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.
New iMac In September
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
With this much lead time and a product that's nearly finished, there may be a greater chance of accurate leaks on the product. Definitely, people will be looking.
rikers_mailbox said:
1. I figure the new iMacs will come with displays..as well. Maybe 17 and 20 inch screens only.
2. iMacs will probably use a 1.6, 1.8 and maybe 2.0 Ghz G5 singles.
Because I'm sure a 3Ghz PM will be released by Jan. of 05'.
3. I expect if the PB's do get a G5 next yr it will be the 1.6 and 1.8 G5's.
4. The eMacs will eventually get the 1.33 and 1.5Ghz G4's.
5. Agreed, the xServes will probably see a upgrade to 2.5Ghz by around Jan. of 05'.
Anybody ever thought about this?
Everyone assumes the new iMac will be a IBM PowerPC G5, but with all the cooling issues they have had with it will it even work? I mean there is a huge amount of cooling capacity even on the air cooled PowerMacs to keep the G5 cooled. Granted those are dual processors, but for a very compact design like the iMac I think cooling will prove to be a problem. Also, Apple does not want the new iMac to sound like a hair dryer in operation. I know that Freescale is working on some new PowerPC processors and before everyone goes off and starts to "twitch" on me for saying anything positive about a Motorola product, maybe Apple is waiting on them and not IBM. I guess soon we will find out. Freescale seems very committed to the PowerPC and they may have some great products for designs with limited cooling capacity.
Everyone assumes the new iMac will be a IBM PowerPC G5, but with all the cooling issues they have had with it will it even work? I mean there is a huge amount of cooling capacity even on the air cooled PowerMacs to keep the G5 cooled. Granted those are dual processors, but for a very compact design like the iMac I think cooling will prove to be a problem. Also, Apple does not want the new iMac to sound like a hair dryer in operation. I know that Freescale is working on some new PowerPC processors and before everyone goes off and starts to "twitch" on me for saying anything positive about a Motorola product, maybe Apple is waiting on them and not IBM. I guess soon we will find out. Freescale seems very committed to the PowerPC and they may have some great products for designs with limited cooling capacity.
If it wasn´t known before
The Swedish Applestore shows the same message about the iMacs
Finally Europe will get a "big" introduction!
/Freedom
The Swedish Applestore shows the same message about the iMacs
Finally Europe will get a "big" introduction!
/Freedom
Abercrombieboy said:
Well but we are only assuming the iMacs will be of a similar design...but I figure they will be slightly bigger and maybe even in a cube form..maybe like a baby PM G5 styled case.
But who knows. I guess it depends on if the new iMacs are headless or not.
DMann said:
The Athlon64 is most definitely being targeted at consumers. The Athlon64 FX and the Opteron are being targeted at the workstation and server markets. For example, HP/Compaq offers an Athlon64-powered system starting from $759 (the Presario 8000Z series).
However, I don't know if any x86-64 systems were shipping when the G5 was announced (although to be fair, the G5s didn't begin shipping in any volume until 6 to 8 weeks after the announcement).
Stock shock
It'll probably rebound as the anticipation for the new iMac G5
heats up. Also, hopefully some new 2.5GHz Powermacs will
surface this month, along with Airport extreme. Maybe
even more surprises are in store........ July has just begun
SeaFox said:
It'll probably rebound as the anticipation for the new iMac G5
heats up. Also, hopefully some new 2.5GHz Powermacs will
surface this month, along with Airport extreme. Maybe
even more surprises are in store........ July has just begun
sord said:
gamers need a powermac anyway, if they continue wanting the latest and greatest. it's not something imac should cater for. gamers are known for changing graphics cards only for being able to play one specific game, so that alone is reason enough for gamers not to buy an all-in-one computer.
and who needs a computer for gaming anyway? there are consoles
thatwendigo said:I think you've just managed to throw everything I fight against on these boards into one post. Hooray.
sorry. but easy on the, Holier than thee bit
thatwendigo said:
true, but the press they will get for this was not entirely unplanned and will be good for them. I was mostly responding to many early posts that this will hurt and that they should have preview the new iMac at WWDC. I think they will get more press because they have them but won't show them.
thatwendigo said:
down boy
my knowledge in the area may be limited by some factor but I'm sure you have have no way of knowing what that factor is based on my recent post.
