Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Press Event October 19 Confirmed

To wait, or not to wait...

~Shard~ said:
So what are you thinking then, Yonah or Merom? Just wondering how long you plan on waiting... :p ;)

I wouldn't discount the PowerBooks updates just yet - as I mentioned in my above post, there definitely exists potential for a decent upgrade to them. What Apple's strategy is with regards to the machine is another matter...
Click to expand...


What i want to know is,

Will it be worth getting the first Intel PowerBook, when i'm going to be having to run all PowerPC software on it, so it will all have to be translated by Rosetta..
..And so would the last PowerPC PowerBook being released end up running my current software at the same speed as Rosetta would on an Intel based PowerBook?

The answer to that will determine whether or not i purchase the last version of the PowerPC PowerBook instead of waiting for the Intel version.......

Of course, then when i start getting Intel based software, i'll be then able to run that at full speed... but i don't want to wait 'till the end of 2006 or whenever it was!!!!

1Ghz of lovin just ain't doin' it for me anymore!
 
andiwm2003 said:
nevertheless the imac rev. c is amazingly cheap when you take the extras into account.
Click to expand...

Except it's still expensive compared to the average PC ;)

Not saying I'd go back, but you take the average consumer and tell them they can get a computer with 17" (maybe even 19") flatscreen monitor for $600 and they'd probably take it over paying $1,299...even if they are getting a much better computing experience and slicker package.
 
davey-nb said:
Wow, soo much certitude from you, do you have an inside track?
I believe the pink madonapod is coming, but the date will coincide with her new albumn.
Click to expand...

The pink Madonna Nano release doesn't have to coincide with her new album. If you look at the U2 iPod last year you'll notice that the iPod was released late October while the album wasn't released until late November.
 
http://www.techworld.com/opsys/features/index.cfm?featureid=1793

Article on why apple chose Intel over AMD.

In the future Apple can switch to AMD with little impact ( not that great compared to Architecture switches, i.e., PPC -> Intel )



minimax said:
what's your point exactly? FWIW Intel can build hundreds of extra fabs if that makes them happy. Fact remains AMD has lots of headroom to grow with the new fab. Please don't bother us with irrelevent news.
Click to expand...
 
My gut tells me it's an Intel PB. Remember that OSX has been running on intel since its inception, they have had ample time to design the motherboard and other components, PB's NEED a revision now, The "Pro" they are talking about are PB's FOR the pro... maybe with a joint announcement that PS is now optimized for Intel.
That's what my GUT says. My brain says "Mini".
 
minimax said:
what's your point exactly? FWIW Intel can build hundreds of extra fabs if that makes them happy. Fact remains AMD has lots of headroom to grow with the new fab. Please don't bother us with irrelevent news.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s irrelevant mainly, because the type of chips that will be made is what’s important. Yes, competition’s definitely a good thing. I also noticed that AMD’s new plant will be making 90nm chips. It wasn’t stated when they’ll be making 65nm tech based chips. If they're using 300mm wafers and on those wafers are 90nm based chips…

Isn't Intel further along in the 65nm process? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but I think it’s more important, in terms of tech and capacity, to be able to make chips based upon 65nm processes. If the silicone wafers are 300mm, it seems one would be able to make more chips when using 65nm manufacturing than 90nm.

Sorry to offend, wasn’t my intent. :eek:

Edit: Besides 65nm allowing for the making of smaller chips... with 65nm couldn't the manufaturer, using 65nm, make more complicated/advanced multi-core chips?
 
Stella said:
http://www.techworld.com/opsys/features/index.cfm?featureid=1793

Article on why apple chose Intel over AMD.

In the future Apple can switch to AMD with little impact ( not that great compared to Architecture switches, i.e., PPC -> Intel )
Click to expand...

Nice marketing story.

"One of the biggest considerations for Apple was getting a road map in all possible markets where they may play," says Rau. "And if you look at AMD's product line, there are some holes." Most notably, AMD hasn't invested in creating a line of low voltage and ultra-low voltage processors that competes with what Intel offers.
Click to expand...

Apparently they have never heard of Turion that bests Pentium M on performance / watt (it has memorybus incl in wattage contrary to the pentium) at lower prices with 64 bit instruction set. For some proper information you should visit some real tech sites as anandtech, tom's hardware and ars technica instead of relying on so called 'unbiased' 'analysts'.

industry analysts say
Click to expand...
LOL :D
 
Doesn't the Turion kick the snott out of the Pentium M and Intels mobile low powered chips? I have heard that from several people and websites, if that is true, then why would Apple go with Intel? AMD in a Mac sounds really good.




minimax said:
Nice marketing story.



