May 18th? G5 Updates?

[Digitalzoom]

I have been lurking around these forums for a few years now.
This is my first post.
Anyhow, I have been waiting for the 2nd Gen G5 since January - I decided to take the plunge and go for a dual 2 Gig with 128MB video & 250GB Sata HDD.
I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.

 

[PowerMacMan]

All this suspence is killing me! Especially when this is gonna be my first Apple Computer!

 

[aswitcher]

I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.

Could be a sign...but since Tuesday has past this week with no fan fair and the 17th is a Monday, I wouldn't old your breath.

 

[Borg3of5]

Something is going on.

I placed my order with Apple this morning for a refurbished Dual. 1.8, and refurbished 23" HD CD. I decided it wasn't a wise maneuver, so I called back to cancel.

The nice young man that answered the call offered to help me "save" on the system, but I politely declined.

Seems strange that a company that charges a premium for a quality system, would offer "savings" to a customer, especially since this was a refurbished system order. I'm sure this doesn't mean G5 updates soon, but it's quite strange nonetheless.

Anyone else have this experience?

 

[MacDaddie0]

I have been lurking around these forums for a few years now.
This is my first post.
Anyhow, I have been waiting for the 2nd Gen G5 since January - I decided to take the plunge and go for a dual 2 Gig with 128MB video & 250GB Sata HDD.
I placed the order 4th May - it was due to ship today. This afternoon I had a call from the Apple store telling me my Powermac won't ship until May 17th.
I was given no reason for this - but maybe...just maybe they are going to be upgraded before June 28th?
Anyhow I'd thought I'll let you guys know.

Perhaps it's coming from overseas?
I just ordered CTO on 10th and ship date is 19th(or before).
Before I was ordering, the website indicated 2~3 business days, but after ordered, it changed to 19th or before.

If this helps anything, also ordered an iPod, it's coming from China in 2 days.
I suspect powermacs are also coming from overseas. What do you all think?

 

[StudioGuy]

Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

 

[wdlove]

Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

We are just going to have to be patient. Those will be rewarded that wait!

 

[iriejedi]

4X in referb list

THis should come as no surprise - the 4X media has been in the referb section FOREVER - looks like they need to give away a 5 pack of 4X DVDs with each new monitor purchased to move inventory supplies of both!

Seeing that Apple just introduced 8x media, "certified for use in Apple 8x SuperDrive" and we don't have an PMs with 8x (yet), I hope this means they are coming SOON, May 18th or not.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

 

[StudioGuy]

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

Ah, I don't track eMac specs - got me there
Good point, oh well...still hoping.

 

[thatwendigo]

My personal view, is that Apple should take advantage of Microsoft's blunders with an aggressive " Try it, you'll like it campaign" including OSX bundled with Microsoft Office.

Many have mentioned that this might hurt Apple's hardware sales,
but I totally disagree.

On what grounds? The massive success of other OSes besides Windows on x86? The way that Dell has basically taken control of the hardware market and locked in with Intel and Microsoft in a triumverate?

Just how does this make any sense?

In the long run, I think offering OSX ported for Wintel P/C's would create a huge support network of additional hardware and software made for OSX and Apple would still benefit by offering the finest hardware available once those P/C users see how trouble free their existing system runs on OSX.

Offering OS X on Intel would turn the system into the modern day Amiga. The company itself would die, the Open Source parts would live on with enthusiasts who eventually have to figure out some way to keep it running, and then the market machine rolls over the corpse. The "trouble free" nature of OS X comes from not supporting insane numbers of hardware configurations, facing the bevy of malicious coders that can write on cheap hardware, and other luxuries we're afforded by our macs.

Remove them, and OS X becomes pretty Windows and nothing more.

I could also see a logical progression to an agreement between Apple and IBM to licence a line of IBM desktops to run on OSX, considering that
the heart of both systems shares the same processor.

