "referring member" to .mac, and save 20% when they renew - I am currently in the process of signing up.
Thanks!
Steve

[numediaman]

Went to Best Buy this evening to pick up some printable CDs. Just for laughs I asked anybody I could find there what the bus speed was for the Sony Vaio I was looking at. The salespeople kept telling me the processor speed -- no one knew what bus speed meant. They directed me to a computer there that is hooked up to their web site. I checked that out as well -- no specs.

Oh well, let's hope the French site is spot on with their rumor of a 3.0+ G5 by WWDC.

[FFTT]

The only rumors I've heard about OSX and Wintel/AMD are those
wondering what would happen if Apple offered OSX as an alternative
operating system for existing Windows users.

Obviously there is a huge demand for " something " more secure and reliable than Windows.

The trend seems to focus on those frustrated users turning to Linux.

My personal view, is that Apple should take advantage of Microsoft's
blunders with an aggressive " Try it, you'll like it campaign" including
OSX bundled with Microsoft Office.

Many have mentioned that this might hurt Apple's hardware sales,
but I totally disagree.

In the long run, I think offering OSX ported for Wintel P/C's would create a huge support network of additional hardware and software made for OSX
and Apple would still benefit by offering the finest hardware available once those P/C users see how trouble free their existing system runs on OSX.

I could also see a logical progression to an agreement between Apple and IBM to licence a line of IBM desktops to run on OSX, considering that
the heart of both systems shares the same processor.

Just a thought

[AppleJustWorks]

I personally don't think that putting OS X on PCs would be a bright idea. One of the things that makes Apple special is that they make the hardware, and the software, which means they have all the solutions, there is no "Apple tells you to go to Dell, Dell tells you to go to Apple" type business.

Also, another thing that differenciates Apple is their hardware quality, if Apple just threw the OS at all the manufactures.....It just wouldn't be Apple...



Aside from my personal opinion, Steve made it very clear that he would stick with his own hardware.
Here's a quote from SJ: "It's perfectly technically feasible to port Panther to any processor...We're running it on the PowerPC and we're very happy with the PowerPC....We have all the options in the world, but the PowerPC raod map looks very strong so we don't have any plans to switch processor families at this point.
November 5, 2003 - Apple Analysys Meeting Conference Call

[FFTT]

I totally understand the Apple purist outlook, but also must be realistic by seeing that Apple hardware IS NOT purely Applese.

Personal computers are simply a selection of parts in a box.

While all the bells and whistles make them attractive for the general public,
the operating system is what makes one combination of parts better than the other.

My view looks at companies like ATI giving it's best and finest priority to the market that sells the most computers while Apple seems to be running
on table droppings.

IF ( and it's a big IF ) Apple found a way to lock it's OS only to run on very specific machines, like IBM or AMD. Then that expanded market might
convince companies like ATI to give OSX based machines first priority.

Apple has the copy protection answer right under their noses.
Fortunately for all the hackers and crackers, they haven't yet
taken advantage of what they " could " do.

Anyway, this subject is a bit off topic here, since another thread now
covers OSX on other systems.

Putting this is very simple terms.

Wouldn't it be great if you could walk into ANY computer store
and find everything you need, parts, software and upgrades
all compatible with OSX?

Apple may just be better off in the long run as part of the BIG THREE 64 bit companies
and leave the clones to run on Microsoft Longhorn,
The perfect OS name for users who think like sheep.

[mr_mac]

I can't wait to get new revisions of the G5 so i can change my old DP G5 2GHz!

Just kidding...

but a dualie 3GHz would fit well on my desk...

[wdlove]

I can't wait to get new revisions of the G5 so i can change my old DP G5 2GHz!

Just kidding...

but a dualie 3GHz would fit well on my desk...

I have a Power Mac G4 Dual 450 which will be about 4 years old by the time Rev. B arrives. Your dual 2GHz really can't be considered old.

[MacDaddie0]

If I order some dual 2.0 G5 today, will Apple upgrade my order to the new one if new macs do get released on 18th?

Not being optimisic, just want to know Apple's policy.

However, it would be great if they do release new ones on 18th. :)

[numediaman]

If I order some dual 2.0 G5 today, will Apple upgrade my order to the new one if new macs do get released on 18th?

Not being optimisic, just want to know Apple's policy.

However, it would be great if they do release new ones on 18th. :)

People ask this question all the time. The simple answer is this: if you order a product, and that product is still available, this is what you will receive.

The stories about Apple instantly upgrading people's orders are usually only true when a product has been discontinued and replaced with the currently available model.

Since there will be no G5 update on the 18th, I wouldn't worry about it (boy, I wish I would turn out to be wrong). Just order your G5 and enjoy.

[peaks]

bwaaaaa

You go ahead and do that!

Why would Mac OS work on a PC anyway? With so many users, it would become a target for malicous coders... Besides, Bill seems to be spending a fair amount on updating and upgrading his project. The nature of the beast is that if 95% of users are using it, that's the market.

New Macs coming out on the 18th? Really? What about all of the other countless reports containing actual "dates" of new G5 "speed bumps" and the like? Apple is missing the window(pun intended :)) and by doing so is removing itself further and further from the mainstream. There are those that prefer this, and if Apple can make ends meet doing it, then we have something special - and that's what seems to have happened.

If/when the new 3GHz macs come out, I will buy one. Unless it's two years from now...

Is processor speed coming to a plateau? Is Moore’s law becoming obsolete?

[MacDaddie0]

People ask this question all the time. The simple answer is this: if you order a product, and that product is still available, this is what you will receive.

