BillyShears said:
Yes, it's basically the OS9 situation again. I think Apple will keep their fastest PM G5 a few years for those who need to run PPC apps. Right now they're keeping the dual 2.7 GHz PM for those needing PCI X slots.
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 iBook at MWSF (January) 2006?
- Thread starter Daveway
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, it's basically the OS9 situation again. I think Apple will keep their fastest PM G5 a few years for those who need to run PPC apps. Right now they're keeping the dual 2.7 GHz PM for those needing PCI X slots.
tom_s said:
So the argument about them releasing the Powerbooks first is effectively moot?
The way I see it is this (rehashing of what everyone says):
They don't want the iBook to be more powerful than the Powerbook, hence the Powerbook should get the Intel processors first. But the iBook would be more suited to Intel because the "pro" apps may not be ported over yet. (Though we don't know, anyway.)
So their options are:
1. Release an Intel-based iBook that is faster than their Powerbooks. Confuse everyone.
2. Release an Intel-based Powerbook that can't run any pro-apps. Disappoint those who buy it.
3. Release an underpowered Intel-based iBook. Makes it seem like the switch was a bad idea.
4. Release an Intel-based Powerbook (and maybe also an Intel-based iBook), but keep the PowerPC lines available.
If I were in charge of Apple, I would choose option 4. It's not too confusing: if you want "cutting edge Intel", get the Intel version. If you need your old apps to work, get the PowerPC version. I think that would be the best bet.
They can't only switch the iBooks, even if they offer two lines, because the Powerbook would still be less powerful. I think the Powerbook has to be the first notebook for the transition, but the iBook might come along at the same time.
Multimedia
macrumors 603
MacIntels Will All Be Faster Than Their Predessors
6. Apple can release more powerful dual core Yonah PowerBooks shortly thereafter in February-March, Perhaps even announce them at MacWorld January 10.
No hurry to release faster iMacs nor PowerMacs as they are running Pretty fast right now with dual core PPC G5s (dual core PPC to iMac next). The longer Apple waits to complete the transition, the faster these two models will leap to when they switch.
5. Apple can release more powerful Mac Mini and iBooks with faster Intel processors without messing up the line because of all the other limitations these models have - fewer expansion ports, low resolution screen or no screen, smaller 2.5" hard drives, only one screen or no spanning, lower maximum ram.BillyShears said:
6. Apple can release more powerful dual core Yonah PowerBooks shortly thereafter in February-March, Perhaps even announce them at MacWorld January 10.
No hurry to release faster iMacs nor PowerMacs as they are running Pretty fast right now with dual core PPC G5s (dual core PPC to iMac next). The longer Apple waits to complete the transition, the faster these two models will leap to when they switch.
Oh yes.. apple are coming out with this surprise announcement with intel in January. I'm sure they won't have made any pro apps intel compatible. 🙄BillyShears said:
Sorry, but c'mon. This is apple, not microsoft. You HAVE heard of rosetta, haven't you? By the time intel brings a speed enhancement, the speed decrease of an emulated PPC won't be significant.
To me, it's likely they will bring out:
#1. Powerbook, then iBook; or
#2. Powerbook, and iBook.
This way, consumer won't beat pro. Old apps still run through sufficient emulation. Official apple apps work straight away in intel binaries and everything is rosy.
Multimedia
macrumors 603
Steve specifically stated in June that all Apple Software development has included Intel versions so there is no reason to believe that any Apple Software doesn't have an Intel Version ready NOW. I think the deployment of the dual core Yonah PowerBook will depend on how soon Intel can supply Apple with enough processors to fulfill thier sales volume needs. Anyone here know how fast the supply of dual core Yonah processors is building? Are they already in full production? Or still only in samples? 😕epepper9 said:
Probably in full production. There's even talk of manufacturers shipping before the close of the year, due to yields going very well. I don't think supply is going to be an issue, which is why I definitely think there is going to be an announcement at least, for MWSFMultimedia said:
Multimedia said:
And if you've been running your software update you have at least one fat file already installed, specifically if you installed the latest Java update and run this command:
$ lipo -info /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.5.0/Commands/java
you'll see this:
Architectures in the fat file: /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.5.0/Commands/java are: i386 ppc
😎
Multimedia
macrumors 603
epepper9 said:
Well, that's speculation based on nothing at all. There are other companies that make "pro" apps besides Apple. They may not have switched over yet. I haven't seen any benchmarks of Rosetta running, say, Photoshop... so I don't know that the speed increase will be enough. I don't think you know, either.
