G5 Rumors

[Scheisskopf]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>I think we are all being led around by the nose and we our having our legs pulled.

If we keep believing in these rumors, this MWSF will be the absolute biggest disappointment yet!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah. Bigger than the Paris disappointment last October. No wait-- they cancelled it.

Bigger than the MWNY last July.

I'm a believer in the Law of Averages, so I think we're due. Whether it's a G5 or not this January remains to be seen, but there are still several Rabbits that Steve has to pull out of his Reality-Distorted Top Hat, like a new iMac.

Even if a so-called "G5" is ready by January, Steve may wait until Tokyo or Seybold if the iMac is introduced in San Francisco. (I like how I'm using "Steve" as if he's my next door neighbor.)

Remember also that Naked Rats said that the upcoming "G5" is not the true successor to the throne, but rather a G4 made up to look like a G5. Kind of like the Man in the Iron Mask, but without Leonardo DiCaprio.

~e

[dWREK67]

[quote]Originally posted by Scheisskopf:
<strong>
I'm a believer in the Law of Averages, so I think we're due.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Law of Averages? Maybe Law of Averages according to a chronic gambler!

Btw... that's a "clever" name...

Derek

[stimuli]

According to some research done by an AI poster ages ago (almost a year!), Raycer (who was bought by Apple) were basically working on a z-buffer accelerator on steroids. Hardware z-sorting.

In 3D, there are 3 (actually, 4, but lets not go there) axises (typo on purpose): x, ie: horizontal, y, ie: vertical, and z, ie : depth.

Z sorting goes like this: You are rendering a house in OpenGL.
Since you are facing the house dead on, it is a waste of processing power to render a) the sides of the house, which are not visible, b) the back of the house, same reason, and everything behind the house, for the same reason.

But let's say there are windows in the house. They are semi-translucent, and allow you to see what is behind them, perhaps a wall w/ a painting on it.

Graphics calculations like these are all z-buffer calcs. You take the wall and painting, 'multiply' them by the translucency of the window, maybe overlay a little fog for atmospherics, and render this to the screen in realtime.

A z-buffer calc. accelerator, ie a hardware chip on the G5 motherboard, plows through this, offloading this from the cpu, which can focus on other tasks.

So WTF does this have to do w/ accelerating Aqua?

Translucency in Aqua. All inactive windows, menus, etc, all overlapping, all the time. Throw in a spiffy Mac OS X xterm into the mix, to maximize the eye candy and increase the jealousy in your PC-lamer friends.

All those layers of translucency, overlapping each other, requires some serious reverse-order z-buffer calculating. Take the desktop pic, add a few overlapped inactive windows, and stick an xterm on top of that, and you have 5 or six levels of partially visible stuff. If there is a chip that a) figures out what isn't visible, and throws that data out of graphics memory, and b) figures out all the multiplied layers, and what the layers overlapped should look like as a 2d surface (ie your screen), you have a very fast, very snappy GUI.

Hope this helps.

Maya ain't coming to OSX because of 400 mhz G4s, boys. They're here for the G5's coming in 2002.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: stimuli ]</p>

[Amorph]

AirSluf wrote:

[quote]My current knowledge of OpenGL leads me to think a quartzlike engine could theoretically be made, but in a VERY Rube Goldberg like manner that would still see much of the code run in the CPU. The main issue here is how the pipeline is laid out and how the acceleration engines choose to implement portions of it for the speed gain.<hr></blockquote>

Excellent post, AirSluf. :) My knowledge of OpenGL is about 5 years old, so I defer.

[Scheisskopf]

[quote]Originally posted by dWREK67:
<strong>
Law of Averages? Maybe Law of Averages according to a chronic gambler!

Btw... that's a "clever" name...

Derek</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay-- The Law of Really, Really Big Numbers Made by an Infinite Number of Red Necks Shooting an Infinite Number of Bullets at Street Signs to Come up with Shakespeare's Hamlet. In Braille.

