Intel Powerbook and iMac in January?

[runninmac]

No I will. . . I've been waiting 3 years for my first Mac. . . I'll mug the person who gets one before me, and leave a few thousand behind in payment of course.

I would NOT be suprised if Apple had their pro apps ready by WWDC.

Well 2 years for me but I may mugg a few people that are ahead of me on a wating list on the apple store

I would also not be surprised. If they didn't I would actually be rather dissapointed. They should have all the pro apps. Theyve had more time than anyone and they had the apple dev. team on there side.

After I read the 10 pages of my thread ive noticed a few things
40% of the people are way to negative
10% are nutreal (yay for you people)
35% seem to be way to positive
And the remaining 15% are just spaming the board

I would do examples but its 2:43 in the moarning and im probobly not making sense right now.

 

[iEric]

wooo powerbooks. probably will wait till rev b OR like maybe 2 weeks after people start receiving them. But usually when I buy rev a, nothing bad happens. Wierd.

on another note, I just went to the states and went a whole bunch of money at Hollister and Abercrombie. So...maybe I won't get it for a while. Maybe till the summer when I"m working full time again.

 

[aafuss1]

The Intel Powerbooks may not have 802.11n, but perhaps WiMax (seems Intel is pushing it) -unless Apple releases a new generation of Airport cards/AE/BT 2.0 modules for the Intel Mac's.

It won't have the Centrino logo (as Apple currently doesn't use the 2915/3945ABG from Intel)

 

[ScubaDuc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beck446
I've read like half of this thread and nobody has given the correct explanation for why this rumor is true: the powerbooks and imacs cost more than the mini or ibooks. More profits.



Although Apple doesn't give the margin of each of its computers, it is obvious that the powerbook and imac have higher margins than the ibook and mini. It is equally obvious that each is more expensive. So the profit is higher for two reasons: more expensive and higher margins. That is why it is clear Apple will release intel on these first. As for anyone who thinks that they would sell more minis - enough to compensate for the above two observations - is mistaken.

It is generally a mistake to look at product margins on individual lines because you are not considering synergies between models. Consider Nokia, analysts have beaten the stock price down because of the new, low cost phones for the developing markets thinking that it would reduce margins. However, cheap phones provide the economies of scale to make even higher margins on the top lines. Nokia's revenue has been increasing despite its luckluster performance in sales. Imac, powerbook, ibook and mini all have some common points. They all require low heat processors and perhaps the the Yonah chips will be pin compatible aloowing to use the same basic motherboard design although with different graphics, HDs, etc.

I think what is important in the Appleinsider rumors is that by spring we'll have most of the Mac line on Intel already. It really does not matter which model they start with, although I hope for a new Mini being the i-Mac a bit too "obvious" to sneak past custom..

 

[unage85]

I still can't get over the 20-25% thinner bit! It's so thin and elegant now! 1 inches and made of Aluminum... NO ONE in the industry does it with Apple's grace. Can Apple seriously top the current design?? If it can be done it goes to show how old the G4 really is in terms of size!!

 

[unage85]

Will the new intel iMac, when it does appear, be considered iMac rev D or iMactel rev A?

Anyway, I hope Apple thinks a mid range machine deserves a mid range graphics card which I feel wasn't the case with the last three iMacs.

That's actually a good point. In the history of Apple's hardware, have they ever reused a case design with a completely new processor inside?? They probably have but I can't seem to think of an example!?!

 

[iMeowbot]

That's actually a good point. In the history of Apple's hardware, have they ever reused a case design with a completely new processor inside?? They probably have but I can't seem to think of an example!?!

Sure. The early Power Mac models were near twins of their Centris/Quadra counterparts, the PowerBook 190 and 5300 had the same case, and so on.

More recently, the iBook G3 (white version, not the Fisher Price handbag) changed little when it got a G4.

 

[seb_carley]

reusing old cases

That's actually a good point. In the history of Apple's hardware, have they ever reused a case design with a completely new processor inside?? They probably have but I can't seem to think of an example!?!