The stories about Apple instantly upgrading people's orders are usually only true when a product has been discontinued and replaced with the currently available model.

Since there will be no G5 update on the 18th, I wouldn't worry about it (boy, I wish I would turn out to be wrong). Just order your G5 and enjoy.

In anyway, sooner the better to use any Macs then just sit here , dwell upon, and curse on Windows.

Hurry up Apple, ship my stuff :p

[Digitalzoom]

I have been lurking around these forums for a few years now.
This is my first post.
Anyhow, I have been waiting for the 2nd Gen G5 since January - I decided to take the plunge and go for a dual 2 Gig with 128MB video & 250GB Sata HDD.
I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.

[PowerMacMan]

All this suspence is killing me! Especially when this is gonna be my first Apple Computer! :eek:

[aswitcher]

I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.


Could be a sign...but since Tuesday has past this week with no fan fair and the 17th is a Monday, I wouldn't old your breath.

[Borg3of5]

I placed my order with Apple this morning for a refurbished Dual. 1.8, and refurbished 23" HD CD. I decided it wasn't a wise maneuver, so I called back to cancel.

The nice young man that answered the call offered to help me "save" on the system, but I politely declined.

Seems strange that a company that charges a premium for a quality system, would offer "savings" to a customer, especially since this was a refurbished system order. I'm sure this doesn't mean G5 updates soon, but it's quite strange nonetheless.

Anyone else have this experience? :confused:

[MacDaddie0]

I have been lurking around these forums for a few years now.
This is my first post.
Anyhow, I have been waiting for the 2nd Gen G5 since January - I decided to take the plunge and go for a dual 2 Gig with 128MB video & 250GB Sata HDD.
I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.

Perhaps it's coming from overseas?
I just ordered CTO on 10th and ship date is 19th(or before).
Before I was ordering, the website indicated 2~3 business days, but after ordered, it changed to 19th or before.

If this helps anything, also ordered an iPod, it's coming from China in 2 days.
I suspect powermacs are also coming from overseas. What do you all think?

[StudioGuy]

Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

[wdlove]

Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

We are just going to have to be patient. Those will be rewarded that wait! ;)

[iriejedi]

THis should come as no surprise - the 4X media has been in the referb section FOREVER - looks like they need to give away a 5 pack of 4X DVDs with each new monitor purchased to move inventory supplies of both!


Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

[Rower_CPU]

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

[StudioGuy]

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

Ah, I don't track eMac specs - got me there :D
Good point, oh well...still hoping.

[thatwendigo]

My personal view, is that Apple should take advantage of Microsoft's blunders with an aggressive " Try it, you'll like it campaign" including OSX bundled with Microsoft Office.

Many have mentioned that this might hurt Apple's hardware sales,
but I totally disagree.

On what grounds? The massive success of other OSes besides Windows on x86? The way that Dell has basically taken control of the hardware market and locked in with Intel and Microsoft in a triumverate?

Just how does this make any sense?

In the long run, I think offering OSX ported for Wintel P/C's would create a huge support network of additional hardware and software made for OSX and Apple would still benefit by offering the finest hardware available once those P/C users see how trouble free their existing system runs on OSX.

Offering OS X on Intel would turn the system into the modern day Amiga. The company itself would die, the Open Source parts would live on with enthusiasts who eventually have to figure out some way to keep it running, and then the market machine rolls over the corpse. The "trouble free" nature of OS X comes from not supporting insane numbers of hardware configurations, facing the bevy of malicious coders that can write on cheap hardware, and other luxuries we're afforded by our macs.

Remove them, and OS X becomes pretty Windows and nothing more.

I could also see a logical progression to an agreement between Apple and IBM to licence a line of IBM desktops to run on OSX, considering that
the heart of both systems shares the same processor.

Not while Jobs is at the helm, and there's good reason. Cloning nearly killed Apple in the mid to late 90s, and it would do it again if they were to open the hardware - as licensing or x86 on Intel would necessarily do.

Personal computers are simply a selection of parts in a box.

While all the bells and whistles make them attractive for the general public,
the operating system is what makes one combination of parts better than the other.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

There is a difference in hardware or there would be no reason to buy one processor over another, one motherboard over another. As any PC overclocker could tell you - parts make a huge difference in reliability and options available to you.

Don't believe me? Read this. (http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890)

The brand of graphics card can make the difference in performance, heat, memory usage, and a whole other range of factors that can impact your system. Some are better designed than others, some are cheaper, some offer options others don't, but they're all the basic chipset.

I guess the OS is what enables those difference, though. :rolleyes:

IF ( and it's a big IF ) Apple found a way to lock it's OS only to run on very specific machines, like IBM or AMD. Then that expanded market might convince companies like ATI to give OSX based machines first priority.

Like DeCSS, the lock would be broken and OS X would be pirated faster than you could possibly imagine. All it takes is one clever guy out there with a little bit of time to send even the best copy protection limping off with its tail between its legs. This is not an age of easy protection, short of using very strong encryption and other informations security measures that are beyond the average user's comprehension.

Wouldn't it be great if you could walk into ANY computer store and find everything you need, parts, software and upgrades all compatible with OSX?

This won't happen with OS X86. All we'll have is a platform that was a fond memory, and Microsoft won't even have to lift a finger for it to happen.

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

Not to mention that it's likely Apple will be including them in the towers, whenever the revisions are. It's only a little more than a month to WWDC at this point.

[dieselg4]

On what grounds? The massive success of other OSes besides Windows on x86? The way that Dell has basically taken control of the hardware market and locked in with Intel and Microsoft in a triumverate?