Not while Jobs is at the helm, and there's good reason. Cloning nearly killed Apple in the mid to late 90s, and it would do it again if they were to open the hardware - as licensing or x86 on Intel would necessarily do.

Personal computers are simply a selection of parts in a box.

While all the bells and whistles make them attractive for the general public,
the operating system is what makes one combination of parts better than the other.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

There is a difference in hardware or there would be no reason to buy one processor over another, one motherboard over another. As any PC overclocker could tell you - parts make a huge difference in reliability and options available to you.

Don't believe me? Read this.

The brand of graphics card can make the difference in performance, heat, memory usage, and a whole other range of factors that can impact your system. Some are better designed than others, some are cheaper, some offer options others don't, but they're all the basic chipset.

I guess the OS is what enables those difference, though.

IF ( and it's a big IF ) Apple found a way to lock it's OS only to run on very specific machines, like IBM or AMD. Then that expanded market might convince companies like ATI to give OSX based machines first priority.

Like DeCSS, the lock would be broken and OS X would be pirated faster than you could possibly imagine. All it takes is one clever guy out there with a little bit of time to send even the best copy protection limping off with its tail between its legs. This is not an age of easy protection, short of using very strong encryption and other informations security measures that are beyond the average user's comprehension.

Wouldn't it be great if you could walk into ANY computer store and find everything you need, parts, software and upgrades all compatible with OSX?

This won't happen with OS X86. All we'll have is a platform that was a fond memory, and Microsoft won't even have to lift a finger for it to happen.

Remember, folks, that the new eMac has an 8x Superdrive - I wouldn't try to read too much into the 8x media availability.

Not to mention that it's likely Apple will be including them in the towers, whenever the revisions are. It's only a little more than a month to WWDC at this point.

 

[dieselg4]

On what grounds? The massive success of other OSes besides Windows on x86? The way that Dell has basically taken control of the hardware market and locked in with Intel and Microsoft in a triumverate?

Ahh, Amiga. I seem to recall they used Motorola processors too. Kind of an AIO, with that fat-keyuboard Amiga 500. WorkBench was kind of Solaris looking. Anyone remember IBM's OS/2? Or OS/@ Warp? It was much better than Windows 3.11 at the time, but never went anywhere. PNC (A medium sized bank headquartered in Pittsburgh) used it throughout their entire enterprise, even years after it was no longer offically supported. Now its relegated to a blip is computing history, like token-ring networking. . .

 

[numediaman]

Not to mention that it's likely Apple will be including them in the towers, whenever the revisions are. It's only a little more than a month to WWDC at this point.

It's nice that there is at least one upgrade we can be sure of (the 8X drives) -- but WWDC? I wish we could be so sure. I remember some having the same confidence about MWSF.

In any case, what other upgrades are we 'sure' about for the towers? Graphic cards? Firewire port changes (I've heard there will be changes here)? Power supply? Memory? thatwendigo, you seem more informed than I about these things. What do we know for sure? (as opposed to wild speculation)

 

[thatwendigo]

It's nice that there is at least one upgrade we can be sure of (the 8X drives) -- but WWDC? I wish we could be so sure. I remember some having the same confidence about MWSF.

If Apple doesn't at least partly update the line at WWDC, I think we'lll be in some serious trouble as a user group. This is a window of opportunity the likes of which they haven't had since before Microsoft managed to market their way into dominance. I believe we'll at least get announcements of new PowerMacs, and I'm thinking that we really need at least a rollout of new models or a hard timeframe of when they're coming.

Anything else, and there really will be a serious reason for people to jump ship.

In any case, what other upgrades are we 'sure' about for the towers? Graphic cards? Firewire port changes (I've heard there will be changes here)? Power supply? Memory? thatwendigo, you seem more informed than I about these things. What do we know for sure? (as opposed to wild speculation)

What am I "sure" about? That's difficult, since I'm dwelling in the nebulous field of industry standards, competitor's specs, and other things that could easily impact the Apple line. I've done a couple of lists, constantly revising them, for what I think should by put in the PowerMacs, and a few others where I've speculated about what we might see.

