Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Apple Laptop In January?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It isn't: PowerBooks existed for years before there were PowerPCs.Frobozz said:
But even if it did mean that (as it originally did with Power Macs), it's a generic term that Apple can use as they like. I expect pro Macs will still be called Power Macs. PowerPCMac would be a problem, but PowerMac isn't.
But I think you're exactly right about some old G4 laptop models lingering on while demand still exists.
stevie misinformation
stevie has to have know longn before they announced their departure from IBM that Intel could make a commitment to a chip for a G5 PB. I say that their statements of when they would be ready were inflated so that they can release it sooner and look amazing. and if APPLE was spending all thet time trying to get a hot IBM chip inside that doesnt mean they still could not have been developing the PB. Also, laptops outsell desktops so it makes sense to PB & iBook them 1st. They also would have to have Frontrow with a built in iSight,....very possible in Jan.
stevie has to have know longn before they announced their departure from IBM that Intel could make a commitment to a chip for a G5 PB. I say that their statements of when they would be ready were inflated so that they can release it sooner and look amazing. and if APPLE was spending all thet time trying to get a hot IBM chip inside that doesnt mean they still could not have been developing the PB. Also, laptops outsell desktops so it makes sense to PB & iBook them 1st. They also would have to have Frontrow with a built in iSight,....very possible in Jan.
epepper9 said:
I like it! Powerbook iv (intravenous). Forget arms and legs, Apple wants BLOOD for these!
blackcrayon said:The question is what will they put after Powerbook... Powerbook G3.. Powerbook G4... Powerbook PM?
I believe Apple own the G3, G4, G5 terms as they are for "Generation 5" so in theory they can keep going, G6, G7, G8..etc. not hinged on what type of chip is inside, even though thats how they market it.
lost ownership of G6
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0402_first_pontiac/
speleoterra said:
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0402_first_pontiac/
Macrumors said:
Citigroup analyst Richard Gardner claims that Apple is poised to release an Intel-based laptop as early as January. Additionally, Gardner forsees Apple becoming a $20 billion company in 2006.
It is not known if Gardner is looking at new information from Apple, or simply responding to recent rumors (1, 2) of Intel-based Apple hardware being ready for debut at MacWorld San Francisco.
Maybe the dual IBM-Motorola PPC / Intel versions of OS X is not really ready for use as a system that can run realiabally on the Intel Macs. Also there may not be enough software ready to make the Intel Macs usuable. Remember the software companies were given a time for their software to be ready by. With the information given in this it sounds like it would be difficult for all of the software to be ready when Apple is still adding parts back into the Intel version. It may be ready for simple things by the middle of the year. But there seems to be too many missing pieces for a January release of Intel Mac software.
Bill the TaxMan
Guess work and echo chambers
Let us remember that unconfirmed sources can often be echos of themselves.
Apple is the kind of company that could make it happen, but time and time again analysts have spoken about upgrades to the PB line, for instance, only to find that nothing has happened. I wonder if failed expectations hurt Apple?
Let us remember that unconfirmed sources can often be echos of themselves.
Apple is the kind of company that could make it happen, but time and time again analysts have spoken about upgrades to the PB line, for instance, only to find that nothing has happened. I wonder if failed expectations hurt Apple?
They'll live up to expectations this time, they won't be taking any chances. Apple knows what it's done wrong in the past.AidenShaw said:
Six months ago, Intel Macs were already usable for iLife, Safari, Mail, etc.--and Photoshop and Word were demonstrated quite nicely in Rosetta, which may have just gained AltiVec support. Many developer reports talk about porting apps to Intel in hours or days. That will vary a LOT, but January is seven months that developers have had. So although not every app will run at top speed next month, many will. And most if not all of the rest will at least run usably in January, even if they get faster later in the year. Plus, an announcement in January could mean shipping in February... and even longer before a huge critical mass of users actually have them in hand. That could buy even more time for developers.heisetax said:
I know I'm being optimistic to think Intel Macs WILL be announced next month... but it's far from out of the question.
As for Steve's timetable: he said "in the market BY June." He didn't give a firm date, he gave a LATEST date. Certainly with some cushion in it, since he was talking about a year later. Apple may very well not begin as late as that latest date. And developers know that. They weren't promised until June. They also have always known that MWSF is a big annual event, and have likely shared our speculation that it marks the earliest end of the possible range.
Or (some) developers may even KNOW the final timetable, under NDA. They may already know they have just 2-3 more months. (Late Jan.-late Feb. shipping date.) Which is actually a long time for even MORE apps to get ready.
Can't remember whether this has been mentioned before, (I'm sure it has, but possibly not in this topic), but on the colour front, this image demonstrates that a darker or black PowerBook would still look great, assuming that they keep the styling almost exactly the same:
http://www.apple.com/powerbook/wireless.html
http://www.apple.com/powerbook/wireless.html
PowerBook Duo?
