morespce54
macrumors 65816
that would make sense... 😉
but then, when was the last time you saw Apple lower prices on their computers? 😕
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's Upcoming Penryn Core 2 Duo Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
that would make sense... 😉
but then, when was the last time you saw Apple lower prices on their computers? 😕
morespce54
macrumors 65816
guzhogi
macrumors 68040
I just hope Apple updates its computers & software soon. Only the MacBooks & MacBook Pros were updated fairly recently (and the MacBook update was awful). We really need to see redesigned iMacs & Mac Pros. Both could use a major design overhaul. Apple Cinema Displays could use an update, too. I remember a thread a while ago w/ a mock-up of what a new iMac would look like. Kinda like a giant iPhone. Black rectangle w/ rounded corners w/ silver outline and speakers on either side. I liked that. Add an iSight, couple of USB 2 & Firewire 400 & 800 ports. Awesome! The displays really need to up the resolution. The current 17" MBP has a higher resolution than the current 20" ACD. Here's what I'd like to see in an iMac:
-No chin
-User upgradeable hard drive, CPU & graphics
-Blu-Ray/HD-DVD BTO option
Mac Pro:
-SLI/CrossFire graphics option (w/ 2 x16 PCIe ports, not 2 x8 used as 1 x16)
-More optical drive bays
-Blu-Ray/HD-DVD BTO option
I'd also like to see an upgraded xServe & xServe RAID. The RAID really needs to upgrade to SATA and/or SAS. iLife & iWork also need to be updated, but I see those as needing Leopard. I also hope the next version of the Mac OS (10.6? 11?) drops PowerPC support and go Intel all the way (preferably even drop original Core Duo & Solo procs). The PowerPC Macs are getting old & slow. Plus, Mac OS X (or whatever it'll be called) will become a lot more efficient & faster once we go to a single platform.
I remember hearing about possibly going to carbon nanotubes for use in transistors. Procs would be a lot faster, cooler & power efficient if we used those. According to Wikipedia, carbon nanotube based procs can get up to 100s of GHz. 😀
-No chin
-User upgradeable hard drive, CPU & graphics
-Blu-Ray/HD-DVD BTO option
Mac Pro:
-SLI/CrossFire graphics option (w/ 2 x16 PCIe ports, not 2 x8 used as 1 x16)
-More optical drive bays
-Blu-Ray/HD-DVD BTO option
I'd also like to see an upgraded xServe & xServe RAID. The RAID really needs to upgrade to SATA and/or SAS. iLife & iWork also need to be updated, but I see those as needing Leopard. I also hope the next version of the Mac OS (10.6? 11?) drops PowerPC support and go Intel all the way (preferably even drop original Core Duo & Solo procs). The PowerPC Macs are getting old & slow. Plus, Mac OS X (or whatever it'll be called) will become a lot more efficient & faster once we go to a single platform.
I remember hearing about possibly going to carbon nanotubes for use in transistors. Procs would be a lot faster, cooler & power efficient if we used those. According to Wikipedia, carbon nanotube based procs can get up to 100s of GHz. 😀
Huh???
Many of the Macs have stayed on a 8 - 12 month updates. Isn't that about the same speed as before. The Intel Mac is the same as it has been since it shipped last Aug. Mine came on my wife's birthday in early Sep. There is nothing to update it to other that using more quad-core processors. Intel hasn't had any speed increases or platform changes yet. It culd easily go well over a year without an update. With no price changes for the existing Intel Mac Pros, the quad=core model didn't replace it just expanded the choices. For that reason I agree with those that say that the Intel Mac Pro has not been updated.
I like mine as it runs just as fast today as it did last Sep. In some ways faster as it now has 13 GB of memory, 2 750 GB Seagate hard drives for data storage & backup system files, 2 WD 150 GB RAPTOR DRIVES USED AS A RAID 0 Volume. Using 4 displays with an ATI X1900 & a purchase of someone that didn't wait for the ATI board, I added his Nvidia board for half of Apple's price.
Back when I sold computers the Windows arena were updated every 3 months & the Macs were updated every 6 months. Now Apples are going 8-12+ months before being updated. Is this slow down more the sign of a mature market rather than the manufacturer of the cpu?
