Apple Releases iMacs

[carl]

Unbelievable!
after a year you would think the so called digital hub would finally rise to the occassion. I wanted to switch but, the value just isn't there for an attractive outdated PC, except for its LCD screen and software. I've been waiting for the 17"wide with @ least 120HD, Radeon 9000 w/64meg and 512mem for 1799. What about a video capture device (PVR)? Come on Steve wasn't 40mil bonus enough? If you are going to supply a non upgradeable PC, put some real stuff in it. Where is the cache, today's bus speed standard, and memory? Still playing with sdram, unbelievable...
Not switching just yet. Where is maklar when you need it...
I will commend the price decrease on the studios. I geuss Steve figured he robbed enough people.

 

[bentmywookie]

Originally posted by MacBoyX

I recommed you get out there and get the most iMac you can afford. And also buy yourself the following book...Macintosh...The Naked Truth...you'll love it.

Good Luck...Godspeed...Rock on witcha bad self!

Ha ha, sorry, I know this is a little OT, but I had to chime in and say that the above-mentioned book, "Macintosh: The Naked Truth" is such a funny quick read. I can imagine pretty much anyone on this forum getting a kick out of it.

Good recommendation MacBoyX!

 

[freemidnight]

Originally posted by Shadowfax


RAM is transferred at a given rate, right? PC 100 sends info 100 times a second, yielding whatever thousand megabytes per second transfer rate. PC 133 RAM is clocked at 133MHz and sends info 133 times a second... you see, these are following a sinewave model..each rise and fall is a cycle. normal SDRAM sends data once each clock cycle, with the rise of the cycle; DDR SDRAM, on the other hand, sends data at both the rise and fall of the cycle, effectively doubling the information passed for the same actual clock speed. so formerly, they would call DDR SDRAM that was clocked at 133 MHz "DDR 266," because it behaves like normal RAM at 266 MHz, even though it's at half that. i don't know if this is the case with Apple's DDR 333, though i would bet it's really at 166 MHz (someone correct me? everything else is at 166 (167) MHz....


does that help, at any rate?

Does this means that the information is redundant (repeated) or that each half cycle there is new information!

 

[brian0526]

Re: RAM upgrades

Originally posted by Dunepilot
Just thought that I had better post up a quick message to those who say that they might upgrade the iMac's RAM after purchase.

Do bear in mind that OS X is very picky about the quality of RAM you put in your machine .

If you do use RAM you get free from a third-party vendor (even extra RAM installed before you buy your Mac, from a mail-order reseller) you do run the risk of having kernel panics in OS X. There is a lot of documentation of this on macintouch.com.

Personally, I've found Crucial's RAM to be pretty safe, but it is just a thought worth bearing in mind that you are more likely to enjoy solid-as-a-rock stability if you buy Apple's RAM despite the premium they charge. This wasn't always the case (when most people were using OS 9), but it does need to be borne in mind these days.

Whoa. Is this true? What do I look for on macintouch.com to find documentation on this? I don't want to pay a premium for this machine and then find the RAM I slapped in it from a third party is causing kernel panics. Or worse yet, have kernel panics and not know the cause. I'll pay the premium for Apple's memory if it is indeed more stable than what I can buy at a reputable third party. I've had good luck with Crucial's RAM. Is there any reason to believe Apple's is better?

Brian

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by freemidnight

Does this means that the information is redundant (repeated) or that each half cycle there is new information!

i guess you could make it redundant, but then it'd just be like "highly faultless normal RAM."

so no, it's new info at each half-cycle, which is why it transfers twice as much info for the same clock rate. got it?

 

[bentmywookie]

At first I was totally dissapointed with these upgrades. Right now though, I think they are ok, except for the price!! Honestly, the "Ultimate" iMac needs to be somewhere around $1800-$2000, not $2400. I just feel that the iMac is now totally not competitive with regard to price.

Also, 256 mb base ram for $1800? I really hate how Apple is so intent on charging more (which I would say is usually worth it) and giving so little RAM, especially when OS X needs it. 512 mb really should have been the base. And sticking with the GeForce MXs after over a year? Those things must cost a nickel by now. Radeon 9000s should have really been in there.

As an upgrade though, this is a real dissapointment (especially for a year).

