Do you all think that there will be anymore updates to the current PPC mac or servers

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Wellander, Apr 11, 2006.

  1. Wellander macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Location:
    Huntington Beach Ca
    #1
    Hi,
    Do you all think that there will be anymore updates to the current PPC mac or servers.
    Like the ibook, powerbook, power mac of the xserves?
    Or do you all think that the updates will be only to intel processors based macs?
    And then was the last time the power macs and xserves were updated?
    Thanks?
     
  2. pknz macrumors 68020

    pknz

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Location:
    NZ
    #2
    No. It would be confusing to consumers. And why take a step back?
     
  3. Wellander thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Location:
    Huntington Beach Ca
    #3
    Hi,
    I am sorry Maybe I was confusing.
    I was not talking about taking a step back.
    I am talking about if there going to be any updates to the PPC based macs/servers (like for one last time) before they go intel.
     
  4. Kaiser Phoenix macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Location:
    London
    #4
    Yes I think he meant that the idea of going to PPC whether an update or anything itself is a step back.

    Intel is the future. (for mac)
     
  5. Wellander thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Location:
    Huntington Beach Ca
    #5
    Hi,
    Ok thanks.
    And then was the last time the power macs and xserves were updated?
     
  6. THX1139 macrumors 68000

    THX1139

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #6
    Let me guess. You bought an IntelMac and you're feeling smug about your purchase?

    How can you take a step back when you haven't taken a step forward? The only intel macs released are the iMacs, MacBooks and mini's. The desktops and Xserves are still on PPC last time I checked, and are still being sold by Apple. Updating them would be a step forward! It wouldn't be confusing to the professionals that are still in the market for an Xserve or desktop. What's confusing about buying a faster, proven system that you already have the software for? You might get 3 or 4 years out of it before switching to intel, and just think how far along the transition will be by then! All software ported and machine problems resolved. That's the time to buy intel, not now unless you're an amatuer or web-surfer.

    Sadly though, the window for updating the remaining PPC line is rapidly closing. I would have thought another speed bump to the PowerMac line would have have been nice as a hold over until the intel desktops appear. Had they done one last bump it would have been a great way to keep sales up. I'm actually thinking of buying a Quad in the next couple of weeks, (and I know others who still want to buy the stablity of the PPC) especially if it gets a speed bump or price drop. Waiting another year for the new machines (revision B) and all of the professional software to be ported is just too long to wait. Especially when your current machine is in dire need of replacement now.
     
  7. sam10685 macrumors 68000

    sam10685

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    xserves was updated last september; the powermac was updated last october. (by the way, we are done with PPC... the future has Intel chips in sight.):D
     
  8. rdowns Suspended

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #8
    No way will there be any more PPC updates. Apple is too busy readying the PPC lines to Intel chips and they wouldn't recoup their expenses for new PPC machines. The entire line will be Intel by year end and I'd bet Apple gets it done sooner.
     
  9. amac4me macrumors 65816

    amac4me

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
  10. badmofo9000 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Shores of Lake Michigan
  11. Tilmitt macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    #11
    Apple won't update its current PowerPC machines because if they did everyone would realize that PowerPC is just as fast (and less ugly) and that Apple was only switching because of the convenience and security of using the same common stuff everyone else uses. To frame the switch to Intel as an upgrade is truly delusional...I still feel sick the way you guys cheer on Intel especially after all the things that were said about them in the past. Why cheer anything at all if you're so hollow?
     
  12. dr_lha macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    #12
    Well I dunno, maybe because the Intel switch has lead to us finally having competitively fast laptops?
     
  13. calebjohnston macrumors 68000

    calebjohnston

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    #13
    PPC isn't dead, buddy. PPC's will be fine for years and years to come. Intel's are reportedly faster, and you can run windows, blahblah. But PPC's are far from dead.
     
  14. Josh macrumors 68000

    Josh

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Location:
    State College, PA
    #14
    PPC's aren't dead in the sense that they will still keep working, and still do everything they are doing today as long as the hardware does not have a mechanical failure.

    As far as updates, improvements, etc....PPC in the Mac, as far as Apple is concerned, is dead.

    Apple will not release any more PPC products or upgrades to existing PPC hardware.

    Any future upgrades to Apple computers will either be the switch to the Intel model, or an improvement on the existing Intel model.
     
  15. milo macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    #15
    Just as fast? Funny, most of the PPC configs have been way slower, now that intel is out IBM and moto can magically match the speed of the intel chips?

    Just look at the benchmarks, with all the released machines native apps blow away the performance of the ones they replace. What is delusional is ignoring major speed gains and pretending that's not an upgrade.

    Who cares what was said in the past? Use your brain, don't get sucked in by emotion and nostalgia. You sound like a mac zealot fanboy at his worst.
     
