PowerBooks in Paris?

[Stelliform]

lord_flash and SeaFox both have valid points. Apple should plan to prevent this sort of delay, but you have to give them a break also.

Now, if after this significant delay Apple maintains their relationship with Motorola longer than they absolutely have to, while they are switching everything to IBM, then we can fault Apple.

 

[the_dalex]

You're taking the classic whiny consumer view. Of corse you want to complain at Apple, you have only one degree of separation between you and them. It's far easier and more satisfying to your ego to yell at Apple than Motorola. Like all those videogame fans who yelled at Wal-Mart employees when the Playstation 2 came out and every store got less than six systems for the initail launch. Sony simply didn't have production ramped up for the demand, but people got mad at whoever was handy to scream at.

That describes about half of my day, every day. I get to be between Apple and the consumer!

Apple's product line strategy has good and bad points. They try to keep products alive for 6-12 months without too much tweaking, keeping specs stable and dropping prices as needed. They only have 5 Powerbooks and 3 iBooks, and if you look at Dell or Gateway they have so many different models and configs that can change at a moment's notice.

In order for Apple to keep their lines stable, they need to have obvious product transitions. With Dell and Gateway, those transitions are sporadic and unpredictable, so people really don't notice them because they are implented slowly and quietly...it's based on whatever parts they happen to have in good quantity (and they sometimes substitute). In order for Apple to transition, they need time to shift gears, allow retail channels to drain (Dell and Gateway don't have stock-carrying resellers), and get the new product into the channel. This takes time, and that time either comes from a delayed product announcement like we are seeing, or an announcement that occurs well before the ship date. They learned that things sometimes need to be tweaked before final release, so I'm guessing they just didn't want to promise any specs and then have to deal with fallout if something didn't pan out. Good for them, bad for the customer, bad for business... if Apple had a real competitor for hardware, they would have a different business plan altogether.

It's tough when you need to replace a current product (especially your most popular one). It's easy when you introduce a new one, like the 12" and 17".

 

[NicoMan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by Raveny
When Steve Jobs announce new Powerbooks in Paris there won't be another keynote with new PB from SJ in the new future.

Why do everyone think that the keynote IS going to be about PBs? Who knows? Historically, Apple Expo hasn't been tremendously exciting (being french, I resent that). But then again, it could be different this time. Anyway... the point is, it could very well be a software-orientated keynote, with a short mention of new PBs and/or new iBooks (God save us all if it's only iBooks...).

eBeef1996 (I am running out of farm animals, someone please help me...)

 

[filmmaker2002]

Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by tomf87
From www.apple-history.com, I found that the PowerMac G4 was introduced in September 1999. The PowerBook G4 was introduced in January 2001.

Why should the G4 to G5 transition for PowerBook happen so quickly? The only reason I could see is the 1.2Ghz G5 (anyone know for sure if these even exist?). But then, with Apple trying to get the PowerMac G5 out the door, I doubt they would try to push two new models with two new processors out as well.

Ah ha, that's the G4 my friend. If you take a look at the Power Macintosh G3 and the Powerbook G3, you will notice that BOTH were introduced in November of 1997. G3 is an IBM processor, as is the G5. I see no reason why this can't happen with an IBM processor again, especially considering the heat specs.

EDIT: Didn't mean to repeat something already mentioned...didn't read the rest of page 8.

 

[hose this!]

Originally posted by art399
Fair enough, and i agree, but i was responding to your response to the question:



The question is, how much of a difference *now*, for day-to-day apps...not a couple years down the road.

Sorry. My bad. It's just my belief that if I plunk down $2.5K for a laptop, it should still be able to keep up with the demands of the latest software a couple years down the road.

 

[hose this!]

Originally posted by NicoMan
The difference is, you can upgrade with a CD ($100-ish... Smallish pill to swallow). Try and upgrade with a CD your 32-bit processor to a 64-bit processor... You see what I mean?
The thing is, what is going to happen is developpers will insert flags in their programs to take advantage of the 64-bit addressing if it's available. They are not gonna abandon 32-bit chips or make their program incompatible with those just yet (I think).

eGoat1997

That's exactly my point though - it's a hell of a lot easier to upgrade to a major revision of the OS so long as it the hardware isn't the rate limiting factor. Yeah, you can run OSX on a G3, it may be a bit sluggish, but there's no technical limitation preventing you from doing it. Not so with the difference b/w a 32 bit and 64 bit architecture. The jump from a 32 bit architecture to a 64 bit architecture represents a major phase change, and with all phase changes, it will happen quicker and more comprehensively than people think.