Let's divide this two ways:

Almost-Certain Updates

1. Revised 970fx processors up to at least 2.6ghz with commensurate FSB
2. Better graphics cards (9800XT or similar) with a possible bump at the low end (GeForce FX 5600 Ultra or ATI 9600 Pro) for towers
3. SATA RAID controllers
4. 8x SuperDrives
5. A fix for the audio noise issues.

Things I Would Like To See

1. 975 dual-cores in dual-processor motherboards using full HyperTransport, clocking at 2.6, 3.0, and 3.4 ghz. They will hopefully have the on-die memory controller and high speed interconnect between processing units, along with SMT. This would afford Apple's pro users a line of towers with 8 processors as far as the system is concerned.
2. Move to PC4200 dual-channel RAM.
3. Adopt the ATI x800 PCI-Extreme card as top-end, while adding PCI-Extreme and keeping AGP 8x for legacy cards.
4. The reappearance of the Quadro FX, FireGL, and Wildcat graphics cards for pro users. In tests where the G5 is getting beaten, it tends to be the GPU that does it.
5. Solving the reported PCI incompatibilities.
6. Offer 10000RPM SATA RAID as standard on at least the top tower, BTO on the lower ones.
7. 12x SuperDrives
8. Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.
9. Use of the FreeScale e600 in the PowerBooks, rather than the G5. For the love of God, use the e600 instead.
10. OS X 10.3.5 - Optimized for SMT, using XCC instead of GCC, and only available for the G5.

 

[BakedBeans]

If Apple doesn't at least partly update the line at WWDC, I think we'lll be in some serious trouble as a user group. This is a window of opportunity the likes of which they haven't had since before Microsoft managed to market their way into dominance. I believe we'll at least get announcements of new PowerMacs, and I'm thinking that we really need at least a rollout of new models or a hard timeframe of when they're coming.

Anything else, and there really will be a serious reason for people to jump ship.



What am I "sure" about? That's difficult, since I'm dwelling in the nebulous field of industry standards, competitor's specs, and other things that could easily impact the Apple line. I've done a couple of lists, constantly revising them, for what I think should by put in the PowerMacs, and a few others where I've speculated about what we might see.

Let's divide this two ways:

Almost-Certain Updates

1. Revised 970fx processors up to at least 2.6ghz with commensurate FSB
2. Better graphics cards (9800XT or similar) with a possible bump at the low end (GeForce FX 5600 Ultra or ATI 9600 Pro) for towers
3. SATA RAID controllers
4. 8x SuperDrives
5. A fix for the audio noise issues.

Things I Would Like To See

1. 975 dual-cores in dual-processor motherboards using full HyperTransport, clocking at 2.6, 3.0, and 3.4 ghz. They will hopefully have the on-die memory controller and high speed interconnect between processing units, along with SMT. This would afford Apple's pro users a line of towers with 8 processors as far as the system is concerned.
2. Move to PC4200 dual-channel RAM.
3. Adopt the ATI x800 PCI-Extreme card as top-end, while adding PCI-Extreme and keeping AGP 8x for legacy cards.
4. The reappearance of the Quadro FX, FireGL, and Wildcat graphics cards for pro users. In tests where the G5 is getting beaten, it tends to be the GPU that does it.
5. Solving the reported PCI incompatibilities.
6. Offer 10000RPM SATA RAID as standard on at least the top tower, BTO on the lower ones.
7. 12x SuperDrives
8. Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.
9. Use of the FreeScale e600 in the PowerBooks, rather than the G5. For the love of God, use the e600 instead.
10. OS X 10.3.5 - Optimized for SMT, using XCC instead of GCC, and only available for the G5.

kill of the imac.... thats a bit of a statement isnt it?
i think a revised imac G5, from an apple marketing point of veiw they need a machine like the imac

just my tupence

 

[oldpismo]

Kill the iMac and offer a real tower in its place, using single processors instead of the now all-dual pro line.

