Apple Press Event October 19 Confirmed

[mac n cheese]

If there are no updates, Apple should auction off the computer division...cheap.

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.

Pretty simple really. I wouldn't advertise the current "pro" line garbage either. Its been outmatched by every crappy PC for a LONG time now. Long in the tooth doesn't begin to describe it. More like dead in the water.

 

[andiwm2003]

Originally Posted by JDOG_
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.


QUOTE=dongmin

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.

i have to say i agree with dongmin. when i tried to put together a comparable 20" dell i ended up around $1400-1500. it's got a faster processor though. (3 Ghz P4. my guess is the g5 2.1 equals around 2.6 ghz p4. so its only roughly 15% slower. that is well in the range where software is more important than exact processor speed.)

anyway you end up with 1300-1500 for a dell. its then up to you if the formfactor, the software and os x is worth the additional $200-400.

all the numbers are of course soft. if you think a cheaper dell matches the imac then your decision of course will lean more towards saying the mac is expensive. if you think the dell is crap quality wise (LIKE I DO from experience) and the speed is comparable then you lean more towards saying the mac is worth it's money.

at last: within the apple universe the 20" imac has the best value for the buck. probably the 12" ibook has a similar value.

my 2 cents.

 

[berkleeboy210]

- 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.

Steve Jobs: "The 12" PowerBook has been a great success for us, and now we are replacing it"

 

[StkhlmSyndrm23]

Steve Jobs: "The 12" PowerBook has been a great success for us, and now we are replacing it"

That's been his favorite new line. I know it was a hit when he used it for the nano and the regular iPod. That sort of statement is so Apple and so Steve. I love it.

The 12" PB has been one of our bestselling computers ever and has an awesome design; it's a really great machine. So now it's time to replace it.

I love it.

 

[stefan15]

Steve Jobs: "The 12" PowerBook has been a great success for us, and now we are replacing it"

If you go 12" --> 12" widescreen, you get 13", since it increases in width by less than an inch. Isn't that how it works? Diagonal lines and what not... it's Sunday and I don't have to think until tomorrow. But assuming that's what happens, it's small price to pay (taking the size hit) for more workspace.

 

[EricNau]

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.

(comapring iMac to other PC)
I think they are really close in terms of price, probably within about $200, especially when you add in the iSight (which would be an equivalent webcam running about the same cost).

 

[berkleeboy210]

That's been his favorite new line. I know it was a hit when he used it for the nano and the regular iPod. That sort of statement is so Apple and so Steve. I love it.

The 12" PB has been one of our bestselling computers ever and has an awesome design; it's a really great machine. So now it's time to replace it.

I love it.

hmm, if a 13" is announced I'll have a tough time deciding between the 13" and the 15" powerbooks.

 

[JasonDawg18]

Just my two cents...

Ok, I'm possibly/probably going to upgrade my powerbook. Here are some predictions. I've read through some of your predictions and welcome yours on mine!

- High Def screens
- 2Ghz G4*(They've got to let PPC go out with some sort of bang - topping 2GHz will help)
- Faster DDR RAM*
- Dual layer superdrives*
- Possible built in iSight?

Thoughts?

 

[EricNau]

Ok, I'm possibly/probably going to upgrade my powerbook. Here are some predictions. I've read through some of your predictions and welcome yours on mine!

- High Def screens
- 2Ghz G4*(They've got to let PPC go out with some sort of bang - topping 2GHz will help)
- Faster DDR RAM*
- Dual layer superdrives*
- Possible built in iSight?

Thoughts?

built in iSight very probable (just my thought). If not I bet we'll see one with the intels.

 

[bentoon]

I only miss the broadcasts i- fun to watch in real time.
I am in NYC, but alas, Apple must have messed up my invite. So close and yet so far.
Anyone gotta spare ticket? I don't have to teach until later in the day

 

[juliana_24]

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.

so what you are saying is that the new g5s coming out this wednesday won't be mac intels because the market isn't ready for it. so they will be just dual dual core?

 

[fklehman]

- 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.

X800 alone would be sweet, but wouldn't even better cards (I assume you're thinking of nVidia or ATI FireGL) put out WAY too much heat considering the PBs already way hot profile?

 

[tekmoe]

i think we can all agree that the new powerbooks will acquire DL superdrives. if they don't, something is seriously wrong...

 

[MacViolinist]

I really don't like the fact that you have to go to a 15 or 17 inch PB to get all the bells and whistles. I've never even been tempted by my friend's 15 and 17 in. pb's. I like my portables...well, portable.

