joey j, you seem to be the only person here that makes any sense. MHz don't matter so you all should quit chanting "10GHz iBooks!" This site is called macRUMORS but I think that even rumors should be moderate. I think we may see flat panel iMacs, possibly a PDA, and maybe pre-orders for G5s on the hardware end. Although, I believe Apple would still do very well to hold off on the G5s for another year. We also might see iBooks running at higher speeds, although I hope not since I just bought a 600MHz DVD model. ;-) On the software end, we're sure to hear something about OS X v. 10.2. It would be too long before another conference came up for them to wait, I think. We also may see a new OS for PDAs, maybe based on OS X, maybe based on the old Newton OS. Whatever Steve has up his sleeve, it will definitely be extremely cool for all the hype they're giving this. We'll just have to wait and see. =)
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.
You Folks are Nuts
- Thread starter Skatters
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ensign Paris
macrumors 68000
Here it is folks!
Sources will remain un-named.
Apple will drop a huge bomb on jan7.
flat screen imacs running G4's 533mhz
PowerMac G5's running dual 866mhz
and last but not least
OSX will run any native windows based program with new update scheduled for mid year.
Buy your stock now!
Sources will remain un-named.
Apple will drop a huge bomb on jan7.
flat screen imacs running G4's 533mhz
PowerMac G5's running dual 866mhz
and last but not least
OSX will run any native windows based program with new update scheduled for mid year.
Buy your stock now!
Mac OSX will run any windows program? Bullllllllllllll
that would completely destroy all those companies (like macsoft) who publish translated programs, who have been apple faithful for so long. I don't see how its possible either?
and why would they announce a g5 and have it at the same speed as the g4?
to the "ignorant masses"
that would seem like less of a change than a 50mhz increase on the g4.
I say uber-g4's
flatscreen imacs
and a robot-puppy named speckles.
Dan
that would completely destroy all those companies (like macsoft) who publish translated programs, who have been apple faithful for so long. I don't see how its possible either?
and why would they announce a g5 and have it at the same speed as the g4?
to the "ignorant masses"
that would seem like less of a change than a 50mhz increase on the g4.
I say uber-g4's
flatscreen imacs
and a robot-puppy named speckles.
Dan
eyelikeart
Moderator emeritus
Re: Here it is folks!
he he he....
I've been waiting for Apple to make a return for me for over a year....very patiently I've been waiting...
January 7 could be a hit for me!
he he he....
I've been waiting for Apple to make a return for me for over a year....very patiently I've been waiting...
January 7 could be a hit for me!
Windows proggies in os x
adding a windows translator into Mac OS X would make os x this century's killerapp. and as for macsoft and others, native os x proggies run a fair bit faster than windows emulation. it'd only be if you had already purchased the pc version of a product that you'd use the emulation. i think a windows emulator in mac os x would mainly be used for apps that aren't out for mac yet or for small apps that you need to use but that nobody's ever heard of.
yeah and apple stock probably is a good buy at the moment...
adding a windows translator into Mac OS X would make os x this century's killerapp. and as for macsoft and others, native os x proggies run a fair bit faster than windows emulation. it'd only be if you had already purchased the pc version of a product that you'd use the emulation. i think a windows emulator in mac os x would mainly be used for apps that aren't out for mac yet or for small apps that you need to use but that nobody's ever heard of.
yeah and apple stock probably is a good buy at the moment...
Foocha
macrumors 6502a
Apple stock usually goes up prior to a Macworld, but usually goes down afterwards when the hype subsides. Now may not be the right time to make a short term investment.
I'm not convinced that we'll see a Windows framework built into OS X - even if Microsoft allowed it (or were forced to allow it by the anti-trust settlement) Windows apps running in OS X would not give the user a very good experience - it would be even worse than Classic, with no chance of ever getting better, and the mix of GUI concepts, (eg. Application Windows, Menu Bar, Task Bar...) would be very confusing. The only real way you could do it from a GUI perspective is contained within a window, like Virtual PC.
Also, a Windows framework in OS X would still require that application developers compile their apps for PowerPC. A normal Windows app would not work on a PowerPC machine. Therefore Windows developers would have to sell a special PowerPC compatible version - this defeats the whole object of the exercise, because it means you wouldn't be able to run any Windows app on OS X - just a handful of badly ported PC apps which don't take advantage of OS X's great GUI.
