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
derbladerunner
macrumors 6502
Hattig said:
Another source also says 'early January 2006'. See here...
http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ106.htm#Jonah
iBook also got Airport first back in '99. The pro apps case mentioned by Thinksecret makes sense, I expect the iBook and Mini to move to Intel first.
I guess always Apple planned this:
- Announce June '06, but prepare for Jan / spring '06
- People will stop buying and waiting in spring '06 based on publicly available information (une '06)
- Announce change of plans on short notice in early '06 so there is no waiting gap based on people's perceptions / the waiting period is closed.
In addition, you get the additional excitement of a long-awited product now coming earlier.
Clever move.
No Powerbook upgrade = Stupidity
It would be very stupid of Apple to upgrade their consumer-level products while the Powerbook languishes with ancient G4s that have only seen modest speed gains in the past 2 years. The Powerbook line is one of their best selling product lines and the one most in need of the upgrade to Intel.
I suppose they could be thinking that they will wait until a particular processor is available, but that would also be stupid since they could always upgrade the processor anytime.
If the iBook was the first to make the transition, would they have to hold the speeds down so they don't eclipse the speeds of the Powerbooks? If so, what's the point? The speed of the current iBook lineup is only marginally slower than the Powerbook lineup.
I think either Thinksecret is blowing smoke up everyone's rear end or Apple is about to make a large blunder.
It would be very stupid of Apple to upgrade their consumer-level products while the Powerbook languishes with ancient G4s that have only seen modest speed gains in the past 2 years. The Powerbook line is one of their best selling product lines and the one most in need of the upgrade to Intel.
I suppose they could be thinking that they will wait until a particular processor is available, but that would also be stupid since they could always upgrade the processor anytime.
If the iBook was the first to make the transition, would they have to hold the speeds down so they don't eclipse the speeds of the Powerbooks? If so, what's the point? The speed of the current iBook lineup is only marginally slower than the Powerbook lineup.
I think either Thinksecret is blowing smoke up everyone's rear end or Apple is about to make a large blunder.
iMeowbot said:
Yes, that caught my eye too. I had a "PowerPC Ready" PowerBook 520C. It was a 68040, of course. IIRC there was some way a CPU module would get installed, but I never saw or heard of one for it.
This is easy ... use Mighty Mouse technology to make the 1-button on the trackpad behave like a reconfigurable multibutton.maverick808 said:
I like the primary button on the left at 2/3, and the secondary button on the right at 1/3. You could switch them around, swap sides, make it 50/50 or 25/75 or even configure it to work like a 1-button.
We have the technology!
Now that the desktops are all shipping with the Mighty Mouse, it only makes sense to implement a similar multibutton technology on the notebooks. Two-finger scrolling covers half of what the Mighty Mouse offers, but why do we notebook users still have to do the ctrl-click maneuver for a right click!?
As for the Intel 'Books, bring 'em on 🙂. I just got a 15" PowerBook (high-res), but we have it all planned out... See, my wife has lots of expensive PPC-only creative software (Adobe CS2, etc.) that would cost a fortune to upgrade to Intel versions. So, I'll get to play semi-early-adopter and get a rev-B Intel PowerBook (I'm guessing about a year from now) and pass this PPC PB to my wife. That way she doesn't have to upgrade the more than $2,000 in software all at once.
Most of what I use is either going to be available free as a universal binary or gets used so rarely that Rosetta will be tolerable. People like my wife who spend most of their day in Photoshop will need to run native versions; it's not so important for my 'an hour here-and-there' kind of use.
I am a web developer, so I'm fired up about the prospect of having Windows and Linux running at near-full-speed in virtual machines on my Mac for site testing purposes. For me, that far outweighs the potential slowdown from Rosetta 🙂.
So, to sum up, thus far, to date, every apple product has been rumored to be Intel based by Macworld with the exception of the Intel based iPod, correct? 🙂
Sorry, I exaggerate, I don't remember seeing a PowerMac in January rumor yet.
Think Secret is bound to be right on at least one of the rumors.
Sorry, I exaggerate, I don't remember seeing a PowerMac in January rumor yet.
Think Secret is bound to be right on at least one of the rumors.