Bill the TaxMan
Many of the Macs have stayed on a 8 - 12 month updates. Isn't that about the same speed as before. The Intel Mac is the same as it has been since it shipped last Aug. Mine came on my wife's birthday in early Sep. There is nothing to update it to other that using more quad-core processors. Intel hasn't had any speed increases or platform changes yet. It culd easily go well over a year without an update. With no price changes for the existing Intel Mac Pros, the quad=core model didn't replace it just expanded the choices. For that reason I agree with those that say that the Intel Mac Pro has not been updated.
I like mine as it runs just as fast today as it did last Sep. In some ways faster as it now has 13 GB of memory, 2 750 GB Seagate hard drives for data storage & backup system files, 2 WD 150 GB RAPTOR DRIVES USED AS A RAID 0 Volume. Using 4 displays with an ATI X1900 & a purchase of someone that didn't wait for the ATI board, I added his Nvidia board for half of Apple's price.
Back when I sold computers the Windows arena were updated every 3 months & the Macs were updated every 6 months. Now Apples are going 8-12+ months before being updated. Is this slow down more the sign of a mature market rather than the manufacturer of the cpu?
Bill the TaxMan
Core 3 would make the most sense given current naming scheme but who knows at this point...
iQuit: I have the same system, a CD MBP. Never seems slow to me unless I run some app with a memory leak and it pegs the two CPUs. Yes, Firefox and Safari, I'm talking about you.
The big question about the Penryn is not that its coming - we've all known that for a while - its what the clock speeds will be. Intel's been wanting to push desktop speeds to 4GHz for a long time. Will 2008 be the year they finally do it? And how about 3.2Ghz on a mobile?
The big question about the Penryn is not that its coming - we've all known that for a while - its what the clock speeds will be. Intel's been wanting to push desktop speeds to 4GHz for a long time. Will 2008 be the year they finally do it? And how about 3.2Ghz on a mobile?
InLikeALion
macrumors 6502a
Apple Price Drops
Hello, I've been a longtime lurker (pre-intel switch) and just decided to join.
With regards to Macs not reflecting Apple's price-breaks from intel, I have to hypothesis without much to back them up, but was wondering if they made sense to anyone else:
1) With the partnership between the two companies being so big, is there a chance that what Apple is originally priced for the chips already reflect the planned price breaks which later come to consumers and other oems?
2) I've thought that Apple might plan their product prices using an average of sorts - seems to me this might be a smart way of them to plan their price points: They sell their computers at a loss with regards to the processors when they first launch (what comes to mind is the incredible value the Mac Pro was shown to be over that Dell XPS system when it was announced), knowing that in a few months they will be gaining a huge margin on the then discounted prices.
This way at the beginning of the product cycle they have a lower profit margin (not getting as much money on the parts) but set low price points, and when other manufacturers lower their price points (and thus margin stays the same) Apple can keep their prices and make the same amount as their competitors, but it creates a stronger perceived product quality and branding.
There have been several times, including the quad 3Ghz Mac Pro's, when people were surprised to see such high end processors in new Apples because of the processor vendor pricing was so high. I feel like my #2 explains how they could get away with it.
What does everyone think?
Hello, I've been a longtime lurker (pre-intel switch) and just decided to join.
With regards to Macs not reflecting Apple's price-breaks from intel, I have to hypothesis without much to back them up, but was wondering if they made sense to anyone else:
1) With the partnership between the two companies being so big, is there a chance that what Apple is originally priced for the chips already reflect the planned price breaks which later come to consumers and other oems?
2) I've thought that Apple might plan their product prices using an average of sorts - seems to me this might be a smart way of them to plan their price points: They sell their computers at a loss with regards to the processors when they first launch (what comes to mind is the incredible value the Mac Pro was shown to be over that Dell XPS system when it was announced), knowing that in a few months they will be gaining a huge margin on the then discounted prices.
This way at the beginning of the product cycle they have a lower profit margin (not getting as much money on the parts) but set low price points, and when other manufacturers lower their price points (and thus margin stays the same) Apple can keep their prices and make the same amount as their competitors, but it creates a stronger perceived product quality and branding.
There have been several times, including the quad 3Ghz Mac Pro's, when people were surprised to see such high end processors in new Apples because of the processor vendor pricing was so high. I feel like my #2 explains how they could get away with it.
What does everyone think?
skellener
macrumors 68000
Yeah you think so?
If so, well, brace yourself, everyone. We're about to see:
Core
Core 2
Core 3
Core 4
in the next few years.
It's just like Pentium I, II, III, IV...
How fun...
