Apple Releases New PowerMacs

[mikefl420]

a selection for my stream of consciousness...

Hmmm. Perhaps the 2.5GHz is the squall before the storm. Stay with me for a minute hear, but what if this is Steve's way of saying "I know, I f**ked up. I shoulda released this earlier-- I'll try my best to get a seat on IBM's board and control production there." This is that March release that never happened. The ADC Offer over the past few months was an attempt to clear the 1.6GHz models. Now them pesky 1.8GHz are priced to go, with cheap graphics and storage options for those who want a dual processor with no frills for a reasonable cost. The ATI Radeon 9800Pro SE 256MB cards that just came out, was supposed to be out a long while ago, these 9800XT cards were probably planned for the original Jan - March release of the PM line. Could all this mean- given Apple really plans to drop the ADC connector from their refreshed displays- that we may still see a 2.8GHz or 3.0GHz at least announced at WWDC with new displays and the X800 or GeForce 6XXX? The display sale continues, 90 Days same as Cash end around the June 26th. I strongly believe we will see display updates before or at WWDC, and at WWDC: 1.6-1.8GHz iMac G5's; 2.8 or 3.0GHz PM G5; ATI and Nvidia high-end graphics cards. One new system isn't the complete plan- by adding one new system Apple stands to increase summer sales- those waiting for Rev. B get it in their new shiny 2.5GHz, those who would love to get their hands on a lower end G5 get the price break they are looking for on the 1.8 and 2.0GHz models- clearing out a few more of them and dropping inventory) And then WHAM! WWDC rolls around and the 1.8 is dropped and replaced by 2.8 or 3.0GHz model. You never know, y'all can call me a conspiracy theorist but I'm waiting 19 days before I make up my mind on which new Mac to purchase.

 

[shen]

boy was i wrong

here i had been noticing that the dual 2.0 was still one of the nicest machines built, and now there is a dual 2.5? easily the nicest machine built and running the nicest OS ever made. sounds like a nice computer to me. good thing i came to this board to find out how wrong i was! you have to hand it to the people here, when offered the best available, they aren't happy with it........

yeah, i was pretty sick of these whining rumor sites before, but this is the camel that broke the straws back.

 

[jragosta]

Yeah. Consumer grade system with a kickass core. I'm not saying it's not powerful, but the stock RAM you get, the stock video card, lack of GBit Ethernet, lack of dual-layer DVDRW, lack of everything else companies like Dell use to differentiate between consumer and professional grade.

Agreed, they are powerful, but come on - only with major league upgrades. This should be as standard - which business in their right mind would make the jump over to Mac if the cost to make their "professional grade" equipment satisfactory in the real world is so disproportinately high?

Really?

Then why are most DELL machines 256 MB of RAM (often SHARED with video memory)?

And how many machines use dual layer DVDR standard?

And you're just plain wrong about Ethernet.

As a package, these are exceptional machines for the money. I can upgrade the video card if I wish (very few people will need to). But if you buy that Dell, how do you upgrade it to dual 1.25 GHz buses? And how do you get an OS as good as OS X to run on your Dell?

 

[icon4x]

Here's what really sucks

I got a single 1.6 G5 last month. Now the Dual 1.8's are the same price. THAT SUCKS! I do really like the system I got, but damn.... I should have listened to macrumors Buyer's Guide.

 

[3.1416]

I am sorry, but this revision is not a disappointment because they couldn't hit 3ghz. Oh well, crap happens.

The reason that this revision IS a disappointment is because crap happened, and Apple has done NOTHING to compensate for it.

YES. 2.5 GHz isn't bad; heck, it's more of a percentage increase than what Intel has managed. But 256 MB of RAM? 5200FX graphics cards that were substandard last year? (Yes, ATI doesn't have a Mac X800 yet. Fine, so put the 9600 in the low end and the 9800 in the 2.5). And why on earth are they using still using a crippled motherboard for the low end?

Very disappointing. I had planned to get a Rev B midrange, but now I'll be looking for a deal on a Rev A 1.8 or 2.0, which I'll upgrade with a retail Radeon 9800.

 

[VeloDrax]

Every card.

Show me an example of any one time apple has shipped with a third party graphics card.

You don't know much about the graphics card market, do you?

Apple does not, nor have they ever, built their own graphics cards. Wouldn't you say that ATI is third-party? Do you think that Apple has a factory churning out nVidia 5200s? Hello, they merely have a supplier.

That's like saying that Apple builds their own DVD drives. Hey, when has an Apple computer ever shipped with a third-party optical drive? Answer, check your system profiler.

 

[iJed]

This sucks.

There is no way that I am buying last years CPU, graphics card and mobo at these insane prices. I can't believe that they have added only one new model after a full year! This is crazy.

 

[macabre]

You don't know much about the graphics card market, do you?

Apple does not, nor have they ever, built their own graphics cards. Wouldn't you say that ATI is third-party? Do you think that Apple has a factory churning out nVidia 5200s? Hello, they merely have a supplier.

That's like saying that Apple builds their own DVD drives. Hey, when has an Apple computer ever shipped with a third-party optical drive? Answer, check your system profiler.

OK, not what I meant. Look at your other post:

Apple can commission any number of third-party manufacturers to supply ATI and nVidia solutions for the Mac.

To which I must explain my reply. Show me a time when Apple has shipped a system with a graphics card that WAS NOT supplied by ATI nVidia etc.

 

[dekator]

I am sorry, but this revision is not a disappointment because they couldn't hit 3ghz. Oh well, crap happens.

The reason that this revision IS a disappointment is because crap happened, and Apple has done NOTHING to compensate for it.

These are supposed to be POWER Macs. They should be shipping with WAY better graphics cards, FAR better RAM, Airport and Bluetooth INCLUDED, and, if possible, a dual-layer Superdrive.

I scoff with incredulity at a "Power" Mac in 2004 shipping with 256MB RAM. Hell, I scoff at 512 standard. THAT IS CONSUMER LEVEL. I scoff at the pitiful graphics cards.

Now, if Apple is unwilling or unable to actually update ANY of these specs to compensate for the lack of GHZ increases... then at least DECREASE THE PRICES ACCORDINGLY. The audacity -- sheer audacity -- to be charging the same big POWER prices for NON-POWER specs... well, there is a reason that most of us are scratching our heads and saying "we waited a year for this.... really?"

Word, my man. I couldn't agree more. In fact, the G5s are wickedly fast and 2,5GHz or 3GHz really don't matter (unless you're fighting a "whose is longer game" with your PC neighbour). At least not for me. What is really at odds is how this baby is equipped. You need at the very least 512Mhz of RAM to call such a system operational. So on top of paying a premium price you have to pay RAM just to work reasonably within OS X!
The graphic cards are a disgrace for systems that are supposed to be top, top, top of the heap. It's so sad. These machine rock, but come with inferior components. This is like Sotomayor doing a high jump with a rope tied to his ancle.
The 1,8GHz model is downright ridiculous. It's just a massive indirect price increase compared to the previous model. Do Apple really think they can fool people. It's offending. Sorry Apple, I love your G5s in principle but not like that. This smacks of rip-off again.
The G5 no doubt outperforms the fastest PCs. Its architecture is far superior. But you don't sell a Ferrari covered in horse dung.

 

[cmoney]

I'm happy!

After all the toil and trouble of waiting for PowerMac G5 revisions, I bought a Dual 2 GHz 2 months ago. I can definitely say I'm happy I didn't wait, but that's mostly because the updated models aren't all that impressive. Sure I could've saved $500 or so, but at least I'm not missing out on significant technical improvements.

I'm interested in seeing if they fixed the beeping power supplies. And also how much quieter the 2.5GHz model is with its liquid cooling.

 

[shadowself]

Embarrassed

I've been an Apple user/supporter since '78, a Mac user/supporter since March '84. Many friends have even labeled me an Apple/Mac fanatic. This is only the third time I've been embarrassed to tell people I'm a Apple/Mac user/supporter.

The 25% clock increase in 12 months is extremely disappointing. The architecture has not changed. The graphics cards are nothing new. Damn, the graphics cards were not even state of the art a year ago. Also the 2.0 GHz model ships with a poorer graphics card than the 2.0 GHz machine you might have bought last week. Clearly a step backward. The liquid cooling on the 2.5 GHz machine is clearly NOT the optimum design since the cooling of each chip is not independent.