I agree, I don't think developers will abandon the 32 bit market, but what industrial Mac app WON'T be touting "OPTIMISED for 64 bits!" a year from now? Hell, Adobe have already released a G5 plugin for Photoshop. You don't think they're optimising next gen software in development right now? You think Apple isn't going to optismise Final Cut Pro 2004 for a G5?

There's no big deal in running today's apps on an underclocked G5 vs. a 1.33MHz G4, but that's today. It may just be a generalisation on this board, but I think people who spend $2.5K on a laptop are expecting a bit more than just "what's good for today." And if they're not, they should be.

 

[doubting_me]

Are there really any Powerbook problems?

I think in some ways many of us (including rumors sites) have been barking up the wrong tree when it comes to Powerbook rumors.

My two cents:

When Apple released the 12 and 17 inch without updating the TiBook, it put itself in a real pickle. There were two obvious solutions. One would be to update the Tibook with the same specs into a Aluminum enclosure with bluetooth, APE, etc around April. It would have been a quiet announcement, and some people would have been mad. Anyway, Apple didn't, probably based on economic data that none of us have access to. Obviously demand, or market analysis showed the TiBook had life left in it and an Alum update wasn't necessary.

Once we crossed into July, however, now Apple couldn't update the TiBook enclosure and SPECS without updating the 12inch and 17inch or things would be out of whack, price / performance wise. So now Apple has to update all three. But we can't do that too soon, probably not because of customer ire, which Apple doesn't really worry about, but because economically there is always a lot of life in a first run, new enclosure system (The TiBook 400/500 when 3/4 of a year before getting even the piddliest of updates - 500/667 and 16 megs of VRAM). This is about the time we should be seeing a refresh of 12 and 17, and yes we are past due for the 15, but economically, the statistics probably pointed this direction as best.

I'm not saying there isn't a shortage of Moto 7457s. Probably is, but is it definite? There was a forum earlier discussing that Moto's own papers said the 7457s wouldn't ship until 3rd quarter (and my experience, which isn't the end all be all, is if it is fiscal year, you write "fiscal year.") and this is exactly what September is.

The iMac's are given this little update, and I can't imagine the Powerbooks having the same processor as the iMacs so we are looking at either 7457's or an G5 announcement with a much later release date.

Economically speaking and judging by the forums, Apple has done everything right. There are lots of us who are going to hit "Buy Now" as soon as we can at the Apple store on Tuesday, which will be great revenue, and Apple got a lot of legs out of the 12 and 17 inch, the former of which got them a back to school special with printer and iPod. I'm sure that moved a lot of units and selling iPods is great because it helps iTMS.

I remember when I was looking for a notebook and the G3 Pismo reigned king, and everyone on the rumor sites were predicting a G4 book at the August and September events and they didn't come out until January, 5 months later. Just like everyone wanted an updated 15 inch Powerbook in May but didn't come up till September. Sounds like those of us who are tech headie enough to actually peruse forums of rumor sites have about a 5 month-less attention span than the general public.

I'm not saying my theory is 100% correct, but maybe all the conspiracy isn't out there, and the 7457s are in the new Powerbooks... right on time.

 

[hose this!]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by filmmaker2002
Ah ha, that's the G4 my friend. If you take a look at the Power Macintosh G3 and the Powerbook G3, you will notice that BOTH were introduced in November of 1997. G3 is an IBM processor, as is the G5. I see no reason why this can't happen with an IBM processor again, especially considering the heat specs.

I agree. There are some very smart cookies at IBM, and helped by deep pockets as well. You know, Apple isn't the only tech company with a healthy sense of vision.

 

[hose this!]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by SeaFox
You're taking the classic whiny consumer view. Of corse you want to complain at Apple, you have only one degree of separation between you and them. It's far easier and more satisfying to your ego to yell at Apple than Motorola. Like all those videogame fans who yelled at Wal-Mart employees when the Playstation 2 came out and every store got less than six systems for the initail launch. Sony simply didn't have production ramped up for the demand, but people got mad at whoever was handy to scream at.

Consumers have every right to make demands as they see fit. Apple and everybody who works for them has a salary and a job to look forward to because we, the consumers, support them. It is not the other way around.

