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.
No 3GHz Soon and No G5 Laptop
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you really consider this process to be working when it leads to liquid cooled processors. Just how much of a clock rate increase will they be able to squeeze out of such a processor? Maybe you are expecting the next rev to use liquid nitrogen of something.
This whole update is a joke. What we have here is Apple hitting the same wall of stagnation that they hit with Motorola. That and Apple underdelivering to their customers via low spec components in their PC's.
Everyone here has to realize that ATI and Nvidia have dropped pricing on their older cards dramtically to make room for the new high performance cards. The cards in these machines are so much off the mark for new produciton hardware that it is an embarassment to even consider these machines.
I think what Apple did is reconfigured the machines so they can make even more of a profit off them with the hopes that the customer base doesn't have a clue. Fortunately the majority of the customer base does have a clue and has been walking away from this hardware for years now. You would thing that not makeing their own sales projections would clue the management team at Apple in a bit. Nope just offer more of the same in their minds should correct all of those slaes failings. For somebody that really admires OS/X it is rahter sickening that we have to deal with a company that is so oriented to screwing the cusotmer.
Dave
This whole update is a joke. What we have here is Apple hitting the same wall of stagnation that they hit with Motorola. That and Apple underdelivering to their customers via low spec components in their PC's.
Everyone here has to realize that ATI and Nvidia have dropped pricing on their older cards dramtically to make room for the new high performance cards. The cards in these machines are so much off the mark for new produciton hardware that it is an embarassment to even consider these machines.
I think what Apple did is reconfigured the machines so they can make even more of a profit off them with the hopes that the customer base doesn't have a clue. Fortunately the majority of the customer base does have a clue and has been walking away from this hardware for years now. You would thing that not makeing their own sales projections would clue the management team at Apple in a bit. Nope just offer more of the same in their minds should correct all of those slaes failings. For somebody that really admires OS/X it is rahter sickening that we have to deal with a company that is so oriented to screwing the cusotmer.
Dave
titaniumducky said:
Apple's market share is so small because of a tiny but vocal fraction of its user base being so whiney and immature that is scaring potential buyers off? Forget about today's hardware announcement, THAT should be the question of the day.
A cheap $3 hooker... I will always remember that remark.
A cheap $3 hooker... I will always remember that remark.
nothing exciting.
Looks like I'll be waiting for next year. This is nothing to be excited about.
this is more bad than good.
$200 more for entry level,
no pci_express
we will be again, last to have pci express.
I think apple should start letting other company build macs again.
Looks like I'll be waiting for next year. This is nothing to be excited about.
this is more bad than good.
$200 more for entry level,
no pci_express
we will be again, last to have pci express.
I think apple should start letting other company build macs again.
jiggie2g said:
Big deal. It's still slower (a single 2.6 GHz processor vs. dual 2.5 GHz G5s), has a much slower memory busy, and doesn't have an OS that's even close to OS X. Not to mention, of course, that it doesn't come with any software and is a no-name, garage shop, 'slap 'em together' system.
Bottom line is that the new Macs are quite competitive with anything out there in their range.
Hold on a second. Maybe I am completely wrong, but doesn't Apple right now have the fastest 64-bit processor in a desktop system right now?
AMD has the 64 FX, which is no more than 2.4 Ghz.
Intel isn't even offering an 64 bit processor in desktops yet. I was hard pressed to find any marketable 64-bit processor they offered on their website.
That means, by my understanding, that Apple has the fastest processors in the market now, for the 64-bit desktop class.
I don't think that's anything to be ashamed of. Sure, we may be off the 3-Ghz mark by a lot, but we are still ahead of the competition!
AMD has the 64 FX, which is no more than 2.4 Ghz.
Intel isn't even offering an 64 bit processor in desktops yet. I was hard pressed to find any marketable 64-bit processor they offered on their website.
That means, by my understanding, that Apple has the fastest processors in the market now, for the 64-bit desktop class.
I don't think that's anything to be ashamed of. Sure, we may be off the 3-Ghz mark by a lot, but we are still ahead of the competition!
