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.
Powerbook and PowerMac Updates - October 19th?
- Thread starter Superhob
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't see the quote in the ThinkSecret article about dropping the 12" PowerBook. All it says now is this: "PowerBooks, in dire need of an update, may also arrive alongside the Power Macs, although details there remain fuzzy." Am I not reading in the right place, or what?
Mr Maui said:I understand this, but Apple will not lower the price with things that are different, or better, in the new lineup. JMO
Rumors may be right when they hint that the 12" is on the verge of being EOL'd. The 12" iBook and 14" iBook are too competive with the 12" Powerbook. They probably outsell it too. Won't swear to that one though.
If the 12" PB is indeed EOL'd, this would be a perfect opportunity for Apple to drop the prices on the updated 15" and 17" PBs just like they did with the iBooks when they were last updated....
Update 12" and 14" iBooks. EOL the 14" iBook with the combo drive. And drop prices. Update the 15" PB and 17" PB. EOL the 12" PB. And drop prices.
Apple should also EOL the 15" PB with the combo drive.
15" PB with SuperDrive for $1899 or $1999.
17" PB with SuperDrive for $2299 or $2399.
Offer the HD displays as a BTO option.
spade said:
New iPod Shuffles.
jedijoe said:
And on the 15" and 17" PBs. But still within 24 hours on the 12" PBs, which means they're probably EOL'd. So I guess no updates on those.
I'm sure someone's already mentioned this by now.
Chrispy said:
I think that the person that you are quoting ment the Apple Developer Powermacs with P4s. Not the powerbooks. Apple will not forbid to install Windows in the Macs. Because that would just be an advantage. Imagine all the arquitects in the world that would just would love to do Autocat in their macs but they cant because VPC is not fast enough. I actually know a couple people that have PC laptops, and Imacs at home because they are Apple fans but they still have to use Windows.
It would also be a kick in the balls to M$ because they don't want macs running access at full speeds. now with intel macs, so many more people are going to be tempted at buying Apple because it is in style (Everybody has an ipod) and for the first time in history, Apple will be more compatible than the PC compatibles it self.
Now they can say, look OS X runs faster than windows and it is a much better operating system. But if u need to do anything with windows, it just runs.
I can also tell you right now that I would not be supprised if microsoft itself writes the drivers for the new Intel Macs, because they are gonna love the fact that the 3rd most popular computer hardware company when it comes to sales Are now their potential customers too )
Microsoft is not Apples Enemy, they are just the bigger guy in the block that we don't like. But Apple and Microsoft from now on are both going to benefit from the swich.
Now what I want to see is actuall windows applications running on OS X with out the need for the operating system. I know that it can be achieved really easily because it can be done with the x86 versions of linux and BSD with some application.
Now I also belive that apple would sell a pb G5 really well during the holiday season, and it would not harm them alot.
Maybe the PB G5 could even sell at the same time as the PX x86, because there is two different niches for them.
If you are a swicher the PB x86 would be a better option, if you are a mac pro and fanatic the G5 would be the one for you, atleast untill RevC of the PB x86.
That is just my 2 cents
My dream machine (looking ahead to Intel) would be the smallest PowerBook... but with the GHz, GPU, and backlit keys of the top PowerBook.plinkoman said:
Apple treats the smallest PB like the low-end, but the small screen isn't a cost-cutting movie, it's for portability. Some people still want maxmium power, and will pay for it. AND it's the one PB MOST likely to get hooked up to an external display. Meaning it's often the PB with the "biggest" screen--bigger than 17". So I'd love to see a version of it treated like the high-end.
I sent that feedback to Apple FWIW
sw1tcher said:And on the 15" and 17" PBs. But still within 24 hours on the 12" PBs, which means they're probably EOL'd. So I guess no updates on those.
They don't have to discontinue the 12" model. They can keep on selling it as is until the Intel transition.
ibook30 said:
New iSight next tuesday!
fklehman said:
Why? PCI-X is basically PCI on steroids, it's the internal-expansion PowerMac has. PCI-E is a different thing, and better in just about every possible way.
Soooooo True!
Well said my friend... What does everyone think about the possibility of a G5 PowerBook? 1.6Ghz maybe? (see previous posts.) Is it remotely possible? Keep in mind these rumor sites aren't always right - by any means. Too many people have lost hope... should I?
nagromme said:My dream machine (looking ahead to Intel) would be the smallest PowerBook... but with the GHz, GPU, and backlit keys of the top PowerBook.
Apple treats the smallest PB like the low-end, but the small screen isn't a cost-cutting movie, it's for portability. Some people still want maxmium power, and will pay for it. AND it's the one PB MOST likely to get hooked up to an external display. Meaning it's often the PB with the "biggest" screen--bigger than 17". So I'd love to see a version of it treated like the high-end.
I sent that feedback to Apple FWIW
Well said my friend... What does everyone think about the possibility of a G5 PowerBook? 1.6Ghz maybe? (see previous posts.) Is it remotely possible? Keep in mind these rumor sites aren't always right - by any means. Too many people have lost hope... should I?
I really hope this one actually becomes a reality... I've been waiting for the dual-core Power Macs for a while now! I could really use a desktop Mac as I need more power. My PowerBook just isn't cutting it sometimes with large .PSD and .ai files. And plus, I just started a graphic design business so this would really help me along the way.
*crosses fingers* Please, Apple!