BTW: Technically, it's Scheißkopf if this word existed in German. I'll have to check with the (German) girlfriend.

~e

[SDW2001]

Check out <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">www.thinksecret.com.</a> What to make of this and please revist my "What Future Computer Will You Buy" thread.....will you purchase one if the posted specs come about? Will the name "G5" make a difference?

[NeoMac]

Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. :D

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. :D </strong><hr></blockquote>

Because there is other evidence.

1) No Official Denials
2) Past statements his Steveness regarding the timely closing of the MHZ gap
3) MOT's own release timetable ...Q1.
4) Many of us believe Apollo is for PB G4 and possibly iMacs. Sahara G3's may be for ibook's.
5) MOT has conceded work is progressing well on the G5.


No one knows. Although ThinkSecret's record has been pretty good to my knowledge. This does hamper the case for the G5, but does not close it.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[NeoMac]

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Because there is other evidence.

2) Past statements his Steveness regarding the timely closing of the MHZ gap
5) MOT has conceded work is progressing well on the G5. ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

If Apollo appears at 1.4Ghz at MWSF, that would constitute 'closing the gap', because we would go from being 1Ghz behind to 500+Mhz behind the P4.

Motorola did say the G5 is progressing, but they also said, don't get your hopes up so soon (paraphrase).

MOSR has 0% credibility with me. TheRegister I will have to wait and see how this pans out.

Peace. :)

[wormboy]

By Law of Averages, I think he is refering to regression to the mean.

[applenut]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. :D </strong><hr></blockquote>

the fact that the G4 still has another scheduled revision due means SHIT. it really does. By using that logic we would be using a G3 750cx now just because there were more revisions left in the G3.

Apple will go to the G5 whenever its ready. If that is before or at the same time as the 7460 you can bet your money that Apple will go with the G5 over the 7460

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

the fact that the G4 still has another scheduled revision due means SHIT. it really does. By using that logic we would be using a G3 750cx now just because there were more revisions left in the G3.

Apple will go to the G5 whenever its ready. If that is before or at the same time as the 7460 you can bet your money that Apple will go with the G5 over the 7460</strong><hr></blockquote>


I agree, applenut. Although closing the MHZ may well be achieved with the G4 Apollo as NeoMac indicated.
BTW, NeoMac:
[quote]Motorola did say the G5 is progressing, but they also said, don't get your hopes up so soon (paraphrase). <hr></blockquote>

That's not paraphrasing, Neo...its your interpretation. To me, it could have been a dodge on pre-announcing an Apple product, which the man certainly couldn't do.

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[NeoMac]

The TRUTH shall set us FREE in 38 days! :)

So I proclaim. Worship me now. :D

[the Belgian waffle]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>Regarding ThinkSecret:

I've been saying it all along in my signature. Why do we insist on believing in pie-in-the-sky G5 processors, when it was made clear a year ago that Apollo was the next G4 upgrade in the time-line.

I believe the 'G5' source om MOSR and TheRegister is a Wintel jerk jerking us around. :D </strong><hr></blockquote>

Because Apple needs processors for both the 'consumer'- and the 'pro'-line.

So let's put it into perspective:

The G4 was introduced at 400 (yikes!), 450 and 500 MHz, and then cut back to 350, 400 and 450 MHz; which actually was what we had with the G3 Yosemite.

By all accounts, the G3 has scaled better than the G4. The G3 was never stuck at 500 MHz for a year, the G4 was. Apple's marketing decision was to put a G3 in comsumer machines, and a G4 in Pro machines. No way in hel was Apple going to have a 'consumer' iMac at faster clock than a G4 powermac. Hence no iMacs faster than 500 MHz.

Let's assume the G5 does surface, and it goes at faster MHz than the G4 we have know (G4e). Fine and dandy, Apple get those G5's in machines once the hit the supply hot spot.