the macrumors post I linked to earlier mentions DVD links. you state that can't ship till Q3 2004. sounds close enough to Q3 2004 to me. the end of sept. could be as little as one day from Q3 2004. with the rest of the industry playing catch up till Q3 2005. Fine
just because the only products that have tried failed to do video, desn't mean that Apple can't change that. all they have to do is think different. I'm assuming the other attempts have been windows based. let me remind you that Bill Gates didn't see a good reason to support sound in the early days, now Apple is the music leader in online music sales.
thatwendigo said:
so correct me, when & what did they do all the industry firsts with. I'd love to read more about it.
thatwendigo said:
some days more than others.
would you belive DNA based computers that can track down cancer cells and eliminate them?
http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/2004/050504/DNA_bot_targets_cancer_050504.html
How about quatum teleportation between entangled atoms?
http://space.com/scienceastronomy/atom_teleportation_040617.html
thatwendigo said:
true the iMac won't out do the PM, sept seems like a good time to update them as well the still need bigger boxes for the expansion the offer. the liquid cooling system for the upper end is butt ugly. this can't please The Steve nor Ive. They'll improve and expand on this technology why else get in to it at all. A consumer tech revolution doesn't need to mean stagnation for the pro line. I say it that way because they are trying to generate new consumer grade business with the forthcoming hype. they don't want to draw away from that with new PM machines
thatwendigo said:
this costs that and the other costs the other, yada yada. and supercomputing costs 350,000,000 whatever, I still want one.
thatwendigo said:
I stream video to and from my G3iBook through my firewire network all the time. I'm just playing the video off the hard drive of the other computer. YOu maybe right about the limits of 802.whatever. the bandwidth required is just what needed transfer the file from one computer to the other (the tablet I dream of is a computer after all, not a dumb display only, I want functionallity away from the network) This will happen and sooner than later.
thatwendigo said:
I understood steve to say (in the keynote) that H.264 can deliver HD resolutions at 4x standard DVD with the same file size. sounds streamable to me.
thatwendigo said:
listen, the phone companies are bringing live tv to cell phones, really they are, just a matter of time till the big daddy to that little screen is here.
Why do you hate my clustered iMac so?
thatwendigo said:
might be photoshop, hell I don't know, who can even tell anymore.
they have ported panther to work on intel hardware. the question is do they need it to? maybe, if they can't get enough IBM chips for their hot new product. iPod hot and then some. who know what goes on in Curpertino...not us, that's why we are here not there.
Porting the OS isn't hard that's been done...I think admitted so by someone at Apple years ago. who said anything about cloners, I suggested that Apple could use HP's manufacturing & retail channels to sell more Apple products like they are planning to do with the iPod. After all, If you're going to sell millions or tens of millions of your new 20th Aniversary iMac (like it or not this is the 20th, whether they call it that or not.) and you're known for short supply of product and that looses business for you, than it would be smart to team up with a long time buddy and GIANT HP! to get those things out the door. I can see a to month pause to prepare such a shift.
Why do you hate my clustered iMac so?
JFreak said:and who needs a computer for gaming anyway? there are consoles
That's what I always tell people. I mean, if a gamer is willing to spend all of that time and money on games in the first place, why not just get a console to begin with? Even PC games aren't always as good as the consoles. (well, in my opinion)
ITR 81 said:
I keep hearing this whole headless thing over and over again and it makes no sense to me, here is why, take a current 20" iMac. The price of that model is $2199, now look at the new 20" display, that display alone costs $1299. You are only paying $900 for the actual computer. I don't see this so called "phantom" headless G5 going for $900. If this happens I think you are going to see this so called headless iMac run around $1,299-$1,599. Is it really a better value? and how many people out there are going to want to hook up a beautiful new iMac to an old Beige CRT or Wal-Mart LCD? Apple wants the iMac to be stylish and beautiful, no clutter of cables or mismatched accessories, and last but most important, simple, plug it in, and it works!
Disgraceful. Utterly disgraceful.
And for the love of god, don't give Apple credit for "being honest."
They HAD to announce this, since there are effectively not selling iMacs for two months which at a minimum will screw up the quarterly unit volume. Wall Street would hammer them in October's announcement. They had to come clean.
Apple needs to get their act together.
Paul Thurrott is going to have a field day with this.
And for the love of god, don't give Apple credit for "being honest."