Ahh, Amiga. I seem to recall they used Motorola processors too. Kind of an AIO, with that fat-keyuboard Amiga 500. WorkBench was kind of Solaris looking. Anyone remember IBM's OS/2? Or OS/@ Warp? It was much better than Windows 3.11 at the time, but never went anywhere. PNC (A medium sized bank headquartered in Pittsburgh) used it throughout their entire enterprise, even years after it was no longer offically supported. Now its relegated to a blip is computing history, like token-ring networking. . .

[numediaman]

Not to mention that it's likely Apple will be including them in the towers, whenever the revisions are. It's only a little more than a month to WWDC at this point.

It's nice that there is at least one upgrade we can be sure of (the 8X drives) -- but WWDC? I wish we could be so sure. I remember some having the same confidence about MWSF.

In any case, what other upgrades are we 'sure' about for the towers? Graphic cards? Firewire port changes (I've heard there will be changes here)? Power supply? Memory? thatwendigo, you seem more informed than I about these things. What do we know for sure? (as opposed to wild speculation)

[thatwendigo]

It's nice that there is at least one upgrade we can be sure of (the 8X drives) -- but WWDC? I wish we could be so sure. I remember some having the same confidence about MWSF.

If Apple doesn't at least partly update the line at WWDC, I think we'lll be in some serious trouble as a user group. This is a window of opportunity the likes of which they haven't had since before Microsoft managed to market their way into dominance. I believe we'll at least get announcements of new PowerMacs, and I'm thinking that we really need at least a rollout of new models or a hard timeframe of when they're coming.

Anything else, and there really will be a serious reason for people to jump ship.

In any case, what other upgrades are we 'sure' about for the towers? Graphic cards? Firewire port changes (I've heard there will be changes here)? Power supply? Memory? thatwendigo, you seem more informed than I about these things. What do we know for sure? (as opposed to wild speculation)

What am I "sure" about? That's difficult, since I'm dwelling in the nebulous field of industry standards, competitor's specs, and other things that could easily impact the Apple line. I've done a couple of lists, constantly revising them, for what I think should by put in the PowerMacs, and a few others where I've speculated about what we might see.

Let's divide this two ways:

Almost-Certain Updates
Revised 970fx processors up to at least 2.6ghz with commensurate FSB
Better graphics cards (9800XT or similar) with a possible bump at the low end (GeForce FX 5600 Ultra or ATI 9600 Pro) for towers
SATA RAID controllers
8x SuperDrives
A fix for the audio noise issues.

Things I Would Like To See
975 dual-cores in dual-processor motherboards using full HyperTransport, clocking at 2.6, 3.0, and 3.4 ghz. They will hopefully have the on-die memory controller and high speed interconnect between processing units, along with SMT. This would afford Apple's pro users a line of towers with 8 processors as far as the system is concerned.
Move to PC4200 dual-channel RAM.
Adopt the ATI x800 PCI-Extreme card as top-end, while adding PCI-Extreme and keeping AGP 8x for legacy cards.
The reappearance of the Quadro FX, FireGL, and Wildcat graphics cards for pro users. In tests where the G5 is getting beaten, it tends to be the GPU that does it.
Solving the reported PCI incompatibilities.
Offer 10000RPM SATA RAID as standard on at least the top tower, BTO on the lower ones.
12x SuperDrives
Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.
Use of the FreeScale e600 in the PowerBooks, rather than the G5. For the love of God, use the e600 instead.
OS X 10.3.5 - Optimized for SMT, using XCC instead of GCC, and only available for the G5.

[BakedBeans]

If Apple doesn't at least partly update the line at WWDC, I think we'lll be in some serious trouble as a user group. This is a window of opportunity the likes of which they haven't had since before Microsoft managed to market their way into dominance. I believe we'll at least get announcements of new PowerMacs, and I'm thinking that we really need at least a rollout of new models or a hard timeframe of when they're coming.

Anything else, and there really will be a serious reason for people to jump ship.



What am I "sure" about? That's difficult, since I'm dwelling in the nebulous field of industry standards, competitor's specs, and other things that could easily impact the Apple line. I've done a couple of lists, constantly revising them, for what I think should by put in the PowerMacs, and a few others where I've speculated about what we might see.

Let's divide this two ways:

Almost-Certain Updates
Revised 970fx processors up to at least 2.6ghz with commensurate FSB
Better graphics cards (9800XT or similar) with a possible bump at the low end (GeForce FX 5600 Ultra or ATI 9600 Pro) for towers
SATA RAID controllers
8x SuperDrives
A fix for the audio noise issues.

Things I Would Like To See
975 dual-cores in dual-processor motherboards using full HyperTransport, clocking at 2.6, 3.0, and 3.4 ghz. They will hopefully have the on-die memory controller and high speed interconnect between processing units, along with SMT. This would afford Apple's pro users a line of towers with 8 processors as far as the system is concerned.
Move to PC4200 dual-channel RAM.
Adopt the ATI x800 PCI-Extreme card as top-end, while adding PCI-Extreme and keeping AGP 8x for legacy cards.
The reappearance of the Quadro FX, FireGL, and Wildcat graphics cards for pro users. In tests where the G5 is getting beaten, it tends to be the GPU that does it.
Solving the reported PCI incompatibilities.
Offer 10000RPM SATA RAID as standard on at least the top tower, BTO on the lower ones.
12x SuperDrives
Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.
Use of the FreeScale e600 in the PowerBooks, rather than the G5. For the love of God, use the e600 instead.
OS X 10.3.5 - Optimized for SMT, using XCC instead of GCC, and only available for the G5.


kill of the imac.... thats a bit of a statement isnt it?
i think a revised imac G5, from an apple marketing point of veiw they need a machine like the imac

just my tupence

[oldpismo]

Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.