But what about the iMac then? Suppose we'll have 1; 1.2 and 1.4 (or 1.2; 1.4 and 1.6) GHz come MW; where would it leave the iMac? At 700 MHz with a G3? At 900 - 1000 MHz with a G3? Or at 900 - 1000 ( and up, but not over the G5 speeds) MHz G4 with altivec and the superdrive iMovie/ iDVD combo on selected (expensive) configurations?

My money is on a G5 in the powermacs, and apollo G4's in iMacs, with superdrives. If there's one line Jobs would love to utter, it'd be 'DVD burning, now for the consumer, thanks to Apple.'

Apple should be ready for a big jump come January, and I think (and hope, for Apple's sake), that they will deliver.

We'll see soon enough.

[TigerWoods99]

A lot of interesting stuff coming forward. The report on Architosh is interesting and another piece of evidence. Also, Motorola just updated their PPC processor roadmap. These signs lead me to believe something big is about to happen. Let's just hope.

[glurx]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>MOSR has 0% credibility with me. TheRegister I will have to wait and see how this pans out.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/29/index.html" target="_blank">The Register</a> and <a href="http://199.105.116.91/MOSR/" target="_blank">MOSR</a> both have the same anonymous source supplying them with alleged G5 info.

[Daver]

I've checked out the new PowerPC roadmap, and its G5 information seems in line with the rumours we've been hearing.

Some concerns, though: the roadmap has no mention of AltiVec on the G5, and clockspeeds are stated as beginning at 800 MHz—respecatable, if the chip is as fast as rumours claim, but far from the 1.2–1.6 GHz everyone is expecting.

Right now I'm certain that we'll see G5 Power Macs in January, but what form they'll take is anyone's guess.

[KidRed]

Here's the latest info <a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml" target="_blank">Architosh</a>

Basically states that the G5 we believe in might not be the G5 that we get. But it didn't mention anything about a G4 being the G5. So it looks like we will get G5s in Jan or at least new Power Macs.

[CapnPyro]

Update at <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">www.thinksecret.com.</a> pretty much says we're stickin with G4's, but FAST G4's-

[quote]December 3, 2001

No True G5 Power Mac for Macworld, Sources Say
By Nick dePlume, Publisher and Editor in Chief

While Apple will not release a Power Mac in January based on the G5 microprocessor, recent reports on the web have elements of truth to them, sources said.

The new pro desktops, believed to ship at Macworld Expo/San Francisco next month, will reportedly ship with a PowerPC 7460 G4 chip, code-named Apollo. While details of the chip have been available since the G4's release years ago, the 7460 has comprised the top of the G4 line and no Apple hardware has shipped with one as of yet.

The new Power Mac G4s will have blazing speed: The lowest-end model will be just under a gigahertz, while the high-end units will come in at 1.4 gigahertz, easily surpassing the "gigahertz barrier."

Other features on board the new Power Macs will include 266MHz DDR SDRAM, a 256K L2 cache and a 2MB L3 cache on the high-end, and upgraded FireWire connectivity, possibly IEEE 1394b. They will not ship with USB 2, however. Additionally, sources said that Apple is planning to begin bundling more software with its pro hardware -- for example, not all PowerBook owners purchase Microsoft Office, and many need a functional productivity application like AppleWorks.

The source of the recent G5 confusion may be the fact that Apple has considered marketing the unit as a Power Mac G5. This development was first reported by MacEdition's NMR Report early last month, but it is unknown as to whether Apple still has such plans.

As Macworld nears, more accurate information will be obtained, so check back for the latest "dirt."<hr></blockquote>

[KidRed]

Yea but the Architosh article came out today as well. So we have no way of knowing who is getting the correct info so we are still at square one. I believe the Architosh article that will will have a G5 in jan just not the real G5, more like it's cousin chip. That is in contradiction to the ThinkSecret article but yet really close. They say a G4 as a G5 and Architosh says G5 cousin as G5.

