PDA

View Full Version : New PowerMac G4's at MWNY


arn
Jul 8, 2002, 06:58 PM
RailheadDesign (http://www.railheaddesign.com/) posts specs and details about upcoming PowerMac G4's at MacWorld Expo 2002:

- Quicksilver is dead.
- 1GHz, 1.2GHz (dual), and 1.4GHz (dual)
- more internal bays
- GeForce 4 MX, GeForce4 Titanium
- 60GB, 80GB, 2x80GB
- same price structure

This approximates (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/05/20020511173913.shtml) older Macworld NY 2002 PowerMac rumors.

jadam
Jul 8, 2002, 07:15 PM
W00t!!!!

menoinjun
Jul 8, 2002, 07:18 PM
Quicksilver is dead? I hope that means a more burshed metal theme, but not like the recent xserve/quicksilver mockup posted. Not that it's a bad mockup, but then the tower would be just like a cheezy standard wintel tower design.

-Pete

JamSoft
Jul 8, 2002, 07:21 PM
These specs are the ones I'm hoping for... but some people say it's still too optomistic...

macosrumors.com posted the same specs — only to then quickly update them saying that 1.33Ghz or 1.22Ghz (I believe) is probably what will happen (according to some sources).

who knows though... :)

Backtothemac
Jul 8, 2002, 07:30 PM
Well, having known Maury for the last three years, I can tell you that he won't post specs unless he is pretty sure that they are right. These are right what I have been saying since February, except I heard 120GB in the top of the line instead of two 80's. Also, 2 gigs of DDR instead of 1.5 GB. Other than that it looks dead on. New case! Hell yea~!

SPG
Jul 8, 2002, 07:32 PM
C'mon! I want some real wild wild speculation! 5ghz G5s for everyone!

job
Jul 8, 2002, 07:57 PM
The specs sound about right.

Looks like I will be buying the baseline 1Ghz come July 17th. :D I just hope it has DDR-RAM too.

JtheLemur
Jul 8, 2002, 08:13 PM
DIE EL CAPITAN!!! =D hehe...

Railhead's usually been pretty spot on, so I 'trust' them more than MOSR. Lately MOSR has been my place for reading stuff then arguing with people about - pure filler speculative crap. Can't WAIT to see a new enclosure!

Tue12
Jul 8, 2002, 08:19 PM
Not great, but not horrible.

But I do wish that PowerMac iterations came every 4-5 months instead of every 6-7 months.

:cool:

solvs
Jul 8, 2002, 08:19 PM
I like the Dual 1.2 GHz. But 2x 80GB hard drives when you can get 120GB drives now for $150. And with ATA/133, you can get 160GB 5.400 RPM Maxtor, soon 200GB 7,200 RPM Western Digital drives. ATA/66 (can you believe Apple still uses that?) can't see anything over like 128-137GB. Neither can the ATA/100 in the xServe. At least, not without special software or some kind of firmware upgrade. It's not about the real world performance, it's about limits.

How about a Radeon 8500 (with TV-Out) as an upgrade option? Or the Radeon 7000 PCI (with TV-Out) as an add-on? Or sound in? 2 CD drives would be cool, too.

And DDR-Ram (333 MHz with a DDR 166 MHz system bus would be nice, but I'm trying to think realistic). There's enough of an increase in performance to be noticed.

I know, I'm asking for too much. It's almost like I'm asking them to build a computer with realistic, modern day specs everyone else seems to want and are willing to spend thousands of $$$ on. ;)

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

DavPeanut
Jul 8, 2002, 09:24 PM
I like the two Dual Proccessor Models idea

gandalf55
Jul 8, 2002, 10:16 PM
this new enclosure isn't going to be white is it? yuk. personally i don't mind quicksilver, i wonder what apple has up their sleeves.

anything metallic would be nice - dark grey brushed alumnim with a hint of blue?

canadianmacguy
Jul 8, 2002, 10:22 PM
I really hope (assuming there is a new case) that it's quieter.. I work at home, and my dual 1 GHz is so loud compared to my PowerBook g3, it's refreshing to put the dual to sleep at the end of the day..

It's loud enough to temp me enough to change all my development work to a PowerBook G4..

(Although my home office is very quiet :)

King Cobra
Jul 8, 2002, 10:26 PM
Here is why I worry about two PowerMacs with dual processors. How expensive would the top of the line 1.4GHz dual be anyways? Can Apple afford to push their Macs so high in price? (I'm not so sure what it would be, but the most I would expect is $3494 for the high end.) And what about dual 1.2GHz to 1.4GHz? If dual 1000MHz chips brought the price of the PowerMac to $3000, wouldn't a dual 1.2GHz with DDR-RAM cost around that much? (Guessing...) And what would make the 1.4GHz stand out, other than speed, while keeping the price low?

I have a feeling that the prices of PowerMacs are going to be jacked up a bit this expo. Again, I expect a high of $3494, but anything more (ex. $3794 for the new Powerbooks) probably pushes it a bit too far.

pgwalsh
Jul 8, 2002, 10:32 PM
I was really hoping to see something above 1.4 Ghz. :o I wanted to be blown away and shocked enough to have permagrin :D for a few weeks. I'm sure I'll be happy with whatever they come out with. Now I'm hoping the rumors are wrong.


Originally posted by King Cobra

I have a feeling that the prices of PowerMacs are going to be jacked up a bit this expo. Again, I expect a high of $3494, but anything more (ex. $3794 for the new Powerbooks) probably pushes it a bit too far.

If this is true, I'll be flat out irritated. They need to stay at $3000 or less for the top end. That is unless they come out with something that's tits.

King Cobra
Jul 8, 2002, 10:41 PM
>...they come out with something that's tits.
Do you think anyone would be offended by such a PowerMac design? :D

Hey, SPG, not a bad avatar. How badly did you want one anyways? :cool:

pgwalsh
Jul 8, 2002, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
>...they come out with something that's tits.
Do you think anyone would be offended by such a PowerMac design? :D


Not at all! While they're at it they can offer some new Input/Output sources and incorporate a Nike pump feautre. Call it iTits.

King Cobra
Jul 8, 2002, 10:52 PM
pgwalsh, I'm not even going to ask what you mean by the pump feature... :eek: but I am assuming that if you are calling this PowerMac the iTits and nothing but the iT!ts, with input and output features and some pump jack, you must have one :eek:ed up imagination! :D

Keep dreaming... :cool:

pgwalsh
Jul 8, 2002, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
must have one :eek:ed up imagination! :D
Keep dreaming... :cool:

oh yes! MYSF we can talk about iYoDaddy

Kid Red
Jul 8, 2002, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by Tue12
Not great, but not horrible.

But I do wish that PowerMac iterations came every 4-5 months instead of every 6-7 months.

:cool:

Ok, I think i'm missing something. When's the last time we jumped 400mhz in 6 months? Because I don't remember that ever happening I'd have to say this jump kicks ass if true.