Noooooooo, the main advantage of the iMac is that it is a decent looking machine in a relatively small package. This makes it the ideal machine to be used as part of the digital home/hub. You can easily have it sitting in the living room, looking good, and coordinating your digital life.

A tower just can't do that as it is too big, even a cube with a seperate screen is too big in some cases. Yes some people may have enough space to hide the box away, but I would guess that not many people have room in their living rooms to hide a tower.

By all means keep a single processor tower, but don't kill of the iMac.

Peter

[thatwendigo]

kill of the imac.... thats a bit of a statement isnt it?

Yes, and it says "this form factor can't contain modern components anymore. If you want speedy, you need to deal withthe fact that it will be ridiculously expensive, bigger, or both."

i think a revised imac G5, from an apple marketing point of veiw they need a machine like the imac

There is no "revised imac G5" because there is no iMac G5 to begin with. I still have yet to see anyone offer a serious challenge to my heat figures on the G5 iMac/PowerBook and other small formfactor darlings.

Marketing cannot change reality.

Noooooooo, the main advantage of the iMac is that it is a decent looking machine in a relatively small package. This makes it the ideal machine to be used as part of the digital home/hub. You can easily have it sitting in the living room, looking good, and coordinating your digital life.

Yes, but without a chip like the FreeScale e600/e700, there's not going to be a way to create a competitively specced system that will at all outperform the current offerings. The limitations on heat expenditure are such that any processor that beats the G4 is going to be hotter, and the case is already kind of limited in displacement of that burden. Either it has to get bigger, employ some new cooling scheme, or both measures, and all of that means greater expense at some level.

A tower just can't do that as it is too big, even a cube with a seperate screen is too big in some cases. Yes some people may have enough space to hide the box away, but I would guess that not many people have room in their living rooms to hide a tower.

A word for you: MiniATX.

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

[BakedBeans]

Yes, and it says "this form factor can't contain modern components anymore. If you want speedy, you need to deal withthe fact that it will be ridiculously expensive, bigger, or both."



There is no "revised imac G5" because there is no iMac G5 to begin with. I still have yet to see anyone offer a serious challenge to my heat figures on the G5 iMac/PowerBook and other small formfactor darlings.

Marketing cannot change reality.



Yes, but without a chip like the FreeScale e600/e700, there's not going to be a way to create a competitively specced system that will at all outperform the current offerings. The limitations on heat expenditure are such that any processor that beats the G4 is going to be hotter, and the case is already kind of limited in displacement of that burden. Either it has to get bigger, employ some new cooling scheme, or both measures, and all of that means greater expense at some level.



A word for you: MiniATX.

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

look apple simply are not stupid enough to do away with the imac, and what i ment was revise the imacs to a g5, even if this means changing them slightly,

i havnt looked at your posts about heat ect ect... the only chance i get to post on these forums is from work ... or at home on my days of whilst looking after my child

but your so wrong about the imac....replaced qwith a tower?? leaving just the emac as the lone all in one... i think not

[thatwendigo]

look apple simply are not stupid enough to do away with the imac, and what i ment was revise the imacs to a g5, even if this means changing them slightly,

i havnt looked at your posts about heat ect ect... the only chance i get to post on these forums is from work ... or at home on my days of whilst looking after my child

It's going to take a lot more than slight modification, and if you can't be bothered to understand why, then you shouldn't be posting about it. We don't need people responding with ignorance, and the posts that people make are generally just wish-lists and gimme-gimmes that have little to do with reality. I research my points, offer links and backing information, and I get opinions in response.

So, before you start talking about the iMac and how easy it supposedly would be, how about to go back and reread this thread? I cover basically everything on it.

but your so wrong about the imac....replaced qwith a tower?? leaving just the emac as the lone all in one... i think not

Many companies don't offer an all-in-one, and even your desires must bow to physics. That's just how it is.

[BakedBeans]

It's going to take a lot more than slight modification, and if you can't be bothered to understand why, then you shouldn't be posting about it. We don't need people responding with ignorance, and the posts that people make are generally just wish-lists and gimme-gimmes that have little to do with reality. I research my points, offer links and backing information, and I get opinions in response.

So, before you start talking about the iMac and how easy it supposedly would be, how about to go back and reread this thread? I cover basically everything on it.



Many companies don't offer an all-in-one, and even your desires must bow to physics. That's just how it is.

firstly i do understand why, infact im sure i understand alot more about it that you, as for calling me ignorant, well thaqts just showing how arrogant you obviously are,

i am saying that the imac from a marketing point of veiw (something you cannot come to grips with) is not an option to have its a must

you post on here and expect people to take your word as fact then give opinions... im not sure who you think you are exactly, but i am bound by contract not to speak about some of the things you post about (if you know what i mean) otherwise i would be able to make you look very small indeed, although i think you will do this for yourself as soon as the new i mac is unvailed,

please lets not get into a flaming match, but i cant apose your points in the way i would like to

[oldpismo]

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it :(

For information, I want to use it for photo viewing and video editing in the most part, as well as music, email and web browsing.

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.

[BakedBeans]

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it :(

For information, I want to use it for photo viewing and video editing in the most part, as well as music, email and web browsing.

