Intel PowerMacs? Apple Phone? MacBooks Ship Date?

[Multimedia]

Want 17" MacBook Pro with FW 800 Back In

i just want my macbook pro right now

Yeah so do I. But they have yet to announce a 17" model with FW 800 back in it.

 

[p0intblank]

September... not bad. I hate waiting, though!

 

[~Shard~]

This shouldn't come as a huge surprise. Adobe will not be natively supporting Intel on Macs until CS3 (this has been stated already) hence the Rosetta emulation, and Conroe is ahead of schedule, which is why we'd be seeing Intel PowerMacs in the fall as opposed to early 2007, like initially speculated.

It's all good.

 

[KindredMAC]

Which products do you think they've delivered ahead of time?

Surely you don't believe the RDF from Jobs about the Intel iMac and MacBook Pro's being ahead of time? Truth is that it's more likely Apple were waiting on Intel.

You are correct. I can't think of a single thing, hardware related, that Apple has actually been on time delivering.

It still all boils down to what I call the "Scotty Philosophy" from Star Trek:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Scott
Read the second sentence.

 

[Multimedia]

FS-Dual 2.5 GHz G5 Loaded, Moving to QUAD 2.5 Now

The PowerMac transition is dictated by Conroe I would think. And I have heard nothing more solid than "second half of 2006" on that front. Anyone know something more recent? I'd HOPE for summer Conroe, but fall seems as likely as not.

The reasons the iBook couldn't go Intel first are:

* Waiting for Core Solo I think, as you say.

* And making them outrun the pro PowerBooks (which Core Duo does for native apps) wouldn't make sense.

I thinik it is not realistic to believe that Intel PowereMacs will ship this year at all. Moreover, by this Fall we will mostly be waiting for Leopard 10.5 to ship with them early next year after the 2007 MacWorld Expo. I'm focusing on aquiring Quad 2.5 PPC for the next year's use or beyond.

Just need to sell my dual 2.5 right now. I've listed it in the marketplace section here if anyone is interested.

 

[aswitcher]

September? Eh, we don't expect them til late anyway, plus it's hard to put much value into the prediction because it is so far away. Nothing much here.

I would think Steve would want them for WWDC 06'

 

[muffinman]

great. i expect itll be "promac" or somthing instead of powermac.

 

[Regular_John]

seems to me that calling it a macbook "pro" is rather misleading since pros can't really use it

 

[abzfigo99]

Is the 3-4 week delay for Macbook Pros ordered today likely to have any impact on pending announcements for new products (Macbook/Mini/Other) in late Feb/March, leading up to Apple's 30th Birthday?

Also, would anyone know if this MBP delay is supply-side-related (production), or caused by excess demand?!

 

[faintember]

seems to me that calling it a macbook "pro" is rather misleading since pros can't really use it

It is a bit disturbing isnt it?
I am in desperate need for more speed (as are others) but that extra speed doesnt do me much good if the app has to be emulated. I hope other pro apps are converted faster than CS.

 

[Multimedia]

FS Dual 2.5 G5 Loaded

Not gonna happen... Have to wait for CS3.
Check it out, click on the first result link:
http://busca.adobe.com/search?site=...m.xsl&restrict=Adobe_com&q=Mac,+Intel&x=0&y=0

This is why I am going out and buying a PowerMac G5 Saturday. I've been saving up and I'm taking the plunge. All my graphics software, CS2 and Studio 8, are PowerPC based and I don't need to upgrade any of it until next year, but I need the power now.

Hey, a Dual Core 2GHz G5 and the potential of 16GB Ram will be all I need for the next 3-5 years until I'm ready to upgrade my hardware again.

When the MacBook (iBook) comes out, I will get that to replace my current iBook. Only need it for email, surfing and road trips. Don't need it to be a work horse.

Want to buy a dual 2.5 G5 Loaded for less money? I have one for sale. Sent you a private message with my email address.

 

[Regular_John]

It is a bit disturbing isnt it?
I am in desperate need for more speed (as are others) but that extra speed doesnt do me much good if the app has to be emulated. I hope other pro apps are converted faster than CS.

Yup, I'm thinking my monies are gonna go for a g4 powerbook rather than a macbook pro seeing as if I'm gonna be shelling out a few thousand for a laptop it would be nice to be able to do my job with it.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Which products do you think they've delivered ahead of time?