Motorola may be at fault for not delivering processors on time, but if Apple bills itself as a computer company, then they are ultimately responsible for delivering computers on time. Fine if they aren't the ones manufacturing processors, but whose decisions (and a bad one at that) was it to rely on a single manufacturer for such a critical part? At the very least, they should at least communicate with their customers about when they can expect new products. This is just a good, decent way of running a business - any business.

As far as all this nonsense about Apple not having a responsibility to deliver or reveal updates to their products in a timely manner, all I have to say is that the people who are positing these comments probably don't have a reliance on their computers (for work, life, etc.).

Not only that, but such practices are bad bad business. Imagine going to a grocery store for milk. They're out. You ask the guy behind the counter, "Hey, I'd like some milk - when are you going to get more in?" The guy looks at you indifferently and says, "We may be getting some in, but even if I knew, I'm not going to tell you when." So you leave in a huff and say "Well, I'm never going to shop THERE again. Especially when I can just go down the corner to the next store and buy..."

...but then that's the point. You really can't do that with Macs, can you? You do rely on a single supplier of computers to run the software you want, and in that sense - though perhaps not in totality - Apple IS a monopoly. To say that Apple in even the smallest way is not is completely ridiculous.

Think different.

Expect more. Demand more. They're here to serve us, not us to serve them.

This applies to our political institutions as well, BTW.

 

[NicoMan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by filmmaker2002
Ah ha, that's the G4 my friend. If you take a look at the Power Macintosh G3 and the Powerbook G3, you will notice that BOTH were introduced in November of 1997. G3 is an IBM processor, as is the G5. I see no reason why this can't happen with an IBM processor again, especially considering the heat specs.

EDIT: Didn't mean to repeat something already mentioned...didn't read the rest of page 8.

I think there is a lot more to it than just the fact that IBM made the G3 available immediately for a laptop. The path that Apple has taken for their laptops (you know, extra slim metallic enclosures), since the original TiBook, is somewhat constraining: they can't just do a Dell and slap a new desktop chip in a big platic enclosure. Industrial design to get all the components together is becoming very important, not because Apple can, but because they need it for their laptops to give them an edge.

My 2 Euro cents.

 

[macphoria]

At this point, I would rather wait few more months and have G5 PowerBooks than semi updated G4 PowerBooks.

 

[NicoMan]

Originally posted by hose this!
I agree, I don't think developers will abandon the 32 bit market, but what industrial Mac app WON'T be touting "OPTIMISED for 64 bits!" a year from now? Hell, Adobe have already released a G5 plugin for Photoshop. You don't think they're optimising next gen software in development right now? You think Apple isn't going to optismise Final Cut Pro 2004 for a G5?

OK I see what you are saying. I guess the only part where I disagree is the speed at which it happens and how it happens. You are saying that apps are going to be optimised for the G5 and rather soon. I would prefer to think that apps are going to be modified to be able to take advantage of the G5, when it's there, but they are still going to be G4 and G3-optimised. The 3 chips are all from the same family (PowerPC), they don't differ by THAT much in theory.
Hmm, who knows... On a different note, hardware change is a tricky issue. I would love to see, in the space of a few months, EVERYONE migrating to the G5 and software developpers producing a version of their soft WRITTEN FOR THE G5. As far as Apple are concerned, that would be fantastic. But irrealistic. So you still have to cater for the ppl that own G3s and G4s and can't (or won't) upgrade. Remember that those 2 chips, as of today, represent something like 4/5 of the Apple range on display at the Apple store, and everyone knows that Macs have, traditionnally, a very long life... So, you see, I don't view the change you are describing as being as quick radical as you do, but heh, it's just my opinion.

eTomato2001

 

[NicoMan]

Re: Are there really any Powerbook problems?

Originally posted by doubting_me
Economically speaking and judging by the forums, Apple has done everything right.

That's the only point where I tend to disagree. I'm not saying that they COULD have done otherwise (timing of supply of 7457s), but it seems that their obsession with inventories (low to inexistant is what has been written for some time now) has deprived them of a lot of sales, especially for the back-to-school season.

 

[SeaFox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by hose this!
Consumers have every right to make demands as they see fit. Apple and everybody who works for them has a salary and a job to look forward to because we, the consumers, support them. It is not the other way around.

That doesn't give us license to blame them for factors beyond their control.

Motorola may be at fault for not delivering processors on time, but if Apple bills itself as a computer company, then they are ultimately responsible for delivering computers on time. Fine if they aren't the ones manufacturing processors, but whose decisions (and a bad one at that) was it to rely on a single manufacturer for such a critical part?