That's what I said. Powerbook then/and iBook for exactly the reason that consumer won't beat pro. Except I think they will keep offering the PowerPC version of at least the Powerbook for people that don't want to emulate.
Multimedia
macrumors 603
Emulation Mode Is Pretty Fast According to June Demo
If the benchmarks suck for emulation, then you just wait for a faster model or Universal Binary of your must have app. This would be what is known as a bump in the transition. Not that big a deal. This thing is going to unfold as smoothly as is humanly possible. But that doesn't mean that some glitches are not going to be part of the process. Glitches are part of the process. It's certainly nothing to get your panties in a wad over. 😛
My thought is that the overall processing speed of the new models will be such that emulation will rival native speed in a previous PPC model at least and possably be even faster at best.
Based on Steve's June demo of Rosetta, the Photoshop emulation is close to native speed. Since Rosetta will be in silicone, it is likely that the emulation mode will be very good. I am sure Apple will not want to release any product that will suck in emulation mode. Wishful guess yes. 😛BillyShears said:
If the benchmarks suck for emulation, then you just wait for a faster model or Universal Binary of your must have app. This would be what is known as a bump in the transition. Not that big a deal. This thing is going to unfold as smoothly as is humanly possible. But that doesn't mean that some glitches are not going to be part of the process. Glitches are part of the process. It's certainly nothing to get your panties in a wad over. 😛
My thought is that the overall processing speed of the new models will be such that emulation will rival native speed in a previous PPC model at least and possably be even faster at best.
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
QuickTransit (Rosetta) is pure software, running on exactly the same Intel processors that every other manufacturer will be using. There are no "silicone enhancements" ;-) .Multimedia said:
Apple is buying the technology from Transitive (see http://www.transitive.com/ and http://www.transitive.com/technology.htm for more info), it isn't even something that Apple has developed. (Also see The brains behind Apple's Rosetta: Transitive.)
One key point from Transitive's description is:
Transitive Technology Brief said:
Since QuickTransit will be emulating OSX (PPC) on OSX (x86) - there should be a simple map for most OS calls. Such calls wouldn't be emulated - the native x86 system or library code would be executed.
If an application spends a lot of time in system calls, its performance will be helped because of the native execution without emulation. Things like OpenGL will run basically at native speeds, since the native OSx86 OpenGL libraries and native drivers can be used.
Multimedia said:
I wouldn't be surprised at all if what Steve showed at the Rosetta demo was tested functions that performed well under Rosetta. It's not like he was taking suggestions on filters to run or batches of functions to be executed. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they had tested certain aspects of certain programs and demoed those to 'prove' that Rosetta will be a fast solution.
If the speed of the Intel based Macs does makeup for the decrease caused by Rosetta, then there shouldn't be any problems switching/working until Universal Binaries arrive. If the Intel Macs simply match the current PPC offerings, I don't see many pros switching over however. If they are faster, well then maybe some will based on future-proofing. I can't imagine many of them 'excited' about having to emulate something for professional work 🙄 😛
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
perhaps they "warmed it up" too
Did the Steve start the programs from scratch, or did he open an icon from the dock - so that perhaps the filter had been run earlier and an optimized translation was already in memory?