Noooooooo, the main advantage of the iMac is that it is a decent looking machine in a relatively small package. This makes it the ideal machine to be used as part of the digital home/hub. You can easily have it sitting in the living room, looking good, and coordinating your digital life.

A tower just can't do that as it is too big, even a cube with a seperate screen is too big in some cases. Yes some people may have enough space to hide the box away, but I would guess that not many people have room in their living rooms to hide a tower.

By all means keep a single processor tower, but don't kill of the iMac.

Peter

 

[thatwendigo]

kill of the imac.... thats a bit of a statement isnt it?

Yes, and it says "this form factor can't contain modern components anymore. If you want speedy, you need to deal withthe fact that it will be ridiculously expensive, bigger, or both."

i think a revised imac G5, from an apple marketing point of veiw they need a machine like the imac

There is no "revised imac G5" because there is no iMac G5 to begin with. I still have yet to see anyone offer a serious challenge to my heat figures on the G5 iMac/PowerBook and other small formfactor darlings.

Marketing cannot change reality.

Noooooooo, the main advantage of the iMac is that it is a decent looking machine in a relatively small package. This makes it the ideal machine to be used as part of the digital home/hub. You can easily have it sitting in the living room, looking good, and coordinating your digital life.

Yes, but without a chip like the FreeScale e600/e700, there's not going to be a way to create a competitively specced system that will at all outperform the current offerings. The limitations on heat expenditure are such that any processor that beats the G4 is going to be hotter, and the case is already kind of limited in displacement of that burden. Either it has to get bigger, employ some new cooling scheme, or both measures, and all of that means greater expense at some level.

A tower just can't do that as it is too big, even a cube with a seperate screen is too big in some cases. Yes some people may have enough space to hide the box away, but I would guess that not many people have room in their living rooms to hide a tower.

A word for you: MiniATX.

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

 

[BakedBeans]

Yes, and it says "this form factor can't contain modern components anymore. If you want speedy, you need to deal withthe fact that it will be ridiculously expensive, bigger, or both."



There is no "revised imac G5" because there is no iMac G5 to begin with. I still have yet to see anyone offer a serious challenge to my heat figures on the G5 iMac/PowerBook and other small formfactor darlings.

Marketing cannot change reality.



Yes, but without a chip like the FreeScale e600/e700, there's not going to be a way to create a competitively specced system that will at all outperform the current offerings. The limitations on heat expenditure are such that any processor that beats the G4 is going to be hotter, and the case is already kind of limited in displacement of that burden. Either it has to get bigger, employ some new cooling scheme, or both measures, and all of that means greater expense at some level.



A word for you: MiniATX.

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

look apple simply are not stupid enough to do away with the imac, and what i ment was revise the imacs to a g5, even if this means changing them slightly,

i havnt looked at your posts about heat ect ect... the only chance i get to post on these forums is from work ... or at home on my days of whilst looking after my child

but your so wrong about the imac....replaced qwith a tower?? leaving just the emac as the lone all in one... i think not

 

[thatwendigo]

look apple simply are not stupid enough to do away with the imac, and what i ment was revise the imacs to a g5, even if this means changing them slightly,

i havnt looked at your posts about heat ect ect... the only chance i get to post on these forums is from work ... or at home on my days of whilst looking after my child

It's going to take a lot more than slight modification, and if you can't be bothered to understand why, then you shouldn't be posting about it. We don't need people responding with ignorance, and the posts that people make are generally just wish-lists and gimme-gimmes that have little to do with reality. I research my points, offer links and backing information, and I get opinions in response.

So, before you start talking about the iMac and how easy it supposedly would be, how about to go back and reread this thread? I cover basically everything on it.

but your so wrong about the imac....replaced qwith a tower?? leaving just the emac as the lone all in one... i think not

Many companies don't offer an all-in-one, and even your desires must bow to physics. That's just how it is.

