New PowerMac Model?

[ingenious]

Wow, Mac news has hit such a crawl of anything interesting people are clinging to this? Yawn! Some day Apple may release something cool again... some day.

edit #2: Did this post get deleted or something? ^^^

I hope that day is June 28! Come on WWDC! (edit #1: ) Don't miss this oppurtunity, please Apple. I want an iMac G5, a PowerMac G5 Rev. B (or something better) and a PowerBook G5 released!

Ha ha my friend said this the other day:

"Innovation takes many naps!"

I hope not.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I think one thing no one has thought about is that fact that imacs use the same numbering system.



iMac,1 iMac (Rev.A - Rev.D)
PowerMac2,1 iMac FireWire
PowerMac2,2 iMac FireWire
PowerMac4,1 iMac "Flower Power"
PowerMac4,2 iMac Flat Panel
PowerMac4,4 eMac

Only the first generation used a different name.
Would it not be safe to assume that PowerMac7,3 is an upgraded Powermac G5? The powermac line was PowerMac3,x from AGP to windtunnel. I believe that the PowerMac7,3 is also in 10.3.3 which shows that apple thought about upgrading them earlier but decided against it or couldn't at the time.

Now what other products are people expecting to be upgraded soon? The iMac, I am quite surprised that they continued to use PowerMac4,x for the flat panel imac because it is so different.

I really hope that because both theses products work with the current version of the system that they will be available immediately.

Actually, all the newer iMacs are series 6 (PowerMac 6,x) machines, including the flat-panel iMacs and the new 20" iMac. That makes me think that PowerMac 8,x MUST be a new iMac, PowerMac 7,3 is a revision to the PowerMac G5, PowerMac 7,4 will be another G5 revision, and PowerMac 9,1 will be called the G6.

 

[Frobozz]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

That sounds plausible.

I'm guessing that the first number is representative of a model line / major revision. PowerMacs, for example, have multiple first digits in their model number because there were multiple architecture changes. Not sure what the criteria is, but a jump from 7 to 8 indicates something more than a speed bump.

I'm going to add it to my pile of indirect evidence supporting the 975 / 3.0 GHz PowerMac this summer.

 

[Frobozz]

Actually, all the newer iMacs are series 6 (PowerMac 6,x) machines, including the flat-panel iMacs and the new 20" iMac. That makes me think that PowerMac 8,x MUST be a new iMac, PowerMac 7,3 is a revision to the PowerMac G5, PowerMac 7,4 will be another G5 revision, and PowerMac 9,1 will be called the G6.

This also seems likely. I got thinking that the 8 might be something other than a PowerMac. I wonder what it is? I think your explanation makes a lot of sense.

 

[Frobozz]

I hope that day is June 28! Come on WWDC!

Amen. If memory serves, last year was pretty much a big yawn-a-thon until WWDC hit and we had Panther and the G5 PowerMac.

 

[Plissken]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).

What are you smoking? Why would 10.3.4 be the last update to Panther?

 

[kenaustus]

My thought: Steve J knows we have been pulling our hair out for months (he's kept his short since the Moto days) and slipped this in to get us going again.

If IBM is delivering now (and they won't say their yield performance) then Steve J will have a lot to blow our minds at the WWDC. I would not be surprised, however, to see something before then if Steve wants to tell the developers about huge back orders.

 

[shawnce]

Here is my translation for you:
However, if you look a little closer at the 10.3.4 update, you will notice that mention of a Powermac 8.1 is made, which makes you think that it is not just a minor update but a completely new machine.

You will also find a reference to SMU_Neo2 which might also make you think that the Neo2 would be a new version of the processor. What is certain is that Neo2 would be a derivative of the current G5. But it is still difficult to confirm whether it is a stripped- down version (like the 970fx of the X-Serves) or, BOOSTED!

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 based, the bridge/memory controller). So systems that are using the PowerMac G5 chip set are...

PowerMac7,3 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.3)
PowerMac7,2 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (current PowerMac G5 line)
PowerMac8,1 using SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.4)
RackMac3,1 using RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin (I assume the Xserve G5 )

So the PowerMac7,3 is using the same platform plugin as the current PM G5s so it is likely not that much drastically different then the current PM G5s. The 8,1 is using a completly different plugin so it is likely different to some extent (less/more or different things connected with the U3 or a variant of the U3).

-Shawn

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 based, the bridge/memory controller). So systems that are using the PowerMac G5 chip set are...

PowerMac7,3 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.3)
PowerMac7,2 using PowerMac7_2_PlatformPlugin (current PowerMac G5 line)
PowerMac8,1 using SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin (new unknown system first in 10.3.4)
RackMac3,1 using RackMac3_1_PlatformPlugin (I assume the Xserve G5 )

So the PowerMac7,3 is using the same platform plugin as the current PM G5s so it is likely not that much drastically different then the current PM G5s. The 8,1 is using a completly different plugin so it is likely different to some extent (less/more or different things connected with the U3 or a variant of the U3).