I can
The first G3s (233/266 Mhz IIRC) came in the same beige case as the 7xxx series they replaced. The tower used a slightly shorter version of the 8/9xxx tower.

I'd personally be expecting all Apple software (consumer + Pro) to be ready within days/weeks of the Intel launch (whichever model comes first) and some big names (Adobe, Microsoft) to be on stage with steve announcing the soon to be released versions of CS, MS Office, VPC.

Here's hoping for a happy day...

 

[generik]

I still can't get over the 20-25% thinner bit! It's so thin and elegant now! 1 inches and made of Aluminum... NO ONE in the industry does it with Apple's grace. Can Apple seriously top the current design?? If it can be done it goes to show how old the G4 really is in terms of size!!

They will probably switch for a new case design though, nothing screams "buy buy buy" more than a *new case*!

 

[al3000]

I knew this would happen, I only just got my first mac...a new PB!

 

[JohnEZ]

I'm a day late with this posting, please do excuse me for that.

But anyway, as far as I'm concerned, the thought that the PowerBook is a "Pro Laptop" is a misconception. I've always been told by people in the Mac world that this is the way it was, and that the iBook was the consumer/student computer.

With all due respect, I disagree. I've been researching colleges recently, and all of the ones that support Macintosh (the number was surprisingly high, actually) highly recommend the PowerBook. Funny that the "student" machine isn't the one necessarily recommended for students. Granted, it is being used in hope of a professional future; but then, what about all the people who have PowerBooks who don't need to use them for work on a regular basis? I'd wager that most people who own PBs don't do it for professional reasons.

Just my thoughts,
-John

 

[mdavey]

I don't think the Apple's PRO apps will be ready in 1Q06

Whyever not? Apple product development teams will have had at least 6 months to compile their apps for Intel processors and that is assuming that they didn't hear about the move to Intel until just before Jobs announced it to the world.

I would guess that the vast majority of the Pro apps are built with Xcode and that Apple use best practices such as automated continuous integration builds so it would be trivial to add Intel as a build target.

That wouldn't magically create a working build for Intel CPUs, but it would provide visibility to the developers as to what is stopping each app from compiling cleanly. Also, knowing what is stopping the app from building is not the same as knowing how to fix it. However, I would expect a range of issues - some apps will be almost trivial to fix (Jobs made a big deal about one of the 3rd party maths simulators being migrated with just two hours work - albeit probably from a very skilled team).

So, I would expect that some of the Pro apps will be trivial to fix for a Universal binary, some will be a fair amount of work and a couple will be very challenging. This still means that Apple will have most of their Pro apps ready for Q1 (and may even have all of them ready now).

 

[JCT]

I'll bet the Pro Apps are either ready or very, very close. This switch has been in the works for years and the real question is whether it was planned as an "out" if IBM fell behind or as part of a more long-term plan. I remain very impressed at how Apple kept this under wraps.

I am always surprised at the "lead" times for these projects. For example, Aperture took over 3 years to develop --- of course, during that time the Intel migration was planned for, so I am sure that somewhere in the building in Cupertino someone has a fast Intel Mac pushing those big RAW files around using Aperture.

Has that stopped me from ordering a loaded Quad? Nope, I'll ride out the first Intel PowerMac Rev or two, but I may replace the old Lapzilla PB with an Intel version after the dust settles, .

Actually the difficulty I am having is in making a recommendation to one of my grad students who has gotten hooked by using one of the lab iBooks after her PC laptop croaked. Can't decide whether she should wait for one of the rumored 13" widescreens... ARGH.

JT

 

[bigandy]

Whyever not? Apple product development teams will have had at least 6 months to compile their apps for Intel processors and that is assuming that they didn't hear about the move to Intel until just before Jobs announced it to the world.

I would guess that the vast majority of the Pro apps are built with Xcode and that Apple use best practices such as automated continuous integration builds so it would be trivial to add Intel as a build target.