I was all set to buy a new mac this revision but now I think it would be best to wait until the end of summer. I have not updated for 4 years and was really hoping to get a 3Ghz so I could go another 4 years.
seraphnyc said:
No. Why I'm pissed is I WANT a PowerBook but logically it doesn't make sense for me to purchase a system that isn't on par with the rest of the industry. A year ago Apple did a revamp on their pro desktop line that brought them neck and neck with the PC world and in some cases blew the doors off of them.
What have we seen for their Pro laptop line? Nothing. Natta. Zero progress other then small incremental speedbumps that amount to next to nothing when it comes to parity with the industry. I want a PowerBook but getting one isn't going to be based on a single factor such as it can run OS X. I want a system that keeps up with the competition, runs OS X, and can handle any task I throw at it in a, relatively timely manner. Call me funny but having FCE take 20-45 seconds to open on a 17" PowerBooks is insane.
If you think I'm mentally unstable. Who knows. Maybe I am. But if anything is making me nuts it's Apple ignoring its laptop line. Last year Jobs said year of the laptop. Contrary to popular belief it wasn't intended as a catch phrase to signal a massive rollout of hardware. He was stressing how important the laptop segment is becoming. If Jobs truly felt that way then why the heck didn't they start focusing on the PowerBook earlier? Is this simply a case of Apple not having enough resources to go around? I don't know and honestly at this point I don't give a crap. Again enough excuses. Show us the payoff or forgetaboutit.
pjkelnhofer said:
I'm sure that one could get that computer for $900. $750 is rather unlikely, though. Even if it was $1000, i would be 1/3 the price of a high end G5, have a better graphics card, more RAM, room for more optical drives, a floppy (yes, a flopp... still comes in handy sometimes...), etc.
Try building a computer here. You'll find you can get a good gfx card, HD, processor, etc. for a grand or less.
Maybe I am just really confused, but doesn't Apple have the fastest 64 bit processor on the market, at least on the desktop market?
AMD has their 64-bit FX-53, which is 2.4 Ghz
Intel doesn't even have a 64 bit processor on the market for desktops. I found their website provided little information on 64 bit processors at all.
Sure we were short of the 3-Ghz mark, but isn't having the best available processor in our class a worthwhile accomplishment?
AMD has their 64-bit FX-53, which is 2.4 Ghz
Intel doesn't even have a 64 bit processor on the market for desktops. I found their website provided little information on 64 bit processors at all.
Sure we were short of the 3-Ghz mark, but isn't having the best available processor in our class a worthwhile accomplishment?
It just dawned on me..
Mac's will never shake the perception that they're too expensive. Why?
Because they LOOK EXPENSIVE.
I've searched around and the new Mac prices are below the prices of the PC's they're smoking. (according to Apple)
But for arguments sake, lets pretend all things are equal value/price ratio.
How can you convince someone that the top computer cost the same as the bottom one?
Mac's will never shake the perception that they're too expensive. Why?
Because they LOOK EXPENSIVE.
I've searched around and the new Mac prices are below the prices of the PC's they're smoking. (according to Apple)
But for arguments sake, lets pretend all things are equal value/price ratio.
How can you convince someone that the top computer cost the same as the bottom one?
Attachments
jragosta said:
Read B4 you speak child. G5 Bus 1.25ghz , Athlon 64 989pin 1.6ghz ...so u were saying ?????
Single Athlon 64 +3800 OC'd Running at the Equilvalent of a Processor clocked at 4.2ghz is faster than Dual 2.6 G5's , hell it might even be faster at normal speeds
You just hit the nail on the head!
I do complex graphics and page layouts (PhotoShop 7 and Canvas 9) on my PM G3-450/IGB RAM/Jaguar at a nice clip. I have built and maintained large, complex web sites on the same machine. Only video rendering calls for a faster processor. When this Mac gives out, I will replace it with the entry level PM G5 at that time, but I'm not sure where I will need all that speed.
bishopduke said:
I do complex graphics and page layouts (PhotoShop 7 and Canvas 9) on my PM G3-450/IGB RAM/Jaguar at a nice clip. I have built and maintained large, complex web sites on the same machine. Only video rendering calls for a faster processor. When this Mac gives out, I will replace it with the entry level PM G5 at that time, but I'm not sure where I will need all that speed.
2.5 gig ship date AUGUST 4th
Shipping on or before 8/02/04
So much for July - I highly doubt we see another announcment in June for G5s if the current announcement will not ship until August - and I'm going the educational route that traditionally has been given shipping priority by Apple...