But, hey, we wil get faster towers in Jan one way or another :)

[TigerWoods99]

Well, maybe it IS the G5 as in PowerPC 8500 G5, but isn't the same as it was originally planned to be. The G5 was talked about as being 64-bit and multi core, however sources say no multi core and the Motorola road map says 32-bit AND 64-bit. Also, maybe some of the originally planned architectural features are not present, or at least won't be initially. I think that since Motorola's road map has 32-bit and 64-bit, we will get a 32-bit G5. Will Rapid IO be there? Who knows, but the G5 will be one hell of a processor that's for sure.

[CapnPyro]

kidred i think this is what your referring to as the mix up, or atleast i hope its that simple

[quote]The source of the recent G5 confusion may be the fact that Apple has considered marketing the unit as a Power Mac G5. This development was first reported by MacEdition's NMR Report early last month, but it is unknown as to whether Apple still has such plans.<hr></blockquote>

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by CapnPyro:
<strong>kidred i think this is what your referring to as the mix up, or atleast i hope its that simple

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well I think that is one take on it. From what I've read on every rumor site and concluded with is this-

-We will get new power macs that are fast in Jan

Now for the g5-g4 thing. There are 3 stories-

1) The G5 will debut
2) The G5 will actually be a souped up G4
3) The G5 will debut but is not the original G5. It's actually the 32bit at a lower clock speed. (refer to tigerwoods post)

So, everything says yes to G5. The confusion is- is it a new G4 that will be called a G5 or is it a G5 but not the G5 we thought.

I think it's the 32 bit G5 ranging from 800mhz -1.4 ghz but not the G5 on all the rumor sites-ie. 1.6-2.4ghz 64 bit.

[msp]

[quote]Originally posted by Daver:
<strong>
Some concerns, though: the roadmap has no mention of AltiVec on the G5, and clockspeeds are stated as beginning at 800 MHz</strong><hr></blockquote>

G5 is a series of chips, not a single design. For example, the 8540 is a G5 class chip, but isn't really suitable for a PowerMac -- I saw no fpu in the technical documents, but there was a vector unit.

Anyway, some G5 class chips will be designed for embedded purposes, where as others will be more suitable for PCs.

[Wrong Robot]

Hrm, well I personally believe the g5 will debut at MWSF, My reasonings are mainly due to the fact that we've had the g4 forquite some time now(plus or nearing to 2 years I believe) and before that the g3 was strong for about 2 years) I had forgotten about the g5 for a long time(the last Time I thought about it until just recently was about the time the dual g4s were released)

The fact that Jobs' stated that apple would "close the mhz. gap" by the end of 2001, also helps the cause for g5 believers, however it is still very true that this could be a big hoax,I wish I could know but alas that is impossible.
my neighbor is an ex-apple exec, I'm sure he knows something about this, he left to live in so. cal like two months ago, and if the g5 was in strong development back then(which I'm sure it was) he would probably know if it would be released sometime soon or sometime not soon, I wonder If I should ask him, But I think he's away for a few weeks, oh well major bummer.

Is the g5 a 64 bit processor or not?
if so, is it the first 64 bit? for desktop computing at least?
or has intel had 64 bit and beyond for a long time?

[SDW2001]

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1201-g5moto-info.phtml</a>

I think the part that speaks of "[four months of testing in prototypes]" is most encouraging.

These are some truly wild rumors. I still think G5 is coming "offcially"....but have my doubts as well.

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[rickag]

And The Register says
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html</a>

new update in the wacky world of rumors.

can anyone say "backtracking" :)

[ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>And The Register says
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html" target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/23158.html</a>

new update in the wacky world of rumors.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Now that is a confusing article. It seems like they are pretty sure IMO, but don't want to go out on limb. I am believer in the principle of "the best answer tends to be the simplest explanation." To me, putting a G5 is the pro line and Apollos in the PB and iMac line makes sense. The G3 can be used to make sure the ibook keeps up with clock speed.

This is truly the most juicy set of rumors I have heard in two years on these boards.