Kid Red
Jul 8, 2002, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
Here is why I worry about two PowerMacs with dual processors. How expensive would the top of the line 1.4GHz dual be anyways? Can Apple afford to push their Macs so high in price? (I'm not so sure what it would be, but the most I would expect is $3494 for the high end.) And what about dual 1.2GHz to 1.4GHz? If dual 1000MHz chips brought the price of the PowerMac to $3000, wouldn't a dual 1.2GHz with DDR-RAM cost around that much? (Guessing...) And what would make the 1.4GHz stand out, other than speed, while keeping the price low?

I have a feeling that the prices of PowerMacs are going to be jacked up a bit this expo. Again, I expect a high of $3494, but anything more (ex. $3794 for the new Powerbooks) probably pushes it a bit too far.

Read the article. It says same price points as currently available, would've eased your mind if you would've clicked the link.

rice_web
Jul 8, 2002, 11:23 PM
Don't think in terms of a megahertz jump. If we had jumped up 400MHz back in the days of 66MHz processing, it would have been freakishly amazing.

Rather, think in terms of percentage. A 400MHz boost equates to a 40% jump, which wouldn't be the largest in Apple history.

TypeR389
Jul 8, 2002, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by rice_web
Don't think in terms of a megahertz jump. If we had jumped up 400MHz back in the days of 66MHz processing, it would have been freakishly amazing.

Rather, think in terms of percentage. A 400MHz boost equates to a 40% jump, which wouldn't be the largest in Apple history.

Lets just hope that we actually get 40%, not less then that because of rumored pipeline lengthening in the new G4++ chips these most likely will be using.

Catfish_Man
Jul 8, 2002, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by TypeR389


Lets just hope that we actually get 40%, not less then that because of rumored pipeline lengthening in the new G4++ chips these most likely will be using. ...the clock frequency increase comes from a transition to .13 micron manufacturing. AFAIK an extended pipeline pretty much requires a complete redesign. The jump from G4 to G4+ was as large as the jump from Pentium Pro to Pentium III in my opinion (except for the clock frequency. I'm just talking about design). Also, if they improve branch prediction and cache/memory along with increasing the pipeline length, it's NOT a bad thing. It's basically a free way to boost the clock frequency, IF and ONLY IF the rest of the setup is sophisticated enough to keep the extra stages fed with data.
Why the **** are people whining about these specs??? These specs (assuming DDR) kick ass. DP 1400MHz with a GF4Ti and DDR is going to be FAST. However, if they don't have DDR, I'll be pissed. That's all I really cared about for this update (speed related, anyway. Some new ports [FW2/USB2] would be nice). Also, I kinda doubt that 2x80GB hard drive. I'd expect 1x120GB or 100GB. I suppose it might be that they're trying to take advantage of the 4 ATA100 controllers on the uni-north by adding in more drives. That would fit with the more optical drives part too. If so, then we might have 2 optical drives and two hard drives, all on separate controllers... mmmm.... 400MB/sec max bandwidth..... mmmmmm.....

dongmin
Jul 8, 2002, 11:56 PM
Well if they increase the sustem bus and add DDR Ram, on top of the 40% boost in mhz, it should add up to a pretty impressive improvement in performance.

I'm assuming, of course, that DDR Ram is a done deal. It's not mentioned in the Railhead report but it's gotta be in there, right?

I don't know about a all-white case. Maybe a mixed palette: white, grey, brushed metal, etc.

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 12:40 AM
i don't care too much about the case

i want to see the ddr ram and at least 1.4 ghz on the top end

it is no fun to see pcs with the ddr and no option for macs for the faster ram

and i hope this is the last incarnation of the g4 and then i want to see a g5 already

this way, we can put the g3 to rest and put g4s in the crt imac and the ibook

Hemingray
Jul 9, 2002, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by Tue12
But I do wish that PowerMac iterations came every 4-5 months instead of every 6-7 months.

What are you, nuts? And have Apple actually get close to keeping up with the competition? :rolleyes: ;)

Nowhere do those specs mention DDR, so I'm hoping that's just considered a given. Also, what about FireWire2?

wsteineker
Jul 9, 2002, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by rice_web
Don't think in terms of a megahertz jump. If we had jumped up 400MHz back in the days of 66MHz processing, it would have been freakishly amazing.

Rather, think in terms of percentage. A 400MHz boost equates to a 40% jump, which wouldn't be the largest in Apple history.

Yep, rice_web is right. Welcome to Moore's Law. It had to hit us Mac users sooner or later. ;)

As for the overall analysis of the situation, I agree with Jef. I don't care if they call the new design scheme "Baby Poop" as long as it has hella fast dual chipsets, DDR, and *crosses fingers* FireWire 2. I think it's fairly common knowledge that these G4s are only a stop gap measure to fill the space between the current line and thhe G5. Let's just all thank God for small miracles like DDR RAM. Dig?

P.S.- This is officially my first G5 post. Looks like I've lost my zealot virginity! :D

Shaktai
Jul 9, 2002, 03:08 AM
Don't know about the new case. May or may not be ready yet. At the very least modifications to the current case to accomodate new internals, and a new color scheme.

I think railhead is pretty much right on, although the mhz isn't locked in stone. (You know how unreliable motorola can be.) At least 1.33 for the top end dual and likely something around 1.4. DD Ram at 2x133 I am pretty sure. Maybe DD Ram at 2x166 since the new G4 7470 can support it. On chip L2 cache increased from 256 to 512k at processor speed. Total combination along with Jaguar speed improvements shoudl be in the neighborhood of 50 to 60% speed boost overall. It will be fast.

macmunch
Jul 9, 2002, 04:19 AM
Hi guys here in Germany there is a Site named www.onlinekosten.de (Serious)

This Site has often exlusiv News about Hardware I since yesterday the knew the START date for the Radeon R300 aka Radeon 9700, it will start on July 17 !!!!

Thats Macworld Date what do you think build to order ?

http://www.onlinekosten.de/news/artikel.php3?id=9346
Thats the link. Translate it its funny.

Its Sure there is something coming, by the way go www.ati.com there you see a trailer I think its the trailer for the new Radeon.


:D

groovebuster
Jul 9, 2002, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by Shaktai
Don't know about the new case. May or may not be ready yet. At the very least modifications to the current case to accomodate new internals, and a new color scheme.



As I said already on another thread...

I guess one thing (for me) is almost for sure.

The next Keyboard and Mouse will be white! You remember the screenshots of Jaguar? There is a screenshot of the system preferences panel and the mouse symbol is not black anymore, it is white!!!

So I think that the major color will be white and not only for the iMac/eMac line. Since the keyboard always matches with the case design, I am pretty sure about that.

I could imagine that they keep the enclosures of the Quicksilver line, BUT...

1) everything that is in silver now will be snow white, also the front,
2) the Apple logo will be chrome,
3) the speaker will be white as well,
4) they will give the opportunity to use a second optical drive (5.25") inside.

That's all. Really new enclosures will come with the G5. But this way they will stop to make an optical difference between the pro and the consumer line. If they want to attract PC dudes, they are used to towers and if they don't get a tower they are not interested. But as long as Apple tells them indirectly what they have to buy (You want to use the Mac at home... then buy an iMac!) it won't work for all of the "switchers"!

