Dual Core PowerMac G5 Updates?

[shawnce]

No, it isn't. HT cannot be considered a separate core, because it can only OCCASIONALLY actually execute two instructions simultaneously.

Note HT isn't all about getting simultaneous instruction execution, it is the ideal goal but not the only goal. It is also about trying to keep the longer pipelines filled to avoid execution unit down time because of interdependent instructions coming from a single thread of execution.

Also note that the Power5 from IBM has a (IMHO better) implementation of HT (cannot recall IBM's naming for it) that can assign levels of priority to the virtual hardware threads to better fine tune the interleaving of instructions. This paired with schedular logic and API in AIX allows the Power5 to be a monster and leverage HT abilities rather well.

 

[visualanté]

im not av consumer a black is greyer on apples lcd...dell doesnt have gloss...others do i know....i luv apple but im not biased

Uhm... no. WinXP uses super saturated colours in their desktop, title bars, etc. that make them look more "vivid". In reality they distract the users' eyes from the actual work - the content inside the super bright window frames. Combine that with the shiny gloss PC laptop makers seem to want to put over their screen (prone to glare), and cram as many pixels into it as they can (1600x1200 at 15" - come on!) and you fool the common consumer into thinking it's a higher quality screen.

In reality, the desired screen is one with accurate colour and a wide viewing angle - Apple's screens are great for that.

 

[shawnce]

well i had them side by side....the settngs were sim and same program but the color dif was drastic...apple lcd is washed out not accurate

You consider any color correction that was in place on the Mac system? The whole of the Mac OS X display is put through color correction (Color Sync).

What was ColorSync profile was the system set to? What white point? What gamma? etc. Was it calibrated?

 

[digitalbiker]

Well put.

And I'll wager that many in the "portable workstation" group would gladly accept a 2" thick 12 lb system with 1 1/2 hour battery life if it were twice as fast as a 1"/6lb/4hr system, and especially if it had more ports.

I've often wondered by Apple hasn't made that mobile workstation for the audio/video "on location" crowd....

I have wondered this myself. The aesthetic beauty and elegant design of the PB is nice but there are many pro portable users who don't give a rat's a**.

Apple is losing a lot of high-end portable sales just because they want to stay an inch thick.

 

[visualanté]

yes i did

You consider any color correction that was in place on the Mac system? The whole of the Mac OS X display is put through color correction (Color Sync).

What was ColorSync profile was the system set to? What white point? What gamma? etc. Was it calibrated?

 

[gate]

Anyone who buys the Rev. A of these MP models is a nutcase, BTW.

Why?

 

[bryanc]

I *need* a new PB!

I've been holding my breath for a PB revision. I will be very disappointed if there is nothing new for the PBs in Paris.

I've been limping along on a 667 MHz TiBook for a long time, and it was recently damaged, so now it crashes a lot and the battery doesn't charge.

I'd been planning on buying a new PowerBook as soon as they got revised, and I'm still hoping for a bump in Paris (faster FSB? better GPU? new features? Something - anything). I think the final PPC-based powerbook will be the machine to have until after the dust settles and the Macintels are Rev B. or more... say 2008.

But I'm not going to buy a system that hasn't been updated for almost a year!

There's got to be a PowerBook update soon! The iBooks have been cannibalizing PB sales for months!

 

[gate]

I'm exactly in the same situation. And not just a better graphic card but a PCI Xpress slot. And DDR 2.

I've been continually pushing back my next Mac purchase waiting for something that will be really worthwhile. If the PowerMac doesn't get a major upgrade then I'll probably end up going with a 20" imac just to make it through the Intel switch.

What the PowerMac needs;
1. Dual, dual-core G5
2. Standard Airport and Bluetooth
3. Faster dual-layer DVD or Blu-ray
4. Standard 1GB RAM (would be nice for a pro machine)
5. Better graphics card

What do you think? I don't NEED a new Mac yet, but I don't want a rev 1 Intel Mac either. Or do I wait for January to get iLife '06 bundled?

 

[wdlove]

Why?

I think that the comment was a little harsh. Most on the forum recommend not purchasing the Rev A model of a Mac. There could be compatibility issues.

 

[AidenShaw]

Apple is losing a lot of high-end portable sales just because they want to stay an inch thick.

They can *stay* an inch thick with the professional "mobility" line - today's albook.

They could add a professional "performance" line with multiple CPUs, more stuff needed by pros (dual disks, for example), and not obsessing over 1" thick.

It's time to kill whatever vestiges still exist of the 2x2 product matrix (consumer/pro, portable/desktop) and look at the market!

Apple loses sales because they think "A" *or* "B", and the thought of "A" *and* "B" never occurs to them. Even the arguments in these boards focus on *or*, not *and*.

It's time to let go of the ghost of the Performa !

 

[visualanté]

i agree so its .25 inches thicker

They can *stay* an inch thick with the professional "mobility" line - today's albook.