They HAD to announce this, since there are effectively not selling iMacs for two months which at a minimum will screw up the quarterly unit volume. Wall Street would hammer them in October's announcement. They had to come clean.
Apple needs to get their act together.
Paul Thurrott is going to have a field day with this.
I'm going to break from my usual format for coherency's sake.
I've covered every aspect of what you're questioning at some point, and so it probably wouldn't hurt to go back through my old posts and find out just what I'm talking about. However, I've made a lot of those little suckers in the last couple of months, so I think I'll try to do a roundup:
Wireless Firewire
The 802.15.3 standard is supposed to be introduced at 55Mbit/s, which translates to 6.875MB/s, and the earliest it's possibly expected in a consumer device is Q3 2004, but it's more likely to be later on. Yes, the stated purpose is to use it in wireless links for DVDs and hard drives, but the thing they don't tell you is that it's not until 2006, where the standard reaches 200-400Mbit/s, or 25-50MB/s, that it's really going to be able to handle any kind of speed like what you're used to thinking of with FireWire.
Meanwhile, the 10G consortium (10 Gigabit Ethernet) will have finalized their standard and brought a wired connection with 1280MB/s to the market. This is enough to stream uncompressed HD video, but only across wires. Even the current gigabbit Ethernet standard is some 20 times faster than the 802.15.3 introductory rate.
Additional concerns include a lack of power, since the wirless FireWire won't have the additional two pins that the cable does, and interference, not to mention security of the transmission. The media companies won't let TiVo pass through a VCR at the moment because of the encryption and copy protection. What makes you think they'd let it be streamed without the same kind of restriction?
So, I reiterate... The "wireless FireWire" you're talking about isn't ready yet, because the underlying wireless standard - 802.15.3 - is a single megabit faster than Airport Extreme. If it were possible at that rate, why would the Airport Express be limited to audio?
Apple and Inustry Firsts
Others have already done this better than I could.
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/
iMacs and PowerMacs
There won't be a PowerMac bump in September, for the same reason that ther wasn't a PowerBook bump in June: update cycle. It would be a logistical nightmare to change models that fast with the kind of distribution Apple runs on, and it would be plain idiotic to do it when they'll have just started shipping their new models.
Even if there were one, to apply the principle of charity, I doubt that the liquid cooling system would be revised because it's too new to be changed yet, and the stats on the PowerMacs aren't yet close to stale. The one place that it would be a good idea to bump sometime in the near future is PCI-Express, and even that can wait a little while longer. As a side note, the liquid cooling system is also hidden away from view, so it's ugliness doesn't matter. I've been inside an iBook without any case over it and it's hardly pretty, either. So what?
Cost
Regardless of whether you care what it costs, Apple is constrained by something called money, and it needs to make it to stay in business. Putting a lot of parts together and then selling them for less than what they cost you is something that loses money, not gains it. At that kind of price point (a $2,000-2,500 cost in parts sold for $1000), you're going to die awfully fast.
To illustrate my point, I'll price comparable PC parts:
--Quality 14.1" laptop replacement LCD - $600
--Single Opteron motherboard - $180
--AMD Opteron 246 2.0ghz - $461
--256MB Crucial PC2700 SODIMM - $60
--2.5" 4200RPM 80GB HD - $170
Cost: $1,471
You were saying?
Streaming and Video
Let me try saying this one more time:
Your hardwired FireWire connection is 400Mbit/s, or 50Mbit/s.
The connection for 802.15.3 is 55Mbit/s (one higher than Airport Extreme), and 6.875MB/s. This is a factor of seven between the two.
An average DVD breaks down into 9.8Mb/s when compressed, so that might at an outside chance, give the possibillity of watching Quicktime content that's been compressed to h.264 across the network. It would max out your connection, prevent any other traffic, and run a real risk of stutter, artifacts, and other problems if there's any signal interference at all. It wouldn't help with anything other than compressed video, and would run no chance of anything more complicated than what I've already said on the subject.
Unless, that is, if you wanted to put the optical drive in the "tablet" part, along with a graphics card to drive the screen, in which case we're talking even more expense.
--
I'd hit the topic of OS X on Intel yet again, but I'm too tired to do it right now. You need to do a little reasearch into what an API is before it would make any sense, though.
