Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel iBook at MWSF (January) 2006?

My theory for January 06

We will see Dual Core Intel Processors in the PowerBooks, Single Core Intel Processors in the iBooks and a cool Intel Mac Mini, I think in january we will see the end of ALL G4 systems and a big howdy to the Intel Apple age.

Because lets face it you can't upgrade the iBooks without the PowerBooks, and an Intel Mac Mini would also usher in the new year so very nicely.
 
ezekielrage_99 said:
Because lets face it you can't upgrade the iBooks without the PowerBooks, and an Intel Mac Mini would also usher in the new year so very nicely.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, of course Apple could. As long as hardly any Pro applications will run natively or at all on intel iBooks there isn't really any other portable pro-alternative than the Powerbooks. My guess is that we'll see these upgraded at the WWDC.
 
It's more of a matter of when not if when it comes to all the Apple stuff getting the Intel inside. Either way we are going to see at least 2 Apple products with some magical type of Intel CPU by June 06.

The million dollar question is which already great Apple product will get the Intel upgrade first😕
 
joshuawaire said:
I predict Apple replaces the G4 processor with a Celeron M in the iBook line, and moves to Intel Integrated Graphics.
Click to expand...


I totally agree with you - iBook will have Celeron M CPUs no doubt about this - still way better than any G4. Pentium M for Powerbooks.

Everytime I have purchased a G4 based Apple product I kinda feel I've been ripped off. The G4 is a slow CPU by today's standards.

Bring on the Intels - I know a few people who will switch as soon as the intels arrive.
 
SiliconAddict said:
Then buy a dead POwerBook off of e-bay why don't ya. It will save you thousands. 🙄 Sorry but I still can't believe people buy computers based on their look. Its so...childish.....for lack of a better word.

Don't get me wrong I don't want some uggo POC system but putting looks as the #1 priority seems wrong.
Click to expand...

You just explained why most Mac users buy Powerbooks. Looks over performance. Bravo!
 
SiliconAddict said:
Then buy a dead POwerBook off of e-bay why don't ya. It will save you thousands. 🙄 Sorry but I still can't believe people buy computers based on their look. Its so...childish.....for lack of a better word.
Click to expand...
I think that's fairly arrogant. Why I certainly don't base my computer purchases on looks either others might have different priorities. A lot of people will find almost all existing hardware good "enough" and then they might be willing to buy based on looks just as likely as any other "quality". I mean, it's not like everyone buys the car that gives best performance for the money is it?
 
AidenShaw said:
Second, OSX is not POSIX compliant. "Okay about your OSX worship, look, it claims to be UNIX, but it is not POSIX compliant. " and http://get.posixcertified.ieee.org/cert_prodlist.tpl?CALLER=index.tpl
Click to expand...

I think you're a little off base with those links, especially the first one which is almost 4 years old (I have no idea what the 2nd one is for). One thing that Apple have definitely done, and I have noticed it as a Unix hacker thats had a Mac since Jaguar, is massivily improve OSX's POSIX compliance since January 2002, for example POSIX threads were added to Jaguar, a large step towards POSIX compliance. I believe the current situation with Tiger is that OSX is POSIX compliant, but not POSIX certified (which basically means Apple haven't given a bunch of money to IEEE).
 
I say....3.0Ghz Dual Dual Core PowerMac G5's and 2.3Ghz iMac G5! And finally...after IBM's annoucement a few months ago of low power G5's, we will have PowerBook G5! Steve couldn't have been serious about the x86. He'd never use something so ugly in one of his computers....
 
Tilmitt said:
Steve couldn't have been serious about the x86. He'd never use something so ugly in one of his computers....
Click to expand...

Yes, because we all know people really like to crack open their machines and look at the inside in order to the actual chip on the motherboard by it's looks.🙄
 
Photorun said:
Yes, because we all know people really like to crack open their machines and look at the inside in order to the actual chip on the motherboard by it's looks.🙄
Click to expand...

Steve forced a redesign of the original Mac motherboard cause he didn't like how the RAM slots looked. The new design didn't work and they had to go back to the old one after wasting a few months. In any case I was reffering to the ugliness in the way x86 operates. You Mac users have forgotten the dream.
 
Seriously, some Mac fanboys need to get over the whole switching to Intel thing. It's going to happen, the wheels are in motion, you can't stop it. Bla, bla, bla...

Some people may stop buying Mac's after they move to Intel, but I see those people as being a very small minority. Like many people have said, who cares what's inside the Mac as long as its fast.

And I highly doubt Apple would have pushed on with the transition if it knew there was nothing to gain. Next years Intel boxes should, and most likely will be, faster then current G4's. So, there won't be every app thats compatible from the word go, but people aern't going to die over it.