Anyone have some uplifting news about how Apple say Aug 4th but mean July 1st?????
More proof that these come with Tiger! (I love the inside of my bubble - so pleasant in here)
Shipping on or before 8/02/04
So much for July - I highly doubt we see another announcment in June for G5s if the current announcement will not ship until August - and I'm going the educational route that traditionally has been given shipping priority by Apple...
Anyone have some uplifting news about how Apple say Aug 4th but mean July 1st?????
More proof that these come with Tiger! (I love the inside of my bubble - so pleasant in here)
arn said:
SiliconAddict said:Screw Apple. Simple as that. Screw them like a cheap $3 hooker. Last straw. I won't go Dell because of their craptacular track record but as soon as IBM rolls out the Pentium M Dothan, that was literally released a couple weeks ago, I'm getting an IBM. Should be out soon. I'm sick of the delay. No more freaking excuses. The M is at 90nm as of the latest version that is SHIPPING NOW. I don't care if its Apple fault or IBM's fault for this. The fact remains that the performance of the PowerBook sucks. Period. barefeats.com has shown that last gen of the M was anywhere from 30% to 40% faster then last falls PowerBook speed bump.
The latest speedbump, if you extract the speeds barefeats.com,
are reporting on the new 1.5Ghz systems, still shows that the M still is probably at least 15 to 20% faster with the "old" Pentium M. Interestingly enough barefeats quietly let that report fade; not mentioning it or following up since that initial report last fall. Wonder why.
The PowerBook's performance sucks. Period. In most cases on the PC side the laptop has a system that is approximately equivalent to its desktop counterpart. Heck in some cases most of the high end laptops can outperform the low-end desktop segment. If Apple truly does introduce the G5 in the iMac we are going to see every desktop product across the board, with the possible exception of the eMac, kick the snot out of Apple's top of the line PowerBook and it appears that this will be the case for some time to come.
I'm going to end up paying more for an IBM then a PowerBook but you know I'm willing to do that simply because its going to be faster. Apple should be embarrassed for the slow POS they have on their hands. It's the most beautiful POS I've ever seen with wonderful features slapped in and around the POS to make it look like the most advanced laptop on the planet. But that doesn't change the fact that it's still a slow POS. Why anyone would go out and buy a new computer simply for a 5% performance increase from the previous version is beyond my comprehension. Maybe its because the PowerBooks are starving for a performance boost beyond the 5%-10% that the latest batch of PowerBooks provides over the last rev. Pathetic. Flame away but I'm not stating anything that isn't bluntly, hurtfully, true and if that makes you think I'm hacking on your purchase that you made I'm not. If it's good enough for you great. Find. I'm very happy for you but since I'm not loyal to any one platform, I don't give a **** about this Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux vs. Amiga vs. whatever debate, I look at all my options and in my opinion the PowerBook stinks like week old New York trash.
On the bright side I'll still be getting something from IBM but it just won't be a G5.
While IBM makes the best PCs in the business, they still are much, much slower than PowerBooks - but are certainly faster in raw speed. Why are they slower? Because of system downtime.
I have several clients running the new PowerBooks and IBM notebooks purchased within the last 6 months. Sure, the IBM machines are faster - but less work gets down on them. They crash in the middle of renders, forcing a reboot and having to start the rendering again on reboot. Within two months the boot time for Windows XP Pro has more than doubled - and these things have to be shutdown because their sleep modes are unreliable.
You can be ignorant and so focused on speed - it's your money. I will tell you this, however. If you work with the IBM, expect crashes on a regular basis. Expect to always have to shutdown and startup the machines (my clients save three minutes at least on the PowerBooks because they instantly awaken from sleep - the IBMs never catch up with the renders because each subsequent restart takes over three minutes). Out of 13 IBM notebooks and 22 PowerBooks, the IBM notebooks have over 12 times the amount of downtime as the PowerBooks (I'm looking at my service records and failure logs now). By my calculations, a slower PowerBook is able to do over three times the amount work of an IBM notebook in an average week in Photoshop, InDesign, FinalCut (or Premiere on the IBM side), and various other machines. Not bad for a slower machine. However, anyone who thinks it just boils down to raw processor speed deserves the problems.