QuickTransit optimizes and caches the instruction streams needed to emulate the program. This means that re-running a filter might be faster than the initial run.efoto said:
Did the Steve start the programs from scratch, or did he open an icon from the dock - so that perhaps the filter had been run earlier and an optimized translation was already in memory?
http://www.transitive.com/technology.htmTransitive Technology Brief said:
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Multimedia said:
Well, that's depressing since iTunes in Windows wipes the floor with iTunes in OSX running on Intel. The speculation was that with needing Rosetta translation, the Mactels couldn't use Alvitec instructions, and therefore ripping mp3s was 4 or 5 times as slow as on Windoze boxes. If iTunes HAS been optimized, that's kind of sad.
dblissmn said:
Ah, an actual Stata user. 🙂 I will try to be succinct here.
(1) I am aware that Altivec is single-precision only and that Stata is double-precision. My G5 optimization comments were not about Altivec.
(2) I am not referring to multi-threading Stata (i.e., making it run on multiple processors). Supposedly they are working on multi-threading it (for multiple platforms), but I seriously doubt that will happen before Stata 11 or so.
(3) By "not G5 optimized," I mean that Stata has not compiled their code with a compiler that has optimization flags for the PowerPC 970 architecture. The PPC 970 (G5) has a very different instruction pipeline and execution resources than the MPC 745x (G4). As such, code that is optimized (both by the coder and the compiler) for the G4 will not necessarily be optimized for the G5. This discussion is unrelated to anything regarding Altivec and multiprocessing. It simply reflects the fact that the G5 and the G4 are very different processors and execute the same instructions, giving the same results, in very different ways.
(4) Part of the reason Stata has never optimized for the G5 is that they use Metrowerks CodeWarrior, which does not support any optimizations for the G5 (because it's owned by Motorola, and the G5 is exclusively an IBM processor).
(5) The reason Stata uses CodeWarrior is because they have a low opinion of XCode's UI (or so they claim). In fairness, a number of programmers I have talked to have a low opinion of XCode's UI.
(6) Given (5), I expect that Stata will drag their feet a bit on shifting over to XCode, which is a necessary step for producing a Universal binary. They are basically being forced to switch to XCode...they wouldn't do it on their own volition.
All that being said, Stata does do a very good job of keeping feature parity across all platforms. So who knows, they may pleasantly surprise us. But I would be totally shocked if it happened before next summer. And, as you said, it may well wait until Stata 10.
jayscheuerle said:
It hasn't been ported to Intel (as of 10.4.1), because it's Carbon. It's like the only iApp not yet ported. The article you are referring to even specifically says that iTunes was running under emulation on OS X.
a little more Yonah info...
I saw this on notebookreview.com:
basically, dual-cores run from 1.6-2.16 GHz, the only single-core model runs at 1.66GHz, and the Low Voltage models are dual-cores that ran at 1.5 or 1.66GHz. The link has pricing info and lineup nomenclature.
I saw this on notebookreview.com:
basically, dual-cores run from 1.6-2.16 GHz, the only single-core model runs at 1.66GHz, and the Low Voltage models are dual-cores that ran at 1.5 or 1.66GHz. The link has pricing info and lineup nomenclature.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
1. Thinksecret has been pretty bad for the last few months. They've missed on pretty much all the big announcements, so their call for an iBook has about as much weight as anyone's here.
2. The whole 'pro/consumer' differentiation in the notebook line is largely cosmetic. With the desktops there are clear feature differences between a PowerMac and say Mini or iMac, with the notebook it's more about shiny aluminum vs. white plastic. Otherwise they are the same, just the cheaper iBooks have lesser specs. The only differences are due to Apple's choices in separating the 2.
The biggest difference to me between the 2 (besides clockspeed) is the PowerBook has better screen and much better keyboard, which I appreciate. But it's not like that's only for pro's, anyone who can afford a PowerBook will find that a benefit.
Anyone using a notebook computer for really pro-level work is taking a big hit in performance, regardless of whether you are using a PowerBook or an iBook.
I think Apple could conceivably announce both at MWSF, but not likely since I think both will get some sort of makeover. Actually, the iBook has gone the longest without a redesign, so maybe they will do that first. You might expect a new PowerBook design, but the current aluminum design is still best in class IMO (way better than the current garish Win notebook look.)