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.


yeah i have a house in the uk (hampshire) and the house was £240k and you cant swing a cat in it.
and of course you dont want to have your computer in the living room, how anoying is keyboard noise when your trying to watch eastenders(lol)
plus if you have kids then they will just destroy it...
also looks a bit **** when you got loads of stuff in the room

i agree with you on the coolibng side of things (check the powermacs out for fancy cooling (i am proud))
EDIT: of apple of course

[thatwendigo]

i am saying that the imac from a marketing point of veiw (something you cannot come to grips with) is not an option to have its a must

Let me try this again...

Marketing can't make physics go away. I understand perfectly what you're saying about the iMac needing more power, but that doesn't change things like convection and wattage.

you post on here and expect people to take your word as fact then give opinions... im not sure who you think you are exactly, but i am bound by contract not to speak about some of the things you post about (if you know what i mean) otherwise i would be able to make you look very small indeed, although i think you will do this for yourself as soon as the new i mac is unvailed,

please lets not get into a flaming match, but i cant apose your points in the way i would like to

I never claimed that my position was more than opinion, when it is opinion. I link to facts, link to stories, and other ways of backing my positions. The MPC7447A runs at 11-12 watts at peak. That is fact. The 970fx runs at 25-30 watts at peak. That is fact. The current G4 iMac formfactor is designed with the MPC74xx series in mind, uses a lower graphics card, and doesn't have a whole lot of room for allowing passive cooling. That is fact.

I'm not impressed by claims of NDAs, because you don't even link to things that aren't covered by them. This is backpedalling and if you were restricted by one that would prevent you from talking, you'd also be restricted from mentioning the fact. Even implying that Apple has a revised iMac on the line (as you are) is probably a violation if it has anything to do with your work.

In other words: I either hope your bosses never find this board (for your child's sake), or I know that you're lying.

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it :(

Well, yeah, but it's not Apple's fault if your wife doesn't play along. ;)

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.

People don't seem to get that I'm saying the G5 iMac just isn't going to fit into the current form factor, and that a redesign will take much better airflow to achieve the size. Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.

My objection is to the ridiculousness of people's wants, not to existence of an "iMac G5." If it's going to be done, it needs to be done right, not as a crappy sop to "marketing."

[oldpismo]

Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Firstly, it is always dodgy accusing people of lying, as it is unlikely that any individual knows everything. As it happens I have had my Dell Latitude D600 for a few months now. The spec is as follows according to the dell.co.uk web site

Up to Intel ® Pentium ® M processor 745 (1.80GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 400Mhz FSB and 855GME chipset)


Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.


Then the other point that I made was that I am fully expecting to have the iMac remodelled to improve the ventillation, and would not mind if it was bigger than the current model to compensate.

Also, spending quite alot of time in Japan, I am aware of how well things can be designed to minimise the size and increase the performance. It's a difficult problem I will admit, but one that I believe that the people at apple can solve. They are after all some of the best in the world at it.

[BakedBeans]

Let me try this again...

Marketing can't make physics go away. I understand perfectly what you're saying about the iMac needing more power, but that doesn't change things like convection and wattage.



I never claimed that my position was more than opinion, when it is opinion. I link to facts, link to stories, and other ways of backing my positions. The MPC7447A runs at 11-12 watts at peak. That is fact. The 970fx runs at 25-30 watts at peak. That is fact. The current G4 iMac formfactor is designed with the MPC74xx series in mind, uses a lower graphics card, and doesn't have a whole lot of room for allowing passive cooling. That is fact.

I'm not impressed by claims of NDAs, because you don't even link to things that aren't covered by them. This is backpedalling and if you were restricted by one that would prevent you from talking, you'd also be restricted from mentioning the fact. Even implying that Apple has a revised iMac on the line (as you are) is probably a violation if it has anything to do with your work.

In other words: I either hope your bosses never find this board (for your child's sake), or I know that you're lying.



Well, yeah, but it's not Apple's fault if your wife doesn't play along. ;)



People don't seem to get that I'm saying the G5 iMac just isn't going to fit into the current form factor, and that a redesign will take much better airflow to achieve the size. Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.

My objection is to the ridiculousness of people's wants, not to existence of an "iMac G5." If it's going to be done, it needs to be done right, not as a crappy sop to "marketing."


your partronising the wrong person pal

firstly i have not said that they have revised the imac at all
secondly i have no restrictions about talking about my restrictions
thirdly please dont mention my child whilst speaking to me as you have no idea of my finacial situation ( what i took from you saying "for your childs sake" )
i have no need for a job... i do it because it is a passion

and to add i have not said that they can put the g5 in the current form
i was just saying that they need to keep the imac "like" the imac for marketing reasons.. and however much you harp on about not being able to cool it or fit it in is going to change that it will in my opinion stay nearly the same

[thatwendigo]

Firstly, it is always dodgy accusing people of lying, as it is unlikely that any individual knows everything. As it happens I have had my Dell Latitude D600 for a few months now. The spec is as follows according to the dell.co.uk web site

Up to Intel ® Pentium ® M processor 745 (1.80GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 400Mhz FSB and 855GME chipset)

Yeah, that "Intel® Pentium® M Processor 745 (1.80 GHz, 2MB L2 Cache)" is a new part, so I'd love to hear how you got one a few months ago. They didn't exist commercially until last week, when the revised chips were released. There are a couple ways I can tell, and one of those is the 7xx naming scheme, and the other is the fact that it's over 1.7ghz. Also, if you click on the Customize tab and go to "Help Me Choose," you come up with a chart that shows I'm right. Centrino 735, 745, and 755 processors all have 2MB of L2 cache, which is a Dothan refinement.

So, rather than calling me "dodgy," how about we hear how you acquired a laptop "months" before it was available?