Apparently they have never heard of Turion that bests Pentium M on performance / watt (it has memorybus incl in wattage cotnrary to the pentium) at lower prices with 64 bits. I'm not going into this once again, but I'd advise you to visit some real tech sites as anandtech, tom's hardware and ars technica for proper information instead of relying on so called ' unbiased' 'analysts'.

LOL :D
Click to expand...
 
ZorPrime said:
I don’t think it’s irrelevant mainly, because the type of chips that will be made is what’s important. Yes, competition’s definitely a good thing. I also noticed that AMD’s new plant will be making 90nm chips. It wasn’t stated when they’ll be making 65nm tech based chips. If they're using 300mm wafers and on those wafers are 90nm based chips…

Isn't Intel further along in the 65nm process? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but I think it’s more important, in terms of tech and capacity, to be able to make chips based upon 65nm processes. If the silicone wafers are 300mm, it seems one would be able to make more chips when using 65nm manufacturing than 90nm.

Sorry to offend, wasn’t my intent. :eek:
Click to expand...

It still wasnt relevant to the original statement that AMD couldnt deliver reliably to Apple which is plain FUD.

Regarding the 90nm vs 65 nm Intel is on 65 nm almost on some of their fabs, but they use different processes and technologies. AFAIK they do not use SOI, and they also don't operate their fabs with the advanced precision manufacturing (APM) that allows AMD incredibly more flexibility and higher mature yields for new technologies (so they can step in later but more efficient). Regarding the 300mm vs. the 200 mm wafers, both Intel and AMD use both and are moving to the 300mm.

edit: yes with every scale decrease they can up frequencies (lower resistance, smaller distances to travel) and make more complex designs. Problem is at present they have hit the physical wall of clock frequency/core diesize. Theoretically it could be a bit larger but they can't get the wires to transport the electrons with less resistance. As a result they can't make them more complex AND increase clockspeed without resorting to radical measures (and throw away useful clockcycles). With every scale decrease they have two choices now: either up frequences with smaller processors (and be able to put more of them on a single die) or make the processor more complex (and powerful per clockcycle) against the current maximum clockspeed. 3/4 GHz for a single structure is really the limit it can operate efficiently at the current average die size. So multicore is the easy way to gain (theoretical) performance fast but it lays the burden on software development (multithreading), which is why I am very sceptical about the current multicore hype.

PS I wasnt offended but your reply was a bit on the aggressive side with non-relevant information to back it up, and I can get a bit edgy then :eek:
 
JDOG_ said:
Except it's still expensive compared to the average PC ;)

Not saying I'd go back, but you take the average consumer and tell them they can get a computer with 17" (maybe even 19") flatscreen monitor for $600 and they'd probably take it over paying $1,299...even if they are getting a much better computing experience and slicker package.
Click to expand...
That's absurd. You can get a really basic pc for $600, but once you start adding all the extras that the imac has like a 128mb graphics card, 512mb ram, 160gb hdd, dual layer superdrive, wifi, bluetooth, isight, media remote, and iLife, you're gonna be well-over $1000 if not over $1300.

Just go to dell.com and try pricing something with iMac's specs. And don't forget that small-form-factor PCs carry another $100-200 premium.
 
Do the same thing with an XPS (most top of the line model) and compare it to a Powerbook, in price and performance it smashes the PowerBook, to me OSX isn't enough to spend $3k on when the specs are wayy overpriced.




dongmin said:
That's absurd. You can get a really basic pc for $600, but once you start adding all the extras that the imac has like a 128mb graphics card, 512mb ram, 160gb hdd, dual layer superdrive, wifi, bluetooth, isight, media remote, and iLife, you're gonna be well-over $1000 if not over $1300.

Just go to dell.com and try pricing something with iMac's specs. And don't forget that small-form-factor PCs carry another $100-200 premium.
Click to expand...
 
daul-core ppc software?????

I love to buy a new powermac dual-core mac but I'm very worried about software for it We will have fat Apps for them but have long will this last?
5 or 10 years from now> It has taken me very long time to save money to buy a powermac with a LCD monitor. In Australia a powermac 2.3 w 1gb , 400gb HD, ATI 850xt , Apple 20" LCD , Modem, = AUS $ 6,411.99. as you can see it is very expenive so I do not want to find myself without software. if software was around for 10 years then thats fine. The mac i have now is imac 233hz , 256mb with 10.3.9 bit slow ok. I can not aford a new mac in 18 months when the mactel macs came into market Now i need the power of a powermac not a g5 imac. What do you think about software for ppc mac???

please help me in this buying choice??