 

[BakedBeans]

It's going to take a lot more than slight modification, and if you can't be bothered to understand why, then you shouldn't be posting about it. We don't need people responding with ignorance, and the posts that people make are generally just wish-lists and gimme-gimmes that have little to do with reality. I research my points, offer links and backing information, and I get opinions in response.

So, before you start talking about the iMac and how easy it supposedly would be, how about to go back and reread this thread? I cover basically everything on it.



Many companies don't offer an all-in-one, and even your desires must bow to physics. That's just how it is.

firstly i do understand why, infact im sure i understand alot more about it that you, as for calling me ignorant, well thaqts just showing how arrogant you obviously are,

i am saying that the imac from a marketing point of veiw (something you cannot come to grips with) is not an option to have its a must

you post on here and expect people to take your word as fact then give opinions... im not sure who you think you are exactly, but i am bound by contract not to speak about some of the things you post about (if you know what i mean) otherwise i would be able to make you look very small indeed, although i think you will do this for yourself as soon as the new i mac is unvailed,

please lets not get into a flaming match, but i cant apose your points in the way i would like to

 

[oldpismo]

For that matter, the G4 towers would easily fit into just about any livingroom I can think of ever being in, and even the current G5s aren't that much of a stretch. It might take a little creativity, but it wouldn't be hard at al for me to use an Apple tower to do things in the livingroom. Besides... What are you using it for? A 15" to 17" screen is going to be pretty bad for watching movies on at any kind of distance, and LCDs over that are still pretty expensive if you have them in computer monitor level resolutions.

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it

For information, I want to use it for photo viewing and video editing in the most part, as well as music, email and web browsing.

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.

 

[BakedBeans]

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it

For information, I want to use it for photo viewing and video editing in the most part, as well as music, email and web browsing.

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.

yeah i have a house in the uk (hampshire) and the house was £240k and you cant swing a cat in it.
and of course you dont want to have your computer in the living room, how anoying is keyboard noise when your trying to watch eastenders(lol)
plus if you have kids then they will just destroy it...
also looks a bit **** when you got loads of stuff in the room

i agree with you on the coolibng side of things (check the powermacs out for fancy cooling (i am proud))
EDIT: of apple of course

 

[thatwendigo]

i am saying that the imac from a marketing point of veiw (something you cannot come to grips with) is not an option to have its a must

Let me try this again...

Marketing can't make physics go away. I understand perfectly what you're saying about the iMac needing more power, but that doesn't change things like convection and wattage.

you post on here and expect people to take your word as fact then give opinions... im not sure who you think you are exactly, but i am bound by contract not to speak about some of the things you post about (if you know what i mean) otherwise i would be able to make you look very small indeed, although i think you will do this for yourself as soon as the new i mac is unvailed,

please lets not get into a flaming match, but i cant apose your points in the way i would like to

I never claimed that my position was more than opinion, when it is opinion. I link to facts, link to stories, and other ways of backing my positions. The MPC7447A runs at 11-12 watts at peak. That is fact. The 970fx runs at 25-30 watts at peak. That is fact. The current G4 iMac formfactor is designed with the MPC74xx series in mind, uses a lower graphics card, and doesn't have a whole lot of room for allowing passive cooling. That is fact.

I'm not impressed by claims of NDAs, because you don't even link to things that aren't covered by them. This is backpedalling and if you were restricted by one that would prevent you from talking, you'd also be restricted from mentioning the fact. Even implying that Apple has a revised iMac on the line (as you are) is probably a violation if it has anything to do with your work.

In other words: I either hope your bosses never find this board (for your child's sake), or I know that you're lying.

Well, I know that living rooms in the states are a lot bigger than those over here in the UK and europe, and having a tower in the room is not practical on both a space and a asthetics point of view, I know, I tried it with my current one which is smaller than the G4 tower and the wife just didn't accept it

Well, yeah, but it's not Apple's fault if your wife doesn't play along.