Then the other point that I made was that I am fully expecting to have the iMac remodelled to improve the ventillation, and would not mind if it was bigger than the current model to compensate.

Also, spending quite alot of time in Japan, I am aware of how well things can be designed to minimise the size and increase the performance. It's a difficult problem I will admit, but one that I believe that the people at apple can solve. They are after all some of the best in the world at it.

As I said... The iMac might be possible if the form factor is revised, but it won't be nearly as small as it is now. There's too much heat to dissipate and expecting something even remotely the same is a recipe for disappointment.

I have faith in Apple's engineers, as well, but I don't believe that they're going to break the laws of physics.

firstly i have not said that they have revised the imac at all secondly i have no restrictions about talking about my restrictions thirdly please dont mention my child whilst speaking to me as you have no idea of my finacial situation ( what i took from you saying "for your childs sake" ) i have no need for a job... i do it because it is a passion

In order: You've said that you have special knowledge that somehow makes you more right than me, and that this applies to the iMac. That's pretty NDA0implying and borderline revealing. If you have no need for a job, then why is there any restriction on your posting ability, since you gave it as a reason for not being able to reply more fully? Also, if you don't want me to mention that I fear for your child's financial security, don't bring him or her up as a part of the argument.

and however much you harp on about not being able to cool it or fit it in is going to change that it will in my opinion stay nearly the same

Have you ever met a poster named Dont Hurt Me? I think you two would get along.

--

As a footnote, I'm kind of sick at the moment, so if I'm coming across as more of an ass than normal, I'm sorry. I'm logging off the computer and taking a nap now.

[iriejedi]

You... you - Bubble Burster!

:p :eek: :o :rolleyes: :) :cool:

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

[FFTT]

Well ****fire!

We all have those hate the world days!

AND days where all of us are as grumpy as a toddler who's
badly in need of a nap.

;)

[Genie]

I'll sell you my G5

[FFTT]

If Apple doesn't at least partly update the line at WWDC, I think we'llwe'll be in some serious trouble as a user group. This is a window of opportunity the likes of which they haven't had since before Microsoft managed to market their way into dominance. I believe we'll at least get announcements of new PowerMacs, and I'm thinking that we really need at least a rollout of new models or a hard timeframe of when they're coming.

Anything else, and there really will be a serious reason for people to jump ship.



What am I "sure" about? That's difficult, since I'm dwelling in the nebulous field of industry standards, competitor's specs, and other things that could easily impact the Apple line. I've done a couple of lists, constantly revising them, for what I think should by put in the PowerMacs, and a few others where I've speculated about what we might see.

Let's divide this two ways:

Almost-Certain Updates
Revised 970fx processors up to at least 2.6ghz with commensurate FSB
Better graphics cards (9800XT or similar) with a possible bump at the low end (GeForce FX 5600 Ultra or ATI 9600 Pro) for towers
SATA RAID controllers
8x SuperDrives
A fix for the audio noise issues.

Things I Would Like To See
975 dual-cores in dual-processor motherboards using full HyperTransport, clocking at 2.6, 3.0, and 3.4 ghz. They will hopefully have the on-die memory controller and high speed interconnect between processing units, along with SMT. This would afford Apple's pro users a line of towers with 8 processors as far as the system is concerned.
Move to PC4200 dual-channel RAM.
Adopt the ATI x800 PCI-Extreme card as top-end, while adding PCI-Extreme and keeping AGP 8x for legacy cards.
The reappearance of the Quadro FX, FireGL, and Wildcat graphics cards for pro users. In tests where the G5 is getting beaten, it tends to be the GPU that does it.
Solving the reported PCI incompatibilities.
Offer 10000RPM SATA RAID as standard on at least the top tower, BTO on the lower ones.
12x SuperDrives
Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.
Use of the FreeScale e600 in the PowerBooks, rather than the G5. For the love of God, use the e600 instead.
OS X 10.3.5 - Optimized for SMT, using XCC instead of GCC, and only available for the G5.

Actually you do quite well at reinforcing my wish list, only you are a bit
too strongly worded in how you express your rebutals.

We DO agree that Apple SHOULD have the best selection of pro parts in the industry.

I also do appreciate that you are more aware of specific upgrades coming into the picture and would like to see those improvements as well.
Including better audio support.

As far as preventing duplication of OSX for use in unauthorized machines,

If I told you I'd have to kill you! :-)

[RndmAxess]

Deleted

[wdlove]

I don't blame Genie at all, she is a very lovely nice young lady! ;)

FFTT Listed under "Things I Would Like To See" #10 are you hoping for and OS X that uses the 64 bit?

[thatwendigo]

FFTT Listed under "Things I Would Like To See" #10 are you hoping for and OS X that uses the 64 bit?

Actually, that's my list, and I'm not expecting there to be much, if any, benefit to changing OS X to a 64-bit system for a while yet. It's still not common to go above 4GB of RAM and consumers aren't using 64-bit math, so there really wouldn't be much of a reason for it yet.

Instead, hardware optimizations specific to the G5 (or other chips, if you pat attention to the rest of my wants list) seem more appropriate.

[Digitalzoom]

Just had it comfirmed by Apple UK - Powermacs are being upgraded 18th May!!. This was the reason for the delay on my CTO Powermac.
The guy I spoke to wouldn't give me the new specs but told me I would recieve a email later today giving me the new specs. Can't wait to see the new specs are. I would love to see a dual 3Ghz but I'm happy with any upgrade.
:D

[BakedBeans]

Just had it comfirmed by Apple UK - Powermacs are being upgraded 18th May!!. This was the reason for the delay on my CTO Powermac.
The guy I spoke to wouldn't give me the new specs but told me I would recieve a email later today giving me the new specs. Can't wait to see the new specs are. I would love to see a dual 3Ghz but I'm happy with any upgrade.
:D

are you lying???