*crosses fingers* Please, Apple!
D3LM3L said:
Basically: yes. Computers will NEVER be "fast enough" when you really think about it. Sure, 2x 2.7GHz G5 is fast. But wouldn't it be nice if the time it takes to compile something on that machine could be reduced by 50%? Or render-times could be reduced by 50%? Or the time it takes to encode video? The list goes on. The computer might be fast, but there are still times when you have to wait for it to finish doing something. And as computers get faster, so do the demands of the users. Video has to be encoded at higher resolutions and bit-rates, software get bigger and more powerful, amount of eye-candy increases. And all that requries faster computers.
My tower-PC at home has a 2.2 GHz Athlon64 in it. It has plenty of performance. But If I were given the possibility to upgrade it to 2x 2.6Ghz dual-core Opteron, I would do so in a heartbeat.
RHMMMM said:
That CPU would run at around 1.6Ghz and consume about 16w of power. 7448 Would run at around 1.6Ghz and consume about 10w of power. At those speeds, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if 7448 actually outperformed the 970GX (7448 has faster bus, twice as much L2 and improved Altivec when compared to G4). So same or better performance, a lot easier upgrade and lower power-consumption, when compared to 970GX. The 7448 would be an excellent upgrade.
It would be kind of disappointing if Apple do end up making a substantial change to the G5 towers at this late date, because that in turn points to the x86 switch being completed at the later end of Jobs' vague estimates. During the window when both architectures are sold, it's going to make purchasing decisions painful, and it would be nice to see that window be as small as possible.
~Shard~ said:So let me get this straight, you're waiting until Apple puts Intel architecture into a Mac, even though you want to run Windows (whereas the Intel Macs will run OS X), and the whole reason you say this is because a certain Mac version of a Windows app doesn't do exactly what you want it to?
- Intel Macs will run OS X, not Windows.
By default, no. But Apple has confirmed that they are not going to stop people from running Windows on Macintels. To people like me, that would be perfect. I could have Windows there for occasional game or two, and OS X (and Linux) for work and other fun things
. All that with just one computer.If OS X/CPU supports wirtualization, I could run other OS'es inside OS X, at native speeds, without having to reboot.
pdpfilms said:
Yes they will. You can't run OS X on Dell, you you will be able to run Windows on Mac.
iMeowbot said:
PowerMacs are the last systems to switch to Intel. I bet they switch in early 2007, so we will be having PPC-PowerMacs for a long time.
This is how I see things occurring
POWERMACS
Single Dual Core 2.0Ghz 512mb DDR2 160gb X600Pro Superdrive $1499
Dual Single Core 2.3Ghz 512mb DDR2 250gb X600XT Superdrive $1999
Dual Single Core 2.5Ghz 1GB DDR2 250gb 256mb X600XT Superdrive $2499
Dual Dual Core 2.5Ghz 1GB DDR2 500gb 256mb X850XT Superdrive $3299
POWERBOOKS
12" - 1.67Ghz 512mb DDR2 80GB 64mb X600 Superdrive $1499
15" - 1.67Ghz 1GB DDR2 100GB 128mb X600 Superdrive $1999
17" - 1.67Ghz 1GB DDR2 120GB 128mb X600 Superdrive $2499 HD
My PREDICTIONS (just guessed)
POWERMACS
Single Dual Core 2.0Ghz 512mb DDR2 160gb X600Pro Superdrive $1499
Dual Single Core 2.3Ghz 512mb DDR2 250gb X600XT Superdrive $1999
Dual Single Core 2.5Ghz 1GB DDR2 250gb 256mb X600XT Superdrive $2499
Dual Dual Core 2.5Ghz 1GB DDR2 500gb 256mb X850XT Superdrive $3299
POWERBOOKS
12" - 1.67Ghz 512mb DDR2 80GB 64mb X600 Superdrive $1499
15" - 1.67Ghz 1GB DDR2 100GB 128mb X600 Superdrive $1999
17" - 1.67Ghz 1GB DDR2 120GB 128mb X600 Superdrive $2499 HD
My PREDICTIONS (just guessed)
you know, apple could put an h264 hardwware decoder chip in these powerbooks. that would help the poor ol g4 to play that hd content. if they can get a chip in a miniscule ipod to do 320x240, they should be able to get something in the pb that can do better than that. didn't ati just release a new chipset last week....
freechris said:oke so with a dual dual-core G5, you would have 4 cores (Quattro core), each running at 2,5 Ghz.
so then you would get a 10 Ghz PowerMac G5
imagine what kind of media attention Apple wil get when this would happen
No, 4x 2.5 GHz. Not the same thing.
So they would sell the machine for only 100$ less than the old Dual 2.3GHz machine, even though it is only 200MHz faster? Not gonna happen... And I would consider that a ripp-off as well and wouldn't buy a machine like that...JRM PowerPod said:
groovebuster
P.S.: Regarding the rest of the line-up it also wouldn't make sense to put two single core processors into the machines instead of one dual core processor. Since one processor will be always cheaper than two. My bet is that the whole PowerMac line moves to dual core processors and that the single cores are exclusive iMac in the future. It would be the perfect distinction Apple was hoping for for so long...
If you could split a heavy computational job into 4 parts and spread them across the 4 cores, you would be able to claim a 10 GHz computational rate. Instead of getting 2.5 GHz worth of computations per second, you would be getting 10.ajwitte said: