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.
PowerMac G5s - on or around Jan 20th?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
That would be a great Machine.. I'm hoping to see the "Rumored" iMac update. Should be interesting when that date rolls around.
Prices for 2.0, 2,3 and 2,6 dual
You think the prices for the 2.0 2.3 and 2.6 models will be about the same like the prices for the 1,6 1,8d and 2,0d?
maybe the lowest model will be just a bit more expensive.
will the mid and highend model stay like that - or will it be a bit more expensive or even a lot?
You think the prices for the 2.0 2.3 and 2.6 models will be about the same like the prices for the 1,6 1,8d and 2,0d?
maybe the lowest model will be just a bit more expensive.
will the mid and highend model stay like that - or will it be a bit more expensive or even a lot?
The 24th???
Mac OS Rumors.com says the 24th is the big press day... but seriously I can not recall Apple ever doing anything on a Saturday.
My vote is for the 20th a Tuesday.
Why? - because for a fact I know it is sooner than any other date after it!
Mac OS Rumors.com says the 24th is the big press day... but seriously I can not recall Apple ever doing anything on a Saturday.
My vote is for the 20th a Tuesday.
Why? - because for a fact I know it is sooner than any other date after it!
It'd be neat if on the 24th, Apple released a new G5 with insane specs. Dual 2.6ghz processors, 1.3ghz FSB (is that possible?), etc. That'll make the Mac-bashers real quiet real quick.
What if the 1.6PM & 1.8 became a smaller form factor and then faster dualies in the big Powermac. Though I don't remember Apple every having two Powermac cases at the same time...
W
W
Macintosh G5
Apple needs to introduce a Single Processor model the "Macintosh G5" and make the "POWER Macintosh G5" all dual CPU.
Macintosh G5
---
2.0Ghz - MacG5 - $1100
2.2Ghz - MacG5 - $1300
2.4Ghz - MacG5 - $1500
POWER Macintosh G5
---
2x2.2Ghz - MacG5 - $2000
2x2.4Ghz - MacG5 - $2300
2x2.6Ghz - MacG5 - $2700
Something in line with that, lower priced single cpu systems in a lower cost case to promote unit sales growth, make them cost less and more people will buy them.
Apple seems to always talk about wanting to grow market share but never prices their products to actually do it. Apple has a lot of good buzz going now, lots of people have a good general feeling towards them even though the've never bought their products before, now is the time to try to make a market share move, and to do that apple needs to get prices down, and offer products more in line with what people are buying...
Apple needs to introduce a Single Processor model the "Macintosh G5" and make the "POWER Macintosh G5" all dual CPU.
Macintosh G5
---
2.0Ghz - MacG5 - $1100
2.2Ghz - MacG5 - $1300
2.4Ghz - MacG5 - $1500
POWER Macintosh G5
---
2x2.2Ghz - MacG5 - $2000
2x2.4Ghz - MacG5 - $2300
2x2.6Ghz - MacG5 - $2700
Something in line with that, lower priced single cpu systems in a lower cost case to promote unit sales growth, make them cost less and more people will buy them.
Apple seems to always talk about wanting to grow market share but never prices their products to actually do it. Apple has a lot of good buzz going now, lots of people have a good general feeling towards them even though the've never bought their products before, now is the time to try to make a market share move, and to do that apple needs to get prices down, and offer products more in line with what people are buying...
Re: Macintosh G5
I totally see what you mean, but then the computers compete directly with the iMacs and you also have a lot of products within the same product line.
Re: Re: Re: I'm buying a G4 - NOT!
You need to be more specific with your language.
G5's won't boot into OS 9. G5's will run Classic.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86209 - Note the G5 is not the only machine on this list. There are some G4 based machines there, too, including the last PowerMac G4s.
You need to be more specific with your language.
G5's won't boot into OS 9. G5's will run Classic.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86209 - Note the G5 is not the only machine on this list. There are some G4 based machines there, too, including the last PowerMac G4s.
Re: Macintosh G5
I agree with everything except those prices will never happen for the lower end and/or those machines UNLESS you mean those are consumer machines like iMac or even eMac. It's good to have product seperation, consumer, prosumer, and pro user, it's what helped Apple streamline their products and regain profitability, I wouldn't want to see it any other way.
I agree with everything except those prices will never happen for the lower end and/or those machines UNLESS you mean those are consumer machines like iMac or even eMac. It's good to have product seperation, consumer, prosumer, and pro user, it's what helped Apple streamline their products and regain profitability, I wouldn't want to see it any other way.
Is there anything Firewire 800? Seems like the "Firewire" hasnt taken off on the PC or Mac Market - I think its a dying breed.
Re: Re: Macintosh G5
I disagree with ALL of you. The PC Market doesnt have these problems of Consumer Line Seperations. Just have the iMac and PowerMac - Drop the eMac.
I disagree with ALL of you. The PC Market doesnt have these problems of Consumer Line Seperations. Just have the iMac and PowerMac - Drop the eMac.
On the contrary, FireWire is the future, which is still being adopted - more and more so. Apple has always been in front of new tehnology like FW - remember USB? I remember when Apple's had USB ports standard and the PC world was still wondering if "this USB thing" would catch on, and it was a good couple years after Apple had made it commonplace on their machines that PCs started to do the same. Same with the SuperDrive - when did Apple introduce their all-in-one DVD burner, and then when did we finally see the SuperDrive-equivalents in PCs?