[NusuniAdmin]

One more day and we find out :)

[Skiniftz]

One more day and we find out :)

Find out what? There will be no update. In the unlikely event there is, I will buy the top end.

[BakedBeans]

Just had it comfirmed by Apple UK - Powermacs are being upgraded 18th May!!. This was the reason for the delay on my CTO Powermac.
The guy I spoke to wouldn't give me the new specs but told me I would recieve a email later today giving me the new specs. Can't wait to see the new specs are. I would love to see a dual 3Ghz but I'm happy with any upgrade.
:D

SO DID YOU GET THIS EMAIL?????

[wdlove]

SO DID YOU GET THIS EMAIL?????

I doubt that he will be able to tell, he may have a non disclosure agreement. We have less than 24 hours now to find out. At least we know for sure that we will get another free song!

[Digitalzoom]

I have had a email cancelling my original order along witha new order number - but the new order number brings up jack when I enter into Apple's order tracking system.
I'd be peeved if they were not updated after what the guy told me this morning.
As soon as I get any more info I'll post it here.

[Zaty]

Less than 24 hours to go. Interestingly, now new rumours have appeared since the intial May 18th one. My guess still is that we'll have to wait until WWDC. But I woulnd't mind if were to be proved wrong in a few hours. :)

[Johnkb]

I find it very hard to believe that the Apple operator would say anything like this. Especially quoting an actual date. It just doesn't seem to fit. I'm not saying he didn't say this, but it's just hard to believe. What were his exact words??

[sebaz]

I have had a email cancelling my original order along witha new order number - but the new order number brings up jack when I enter into Apple's order tracking system.
I'd be peeved if they were not updated after what the guy told me this morning.
As soon as I get any more info I'll post it here.

By new order # you mean something like M9020LL/A (thats the G5 1.6 order number in the USA btw)?

If you have a new neverseen before order number, we may be getting into something...

[thatwendigo]

I call foul, on two counts. The first is that I find it extremely unlikely that Apple would pre-announce through email what they haven't even called press for. MacRumors has traditionally been pretty decent at noting when Apple sends out invitations to the news agencies to show up for a product announcement and I've not seen anything about this. Most likely he's being upgraded to the next highest model due to wait over the one he ordered, as I've heard of such things happening for particularly hard-to-fill or botched orders in the past. Perhaps the poster who claims his upgrade could sanitize his email of any identifying information and post it here, so that we could see for ourselves what Apple has to say.

Secondly, I was at my local reseller today, and there was no sign of change or of new materials and they've been pretty good about getting things as soon as possible. The workers were all casually discussing the rumors with me, and they all agreed that the most likely course of action is that we'll see some kind of update at WWDC. While this is hardly a conclusive point, the only marked-down inventory were portables that are now a generation back.

[Johnkb]

Talking to an apple operator, I was told that they usually don't find out till 5 minutes prior. She said she's in the dark just like the rest of us. Not sure if this is the truth or not.

[dornball]

so what's the answer from the email? ;)

[aswitcher]

Talking to an apple operator, I was told that they usually don't find out till 5 minutes prior. She said she's in the dark just like the rest of us. Not sure if this is the truth or not.


Thats my understanding as well. Resellers here in Oz for example were completely suprised by the emac upgrade earlier this year and Apple A were non the wiser...

[gerardrj]

By new order # you mean something like M9020LL/A (thats the G5 1.6 order number in the USA btw)?

If you have a new neverseen before order number, we may be getting into something...

That's not an order number, that's a part number or model number.

[ph_555_shag]

PLEASE be new power macs, we need to buy a new computer before the end of the financial year on july 30....... COME ON!!!!!

[aswitcher]

PLEASE be new power macs, we need to buy a new computer before the end of the financial year on july 30....... COME ON!!!!!


I think you'll find the FY ends 30 June... ;)

[ITMediaCo]

I think you'll find the FY ends 30 June... ;)

I thought it was October.

[aswitcher]

I thought it was October.

:eek:

FBT year ends 30 April.

End of October is Halloween ;)

[Skiniftz]

I say it again - there is no way at this stage of the year that Jobs is going to miss his chance to say "Just one more thing..." on stage at WWDC. Unless of course we are going to see 2.6Ghz now and 3Ghz announced in a month...but that would be silly.

[.a]

well, whatever happens - i have to buy one ... probably with 4gb of ram for the start - hope to get my hands on those 2gb ram modules - they are quite rare/non existing (?) in switzerland ...
.a

[Skiniftz]

well, whatever happens - i have to buy one ... probably with 4gb of ram for the start - hope to get my hands on those 2gb ram modules - they are quite rare/non existing (?) in switzerland ...
.a
I'm assuming you know this, and I don't want to sound patronising here, but I can not stand by and let someone be unbelievably and blatantly ripped off silly by Apple just in case you are not aware of something.

Namely, do not, under any circumstances, buy RAM from Apple.

(Unless of course you have lots of money you need to get rid of in which case email me and I can suggest many ways of solving this problem...)

[Johnkb]

I guess there are no updates, as expected.

[.a]

I'm assuming you know this, and I don't want to sound patronising here, but I can not stand by and let someone be unbelievably and blatantly ripped off silly by Apple just in case you are not aware of something.

Namely, do not, under any circumstances, buy RAM from Apple.