Also for companies it doesn't make sense anymore, since a lot of them probably would buy some eMacs or iMacs for office work and towers for the real workload. But at the moment you have two different designs that don't get along very well. A Quicksilver beside an iMac doesn't give you the feeling that it looks good together.

:D

I wish it would be the 17th already... reminds me of X-mas when I was little!! ;)

groovebuster

Jack Tenric
Jul 9, 2002, 07:21 AM
I would be disapointed if 2/3 of the new models were dual proccessor. DP is great and an excellent choice for the high-end model but making nearly everything DP isn't the solution. Besides the fact that most games won't use DP, having to go DP for everything in an effort to try and keep up with PCs only makes the chips look weak. How about this?

G4 1GHz
G4 1.3GHz
G4 1.4GHz DP

pianojoe
Jul 9, 2002, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by Jack Tenric
I would be disapointed if 2/3 of the new models were dual proccessor. DP is great and an excellent choice for the high-end model but making nearly everything DP isn't the solution. Besides the fact that most games won't use DP...

Have you *ever* heard about an operating system called "OS X"?
:D

mrMahann
Jul 9, 2002, 09:05 AM
must agree... what does mid-range get w/ dualies, unless its that much faster?

would like to see the good/better/best/awesome rating continued, tho instead of more disk/memory, have dual 1.4/whatever fastest speed is at awesome, then dual 1.2 at best, single 1.2 better, and 1.0 at good.

single 1.2 would fit my needs but would probably fork over the extra pe$os for a dualie.

case change: are they gonna do a case change for g5 at mw/sfo or /ny next year if they do a new one announced next week? would think they'd keep w/ (yuk) q/s if there's a new case, unless they're suddenly being responsive to the minions.

can also see this as the new case and g5 gets the same one, only perhaps dittied up a bit, racing stripes or whatever.

damn, hope its not white. would like to see metallic.

Mr. Anderson
Jul 9, 2002, 09:14 AM
Looks like we'll be getting some good stuff, but its still lacking IMO. I won't be buying this year it seems.

my old tar

Backtothemac
Jul 9, 2002, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by dukestreet
Looks like we'll be getting some good stuff, but its still lacking IMO. I won't be buying this year it seems.

my old tar

Great Duke, why not? Seriously, that is a 40% jump in processing power in 6 months, plus DDR, Firewire 2, 2GB of memory, and probably 4MB of DDR L3 per proc. Man, that is a huge performance increase. Well worth paying the money. Well, my specs are. The ones that railhead put up are good, but not as good ;) See ya Friday!

Retlas
Jul 9, 2002, 09:27 AM
I think that the speed increase is what we all expected, and deep down we knew the G5 would not yet appear. But, if I were to order the 1.2 DP on July 17, how long would it really take me to plug it in at home? What would the approximate delay between order time and when I plug it in at home be?

Macmaniac
Jul 9, 2002, 09:34 AM
I hope this speculation is correct! I can't wait to see it happen first hand and get to use it;)

Bifrost
Jul 9, 2002, 09:43 AM
I don't see how they could maintain the same price points with that lineup.

Current prices on PowerMacs:

800 MHz - 1599
933 MHz - 2299
Dual 1GHz - 2999

Are we supposed to expect:

1 Ghz - 1599
Dual 1.2 GHz - 2299
Dual 1.4 GHz - 2999
???????????

Or are they counting the custom built "Ultimate" option that rings in at $4099 as a "price point"? I just can't see Apple selling a Dual 1.2 GHz machine for the same price it sold a single processor 933 MHz machine the day before. I am hoping we will see two single processor speeds (maybe 1.0 and 1.2 GHz) as well as the two dualies. But that's just my hope. I mainly run FORTRAN programs that I have written on my PowerMacs, and it takes a lot of extra effort to program for dual processors....

Backtothemac
Jul 9, 2002, 09:46 AM
BiFrost, Apple does that all the time. The last series topped out at dual 800's and it went from the top o the line to the bottom of the line in one day, and the price point stayed the same! Seriously, that is SOP for Apple.

Brent
Jul 9, 2002, 09:50 AM
If the PMacs get 166 DDR, Intel is going to start soiling it's panties. The dual 1.4s could SMOKE the 2.53 Pentium4 with that kind of bus speed increase.

I think the reason Apple is being as tight as a nun about this whole affair is something really really big is coming down the pipeline. Maybe the big 'thing' isn't 1 groundbreaking event, but a few rather large ones. I don't want to speculate what the others might be, but I would love to see an iPDA and DDR in the Powerbook.

I can hope, can't I? :cool:

canadianmacguy
Jul 9, 2002, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by groovebuster


I guess one thing (for me) is almost for sure.

The next Keyboard and Mouse will be white! You remember the screenshots of Jaguar? There is a screenshot of the system preferences panel and the mouse symbol is not black anymore, it is white!!!

So I think that the major color will be white and not only for the iMac/eMac line. Since the keyboard always matches with the case design, I am pretty sure about that.


Possibly yes, but the new icon in the finder that represents the computer is the new iMac (at least in my build).. so maybe it's to sync things up with the iMac?

mymemory
Jul 9, 2002, 10:40 AM
They are gonna compensate the price with a very fancy enclosure design. They won't reduce the price, they are gonna innovate with the enclosure.

groovebuster
Jul 9, 2002, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by canadianmacguy


Possibly yes, but the new icon in the finder that represents the computer is the new iMac (at least in my build).. so maybe it's to sync things up with the iMac?

But why would they do that just for the iMac and ignoring their other products? Since I am pro user I wouldn't like to have an iMac icon all the time on my Desktop...

We'll see soon I guess! ;)

groovebuster

robguz
Jul 9, 2002, 10:46 AM
They absolutely could maintain those price points with no problem at all. The towers bring their biggest profit margins and the reality is that with rebates, the current lineup has been several hudred dollars cheaper for a while now, so they'd just get rid of the rebates. CPU prices are pretty minimal in the cost of most of their machines. Maybe $300 at most to add another processor, and minus the rebates, well there's the extra $300 so it's a wash. Other components always get cheaper over time. If anything, I think the prices would still be ridiculously inflated. What kind of CPU could one get in the Wintel world for $3000? That the low-end tower still costs a whopping $1700 in this day and age is just nuts!

As much as Apple would like to live in it's own world, they are competing with the Wintel world. What wintel user that's never used a mac is going to say, "gee I can get a low end 1 Ghz mac for $1700 or a 2 Ghz low end PC tower with an OS that I already know for $800, so I think I'll switch to the Mac."

Bifrost
Jul 9, 2002, 10:59 AM
Backtothemac:

When did Apple offer a dual 800 machine as "bottom of the line"? Did I misunderstand you on that? The last series topped out at dual 800's, yes. But the current "bottom of the line" is a single processor 800. Not dual. I would not be surprised at all if the bottom of the line machine was a single processor 1 GHz. But I would be surprised at the middle of the line being a dual 1.2 GHz. That doesn't seem to be consistent with what Apple has done in the past. Not that I would complain, although I wouldn't mind seeing a single processor machine faster than 1 GHz. Maybe I'm missing something (I am a newbie, after all), but the jump from single 933 MHz to dual 1.2 GHz without the price going up seems larger than usual.