I also am skeptical of $200 iBook price drops. If they do, then it will almost certainly include Intel integrated graphics to save money. The cheapest iBooks could certainly go this route, I think it would be a good idea since Apple could then drop the price a bit. Of course, there would be at least 1 iBook with a decent GPU.
2. The whole 'pro/consumer' differentiation in the notebook line is largely cosmetic. With the desktops there are clear feature differences between a PowerMac and say Mini or iMac, with the notebook it's more about shiny aluminum vs. white plastic. Otherwise they are the same, just the cheaper iBooks have lesser specs. The only differences are due to Apple's choices in separating the 2.
The biggest difference to me between the 2 (besides clockspeed) is the PowerBook has better screen and much better keyboard, which I appreciate. But it's not like that's only for pro's, anyone who can afford a PowerBook will find that a benefit.
Anyone using a notebook computer for really pro-level work is taking a big hit in performance, regardless of whether you are using a PowerBook or an iBook.
I think Apple could conceivably announce both at MWSF, but not likely since I think both will get some sort of makeover. Actually, the iBook has gone the longest without a redesign, so maybe they will do that first. You might expect a new PowerBook design, but the current aluminum design is still best in class IMO (way better than the current garish Win notebook look.)
I also am skeptical of $200 iBook price drops. If they do, then it will almost certainly include Intel integrated graphics to save money. The cheapest iBooks could certainly go this route, I think it would be a good idea since Apple could then drop the price a bit. Of course, there would be at least 1 iBook with a decent GPU.
aswitcher said:
In the past they have been good. But lately they have been wrong a lot more than they've been right (ever since around that lawsuit...). Let me count the ways-
1. Said the first special event would be ROKR only with absolutely no new iPods (there were already nano leaks by then.)
2. Said in September that there would be no Mac updates until MacWorld 06. Then they said there would be updates at the second special event, and nothing else (no mention of FrontRow or built-in iSight in the iMac though.)
3. Oh no, wait! They say there will be a new iPod after all. But its for sure not going to do video.
They could be right about MacWorld, but it's not like in the past where I have any confidence they have good, solid information.
I'm not worried about the Pro -v- consumer markets.
If a user is a pro and needs to see their main apps updated before moving to Mactels, but needs a computer now then the new PMs are fine. independents get to write off the full cost this year against their taxes, including both sides of Social Security taxes, which is a total of 15.3% by itself. Throw in State and Federal taxes and, depending on their tax bracket and state taxes, and they save 40% to 50% of the investment. Makes the new PMs look pretty good, especially since they can get most or all of that money back when they are ready to move to Mactels by selling this years PM to a friend or on ebay. In short, tax breaks and resale values cover the independents who need something now - they will get to use the newest PMs (or PBs), essentially for free. Emulation isn't a concern for them.
In terms of potential releases, look to the processors available in January as they will give you the best indication of what Apple will do. Dual cores indicate PBs and iMacs while older single cores indicate iBooks and Mac minis.
If a user is a pro and needs to see their main apps updated before moving to Mactels, but needs a computer now then the new PMs are fine. independents get to write off the full cost this year against their taxes, including both sides of Social Security taxes, which is a total of 15.3% by itself. Throw in State and Federal taxes and, depending on their tax bracket and state taxes, and they save 40% to 50% of the investment. Makes the new PMs look pretty good, especially since they can get most or all of that money back when they are ready to move to Mactels by selling this years PM to a friend or on ebay. In short, tax breaks and resale values cover the independents who need something now - they will get to use the newest PMs (or PBs), essentially for free. Emulation isn't a concern for them.
In terms of potential releases, look to the processors available in January as they will give you the best indication of what Apple will do. Dual cores indicate PBs and iMacs while older single cores indicate iBooks and Mac minis.
d_and_n5000 said:
Not gonna happen. The Pentium M is a fairly expensive cpu and you want the most expensive version of it in a consumer laptop. Not that I wouldn't want this, but wanting doesn't make it so.