Apple Event on Thursday May 18th, 2006?

[Multimedia]

Still Think ALL CD Processors Are Only Short Term To ALL Be Replaced By C2D ASAP

I really doubt it...if anything the roadmap for the Intel transition in August will mean:

MacBook 13.3":

1.66CD/512MB/40GB/GMA950/Combo/iSight+FR/ $999,
1.66CD/512MB/60GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1299
1.83CD/512MB/80GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1499 (August Intro.)

So why wouldn't the above be C2D after the supply limitation of the new C2D processors is more than demand? I don't understand the logic. I don't think the price of the slower C2D processors is going to be significantly higher than the price of the old CDs is it?

I even wonder how long after the Merom launch Intel will continue to even make and sell CD processors. Why would they waste manufacturing capacity continuing to make an obsolete processor that's socket and mobo compatible with Yonah's? And as Alden says below in Post #178 and I have already posted numerous times, it would be best for everyone if Steve uses WWDC to announce an all 64-bit line thereafter in conjunction with a highly 64-bit capable Leopard introduction with a ballpark shipping date - I'm thinking January 2007 but it's only a guess based on where we are now and the frequency of updates throughout the life of Tiger.

It's my understanding that Tiger has laid the foundation for Leopard so the evolution to 10.5 is already in place such that Steve can introduce it in August and deliver it rapidly at MWSF in January. But this is merely an "educated guess" type of rumor I am reinforcing and nothing based on any sort of real inside info. Someone care to support or correct me on this point please?

MacBook Pro (August Updates):

15" 2.0C2D/1GB/80GB/X1600 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1999
15" 2.16C2D/1GB/100GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2499
17" 2.33C2D/1GB/120GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2799

Perhaps. But why not just bring the x1600 up to full speed instead of putting in a more power hungry x1800?

 

[SC68Cal]

Reminds me of the old TiBook for some reason, with Red.

 

[AidenShaw]

I really doubt it...if anything the roadmap for the Intel transition in August will mean:

MacBook 13.3":

1.66CD/512MB/40GB/GMA950/Combo/iSight+FR/ $999,
1.66CD/512MB/60GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1299
1.83CD/512MB/80GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1499 (August Intro.)

MacBook Pro (August Update):

2.0C2D/1GB/80GB/X1600 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1999
2.16C2D/1GB/100GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2499
2.33C2D/1GB/120GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2799

You may very well be right - on the CPU front. (no comment on the GPU/RAM/disk...)

But - you should hope that you are wrong.

The best thing for the Apple platform would be for The Steve® to say at WWDC'06 that "from today on, all MacIntels are 64-bit".

Kill Yonah ASAP. Apple should have waited for Merom and introduced Mac OSX on Intel as 64-bit only.

 

[Legacy]

You may very well be right - on the CPU front. (no comment on the GPU/RAM/disk...)

But - you should hope that you are wrong.

The best thing for the Apple platform would be for The Steve® to say at WWDC'06 that "from today on, all MacIntels are 64-bit".

Kill Yonah ASAP. Apple should have waited for Merom and introduced Mac OSX on Intel as 64-bit only.

I agree, but the reality is Apple prefer short term glory to long term progress - they want the intel transition to be over as soon as possible and that means adopting the 'newest' intel technology - the Yonah chip.

Secondly, in terms of differentiation and price the Yonah will probably be cheaper to adopt at a respectable speed in the MacBook models which should be at competitive prices v.s the MacBook Pro which not many people can afford. Esp in the UK they charge £1500 for the entry model - $2700!!, so price is very important

 

[Multimedia]

Why Would Intel Keep Making & Selling Yonah After Merom Ships?

You may very well be right - on the CPU front. (no comment on the GPU/RAM/disk...)

But - you should hope that you are wrong.

The best thing for the Apple platform would be for The Steve® to say at WWDC'06 that "from today on, all MacIntels are 64-bit".

Kill Yonah ASAP. Apple should have waited for Merom and introduced Mac OSX on Intel as 64-bit only.

I agree, but the reality is Apple prefer short term glory to long term progress - they want the intel transition to be over as soon as possible and that means adopting the 'newest' intel technology - the Yonah chip.

Fine. But what makes you think this isn't just Apple's public beta learning curve and that they won't switch to Merom ASAP?