Anyway, whatever comes out, I'm buying. I've got a research budget that expires soon, so I have to spend the money now. Only severe disappointment (minute speed increase, no DDR, etc.) would force me to either wait until MWSF or look for a bargain basement price on another 933. Anything remotely like what the Register is reporting will see me buying a new PowerMac this summer.

drastik
Jul 9, 2002, 11:12 AM
I'm with robguz. Apple beats prices higher than they need be. My longtime justification for this is a complete system for the price (e.g. firwire, USB, ethernet, s-video-out (PB), come on the machine instead of being like y PC owning friends who get a new device or software package and have to buy/install new software. The only installing I've ever done are HDs, RAM, and once I put an upgrade card in an old Quadra of mine.

Now, however, those add on pieces of hardware are cheap and plastic, so their inclusion in a Mac system doesn't justify the price. Lower price points, or at least the same for better systems are key.:D

Retlas
Jul 9, 2002, 11:15 AM
I think that the speed increase is what we all expected, and deep down we knew the G5 would not yet appear. But, if I were to order the 1.2 DP on July 17, how long would it really take me to plug it in at home? What would the approximate delay between order time and when I plug it in at home be?

billiam0878
Jul 9, 2002, 11:50 AM
I don't know about the rest of you, but I think a 40% jump in MHz, DDR RAM and new enclosures are a SWEET upgrade. Furthermore, for those of you who have your doubt regarding Apple's the new white color scheme, don't worry; the new PowerMacs will be another gorgeous testament to Jonathan Ive's genius ;)

Bill

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Bifrost
I don't see how they could maintain the same price points with that lineup.

Current prices on PowerMacs:

800 MHz - 1599
933 MHz - 2299
Dual 1GHz - 2999

Are we supposed to expect:

1 Ghz - 1599
Dual 1.2 GHz - 2299
Dual 1.4 GHz - 2999
???????????



or how about ;

933 1599
1 ghz 2299
dual 1.2 2999

that sounds a little more down to earth...and with ddr ram

Rocketman
Jul 9, 2002, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
BiFrost, Apple does that all the time. The last series topped out at dual 800's and it went from the top o the line to the bottom of the line in one day, and the price point stayed the same! Seriously, that is SOP for Apple.

This fact should be on all the PC rumour sites!

Rocketman

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by Rocketman


This fact should be on all the PC rumour sites!

Rocketman

ok then, i could live with 1 ghz being 1599 for a g4 tower...my goal is to see g5 which, in my strange logic, will purge the g3

follow me?

then after purging g3, then the crt imac and the ibook will get g4 and we will be altivec across the board!

sj says crt imac will live for education mkt well into 2003

and ibook g4 sounds sexy to me, even in 2003...and even if tibook goes to g5...i would not be able to afford or justify it

i could be a lot like more of you kids/young ones here, but when you get older (late 20s-early 30s), don't pay for grad school at a private university with a credit card...he he

otherwise, i would easily have a tibook right now:p

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield


i could be a lot like more of you kids/young ones here, but when you get older (late 20s-early 30s), don't pay for grad school at a private university with a credit card...he he

otherwise, i would easily have a tibook right now:p

being a pt teacher, i am not knocking school...but get only the education you will need and use for life (hs, or trade school, or college, or med school, whatever) and nothing more...being over qualified is a beech when trying to find a job

and use the saved money for a tibook...he he

depending on your real estate market, also use the rest for a house

never buy a new vehicle since that is the biggest waste of funds...motorcylcle new is ok as alphatech can attest to

don't invest all your funds in the same stock, funds, or even business sector

diversify

don't trust is all to retirement or iras or social security only

some gold or silver is ok but green american cash is still the "gold" standard of today...but this can change from time to time

and remember, the president is a figurehead and the real power of the usa is in the hands of the speaker of the house...of which most know nothing about and the way the speaker likes it

rant over

DavPeanut
Jul 9, 2002, 01:05 PM
Just for everyones info., the G4 can't have a 166 Mhz Bus, so it cant have any of this 333 Mhz DDR RAM thing. At least I think.

Is it possible to have triple speed RAM. Could you make TDR RAM at 400 Mhz with a bus at 133 Mhz?

Moonlight
Jul 9, 2002, 01:41 PM
Does anyone think they might add bluetooth on the motherboard ? it seems like a logical step.

DavPeanut
Jul 9, 2002, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by Moonlight
Does anyone think they might add bluetooth on the motherboard ? it seems like a logical step.

I think its a good idea too, but I'm not sure if they will do it. We'll have to see at MWNY.

Welcome to Macrumors!

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by DavPeanut
Just for everyones info., the G4 can't have a 166 Mhz Bus, so it cant have any of this 333 Mhz DDR RAM thing. At least I think.

Is it possible to have triple speed RAM. Could you make TDR RAM at 400 Mhz with a bus at 133 Mhz?
I don't thing TDR is is possible. Regular ram "talks" once per clock cycle. DDR "talks" on the up and down ticks of the clock cycle. Since there is no clear "middle" of the clock cycle I don't think it's possible.

Now, quad speed (QDR?) is thinkable, if a second clock cycle was added exactly half way between the original clock - but you've effectively doubled your bus speed then haven't you?

Catfish_Man
Jul 9, 2002, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by DavPeanut
Just for everyones info., the G4 can't have a 166 Mhz Bus, so it cant have any of this 333 Mhz DDR RAM thing. At least I think.

Is it possible to have triple speed RAM. Could you make TDR RAM at 400 Mhz with a bus at 133 Mhz? ...but the current G4 doesn't support ANY sort of DDR ram, 333, 266, or 200. I think 266 is the most likely, but not for the reason you posted.

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Moonlight
Does anyone think they might add bluetooth on the motherboard ? it seems like a logical step.

I've heard the rumor from various sources (on the web) that we will see bluetooth. However, I don't see the benefit. Bluetooth is slow and as today's devices support massive data transfers. I don't see why you'd need it on a pc?

