Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I priced a Monarch Computing PC box, 64bit FX 53, a Radeon 9800 XT, a DVD-R/CDRW, 2 gigs RAM, 2x74G SATA HD, and XP Pro for $3400. Remember, there is hardly any software that is 64bit native for the OS (still waiting on longhorn).

" good things come to those that wait "[/QUOTE]

I think I just read on Cnet that Longhorn is delayed until mid-2006, and even then without some of its promised features. For some, the wait mgiht eb a llong, long, time (at least in computer time)
 
numediaman said:
I hope I'm not duplicating here . . .

here is the latest from AppleInsider;
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=417

. . . according to a reliable source, Apple was recently forced to completely rework the internal temperature sensors inside the current G5 case design to accommodate the new 90 nanometer G5 processors. Apparently, the new 90nm daughter cards have a different profile and seat position than the cards included in the initial Power Mac G5.

"The sensors were reading too low of temperature coming off of the heat-sinks and this would throw the fans into a frenzy," one source said. "The fans would spin up to an intolerably noisy speed and then the machine would shut itself down to prevent damaging the processors even though the internal temperature of the processors remained well below 27-degrees Celsius."

Apple engineers have reportedly resolved the sensor issue, though sources say that low processor supplies may have acted to compounded the delays. Reportedly, IBM's Power PC G5 970FX chip has failed to yield even the baseline 2.0 GHz mark on a consistent basis, preventing Apple from introducing faster machines . . .

. . . Compelling evidence implies that the first set of Power Mac G5 revisions were to take place prior to the 15th of March . . .​

I don't know if this is AI trying to make excuses for some bad predictions, or Apple making excuses for not being able to build products.

But the end result is everyone looks bad: IBM, because they can't supply chips with faster speeds and in quantity; Apple, because they don't have suppliers they can count on, and their engineering guys are having troubles; the rumor boards because there is nothing solid to report.

As I stated before, everyone needs to hold off on the 3.0 talk -- to date, there is no evidence that Apple can make it to 2.2!
This really hurts and explains a lot of things if true.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.