[Eupfhoria]

Lets see if I can try to summarize everyones points of view here:

Hard-Core Mac users: Want badly, but would live with faster G4's

Average user: Would be nice...

Pro-user: If it makes my rendering faster...

Low end user: Don't care

Hard Core PeeCee user: Don't care

Possible wintel convert: Almost required.

Rumor sites: G5's, and fast ones!

Non-rumor news sites: *Silence*

Motorola: "In progress". Would be nice to release ASAP, but not of top importance.

Apple Marketing: G5 or death.

Apple Sales: "G5? what's that? a desktop? We got this nifty iPod to show you..."

Me: "Couldn't possibly afford another computer (just got a QS 733), bragging rights would be nice tho."

[Eupfhoria]

oh and those people who are talking about how MWNY 2001 was the worst macworld ever obvously don't remember the one where Gates' face appeared on the screen

[nicsta]

I doubt very much that the G4 Apollo is what Steve Jobs was refering to when he stated that Apple will close the MHz gap by late 2001.

Apollo is just a die shrink and it seems that the priority was to reduce power consumption more than increase performance. Remember that when the x86 processors go .13, they will likely leave Apollo in the dust.

No way Apollo was meant to compete with the P4 and Athlon XP. It is designed to kick mobile Pentium butt. Had Apple wanted to take on the P4 and Athlon XP with Apollo then surely they would have taken advantage of the die shrink to beef up the FP unit (which is currently woeful) and implement a larger L2 cache.

[Rmh1572]

YOu know I thought that too. How could apollo compete with the new processors coming out. I don't believe it can either. The way it looks now though it will have too.

[discstickers]

[quote]And another thing, a lot of people seem to believe the G5 will be 64bit. Look at Motorola's roadmap <a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf" target="_blank">http://e-www.motorola.com/collateral/PPCRMAP.pdf</a>

"32 & 64 bit products"<hr></blockquote>
Right. Exactly. The G5 will be 32 bits.... in the embedded market. Look at the g5 class that moto just announced. Its for the embedded market. Its 32 bit. Its altivec-less. Thats why the roadmap says what it does.

[rickag]

<a href="http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001dec/bma20011203009125.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001dec/bma20011203009125.htm</a>

Another unconfirmed rumor.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001dec/bma20011203009125.htm

Another unconfirmed rumor.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, after reading the article-WOW. But, has that ever been done before? A Moto employee leaking a roadmap to a rumor/news site? Just the line "..we at Moto are pleased to say.." Would you leak info with a sentece like that? I know you would want to confirm where you work to legtamize the info, but it sounds too blatant to me. Dunno, eveything is getting confusing now.

We have the G4 which tops out a 1ghz, the Apollo was supposed to be for portables, the Apollo may be the next tower chip but still tops out at 1ghz. Then we have the G5 which is for networks and maybe towers. It won't be ready, it will be ready.

So you're telling me that in Jan we will see the towers at 933, 1.0ghz and dual 933? I don't see how people think we will get a 1.2 or 1.4 G4 Apollo when everything says it tops out at 1.0ghz. So then this show will suck, only 67mhz increase? Even if to hold off 6 months till July for the G5, it's still gonna suck.

Getting depressed :(

[edit: fixed too-wide URL - UBB apparently can't handle &lt;URL&gt; tags in quotes?? -Amorph]

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[Phrogman]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001dec/bma20011203009125.htm

Another unconfirmed rumor.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Total BS!!......there will be NO! G5 at MWSF '02!

[edit: fixed too-wide URL -Amorph]

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Phrogman:
<strong>

Total BS!!......there will be NO! G5 at MWSF '02!</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's ok man, you don't need to get o upset :)

[KidRed]

mm, a lot more people are starting to chime in about no G5 in Jan. This is from yourdailymac-

[quote] We got this e-mail today about the future of the G5, it is from a source close to YDM:

I would have to take this into consideration but things are delicate at the moment. I would prefer to have my exposure minimized. But I will tell you one thing concerning future PowerMac plans; I am almost certain there will be no G5 this January. It is almost certain the new machines will be G4's with better bus and process technology. Presently the 7450 only supports 133MHz at 64bits but the 7460 among other things will have a wider throughput and the ability to double pump. I will see
what other details can be safely given with out any compromise.
<hr></blockquote>

[Bozo the Clown]

Two conflicting rumors:

Faster G4s
G5s

All part of the Steve Jobs Fog.