As for FireWire, it's becoming more and mroe adopted, but FW800 is still not utilized very much - FW400 is definitely becoming more and more popular though, what with DV cams and high-end digital cameras, and I completely disagree with you when you say the FW is a dying breed.
nah
the eMac is great
its cheap and offers all normal office/internet peeps need.
the imac is what noone needs, but its looks great!
i would continue both lines until CRT monitors are totally out of date,
then i would set 4 or 5 imac models (that represent the old emac and the current imacs at that time)
the eMac is great
its cheap and offers all normal office/internet peeps need.
the imac is what noone needs, but its looks great!
i would continue both lines until CRT monitors are totally out of date,
then i would set 4 or 5 imac models (that represent the old emac and the current imacs at that time)
IEEE1394 (which is called Firewire in Apple) has NOT taken off for the main stream - and its been around for years now. Most in the Manufacturing (those who make Video Cameras and Hard Drives) industry disagree with you and see USB 2.0 as the standard. Look at PC's with like 500 USB 2.0 Ports and maybe ONE IEEE1394 Port - theres a reason for it - So I dont see FW800 even comming close to a standard (for the main stream population) In regards to USB - I disagree with you there - Remeber how everyone was jumping up and down that FINALLY Apple put USB 2.0 on the PMG5?? I dont consider that to be an "innovator" in product lines. Dont get me wrong - I love Mac - not bashing - just being honest - some people see Apple as "Never can do wrong and always on top" - but in the case of Firewire - it just hasne taken off - PERIOD.
My opinion is that the USB technology will get faster.
Professionaal industry uses FW devices more than you realize. Not saying USB isn't currently more popular, but FW is being used more and more whether you realize it or not. And yes I realize FW is IEEE1394. Being an Electronics Engineer I have worked with more IEEE standards hands-on than you have probably even heard of.
As for if it will become more mainstream and become "the next big thing", I guess time will tell.
Originally posted by ~Shard~
Professionaal industry uses FW devices more than you realize. Not saying USB isn't currently more popular, but FW is being used more and more whether you realize it or not. And yes I realize FW is IEEE1394. Being an Electronics Engineer I have worked with more IEEE standards hands-on than you have probably even heard of.
As for if it will become more mainstream and become "the next big thing", I guess time will tell.
I think "time" has already told
Originally posted by TranceClubMusic
I think "time" has already told
Fair enough - everyone is entitled to their opinion.
FW vs USB 2
While this discussion may verge on being off topic, I think that FW did miss the window for being widespread on consumer boxes. Why it did that is probably the more relevent question - I'm not sure if there were any license fees (because I thought it was an industry standard), or if the addidtional cost of FW ports just made most PC makers stick to USB only.
Now that USB 2 has come along, it seems that there will be even fewer consumer PC's with the FW interface - many external HD's now ship with both FW and USB2, so the PC manufacturers will have even less incentive to include FW. If they made users get by with the slow USB, how can these same people complain about only having the faster USB 2.
I know that FW 800 (I have an external drive) does have twice the theoretical speed, but the HDs themselves are still below regular FW speeds. I did see a review in Macworld on these drives from Nov. 2003, that showed that when duplicating files INSIDE an external FW 800 drive the speed increase was about 30%, but that was the largest increase.
As for the use of FW on digital cameras, I wonder if it isn't driven by 2 things: first, wasn't Sony (a huge DV maker) one of the parties, like Apple, with an interest in pushing FW? They seem to be the only PC maker besides Apple that has IEEE1394 ports as standard. And secondly, the 4-pin FW port appears much smaller than comparable USB ports, so given the push to make the DV devices as small as possible this might have also driven it's adoption in DV.
I also agree that FW's success with DV will probably NOT continue to grow with other devices. Besides HDs, I don't see many groups of devices that use FW. Almost no printers, a minority of scanners even given the HUGE speed hit with the origianl USB (granted, high end ones use FW, but with USB2 out this will decrease), and very limited ussage even in tape back-up devices.
edited for spelling mistakes, so everyone won't laugh too hard
While this discussion may verge on being off topic, I think that FW did miss the window for being widespread on consumer boxes. Why it did that is probably the more relevent question - I'm not sure if there were any license fees (because I thought it was an industry standard), or if the addidtional cost of FW ports just made most PC makers stick to USB only.
Now that USB 2 has come along, it seems that there will be even fewer consumer PC's with the FW interface - many external HD's now ship with both FW and USB2, so the PC manufacturers will have even less incentive to include FW. If they made users get by with the slow USB, how can these same people complain about only having the faster USB 2.
I know that FW 800 (I have an external drive) does have twice the theoretical speed, but the HDs themselves are still below regular FW speeds. I did see a review in Macworld on these drives from Nov. 2003, that showed that when duplicating files INSIDE an external FW 800 drive the speed increase was about 30%, but that was the largest increase.
As for the use of FW on digital cameras, I wonder if it isn't driven by 2 things: first, wasn't Sony (a huge DV maker) one of the parties, like Apple, with an interest in pushing FW? They seem to be the only PC maker besides Apple that has IEEE1394 ports as standard. And secondly, the 4-pin FW port appears much smaller than comparable USB ports, so given the push to make the DV devices as small as possible this might have also driven it's adoption in DV.
I also agree that FW's success with DV will probably NOT continue to grow with other devices. Besides HDs, I don't see many groups of devices that use FW. Almost no printers, a minority of scanners even given the HUGE speed hit with the origianl USB (granted, high end ones use FW, but with USB2 out this will decrease), and very limited ussage even in tape back-up devices.
edited for spelling mistakes, so everyone won't laugh too hard
- Status