Pants
Jul 9, 2002, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Bifrost

Or are they counting the custom built "Ultimate" option that rings in at $4099 as a "price point"? I just can't see Apple selling a Dual 1.2 GHz machine for the same price it sold a single processor 933 MHz machine the day before. I am hoping we will see two single processor speeds (maybe 1.0 and 1.2 GHz) as well as the two dualies. But that's just my hope. I mainly run FORTRAN programs that I have written on my PowerMacs, and it takes a lot of extra effort to program for dual processors....

w00t! a fellow fortran-er here!
indeed it does take a tad (lot!) more effort. Some tasks are ok mind, but gcc under osX is nice. Are you using the absoft compilers? I never got on with them personally, although I do know they do a high performance (altivec) version - but its not excatly cheap. Im only just thinking about porting my stuff over from a sun- I've heard some pretty good things about gcc under osX, although Im not sure how quick/performace is....(this, people, is why Id like a true 64bit g5/hammer....)

brainchild2b
Jul 9, 2002, 02:37 PM
I think you fail to understand bluetooth. Bluetooth is not meant to replace highspeed wireless. It compliments high speed wireless, and without a doubt plays a big part in the Mac future. For example 802.11 lets you put just about anything wirelessly over it. Bluetooth is more or less of a standard in the fact that it has one protocal. If you support bluetooth, anything that is bluetooth compatible will work with your hardware. No extra drivers ect needed. For example wireless mice, wireless pens that send data to screen. Wireless cellphone earpieces, wireless sync to computer, are all devices that don't need the high power that 802.11 takes nore the broadcast range. Bluetooth can fit in supersmall devices. Apple will be making your mouse and keyboard both bluetooth enabled in the future. Bluetooth has soooo many options. I've seen a bluetooth keychain that turns the lights off in the house when you leave. Or a bluetooth (standard size pen) that as you write on a pad nearby sends all the scribbles to the screen. Bluetooth is a connectivity standard. I can sync my entire phone address book instantly with my calendar and contacts on my computer. No cables NO software no hassle. Bluetooth is the future and will work well with 802.11g high speed wireless networks. Do some more research into it, you will find it harbors great possiblilities. I'm very excited to see our wireless world emerging...

Jack Tenric
Jul 9, 2002, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by pianojoe
Have you *ever* heard about an operating system called "OS X"?

OS X supports DP but not all games do. Please look into something before randomly posting.

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 03:36 PM
I understand where you're coming from, but bluetooth is not as easy as you make it sound. There're plenty of bluetooth devices out there, unfortunately they don't communicate that well together. Given that it's rather expensive to implement and there's all types of communication problems, it seems to be a real bluetooth (as in ache). There's lot's of technologies people say is the future, but I'm not so sure bluetooth will make it.

If the cost comes down considerably, it may be worthwhile, but until then it's not worth it. It's been around for a while now, but it's not taking off like people hoped for.

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by Jack Tenric


OS X supports DP but not all games do. Please look into something before randomly posting.
True - but most games should be multi-threaded now-a-days. Thus, they will automatically be spread across the 2 proc's. (Unless the they specifically ask the OS not to be for some reason.)

That is, as long as you're running them on OS X.

Bifrost
Jul 9, 2002, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by Pants


w00t! a fellow fortran-er here!
indeed it does take a tad (lot!) more effort. Some tasks are ok mind, but gcc under osX is nice. Are you using the absoft compilers? I never got on with them personally, although I do know they do a high performance (altivec) version - but its not excatly cheap. Im only just thinking about porting my stuff over from a sun- I've heard some pretty good things about gcc under osX, although Im not sure how quick/performace is....(this, people, is why Id like a true 64bit g5/hammer....)

Yep, I'm using Absoft. Research grant money makes the expense not such a pain and the AltiVec optimization (although still not great) is nice. Haven't tried gcc on osX yet, but I would guess that it doesn't do any auto-parallelization for multiple processors. Right now I have a cluster of 5 G4s and I use MPI and Pooch to handle message passing between processors. My understanding is that (using this setup) one must add an additional layer of message passing code to make use of multiple processors in a single machine (as opposed to multiple processors which are each housed in a separate machine). Although the processing power per dollar is great in the dualies, I can't see rewriting all my code to take advantage of the extra processor. And if I don't, then I might as well have a single processor machine for less $. That's why I am hoping to see a single processor 1.2 GHz machine (or similar).

Anyways, Pants, its nice to know I'm not the only FORTRANer left. :)

Backtothemac
Jul 9, 2002, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield


or how about ;

933 1599
1 ghz 2299
dual 1.2 2999

that sounds a little more down to earth...and with ddr ram

I am sorry jef, but if that is what they come out with, then they should be tar'd'n'feathered.

SPG
Jul 9, 2002, 05:43 PM
In defense of the mid range dual... I think it's a great idea. A reasonably priced machine that can take advantage of DP to render FCP filters, PS, and all the other goodies for a mid range price...$2499? 2299? That's the machine I want.

In defense of the low end vs. a PC... What the ******* is the iMac for? If you want a machine that will compete against a wintel and be the better option it's the iMac not the tower.

In defense of Bluetooth... Bluetooth is a very good standard for the low range wireless, it's not that expensive and what are the alternatives that have adopted widespread compatibility? none. Airport is good for the whole machine but how much would an airport mouse or keyboard cost? how well would that work?

jesyjames
Jul 9, 2002, 06:00 PM
According to:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwny02apple.html

They are %100 sure there will not be a powermac announcement.

I'm %100 sure I hope they do make an annoucement.

SPG
Jul 9, 2002, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by jesyjames
According to:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwny02apple.html

They are %100 sure there will not be a powermac announcement.

I'm %100 sure I hope they do make an annoucement.

Yeah, not at MWNY according to them, but within a month after.
Hereby throwing gas on the fire, what other occasion merited the delayed announcement of something ready to go? The intro of the new iMac, since it was such big news that the towers would steal some of it's thunder. So, what does Steve have up his sleeve this time that's so big that it is worth delaying the new towers and pissing off his core Pro market? hmmmmm.....

tcmcam
Jul 9, 2002, 06:30 PM
Here's a depressing article:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwny02apple.html

They are saying that there will be no new G4 PowerMac's at MWNY, just a 17" iMac.

How depressing.....

An I was just about to buy a new box. Oh well, no more money for Apple until they get it right!!!

Horne
Jul 9, 2002, 06:41 PM
Aye,

Sounds like an announcement in early August for the new PowerMacs if we put all our information together:

-Rebates on current line of G4s until 12 August
-Jaguar release brought forward to early August (pre-installed in new G4s?)
-Testing on 6 new casings (delaying output)

I have just sold my 800MP, s I could hopefully buy the 1.4 MP modle next Wednesday. Serves me right for trying to be so smart!

:rolleyes:

Horne

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 06:42 PM
According to the ThinkSecret article:
This is a clear sign Apple is sitting on a huge inventory of G4 towers. In the past, Apple has postponed the rollout of new CPUs (the G3 PowerBook three years ago is one example) until inventory of older models was depleated. We're sure this is the reason for the G4 tower rollout delay this time. As one dealer put it, "Professional system sales have slowed to a trickle. They've got to clear stock before they rollout new models. That's how bad it is."
Why doesn't Jobs just put 'em in a land fill like the rumored Lisa's? I have no desire to buy a non-DDR PowerMac for anywhere near the price they are currently asking - even with the new rebates. (I don't need a new monitor, thank you very much)

I wonder how much lower my AAPL stock will go on the 17th if ThinkSecret is right? :rolleyes:

qwerpafw
Jul 9, 2002, 06:43 PM
Now, quad speed (QDR?) is thinkable, if a second clock cycle was added exactly half way between the original clock - but you've effectively doubled your bus speed then haven't you?