I also don't agree that you can't get the power in the space, as at the moment at work I have a 1.8 MHz centrino laptop (yes I know different power chipset etc) but it is alot smaller in volume than an iMac, and there should be room to increase the processor and allow plenty of space for ventillation. I would like to point out that I am not opposed for a redesign in the case, possible making a bit bigger (though not too big) as I do realize that the current model may not have room inside it.

People don't seem to get that I'm saying the G5 iMac just isn't going to fit into the current form factor, and that a redesign will take much better airflow to achieve the size. Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.

My objection is to the ridiculousness of people's wants, not to existence of an "iMac G5." If it's going to be done, it needs to be done right, not as a crappy sop to "marketing."

 

[oldpismo]

Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Firstly, it is always dodgy accusing people of lying, as it is unlikely that any individual knows everything. As it happens I have had my Dell Latitude D600 for a few months now. The spec is as follows according to the dell.co.uk web site

Up to Intel ® Pentium ® M processor 745 (1.80GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 400Mhz FSB and 855GME chipset)

Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.

Then the other point that I made was that I am fully expecting to have the iMac remodelled to improve the ventillation, and would not mind if it was bigger than the current model to compensate.

Also, spending quite alot of time in Japan, I am aware of how well things can be designed to minimise the size and increase the performance. It's a difficult problem I will admit, but one that I believe that the people at apple can solve. They are after all some of the best in the world at it.

 

[BakedBeans]

Let me try this again...

Marketing can't make physics go away. I understand perfectly what you're saying about the iMac needing more power, but that doesn't change things like convection and wattage.



I never claimed that my position was more than opinion, when it is opinion. I link to facts, link to stories, and other ways of backing my positions. The MPC7447A runs at 11-12 watts at peak. That is fact. The 970fx runs at 25-30 watts at peak. That is fact. The current G4 iMac formfactor is designed with the MPC74xx series in mind, uses a lower graphics card, and doesn't have a whole lot of room for allowing passive cooling. That is fact.

I'm not impressed by claims of NDAs, because you don't even link to things that aren't covered by them. This is backpedalling and if you were restricted by one that would prevent you from talking, you'd also be restricted from mentioning the fact. Even implying that Apple has a revised iMac on the line (as you are) is probably a violation if it has anything to do with your work.

In other words: I either hope your bosses never find this board (for your child's sake), or I know that you're lying.



Well, yeah, but it's not Apple's fault if your wife doesn't play along.



People don't seem to get that I'm saying the G5 iMac just isn't going to fit into the current form factor, and that a redesign will take much better airflow to achieve the size. Also, unless you just bought that Centrino last week, I know that you're lying. The clock on Penitum-M systems was 1.7ghz until the Dothans were released, and the only ones I've seen in a product are IBM's Thinkpad t42s, and those are at 2.0ghz.

Just as a side note, the Centrino 1.7ghz 130nm part (which is possibly what you meant to say you had) runs at 30-35w at peak, but scales down below 10w when it's at idle. That's why it can go in a laptop, but the 970 or 970fx will still be a problem even in desktop machines. If IBM releases a new chip that we haven't heard about, one that has better power management, then I can see a revised iMac. In fact, if we're getting the 975s and they have PowerTune and other refinements, then we might very well see one in a modified enclosure.

My objection is to the ridiculousness of people's wants, not to existence of an "iMac G5." If it's going to be done, it needs to be done right, not as a crappy sop to "marketing."

your partronising the wrong person pal

firstly i have not said that they have revised the imac at all
secondly i have no restrictions about talking about my restrictions
thirdly please dont mention my child whilst speaking to me as you have no idea of my finacial situation ( what i took from you saying "for your childs sake" )
i have no need for a job... i do it because it is a passion

and to add i have not said that they can put the g5 in the current form
i was just saying that they need to keep the imac "like" the imac for marketing reasons.. and however much you harp on about not being able to cool it or fit it in is going to change that it will in my opinion stay nearly the same