I like this assumption they have the choice. If there was a catastrophic problem at Intel and they couldn't produce faster CPU's, or any at all, do you think Dell can just call up AMD and say "Hey! Make me 30,000 3.5Ghz Pentium 4's will ya? Intel can't fill our demand."

PPC development treed off in two different directions when the Apple-IBM-Motorola relationship broke down. Just because IBM and Motorola are both making CPU's called "G4" by Apple marketing doesn't mean you can just dump one and swap in another when you run out of a specific part.

Apple did have IBM license a Motorola design to meet needed demand at a point in the past. But I'm sure Motorola had to agree to let IBM do that. Maybe they didn't want to let work get farmed out this time.

As far as all this nonsense about Apple not having a responsibility to deliver or reveal updates to their products in a timely manner, all I have to say is that the people who are positing these comments probably don't have a reliance on their computers (for work, life, etc.).

I disgree. I think they do have a reliance on their computers. The difference is, unlike the gotta-have-the-latest-fastest craze that grips the Wintel world, Macs retain their usefullness longer so we don't have such a problem being a little more patient.

Not only that, but such practices are bad bad business. Imagine going to a grocery store for milk. They're out. You ask the guy behind the counter, "Hey, I'd like some milk - when are you going to get more in?" The guy looks at you indifferently and says, "We may be getting some in, but even if I knew, I'm not going to tell you when." So you leave in a huff and say "Well, I'm never going to shop THERE again. Especially when I can just go down the corner to the next store and buy..."

This example has no similarity to present events. If this we a valid Apple metaphor:

1) The store would have milk, it just wouldn't be as fresh as the milk you want. Hence the guy "wont tell you when" because he wants to sell the milk he has now.

2) There are no other stores. If you want MILK, you have to buy from the Apple market. If you go to the Microstore, you get water instead.

...but then that's the point. You really can't do that with Macs, can you? You do rely on a single supplier of computers to run the software you want, and in that sense - though perhaps not in totality - Apple IS a monopoly. To say that Apple in even the smallest way is not is completely ridiculous.

Nobody here has denied that. We simply enjoy the flavor of this monopoly more. Also, the world isn't drowning in milk, and the water is washing all the other beverages away!

 

[Bruja]

Re: ^5 almost for sure

Originally posted by hose this!
Consumers have every right to make demands as they see fit. Apple and everybody who works for them has a salary and a job to look forward to because we, the consumers, support them. It is not the other way around.

Motorola may be at fault for not delivering processors on time, but if Apple bills itself as a computer company, then they are ultimately responsible for delivering computers on time. Fine if they aren't the ones manufacturing processors, but whose decisions (and a bad one at that) was it to rely on a single manufacturer for such a critical part? At the very least, they should at least communicate with their customers about when they can expect new products. This is just a good, decent way of running a business - any business.

As far as all this nonsense about Apple not having a responsibility to deliver or reveal updates to their products in a timely manner, all I have to say is that the people who are positing these comments probably don't have a reliance on their computers (for work, life, etc.).

Not only that, but such practices are bad bad business. Imagine going to a grocery store for milk. They're out. You ask the guy behind the counter, "Hey, I'd like some milk - when are you going to get more in?" The guy looks at you indifferently and says, "We may be getting some in, but even if I knew, I'm not going to tell you when." So you leave in a huff and say "Well, I'm never going to shop THERE again. Especially when I can just go down the corner to the next store and buy..."

...but then that's the point. You really can't do that with Macs, can you? You do rely on a single supplier of computers to run the software you want, and in that sense - though perhaps not in totality - Apple IS a monopoly. To say that Apple in even the smallest way is not is completely ridiculous.

Think different.

Expect more. Demand more. They're here to serve us, not us to serve them.

This applies to our political institutions as well, BTW.

Wurd!!! Are you listening Mr. Jobs & Detroit???

 

[yujini]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by hose this!
Consumers have every right to make demands as they see fit. Apple and everybody who works for them has a salary and a job to look forward to because we, the consumers, support them. It is not the other way around.

Motorola may be at fault for not delivering processors on time, but if Apple bills itself as a computer company, then they are ultimately responsible for delivering computers on time. Fine if they aren't the ones manufacturing processors, but whose decisions (and a bad one at that) was it to rely on a single manufacturer for such a critical part? At the very least, they should at least communicate with their customers about when they can expect new products. This is just a good, decent way of running a business - any business.