I'd be willing to bet that half the "rumors" are actually disinformation leaks.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Bozo the Clown:
<strong>Two conflicting rumors:

Faster G4s
G5s

All part of the Steve Jobs Fog.

I'd be willing to bet that half the "rumors" are actually disinformation leaks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't forget the plain "Fast G4s" no guarantee that the G4s will be "faster" in Jan, not if the G4s top out at 1.0ghz. That's the 3 conflicting reports.

[blabla]

Why did Motorola bother with the 7441/7451?

As I understand it, it these to "new" chips supports a slightly better 2-level cache algorithm than the 7440/7450.

[rickag]

WOW :eek: doesn't due justice to this rumor.

Actually, I posted that link to Geek.com because, of all the rumors about the G5, this seems the most blatant line of bologna. :rolleyes:

But it sure is a whole lot better than Motorola's roadmap. If your wishing, might as well wish for the moon.

Just an adendum: I personally don't think we'll see a G5 in a computer @ least until the 4th quarter of (edit)NEXT year, if then. Remember the MPC8540 won't even be sampling until the 2nd quarter of (edit)NEXT year and it is a MUCH less complicated processor than any desktop CPU.

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

[NeoMac]

I think we have been fools long enough. All these rumors are probably from a bunch of Wintel users jerking us around and having fun at our expense.

It's time we wise up and just appreciate the great product that is Macintosh.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by NeoMac:
<strong>I think we have been fools long enough. All these rumors are probably from a bunch of Wintel users jerking us around and having fun at our expense.

It's time we wise up and just appreciate the great product that is Macintosh.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I will/would if the new G4s have DDR and a faster bus :)

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

Well, after reading the article-WOW. But, has that ever been done before? A Moto employee leaking a roadmap to a rumor/news site? Just the line "..we at Moto are pleased to say.." Would you leak info with a sentece like that? I know you would want to confirm where you work to legtamize the info, but it sounds too blatant to me. Dunno, eveything is getting confusing now.

We have the G4 which tops out a 1ghz, the Apollo was supposed to be for portables, the Apollo may be the next tower chip but still tops out at 1ghz. Then we have the G5 which is for networks and maybe towers. It won't be ready, it will be ready.

So you're telling me that in Jan we will see the towers at 933, 1.0ghz and dual 933? I don't see how people think we will get a 1.2 or 1.4 G4 Apollo when everything says it tops out at 1.0ghz. So then this show will suck, only 67mhz increase? Even if to hold off 6 months till July for the G5, it's still gonna suck.

Getting depressed :(

[edit: fixed too-wide URL - UBB apparently can't handle &lt;URL&gt; tags in quotes?? -Amorph]

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>


A 67mhz increase....or even a 100mhz increase will be a ****ing joke.

I love the "F-bomb censor"....it is my third time tonight using it!

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>


A 67mhz increase....or even a 100mhz increase will be a ****ing joke.

I love the "F-bomb censor"....it is my third time tonight using it!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yea, that's why I'm starting to get depressed. I would love for Apple to release a faster G4 with DDR and faster bus, I would be ELATED if they released a G5.

But, if the G4 tops at 1.0ghz and we see how the last show was then we should expect the top of the line to bethe same old G4 running at 1.0ghz.

:( forgive my happiness

[muchfresh]

People, People

There is no way that a g5 is shipping within the next 6 months. If there was a brand new PPC chip architecture on the market there would be tons more people with eval systems. Testing a new Chip, Chipset and Mobo is way to complicated to have be entirely tested in house. I remember when the G4 was being introduced multiple people were reporting using a test system.