Secondly, in terms of differentiation and price the Yonah will probably be cheaper to adopt at a respectable speed in the MacBook models which should be at competitive prices v.s the MacBook Pro which not many people can afford. Esp in the UK they charge £1500 for the entry model - $2700!!, so price is very important

OK. So why do you think Merom Processors will cost significantly more than Yonah processors once the initial Merom runs are out the door? I would think that Intel is going to make it financially advantageous to all their customers to drop Yonah like a hot potato as soon as they can. Am I off base to believe that Intel doesn't want to keep making Yonah processors for any longer than it takes to ramp up Merom production full bore?

 

[Georgeo]

The only real answer is "Wait and see"

Hi there,
What are u waiting for? I got my macbook already wink wink.

 

[Georgeo]

Hi there,
What are u waiting for? I got my macbook already wink wink.

I love it

 

[vccavtech]

HAHA, when the macbooks come out, if that's what they are going to be called, what are we going to do. we spend most of our days waiting for a computer that will be out dated in 4 years. isn't that sad. I know it's not just another computer, but it technically is. that doesn't make since to you but it does to me. people talked and talked about the dual usb ibooks, you know the first ones with a g3 500 mhz. i just sold mine by the way. we'll be doing the same thing in 4 years.

 

[Shamus]

Personally, I am hoping for some sort of upgrade to the Nano line. Maybe 6GB, and I would be happy . And for the sake of the people who have been itching for a Macbook, I hope that is released to!

 

[Multimedia]

MacBooks May Be Outdated In 3 Months Rather Than The Usual 2-3 Years

HAHA, when the macbooks come out, if that's what they are going to be called, what are we going to do. we spend most of our days waiting for a computer that will be out dated in 4 years. isn't that sad. I know it's not just another computer, but it technically is. that doesn't make since to you but it does to me. people talked and talked about the dual usb ibooks, you know the first ones with a g3 500 mhz. i just sold mine by the way. we'll be doing the same thing in 4 years.

Oh I wish you were right. But this time we have an exception to the rule. MacBooks May Be Outdated In 3 Months Rather Than The Usual 3 Years thanks to the imminent 64-bit Merom release in August. All the "new" MacIntels are based on the last of the 32-bit processors. It's really a sad situation for those of us who see the long term big picture.

I know we're getting razzed by those of you who think they are "fast enough" etc. We don't doubt they are fast and cool - well not really cool - and fun and neat. We're thinking about the long term viability of 32-bit processing in the face of a predominantly 64-bit friendly OS next year. While it's nothing to have a cow over, we don't see the point of investing a lot of money in this processor as the opening volly into the Intel space when it will be replaced by a completely new 64-bit processor family beginning in little more than two weeks (June) and completing deployment by September. That's all.

Core 3 Duo is in 2008
Core 4 Duo is in 2010

Why buy Core 1 Duo when Core 2 Duo is so close at hand? . Cooler, Faster, Quieter Mobile Processors in 3 months. Is that really a very long time to wait?

This is how we VOTE on what the MARKET WANTS not what Apple wants to FOIST on the Market. WE ARE THE MARKET. WE CAN VOTE by NOT BUYING obsolete technology now. This is what the debate here is all about.

Now if you need something right away, no problem. Core Duo is fine for the short term. It just appears to me to be a product line family that will have a very short life span and that models containing it will depreciate in value sooner than past and future models have and will. Is that fair? I really don't want to piss anyone off here. I am trying to be gentle. . It's a HISTORICAL BIG PICTURE point of view.

 

[macjay]

I really doubt it...if anything the roadmap for the Intel transition in August will mean:

MacBook 13.3":

1.66CD/512MB/40GB/GMA950/Combo/iSight+FR/ $999,
1.66CD/512MB/60GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1299
1.83CD/512MB/80GB/X1400 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1499 (August Intro.)

MacBook Pro (August Update):

2.0C2D/1GB/80GB/X1600 128MB/Super/iSight+FR $1999
2.16C2D/1GB/100GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2499
2.33C2D/1GB/120GB/X1800 256MB/Super/iSight+FR $2799

No way there is overlap between the MB and MBP on VRAM-- the MB's has to be less (likely 64mb). Also HD overlap very unlikely.

 

[netdog]

Oh I wish you were right. But this time we have an exception to the rule. MacBooks May Be Outdated In 3 Months Rather Than The Usual 3 Years thanks to the imminent 64-bit Merom release in August. All the "new" MacIntels are based on the last of the 32-bit processors. It's really a sad situation for those of us who see the long term big picture.

You know Multi, I agree with you. The thing I find odd is that you were hooting for the MBP 17" just a couple of weeks ago. Did you buy one, or were you just excited about it. An MB with a Yonah will have an early sell-by date, but woe to anyone who has shelled out $2799+AppleCare+RAM, or $3448.00 for a reasonably configured MBP 17" with a Yonah.