That wouldn't magically create a working build for Intel CPUs, but it would provide visibility to the developers as to what is stopping each app from compiling cleanly. Also, knowing what is stopping the app form building is not the same as knowing how to fix it. However, I would expect a range of issues - some apps will be almost trivial to fix (Jobs made a big deal about one of the 3rd party maths simulators being migrated with just two hours work - albeit probably from a very skilled team).

So, I would expect that some of the Pro apps will be trivial to fix for a Universal binary, some will be a fair amount of work and a couple will be very challenging. This still means that Apple will have most of their Pro apps ready for Q1 (and may even have all of them ready now).

i'm thinking that most of the Apple Pro Apps have been compiled for OSX86 for many months, if not at least a year now. they know without them it'll be hard to pitch a new machine on the platform, so i'd bet good money they'll come out when the first intel powered Mac surfaces...

 

[ksz]

But anyway, as far as I'm concerned, the thought that the PowerBook is a "Pro Laptop" is a misconception. I've always been told by people in the Mac world that this is the way it was, and that the iBook was the consumer/student computer.

With all due respect, I disagree.
...

I think you're right. My 15" PowerBook at 1.25 GHz and 1.5 GB memory crashes when I try to edit a 60-minute DV with iMovie. I ended up taking the project to a family member's dual processor G4 which crunched through the project almost effortlessly. The existing PowerBook, in my opinion, is really not the powerhouse it is cracked up to be. A dual-core Yonah-based PowerBook with a 533MHz bus, on the other hand, may well be a serious contender.

 

[gekko513]

Bravo 840quadra

Anyway...

What I thought the MacMini was rumored to be the first to get updated?
Now its the iMac??

Why!? that means the new version would have the shortest lifespan ever. It's just got DDR2 and PCI-express... and a speed-bump to last all of 3 months?

These rumors are getting daft.



Hmmmmm.... why exactley?

The Mac mini can still be the first to be updated, but if Apple keeps it's current strategy they will just start shipping it with Intel processors without telling anyone about it.

 

[ksz]

I'll bet the Pro Apps are either ready or very, very close. This switch has been in the works for years and the real question is whether it was planned as an "out" if IBM fell behind or as part of a more long-term plan. I remain very impressed at how Apple kept this under wraps.

With the exception of some senior managers, we know almost nothing about the Apple org chart. Who are the functional managers, technical leads, and directors? Who is the engineering manager for Aperture? For FCP? For iLife? Apple is understandably very protective of such information.

Because of Apple's focus on innovation, ideas have to be guarded. Apple has likely instituted effective measures to safeguard those ideas until IP Protections are in place or until a product sees the light of day. Rumors, it seems, are a constant thorn.

I am always surprised at the "lead" times for these projects. For example, Aperture took over 3 years to develop --- of course, during that time the Intel migration was planned for, so I am sure that somewhere in the building in Cupertino someone has a fast Intel Mac pushing those big RAW files around using Aperture.

If Aperture took 3 years (and I don't doubt it), it is really impressive how well the project was guarded. I plan to buy a Nikon D200 in January and will switch almost entirely to RAW if Aperture can truly turn RAW into a piece of cake.

Has that stopped me from ordering a loaded Quad? Nope, I'll ride out the first Intel PowerMac Rev or two, but I may replace the old Lapzilla PB with an Intel version after the dust settles, .

I am going to wait until Macworld San Fran before making my next purchase decision. Apple's strategy for 2006 may be more fully disclosed at that time, and I will make a decision on that information.

Actually the difficulty I am having is in making a recommendation to one of my grad students who has gotten hooked by using one of the lab iBooks after her PC laptop croaked. Can't decide whether she should wait for one of the rumored 13" widescreens... ARGH.

January is just around the corner. If she can wait, it might be well worth it.

 

[panda]

exactly - buying is what its all about

They will probably switch for a new case design though, nothing screams "buy buy buy" more than a *new case*!

it would seem that apple's prime concern is selling as many computers as possible.
the risk with the transition and the first anoncement thereto is that sales slow. the worst case scenario being that sales slow lots, for a long time. in my opinion the key strategy behind the transition is based on; how to to avoid a big dropoff in sales?
i think the sales optimization can be broken down into 2 parts: software compatability and transition time.