From the Private Submissions forum...
From the Private Submissions forum...
So maybe the Intel PowerBook *will* hit the streets first
I was thinking similar things when peoplae started talking about dual core PowerBooks and single core iBooks. PowerBook Duo2 perhaps for this line, then followed up by Duo3 and so on. They could even adopt a similar naming strategy for the other lines, with maybe the iBook being called the Uni, (also fits in with the students, a lot of who use the iBook, ironically enough), and then as it switches to Dual core, Duo2 as well.Cooknn said:From the Private Submissions forum...So maybe the Intel PowerBook *will* hit the streets first
Cooknn said:From the Private Submissions forum...So maybe the Intel PowerBook *will* hit the streets first
Hmmm PowerBook MCore.
stockscalper said:
Show me where you get the same laptop _any_ cheaper.
You are making the same, old mistake of comparing the cheapest of the cheap that Dell can advertise (but you won't be able to buy it at that price if they can help it) with the price of a quality product. And remember that we are talking here about dual processor Yonah chips, not about the old bangers that you find in a cheap laptop.
I agree, the cheapest laptops all tend to have Celeron M's in them. To get to Pentium M, you need to go to prices that aren't much cheaper than iBooks, if at all.gnasher729 said:
and why won't Apple do the same ??
See http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&oc=MLB1610&s=biz:
Why not give the customer the choice of a $699 iBook with a 1.4 GHz Celeron M, or a $999 iBook with a 2 GHz Pentium M, or a $1299 iBook with a dual-core 2.13 GHz Yonah?
The customer can make choices like that from Dell and HP, and pretty soon Apple will be just another Intel shop....
And what's wrong with that? Why can't Apple BTO the CPU that you want, like Dell?steve_hill4 said:
See http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&oc=MLB1610&s=biz:
- Intel® Pentium® M Processor 770 (2.13 GHz/2MB Cache/533MHz FSB) [add $400]
- Intel® Pentium® M Processor 760 (2 GHz/2MB Cache/533MHz FSB) [add $200]
- Intel® Pentium® M Processor 750 (1.86 GHz/2MB Cache/533MHz FSB) [add $100]
- Intel® Pentium® M Processor 740 (1.73 GHz/2MB Cache/533MHz FSB) [Included in Price]
Why not give the customer the choice of a $699 iBook with a 1.4 GHz Celeron M, or a $999 iBook with a 2 GHz Pentium M, or a $1299 iBook with a dual-core 2.13 GHz Yonah?
The customer can make choices like that from Dell and HP, and pretty soon Apple will be just another Intel shop....
The Duo is back?
I predicted "PowerBook D" or "PowerBook Dual" earlier in this thread. But the Duo was the first Mac I REALLY wanted (and never got), so the name works for me
But that note raises an interesting possibility:
I've assumed that Apple would keep selling a G4 model or three "quietly on the side" after the Intel machines come out. Choice is good, in a transition.
But what if Apple slants it the other way? What if, at first, they keep the current PBG4s as the "main" product line, and introduce an "early-adopter" Intel PowerBook as a choice for those who want it? Marketed correctly, it could avoid a lot of the flak from users who wish more apps were ready. They'd KNOW it was an early-adopter "special" product. And I bet it would sell like hotcakes even so.
And Apple might do this with the PB as a test for doing something similar with PowerMacs later on.
Then, gently transition the Intel machines from "an option" to "the main line." When the time is right.
Still not ideal--choice means confusion--but Apple would promote ONE line (PPC or Intel) as the main PowerBook line, and carefully choose when to change their stance. They'd keep it simple.
If there have to be compromises in this switch (and there DO have to be), then this might be a great way to handle them.
And I still get my Intel PowerBook ASAP
Do you think they will be coming out with a 17" in january? Everyone seems to say wait for the 2nd gen's of the new powerbooks....and I'm guessing that will be 4 or 5 months. I was going to go with a 15" inch...but with all the screen problems...I don't mind shelling out the extra cash for the 17". Good or bad idea? I'm going to be using it for mostly daily applications...but also some protools recording. Good or bad idea?
It's not a bad idea, but I could imagine all the "Plz help! my rev a celeron mac died!" as apple had spent more time optimizing Pentium M compatibility. And also to avoid being an intel shop, I think they should just have the 750 and 760 or maybe 760 and 770. I don't know how apple do things these daysAidenShaw said:
Celeron M and Pentium M are the same chip, no visible difference except for the speed.epepper9 said:It's not a bad idea, but I could imagine all the "Plz help! my rev a celeron mac died!" as apple had spent more time optimizing Pentium M compatibility. And also to avoid being an intel shop, I think they should just have the 750 and 760 or maybe 760 and 770. I don't know how apple do things these days