All i here about the G5 is BullDooDoo from the same jackOff. If I were to wager a dollar I would bet that the "source" is the guy at <a href="http://www.ihateapple.com." target="_blank">www.ihateapple.com.</a> I bet he is ROTFL every day at the stupid nonesense, hope and desperation.

[SDW2001]

applenut is saying that he has heard from a very reliable "source" that G5's are definitely coming out at MWSF and the iMacs will G4's.

Beat that with a stick....


Also, I have heard rumors there may be up to 1200 test machines out there.....that sounds a bit high though....

[Tarbash]

It's really impossible to gauge the likelihood of the G5 being released by just trying to see if there are a lot of test units out or not. Fact is, if you're not a developer or someone critical to Apple, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW. :eek: Apple's NDAs are a very powerful tool. Original iMac, PowerMac G4, iPod... all of these projects took us by surprise, and we never heard anything about test units.
The iPod began development in January! How many people knew a thing about it then?
Nobody here really knows how long Apple has been working with the G5 except for Steve Jobs and the G5 engineers. Period.

[Bozo the Clown]

The fact that we don't have G5 confirmation (I almost typed "Coformation;" must be getting close to MacWorld :D ) Doesn't mean squat. The fact that the rumor hasn't been squashed means the possibility exists.

I think Jobs and Co, spread conflicting leaks (these things that yourdailymac prints and stuff from other sites I never hear about except when there's less than a month to go before MW). By doing that, they is know way we can know for sure. I'm sure the disinformation leaks are coming from "sources close to Apple." That should make you even more suspicious.

Arghhhhhh! We don't really know anything, unless rumors get specifically denied (which does happen). That's all I'm trying to say!

[DaveLee]

Just a thought -

What about the nomenclature?

Motorola hasn't denied the existence of the 8540. Is it unreasonable to assume that the initial G5 type 8500 (or whatever) is actually out there sampling? (I know that the difference is large - 8540 is embedded etc) but it is interesting.

Also, the fact that the 'G5 is progressing well' and there has been no denial from Motorola or Apple about the application also yields some hope for the debut at SF. Remember all the rumors about the Xbox and the M$ denials of same - 'we have no intention of entering the console market at this time' (or something similar)?

[Toofeu]

:mad:
you are 100% !!! a weeny 67mhz increase....or even a 100mhz increase will be a ****ing joke.
I expect a better speed bump.
And for crissake a revised moto with a faster bus and DDR!!!

[rickag]

posted by Mike D in another thread
[quote]fuel to the fire

E-week article

very interesting comments on the changes within the G4 line as compared to the p2 and p3 <hr></blockquote>

I still like Geek.com's roadmap much better
:D

[Mike Eggleston]

Think of it like this, folks. Here we are, all of us speculating that the G5 will or will not be out there in January. Has anyone bothered to think WHY the NY expo was such a flop?? Let me give you an idea...

The G5 archeticture was coming along, then all of the sudden a snaffoo. This happens during the development process. Th G5 was going to be their baby, and the one to get the crowd really excited. However, they don't have that now. All they have is a new case. That isn't going to sell at all. So they punted. They put faster G4s in there, as well as made a "new" iMac enclosure (notice nothing new about them, just a comeback of Snow) with slightly faster speeds. Everyone was dissapointed, including me.

But now I look back, and I begin to speculate that maybe it was because the G5 wasn't ready then. If that is in fact the case, then they would have had an additional SIX MONTHS to fix all of the bugs and start ramping up production. This seems to be the most likely of all scenerios. This is why NY sucked, and this is why SF will have both the iMac Revisited and then new G5.

BTW, I have no sources, only my gut. :)

[applenut]

[quote]Originally posted by Mike Eggleston:
<strong>Think of it like this, folks. Here we are, all of us speculating that the G5 will or will not be out there in January. Has anyone bothered to think WHY the NY expo was such a flop?? Let me give you an idea...