1. software compatability
one way to minimize slower sales, is to make sure that ppcs remain useful even beyond the transition. this would mean continuing to upgrade them, but most importantly, ensuring software compatability. if i knew that a powerbook bought today, would continue to be supported for the next few years, with new releases of existing software (preferably x86 and ppc compatible), then buying, or owning a ppc now, is quite desirable. (is it indeed the case that upcoming software releases from apple and others are intended to be compatible for both platforms???). we know that rosetta allows an x86 to run ppc software, but will new versions of software be made to run on ppc as well as x86??? CAN ANYONE CLARIFY THIS???
software compatability is also key, for it allows larger organizations running a number of macs, to transition slowly, by evolviing over time to the new platform, rather than having to make a decision to be either ppc, or x86 and to make a costly transition in one go.

2. transition time
ever since the transition announcement, the question has been; buy now or wait (as pointed out above, software compatability, if it exists, can ease the hesitance to buy now)?
the longer the time lapse since the announcement, the greater the reluctance to buy. once the first intelmacs appear, the reluctance to buy ppc will increase much much more. that being the case, it would make sense to do two things: transition the computers with the biggest impact on the bottom line first (in other words transition the most profitable computer segments first and perhaps those that have suffered most by declining sales due to the announcement)... and make sure that the others follow on as quickly as possible. if it is the case that pbooks and imacs are the most valuable segment, then transition them first.

in this scenario, ensuring that the transition time for the whole range, once the first macintels ship, is kept as short as possible, is the critical factor.

i would not be overly concerned about which programs have been converted to run on the x86 first, because, most users will gladly trade off a slower performance, using rosetta for some time, while being secure in the knowledge that once the software is updated, that they are using a computer that will run faster and be forward compatible for many years to come.

as for any form factor changes? certainly, if you want to make a big ado about the transition, then new designs are the way to go.

 

[GonzoRob]

at a guess , what speed processors do people think Apple will use?
With intel macs, all I want is something that can run Steam via winex
Also a 13" PB with a faster GFX card would be fantastic - i'd buy one in a shot..

Rob

 

[ksz]

2. transition time
ever since the transition announcement, the question has been; buy now or wait (as pointed out above, software compatability, if it exists, can ease the hesitance to buy now)?
the longer the time lapse since the announcement, the greater the reluctance to buy. once the first intelmacs appear, the reluctance to buy ppc will increase much much more. that being the case, it would make sense to do two things: transition the computers with the biggest impact on the bottom line first (in other words transition the most profitable computer segments first and perhaps those that have suffered most by declining sales due to the announcement)... and make sure that the others follow on as quickly as possible. if it is the case that pbooks and imacs are the most valuable segment, then transition them first.

in this scenario, ensuring that the transition time for the whole range, once the first macintels ship, is kept as short as possible, is the critical factor.

i would not be overly concerned about which programs have been converted to run on the x86 first, because, most users will gladly trade off a slower performance, using rosetta for some time, while being secure in the knowledge that once the software is updated, that they are using a computer that will run faster and be forward compatible for many years to come.

Well said. Actually, quite well said.

 

[Roller]

I still can't get over the 20-25% thinner bit! It's so thin and elegant now! 1 inches and made of Aluminum... NO ONE in the industry does it with Apple's grace. Can Apple seriously top the current design?? If it can be done it goes to show how old the G4 really is in terms of size!!

I wouldn't mind a thinner, lighter PowerBook, but it's going to be hard to do that and maintain overall rigidity.

Also, although I liked the way my 15" aluminum PB looked new, it was pretty scratched up after only a few months - my old Lombard looked better after a few years. I also hope that they can come up with a better latch.

 

[AidenShaw]

at a guess, what speed processors do people think Apple will use?

The same speed chips that HP, Dell, Lenovo and everyone else is running!

