Intel Powerbook and iMac in January?

[Marx55]

Besides, remember that Apple does not have to worry and invest on development of the logic board. Intel does it. Apple will use Intel logic boards on Mactels.

So apple just makes the case design, the OS and little more. That can speed up new Mac releses tremendously.

Expect to see new Mac models every few months once Mactel tales over on 2006. As in the PC-Windoze world.

A new bright future is ahead. And the possibility to dual or triple booting as Mac-Win-Linux is fantastic and will sell many many many Mactels around the world. I only hope that one could switch between OSes without rebooting the whole system. Much as Classic woks now, but a full native speed, of course.

 

[macorama]

January is just too far ahead of schedule. Even if Apple could, I don't think they would release that soon. Besides, just AFTER Christmas? That doesn't make any sense.

You mean like when the Mac Mini was announced? Just after christmas this year?

 

[Abstract]

So, Apple is about to launch Intel based hardware as early as January? Has anyone even thought that this may be academic if the OS is not ready yet? As of now, both are at 10.4.3 as far as features go, but spend even a second at the relevant forums and you can see that there is still a lot of work to do to get OS X86 ready for the market. iTunes is rumoured to have been ported to Intel, but apart from iPhoto, the rest of the iApps are still PPC, to say nothing of the rest of Apple's stable of applications.

iTunes and everything has been ported to Intel. iLife uses universal binaries, no? That means iTunes, iPhoto, and probably everything else.

In fact, OSX is also ready for Intel. Steve even said OSX was always designed with PPC and x86 in mind. He also used an Intel Mac during his keynote when he announced this.

 

[dontmatter]

The biggest issue with the Mactel transition is not the hardware. It is the availability of native Mactel software.

So, releasing Mactels ASAP would accelerate the release of native Mactel applications. And meanwhile you have Rosetta to run at decent speed legacy PowerPC code. No problem.

So, think different!

All Mactels are coming in 2006 or not later than January 2007.

Yes and no. New mactels will not have much software support, and so will loose sales of non-early adopter types (though, early adopters make up a large portion of the mac community). So people hoping for a whole new lineup early... not gonna happen. But two computers, so you can buy a desktop or a laptop from either maker, is perfect. Brings the software out sooner, gets a test audience for it, but doesn't increase risk. If all goes well, they accelerate it, and ship a lot of units early-if software is slow to move, there are bugs, and the quad powermacs turn out to still be faster, then they move as slow as they can, and make everyone happy.

But yeah, I say they're guarenteed to introduce earlier than they said they would, because if they didn't, people would know updates were coming, and sales would plummet, and then if the transition turns rough, you've got a major problem. But if people expect six months until intel, why not buy a PPC mac for christmas? And then pop out the intels early, and you avoid a major part of slowed sales from people waiting. So if there are roadblocks, they'll make their promise (also that reason, they want room for error), and if there aren't many, they'll beat it signifigantly, that's how it's planned.

 

[Hiroshige]

Anik,


The bottom line is, if a purchase is not going to make you happy, then don't do it.

 

[Bonte]

Ppc - X86

Why not keep the PPC in production?

Developers would be forced to support both architectures and maybe PPC has a surprise for us in a few years, why not support the PS3 to gain market share and create a buzz in the gaming industry.

 

[Henri Gaudier]

Can't be true..

with how stingy Apple are at upgrades there about a year of upgrades left in the iMac if not more. We know there's a 2.7 G5 and we've had it a while so now behind the scenes or in a year, what will be available? So, even as it stands we can expect a small incremantal drift up to 2.7 in say .. 3 revisions? If not, why not give the iMac now the 2.3 & 2.7? If the line is finished let's have 'em and just watch those Christmas sales fly.

The real contender has to be the Power(Ha ha)Book. This thing has been stuck in the mud for 2 years.

 

[ksz]

Why not keep the PPC in production?

For how much longer?