Surely you don't believe the RDF from Jobs about the Intel iMac and MacBook Pro's being ahead of time? Truth is that it's more likely Apple were waiting on Intel.

The first things would be OSX, though at the time it was introduced it wasn't fully functional, it is now the standard for Operating systems. Let's not argue the minutiae, OSX took the lead in what it does.

The iPod, combined with iTunes. Bug winner.

The new iMac and the new Macbook, maybe not ahead of when you thought they should have been delivered, but they were ahead of when the market thought they would be delivered.

Even if Apple were waiting was waiting on Intel, that is different from what was expected of Apple.

The fact is, in a short period of time after Apple announced the switch, the transition started. It's not common among the majority of companies that exist these days.

The fact that OSX was dually developed to take advantage of what was to become to the better chip technology? who else has done that?

There are many aspects to consider, whether it be chip technology, computer design, or the software, Apple is delivering the technology first. The delivery of the product is practically on time with the delivery of the product.

Compare this to the competition. The competition has not indicated that they care enough about competing technologies to develop software in tandem.

Beyond that, they have not even been able to deliver their new software (which is not that much different what Apple already has delivered) within a half decade (and counting) of when OSX arrived.

There is a difference in time from when Apple was expected to deliver their first Intel based computers, and when they did.

What Apple was doing behind the scenes is a whole different matter. Apple delivered to the market before most (if any) thought they were going to be able to.

In that regard, they are ahead of what people have been expecting from them. They've delivered, and the products have been good.

Contrast that against competing companies who have had the same opportunity to play the same game, few have been able to do what Apple has done.

 

[Mechcozmo]

In terms of a new PowerMac...
I'd like to see a Quad PowerMac with a Core Duo and a Dual-Core G5 in it. It would be the best of both worlds, and the fastest Mac. It would also be future-compatible for years to come.

It'd be a pain in the ass to assemble though, which is why I doubt we would see it.

But if anyone could pull together a Quad Combo box, I'd bet on Apple.

 

[danielwsmithee]

February 28th

My good friend just ordered a MacBook Pro, he was quoted a ship date of on or before February 28th. That seams to jive with the 2-3 weeks.

 

[laidbackliam]

In terms of a new PowerMac...
I'd like to see a Quad PowerMac with a Core Duo and a Dual-Core G5 in it.

you know, that'd be cool if it were possible to put two architechtures on the same board (not trying to be sarcastic). honestly, that would be cool. i'm just glad that i'm not going to need any pro apps anytime soon.... go macbook.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Which products do you think they've delivered ahead of time?

Surely you don't believe the RDF from Jobs about the Intel iMac and MacBook Pro's being ahead of time? Truth is that it's more likely Apple were waiting on Intel.

I realize your point though, marketing aside, what if Apple is only delivering only they really thought they could deliver on time. In that respect, they should only be given credit for the fact that they are meeting internal goals for what they know is achievable. It's a much more sober analysis of what they are actually doing.

Putting all Apple adoration aside, it can be seen as Apple simply achieving (for the most part) all of the internal goals laid out for the company.

Under promising and over delivering is a line Steve Case was using in his heyday and based upon what he has done since, just a feel good sales pitch.

But perhaps in mockery of that, Apple has managed to do that, realization of the marketing aspects aside.

When compared to all competing companies though, Apple is delivering products in a more timely manner than those competing with Apple. That much can be said. The transition, considering what is being undertaken, is not going too badly. It's not like Microsoft has even had those issues to deal with when getting Longhorn/Vista onto the market.

Longhorn/Vista has long been promised and not yet delivered. In the meantime, OS security appears to be viewed as a new source of revenue for the competition.

Don't tell me that that is not another aspect where Apple is ahead of the game.

Marketing aside, there is a clear advantage in one over the other, one is being used and the other is still being promised. If nothing else, Apple delivered.

 

[Tux Kapono]

Whoever in the AppleInsider article quoted "spring 2007 for CS3" clearly failed at math.

Adobe CS2 was announced April 4, 2005.
Adobe holds tight to their 18-24 month timeline between revisions.

That adds up to CS3 coming out as early as October 2006 or as late as April 2007. I wouldn't call that range 'spring 2007', more like 'winter 2006'.

 

[MacCheetah3]

Hi

and getting a G5 wouldn't make sense at this point.