 

[arn]

Re: Re: RAM upgrades

Originally posted by brian0526


Whoa. Is this true? What do I look for on macintouch.com to find documentation on this? I don't want to pay a premium for this machine and then find the RAM I slapped in it from a third party is causing kernel panics. Or worse yet, have kernel panics and not know the cause. I'll pay the premium for Apple's memory if it is indeed more stable than what I can buy at a reputable third party. I've had good luck with Crucial's RAM. Is there any reason to believe Apple's is better?

Brian

this is pretty true...

If you have kernel panics regularly... it's most likely a hardware problem - and that's most likely "faulty" ram... even though it doesn't come up as a problem in the diagnostics.

arn

 

[Greenlightboi]

Disappointed Also...

I hope everyone realizes that PC's are using 533 Mhz bus... and yes, this makes a difference. Also, the video ram in these machines.... blah. you can get a 128 MB card for dirt cheap. Also, Motherboards in the PC world supporting USB 2.0 and DDR are also dirt cheap. But ok apple, I see your marketing thing you have with Firewire 800... but where is that at? :-/ People, macs are much slower then PC's now.. it gets worse everyday and its a sad thing. It isn;t just the processor, its the whole computer, and the price is unbeleivable. I mean, apple is up to speed let alone cutting edge. Cutting edge would have been a equivlent to a 2.5 GHz P4, 533 Mhz bus, 768 at least of RAM, 128 MB of video ram ON THE BASE MODEL and 256 on the top, USB 2.0 AND FireWire 800, bluetooth on everything, and a cool industrial design bluetooth keyboard and mouse to make a mark.

Apple = :-( for a long time to come...

 

[iJon]

Re: Disappointed Also...

Originally posted by Greenlightboi
I hope everyone realizes that PC's are using 533 Mhz bus... and yes, this makes a difference. Also, the video ram in these machines.... blah. you can get a 128 MB card for dirt cheap. Also, Motherboards in the PC world supporting USB 2.0 and DDR are also dirt cheap. But ok apple, I see your marketing thing you have with Firewire 800... but where is that at? :-/ People, macs are much slower then PC's now.. it gets worse everyday and its a sad thing. It isn;t just the processor, its the whole computer, and the price is unbeleivable. I mean, apple is up to speed let alone cutting edge. Cutting edge would have been a equivlent to a 2.5 GHz P4, 533 Mhz bus, 768 at least of RAM, 128 MB of video ram ON THE BASE MODEL and 256 on the top, USB 2.0 AND FireWire 800, bluetooth on everything, and a cool industrial design bluetooth keyboard and mouse to make a mark.

Apple = :-( for a long time to come...

yeah yeah, we hear this all the time. i have a bling bling pc i built which is very very nice. I also have a dual 1.25 mac and a 12 inch powerbook. but i HATE working on my pc, i have it for games. i know a lot about windows and macs, but its just when i sit down at my pc it just plain isnt fun. yeah im sure my 2ghz pc is faster than my dual 1.25, but i dont care. It's just they gui is so friendly and nice to be around, i love just browsing the web and pulling up itunes and listening to somthing. windows media player just plain sucks and i hate it. i love the interface of mail, i refuse to check my mail in outlook any more on my pc because outlook is way to messy and bloated. i could go on and on. i work with computer customers every week, and if you were in my shoes you would learn that about 70% percent of the people i talk to dont give a rats ass about the speed. These people get so caught up in me showing them iPhoto, iMovie, Mac OS X that they dont even look at the spec sheet, they just tell me i want one and i want one know. I recently had an old lady, between 60-70 years old who was dying to breast cancer. She came in and told me she wanted to make the most of her final years and really wanted to have some cool stuff and have soem fun. We spend quality time together on the computers and I showed her the things she, a normal person could do. This is what she purchased from me that following week. She purchased a high end 17 inch imac, best canon powershot money can buy, a very nice canon camcorder, and a 20gb ipod and much much more. I talk to her all the time when she comes in and she can never thank me enough. She is living life to the fullest now and filming vacations, saving those precious moments listening to music all on her mac and doing things she never though possible, and none of it on a 2ghz windows machine. these are a majority of customers and this is what peopl want to do, apple cant switch everyone. but like i said, i got the pimp mac and the pimp pc, and i am always at my mac unless im playing a game. if apple cant do it for you, go to pc, its ok, itjust a computer. but just to let you know your telling us an old arguement and nobody can ever win.

iJon

 

[shadowfax]

Re: Re: Disappointed Also...