  16. ~Shard~ macrumors P6

    ~Shard~

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Location:
    1123.6536.5321
    #16
    There is no way Apple will release any more PPC products. PPC was the past, Intel is the future. Conroe PowerMacs will be announced at WWDC and Woodcrest Xserves will be announced later in the fall. :cool:
     
  17. Tilmitt macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    #17
    Apple isn't using the latest PowerPC chips available to them. You can already get even lower power G4's from freescale with twice the L2 cache and higher frequency than the PowerBook G4's. There are dual core G4's already sampling that Apple could've used. On top of that there are new G5 cores with way improved memory latency that gives a massive boost. Apple doesn't use these because the "4x" Intel performance boost would rapidly disappear. Apple chose x86 for security in knowing that they can never again be behind or ahead of the competition. In order to justify the switch to you guys they have to come up with some clever marketing. That's all Intel ever is...marketing. Fitting that they should fool their own users using their new masters technique. Of course you buy it...enjoy your integrated graphics and ugly CPU's.
     
  18. ~Shard~ macrumors P6

    ~Shard~

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Location:
    1123.6536.5321
    #18
    Agreed, a great deal of it is all about spin. That being said, how exactly can a CPU be ugly? :confused: :p ;)
     
  19. milo macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    #19
    What's the highest frequency on the latest G4's?
    G4's sampling? That's not the same as shipping, core duos have been out 3 months already.
    "Massive boost" from memory latency? Doubt it.

    The intel macs are shipping, and they blow away the old boxes. Every PPC advance you mentioned is vaporware. That's why apple dumped them, they make hype and promises all the time, but they never deliver. Keep up the fanboy rhetoric, it's amusing.

    Ugly cpu's? With the speed boost we're seeing, the uglier the better.
     
  20. Tilmitt macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    #20
    1.84Ghz with twice the L2 cache and a faster FSB.

    Vaporware only because Apple decided not to use it. It's there. You can buy the G4's I mentioned from Freescale. IBM has the new G5's on offer, Apple won't take them because it will ruin the dramatic "performance increase" when they ship their other Intel macs. Look I don't pretend that core chips are slow or anything, they're performance is brilliant. Better than the G4 yes. Better enough to switch based on what the G4 can offer, most definitely not. And on top of that they are a mess cause they are x86.

    PowerPC atm is not faster than Intel in general, but I would strongely argue that the difference is minimal when you actually use the PowerPC chips that are available and that the switch is purely for the reasons I outlined above. And I lament that Macs transition to such a backward mangled architecture. Humanity is capable of better than tying its hands to a backwards compatibilty driven relic.
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #21
    The PowerPC architecture is elegant, but Motorola and IBM have mostly failed in bringing the architecture to its full potential. A few things killed PowerPC.
    1. Faultering GHz numbers. Obviously, this isn't the only thing that matters in a computer, but when consumers could see a 500mhz G4 compared to a 1.8+ Ghz P4, they were wondering just how efficient that PPC could be.
    2. Starved FSB. This has always been a problem, and even now compared to the DuoCore and the G5, the G4 has been lame.
    3. Higher wattage. While the G4 was very efficient as it matured, it was limited by the above, and while the G5 fixed the above, it also used a lot of power and created a lot of heat. The heatsinks and fans in a G5 tower and iMac could never be replicated in a laptop. And laptops are the future of computing.
    4. DuoCore. Two cores is impressive, especially when it can be made small and light enough to fit into a laptop that can compete with a large and more expensive desktop.

    As much as I like the PPC, I think Apple needed to transition to x86 because it removes all the marketing drag, and the performance drag, all the arguments about PPC versus x86. Now, Apple can compete up front with others and be in line for the same video cards as anyone else.
    The downside is an ugly architecture and the possibility of simplier attacks on the system. But the upside is market-share, performance, and a future with a supplier that is dedicated to the platform, unlike Motorola and IBM.
     
  22. dr_lha macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    #22
    The fact is the Core Duo is a powerful laptop CPU, streets ahead of anything Freescale can come up with. Freescale "Dual Core" PPCs are vaporware right now, they've been "sampling" for ages now and still no product. Core Duos are here now, when Intel promised them.

    Freescale are more interested in the embedded market than computers and IBM more interested in consoles. IBM are especially bad, given that the G5 is based on the POWER4 architecture, and IBM are now up to POWER5 and soon POWER6, so we should have G6 chips by now, but no. Instead we get incremental upgrades. A dual core G5 was a step in the right direction, but the IBM clearly had no interest in what Apple really wanted, a low-power G5 capable of going in a laptop.
     
  23. Sharewaredemon macrumors 68000

    Sharewaredemon

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Location:
    Cape Breton Island
  24. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #24
    Well blow me then, somebody will always scrimp costs and cut corners using an obscure architecture that no one knows for one. I for one prefer Apple to be more transparent and use INTEL instead.

    Just look at the time when they released those piss poor MBP specs and look at the public reaction, people can compare and they aren't morons (although quite a lot of the Mac userbase seem to be)

    And oh yeah, to your reference about integrated graphics, get this, even my integrated graphics has the ripple effect, speaks loads for your discrete graphics solution doesn't it. And remember how Apple actually uses the ripple effect/Core Image support as a differentiating factor in product lines? Talk about lame.
     
  25. pknz macrumors 68020

    pknz

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Location:
    NZ
    #25
    Actually, if you read my signature you would see that I do not own an Intel Mac.

    I stand by my first comments.
     

Share This Page