Hunts121
macrumors regular
Lurch_Mojoff said:
I run FCP HD on my powerbook (haven't moved up to 5 yet I probably won't til I get an Intel PB though by then it might be 5.5 or something haha) and its always ran fine for me. Rarely are the rendering time so awful that I want to chuck this thing. It beats waiting in line at the school mac labs for a G5. 😉
deputy_doofy
macrumors 65816
Now, it may have already been mentioned somewhere in the last 6 pages, but there's always the possibility that the 12" Powerbook could see an upgrade to a Pentium-M along with the iBook.
I only say that because the 12" Powerbook received no update at all last time and, while it is considered a professional machine, it is the low end.
After all, someone who is doing massive Photoshop work on a laptop is more likely to do it on a 15" or 17", not a 12", so it would be a good place to test the waters.
Just my opinion...
I only say that because the 12" Powerbook received no update at all last time and, while it is considered a professional machine, it is the low end.
After all, someone who is doing massive Photoshop work on a laptop is more likely to do it on a 15" or 17", not a 12", so it would be a good place to test the waters.
Just my opinion...
deputy_doofy said:
If Apple does such a dumb move I will not buy a new PB...P-Ms are dead meat already, considering the new Intel announcements...
puckhead193
macrumors G3
the only thing that would stop me to believe that pro lines won't be the first because of the software. I suspect in the begining their will be all kinds of software issues and a professional would be screwed if FCP or photoshop doesn't work like it should.
SiliconAddict
macrumors 603
rlwimi said:
Ahh trolls. There's nothing like a steaming cup of stupidity in the morning to get yah going. 😱
How about if in January they release Intel-based iBooks and upgrade the Powerbooks with the 7448's by Freescale? 😀
Could work 😉 but at the moment i dont trust any of the rumors. Though this one does seem more pluasable than the rest.
Could work 😉 but at the moment i dont trust any of the rumors. Though this one does seem more pluasable than the rest.
Yebot
macrumors 6502
QCassidy352 said:
First,
iBooks are rarely in competition with Powerbooks. If you want to run pro-apps then Powerbook will still be the best machine come January because those apps will still be optimized for PowerPC. If you want to run consumer apps (iLife) then the new iBook will be the best machine since those apps will be optimized for both PPC and Intel.
Second,
Say it with me, 'Every version of Mac OS X has been built for Intel for 5 years. 'Every version of Mac OS X has been built for Intel for 5 years. 'Every version of Mac OS X has been built for Intel for 5 years.'
They've been work on this for 5 years, not 5 months. We are not dealing with Microsoft.
Yebot
macrumors 6502
ccrandall77 said:
WRONG, It would be very stupid of Apple to put an Intel chip in a Powerbook before all the Pro-apps are ready.
If all you want to do is play with iTunes, surf Macrumors and send pictures of your dog to your mom then get the Intel-iBook and enjoy *thinking* that your machine is faster than everything else Apple sells.
It makes perfect sense to transition the iBooks, Mac mini's and perhaps the iMacs first. These are the machines that will sell even though Adobe and other pro-app vendors aren't ready to distribute universal binaries.
MWSF Prediction
Not really a prediction, but more a statement of what Apple should do if they were smart.
1.) Single-core Yonah Powerbooks over 2GHz with upgraded GPUs, slimmer design, and a 13.3" and/or 10.6" model.
2.) Celeron-M iBooks up to say 1.8GHz also with upgraded GPUs, slimmer design, widescreen displays in sizes matching the Powerbook line (cheaper if they are making fewer types of parts).
3.) Small upgrades to iPod Nano and Shuffle.
4.) Possible Celeron-M Mac Mini also up to 1.7 or 1.8GHz with a better GPU.
By June, I expect the Powerbooks to go dual-core, the iBooks will go to single-core Yonahs as will the Mac Mini. At this point, I see the iMac being considered for the dual-core Yonahs.
By the end of 2006, I think the 64-bit Intel chips will make their way into the Powerbook and iMac lines. Speed bumps for Mac Mini and iBook.
MWSF 2007 will introduce the Mactel PowerMacs.
Why do I think it should go this way? Well, as I said earlier the Powerbooks need the upgrade more than any other line, followed by the iBooks. That would leave the Mac Mini as the only G4 in the lineup. I could see them continuing to produce Mac Mini G4s until the inventory of G4s is exhausted... then they should go Intel. Producing Mactels, G4s, and G5s I don't think is a good idea. They need to reduce the different processor lines to save $$$.