That being said, I would jump all over a 13" widescreen.

 

[nichtsicher]

All I want in the new powerbook is PCIe and a great video card DDR2 ram so that would see a processor change maybe? HD displays would be a nice feature and of course more RAM bigger HDD's is this too much to ask?

 

[nichtsicher]

All I want in the new powerbook is PCIe and a great video card DDR2 ram so that would see a processor change maybe? HD displays would be a nice feature and of course more RAM bigger HDD's is this too much to ask?

Also if Apple are having problems with their new models as the rumour suggests wouldnt that mean that they are making quite significant changes?

 

[mpqtpie]

That being said, I would jump all over a 13" widescreen.

Ouch.

That just sounds painful.
(Fine print: Jumping on powerbooks not recommended.)

He. he.

 

[obrien234]

I think a lot of people are misled about Intel Macs. Yes Apple does have OSX compatibility, but its not optimized, and neither is the software. If its not optimized and the code isn't written to execute at its fastest, the Intel Mac's will be probably slower than the PPC's. The base code is there, but there is so much to add and change to the OS and its native programs that there is no way that it would be ready this early.

 

[iQuit]

I am saying that, also that a PPC PowerMac would be better than a Intel Mac for a while, and that when they update it it will be still PPC and maybe will be dual dual, if not hopefully hitting at least the 3 GHz barrier.


(edit) basically....pro machines will stay PPC for a while due to it needs to be natively running all the major apps before a professional will buy it, or else why would someone but it over a PPC if it can't do as much??

so what you are saying is that the new g5s coming out this wednesday won't be mac intels because the market isn't ready for it. so they will be just dual dual core?

 

[Stella]

AMD and Intel are always bunny hoping over one another - one year it'll be AMD, then next Intel.

If AMD become too attractive it will take little effort to change to AMD ( just as it is now for windows machines )

At the end of the day, there is little performance differences between the two. x86 based processors will deliver what PPC could not:

1. availability
2. mobile performance
3. Speeds in excess of 3Ghz

Offended? -> I picked out the first article on the subject that came out of Google - reason why Apple picked Intel rather than AMD - there are plenty.

Google - "apple reasons why intel over amd"

Granted, there are probably better articles.

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

 

[nagromme]

Black keys w/ white backlit letters...mmmm. I don't think they will change from the aluminum on the pro machines though. They use that to seperate the lines of products, and they also need to use a higher quality material than plastic on the pro stuff.

FWIW, there were rumors over a year ago about carbon fiber PowerBooks. (I don't know much about the properties of CF, and I'm imagining it scratches just as badly as plastic.)

I saw Steve's "iPods for the holidays sans Shuffle" slide the other day, and my first thought was that the Shuffle would look like a fugly cousin next to the new kids on the block. My hunch is that Apple won't update it at all; the price may drop, the stock will slowly disappear and that'll be the end of it.

As long as they can make them cheap, I think they still have a place. Note that in Apple's iPod gallery they have a new "family portrait" showing all 3 iPods together. (And though the nano isn't new, it's still a great machine. It's not the right choice for everyone, but people do like them. I like the cable-free attachment, myself.)

 

[Quartz Extreme]

At the end of the day, there is little performance differences between the two. x86 based processors will deliver what PPC could not:

1. availability
2. mobile performance
3. Speeds in excess of 3Ghz

4. Innovation

There is simply more demand, more widespread use and more competition in the x86 processor arena. All of this leads to innovation. The PowerPC market at this point can't really match this. Now yes, PPC is used in some of IBMs servers, embedded applications, and notably in several gaming consoles, but, aside from Apple, PowerPC isn't being used in mainstream personal computers.

"As we look ahead we can envision some amazing products we want to build for you and we don't know how to build them with the future PowerPC road map." - Steve Jobs

By using x86, Apple gains access to faster, cheaper, and more innovative processors that can keep up with their innovative designs and visions.

 

[iQuit]

I can see the day when Apple reaches $299 complete desktops lmao.

 

[nichtsicher]

Well we must remember Apple is a company, companies main interest is capital. They most likely moved to obtain more capital, Intel offered that. Intel is good at marketing IBM issnt. Although PPC Prosessors are better, Intel sells more.
Today, production is not about quality

 

[Epicurus]

hmm, if a 13" is announced I'll have a tough time deciding between the 13" and the 15" powerbooks.

If the 13" comes in with a decent WXGA screen then it'll have 1280x800 pixels, awfully close to the current 15" resolution. This would seem to indicate that the 15- (and 17-) inch models will get a screen upgrade. It really would be about time for something like this.