I'm not convinced that we'll see a Windows framework built into OS X - even if Microsoft allowed it (or were forced to allow it by the anti-trust settlement) Windows apps running in OS X would not give the user a very good experience - it would be even worse than Classic, with no chance of ever getting better, and the mix of GUI concepts, (eg. Application Windows, Menu Bar, Task Bar...) would be very confusing. The only real way you could do it from a GUI perspective is contained within a window, like Virtual PC.
Also, a Windows framework in OS X would still require that application developers compile their apps for PowerPC. A normal Windows app would not work on a PowerPC machine. Therefore Windows developers would have to sell a special PowerPC compatible version - this defeats the whole object of the exercise, because it means you wouldn't be able to run any Windows app on OS X - just a handful of badly ported PC apps which don't take advantage of OS X's great GUI.
Thanks
Thanks for clearing the air Foocha. There was a lot of ******** floating around here.
And to clear some more air:
>and why would they announce a g5 and have it at the same speed as the g4? -Teknologika
Because a 64-bit G5 processor could blow the pants off a G4 running twice its clock speed. A 64 bit chip has an entirely new architecture, shorter pipeline, and has the potential of many chip on chip capabilities. Its just better.
It like asking why you would choose a ferarri's 8 cylinder engine over a ford f-350's. There's more to the speed of a machine than just the number of cylinders.
Thanks for clearing the air Foocha. There was a lot of ******** floating around here.
And to clear some more air:
>and why would they announce a g5 and have it at the same speed as the g4? -Teknologika
Because a 64-bit G5 processor could blow the pants off a G4 running twice its clock speed. A 64 bit chip has an entirely new architecture, shorter pipeline, and has the potential of many chip on chip capabilities. Its just better.
It like asking why you would choose a ferarri's 8 cylinder engine over a ford f-350's. There's more to the speed of a machine than just the number of cylinders.
Skatters> joey j, you seem to be the only person here that makes any sense.
Cool, thanks man, which of my posts tipped you off? 😉
Although, be warned; agreeing with me is dangerous, please invest in a
flameproof suit. Also be prepared for someone to come up with the clearly
obvious truth that:
joey j == Skatters
... which will emerge before long. Anyone game enough to open their mouth?
😎
Cool, thanks man, which of my posts tipped you off? 😉
Although, be warned; agreeing with me is dangerous, please invest in a
flameproof suit. Also be prepared for someone to come up with the clearly
obvious truth that:
joey j == Skatters
... which will emerge before long. Anyone game enough to open their mouth?
😎
agreenster> Because a 64-bit G5 processor could blow the pants off a G4
running twice its clock speed. A 64 bit chip has an entirely new
architecture, shorter pipeline, and has the potential of many chip on chip
capabilities. Its just better.
I agree with your points insofar as you specifically mean the G5. However
(from my perspective, anyway) you seem to be linking the perceived
advantages all back to the point that the G5 is a 64-bit processor. On the
contrary, a 32-bit G5 could do all this, none of your speculated
performance advantages are intrinsic to 64-bit addressing (which is all
this is, really).
As far as all 64 bit processors having new architectures, Hammer is a
64-bit x86 😛. Apparently Intel is working on a similar project seeing as
ia-64 is screwed for the foreseeable future.
It is probably worth pointing out that the G5 has a 10 stage pipeline, so
it is not necessarily true that 64-bit processors have shorter pipelines.
running twice its clock speed. A 64 bit chip has an entirely new
architecture, shorter pipeline, and has the potential of many chip on chip
capabilities. Its just better.
I agree with your points insofar as you specifically mean the G5. However
(from my perspective, anyway) you seem to be linking the perceived
advantages all back to the point that the G5 is a 64-bit processor. On the
contrary, a 32-bit G5 could do all this, none of your speculated
performance advantages are intrinsic to 64-bit addressing (which is all
this is, really).
As far as all 64 bit processors having new architectures, Hammer is a
64-bit x86 😛. Apparently Intel is working on a similar project seeing as
ia-64 is screwed for the foreseeable future.
It is probably worth pointing out that the G5 has a 10 stage pipeline, so
it is not necessarily true that 64-bit processors have shorter pipelines.