I disagree. While IBM may very well be stubborn about putting R & D to a portable alternative, they still have the best chips for desktops. The PowerPC 970 and the Apple designed system controller to go along with it are superior in many ways to Intel's. I won't go into the whole reasoning, ... for the Intel switch but it certainly was not because the G5 was a slouch. A Quad would be nothing less than a great investment right now.

 

[Tegosaurus]

On MacBidouille.com some readers are reporting they received mails from Apple stating that the MacBook Pros they ordered on the keynote day will be shipped on the 28th of february, instead of the first announced 7th of february, because of bigger than expected demand. Arrival date is set to 3th of march...

La demande pour le produit que vous avez commandé ayant dépassé nos prévisions, nous ne pourrons vous livrer dans les délais prévus initialement. Nous envisageons désormais un envoi le 28.02.2006 .
Nous estimons qu'elle devrait vous être livrée à votre adresse de livraison aux alentours du 03.03.2006.....

I've also seen my order's shipment date at TechData (distributor) shift from 6th to 16th to 20th of february. Will try to get my shop to check it once more today... Of course that's only a distributor's wild guess of when they will be able to supply the resellers.

 

[Multimedia]

FS-Dual 2.5 GHz G5 Loaded, Moving to QUAD 2.5 Now

Hi

I disagree. While IBM may very well be stubborn about putting R & D to a portable alternative, they still have the best chips for desktops. The PowerPC 970 and the Apple designed system controller to go along with it are superior in many ways to Intel's. I won't go into the whole reasoning, ... for the Intel switch but it certainly was not because the G5 was a slouch. A Quad would be nothing less than a great investment right now.

Listed in the marketplace section here. I totally agree MacCheetah. Quad is where it's at now and probably for another year until Leopard 10.5 ships with a Quad and possably Dual Quad (8) core Intel Mac early next year. Anyone want to graduate to the Dual 2.5 loaded, please contact me off list.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Ummm....woot?

 

[Avicdar]

What about NAB and Powermacs?

The rumored Final Cut Extreme is said to be announced at NAB, and that it will be $10K. Some have speculated that means there will be a mandatory platform configuration of some sort in order to run/support it.

Does this mean a Final Cut Extreme spec'd powermac that is not available now?

Is it possible that Apple is going to be able to show a next gen intel chip running this upgraded suite? (i.e. is it possible that Intel has agreed to provide Apple with a handful of prototype chips for this purpose?) Maybe they would announce the configuration at NAB for shipment in late Summer of 06.

Or, if there are no chips ready to show, perhaps apple can hook up two powermacs together under the table to demonstrate the expected performance of the Intel based powermac running Final Cut Extreme. I have no idea how the next gen Intel chips will compare to the dual G5's, but am guessing Apple is going to want to configure the most kick ass powermac yet for this software (if it does indeed exist).

Thoughts on that?

 

[Multimedia]

Quad 2.5 G5 Should Be Enough For Final Cut Extreme

The rumored Final Cut Extreme is said to be announced at NAB, and that it will be $10K. Some have speculated that means there will be a mandatory platform configuration of some sort in order to run/support it.

Does this mean a Final Cut Extreme spec'd powermac that is not available now?

Is it possible that Apple is going to be able to show a next gen intel chip running this upgraded suite? (i.e. is it possible that Intel has agreed to provide Apple with a handful of prototype chips for this purpose?) Maybe they would announce the configuration at NAB for shipment in late Summer of 06.

Or, if there are no chips ready to show, perhaps apple can hook up two powermacs together under the table to demonstrate the expected performance of the Intel based powermac running Final Cut Extreme. I have no idea how the next gen Intel chips will compare to the dual G5's, but am guessing Apple is going to want to configure the most kick ass powermac yet for this software (if it does indeed exist).

Thoughts on that?

I'd be very surprised if the Quad 2.5 GHz G5 is not enough to run Final Cut Extreme on. I will be happy to be running Final Cut Studio on a Quad. I don't see Apple pre-announcing an Intel Quad processor PowerMac as early as April. That could hurt sales of dual core G5 PowerMacs for the remainder of the year.

 

[gugy]

I agree. The new PM Intel might only happen at the end of the year.
I wouldn't discard another revision for the PM G5 before Intel.
Professionals will not jump straight at the PM Intel until Adobe has all their main apps native Intel. No way. Nobody wants to be working under Rosetta in a professional environment.
I believe we might see new Apple video apps at NAB and maybe a new cinema display and a more powerful PM G5.