Originally posted by iJon

yeah yeah, we hear this all the time. i have a bling bling pc i built which is very very nice. I also have a dual 1.25 mac and a 12 inch powerbook. but i HATE working on my pc, i have it for games. i know a lot about windows and macs, but its just when i sit down at my pc it just plain isnt fun. yeah im sure my 2ghz pc is faster than my dual 1.25, but i dont care. It's just they gui is so friendly and nice to be around, i love just browsing the web and pulling up itunes and listening to somthing. windows media player just plain sucks and i hate it. i love the interface of mail, i refuse to check my mail in outlook any more on my pc because outlook is way to messy and bloated. i could go on and on. i work with computer customers every week, and if you were in my shoes you would learn that about 70% percent of the people i talk to dont give a rats ass about the speed. These people get so caught up in me showing them iPhoto, iMovie, Mac OS X that they dont even look at the spec sheet, they just tell me i want one and i want one know. I recently had an old lady, between 60-70 years old who was dying to breast cancer. She came in and told me she wanted to make the most of her final years and really wanted to have some cool stuff and have soem fun. We spend quality time together on the computers and I showed her the things she, a normal person could do. This is what she purchased from me that following week. She purchased a high end 17 inch imac, best canon powershot money can buy, a very nice canon camcorder, and a 20gb ipod and much much more. I talk to her all the time when she comes in and she can never thank me enough. She is living life to the fullest now and filming vacations, saving those precious moments listening to music all on her mac and doing things she never though possible, and none of it on a 2ghz windows machine. these are a majority of customers and this is what peopl want to do, apple cant switch everyone. but like i said, i got the pimp mac and the pimp pc, and i am always at my mac unless im playing a game. if apple cant do it for you, go to pc, its ok, itjust a computer. but just to let you know your telling us an old arguement and nobody can ever win.

iJon

rock on! i think your dualie 1 1/4 is way faster than a 2 GHz P4, honestly, though not the 3 GHz they have out. but shoot, that's a non-issue. my Tibook is just unbelievable on so many levels. what's this ***** envy-has-to-be-the-fastest-thing-by-the-most-respected-benchmarks? my 1 GHz G4 and M9000 Radeon can run SO MANY QT videos at once, never drops frames on DVD watching, and runs smooth as butter in photoshop. so it isn't the fastest thing that ever saw the light of day. it's such a divine pleasure to sit and work on it; i practically feel like kissing it when i see it. it's so beautiful externally, and the OS is just better than anything ever. it doesn't need a pimpin 3 GHz fast computer to run it. it needs a fast machine, not the fastest, and that is what i got. windows XP is fine, i guess, but there is nothing even remotely endearing about it at all. the default GUI looks pixelated, for god's sake. not that that is what i base the experience on. there is something about it that is just not pleasant. maybe it's having seen a mac. i mean, i used to like XP a lot, thinking, wow, so much better than 98 and 2000! until i got my powerbook i thought, well, this is not so bad. now, having the powerbook, any time i do something on my PC, i just think, darn, this is unpleasant! why would i settle for this, even if it saves me 300-400$? it's just nothing like the mac experience. but maybe that's just me. and hence, this is not an argument, just pointless back-and-forth "expression of preference" with PC users.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

I hear a lot of wining from the peeeceee"s wanna bees sorry but macs have allways been the sum of the whole machine and the sum of the whole experience! go with your wintel- oooraa - oooraaaa specs and billys jam it down your throat software that stinks and leave the mac site and dont worry about It! all you pee cee cryers out there have mac envy that is obvious. cry cry cry! they lower the price 200 bucks, they increase the cpu g4 by 200 mhz,add all kinds of stuff and still boo hooo . My made in a garage pc has this bus and a intel that has to run at super high speeds to get anything done! Go to wal mart and get that hunk of junk! Now if you want a total computer experience with style that will do everything you ask it and more and that will hold its value and make computing fun instead of a nightmare then the mac is your answer. Also funny how this lil old imac keeps getting the awards and the press saying how great it is which you dont hear of on the wintel side!when i take a photo and plug my camera into my keyboard and my computer simply says you want em and with 1 click i have it all and then think of someone i know who has been struggling with her pc for a year and still cant figure why the dam thing wont load her pictures i can only laugh!-Macs are just easier to use and the coolest computers on the planet. And with that said i am hitting the sack knowing full well that tomorrow my mac will be there waiting to do whatever i ask it! good nite!