I've covered every aspect of what you're questioning at some point, and so it probably wouldn't hurt to go back through my old posts and find out just what I'm talking about. However, I've made a lot of those little suckers in the last couple of months, so I think I'll try to do a roundup:
Wireless Firewire
The 802.15.3 standard is supposed to be introduced at 55Mbit/s, which translates to 6.875MB/s, and the earliest it's possibly expected in a consumer device is Q3 2004, but it's more likely to be later on. Yes, the stated purpose is to use it in wireless links for DVDs and hard drives, but the thing they don't tell you is that it's not until 2006, where the standard reaches 200-400Mbit/s, or 25-50MB/s, that it's really going to be able to handle any kind of speed like what you're used to thinking of with FireWire.
Meanwhile, the 10G consortium (10 Gigabit Ethernet) will have finalized their standard and brought a wired connection with 1280MB/s to the market. This is enough to stream uncompressed HD video, but only across wires. Even the current gigabbit Ethernet standard is some 20 times faster than the 802.15.3 introductory rate.
Additional concerns include a lack of power, since the wirless FireWire won't have the additional two pins that the cable does, and interference, not to mention security of the transmission. The media companies won't let TiVo pass through a VCR at the moment because of the encryption and copy protection. What makes you think they'd let it be streamed without the same kind of restriction?
So, I reiterate... The "wireless FireWire" you're talking about isn't ready yet, because the underlying wireless standard - 802.15.3 - is a single megabit faster than Airport Extreme. If it were possible at that rate, why would the Airport Express be limited to audio?
Apple and Inustry Firsts
Others have already done this better than I could.
http://www.theapplemuseum.com/
iMacs and PowerMacs
There won't be a PowerMac bump in September, for the same reason that ther wasn't a PowerBook bump in June: update cycle. It would be a logistical nightmare to change models that fast with the kind of distribution Apple runs on, and it would be plain idiotic to do it when they'll have just started shipping their new models.
Even if there were one, to apply the principle of charity, I doubt that the liquid cooling system would be revised because it's too new to be changed yet, and the stats on the PowerMacs aren't yet close to stale. The one place that it would be a good idea to bump sometime in the near future is PCI-Express, and even that can wait a little while longer. As a side note, the liquid cooling system is also hidden away from view, so it's ugliness doesn't matter. I've been inside an iBook without any case over it and it's hardly pretty, either. So what?
Cost
Regardless of whether you care what it costs, Apple is constrained by something called money, and it needs to make it to stay in business. Putting a lot of parts together and then selling them for less than what they cost you is something that loses money, not gains it. At that kind of price point (a $2,000-2,500 cost in parts sold for $1000), you're going to die awfully fast.
To illustrate my point, I'll price comparable PC parts:
--Quality 14.1" laptop replacement LCD - $600
--Single Opteron motherboard - $180
--AMD Opteron 246 2.0ghz - $461
--256MB Crucial PC2700 SODIMM - $60
--2.5" 4200RPM 80GB HD - $170
Cost: $1,471
You were saying?
Streaming and Video
Let me try saying this one more time:
Your hardwired FireWire connection is 400Mbit/s, or 50Mbit/s.
The connection for 802.15.3 is 55Mbit/s (one higher than Airport Extreme), and 6.875MB/s. This is a factor of seven between the two.
An average DVD breaks down into 9.8Mb/s when compressed, so that might at an outside chance, give the possibillity of watching Quicktime content that's been compressed to h.264 across the network. It would max out your connection, prevent any other traffic, and run a real risk of stutter, artifacts, and other problems if there's any signal interference at all. It wouldn't help with anything other than compressed video, and would run no chance of anything more complicated than what I've already said on the subject.
Unless, that is, if you wanted to put the optical drive in the "tablet" part, along with a graphics card to drive the screen, in which case we're talking even more expense.
--
I'd hit the topic of OS X on Intel yet again, but I'm too tired to do it right now. You need to do a little reasearch into what an API is before it would make any sense, though.
vuc78000 said:
Umm no. They don't just take components and but them in a pretty box (ala dell, well ok theirs aren't pretty but you get the idea). They design the whole computer from the ground up using design and functionality as their constraints. Not to mention that they design stage is way before the implementation stage. For them to say "gee I don't like the way it looks at this point" makes no sense. If they are this close to production they know what it looked like for a while. Next question...
whatever said:
Why in the name of heaven would they stick with the G4 in the iMacs? Apple has a high end offering (PowerMacs) and a low end offering (eMacs). The iMac needs to be a steping stone between the two. The G4 is just not powerful enough to start doing miniPro tasks. Editing video is ok on a G4 but a G5 is far better. If you just need e-mail and internet a G4 is fine but then you are the market Apple is targeting with the eMac.