They could add a professional "performance" line with multiple CPUs, more stuff needed by pros (dual disks, for example), and not obsessing over 1" thick.

It's time to kill whatever vestiges still exist of the 2x2 product matrix (consumer/pro, portable/desktop) and look at the market!

Apple loses sales because they think "A" *or* "B", and the thought of "A" *and* "B" never occurs to them. Even the arguments in these boards focus on *or*, not *and*.

It's time to let go of the ghost of the Performa !

 

[eme jota ce]

It's time to kill whatever vestiges still exist of the 2x2 product matrix (consumer/pro, portable/desktop) and look at the market!

Apple loses sales because they think "A" *or* "B", and the thought of "A" *and* "B" never occurs to them. Even the arguments in these boards focus on *or*, not *and*.

You make a good point. Do you think that this forum is reflective of the market? If so, its focus upon "*or*, not *and*" may suggest that Apple's A/B approach is tailored to its market.

 

[Lacero]

So you're suggesting we go back to a unified product line-up with an assortment of cryptic model numbers, like the PC world? Apple already tried that with their Scully/Amelio-era product lines.

 

[digitalbiker]

im not av consumer a black is greyer on apples lcd...dell doesnt have gloss...others do i know....i luv apple but im not biased

You can't win this arguement here but I agree with you completely.

Apple hasn't updated their PB displays in 3 - 4 years. They also insist on keeping a 'lower than industry normal' dpi resolution.

Even though people here will tell you not to trust your own eyes and own comparisons. They also complain about not being able to read text on higher resolution screens even though they have fully scalable fonts and they eventually end up printing at higher resolutions anyway.

The facts are that Apple's current PB displays are about 2 generations behind state-of-the-art and 'ARE' in need of an upgrade.

 

[lopresmb]

I wonder how one dual-core G5 would hold up against a Dual Processor G5? (that is to say if it were not a dual - dual core). It may not be that much faster???

 

[digitalbiker]

More like 2 years!

I've been holding my breath for a PB revision. I will be very disappointed if there is nothing new for the PBs in Paris.

I've been limping along on a 667 MHz TiBook for a long time, and it was recently damaged, so now it crashes a lot and the battery doesn't charge.

I'd been planning on buying a new PowerBook as soon as they got revised, and I'm still hoping for a bump in Paris (faster FSB? better GPU? new features? Something - anything). I think the final PPC-based powerbook will be the machine to have until after the dust settles and the Macintels are Rev B. or more... say 2008.

But I'm not going to buy a system that hasn't been updated for almost a year!

There's got to be a PowerBook update soon! The iBooks have been cannibalizing PB sales for months!

I feel for you.

I have a TI 867 which has developed a logic board problem and the display 'fritzes-out' on a regular bases. I desperately need an update and I can't bring myself to buy the high-end $3000 17" w/AppleCare when the tech is ancient.

The last PB update was back in Feb 2005 and that was a dissappointing minorspeed bump and a shock absorbor system for the HD.

Here's hoping for a better update in Paris!

 

[heisetax]

Intel in a G5 Case

I'm with iGary on this. The part of me that just bought my new 2.3 G5 this month is going "OMFG NOOO THEY CANT DO THAT TO ME".

But then again... in two years time that could be a nice upgrade who knows maybe the Duel Core's can pop into existing G5's? Maybe we could see some upgrade kits? Long shot but

I'm sure that the CPU would have a different pin-out & probably different voltage requirements. Then the supporting chips for an Intel CPU will be totally different than a PPC. Because of the cooling zones on the G5, it may be difficult to even put a non-G5 motherboard in the case. That will depend on what kind of motherboard Apple designs for the Intel Mac.

You're more apt to be able to put the Intel Mac Tower into a plain beige ATX box though. We'll see what kind & size of motherboard Apple & Intel comes up with. Or maybe you'd like one of those gaudy, transparent cased neon-lighted cases.

So far all that I've seen from the proposed Intel Macs is a different CPU maker that will require all new versions of my tried & true applications & utilities. For this trade I am just being offered a possibility of a lowr-powered CPU. The speeds of the Pentium M is in the same speed range of the PPC G4. So what would I gain. Intel says that they are going after lowered power consuymption, which they have shown includes slower cpu clock speeds. Other than the P$ units that are currently running the Mac OS 10.4, there has been no indication that clock speeds will be any faster. Only that we will continue to hear that MHz does not count, its only the amount of work done in one cycle. So what will we really gain? What good software products will we loose?

Just like the transition from OS 9 to OS 10, many excellent applications were lost. Many were too small to make the change or system update. Using the term "upgrade" is always questionable when great changes are made. This will happen again, but now we'll loose the ability to run many of the Classic OS 9 applications. When Steve Jobs degrees that the transition is over, those that bought the new story will be unable to run their many still excellent & useful OS 9 & X applications.

Have fun trying to put your new-to-come Intel Mac motherboard in your G5 case.