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
I hear a lot of wining from the peeeceee"s wanna bees sorry but macs have allways been the sum of the whole machine and the sum of the whole experience! go with your wintel- oooraa - oooraaaa specs and billys jam it down your throat software that stinks and leave the mac site and dont worry about It! all you pee cee cryers out there have mac envy that is obvious. cry cry cry! they lower the price 200 bucks, they increase the cpu g4 by 200 mhz,add all kinds of stuff and still boo hooo . My made in a garage pc has this bus and a intel that has to run at super high speeds to get anything done! Go to wal mart and get that hunk of junk! Now if you want a total computer experience with style that will do everything you ask it and more and that will hold its value and make computing fun instead of a nightmare then the mac is your answer. Also funny how this lil old imac keeps getting the awards and the press saying how great it is which you dont hear of on the wintel side!when i take a photo and plug my camera into my keyboard and my computer simply says you want em and with 1 click i have it all and then think of someone i know who has been struggling with her pc for a year and still cant figure why the dam thing wont load her pictures i can only laugh!-Macs are just easier to use and the coolest computers on the planet. And with that said i am hitting the sack knowing full well that tomorrow my mac will be there waiting to do whatever i ask it! good nite!

shouldn't stir up the hive man, but i hear you.


..... in my history class, we were doing powerpoints of dictators. everyone else put theirs on a CD to put into my teacher's laptop, who then plugs that into he (very very nice) LCD projector. my group went first, and brought my PB G4 to do my presentation. i plugged it in, and it auto detected the 2nd screen and had it displaying literally the instant i opened up the lid (it was sleeping). then when i was done, they used my teacher's Dell to do everyone else's presentations. it took, seriously, 5 minutes to get it all set up right and aligned and all that. and it was in mirrored mode, for god's sake! lol.

 

[job]

After comparing the baseline tower and the top-end iMac, the tower for once seems to be the better buy.

meh 2cents.

 

[TyleRomeo]

Originally posted by cr2sh
My question is where do we go next? The g3 was put into the powermacs/books until the g4 was introduced. Everyone stepped up a level at that point, the ibooks/imacs got a g3, the powermacs/books got a g4. When the ppc970 is introduced sure.. they powermacs/books will step up to the 970, but what will be done with the imacs/books?
Right now, everyone (cept the ibook) is pushing a g4, with ram and specs differences sure... but when we get the 970, the iMac should not step up as well. It should reside with the g4, but they'll probably cease manufacturing them... and then what? Unless Apple/IBM has something up their sleave, this type of updating (where all the lines get slight variations and RAM types) will be the norm.

Will we continue to get dual pro systems?
I think what I want, maybe what we all want, is a superchip introduced for pro-level and a lower level chip for the consumers. What I'm talking about is sheer power4 and ppc970... but I don't understand what Apple is doing.

interesting point...well if apple decides to continue its pattern of CPUs then it will switch back to IBM for the G5 and that will be introduced in the power macs first then trickle down into the powerbooks.

Then the iMacs and iBooks will use the left over G4 chips, like the 7457 and whatever Motorola has left in the bank. Just like the current iBook is using the left over G3 chips by IBM. I'll predict right now that after the iBook goes 1GHZ G3 then we will have a major apple chip revelation. Only time will tell.

Tyler

 

[flyfish29]

Originally posted by yzedf
Drastik,

How nice of someone to finally call me on it.

I am a Mac liker... if that makes sense. I like them, I use my friends machines on occassion (new ibook and pismo) and have been impressed with OS X since the original beta. It is just that the policies of the company regarding their hardware, and the vendors they choose to buy from (frickin' Motorola!!!), irks me.

OS X was supposed to be the Windows Killer(tm). It could be that it is. But with this sorry state of the hardware, it will never happen. About the time Apple figures it out we will have seen 2 newer Windows OS' since then.

iLife is cute... but it won't convince more than a few people to buy a Mac instead of a PC.

Price would bring them over in droves.

So would comparable hardware specs. Most everyone wants newer, better, and faster.

That is the market. Apple needs to figure this out and respond accordingly.