It becomes extremely cost-ineffective to support 2 processor architectures with two different roadmaps for next-generation features, power dissipation, and performance, and design and debug 2 motherboards and 2 chipsets for every model, and maintain supplier relationships with 2 different vendors, coordinate the release dates of nextgen Intel and PPC so as not to alienate the PPC-Mac buyers nor the Intel-Mac buyers, etc.

Developers would be forced to support both architectures and maybe PPC has a surprise for us in a few years, why not support the PS3 to gain market share and create a buzz in the gaming industry.

One has to cut their losses and move on. You have to trim and focus. Change is always hard, but change passes and everyone moves on.

 

[shadowmoses]

I dont know why apple are so keen to keep updating the iMac, it seems to be updated far more than any other mac.....Maybe becuase they see it as a route to encourage switchers??

Shadow

 

[yoak]

I don´t see the point (as many on this board do) for Apple to keep upgrading their computers with PPC chips AFTER they have started the switch to Intel.

Why would you put a G5 2.7 in the iMac if you have chips provided buy Intel available?

Do they have huge stocks of PPC chips sitting around?
Seems unlikley as they have known of the switch for a god while now

 

[rdowns]

Apple exists to grow shareholder value. They have done a remarkable job doing this over the past 2+ years with their stock going from $22.50 to $61.50 ($123.00 adjusted for the stock split) since 9/2003. This has been fueled not only by explosive iPod sales but record Mac sales. (about 700,000-800,00 a quarter for 2002-2004 and then exploding to well over a million for all of 2005) These record Mac sales have occurred with many glitches (no iMac for sale as the G5 is delayed, anemic PM updates, anemic PB updates) and with knowledge of the Intel transition for over 6 months.

Their stock is still rising nicely with expectations of continuing record iPod sales and increased Mac sales. What to do after Christmas? The business story then will be the Intel transition. Apple needs to move as quick as they can or their stock may tumble as huge profits are taken by long holders.

Apple announces results on or about January 15th. Excellent numbers are expected for the xmas selling season. Can you imagine the buzz if the beginning of the Intel transition were to be announced a week or so before the results?

From the business side of the equation, I think significant Intel related announcements will happen in January. Apple is bold, why not do it in your best selling lines (iMac and PB)? Recall the discontinuance of the iPod mini, the best selling one and its replacement with the nano. Apple needs to be bold in their transition. Doing the Mac mini first would be a poor business move. Would say to me that we don't have much faith in our early transition and we're doing it on a low risk product.

 

[sancgreal]

new line of mac computers? or new additions to the line?

Maybe that they'll just add one to the iMac line. hmmm how about an iMac 30" mactel!

or maybe create a new set of computers: the "Mactel family"
consisting of a new mactel laptop (the 13" widescreen ibook/powerbook), mactel iMac (30" iMac)

it'd be cool to have black versions of the iBooks too like the new iPods

Thinner laptops? maybe that comes later

 

[bigandy]

I can see them dropping the bomb of a dual core intel powered iMac in January, surpassing the power of most peecee desktops, just so they can give everyone the finger.

I can also see the intel PowerBook arriving, people going "ok we really needed that, the powerbook was getting stale", and then thinking "well what are we going to run on it?".

that's when Apple mention the intel optomised versions of FCP, Motion, DVDSP, iLife '06, and then bring on stage a few "industry colleagues", announcing intel versions of MS Office for Mac, Macromedia products, and maybe a suprise Photoshop announcement, a la "there won't be an ipod video".

If they announced intel versions of Final Cut Studio, i'd probably shoot out and buy one pretty quickly, as FCP even faster would be great, and Motion can always do with more power...

 

[shanmui1]

Hey my first post here.

What about the GPU? If the new intel iMac is coming out in january, any chance for something midway decent like x800? If they put that in there I will buy at once!

 

[Will Cheyney]

I believe that all G4 models will be replaced first with Intel chips. The G4 is what, a 6-year old processor.
With the iMac and PowerMac already having faster and more capable chipsets, I imagine these will be updated after.