InLikeALion
macrumors 6502a
Even if it sounds sort of gimmick-y, from a marketing standpoint I think it makes sense. The consumer can keep track and know which is which. Think about AMD' naming scheme - as just an occasional browser of their wares, I have know idea where their processors fall within their respective lines.
I remember being a kid when my friend showed me a computer with Pentium III processor, I reacted incredulously: "THREE? They just came out with TWO!" The naming convention made it seem like a huge step forward.
Porchland
macrumors 65816
Macworld in January could be insane -- depending in part on what does and doesn't come out between now and October.
We could see at Macworld:
* MacBook Pro updates,
* MacBook updates,
* an ultralight MacBook (maybe Sept./Oct),
* a (probably slight) iPhone update,
* Apple TV update (incl. content purchase from the box),
* movie rentals, and
* TV subscription package.
I think we'll get in Sept./Oct.:
* iPod widescreen,
* iLife 08,
* shiny new iMac,
* nano and shuffle bumps (maybe).
guzhogi
macrumors 68040
I'd also like to see TiVo/DVR functionality and maybe have it merge w/ the Mac Mini. Add better graphics and an HDMI port, and that would be great! The Mac Mini &
TV are great products and might be a great product if done together. Or a major flop. Not sure.
PCMacUser
macrumors 68000
How about Triad Core
Um, well considering the Triads are the Chinese equivalent of the Mafia... oh, maybe Triad Core
would be accurate! 😉I agree, but from a marketing standpoint they'd not want to release all of this at once. You want to constantly create awareness for your brand and keep the non-users thinking "Oh look, Apple's released another update! How ingenious and great of them to take care of the customers so regularly. Maybe I should switch too!" - so actually doing what Steve so eloquently "promised" at MW07 and hasn't happened really so far.
My thoughts are that this was the usual marketing babble, and Apple had to concentrate on the iPhone to release it as scheduled.
So at some point they better start releasing more Hardware (especially computers) or else they'll be undermining themselves and won't have a good bargaining point next Macworld.
Just my .02
iSee
macrumors 68040
I hate to say it, but what in the history of Apple's computers gave you the idea that they would ever put a strong 3D video card in a Mac?
It seems like Mac gaming is going through some kind of small renaissance right now, so your chances are better than ever, but I'd hardly bet money on it.
Good Point!
This is the reason that some people can use a computer thaat is several generations old & others need one that is still a couple of generations in the future. Everybody does something different with their computer. Plus they expect something different. Some only think of speed, others just want it to work.
For what I do most of the time my 17" PowerBook does all I need. If I didn't have to run Windows as much as I do, I'd not need the better QWindows operation of my Intel Mac Pro.
Your computer does what YOU ask of it & YOU are happy with & how it does it. Then no one that is really thinking could bad mouth or flame you. At one time we became Mac Users because we thought different. That really means that if we think different, I would expect you to think different than me & the next person. That does not make any of us right or wrong, it just makes us different.
Still thinking different after 23 years with a Mac.
Bill the TaxMan
This is the reason that some people can use a computer thaat is several generations old & others need one that is still a couple of generations in the future. Everybody does something different with their computer. Plus they expect something different. Some only think of speed, others just want it to work.
For what I do most of the time my 17" PowerBook does all I need. If I didn't have to run Windows as much as I do, I'd not need the better QWindows operation of my Intel Mac Pro.
Your computer does what YOU ask of it & YOU are happy with & how it does it. Then no one that is really thinking could bad mouth or flame you. At one time we became Mac Users because we thought different. That really means that if we think different, I would expect you to think different than me & the next person. That does not make any of us right or wrong, it just makes us different.
Still thinking different after 23 years with a Mac.
Bill the TaxMan
Maybe once or twice
They once did when they had no good advances but wanted the additional revenue of a new model. But Apple likes high profit margin items. AThis just goes with their operating model of charging what the Mac User will pay plus a little more, not what the market expects, wants or needs.
Bill the TaxMan
They once did when they had no good advances but wanted the additional revenue of a new model. But Apple likes high profit margin items. AThis just goes with their operating model of charging what the Mac User will pay plus a little more, not what the market expects, wants or needs.
Bill the TaxMan
I'm not talking about workstation and server Xeons as they are already 1333 FSB, i'm talking about desktop variants aka Conroe. There moving from 1066 FSB to 1333FSB right? Hmmmm DDR3 is too expensive at the moment.... So basically your telling me FSB (laptop) is 800mhz but when Penryn comes out it will be 1067FSB?