I'll hold off final judgement until 21 September 2004. However, if we don't get another speed bump by then things are going to look very bad. This will be no different than the bad days of the Motorola G4 era. If we don't see another speed bump until MWSF next January then the fourth calendar quarter of this year will be as bad for the Mac market share as the mid 90s were. 2%-3% share of personal computer sales? If we don't see a huge leap forward between now and MWSF you can expect the quarterly share of world wide sales to drop under 1%. I'm prepared for more articles about doom and gloom to start about the Mac line (but not necessarily Apple as a company because of the iPods and iTunes).

 

[icon4x]

I agree

Word, my man. I couldn't agree more. In fact, the G5s are wickedly fast and 2,5GHz or 3GHz really don't matter (unless you're fighting a "whose is longer game" with your PC neighbour). At least not for me. What is really at odds is how this baby is equipped. You need at the very least 512Mhz of RAM to call such a system operational. So on top of paying a premium price you have to pay RAM just to work reasonably within OS X!
The graphic cards are a disgrace for systems that are supposed to be top, top, top of the heap. It's so sad. These machine rock, but come with inferior components. This is like Sotomayor doing a high jump with a rope tied to his ancle.
The 1,8GHz model is downright ridiculous. It's just a massive indirect price increase compared to the previous model. Do Apple really think they can fool people. It's offending. Sorry Apple, I love your G5s in principle but not like that. This smacks of rip-off again.
The G5 no doubt outperforms the fastest PCs. Its architecture is far superior. But you don't sell a Ferrari covered in horse dung.

Apple sales will probably go down with this move. Big deal, you go from a dual 2 to a dual 2.5, and drop the low end 1.6... and WHY do they only offer 3 models, because their website can't handle 4? Why not still offer the single 1.6 and knock a few hundred off? The 1.6 works great (I love mine) with a gig of RAM. the bottleneck is not the processor or the bus, it's the RAM.

256 k RAM is a joke for a Dual 1.8 G5 system, especially if they are targeting graphics pros. I wouldn't call it selling a Ferrari covered in horse dung... I'd call it selling a Ferrari with a 4 -banger Chevrolet engine.

 

[DGFan]

No the point is here is that really the Geforce FX 5200 is a joke for a machine that costs over $2K. The nearly 3 year old Geforce Ti 4600 that Apple used to offer in the Highend is actually faster than a Geforce FX 5200. Three Years ago Mind you!!! The Radeon 9600XT is also a Joke as well, as the Newest Radeon X800 is nearly 2-4 times Faster than the 9600XT!!!. Now at the high end Apple offers us the Radeon 9800XT which is allready a year old in the PC world and is nearly an EOL product. Too add insult Apple Charges a $300 upgrade fee with no credit given for your 9600XT that you are swapping out with a 9800XT. In the PC world the Radeon 9800XT can be found as low as $249. To be even more difficult the Radeon 9800XT that apple offers as a BTO takes up an extra PCI slot leaving you with only two open slots!!! I need more than two open slots!! The Radeon 9600XT just won't cut it!! and the 9800XT is not worth the Price to upgrade especially when I lose a PCI slot. Did I mention too that even the Radeon 9800XT pales in comaprison to the new Radeon X800 XT, the X800 XT is about 50%-100% faster!!! when compared to the 9800XT and 2-4 times faster than the 9600XT.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044&p=1

I don't know about "nearly". The 4600s came out in 2002 and it's nowhere near 2005 yet. Yet the low end G4 PowerMacs two years ago did not come with the 4600 standard. So why would you expect, two years later, for the low end PowerMacs to come with the best video card available for the Macs?

I share your concern about pricing. On the other hand, there are fixed costs associated with bringing the cards to the Mac and much lower unit volume over which to recoup those costs. Pricier graphics cards is just a cost of living on the Mac.

And your complaints about the x800 are pretty irrelevant. Has ATI released the x800 for the Mac yet? No? Well why are you whining about it not being available then? And how is this Apple's fault?