The G5 products are not in desperate need up an upgrade. The PowerMacs are very fast machines and the iMacs aren't too slow either. I have the iMac G5-1.9GHz and it's a very good machine with a lot of life in it. I don't think it should be upgraded until either the dual-core Yonahs are ready or the 64-bit dual-core Intel chips are ready.
I also hope they finally ditch the acrylic/polished metal design of the iPod. The iPod-mini was the best designed of the iPods and they need to go back to that design. I have owned just about every iPod and my favorite is the iPod-mini... I just wish they'd put the color screen on it and doubled the capacity instead of coming out with the Nano.
New products for this year, possibly as soon as MWSF, should include:
1.) New Airport products using (pre-)802.11n technology.
2.) New Airport Express with HDMI for streaming HD and 5.1-7.1 audio and remote control capability.
3.) New Front Row application for all Macs with better performance
4.) Video encoding software to make iPod Video files easily (maybe an add-on to iMovie or Quicktime Pro)
5.) An HTPC add-on for the Mac Mini...
The HTPC add-on should look like the MiniMate or LaCie Mini Companion.
It should have additional firewire and USB2 ports.
It should contain a fat HDD (400+GB).
It should have 5.1-7.1 audio capability.
It should be able to record HD streams.
It should have an optional two-way cable card.
It should have builtin IR for use with the Apple Remote.
A Mac Mini with HTPC add-on would eliminate my need for a cable box, DVR, DVD player and stereo. You would just have that single component. Or, put the Mini + HTPC add-on in your bedroom and use the upgraded AX to connect to your home theater. Get an external Blu-ray or HD-DVD burner to burn HD content (I doubt we'll see these as an option on macs for a while until the format is standardized... so that's why I say it'd be an external drive).
Not really a prediction, but more a statement of what Apple should do if they were smart.
1.) Single-core Yonah Powerbooks over 2GHz with upgraded GPUs, slimmer design, and a 13.3" and/or 10.6" model.
2.) Celeron-M iBooks up to say 1.8GHz also with upgraded GPUs, slimmer design, widescreen displays in sizes matching the Powerbook line (cheaper if they are making fewer types of parts).
3.) Small upgrades to iPod Nano and Shuffle.
4.) Possible Celeron-M Mac Mini also up to 1.7 or 1.8GHz with a better GPU.
By June, I expect the Powerbooks to go dual-core, the iBooks will go to single-core Yonahs as will the Mac Mini. At this point, I see the iMac being considered for the dual-core Yonahs.
By the end of 2006, I think the 64-bit Intel chips will make their way into the Powerbook and iMac lines. Speed bumps for Mac Mini and iBook.
MWSF 2007 will introduce the Mactel PowerMacs.
Why do I think it should go this way? Well, as I said earlier the Powerbooks need the upgrade more than any other line, followed by the iBooks. That would leave the Mac Mini as the only G4 in the lineup. I could see them continuing to produce Mac Mini G4s until the inventory of G4s is exhausted... then they should go Intel. Producing Mactels, G4s, and G5s I don't think is a good idea. They need to reduce the different processor lines to save $$$.
The G5 products are not in desperate need up an upgrade. The PowerMacs are very fast machines and the iMacs aren't too slow either. I have the iMac G5-1.9GHz and it's a very good machine with a lot of life in it. I don't think it should be upgraded until either the dual-core Yonahs are ready or the 64-bit dual-core Intel chips are ready.
I also hope they finally ditch the acrylic/polished metal design of the iPod. The iPod-mini was the best designed of the iPods and they need to go back to that design. I have owned just about every iPod and my favorite is the iPod-mini... I just wish they'd put the color screen on it and doubled the capacity instead of coming out with the Nano.
New products for this year, possibly as soon as MWSF, should include:
1.) New Airport products using (pre-)802.11n technology.
2.) New Airport Express with HDMI for streaming HD and 5.1-7.1 audio and remote control capability.
3.) New Front Row application for all Macs with better performance
4.) Video encoding software to make iPod Video files easily (maybe an add-on to iMovie or Quicktime Pro)
5.) An HTPC add-on for the Mac Mini...
The HTPC add-on should look like the MiniMate or LaCie Mini Companion.
It should have additional firewire and USB2 ports.
It should contain a fat HDD (400+GB).
It should have 5.1-7.1 audio capability.
It should be able to record HD streams.