Yes, QDR is more than thinkable. It has already been done. Basically.

Rambus RAM is close enough to QDR RAM most people wouldn't care about the difference.

Originally, Rambus RAM was 400Mhz rated, which is a quad-pumped 100Mhz structure.

Now it is 533Mhz. that is speed. If you want QDR, buy a P4 :)

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by qwerpafw

Originally, Rambus RAM was 400Mhz rated, which is a quad-pumped 100Mhz structure.

Now it is 533Mhz. that is speed. If you want QDR, buy a P4 :)
Motorolla is so far behind the 8 Ball on this it makes me sick!

ddtlm
Jul 9, 2002, 06:46 PM
eric_n_dfw:

Regardless of what games "should" be like, I am here to inform you that they are not generally multi-threaded (even for OSX). In fact, they don't even play all that well on OSX, for example in Warcraft3 my dual 800 w/ GF2MX gets run into the ground by my friend's Athlon 1400 with GF2MX, and by no small margin either. It's a massive defeat, I can't even play 8-way games (6 AI) remotely smoothly at 800x600 low graphics settings. Dissapointing. But hey, I'll put up with that to avoid my PC. :)

Anyway, in other news, I think people here are getting overly excited about nothing. As far as I can tell, even the DDR-supporting G4 is unconfirmed, let alone one with 512k of L2 and more L3. I more expect G4's with the same ol 133mhz FSB but the DDR memory as seen on Xserve. I can't imagine they would have created that Xserve chipset for just the Xserve for just a few months. I would be very surprised if Apple could afford to do that.

Anyway, if you hype yourselves up and then crash after the expo, you're at fault.

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 06:53 PM
Yea right "there not going to release a new PowerMac." If they were not going to put out new boxes they wouldn't open the market for 1Ghz G4 to third parties. I think they fed the article so it would be a surprise. Almost everything else in the article is known except for the PDA.

Cheaper deals to get ride of what they can before they introduce new machines.

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 07:02 PM
As far as games on OS X go, I'll admit I'm no expert. That's what my GameCube is for! :)
Is WarCraft Carbonized or is it running in the Classic environment? What would be telling would be how it runs on a single G4 800 (with the same L3 cache - if such a beast is out there) compared to the dual.

I am afraid you are right about the DDR being like that of the XServe - which is also dissapointing because it is not "true" DDR into the G4. It's better than nothing, but just barely.

I hope MWNY and/or this new, rumored, August announcement make us wrong, but I am not holding my breath.

eric_n_dfw
Jul 9, 2002, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by pgwalsh
If they were not going to put out new boxes they wouldn't open the market for 1Ghz G4 to third parties.
Um, I must have missed something, what 3rd parties are you talking about? And why wouldn't Motorola be allowed to sell it to whomever they wanted?

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

Um, I must have missed something, what 3rd parties are you talking about? And why wouldn't Motorola be allowed to sell it to whomever they wanted?

Motorola and Apple are partners in the production of PPC chips. The partnership prevents Moto from releasing chips (as far as I know). I've read this numerous times over the past few years. Checkout XLR8yourmac.com and read on the new 1Ghz upgrades.

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac


I am sorry jef, but if that is what they come out with, then they should be tar'd'n'feathered.

he he

besides the 933 g4 to the dual 1.2 ghz and ddr ram, i was also thinking the use of the best video card available in all models

if apple goes to 1.4 ghz, that will be a significant jump in speed and will hold the pro users over until the arrival of the g5

if g5 comes out next year, i sure hope by then it will be 2 ghz...and after that, who will really be thinking about cpu clock speed?

faster bus and faster ram will top the list, followed by better and better video cards

...and all this at lower and lower prices

personally, i don't care if g5 tops out at 2.7 ghz or 3.7 ghz in the future...at a certain point, raw cpu speed won't woo the masses and there seems to be an indication of this in the pc world due to faster clock speeds and an apathetic pc clientele

i mean how fast do you need to run the internet with 56 k modem and microsoft office? a fast cpu will make little difference in those "most used" applications

another thing i think many people would like to see is multiple processors in more machines...and not just the pro line

i am waiting for a dual processor laptop...from anybody

to my knowledge, i have never heard of such a monster

barkmonster
Jul 9, 2002, 07:17 PM
I doubt it, how many macworld expos can you remember where they only updated the lowend consumer models, especially after they already had to increase the retail cost of the iMac to compensate for the cost of the LCD. 17" iMac, I don't think so.

Updated powermacs are a definate, it goes without saying there's going to be new towers, the clock speed, Motherboard, Case and features are all being discussed as being updated, I think no update at all in highly unlikely.

As for the specs...

They went from 350,400,450 and 500Mhz to 400, Dual 450 and Dual 450Mhz once. I'm hoping they're actually going to put the L3 cache on the entry level model this time to make it fair on people who want a powermac with a decent motherboard and expansion options.

I think if we do see the 1Ghz, 1.2Ghz x 2 and 1.4Ghz x 2 specs at macworld the top 2 models (3 counting the 'Ultimate' model) will make the entry level model look pretty bad in any benchmark.

Right now if configure the entry level with a 60Gb HD and drop the modem, a mid range G4 with an Ati Radeon 7500, no modem and a CDRW comes to £340.75 extra. I wouldn't pay that much more for a L3 cache and under 17% extra clock speed even thought the L3 makes the mid range perform a lot faster than the entry level.

If they still offer BTO options like they do now, £340 is definately going to be worth it for 2 CPUs with a 20% higher clock speed on each one. I could live without the superdrive and faster graphics card just to get a dual 1.2Ghz myself.

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by pgwalsh


Motorola and Apple are partners in the production of PPC chips. The partnership prevents Moto from releasing chips (as far as I know). I've read this numerous times over the past few years. Checkout XLR8yourmac.com and read on the new 1Ghz upgrades.

the moto chips made for apple is only 12 percent of moto's chip production, so i seriously doubt that

that is the fundamental problem and why moto was stuck at 500 mhz for so long

how could 12 percent of your chip business run your company and get high priority, especially since motorola does way more than chips, or chips for cpus

cellphone unit is more influential at moto

rice_web
Jul 9, 2002, 07:22 PM
I could imagine a possible solution with all dual-processor Macs.

Here it goes:

iMac - Low-end Single G4

Cube (it returns) - High-end Single G4

PowerMac - Dual G4 configuration

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield


the moto chips made for apple is only 12 percent of moto's chip production, so i seriously doubt that

that is the fundamental problem and why moto was stuck at 500 mhz for so long

how could 12 percent of your chip business run your company and get high priority, especially since motorola does way more than chips, or chips for cpus

cellphone unit is more influential at moto

You're talking about the embedded chip market. Different chips based on the same technology.

npm
Jul 9, 2002, 07:28 PM
re: http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwny02apple.html

fyi, the shipping time for apple online store is 10 days... maybe nothing!

*Power Mac G4 Z058 10 days Remove $3,348.00 $3,348.00 *

rice_web
Jul 9, 2002, 07:35 PM
Oh, by the way...