 

[pjkelnhofer]

YES. 2.5 GHz isn't bad; heck, it's more of a percentage increase than what Intel has managed. But 256 MB of RAM? 5200FX graphics cards that were substandard last year? (Yes, ATI doesn't have a Mac X800 yet. Fine, so put the 9600 in the low end and the 9800 in the 2.5). And why on earth are they using still using a crippled motherboard for the low end?

It doesn't make sense to ship any computer with the fastest graphics card standard, you would lose too much money from people downgrading from the 9800 to the 9600!

Doesn't the bottom end always have a "crippled" motherboard. It is one of the ways that Apple gets people to spend the extra $500 to move up a model. They want more than just proc speed to differentiate the line up.

 

[johnnowak]

They probably could've got the 2.0 G5 up to 2.5 last year via liquid cooling.

Absolutely NOTHING has been advanced chip wise in the past year.

This is crap.

 

[cr2sh]

Wow... stunner.

Who would have thought apple would introduce new powermacs while the brilliant savings promo was still in effect? Unbelievable!

I'll put money, the guys who are buying new g5s today are ordering the displays too.. Apple released this update today because they need to get rid of those damn displays.

No doubt Jobs is setting the stage at WWDC, but for what?
Could he be hoping to gather interest in the Consumer driven 64bit applications.. getting people to develop for the iMac g5?

June is exhausting...

 

[pjkelnhofer]

Apple sales will probably go down with this move. Big deal, you go from a dual 2 to a dual 2.5, and drop the low end 1.6... and WHY do they only offer 3 models, because their website can't handle 4? Why not still offer the single 1.6 and knock a few hundred off? The 1.6 works great (I love mine) with a gig of RAM. the bottleneck is not the processor or the bus, it's the RAM.

256 k RAM is a joke for a Dual 1.8 G5 system, especially if they are targeting graphics pros. I wouldn't call it selling a Ferrari covered in horse dung... I'd call it selling a Ferrari with a 4 -banger Chevrolet engine.

You may not realize this but you can actually buy more RAM. In fact, Apple is hopping that is what exactly people will do! They are trying to make money you know. I am currently using a G3 iMac DV with 1 GB of RAM and it benchmarks higher on a lot of things that an 800MHz G4 with the "standard 256MB" of RAM with which it shipped.

They probably dropped the 1.6 GHz because it is destined for the iMac as is the 1.8 GHz (as a single). A lot of people expected the entire PM line to go Dual so that it could be differeniated from the iMac line when it goes G5.

 

[cmoney]

Also the 2.0 GHz model ships with a poorer graphics card than the 2.0 GHz machine you might have bought last week. Clearly a step backward.

It's a step backward because it's no longer the top model in the range. Apple always does this, it's their basic business model as far as upgrades go. Think of it like this: last night, a dual 2GHz model with 512MB, 160GB, Radeon 9600 cost $2999. Today it costs $2549.

For the people complaining about the new lowend dual 1.8Ghz model, yesterday, you got a dual 1.8GHz for $2499. Today you get a dual 2GHz model.

No, they're not the impressive updates that everyone was hoping for, and shame on Apple because if they had smaller more discrete, more frequent updates throughout the year, maybe they could head off some of that and manage expectations better. But the new models are a little cheaper than before, though still less than spectacular when you consider that it's been almost a year since the initial model release.

 

[fishtank22]

No way we're seeing new PMs at WWDC

These new 2.5DP machines aren't even shipping till Mid july. If they announced new machines in 2 weeks, everyone would cancel their orders.There is no way we're seeing new PM at WWDC

I don't doubt that there are cool products coming at WWDC, they are just not PMs.

 

[sabbath999]

We'll be seeing PCI Express in the PPC 975 revision
which ought to be announced sooner than you think,
as IBM has not had the delays it had with the 90nm
970 FX. Who knows? .......... WWDC is 2 1/2 weeks
away. a 3Ghz announcement then would be nice,
although would likely spur alot of disappointment
for those who ordered the 2.5s.

OK ENOUGH WITH THIS ALREADY!

