Apple "has stuff to blow away intel"

[bones]

Too much work to submit a story.

See:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0001011/2003/02/17.html#a2298

I've had some sneaks behind the scenes (not official ones, though). Apple has some cool stuff coming this year to be sure -- including some desktop machines that are outperforming current Intel stuff.

This is from a diehard MS stalwart and apologist. Just read some of his other stuff. If HE is saying this, i believe it.

[mac15]

will we see the 970s this year, my bet is 100% YES.

[nuckinfutz]

hmmmmmmm dual PPC 970 would be just the High End ticket

[wolfywolfbits]

My bet is that Apple has some kind of blowing device, like one of those leaf buster things.

[Kid Red]

He said stuff, in addition to desktops. So wow, I can't wait to see what Apple has up it's sleeve. new tower case w/970, new iMac with new case, new iPod member, new iBooks maybe too?

[MrMacMan]

Well apple realeased there nice laptops so I can only think the desktops are next.

And I hope the 970 will only be the beggining. Please.

[richie]

Originally posted by wolfywolfbits
My bet is that Apple has some kind of blowing device, like one of those leaf buster things.

IMO, a high pressure water cleaner would be more useful. And they've already got the noise-production (with the Windtunnel G4s) right up there on par with the competition

[cr2sh]

Wouldn't it be fat if the 970 was released in the Powerbook first...
People would clammer to buy and then when the desktops are released they'd go crazy spending again.

Ahh well, I never thought I'd have to wait this long for a "g5."

[prewwii]

.... since 1993. That was the year I said when Mac has a machine faster than a PC across the board, forget those cooked up photoshop demo's, then I would buy a new machine. I have picked up a couple of used machines since then.

With the recent turn of events and PC performance moving further and further ahead of a Mac I am wondering if I will be on social security before the Mac even equal it's relative performance in 1990 when a Mac was about as fast as a PC for a few weeks. I may have bought my last new Mac if I remain true to my statement that I will buy a new Mac when a Mac is across the board faster than a PC.

What I read about the 970 says it will return the Mac to the same relative performance as the 1990 Mac when compared to the current PC performance. That folks is not progress.

If it's not 10x it's not noticable....... it's a milking machine for getting money to move from our pockets to Apple while we're trying to figure out if the emperor has his clothes on.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by prewwii
.... since 1993. That was the year I said when Mac has a machine faster than a PC across the board, forget those cooked up photoshop demo's, then I would buy a new machine. I have picked up a couple of used machines since then.

With the recent turn of events and PC performance moving further and further ahead of a Mac I am wondering if I will be on social security before the Mac even equal it's relative performance in 1990 when a Mac was about as fast as a PC for a few weeks. I may have bought my last new Mac if I remain true to my statement that I will buy a new Mac when a Mac is across the board faster than a PC.

What I read about the 970 says it will return the Mac to the same relative performance as the 1990 Mac when compared to the current PC performance. That folks is not progress.

If it's not 10x it's not noticable....... it's a milking machine for getting money to move from our pockets to Apple while we're trying to figure out if the emperor has his clothes on.

You missed it. The 604e 350MHz was the fastest desktop chip in the world for its time. First to 350MHz too. The original beige G3 also beat the Pentium IIs of its time, just as the G4 did with the P3 600-700 (of course, it started out 500MHz G4 vs 600MHz P3, and quickly became dual 500MHz G4 vs. 1000MHz P3).

[rainman::|:|]

yeah it's happened a couple of times. in portables it's more frequent... they've had the fastest processors before, i remember drooling over them.

pnw

[prewwii]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man
You missed it. The 604e 350MHz was the fastest desktop chip in the world for its time. First to 350MHz too. The original beige G3 also beat the Pentium IIs of its time, just as the G4 did with the P3 600-700 (of course, it started out 500MHz G4 vs 600MHz P3, and quickly became dual 500MHz G4 vs. 1000MHz P3).

Fast at floating point not integer. I did database work for years and would test the Mac against a PC a lot. A Mac never won since 1990.

There is a paper by Hanibal at Arstechnica that talks about the integer processor on the PowerPC and the Pentium series. Pentium's are optimized for integer operation and have a greater number of integer processors and they are a more capable than the PowerPC approach. Without a doubt there are some floating point situations where a PowerPC is king, none in the integer world.

[macphoria]

What about Apple PDA? Or Tablet like device?

Personally, I would like to see portable storage device from Apple. Zip disk is no longer what it used to be. Burning CD's just isn't very efficient. Portable external Hard Drives are good (including iPod), but they tend to be expensive and must carry cables around. Small USB keychain devices are cool, but they tend to be small in capacity and hefty in price. I wonder if Apple can come up with a nice compromise of these devices? Maybe wireless portable flash memory storage device?

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by bones
Too much work to submit a story.

See:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0001011/2003/02/17.html#a2298


This is from a diehard MS stalwart and apologist. Just read some of his other stuff. If HE is saying this, i believe it.

IMHO, this is coming from a bona-fide blowhard. His weblog also states that Microsoft has stuff that blows anything Apple (or OpenSource/Linux) has in development away (it would be nice if his blog had dates in it along with the times ...), and that he has been an Apple user since 1988.

Seems to me anyways that he is more interested in publicity than accuracy.

[MorganX]

Originally posted by jettredmont
IMHO, this is coming from a bona-fide blowhard. His weblog also states that Microsoft has stuff that blows anything Apple (or OpenSource/Linux) has in development away (it would be nice if his blog had dates in it along with the times ...), and that he has been an Apple user since 1988.