It should have an optional two-way cable card.
It should have builtin IR for use with the Apple Remote.
A Mac Mini with HTPC add-on would eliminate my need for a cable box, DVR, DVD player and stereo. You would just have that single component. Or, put the Mini + HTPC add-on in your bedroom and use the upgraded AX to connect to your home theater. Get an external Blu-ray or HD-DVD burner to burn HD content (I doubt we'll see these as an option on macs for a while until the format is standardized... so that's why I say it'd be an external drive).
Super Dave
macrumors 6502
JoeG4 said:
Ok, cheaping out on the FireWire port on the iPod I'll agree with. Bad move in its cheapness. But don't equate cheap iPods with cheap Macs. They are different departments and quite frankly Apple never cheaps out on their Macs. (*waiting for the flames*) The PowerBook has in both its 15 and 17" iteration FireWire 800 and a backlit keyboard. Who needs this stuff?! No one, but it makes life that much more grand to have it. Even Apple's entry level machines have FireWire ports while PC users are like "fire what?"
Regarding video for iPod I think it's a good hedging of bets. It prevents anyone else from stealing their thunder. If video takes off it will now be on the iPod. If it dies, then it's a non-issue because the iPod is still great for music.
I guess what I'm saying is that your argument lacks consistency. You equate budget consciousness with inclusion of video. I think what you are saying is that Apple is moving away from where you think they should be going. That doesn't mean they are moving in the wrong direction.
David 😎
PS - Regarding Apple introducing variable pricing on songs I'll believe it when I see it. Some EMI exec shooting his mouth off doesn't hold much sway in my books.
Those costs are still internal to the Apple as a company, whereas Dell's cost for the Microsoft tax is money out the door. Since Apple will continue to develop OS X regardless which hardware they are producing, this will be a fixed cost regardless of hardware development.dr_lha said:
Besides, overall Intel based computers are commodity products. There are so many suppliers that profit margins are very thin on the hardware side. At one point, Dell was even looking at not putting on stickers on their computers in an attempt to save costs. Not having an external cost for the operating system puts Apple in a very good competitive position.
Super Dave
macrumors 6502
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
Yebot
thank you for utilizing common sense.
Also I don't know why people on here are assuming that a Pentium M laptop is by default faster than a G4 based laptop.
A 1.5Ghz Pentium M is going to be slightly faster than the current G4 based iBooks of today. However it won't be faster than a 1.7Ghz G4 if the Powerbooks can get there with a 7448 Freescale chip.
Consumers will likely be satiated by an iLife 06 and iWork 2 for Intel Macs. The other app support will come.
Powerbook users need Office, Adobe and a plethora of apps to be ready. No reason not to wait.
thank you for utilizing common sense.
Also I don't know why people on here are assuming that a Pentium M laptop is by default faster than a G4 based laptop.
A 1.5Ghz Pentium M is going to be slightly faster than the current G4 based iBooks of today. However it won't be faster than a 1.7Ghz G4 if the Powerbooks can get there with a 7448 Freescale chip.
Consumers will likely be satiated by an iLife 06 and iWork 2 for Intel Macs. The other app support will come.
Powerbook users need Office, Adobe and a plethora of apps to be ready. No reason not to wait.
Yebot said:
🙄 First, how do you know that the Pro-apps aren't going to be ready for MWSF. Demonstrations have shown that most apps require very little effort to port over to x86.
Second, how do you know that the performance hit taken by using Rosetta would outweigh the performance gain of a 2GHz+ Yonah?
Third, it's not going to matter if a G4-1.67 is slightly faster than a 2.0GHz Yonah for running Pro apps in Rosetta (and I'm VERY skeptical this is the case), you are either going to have to make the iBook line slower so people won't automatically assume it's a much better machine or you are going to have to do a pretty darn good job of marketing the Powerbooks over the iBooks or people will just buy the cheaper iBooks.
And even if the Pro-apps aren't quite ready by MWSF, how many Powerbook owners run pro-apps? I've owned 2 Powerbooks and I've never run a Pro-app. I know plenty of Powerbook owners who don't run Pro-apps. And there are going to be so many other apps that'll run FASTER on a Mactel iBook that it'll make buying a G4-1.67GHz Powerbook a dumb idea.
Your Pro-app arguement for holding back the Powerbook upgrade simply doesn't hold any water in my opinion.