-Shawn

I agree with your analysis and I think my own does not conflict with it. It seems that we're going to see new hardware come WWDC - I'm looking forward to it!

 

[BornAgainMac]

Excellent Marketing

Wow! This is excellent marketing by the folks at Apple.

 

[nsb3000]

Since there is a chance that 10.3.4 might be the last update to Panther, this only means that we'll see new models between now and year's end (i.e. the release of Tiger).

From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Its the iMac G5 !

Mac,1

iMac (Revision A + B)
iMac (Revision C)
iMac (Revision D)

PowerMac1,1 Power Macintosh G3 (Blue & White)
PowerMac1,2 Power Macintosh G4 (PCI-Graphics)
PowerMac2,1 iMac (Slot-Loading CD-ROM)
PowerMac2,2 iMac (Summer 2000)
PowerMac3,1 Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)
PowerMac3,2 Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)
PowerMac3,3 Power Macintosh G4 (Gigabit Ethernet)
PowerMac3,4 Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)
PowerMac3,5 Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver)
Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver 2002)
PowerMac3,6 Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors)
Power Macintosh G4 (FW 800)
Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors 2003)
PowerMac4,1 iMac (Early 2001) iMac (Summer 2001)
PowerMac4,2 iMac (Flat-Panel)
PowerMac4,4 eMac eMac (ATI Graphics) eMac (1 GHz G4)
PowerMac4,5 iMac (17-inch Flat-Panel)
iMac (17-inch 1 GHz)
PowerMac5,1 Power Macintosh G4 Cube
Power Macintosh G4 Cube (Early 2001)
PowerMac6,1 iMac (USB 2.0)
PowerMac6,3 iMac (20-inch Flat-Panel)
PowerMac6,4 eMac (USB 2.0)
PowerMac7,2 Power Macintosh G5
PowerMac 8 iMac G5

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Mac,1

iMac (Revision A + B)
iMac (Revision C)
iMac (Revision D)


PowerMac1,1

Power Macintosh G3 (Blue & White)


PowerMac1,2

Power Macintosh G4 (PCI-Graphics)


PowerMac2,1

iMac (Slot-Loading CD-ROM)


PowerMac2,2

iMac (Summer 2000)



PowerMac3,1

Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)


PowerMac3,2

Power Macintosh G4 (AGP-Graphics)


PowerMac3,3

Power Macintosh G4 (Gigabit Ethernet)


PowerMac3,4

Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)


PowerMac3,5

Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver)
Power Macintosh G4 (Quick Silver 2002)


PowerMac3,6

Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors)
Power Macintosh G4 (FW 800)
Power Macintosh G4 (Mirrored Drive Doors 2003)


PowerMac4,1

iMac (Early 2001)
iMac (Summer 2001)


PowerMac4,2

iMac (Flat-Panel)


PowerMac4,4

eMac
eMac (ATI Graphics)
eMac (1 GHz G4)


PowerMac4,5

iMac (17-inch Flat-Panel)
iMac (17-inch 1 GHz)


PowerMac5,1

Power Macintosh G4 Cube
Power Macintosh G4 Cube (Early 2001)


PowerMac6,1

iMac (USB 2.0)


PowerMac6,3

iMac (20-inch Flat-Panel)


PowerMac6,4

eMac (USB 2.0)


PowerMac7,2

Power Macintosh G5

PowerMac 8

iMac G5

Although I didn't list all the numbers, I came to the same conclusion - it can only mean an iMac G5 is coming. Oh well - I bought my G4 iMac in February of this year (what that does mean is that it will most likely be replaced by a G6 Mac of some sort in 2007).

 

[nsb3000]

I agree. Given that it is unlikely that we'll see Tiger until 2005 (Spring perhaps?) leaving 10.3.4 as the last update for that long seems VERY unlikely.

(This refers to the comments made that Apple isn't going to be updating OS X yearly now. I doubt they'd have made that announcement if it was going to be, say 15 months. It means at least 18-24 months between major updates, which puts it April-Oct 2005.)

I think those comments were refereeing to after apple releases tiger. I don't really think they would introduce it and then wait 8 months or more to sell it.

 

[Dave00]

IMO, this can only mean two things:

Apple planned to release a new PM revision sometime between March and May (the release dates of 10.3.3 and 10.3.4, respectively), but had to change that plan for whatever reason, probably IBM's yield problems.
[...]

Reading through the rumor noise, something WAS supposed to come out in March and fell through, probably due to cooling issues. The strongest evidence for this was that even the more staid of the rumor sites were calling it a certainty. Hopefully, these issues have been worked out. Otherwise, it'll be a ho-hum WWDC with modest speed-bumps but no new chip; which, if it were the case, would make a quad-processor more likely. ("Sorry, we weren't able to reach 3Ghz, but LOOK! Quad processors!")