Seems to me anyways that he is more interested in publicity than accuracy.

I'd have to agree with that. Microsoft isn't going to deviate very far from its corporate image and branding it has created with Windows.

Performance-wise, the Wintel world will still have to improve peformance with brute force. Windows and Office must remain bloated for compatibility. That's why with much faster processors and bandwidth, the only time a PC shows its stuff is playing games or running a non-Windows OS. Even MS' database performance is achieved through brute force. Fortunately, the hardware is still cheaper than competitors with ends up giving MS the edge.

[timbloom]

I really have serious doubt that this guy knows anything more than we do about upcoming products.
The 970 will just plain clown on other desktops. I just hope we actually use it before we're all just too tired of waiting.

[yosoyjay]

I'm just going to consider this a joke for a number of reasons. Now I'm going to laugh my way to the shower.

[GPTurismo]

Originally posted by prewwii
Fast at floating point not integer. I did database work for years and would test the Mac against a PC a lot. A Mac never won since 1990.

There is a paper by Hanibal at Arstechnica that talks about the integer processor on the PowerPC and the Pentium series. Pentium's are optimized for integer operation and have a greater number of integer processors and they are a more capable than the PowerPC approach. Without a doubt there are some floating point situations where a PowerPC is king, none in the integer world.

Same reason Suns are better database systems that linux/Intel boxes at the time, if you don't add the variable of price

[sparks9]

Like that is ever going to happen ...

[edenwaith]

Does this mean Apple computers are 'supposedly' going to catch up, or get some increase to truly blow away Intel boxes?

Or do they mean Apple will blow them away on more Photoshop tests?

Or perhaps they are looking at some dual 1.8 GHz machines. Or maybe quad-processors, running at 1.8 GHz a piece. Now, that would be cool.

As an odd side note, it seems silly for M$ to make so many different versions of Windows. When W2K came out, I think there was something like 5 different Windows versions out there, not including Win98 and earlier. OS X is so much easier. There is OS X, useful for the casual and power user, and then there is OS X Server. But hey, even that isn't necessary if you have regular OS X! From what I've seen and read, OS X Server seems to add some useful tools to make managing a network even easier.

[MacCoaster]

This is bull****. He's had sneak previews, but unofficial ones...

Probably just to grab attention AND probably based off the 970 rumors.

It's as official as Apple using the 970 -- 100% unconfirmed. Perhaps THAT is the "unofficial" reason.

I won't believe this guy until he has hard evidence and I won't believe things until they are announced.

Edit: what if the previews are only software? Maybe he was just basing his opinion of hardware ON the rumors of 970 and passing them as fact--which might be SEPARATE from the things he saw. His blog entry is way too broad and not specific enough.

[trebblekicked]

Originally posted by MacCoaster
This is bull****...
It's as official as Apple using the 970 -- 100% unconfirmed. Perhaps THAT is the "unofficial" reason.

I won't believe this guy until he has hard evidence and I won't believe things until they are announced.

thats why it's here on page 2. where it belongs.
but hey, it is a rumor site, after all.

[madamimadam]

I notice that no one pointed out that the UPCOMING Apple stuff will blow away CURRENT Intel.

That is really not a feat... it is great when UPCOMING Apple beats UPCOMING Intel or CURRENT Apple beats CURRENT Intel.... otherwise, what is the point of saying anything.

Apples and Apple, Oranges and Oranges.

[bousozoku]

Originally posted by prewwii
Fast at floating point not integer. I did database work for years and would test the Mac against a PC a lot. A Mac never won since 1990.

There is a paper by Hanibal at Arstechnica that talks about the integer processor on the PowerPC and the Pentium series. Pentium's are optimized for integer operation and have a greater number of integer processors and they are a more capable than the PowerPC approach. Without a doubt there are some floating point situations where a PowerPC is king, none in the integer world.

The 604e had 3 separate integer units while the Pentium II and Pentium III had one. The 604e did outstrip the Pentiums of the time in processor throughput--integer and floating point. Unfortunately, the G3 and G4 put an end to that with Motorola's power disappation changes toward economy and their flirtation with being the first to produce a desktop processor with a vector-processing (SIMD) unit. (As everyone knows, it's much better to have a vector-processing unit that's almost unused rather than real speed.)

Database work depends on I/O throughput more than the processor unless the database you're accessing completely fits into memory and doesn't cause any auxiliary disk I/O.

Btw, what happened in 1990?

[prewwii]

Originally posted by bousozoku
Btw, what happened in 1990?

About 1990 we were doing a shop floor control and circuit test project using National Instrument's LabView (one of the finest pieces of software I have ever used) and ACIUS 4D. Both packages were developed on Mac and came out with a Wintel version about 1990...91. In both cases the Wintel version out performed the Mac version.

I am not sure of the exact date when the PPC 601 came on the scene, I think it was 1990 or 91. When that happened not many applications ran native and were slowed down even more by the emulation mode. FileMaker Pro went to version 3 and slowed down as it has slowed with each successive version since. I/O as you pointed out had a lot to do with that.

As I remember there was a version of 68040 that could beat up on an early 486. I had a 225 PowerTower (my last new computer) with a 604e that could beat up an a few 266mhz Pentiums. That lasted for a week or two.

I drive a 867 Quicksilver that is a nice machine. Not a rocket though. I have been in computers since the late 50's and I want one rocket before I quit. When Apple makes a burns them all machine I will buy it just to see it scroll fast and then will it to my kids.