Naimfan said:DaleDrechsler said:If people are anything like myself, They're waiting for a G5 Powerbook. I'm dying to switch from XP to Panther, but I need a portable and the current batch of G4 Powerbooks just can't entice me away from price equivalent PC desktop replacement style laptops (in terms of speed of processor). My wait for the G5 Powerbook continues...
Dale--
Don't hold your breath, and don't expect the G5 PBs to offer all that large a performance advantage over a tricked out G4.
Best,
Bob
Thanks for killing a potential switchers dream 😛 . Dale - keep hope alive. But I would advise- if a G5 does get released, wait for rev B. Trust me (being an owner of a 400Mhz TiBook and a current user of a 867 12" all revision A's - all with nagging issues that were fixed in rev B's and beyond) If you are aching for a Powerbook now, get a G4 867 or 1gig titanium used with the ram maxed and the HD upgraded to the latest 7200RPM Hitachi's. This was the pinnacle of the TiBook and all the kinks were worked out with that design. Sure no FW 800 built in and no bluetooth, but that system can tie you over till rev B of the G5 powerbooks are released. C'mon- you wanna switch- you wanna do it now!
CmdrLaForge said:Well - you need 500 😱
Ok, I can't see how this news has any importance !? I read through the article and Apple isn't even mentioned or am I blind ?
We will see what is actually announced.
DaleDrechsler said:With G5 sales not meeting expectations, it now seems like a pretty dumb move on the part of Steve Jobs to say "They'll be at 3ghz in a year."
anubis said:It should be noted that not only is the POWER architecture used in the G5, but also the G4, G3, 604, 603, and 601. In fact every powermac ever made has been based on the POWER architecture.
Inteesting tidbit: POWER stands for "Power Optimization With Enhanced Risc"
mowogg said:It seems like so many individuals are putting off buying a G5 until the next mythical speed bump. I would be very interested to know how many of these people actually will eventually buy a G5 and how many of them are posers who can't afford or justify buying a G5 and are making excuses.
jwdsail said:G5 sales expectations may have been high. It's a first release ... First product w/ PPC 970s, 1st w/ new multi-fan cooling system, first w/ new case design, first w/ new MB design (Hypertransport), and the frst system w/ SATA drives...
As much as I've been drooling over the G5 since it's launch, I never buy the 1st release of any product.. TVs, computers, printers, software, etc.. I waited for the PB G3 300 even though everyone was excited about the first gen 233, 250, and 292 G3s.. even managed to save some cash.. And I waited for the PB G4/550, managed to save over the 400/500 PBs on that one too..
I suspect that inspite of the pent up demand, that there are many waiting for a revision (any revision - not just waiting for 3GHz or posing that can't afford it anyway...) before jumping into being a beta tester. Apple may have been well advised to have had a revision where the included drive sizes were changed, just so there would have been a precieved revision.... For some that may have been enough to get them to jump, to feel that any bugs there may have been had been addressed.
When Apple does release the next update, there will be buyers that have been waiting for the 3GHz update as well as the people that never buy 1st release products.. There will be a nice jump in sales. And yes, there will be some that just bought 2GHz G5s that will say that they're waiting for 4GHz before upgrading.. Starting to feel old all of a sudden...
Just my $0.02
Me
Absolutely! I think that getting the 90's into the motherboard equation presents Apple with a lot of head scratching - any further moves to 3ghz later in the year will probably be much easier, and will leverage off the beta testing of this new RevB motherboard (and all the people who maintain that it will be more solid than the RevA).areyouwishing said:I sure hope that all the people that buy 2nd Generation G5s don't have any problems. I think that with the way apple and IBM are doing the rev 2's you are taking just as big of a gamble. The change from 130mm to 90mm is a huge step, and we still haven't seen a production Xserve yet.
The only problem I have had with my 2ghz at work is the power supply whinning.
I think it's exactly the other way around. IBM first developed the POWER architecture and then in a collaboration with Apple and Motorola developed the PowerPC (601) which was sort of a cut-down version (like the 970 is too, from the POWER 4) from the first POWER processor.crenz said:Uh, are you confusing the PowerPC architecture with the POWER-processors by IBM (which are using the PowerPC architecture)? Also, it's probably not "Risc", but "RISC", which gives the quote a whole different meaning...
No, they refer to the JS20 as POWER-based, witch it is. It's not Xeon bsed, nor based on Itanium, Athlon, Opteron or whatnot. It's based on POWER technology. You shoud have continued reading bcause it's also "Designed to support POWER technology". So that's that.otter-boy said:Actually, they refer to the 970 as a power-based processor.
Naimfan said:Knowing something about IBM, I would suggest they will give a fairly clear roadmap, specifying what they plan to achieve with the 970 and the 980. Given the "slew of announcements" expected, the roadmap will most likely cover a wide variety of uses for the Power chips, not just Apple.
vpalvarez said:🙂 Apple is probably promoting the G5 on their homepage to spur sales in order to clear the inventory for the new revisions. This IBM event seems like an acceptable venue for apple to make the announcement.
otter-boy said:It looks like it will be a presentation over actual POWER processors (Power4, Power5, etc.), not the PowerPC which the Mac runs on. This is more interesting considering the long-term prospects of IBM chips than the immediate prospects for Apple.
POWER4 does indeed have PowerPC-AS instructions as it is the core of current line of iSeries (AS/400) computers. POWER4 supports five architectures: 64-bit PowerPC-AS, 64-bit PowerPC, 32-bit PowerPC, 64-bit POWER and 32-bit POWER.stripes said:I think IBM's "North Star" CPU was the first CPU to have POWER and PowerPC instruction sets, it also had PowerAS instructions, which I don't think the POWER4 has. I don't think the POWER4 had the PowerAS stuff. Maybe the POWER5 will.
vpalvarez said:🙂 Apple is probably promoting the G5 on their homepage to spur sales in order to clear the inventory for the new revisions. This IBM event seems like an acceptable venue for apple to make the announcement.
stripes said:Unfortunately the POWER4 did *not* have the AltiVec (Velocity Engine) instructions, and the POWER5 may or may not have them (I think IBM has to pay Moto for them, so it might be to their benifit to not include them in CPUs unless Apple is the intended consumer, if they were free they might include them on the off chance that Apple would buy them and do a seriously high end box).
yamabushi said:If IBM is serious about challenging Intel then they need to start promoting alternatives to the general public.
mac-in-fool said:With the Apple Promo's ending on the 27th, and IBM's big conference on the 31st. That leaves Tuesday the 30th the date for a PowerMac release. Otherwise IBM would steal some if not all of Apples Thunder.
legion said:IBM doesn't have to pay any licensing to Motorola for "AltiVec." AltiVec is just a marketing name, but the SIMD unit is freely available to IBM (IBM uses the name VMX). The reason why IBM doesn't use it is because, well, it's a lousy vector unit. Having to strap the connection to a server chip (POWER series) for VMX is useless as they have the money to attach a better vector unit on chip. They put the VMX unit on the current PPC970 with much protest and at Apple's instance (mostly because of Apple marketing for the last few years about AltiVec accelerated programs) If it was left to IBM, they wouldn't have used it at all as technology-wise it's a backwards step.