   Intel® Pentium® Processor EE 840, 3.20GHz, Dual Core, HT, 2X1MB, 800 [add $1,139]  
   Intel® Pentium® D Processor 840, 3.20GHz, DC, 2X 1MB L2, 800MHz [add $509]  
   Intel® Pentium® D Processor 830, 3.00GHz, DC, 2X 1MB L2, 800MHz [add $279]  
   Intel® Pentium® D Processor 820, 2.80GHz, DC, 2X 1MB L2, 800MHz [add $179]  
   Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 670, 3.80GHz, 2MB L2, 800MHz [add $549]  
   Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 660, 3.60GHz, 2MB L2, 800MHz [add $349]  
   Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 650, 3.40GHz, 2MB L2, 800MHz [add $199]  
   Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 640, 3.20GHz, 2MB L2, 800MHz [add $59]  
   Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 630, 3.00GHz, 2MB L2, 800MHz [Included in Price]  
 

   Dual-Core Intel® Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2x2MB L2 cache [add $1,150]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 3.80GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [add $930]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 3.60GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [add $520]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 3.40GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [add $260]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 3.20GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [add $130]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 3.00GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [add $60]  
   Intel® Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2MB L2 Cache [Included in Price]
 

   Intel® Pentium® M Processor 740 (1.73GHz) 14.1 SXGA+, RADEON X300 [add $110]  
   Intel® Pentium® M Processor 750 (1.86GHz) 14.1 SXGA+, RADEON X300 [add $160]  
   Intel® Pentium® M Processor 760 (2.00GHz) 14.1 SXGA+, RADEON X300 [add $240]  
   Intel® Pentium® M Processor 770 (2.13GHz) 14.1 SXGA+, RADEON X300 [add $390]

I'm not claiming that Apple will use Netburst-based chips, I'm just showing that most of the current Intel vendors have an option for each speed chip. Wonder if Apple will stick to good/better/best/ultimate or if a BTO system will have a menu option for chip speeds.

BTW, on the first (a Dell PW380) it only costs $279 to upgrade from a 3GHz single core to 3GHz dual core, not bad.


Intel has a flash movie comparing single core, hyper-threading and dual core - http://www.intel.com/personal/desktop/pentium_d/demo/popup/demo.htm

 

[Roller]

1. software compatability
(is it indeed the case that upcoming software releases from apple and others are intended to be compatible for both platforms???). we know that rosetta allows an x86 to run ppc software, but will new versions of software be made to run on ppc as well as x86??? CAN ANYONE CLARIFY THIS???

If it's as easy to compile universal binaries as we've been told, it'd be silly for vendors not to do that for the next three or four years, at least. The installed base will be mostly PPC for a long time, so anyone who released an Intel-only software would be giving up a large potential market.

2. transition time
ever since the transition announcement, the question has been; buy now or wait (as pointed out above, software compatability, if it exists, can ease the hesitance to buy now)?
the longer the time lapse since the announcement, the greater the reluctance to buy. once the first intelmacs appear, the reluctance to buy ppc will increase much much more. that being the case, it would make sense to do two things: transition the computers with the biggest impact on the bottom line first (in other words transition the most profitable computer segments first and perhaps those that have suffered most by declining sales due to the announcement)... and make sure that the others follow on as quickly as possible. if it is the case that pbooks and imacs are the most valuable segment, then transition them first.

I agree that they'll shoot for a fast transition, doing one or two product lines at a time - Apple probably doesn't have the resources for an all-at-once switch. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the entire transition goes more quickly that we expected.

 

[AidenShaw]

it's not

If it's as easy to compile universal binaries as we've been told....

Well...

http://news.com.com/Chizen+on+Apple+MacTel+switch+not+easy/2100-1046_3-5844899.html

Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen recently met with CNET News.com.... During the interview, he offered insights into Apple Computer's switch to Intel chips.

Q: I wanted to get your take on Apple's switch to Intel. How difficult is the process of migrating apps from platform to platform?

Chizen: Steve (Jobs) likes to trivialize the process and make it seem easy, but moving the apps over is not that easy...Getting over to MacTel is work.

 

[Roller]

Well...

Yes, but once you've done the work of getting your software to run on Intel, it shouldn't be that difficult to also keep it running on PPC.