I believe ThinkSecret's recent article on "no new PowerMacs" more than any of the rumors in existence.

Besides, the iMac needs a few updates here and there.

rice_web
Jul 9, 2002, 07:38 PM
THIS JUST IN

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-942608.html?legacy=cnet&tag=lthd

CNet predicts iMac "face-lift"

ddtlm
Jul 9, 2002, 07:43 PM
eric_n_dfw:

Yeah warcraft3 is OSX native and has worked flawlessly (well, once it crashed while I was starting a single-player game). I think that getting a GF4TI would help it out performance-wise, but I also think the CPU isn't fast enough when the games get big, no matter what the video card is. The minimum spec for warcraft3 is a 400mhz P2/G3, by the way, so a lot of people, PC and Mac, are gona be stuck in smaller games.

solvs
Jul 9, 2002, 07:59 PM
Or GHz, for that matter.

Everyone is focused on the processor, but forgeting about the important stuff. Motorola can sit on their butts for as long as they want (well, not too long I hope), it's Apple that's not keeping up. They want us to spend so much on the PRO machines, but they use yesterday's technology.

LCD's are expensive, obviously. So is GB Ethernet. But they use those. I can see why they would not want to use USB2 until FW2 is available. And Bluetooth, don't get me started, but what about everything else?

DDR-Ram is a must have. There is enough of a difference in performance versuses the small (if not negligible) increase in price to make it worth it. We see that it is possible with the xServe, however bastardized it may be. And we could easily have 333 MHz DDr-Ram with a 166 (or 2x 166) MHz FSB. For the guy who said it's not possible, it is. Read Motorola's spec sheets. Up to a 166 MHz FSB for the G4 as it is now. IBM's G3 can have a 200 MHz FSB, but no Altivec or Dual-Procs.

And why isn't anyone else p*ssed they still use ATA/66. Does anyone else still use that anymore? Don't give me that old arguement about how current drives can't even saturate a 66MB bus. It's the same as with DDR-Ram, performance vs. cost makes it worth it. We need ATA/133 to utilize drives over 128-137GB (mentioned in a previous post in this article). Of course, eventually we'll be using Serial Drives anyway, so I guess I'll have to buy a PCI card anyway (no eMac for me). Who knows how long it'll take Apple to use that, anyway.

It's still better than a PC, but I'm not upgrading 'til it's worth it. Great OS, good CPU, ancient hardware specs, pissed off people with no reason to want to buy a new computer. It works fine for the iMac, iBook, and eMac (just make them cheaper). For the pros, we need PRO stuff. You want Hollywood to pay attention, give them a reason. I'm getting in to video-editing and need as much speed as possible. And external drives are a pain. 2 Drives are better than 1.

The CPU looks slow, but it's not. It just need better hardware to feed it.

---

Just my opinion, I could be wrong... But I'm not.

beatle888
Jul 9, 2002, 08:17 PM
no new powermacs? thats just stupid. i wouldnt get your underwear all
bunged up over that.

thats just idiotic.:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by pgwalsh


You're talking about the embedded chip market. Different chips based on the same technology.

some of that 88 percent is embedded and it's big business

there is also the router business using some of the 0x0 chips

and the mid to high level server business

and mainframes like the as400

risc processors and moto processors are used in other places besides macs

apple does not have any control per se over motorola as much as we would like

the cpu raw speed issue will eventually die down and many of us won't be so critical of moto's slow progression thru the speeds...but it may take years for that criticism to die down

jefhatfield
Jul 9, 2002, 08:24 PM
and if we get updates on other things besides the g4 towers, then we will just have to wait

a speed bump and larger monitor option on imac, apple's flagship computer, would not be bad but a little undershelming to say the least since we are looking new powermacs this time around

maybe ibook and tibook upgrades? now that would be cool, too

pgwalsh
Jul 9, 2002, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield


some of that 88 percent is embedded and it's big business


I'm not saying Apple has any say in the embedded market. Cisco Systems has signed up to use the G4 in their routers as you said. They sell a lot more products then Apple. What I'm saying is third party manufactures of ziff cards etc don't have access to those chips. That's why you don't see upgrades matching current cpu released by Apple.

If they didn't have say in it, then Moto would do press releases with the new processors as they come out. When Apple announces the products Moto releases the specs shortly after. This is only for the PPC used in Apple systems.

ddtlm
Jul 9, 2002, 08:34 PM
solvs:

"The CPU looks slow, but it's not. It just need better hardware to feed it."

I would actually argue that it is getting slow, FSB or not. AltiVec is nice but the rest of the G4 core seems to be outclassed item-for-item by the Athlon. It is especially lacking in floating point units, having only one whereas the Athlon as 3. Sure the one G4 unit is better than a single Athlon unit because of register count (vs the fake-registers of modern x86 FPU stacks), but we are still looking at a 3-to-1 ratio here. Integer resources of the G4 are much more compeditive, so I bet a 1.0ghz Athlon would be more or less as fast as a 1.0ghz G4 in most integer tests.

Obviously when the G4 can use AltiVec, it's performance goes "through" the roof, but unfortunately the roof is the 133mhz bus and PC133 RAM. Note also that not all apps can gain from AltiVec, mainly certain raw number-crunching things can, such as certain Photoshop filters and also cryptography routies such as RC5 or whatever they call that.

I'm not sure how many people know this, but AltiVec is actually more impressive at handling integers than floating point; 3 of the 4 units can work on int's (of various sizes) whereas only 2 of the 4 units can work on float's (of one size).

Anyway, enough rambling about that!

"And we could easily have 333 MHz DDr-Ram with a 166 (or 2x 166) MHz FSB. For the guy who said it's not possible, it is. Read Motorola's spec sheets. Up to a 166 MHz FSB for the G4 as it is now."

166mhz FSB perhaps, but thats a lot different than 166-DDR, AKA 333mhz. Basically the difference is in "pumped-ness" and the current bus is single-pumped, while DDR is double-pumped and the P4 uses a quad-pumped bus. Performance does not scale exactly with "pumped-ness" (like clock speed) but more does help some.

ibjoshua
Jul 9, 2002, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by wsteineker
I think it's fairly common knowledge that these G4s are only a stop gap measure to fill the space between the current line and thhe G5.

i hate to piss on your cornflakes but i seem to recall an article that said the G5 would not be out till late 2003

http://www.macrumors.com/forums/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=6733

josh

billiam0878
Jul 9, 2002, 09:07 PM
What I find most irritating about this news is that the iMac is guaranteed little or no speed bump. Why? Because if the iMac is bumped past 933MHz it offers more value than the PowerMacs, eats into those "trickling" sales, and Apple’s inventories remain bloated. If both machines were updated at the same time, at least we would have the assurance that the iMac might hit a GHz.