Alantis
 
If I was you I'd but the last final and last generation of PowerMacs and keep it. All the PPC bugs will be fixed and PPC will be the majority of Macs for a long time to come, it won't be like they will be obsolete right away. There will also be no increase in performance for a long time to come in the Intels, and a lot of software won't be available as well as bugs that will have to be worked out. PPC is the way to go.


Atlantis said:
I love to buy a new powermac dual-core mac but I'm very worried about software for it We will have fat Apps for them but have long will this last?
5 or 10 years from now> It has taken me very long time to save money to buy a powermac with a LCD monitor. In Australia a powermac 2.3 w 1gb , 400gb HD, ATI 850xt , Apple 20" LCD , Modem, = AUS $ 6,411.99. as you can see it is very expenive so I do not want to find myself without software. if software was around for 10 years then thats fine. The mac i have now is imac 233hz , 256mb with 10.3.9 bit slow ok. I can not aford a new mac in 18 months when the mactel macs came into market Now i need the power of a powermac not a g5 imac. What do you think about software for ppc mac???

please help me in this buying choice??

Alantis
Click to expand...
 
iQuit said:
If I was you I'd but the last final and last generation of PowerMacs and keep it. All the PPC bugs will be fixed and PPC will be the majority of Macs for a long time to come, it won't be like they will be obsolete right away. There will also be no increase in performance for a long time to come in the Intels, and a lot of software won't be available as well as bugs that will have to be worked out. PPC is the way to go.
Click to expand...


it makes no sense to me that software won't be available for the new computers. why create the computer if you can do nothing with it.

shouldn't the standard mac programs like adobe stuff still work.. i mean if i was the developer i would make sure that it would be a big head ache for someone to buy a new system
 
iQuit said:
Do the same thing with an XPS (most top of the line model) and compare it to a Powerbook, in price and performance it smashes the PowerBook, to me OSX isn't enough to spend $3k on when the specs are wayy overpriced.
Click to expand...

And even after all that you still got a PC :eek:

People look at Dell and say "Oh what a great deal!" But the $299 computer is stripped with a Celeron, no burner, fat monitor, low memory and no frills. Add the things you really want that will do what you need to do for the next 6 months until it's out of date and you are easily in the $1,000+ range.

Dell * other PC manufacturers are hurting right now. Their products stink, the R&D is non-functional (same products, different packages) and they have had the same processor for over a year. There has never been a better time for Apple to make a move on the market. Why they don't agressively pursue with great ads akin to the iPod ads is beyond me.
 
12" will be retired

- The 12"PB will be retired on Wednesday, pending the release of a 13" widescreen PB. The 15" and 17" will also receive updates.

- The PM series will all feature PCIe, starting with X800 cards and options for higher performance cards.
 
I am saying, Rosetta can only emulate a g3 processor, meaning for a while MacTels will be slow with most apps, which is why they won't hit the Pro line first. Even when they have Native x86 apps, they won't be able to outperform the PPC for a while considering altivec. So right now the best thing would be to get a PPC machine. Also all Mac owners have a PPC right now, meaning development for PPC will continue to go on for years. Even if MacTels sell a lot the majority of all macs will be PPC, so meaning they will be forced to keep developing for PPC architecture. Also this guy was interested in the PowerMac which is part of the pro line, which won't be one of the first MacTels and will have issues such as bugs that will be flawed in the first few revisions. People act like it will be a smooth transition, but in all reality...it isn't just going to be bam you have a new processor and everything is fine. I am not saying software won't be available but a lot of it won't be right away ad well as the software being able to outperform the PPC architecture until they can run it at full speed. Adobe will still work, but the fact that it will be a new architecture means the software won't be as fast as it currently is on the dual core G5's because Adobe has used the extra processor and altivec.





juliana_24 said:
it makes no sense to me that software won't be available for the new computers. why create the computer if you can do nothing with it.

shouldn't the standard mac programs like adobe stuff still work.. i mean if i was the developer i would make sure that it would be a big head ache for someone to buy a new system
Click to expand...
 
Loke said:
- The 12"PB will be retired on Wednesday, pending the release of a 13" widescreen PB. The 15" and 17" will also receive updates.

- The PM series will all feature PCIe, starting with X800 cards and options for higher performance cards.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see your 12/13 inch prediction come true. :)
 
tablet mac?!?!

When do you think apple releases a tablet version of the ibook or the powerbook? Wednesday????

What are the chances the new powerbooks will be lighter and thinner?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back