As far as all this nonsense about Apple not having a responsibility to deliver or reveal updates to their products in a timely manner, all I have to say is that the people who are positing these comments probably don't have a reliance on their computers (for work, life, etc.).

Not only that, but such practices are bad bad business. Imagine going to a grocery store for milk. They're out. You ask the guy behind the counter, "Hey, I'd like some milk - when are you going to get more in?" The guy looks at you indifferently and says, "We may be getting some in, but even if I knew, I'm not going to tell you when." So you leave in a huff and say "Well, I'm never going to shop THERE again. Especially when I can just go down the corner to the next store and buy..."

...but then that's the point. You really can't do that with Macs, can you? You do rely on a single supplier of computers to run the software you want, and in that sense - though perhaps not in totality - Apple IS a monopoly. To say that Apple in even the smallest way is not is completely ridiculous.

Think different.

Expect more. Demand more. They're here to serve us, not us to serve them.

This applies to our political institutions as well, BTW.

Though I've posted this on another forum as well,
announcing a new product when it is not available yet is not a good idea. There have been cases where the company would go bankrupt because of this. Have you ever seen cases where they would announce a product ahead of time when they have a current model available for sale? (i'm assuming the new product is the revised/upgraded same product)

Not one company does that. I know Dell doesn't do it. Gateway doesn't do it. Compaq doesn't do it. And of course apple doesn't do it. If they did say we're going to start selling the new 15' al powerbooks on october 15th, why would people buy the powerbooks right now? They would sell almost no ti15 powerbooks.

Milk is different. You are asking when the same exact milk will be available. That can be answered. But if you were an average user who doesn't check rumor sites and stuff, if apple said "we're announcing the new ibook. It's going to have this and that, and it will be available soon", would you go out and pay 1500+ bux for it? I wouldn't.

That's how the company (damn, forgot the name of it though it's such a well known event in the business industry) who made computers in the 80s went bankrupt. Their PCs were selling like mad crazy, and they announced the new PCs that they were going to sell with all the specs and stuff, but after they announced that, people were waiting for it. They couldn't sell the current models available, no cash flow, and thus couldn't pay for parts and R&D. And of course, the company went bankrupt.
(But the CEO, he made tons of money after he wrote a book on this)

Don't think what Apple is doing is bad business. This is what all tech companies do nowadays. Not just apple. The fact is, if you do a business, don't announce an upgrade of the same model (in this case powerbooks) ahead of time.
You may argue that apple has more than just powerbooks, but it still gives a negative impact by not being able to sell the current powerbooks, thus giving apple a lesser cash flow.

 

[MacIke]

Originally posted by tizza
I'll be ready to hit the order button the moment after the keynote ...

I will be there ready to order the 15"

 

[MacIke]

Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by Raveny
<I found that the PowerMac G4 was introduced in September 1999. The PowerBook G4 was introduced in January 2001.>



When you look at apple-history again you will notice that the G3 Powerbook came out at the same time with the G3 Powermac! And now the G5 is also from IBM like the G3s. And I think that after 10+ month there can't be just a 0.25 speed bump.

When Steve Jobs announce new Powerbooks in Paris there won't be another keynote with new PB from SJ in the new future. Or do you think that he comes up with PB again in 6 month or so? Either it will be the G5 PB or a G4 with an extra. If G4 is in it the G5 will come out later than early 2004.

Sorry for any mistakes. I don't have written or spoken English for 2 years.

Mistakes overlooked and gladly forgiven.
javascript:smilie('')

I am really hoping for G5 PB. This makes sense on timing. Will not undercut the powermac side

and.... give Steve a huge show.

a .25 increase is a YAWN and will not have apple on the cutting edge... not to mention it will be as fast as an iMac?

Anycase I will be there on Tuesday ready to buy.

 

[hose this!]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by yujini
Though I've posted this on another forum as well,
announcing a new product when it is not available yet is not a good idea. There have been cases where the company would go bankrupt because of this. Have you ever seen cases where they would announce a product ahead of time when they have a current model available for sale? (i'm assuming the new product is the revised/upgraded same product)

What, like with the G5 towers?

 

[yujini]

I thought that was a delay in shipment?
Taking preorders for a new product that would ship in a month seems fine. Though it seems like apple has delayed the shipment for the 1.8ghz and 2.0 duals to the customers.
And obviously now you see all these complaints about apple not shipping it on time and keep delaying it.