Furthermore, since when have MacWorlds been about "facelifts" rather than major overhauls? A new PowerMac with a new case, faster processors, DDR RAM, and who knows what else SHOULD be displayed at MacWorld in front of a large audience. If new LCD displays were coming with the PowerMacs, then one would assume those should also be displayed in front of such an audience. I understand that the 17-inch "facelift" for the iMac is necessary, however, I would not consider such an update equally or more important than a major overhaul to Apple's pro desktop models. Isn't Apple trying to capture Hollywood and maintain its strong market share in music and desktop publishing? Well last I knew these markets needed more than an iMac for their processor-intensive work and a 17-inch screen will not make the difference. OK, I'm done ranting. :)

Bill

qwerpafw
Jul 9, 2002, 09:09 PM
Anyway, in other news, I think people here are getting overly excited about nothing. As far as I can tell, even the DDR-supporting G4 is unconfirmed, let alone one with 512k of L2 and more L3. I more expect G4's with the same ol 133mhz FSB but the DDR memory as seen on Xserve. I can't imagine they would have created that Xserve chipset for just the Xserve for just a few months. I would be very surprised if Apple could afford to do that.
This has been my expectation since the Xserve came out. IMO, Apple meant to put that lopsided memory-FSB arrangement to work immediately on its powermacs, but didn't b/c they were selling quite fine, having been refreshed in feb.

Anyway, if you hype yourselves up and then crash after the expo, you're at fault.
Naw. :D

etoiles
Jul 10, 2002, 12:46 PM
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-942669.html?tag=fd_top

not sure if this is just a coincidence, but Nvidia is expected to announce a new generation of nForce next week...

So far, they only supported AMD (I think), but with Apple pushing into highend graphics (hopefully).

Fingers crossed.

ddtlm
Jul 10, 2002, 01:15 PM
etoiles:

The nForce is not high-end, this new one will be no better than Apple's GeForce4mx. It would be good for the iMac though (if Apple didn't mind an iMac with DDR, possibly dual-channel DDR).

(Of course there is an nForce without graphics at all, which would be suitable for high-end.)

etoiles
Jul 10, 2002, 04:18 PM
oops, you are right, my mistake :rolleyes:

they might announce some PowerPC related product for future release, though, maybe to use the technology in iBooks and iMacs. I am still a bit unclear about the whole nForce thing, but I guess it is cheaper ? Possibly maybe ? :p

ok. ok, one rumor at the time
:D

goglamosh
Jul 11, 2002, 01:30 AM
if apple were to release a Cube (a bit of a stretch), does anybody think that it would have one or a couple of PCI slots? if so, i would definitely change my mind from buying a Power Mac to buying a re-released Cube. i gotta have expansion.

wsteineker
Jul 11, 2002, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by i_b_joshua
i hate to piss on your cornflakes but i seem to recall an article that said the G5 would not be out till late 2003

http://www.macrumors.com/forums/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=6733

josh

Yeah, I saw that rumor. I'd hesitate to call it an article, but whatever floats your boat. There are just as many rumors that say the G5 is testing well and just waiting on higher per wafer yields. I would be shocked if we didn't have G5 chips by this time next year. That's just me, I guess.

johnpaul191
Jul 11, 2002, 01:55 PM
The case will sport more internal bays to better handle multiple IDE drive
installations.

what the heck does that mean? have you ever looked into your case? it has room for 6 drives in the bottom. there is an issue with cables/controller cards.... but not really for the room to stash em. the stock setup of the G3 BW and the G4 towers makes it a snap to pop in a 2nd drive..... beyong that takes a hair more effort, but it's not because of room to stick the physical drives. i wonder if they meant external bays? some people have lamented there not being a 2nd full size bay on the front. though Apple's solution seems to be the superdrive or the combo drive. i'm not totally sure what people want that other bay for these days, but there seems to be some calling. the only real need for 2 optical drives is making copies. really you can image the CD on your hard drive and burn, but if you make copies of random CDs then i guess it would be nice. guess we'll see either next week or next month what the next revision will bring. i'll be pulling for more than a mghz bump as much as anyone (DDR?).

pgwalsh
Jul 11, 2002, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by johnpaul191

the only real need for 2 optical drives is making copies.
That's not the only reason for two bays. I like to listen to CD's on my computer in one drive and use the other to access image archives etc. Having two cd rom/dvd drives is great. I don't even care about the speed of the drive either. I've been pulling cd rom drives from old computers just for the purpose of having one drive available for an audio cd.

mischief
Jul 11, 2002, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by pgwalsh

That's not the only reason for two bays. I like to listen to CD's on my computer in one drive and use the other to access image archives etc. Having two cd rom/dvd drives is great. I don't even care about the speed of the drive either. I've been pulling cd rom drives from old computers just for the purpose of having one drive available for an audio cd.

Or if you want to play a game while burning a CD or perhaps just keep a copy of Norton Utilities in 1 so you can boot from it without digging it out or maybe to RIP with iTunes while installing software.......

There are a ton of uses for 2 optical drives beyond piracy... Get a life johnpaul.

ibjoshua
Jul 12, 2002, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by wsteineker


Yeah, I saw that rumor. I'd hesitate to call it an article, but whatever floats your boat. There are just as many rumors that say the G5 is testing well and just waiting on higher per wafer yields. I would be shocked if we didn't have G5 chips by this time next year. That's just me, I guess.


yeah I take your point.

i guess I've taken the idea of a rumors site (with the word rumors in the url) to be actual rumors not just wild speculation.

i'm more inclined to believe the later dates that are reported. the 'new' operating system that was gong to be System 8 then 9 and was finally scrapped and we got a completely new, three quarters finished, 10 took a lot longer than we all hoped.

you get my idea. sorry if i sounded stuffy.


josh

digital1
Jul 12, 2002, 10:04 AM
I first thought this was funny.... :D :D http://planetpm.itsamac.com/macgamecube/first.html

Go there if you want to laugh. Sounds like a conspiracy theory mixed with psychosis. And this was interesting.


http://www.nikkeibp.asiabiztech.com/wcs/leaf?CID=onair/asabt/moren/192188

mrMahann
Jul 12, 2002, 10:54 AM
backtothemac: right on, like what you said about "40% jump in processing power" cause new momboard in and of itself should give a good goose in actual work done per IN ADDITION.

don't know if jump in cpu cycles will translate into same fraction added of work done, but w/ new momboard, tweaked CPU architecture and DDR perhaps we'll get at least that. which, is likely better than just binking cycles. very possibly it could mean 50% more powerful machine. latch that onto the improvement in X and things are lookin' good.

plus, some of you really really need the muscle, but many, myself included, just need enuf to justify the purchase. i need more than i have now, 333MHz G3 in my 7500 and if i'm thinkin' the next big rev is far enuf off and only incrementally better then i'm forking over pe$os.

speaking of next big rev, if this is a "yikes" i may pass. but, am thinking why would they make more than one major changes to momboard w/i year? if momboard changes, its likely to be generally g5-ready for next year, and thusly be worthwhile for the Next Great Purchase.

someone mentioned something about intel shakin' in their drawers should the new PPCs be all powerful. is that true? does intel really worry too awful much about life in our litle marketshare? perhaps an amusing diversion, but they've got so much momentum and have done so much right w/ respect to marketing... athlon has been better and still does more per pe$o, yet intel still has them cornered.