 

[Multimedia]

Initial Enthusiasm Was Depressed By All The Bad News Plus Alden Shaw & ehurtley Posts

You know Multi, I agree with you. The thing I find odd is that you were hooting for the MBP 17" just a couple of weeks ago. Did you buy one, or were you just excited about it. An MB with a Yonah will have an early sell-by date, but woe to anyone who has shelled out $2799+AppleCare+RAM, or $3448.00 for a reasonably configured MBP 17" with a Yonah.

Exactly. No, I didn't buy one because after my initial enthusiasm that it had retained FW800, I came to my senses about how soon Merom based models will ship thanks to Alden Shaw's & ehurtley's excellent analysis in the Core 2 Duo thread.

Plus all these problems with noise, heat and uneven screen brightness and flicker have soured me on this current version anyway. I've become convinced Apple is using consumers as their beta site for all the Pre-Merom systems in preparation for a much better 64-bit Woodcrest, Conroe & Merom deployment by Summer's end. . I hope.

This forum is a great place to keep on top of what's happening out there. I've been hanging out here a lot lately. Very helpful and informative community here. Love you all. Quite the soap opera isn't it?

 

[netdog]

I've become convinced Apple is using consumers as their beta site for all the Pre-Merom systems in preparation for a much better 64-bit Woodcrest, Conroe & Merom deployment by Summer's end.

Agreed

 

[jimN]

What a bunch of conspracy theorists. Beta program my arse. There are evidently problems with the currrent MBPs (although forums seem to allow these to be blown out of proportion) but many of these are construction and component problems - regardless of the chipset these will persist.

Yes, the yonah chip will be old technology but it will be far from unusable. Your yonah laptop won't technically be out-of-date until Leopard is released. This will happen towards the end of the year but if experience with Tiger serves then the first really stable build will take a few more months to appear - i seem to recall Apple really pushing 10.4.2 (or was it .3). Regardless your computer won't top working nor will programs you have run any slower than they did the day before a merom replacement was released.

As it stands I don't think we'll see Merom's running cooler than Yonah, although I suppose that at exactly the same speed (not clock speed but actually task completing speed) they might manage this. They are only replacing top end yonah chips so at present they would be a more expensive option. Plus, given the g4 is still widely used and is a 32bit chip, apple will need to ensure that 32bit support persists for years to come. Just because console owners get sold on the mythology of the extra 'bits' we shouldn't get too caught up with numbers that will likely have very little relevance to teh average user.

 

[Multimedia]

Only Looks Like A Conspiracy - Not Really Is One

What a bunch of conspracy theorists. Beta program my arse. There are evidently problems with the currrent MBPs (although forums seem to allow these to be blown out of proportion) but many of these are construction and component problems - regardless of the chipset these will persist.

Well I for one hope you are wrong about that or we'll never advance to one. This is not about asserting any conscious conspiracy by Apple. Just a comment on the reality that looks similar to a conspiracy due to a lot of bugs in Rev A models. 15" is up to the 4th motherboard in less than 4 months for example. Seems like a pretty beta-like environ to me.

Yes, the yonah chip will be old technology but it will be far from unusable. Your yonah laptop won't technically be out-of-date until Leopard is released. This will happen towards the end of the year but if experience with Tiger serves then the first really stable build will take a few more months to appear - i seem to recall Apple really pushing 10.4.2 (or was it .3). Regardless your computer won't top working nor will programs you have run any slower than they did the day before a merom replacement was released.

As it stands I don't think we'll see Merom's running cooler than Yonah, although I suppose that at exactly the same speed (not clock speed but actually task completing speed) they might manage this. They are only replacing top end yonah chips so at present they would be a more expensive option. Plus, given the g4 is still widely used and is a 32bit chip, apple will need to ensure that 32bit support persists for years to come. Just because console owners get sold on the mythology of the extra 'bits' we shouldn't get too caught up with numbers that will likely have very little relevance to the average user.

Merom will replace the entire Yonah line including 1.66 GHz - not only top speeds. Cooler should happen no matter what speed. Please let's not keep confusing a doomsday "32-bit computing is dead" type of position with what some of us are saying. Nobody is saying it's unusable. We're just talking about voting with your dollars for 64-bit processors by waiting a very few more months. If you can't wait then don't. No biggie.

 

[aswitcher]

I think Apple wanted to switch to Intel as fast as possible, and rather than wait for second half 06 they entered the market 6 months early for good business reasons. They are now firmly targeting disgruntled XP users in the window before Vista comes to save the day (07').

For Apple 06 is the year of the switcher.

But I agree by pulling their time lines forward they are leaving the early intel mac adopters with hardware that will be quickly trumped by 64 bit machines with faster, cooler and cheaper bits in the second half of this year.

I really hope they put the new chips in the whole line as soon as they can - and I cant see why they wouldn't, so I expect everything with intel to date will get a new chip.

I also wonder if this earlier than expected intel shift means that new form factor iMacs, just minor tweaks perhaps, are in the wind since I read that the case is not so user friendly to open as it used to be.

 

[BlizzardBomb]

This thread is hurting my head.

Yonah is obsolete the second Merom comes out! Yes... just like the Quad-G5 will be when it gets replaced. But hold on, then just half a year after Merom, Merom would be obsolete! Ok, let's wait until the end of time until computers don't even need a processor, and they run off brain power

And we're talking about releasing a consumer machine. Do you think the average consumer is going to go around asking if you have a 64-bit processor? Do you think the average consumer who needs to word process a document is going to be thrilled about having 20% more power than Yonah?

 

[aswitcher]

This thread is hurting my head.

SNIP

And we're talking about releasing a consumer machine. Do you think the average consumer is going to go around asking if you have a 64-bit processor? Do you think the average consumer who needs to word process a document is going to be thrilled about having 20% more power than Yonah?

First up I think the average user is a myth because in reality the average user 3 years ago wasn't likely to be doing anything like the level of photo or video manipulation they can these days, and the same will apply for 3 years from now with these and other like multimedia apps. And lets not even discuss games or HDTV

Second if you plan to keep a machine 3-5 years then you would be better off with 64 bit so your well placed for any software optimised for it during this time - which MAC OSX will be sometime in this period.

I am not saying its crap to have a 32 bit machine (not like other posters are saying/being accused of), I am saying I think Apple hurried them into the market and it wont be until later this year that intel macs will get the longer legs that will better carry them over the years. Thats why I am waiting.

 

[inmotion]

good one blizzardbomb. i for one completly agree with you.
consumers needing 4 gigs of ram? now i think thats money down the drain.
furthermore, look at xp 64 bits... not everyone jumped on the boat did they?
the fact is that few programs out there are made for 64 bits and its not in 4-5 years that every program in the market will be 64 bits.
if your working for some kind of company which requires you to process large amount of data (meaning terabytes) this wont benefit you
programs made for 64 bits will probably only come out in 2007-2008 and consumers wont see a need to actually "switch" to 64 bits until then.
sure, wait and buy a merom now if you want, that is if you plan on keeping a laptop (and i mean working with it everyday) for the next 5 years at least while awaiting the programs to all migrate unto 64 bits...

bottom line is consumers really dont need this, at least not yet, yonah is smoking fast and for someone who emails, surfs, chats, does word processing.... it should be perfectly alright (-> those are the ones targeted for the MB..... we're not talking about server people right ? )

if you plan on sitting out the MB because you want merom then the MB is simply not for you... wait for the next update of the Powermac... maybe then you'll be satisfied... and again, thats a maybe

 

[alphace]

64 bit on intel consumer cpus (so not itanium who is real 64 bit) is based amd's technology AMD64, and it's not true 64 bit, it uses 64 bit on memory addresses not on instructions so you won't get great improvement in performance.
I think core duo is good but I don't really care about 32 or 64 bit when u won't get a real boost in performance through the architecture.

I'll get a mb cause I need a good laptop , cause they are durable and the price of used ones doesn't falls down like pc notebooks.

 

[disconap]

My guess is Jobs will be apologizing for the recent security update.

 

[Mersen]

What a bunch of conspracy theorists. Beta program my arse. There are evidently problems with the currrent MBPs (although forums seem to allow these to be blown out of proportion) but many of these are construction and component problems - regardless of the chipset these will persist.

Yes, the yonah chip will be old technology but it will be far from unusable. Your yonah laptop won't technically be out-of-date until Leopard is released. This will happen towards the end of the year but if experience with Tiger serves then the first really stable build will take a few more months to appear - i seem to recall Apple really pushing 10.4.2 (or was it .3). Regardless your computer won't top working nor will programs you have run any slower than they did the day before a merom replacement was released.

As it stands I don't think we'll see Merom's running cooler than Yonah, although I suppose that at exactly the same speed (not clock speed but actually task completing speed) they might manage this. They are only replacing top end yonah chips so at present they would be a more expensive option. Plus, given the g4 is still widely used and is a 32bit chip, apple will need to ensure that 32bit support persists for years to come. Just because console owners get sold on the mythology of the extra 'bits' we shouldn't get too caught up with numbers that will likely have very little relevance to teh average user.

Ughh more things to worry about... I cant imagine that I will ever truly NEED 64 bits... I am the type that will just be doing the surfing, emailing, word docs, playing the occasional game, simple video editing and photo storage. Would I ever utilize the 64bits even if I had it?

My biggest concern, is that if I didnt wait till the 64bit was in the Macbook, would I not be able to purchase a Leopard upgrade when it comes out in ?January? Does this mean that all existing Macs will not be able to change from Tiger to Leopard??

If the Memron is due in August when do you really think it will be placed in the Macbook?

 

[peharri]

But I agree by pulling their time lines forward they are leaving the early intel mac adopters with hardware that will be quickly trumped by 64 bit machines with faster, cooler and cheaper bits in the second half of this year.

There will always be a better, newer, more impressive chip just around the corner. The fact is that when Apple release the Core Duo based machines, the specs were impressive. The iMac Intel might have been just as fast as it would have been had it been upgraded to the dual-core G5 as the PowerMacs were, but nonetheless, it was impressive, and the machines were impressive compared to non-Macintosh PCs.

This whole "Apple should have waited until v2 came out" stuff strikes me as silly. And I don't think they need to wait for Core 2 Duos for the MacBook either. The architecture is still fine, and while one can make legitijmate complaints that over-all, Apple's laptops have too high an entry-cost in a market where laptops start at $500, Apple releasing a Core Duo based MacBook at $1,100 would still represent it releasing a machine that's value for money. At that price, you'll be getting a Pentium M or even a Celeron M from other manufacturers, that's a generation behind.

As far as the "But all 32 bit Macs will be obsolete within three years" thing goes, I call BS. First of all, if Apple releases a 32-bit MB, then we can expect them to continue to sell 32 bit Intel machines for the next year or so. The Mac mini isn't going to go 64 bit when other Macs aren't 64 bit, so it strikes me that the majority of Apple's sales this year will be of 32 bit systems, even assuming the MBP and iMac go 64 bit tomorrow.

Second, Apple developers are going to be doing the universal binary thing for at least three years. More Macs will most likely be PowerPC than Intel for that long, if not longer. It's not terribly likely, in my view, that a developer will want to put processor-specific isms into a program intended to be a UB. It's awkward. It's easier to just write the whole damned thing in C/C++/Objective C and let XCode take care of everything. You might see a handful of applications "optimized for 64 bit" (in the same way as some were optimized for the G4), but they'll generally work on the 32 bit systems as developers are unlikely to want to limit themselves to a single processor model during this three year time span, and so, yes, they are going to have a core C program with "replaceable" components, rather than programs where significant parts are written in assembler and only assembler.

The net effect of the Intel switch is to make processorisms a non-issue for many years to come. With no compelling reason to use 64 bit features other than performance, and with more than half your market disappearing the moment your program becomes tied to one single processor architecture, I think it's improbable we'll see the kinds of doomsday scenarios some here are painting. In the mean time, a MacBook with a Core (1) Duo isn't going to be "obsolete" in three months. It's going to start to get creaky, and in need of replacement, in three years like everything else. Its performance will be impressive compared to many similarly priced computers. It'll run everything released in the next three years that its fast enough to run. It's going to be ok. You might have difficulty running some of the more graphics intensive games, but that'll be because of GPU not CPU, and given its a laptop, the GPU tradeoff may work in your battery-saving favour.

 

[AidenShaw]

saving 1000 words

64 bit on intel consumer cpus (so not itanium who is real 64 bit) is based amd's technology AMD64, and it's not true 64 bit, it uses 64 bit on memory addresses not on instructions so you won't get great improvement in performance.

I think core duo is good but I don't really care about 32 or 64 bit when u won't get a real boost in performance through the architecture.

http://www.barefeats.com/dualcore.html
"64/64" means 64-bit OS/64-bit application, "64/32" 64-bit OS/32-bit application...

"2. Running Windows 64 and 64 bit software will be like having a nitrous oxide injection system under the "hood" of your PC. We saw an 8% to 37% gain over "32/32" and "64/32", depending on what application we ran."​

That looks like a real boost in performance to me

And, BTW, PowerPC/SPARC/PA-RISC/Alpha all use 32-bit length instructions, IA64 uses 41-bit instructions. Instruction length is not relevant for a discussion of "true 64-bit" - your claim that x64 is not 64-bit because it only handles 64-bit addresses and data is not true.