 

[hose this!]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by SeaFox
I like this assumption they have the choice. If there was a catastrophic problem at Intel and they couldn't produce faster CPU's, or any at all, do you think Dell can just call up AMD and say "Hey! Make me 30,000 3.5Ghz Pentium 4's will ya? Intel can't fill our demand."

Sure. It's grouped under what might be called the "natural laws of competition". If Intel can't fulfill processor demand, AMD sure as hell will - and they know this.

Why you're willing to go to such great lengths to defend this Apple policy borders on unquestioning orthodoxy. Have you or any one you know ever run their own business? If you purport to offer a solution to customers and then can't deliver it, they don't want to hear crap about how it's your supplier's fault or the delivery guys fault or whatever. It's pretty much your fault and if you run over expected ("expected" and "promised" may draw a distinction in a court of law, but is immaterial in a market) you better tell your customers when they can expect delivery.

Apple is a computer company. They're in the business of making computers. An essential part of that business is releasing fresh products in a timely manner, ESPECIALLY when their customers express a great demand for them. The foundation of any good business is delivering products your customers want/need. Lining up their suppliers and partners is Apple's responsibility. The buck stops there. It's not whiny at all that we should hold them ultimately accountable.

 

[Raveny]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by MacIke
Mistakes overlooked and gladly forgiven.
javascript:smilie('')

I am really hoping for G5 PB. This makes sense on timing. Will not undercut the powermac side

and.... give Steve a huge show.

a .25 increase is a YAWN and will not have apple on the cutting edge... not to mention it will be as fast as an iMac?

Anycase I will be there on Tuesday ready to buy.

Thanks for forgiving!!!!

I think it's possible that there will be G5 Powerbooks this keynote and next time SJ introduces G4 Ibook.. next time G5 Imac and so on...

 

[hose this!]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by yujini
Don't think what Apple is doing is bad business. This is what all tech companies do nowadays. Not just apple. The fact is, if you do a business, don't announce an upgrade of the same model (in this case powerbooks) ahead of time.
You may argue that apple has more than just powerbooks, but it still gives a negative impact by not being able to sell the current powerbooks, thus giving apple a lesser cash flow.

Yes, but stocks of old PBs are nearly depleted. It's not like they have wherehouses and wherehouses filled with them that they're waiting to sell. Your argument would be stronger if they did.

As many people have posted on this board (and I'm sure many more lurkers are doing the same), they are holding back their laptop purchase based on news of upcoming PB releases. This goes for people who are trying to decide b/w a PC laptop and a Mac as well. There have been some angry posters who have held out as long as they could but have gone ahead and purchased PC laptops as a result of this uncertainty. Taken to this extreme (and it is extreme - extremely tardy), Apple should do something that they might not do under normal circumstances because they ARE losing customers (back to school crowd, anyone?) as a result of this delay.

I, for one, would have bought a new PB 3-4 months ago if I knew Apple were going to release only a slightly speedier G4 model this fall. But now that I've had to wait this long, if it's not a G5 or they lower prices on the new G4 line, forget it.

 

[Bruja]

I do think that it's rather sad that since appl has a monopoly on their products, they can bloody well do what they please. To re-iterate what I've said in another thread: Apple's reason for delay is weak! We are the people waiting in line for this thing to be released/made availible to the public. I for one, will think twice about purchasing new technology from appl in the future because if there were other companies that produced the same type of laptop then I would've purchased it by now OR appl would've been more apt to give more information. Lastly: Milk should be drunk, not chewed!! hose this was correct and though the "haters" may try to flame him/her, they know (deep in their hearts) that he/she is correct.

Solace,

Edited for typos -Bruja

 

[eric67]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: almost for sure

Originally posted by NicoMan
Why do everyone think that the keynote IS going to be about PBs? Who knows? Historically, Apple Expo hasn't been tremendously exciting (being french, I resent that). But then again, it could be different this time. Anyway... the point is, it could very well be a software-orientated keynote, with a short mention of new PBs and/or new iBooks (God save us all if it's only iBooks...).

eBeef1996 (I am running out of farm animals, someone please help me...)

yes I agree with you, MacOSX was announced at Apple Expo Paris, and it is usually a more software annoucement Expo, not hardware... maybe a small speed jump for all PB, but nothing tremendous; anyway there is no web broadcasting, so do not expect big news regarding hardware.
I do imagine more software news, like introducing and/or announcing Panther, the iTMS ofr Windows, maybe for Europe too, iOffice,...
let see