The recent PowerBook updates were only slight - much like the revision before that. We got what... brighter screens? Not much of an update really, more of a short-sighted encouragement to make people desire a new one.

The iMac however was more significantly updated. With the introduction of a thinner form-factor, integrated iSight and 'Media Centre' approach, Apple wouldn't have R&D'd that much for only 2 months worth of sales.

My betting on the Intel-front is on a 'Media Centre' (Front Row and remote Mac Mini and new re-styled PowerBooks - both with Intel chips, obviously.

 

[splintah]

imagine

a 13" widescreen powerbook
with a dualcore processor
25% thiner than current 12"

maybe with upgradeable interchangeable pci-express graphics chip

and wasnt there some buzz that you can run 2 os on those dualcore chips simultaniously

so i could switch to win for a prog which isnt available for intelOSX yet like switching programs with expose
because osx an win run simultaniously

i do not want to use win
but for me as a 3d artist there are a lot of progs not available for the mac
and at the beginning there would be a lot of progs not yet available for the intelOSX

so overall
i think thats gonna be great

 

[denial]

imagine

a 13" widescreen powerbook
with a dualcore processor
25% thiner than current 12"

maybe with upgradeable interchangeable pci-express graphics chip

and wasnt there some buzz that you can run 2 os on those dualcore chips simultaniously

so i could switch to win for a prog which isnt available for intelOSX yet like switching programs with expose
because osx an win run simultaniously

i do not want to use win
but for me as a 3d artist there are a lot of progs not available for the mac
and at the beginning there would be a lot of progs not yet available for the intelOSX

so overall
i think thats gonna be great

It all sounds great. If this was announced I would RUN down to the Apple store and purchase.

 

[ksz]

Hey my first post here.

What about the GPU? If the new intel iMac is coming out in january, any chance for something midway decent like x800? If they put that in there I will buy at once!

Me too. Apple could move to Intel with a big splash, but from the AppleInsider article it appears that no new features will appear, only a new processor. I hope that is not the case and that Apple does introduce at least one new iMac which gives a good jolt to the system...e.g. dual core Yonah, X800 Pro, and SATA-II.

AppleInsider
According to sources familiar with Apple's plans, the first Intel iMac won't usher in a slew of new bells and whistles, and instead will be based largely on the design and feature set of the current iMac. In fact, recent rumblings reveal that Apple will reuse the 'media center' iMac enclosure introduced at last month's special event in San Jose, Calif.

 

[lopresmb]

Woah! Time to sell my POS powerbook!

The laptop which can't even play Battlestar Galactica DVD without pops and stutters!

I'll give you $5 to take the trouble off your hands

 

[oober_freak]

Anyone else look at this newbiees other posts...not one positive thing, all bashing...listen, Bill, you mind if I call you Bill? No? Ok, Mr. Prince of Darkness, you mind if I call you Mr. Prince of Darkness? No? Ok, well, anywho...SHUSH!

But, he has a valid point.

I agree the laptops will benefit with the pentium M processors in them. But how would apple explain going back to 32-bit processors with Yonah for the iMacs? Or are they getting the Meroms early?

If they're going to put Yonahs on the iMac I guess they'll have to explain real hard why they went back to 32 bit from the 64 bit G5s

Also, the iMac will be one of the very few if not the only desktop computer using pentium M processors sold commercially.

 

[rockthecasbah]

Just AFTER christmas is the best time to release stuff. Apple's a hot brand, people want it, and are going to get it for christmas sales. It's always a strong quarter. You can sell the same old thing, as long as it's still considered OK, at maximum profit margin. But as soon as christmas is done, wallets become tight... introducing a new product opens them up, gives you a major edge in the quarter when everybody else is hurting. Also, Apple has the power to make people buy on an update, whereas the cycles are far less important on PCs. Also, apple always has trouble ramping production up fast enough, so starting that time of year ensures that you still get the buzz, but most people don't buy until spring, when things are all up and running.

Remember last year? The mini, the shuffle, iwork, several other software bits, I believe?