(Unless of course you have lots of money you need to get rid of in which case email me and I can suggest many ways of solving this problem...)

thanks a lot for your warning! yes, i know that apple charges way too much for their ram (i think it's about three to four times more ... ). i should have been more precise ... i'll order a g5 with 512mb (or whatever the base of rev.b will be) and order 4gb in addition from another reseller - do you know about any 2gb modules?
thx again!
.a

[Mr. Anderson]

I guess there are no updates, as expected.

nope - it just didn't make sense with WWDC around the corner.....

now we just have to wait for all the other faux Tuesday release dates until June :D

D

[numediaman]

What? The new G5s weren't announced on March 23rd? :D

Let's hope that the rumor heats up the closer we get to WWDC.

[CmdrLaForge]

With WWDC a little bit more then one month away I don't see any updates until then. On WWDC I expect:
- iMac G5
- New PowerMac with dual 3.0 GHz max.
- new displays
- 4th generation iPod
- one more thing

[itsa]

So much for this rumor! :)

[iriejedi]

Here's the deal - if you want accuracy you have to add a year to the date!

March 23rd, May 18th bah Hum bug!

Now June 15th 2004 or 2007 or 2010 Those are predictions! That specifies one and only one day. May 18th is a regular accurance and where is the spine in that predicition? I mean all it takes is onle elementary school comeback ... "I meant NEXT May 18th (including the mandatory toung sticking out gesture)" to back up original rumor - now if the rumor attached a YEAR to the date.... Like May 18th, 2004 - that is a person with backbone!

:eek:

So off to the rumor mill Bar and Grill to hang out with everyone getting on the WWDC band wagon!


So much for this rumor! :)

[Skiniftz]

Well I have to say it..

I TOLD YOU SO!!!

[wdlove]

I was among those that wasn't expecting anything today. So much for the rumors. There certainly is no reason for Apple to make any announcements till WWDC since they have the $500 off with the purchase of a G5 and a 23" Cinema Display.

[DrGruv1]

I was among those that wasn't expecting anything today. So much for the rumors. There certainly is no reason for Apple to make any announcements till WWDC since they have the $500 off with the purchase of a G5 and a 23" Cinema Display.

It would keep me going till the dual 3ghz... seems like a waste of $1000 though (that's the problem) hard to throw $1000 at something...

BUT if the 3ghz don't show till Jan. 05... it would be worth it

-ideas?

[gerardrj]

I think you'll find the FY ends 30 June... ;)

It varies by company. The person who made the comment was apparently referring to the financial cycle of the company for which he or she works.

A company can have their fiscal year end just about whenever they want, it's an arbitrary thing, but it will (must?) coincide with the end of a quarter.

[aswitcher]

It varies by company. The person who made the comment was apparently referring to the financial cycle of the company for which he or she works.

A company can have their fiscal year end just about whenever they want, it's an arbitrary thing, but it will (must?) coincide with the end of a quarter.

Oh, ok. Weird. Never heard of Financial Year referring to anything but the tax year ending in June.

[NusuniAdmin]

oh well, no updates...darn. Guess we have sometin to look forward too in june :). I am still hoping for g5 update, new imac (steve is gonna have a heart attack and probly make out with one on stage), of course Tiger, and maybe new ipod and ipod mini.

[itsa]

I was among those that wasn't expecting anything today. So much for the rumors. There certainly is no reason for Apple to make any announcements till WWDC since they have the $500 off with the purchase of a G5 and a 23" Cinema Display.

Call me CRAZY but I expect something EVERY week from apple.
maybe not a new line every week.. but for sure something. I think something is wrong when there are no changes at apple.

As for them displays.... They still are not worth the price! Even if they dropped the fact that you must buy a G5 with it to get the discount.
There are far too many better Displays out there that even look better with the G5 to waist that kind of money.

Crazy! There I did it for you.

[SeaFox]

Am I the only one NOT surprised Mr Digitalzoom is gone now.

"I just had it confirmed" my a**!

[rdowns]

Let's hope that the rumor heats up the closer we get to WWDC.

Cue thatwendingo. Time for another G5 and heat related issues post. :D

[tunanut]

why is it everytime i DON'T want to buy a new mac, there seem to be flooding the market with revisions, but now, when i would love to see the dual 2g drop in price, i'm growing cobwebs on my amex?

so what's the deal with the monitors, no great shakes? i heard the 20" is all around better rez, but what brands/models are superior (in your humble, unbiased opinion)?

[ClimbingTheLog]

Oh, ok. Weird. Never heard of Financial Year referring to anything but the tax year ending in June.

When you set up a company you elect whatever tax year you want. The tax year might end in June in your company but at another it might be on September 16th (though it's almost always at the end of a quarter).

June 30 is most popular because December 30th is Christmas and this way everything can be wrapped up for the year before people go on vacation.

Oh, back on topic, we need a Luser! icon for this topic to indicate it's a turd. No updates. -50 hit points for the rumor monger.

[ClimbingTheLog]

why is it everytime i DON'T want to buy a new mac, there seem to be flooding the market with revisions, but now, when i would love to see the dual 2g drop in price, i'm growing cobwebs on my amex?

Which do you want? Price drops or new revisions? They're mutually exclusive. When a product is on its way out you get price drops and special promotions. When it's brand new you pay top dollar.

[Crikey]

I guess there are no updates, as expected.

Oh, but I disagree! GarageBand 1.1 will be of more immediate use to me than a dual 3-GHz G5 would have been. ;-) I've got to pay off some of these new music toys before I can afford a new Mac. End of June should be just about right!

Thank you Apple, for a happy May 18th!


Crikey