In addition, the amount of time you will have to spend on MS Update will also give you a hit - and you'll find that some of your crucial programs will not work the same after some of those updates. That'll take even more time out of your day. Give someone a new IBM high-end Centrino or Pentium M notebook and give another a top-end G4 15" PowerBook. Make them work the same amount of hours and do the same things. I guarantee you that after two weeks the PowerBook will have done more than three times the amount of work. It's not even a contest. The hardware is nice on the PC side and is definitely superior in many ways (and cheaper), but the OS and a lot of the other software is so poorly made (and horribly optimized for notebooks) that you'll end up losing time.
Go ahead, be stupid. I warned you.
Suggestions?
I purchased a refurb. DUAL2.0 Monday... like an idiot. I figured if the prices dropped, than it would be a little easier to swallow if I didn't pay full price. I didn't expect prices to drop two days after I ordered! I wish I had found these forums earlier!
Cost to me was $2399.00 - 75$ -> 2324.00
Now duals are $2499 with crappier video, $2599 with ATI Pro.
I should be getting the boxes delivered sometime Friday.
I can RMA this back and do one of the following:
1) New 2.0 DUAL -> $2499
2) New 2.5 DUAL -> $2999
3) Wait for a new refurb.
I've heard that 2.5s will take up to a month to get once ordered... is this true? If so, I really don't want to wait that long.
I've heard that refurbs are pretty much indistinquishable from a new machine.
The apple store is no longer selling refurbs at the moment, just old stock for the same price as the current machines. They won't give me price protection either... they don't offer refurb 2.0 rev. A's or are just saying that they now cost $2499 as well.
I wonder what refurb prices will really be on 2.0 duals, 2.5 duals in the next few months, probably something like 2399 2.5 dual, 1999 2.0 dual?
Can I hear suggestions please? What would you do?
Time to bail?
I purchased a refurb. DUAL2.0 Monday... like an idiot. I figured if the prices dropped, than it would be a little easier to swallow if I didn't pay full price. I didn't expect prices to drop two days after I ordered! I wish I had found these forums earlier!
Cost to me was $2399.00 - 75$ -> 2324.00
Now duals are $2499 with crappier video, $2599 with ATI Pro.
I should be getting the boxes delivered sometime Friday.
I can RMA this back and do one of the following:
1) New 2.0 DUAL -> $2499
2) New 2.5 DUAL -> $2999
3) Wait for a new refurb.
I've heard that 2.5s will take up to a month to get once ordered... is this true? If so, I really don't want to wait that long.
I've heard that refurbs are pretty much indistinquishable from a new machine.
The apple store is no longer selling refurbs at the moment, just old stock for the same price as the current machines. They won't give me price protection either... they don't offer refurb 2.0 rev. A's or are just saying that they now cost $2499 as well.
I wonder what refurb prices will really be on 2.0 duals, 2.5 duals in the next few months, probably something like 2399 2.5 dual, 1999 2.0 dual?
Can I hear suggestions please? What would you do?
Time to bail?
Duh!
I think that the 1.8, 2.0, 2.5 lineup is kind of stupid. Maybe Apple is keeping the secret that there is going to be a 3Ghz PowerMac G5 at WWDC. Here is my lineup:
Single:
1.8
2.0
Dual:
2.5
3.0
I know it wont happen, but I would love it.
I think that the 1.8, 2.0, 2.5 lineup is kind of stupid. Maybe Apple is keeping the secret that there is going to be a 3Ghz PowerMac G5 at WWDC. Here is my lineup:
Single:
1.8
2.0
Dual:
2.5
3.0
I know it wont happen, but I would love it.
As a media professional I am disappointed about there not being a 3ghz G5, but the 2.5 is more horse power to throw at my rendering tasks at the end of the day. Being that I compress a LOT of video, a LOT of 3D animation for DVDs and CD-ROMs along with in-house programming... I will take what I can get. A 500mhz increase is a nice jump and should fare well in rendering out video and 3D animations as well as compiling code with the quickness.
As for WWDC, I will be there... and hopefully Tiger will ROCK! and hopefully they will have some other kewlness to show.
As for WWDC, I will be there... and hopefully Tiger will ROCK! and hopefully they will have some other kewlness to show.