Bill the TaxMan

 

[AidenShaw]

non sequitur

So you're suggesting we go back to a unified product line-up with an assortment of cryptic model numbers, like the PC world? Apple already tried that with their Scully/Amelio-era product lines.

The product names aren't related to the matrix.

I'm suggesting that, in particular, the "powerbook must be thin" mantra means that Apple is not addressing the needs of a core market - the "on location" professional.

This is also an "expense account" market, so Apple could charge plenty for the portable workstations - at least enough to compensate for a smaller sales volume.

The 2x2 matrix was created at a time when Apple was bleeding, and needed a transfusion of cash from Microsoft to stay alive. It's outlived its usefulness.

 

[andrew_webb]

I've just ordered a PowerMac G5. I got this email from Apple Store UK but thought nothing of it until I saw your post:

"The demand for the product you ordered has been higher than anticipated.

We are shipping as quickly as possible, but cannot meet the ship date we previously estimated for you. We now expect to ship your order by September 20th, 2005."

It curiously coincides with the date of the Apple Expo. I'm hoping it is because they are going to up it to one of the new ones.

 

[AidenShaw]

piece of cake

it may be difficult to even put a non-G5 motherboard in the case

"We stumbled across a few pictures of Apple's Aluminum G5 enclosure with the Intel board visible inside."

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000740046045/

http://www.powerpage.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/powerpage.woa/wa/story?newsID=14643

 

[digitalbiker]

This has always bothered me about Apple

The product names aren't related to the matrix.

I'm suggesting that, in particular, the "powerbook must be thin" mantra means that Apple is not addressing the needs of a core market - the "on location" professional.

This is also an "expense account" market, so Apple could charge plenty for the portable workstations - at least enough to compensate for a smaller sales volume.

The 2x2 matrix was created at a time when Apple was bleeding, and needed a transfusion of cash from Microsoft to stay alive. It's outlived its usefulness.

I think you hit the nail on the head (Apple's Corporate EGO).

This has always bothered me about Apple. They consistantly tell the user what they need, rather than listening to the needs of the user.

They never allow the user to custom configure anything because according to Apple it would destroy the "Apple Experience" or it wouldn't be proper "GUI design etiquette" etc. etc.

Look at the two-button mouse arguement, the lack of OS interface customization, the lack of component selection on new hardware, and the lack of product selection.

Apple claims it is part of the keep it simple, elegant, and "just works" beauty of Apple. It sounds like BS to me. I think Apple believes they know better what you want than you do. A typical, top down, "EGO driven", control freak, corporate attitude.

 

[notheremuch]

Listening to the customer is important. But, we do not have all of the information that Apple (or any) corporate offices have. They are in the computer design and manufacturing business. Most of us are not. Customer input only goes so far. I can't remember the name of the book now - but it demonstrated that companies that did what customers requested practically always failed...again, because the customer does not have the experience or vision of the entire market.

BTW Still, I am curious about what pricing will be on the dual core PowerMacs based on Apples pricing history..

 

[Ino]

Listening to the customer is important. But, we do not have all of the information that Apple (or any) corporate offices have. They are in the computer design and manufacturing business. Most of us are not. Customer input only goes so far. I can't remember the name of the book now - but it demonstrated that companies that did what customers requested practically always failed...again, because the customer does not have the experience or vision of the entire market.

BTW Still, I am curious about what pricing will be on the dual core PowerMacs based on Apples pricing history..

Yes, I agree. To digress a little, whoever thought we ever "needed" tens of gigabytes' worth of music in our pockets? The iPod was one of those things that Apple TOLD us we needed, and it was both innovative and successful. And if Apple listened to consumers, who were largely happy with the iPod mini, we would never have the iPod nano. The consumer is important, but don't let them run your company. What I got from 9/7 was that one very important reason for bringing out the iPod nano was to put even more pressure on the competition who had their crosshairs on the iPod mini...

But back to computers...just think about it this way, despite the things digitalbiker was mentioning, we still prefer Macs over PCs, and OS X over Windows. While a chunk of it can be attributed to the crappy design of Windows, I think Apple still deserves at least SOME credit for a better design and better product.

 

[Lacero]

If you apply this to video, nobody ever asked for digital video or DVDs, yet they have become immensely successful.

Nobody wanted the automobile, since people were perfectly happy with horse and carriage.

When the first telephone made it's appearance, people shunned the invention.

If companies kept asking what customers wanted, we'd all be living in the stone ages.

Quite frankly, people buy laptops for portability. Period.

 

[~Shard~]

If you apply this to video, nobody ever asked for digital video or DVDs, yet they have become immensely successful.

Nobody wanted the automobile, since people were perfectly happy with horse and carriage.

When the first telephone made it's appearance, people shunned the invention.

If companies kept asking what customers wanted, we'd all be living in the stone ages.

Quite frankly, people buy laptops for portability. Period.

Well said. In many cases, customers simply don't know what they want - innovative companies such as Apple do indeed have to tell them what they want and steer them in the right direction, as with your excellent examples above.