As for a 23" iMac whats the point?? Look at the prices. a 23" display alone costs $2000, so its safe to say that 23" iMac would be around $2500. You might as well start looking at G5's at that point.
No a 17" low end 20" high end makes much more sense.
Next question...
mhouse said:
Of course it is, with the improved architeture and raw speed of a G5 compared to a G4? You bet it will. Next question...
Dirt cheap means no innovation and lower quality parts. Hence the "dirt" in dirt cheap". As the old saying goes, you get what you pay for. Next...mhouse said:
MikeLaRiviere said:
Sure there is, and BeoVir has been nice enough to point it out:
BeoVir said:
Of course they could just use faster G4's but then your next point makes no sense...
If they are just sticking in faster processors, why a dramatic redesign? If you have to redesign, why not just do it for a new processor? They can use single processor G5's at the 130nm process (that way they aren't stealing from the 90nm PowerMac G5 chips) and I'm sure come up with some way of cooling them, liquid cooled iMacs perhaps? Next...MikeLaRiviere said:
Other than the fact it also says available? Next...sord said:
Glad someone gets it! Three cheers for thatwendigo!thatwendigo said:
Dave the Great said:
Its good for a few reasons. First, it means that Apple is going to come out with a new iMac. Second there is no such thing as bad publicity, well maybe, but not in this case. This is going to create buzz about what the new iMac will be like. Third, high end recording is done on PowerMacs....
Honestly, as a recent college grad and mac user, not being able to buy an iMac that was feature wise comparable to a cheaper eMac isn't that much of a set back. Not to mention alot of us college kids are going for laptops these days anyway.Dave the Great said:
Oh and WWDC was not dissapointing for developers (who it is meant for) but for people who expected it to be something it wasn't. Its like being dissapointed you don't get a lot of Christmas presents at Easter.
This is an ok idea, the problem is that the G5 manufacturing plants have all been retoold for the new G5's. Pumping out the old 1.6 models would take manufacturing capabilites away from the G5's, take time, add an old model in for a short time period, and probably wouldn't be cost effective. I think Apple is willing to take the loss of a few potential customers at this point and bank on the fact that most people who were looking at iMacs were allready swaying towards eMacs with similar specs or taking the plunge to get PowerMacs.Dave the Great said:
And thats all for now, time to sleep...
First of all I said no real offer between $1000 and $2000 ... The $1299 single G4 is an insult not an offer ... And as others have pointed out, the PowerMac G4 has gone out of production.goglamosh said:
And also it doesn't have a screen, so you have to add $699 for Apple's cheapest screen offer. So Apple's cheapest computer offer with an LCD screen is currently a single G4@1,25 with Combo drive and a 17" screen for $1998
New iMac...
Time to simplify the line again... eMacs, gone.
iMac will no longer have a built-on monitor -- if the monitor is not included in the price it will make the cost of an iMac seem more in line with PCs.
(Anyone notice how expensive their cheapest new monitor is? $1300) Apple will introduce a set of consumer monitors to sell along side the iMac; LCD 15" and 17", possibly even a wireless LCD display with pen input.
iMac Prices: $599 - $1299
New Display prices: $399 - $999
It's part of the new business model Apple is adopting ... client, workstation, server.
Time to simplify the line again... eMacs, gone.
iMac will no longer have a built-on monitor -- if the monitor is not included in the price it will make the cost of an iMac seem more in line with PCs.
(Anyone notice how expensive their cheapest new monitor is? $1300) Apple will introduce a set of consumer monitors to sell along side the iMac; LCD 15" and 17", possibly even a wireless LCD display with pen input.
iMac Prices: $599 - $1299
New Display prices: $399 - $999
It's part of the new business model Apple is adopting ... client, workstation, server.
NOW they tell me !!!
Well, I was waiting for the iMac to be announced at the WWDC. When I didn't see anything being announced, I thought, what the heck! I'll just order a PowerMac G5 2.0. And NOW they tell me the iMac is due out in September??? I'm a bit bummed out. Patience is clearly a virtue that I'm lacking...
Still, I find a considerable amount of solace in the fact I'm going to have one hell of a machine two months before the new iMac starts to ship !