That is why I keep saying:

COMPETE OR DIE

Look at the sales of the iPod. Great hardware, great software, and reasonable price. The push was so big, tht Apple actually sold a Windows version! That is what competition is all about.

This niggling over Consumer vs Professional desktops is pointless. What is this... Macintosh vs Apple ][ again or what???

I beg to differ...not everyone wants newer, better, and faster!

Competition is not at all just about price. Walmart may have us thinking that is the basis for competition. Uggg.

So do you think that a shirt from Walmart will perform the same as the shirt from LL Bean? I hope not!


Competition is not just about price or even quality componets. It is also about service, reliability, quality construction, durablility, etc. Apple computer controls everything about their computers (hardware,software, construction, distribution)! That is why their reliability is second to none, their performance is outstanding, and why Windows will never run like the well oiled machine.

When you factor in the lost revunue, time on hold, replacement of hardware and software, you end up paying much more for a PC than a Mac. Countless studies have been done to prove this fact! However, I think it is difficult to prove this fact to people.

I have only owned Mac's for over 15 years. I have only purchased three Macs in that time period (about to get my fourth) and have NEVER had a hardware problem that I had to pay for. There was one problem on my All In One PowerPC, but Apple recalled them and paid for the repair. In this same time period my two sisters have purchased 4-5 PC's each and collectively bought three extra hard drives, a mother board, and three video cards, and two modems all to replace the "factory supplied components" that were supposed to last the life of the computer.

If Apple continues with software development like it is, keeps on the cutting edge on technology (they have made some mistakes in this area, but who doesn't) then they will keep getting return business as well as new customers who most likely will return to purchase another Mac down the road.

This is what real Competition is about. Giving the customer the best value...cost vs quality are on opposite sides of the scale when weighing a purchase decision. If you want a higher quality product then the cost will most likely go up.

Remember....we vote with our dollars. If you believe in what a company makes, sells, services,etc. then vote with your damn dollar. If you don't, then don't. Be willing to pay a little extra for a company's extra effort!

Slipping off soapbox now!

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by TyleRomeo


interesting point...well if apple decides to continue its pattern of CPUs then it will switch back to IBM for the G5 and that will be introduced in the power macs first then trickle down into the powerbooks.

Then the iMacs and iBooks will use the left over G4 chips, like the 7457 and whatever Motorola has left in the bank. Just like the current iBook is using the left over G3 chips by IBM. I'll predict right now that after the iBook goes 1GHZ G3 then we will have a major apple chip revelation. Only time will tell.

Tyler

you think it will take them until the fall to get to 1 GHz? that seems really slow to me. not that i know much, but still.... 200 MHz in 9-11 months seems too little for this time when they really need to get it up. i think they should be mounting G4 1 GHs/933 MHz in them within 2 months of the PPc 970's advent, personally. by then, they should have the 970s in powerbooks at at least 1.25, don't you think? maybe not, though.

i wonder if they will keep the 970s to JUST the Pmacs for a few months? i dunno at all, lol. all speculation.

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by yzedf

That is why I keep saying:

COMPETE OR DIE

well, it's quite clear apple is competing. they sure as hell aren't dead, or even dying. for a recession, they are doing darn well. so they are following your extremely vague, simplistic maxim.

have you read Good as Gold by Joseph Heller? you'd be a good candidaet for the treasury secretary there.

"We need to balance the budget."

 

[yosoyjay]

Re: Re: Re: RAM upgrades

Originally posted by arn


this is pretty true...

If you have kernel panics regularly... it's most likely a hardware problem - and that's most likely "faulty" ram... even though it doesn't come up as a problem in the diagnostics.

arn

I've often found that people who install third party ram may have cause the problem themselves because they didn't take any esd precautions.

Use that groundstrap.

 

[shadowfax]

Re: Re: Re: Re: RAM upgrades

Originally posted by yosoyjay


I've often found that people who install third party ram may have cause the problem themselves because they didn't take any esd precautions.

Use that groundstrap.

what's ESD?

 

[praetorian_x]

Originally posted by GPTurismo
Btw Prat, prat means idiot in old english O

<laugh/> Nice. And, for the most part, correct.

Tragically, even an idiot can see these updates are max lamer.