You really wound up with a great buy if you bought the original G5's. There's been very little depreciation due to the lack of new machines & relatively stable prices. Refurbrished Dual-2Ghz machines are $2400 at the Apple Store. $600 depreciation (20%) over 9 months? That's fantastic.

Dave

 

[tother]

quad g5's

me two cents is that apple needs to come out with a quad proc workstation to make stand in the vfx arena they entered when they bough out shake. i'm a compositor and we are still having to use pc for all vfx work (2d-3d). we all love macs and have them at home but they don't cut it for feature film/highend broadcast work. the g5's are fast but not enough, shake barely runs on a dual g5 and motion is a hog because of all the real-time. i believe we are going to see within the next year quad procs on both sides (mac/pc). programs and clients are getting more demanding and proc speeds are not climbing as high as they did in recent years. this seems to be the only logical route to take. i'm excited for it will be like a mini discreet inferno system for a 10th of the price. we will see and i hope it happens soon or apple might loose ground in this market no matter how cool there programs are.

late

 

[Alb]

2*2(virtual) = 4!!

4 processor? 975!! Yeeeees!!!

This is certainly a dual 975 PowerMac (or single Power 5!) since the hypertrading-like feature in the Power 5 (and in the supposed 975) is seen from the OS as been 2 different processor. So a dual 975 PowerMac would be seen from MacOS X a 4 "logical" processor machine!

And the "7.3" machine could easily be the new G5 (970fx) iMac...

alb

 

[Lanbrown]

this is purely speculation and should be taken with a grain of salt, but since the current PM is 7,2 and this "new model" is 8,1 it may be proof that this new model is in fact using the 975 chip as previously rumored since they jumped from 7 to 8. I have no idea what I'm talking about though so if i'm way off base, slap me silly....but gently...

The current iMac is 6.1 and 6.3, the G5 is 7.2 and the eMac 6.4. 8.1 does not necessarily mean that it will be a PM, but will be a desktop, which the iMac, PowerMac and eMac all fit into.

 

[denm316]

what a slow rumor day when this makes the front page

 

[dongmin]

Yes it is also telling that the 8,1 is listed under the MacRISC4PE which implies, at least to me, it is using a PowerMac G5 like chip set (U3 based, the bridge/memory controller).

If this is true, coupled with the observation that even numbers (4,1 6,1 etc.) have designated iMacs, then it seems fairly reasonable to assume that a new form-factor G5 iMacs are on the way. Rather exciting to consider the possibilities. Will Apple retain the all-in-one design? (Most likely.) Or will Apple introduce a headless iMac as many have been clamoring for? (Dream on.)

 

[Zaty]

What are you smoking? Why would 10.3.4 be the last update to Panther?

From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .

seriously? you think .4 is the last panther update between now and octobrer(ish)? god i hope not. what was jaguar's 10.2.x number 9 months after it was released? that could give us some clues...

Like I said in another post, I don't think 10.3.4 will be the last update to Panther but it's not completely impossible as IMHO Panther really seems to be finished and Apple might decide to gear the main effort towards Tiger.

 

[StudioGuy]

I'd buy a quad PM for our studio as well - there can never be enough power for audio plug-ins and/or real-time rendering.

Expecting a big price hit for a quad if ever it comes, but that's ok

 

[dongmin]

Reading through the rumor noise, something WAS supposed to come out in March and fell through, probably due to cooling issues. The strongest evidence for this was that even the more staid of the rumor sites were calling it a certainty. Hopefully, these issues have been worked out. Otherwise, it'll be a ho-hum WWDC with modest speed-bumps but no new chip; which, if it were the case, would make a quad-processor more likely. ("Sorry, we weren't able to reach 3Ghz, but LOOK! Quad processors!")

It's funny, one guy makes a random statement about some piece of code in the OS that may or may not have something to do with quad processors and boom, everyone starts chiming in about how quad processors are definitely the way to go. "Apple is sunk unless they release quad processors!" "We're doomed! Quad G5s will save the day!" I can't imagine a more unlikely scenario given the fact that they're having hard enough time cooling two processors.

And no, the Power Mac revision wasn't delayed because of cooling issues. Steve himself has come out and said that they've delayed shipments because IBM has been having YIELD PROBLEMS with their 90 nm processorss, i.e. the 970fx which was supposed to go into the Power Mac revision.

 

[SiliconAddict]

From a historical perspective, this seems unlikely. There were 6 updates to 10.1, 8 updates (I think) to 10.2 .

You can’t use that as reference since 10.1 and to a certain extent 10.2 had a whole heck of a lot of things to tweak/fix/optimize. Dat being said NO way in hell is Apple going to not release any updates for 5 months. Heck was not 10.2.8 release literally weeks before 10.3 was released?

 

[eyeluvmyimac]

Would there be a huge performance gain when jumping from dual to quad? I mean there are lots of arguments (valid or not) that duals aren't that big of a gain over singles (this is clearly untrue although I have never owned a dual), but could anything take full advantage of quad yet?