They are NOT going to be announcing a 3Ghz processor at WWDC. Even if they did, which they won't, the 2.5's won't ship until July... people wouldn't be pissed, they would just cancel the orders since Apple doesn't bill you until the products are shipped!

Good grief!

 

[icon4x]

You may not realize this but you can actually buy more RAM. In fact, Apple is hopping that is what exactly people will do!

I did realize that, and that's why I decided to get the 1.6 with a Gig of RAM instead of the dual 1.8 with no additional RAM. People on a tight budget will make decisions like that.

What sucks now (for me, but not for people buying now) is that the dual 1.8 is the same price as the single 1.6 was. The low end system is much higher than it was, but the top end model is not that much better than the mid level system.

The "low end" dual 1.8 is an awesome deal, now.

 

[iPC]

here we go again

round and round we go, when apple gets a clue, nobody knows.

1/2 the upgrade that was mentioned last year, and it took liquid cooling to do it? that is pretty sad.

motorola is not as bad as we all thought, eh?

as to shipping mid-July... change that to early to mid-August (just a guess).

 

[fpnc]

horribly wrong?

The only thing this "update" confirms beyond any doubt is that something HAS gone "horribly wrong" in the G5 development process. Readers may remember those words ("horribly wrong") from a G5 rumor that was attributed to an Apple source several months ago.

I was NOT one of those who was trying to hold Steve Jobs to his "3GHz in 12 months" promise. However, IMO this latest update is almost as bad as it could get. Sure, it could have been worse (no update at all); however, I have a feeling that the new 2.5GHz configuration represents little more than a panicked attempt to show some level of progress over the last year. The gap between the 2 and 2.5 GHz configuration is too wide to be explained by simple yield distributions on IBM's 90nm fab. The water cooling also seems a little strange. In fact, I would not be surprised if Apple is being forced to overclock the 970fx from a selection of hand-picked, 2.0+ GHz processors. While there is really nothing wrong with overclocking if done well and safely (for the processor and system controller), I would say that if the system is being overclocked it certainly indicates that IBM is continuing to have major problems with its 90nm fab.

There also appear to be some unknowns at this time. Apple says only that the 2.5GHz configuration is "expected to be available in July." However, that's obviously NO guarantee that the 2.5GHz systems will be shipping in quantity any time soon. I would not be surprised if we didn't see the 2.5GHz systems in any significant number until late summer.

Second, I have yet to see any photographs or artist's renderings of the internals of the 2.5GHz system. AppleInsider's claimed images from a mistakenly released maintenance manual MAY turn out to be the water-cooled, 2.5GHz system. But, I've never been convinced that the AI images were real and until we actually see the internals of the 2.5GHz system I don't think we will know one way of the other. So, the question might be do the 2.5GHz systems even exist in any form that could be considered marketable? Or, do they just have a few jerry-rigged, lab-only system.

Third, it seems that everyone is assuming that the 1.8 and 2.0 GHz configurations are using the new 970fx processor. However, I have yet to see any direct evidence from Apple that this is true. It certainly seems possible that these two systems are using the original 970 processor and that would mean that the "new" 2.0GHz system is completely unchanged from last year's model (on a system or architectural level). This casts further doubt about what is actually happening on IBM's 90nm process (okay, yes, the xServe's is using 90nm chips, but there we're limited to very low quantities).

Overall, I would say that it does appear that things have gone "horribly wrong."

 

[icon4x]

OK ENOUGH WITH THIS ALREADY!

They are NOT going to be announcing a 3Ghz processor at WWDC. Even if they did, which they won't, the 2.5's won't ship until July... people wouldn't be pissed, they would just cancel the orders since Apple doesn't bill you until the products are shipped!

Good grief!

Stop reading the thread, then.

 

[macridah]

...
For the people complaining about the new lowend dual 1.8Ghz model, yesterday, you got a dual 1.8GHz for $2499. Today you get a dual 2GHz model.
...

I don't think anyone bought a dual 1.8 yesterday; wasn't there a 7-10 business day wait? But if you went to the apple store and bought in stock, then you didn't do your research. Everyone should of saw new powermacs being released soon and known that the old models would drop in price. This is for people that bought this week.