Well, I was waiting for the iMac to be announced at the WWDC. When I didn't see anything being announced, I thought, what the heck! I'll just order a PowerMac G5 2.0. And NOW they tell me the iMac is due out in September???
I'm a bit bummed out. Patience is clearly a virtue that I'm lacking...Still, I find a considerable amount of solace in the fact I'm going to have one hell of a machine two months before the new iMac starts to ship !
the_mole1314 said:
Hell froze over a while ago when they released iTunes for Windows
Can't until September now.
Chip NoVaMac said:
I think a lot of students don't order until thet get to campus. Apple has
been willing to shift available inventory around before so I would guess
that for a mass-market computer like the iMac volumes should pretty
quickly reach what is needed to meet 'back-to-school' demand.
DMann said:
You lost me buddy... Opteron is the one that is not a consumer desktop machine, that's the AMD server 940 line. All 939s models and 740 pins are desktop machines. Buy the processor anywhere you want online that has the cheapest prices, and buy the respective motherboard and powersupply. I don't get how you say AMD64 is not a consumer desktop machine, it is. And it's not a server or workstation although it outperforms it's predicessor dual Opteron 940's by itself... (that being the AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 to be exact) If you want benchmarks I can give you about ten or so of indipendent companies for more of your own comparison on all the specs of the Opteron's and FX-53. All the AMD 64 processors are consumer desktop machines, from 64 3000+ to 3800+, and the FX models both 51 and 53. Where you heard they aren't consumer desktop models, I dunno but that's wrong. Not being sarcastic or anything, just saying they are consumor products and not for servers or workstatoins. In fact, the 939 pin FX-53 has the pins situated specifically that even if you wanted to you couldn't fit it into the 940 slot server/workstation motherboards... (there is a 940 pin model though too, just incase you have to have it, but the 939s is for PC desktops only). The AMD 64 FX-53 single handedly delivers continual blows to even the Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition at 3.4GHz. By my own calculations of tests done and turned into percentages, the FX-53 wins roughy 66%-70% of all benchmark tests against the P4 EE done by indipendent companies that I've found online. You can do it too if you're interested and haven't yet... I'd like to see AMD take the place of IBM in making processors for the new Apple computers of the future, that would be interesting. Especially since they do have the worlds fastest processor now. The architectural design of the FX-53 chip is outstanding. The core speed doubles it's own MHz just due to having a second channel line of communication with the memory... A totally new future of processors from here on out for every personal computer, multi-channel memory! All you CPU geeks probly already know that... An AMD/Apple computer would be a good way for Apple to catch up with the competition again IMO. Too bad even if they did decide to do that (most unlikely anyway) it wouldn't be in time for those new iMacs this September.
And just so you know Dmann, the idea of 64-bit processing isn't something new this past year or two, and it wasn't invented by IBM. Yeah, IBM made the G5 64-bit processor and it was sold in G5 PowerPC's ONE MONTH before the AMD64's were the market... I don't see how that gives the G5 an edge if that's what you were getting at? Remember all the contraversy over those initial Veritest G5 performace benchmarks? One reason is because of the benchmarks that came out a short time later of the AMD64's... First on the scene doesn't always mean best technology. I wouldn't think twice of taking AMD over IBM CPU's any day, unless you want a slower processor that is.
Wondering how it musters up to dual G5 computers, well in all tests I've seen it's won the majority. (exception of Apple's own tests) Most around the range of 77 to 13 in tests of indipendent companies. But I dunno, I'm hard to please on comparing PC's to Apple computers. Benchmarks aren't amazing either, hope I didn't leave that impression on anyone... The software and platforms are different between the two also, and that's an obvious reason why I don't like PC vs. Apple tests. And none of the wins for either side were by much more than nanoseconds in most of the tests............ In other words who cares, you can't feel it. BUT, it's interesting how AMD's technology of one processor can stay up to par with two of IBM's G5 processors. One more reason I wish Apple would make a switch! If you're gonna put a PC processor in your machine you might as well update to the best technology is the way I see it, no matter who the company is.
bertagert said:
Exactly. This is really worse for Apple as a company. Having nothing so sell for 2/3 of the quarter. Bad news. Very bad managed ramp-up, ramp-down.
For the consumer its mixed, at least you know when the new stuff comes. If you want to buy one now - bad news.
And that a new iMac is coming at all - well that was something that was already clear, just not the exact timing.