Notice-there are sales, on almost everything, almost every time of year. But leading up to christmas? Full retail, because people are willing to pay it. As soon as it's done, sales go on, to boost numbers. Apple's working that.

It sounds like a great plan to me, though I'm not sure they should leave the iBook until after the imac-seems to me like their most popular portable, though consenus seems to be that the powerbook is.

Good points, but also with people not knowing of eminent updates, they will buy up the current stocks of the present machines, helping Apple to have less old-revisions in stock when the new machines are announced.

 

[lopresmb]

The rumermill's wheels begin to build momentum

woohoo, the massive rumermill has started and will be in full swing until Jan '06 (and longer assuming that we are going to see a steady stream of macs coming out). I tell you what, 2006 is going to be a fun year no matter how you look at it. We are going to see entirely new product lines launches, fastest Macs ever built, and who knows what else.

All grumbling and speculation about specs and release order aside, I'm just looking forwars to what Apple is going to do. It ought to be a really cool show to watch, for quite a while.

P.S. Anyone with a iSight iMac - check this out..
--Apparently the Photobooth App is the FIRST officially released INTEL AND POWERPC compiled program. Just go to get info about that app and apparently it will tell you that it was created using a universay bianary and able to run natively on both systems. I thought this was pretty dag on cool.....

 

[ksz]

...But how would apple explain going back to 32-bit processors with Yonah for the iMacs? Or are they getting the Meroms early?

If they're going to put Yonahs on the iMac I guess they'll have to explain real hard why they went back to 32 bit from the 64 bit G5s

The iMac barely gets up to 4GB physical memory and is not meant for 64-bit applications that require direct access to more than 2^32 bytes (4GB) of physical memory. Putting a 32-bit Yonah in an iMac is not a downgrade at all.

Also, the iMac will be one of the very few if not the only desktop computer using pentium M processors sold commercially.

There is nothing wrong with using a mobile processor in a desktop. The cramped enclosure of the iMac requires a cool-running processor. Yonah can give the iMac just what it needs: High compute-power with low electric-power -- i.e. good performance per watt.

 

[MacEyeDoc]

oh, you poor souls clinching your brand new Powerbooks. have you already forgotten the TITANIUM POWERBOOK HISTORY? DANG! I got my first Mac, a super-loaded GHz Tibook, in November of 2003, literally days after they were announced. and that was actually a reasonable upgrade--you know, they sped up the processor some 'n' stuff.

NOT TWO MONTHS LATER.... MWSF.. oh, gee, 12 and 17 inch aluminum powerbooks! now granted, it was a good long while before the 15 inch one saw the light of day, but it's not at all outside the realm of possibility that they would do something crazy like update the powerbooks a lot sooner than you think... and I would be thoroughly unsurprised if it was the 12 inch powerbook that saw one of the first MacIntel conversions--It would be their coolest laptop by far if it were widescreen and fast, and 1 inch thin like the other ones.

Not that I would give any credence to this article, which I regard as mere speculation by someone who's about as in-the-know as 75% of the people that read MacRumors, but still, just because the powerbooks were recently updated doesn't mean that they won't be among the first to see the new Intel processors. And rightfully so, because they're really hurting badly on performance, and laptops are probably the most important line of computers to have be attractive, especially when you're trying to woo a halo effect out of a bunch of iPod junkies. How would it be if they upgraded the iBook first? it's hard enough to distinguish those two lines as it is!

Ed: and yes, gammamonk, they announced those AlBooks in January, just a few weeks after Christmas...

He's right, gammamonk - Apple will have no qualms about updated something in January - they've done it before.

 

[djdarlek]

NOT TWO MONTHS LATER.... MWSF.. oh, gee, 12 and 17 inch aluminum powerbooks! now granted, it was a good long while before the 15 inch one saw the light of day, but it's not at all outside the realm of possibility that they would do something crazy like update the powerbooks a lot sooner than you think...

Like killing off one of the world's fastest selling music players in favour of a completely redesigned model? [ipod mini - nano anyone?]