There is lots to gain from this transition. Steve isn't stupid. He wouldn't kill the company that he helped rescue from impending doom. He's smarter then that.
 
Lacero said:
I still postulate the theory the Earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese.
Click to expand...

So does the bible (Isaiah 11:12, other places) and for some reason people still buy into that tawdry tome. However nowhere does it mention cheese?!

Would people stop saying how slow the G4 is! For some processes, yes, but for others it isn't! On other threads many Powerbook (and one Mini as I recall) user was talking about certain actions with certain applications that were as quick as a G5 and as faster than certain, newer model, PCs they were using. Applications run based on how they work with the CPU and, for some applications, they're written incredibly well to mesh with a G4's instruction. A friend of mine has a Powerbook and I can attest for day to day actions like Mail, Safari, etc., I can't tell the difference between that and my G5 2.0 DP machine. In fact when he's over he can launch a lot of stuff as fast as mine. Yes, Gaming is slower and power apps mostly slower but not incredibly so. Those thinking about still buying a G4 today needn't worry, that machine will give you a good three to five years of good use. Remember a computer is a tool for the job, and the G4 is a mighty good tool!
 
Tilmitt said:
Steve forced a redesign of the original Mac motherboard cause he didn't like how the RAM slots looked. The new design didn't work and they had to go back to the old one after wasting a few months. In any case I was reffering to the ugliness in the way x86 operates. You Mac users have forgotten the dream.
Click to expand...

I was being disingenuous, kinda like humor but not that funny. I know of the Mac story but it was for the PowerMacs which could easily open, not the Powerbook line. And being an aesthetics guy I agree to make the insides as sexy as the outside. But in my G5 you don't see the processors, only these giant shiny boxes that say "G5." Maybe Steve will put "G6" on the Intel models forgoing the need for their ugly logos? We can all dream!

And you're pulling my leg about how x86 operates I hope as the way the newer crop process instruction is quite different from the older models. When you look at the org chart of how/where the parts take info it doesn't look that different than a PPC too.

I dream of Macs staying relevant, increasing market share, making Windoze lusers looking bad, getting faster to the point where I think and it happens. I don't care if they have to find a way of wiring a hamster in a wheel inside each box to get to the end result, just do it!
 
kbonnel said:
I just hope they don't stick those damn "intel inside" stickers on the new machines.!!!

Kimo
Click to expand...

I remember when we first heard that Apple was switching proc. manufacturers and we had thread after thread devoted to naming the new 'hybrids' and also debating whether or not we thought that Macs would now come branded with an Intel badge 😛
 
NickFalk said:
I think that's fairly arrogant.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. You buy a couch it should be comfortable. You buy a TV it should do what you want out of it. Now if you buy a piece of art. . .it should look pleasing. There isn't anything arrogant here. It’s the difference between wanting a tool to do something and wanting a status symbol. I personally abhor people who buy “stuff” because its trendy. More then anything it seems a bit shallow to me. *shrugs* That’s just how I see it. Nothing arrogant about it.
 
efoto said:
Perhaps not independent hardware pieces such as those you mentioned, but I do think that switching the proc should have a direct effect on the system board, fsb which would increase the speed/performance of the RAM, etc etc. The system itself should get snappier (assuming no software bumps) simply because we are getting away from the god-awfully slow 200MHz fsb we have been damned with in the *Books.

Other than those directly related pieces, I fully agree that many other hardware specs will probably remain the same (screen, HD, battery, etc).
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the screen res and battery life are probably the only reasons I'd ever want to update my iBook...
 
Dale Cooper said:
Wensleydale.
Click to expand...
wngwensleydale_sm.jpg
 
ezekielrage_99 said:
It's more of a matter of when not if when it comes to all the Apple stuff getting the Intel inside. Either way we are going to see at least 2 Apple products with some magical type of Intel CPU by June 06.

The million dollar question is which already great Apple product will get the Intel upgrade first😕
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be to far fetched to think that Apple could also begin selling Apps including Pro Apps that have both PPC bibaries and X86 binaries on the cd. They have after all, known internally of the switch to Intel alot longer than the public.
I think that we could all be surprised and see some of Apple's apps mirgate quickly or even already done. Now, apps from other vendors perhaps it will take a while longer such as Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.. but maybe this is why Apple was prepared and released Aperture. I know that they said it's not supposed to compete with Photoshop, but all they would have to do is add layer capability and maybe a "light" version and whala.

I just don't think that there is going to be a major hold up on the app side of the switch.

my $.02 worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back