Cheers,
prat

 

[bigizzy]

Customization required

what the market really needs is a fully customizable Mac. Why not introduce a Mac which can be assembled by the end user into a cabinet. Introduce a mac where the user can choose which mother board (single processor or dual processor, different number of ports, expansion slots etc), which processor, type and amount of ram, type of display card, type of sound cards (if sound is not on board the Mother board), choice of monitors and a standard mac mini/tower cabinet.

This will allow all mac heads to build a mac to the specification they want. Definately this will not give them the cool looks of an Imac but then this might very well spur the sales of the mac which is what apple needs.

 

[praetorian_x]

Re: not crap

Originally posted by chubakka
a jump from 800 to 1 Ghz is a 25% increase. that's not miniscule...
and a Xeon 2 Ghz is no speed demon.

Aaaaahhhaahaaaahaaahaaa!

That is *awesome*!!! 2 ghz Xeons! SLOW! From a Mac user! Well lets start the insansity!

Ahhhhahahaha! Wooooooo.

Oh... geeze... Oh... hold on... heh... Oh, man, my sides hurt... heh heh...

Cheers,
prat

 

[shadowfax]

Re: Customization required

Originally posted by bigizzy
what the market really needs is a fully customizable Mac. Why not introduce a Mac which can be assembled by the end user into a cabinet. Introduce a mac where the user can choose which mother board (single processor or dual processor, different number of ports, expansion slots etc), which processor, type and amount of ram, type of display card, type of sound cards (if sound is not on board the Mother board), choice of monitors and a standard mac mini/tower cabinet.

This will allow all mac heads to build a mac to the specification they want. Definately this will not give them the cool looks of an Imac but then this might very well spur the sales of the mac which is what apple needs.

you can fit an XServe into the wall, LOL. i don't think they need to make customization a big option. that would be WAY too expensive to support as a single company (notice no single PC company does this on a large scale).

i think anyone who rants off on how "letting people make macs from scratch would help their business" are out of his mind. that would take some drastic, expensive changes, and the market for such is miniscule at best. you think droves of PC users made it from scratch? ha! not many at all, not many at all....

 

[shadowfax]

Re: Re: not crap

Originally posted by praetorian_x


Aaaaahhhaahaaaahaaahaaa!

That is *awesome*!!! 2 ghz Xeons! SLOW! From a Mac user! Well lets start the insansity!

Ahhhhahahaha! Wooooooo.

Oh... geeze... Oh... hold on... heh... Oh, man, my sides hurt... heh heh...

Cheers,
prat

i was pretty consistently beating a 1.9 GHz p4 with my 1 GHz TiBook in photoshop....

compare to the current midrange "nice" mac, the DP 1.25 GHz.... you are talking easy rapage of a single Xeon... now, DP some Xeons and put a linux/Unix server on it, and i will start to say, yes, your system cooks most macs (if not all), but can you iMovie/iTunes/iPhoto with it? nah... X86 owns in low end servers and games, and neither of those strongly appeals to me.

 

[cr2sh]

Originally posted by TyleRomeo
Then the iMacs and iBooks will use the left over G4 chips, like the 7457 and whatever Motorola has left in the bank. Just like the current iBook is using the left over G3 chips by IBM. I'll predict right now that after the iBook goes 1GHZ G3 then we will have a major apple chip revelation. Only time will tell.

I don't think motorola has much more in the bank on the g4.
So if in 6months we get word of the ppc970 coming to the PowerMac line, does then the imac/ibook step up to hardcore g4 action, and how much further can it go? Will we one day see a 2GHz G4 in an ibook? (Who would have thought that when the g3 started at 233mhz we'd have gotten to a gig?) I don't know, but I have very little faith in Motorola's ability to push the g4 any further, and even then.. does the consumer line need altivec? Who would buy a g4 ibook, when the old g4powerbook has far better features? Does apple really enjoy the continued success and competition presented even today by the Pismo line? I don't see a g4 ever making it into a ibook, unless its a very limited special edition run before winter.

My guess is we'll see a ppc970 with AND without altivec. After all, how many consumers understand the velocity engine? Wouldn't it be a better marketing strategy? And wouldn't many people argue that Mototrola is already using this method? What after all is the difference in the g3 and g4? I expect we'll get a 1gig g3 ibook by may, and maybe another power series update... but come fall news of the 970s (plural) will hit.

</speculation>