The G5 archeticture was coming along, then all of the sudden a snaffoo. This happens during the development process. Th G5 was going to be their baby, and the one to get the crowd really excited. However, they don't have that now. All they have is a new case. That isn't going to sell at all. So they punted. They put faster G4s in there, as well as made a "new" iMac enclosure (notice nothing new about them, just a comeback of Snow) with slightly faster speeds. Everyone was dissapointed, including me.

But now I look back, and I begin to speculate that maybe it was because the G5 wasn't ready then. If that is in fact the case, then they would have had an additional SIX MONTHS to fix all of the bugs and start ramping up production. This seems to be the most likely of all scenerios. This is why NY sucked, and this is why SF will have both the iMac Revisited and then new G5.

BTW, I have no sources, only my gut. :) </strong><hr></blockquote>


no, NY sucked because everyone was expecting much too much and it wasn't realistic for that moment.

I doubt the G5 was ever meant to be released there.

[SDW2001]

G5 last NY? Probably not...though possible. I actually think it is the iMac that wasn't ready. Or, they may have decided not to release it in a bad economy....a debatable but OK idea.

[Eskimo]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
[qb]Question


Some where I read that from start to finish it takes 50-60 days to manufacture microprocessors. Ass-u-me the Register article is true, then the first volume production G5's will be ready to ship when......about the end of Jan. right. Please correct me if I'm wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.<hr></blockquote>

60 days is a pretty good general guess at the minimum amount of cycle time for a processor witht that many metal levels. Maybe even a little more.

[quote]Any one know what ultrascalar means?<hr></blockquote>
Never heard of it in regards to general architecture. A group from Yale seemed to coin the phrase in an effort to design a high clock speed high issue width processor. Usually you make a tradeoff in IPC for clockspeed. Performance = IPC x Clockspeed. Ultrascalar in this context would be a processor that could greatly increase both it seems.

[ 12-06-2001: Message edited by: Eskimo ]</p>

[rickag]

Thanks Eskimo

Then, just based on The Register's initial article(based on an email) the G5 couldn't be ready to even ship to Apple before middle to late Jan.

I'm hoping for Apollo manufactured using HiP7(0.13µ and SOI) and DDRsram :)

I'm expecting Apollo manufactured w/ SOI and the same 133MHz bus :(

regardless, I'll be buying in Jan.

[Tarbash]

I still don't see why Steve couldn't announce the G5s and have them shipping in February, as he did with the Titanium and 733 Mhz G4.

[rickag]

Tarbash
I bet if he could he would just as in the past. I am not counting on it though, because I don't think the G5 will be ready until 3rd or 4th quarter of 2002.

Hope I'm completely wrong, but I'll still be happy with whatever computer I buy in Jan.

[Tarbash]

In the summer of '99, before the G4 was released, a prominent Apple employee was quoted saying he didn't think the G4 would see the light of day before mid-2000.... ;)

[opuscroakus]

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>


no, NY sucked because everyone was expecting much too much and it wasn't realistic for that moment.

I doubt the G5 was ever meant to be released there.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Isn't that what's happening now? As I gather, everybody here seems to have argued out basically 3 scenarios that will happen powermacwise.

1. No G5, G4 topping out at 1gig. Mobo w/ DDR.

2. Apollo 1Ghz, 1.2Ghz, 1.4 Ghz. Dual 1.2 and 1.4 if fabs are good. Mobo w/DDR & 1394b.

3. G5 1.2Ghz, 1.4 Ghz, 1.6Ghz. Mobo w/ DDR, 1394b/400Mhz bus/RapidIO/etc.

The majority consensus seems to be that #3 either will happen or needs to happen or Apple is DOA. Granted that #1 would indeed be a disappointment, if G5's don't appear (my bet is March with 10.2), what's so bad about #2?

The dual 800 is a damn fine machine, and unless you want to talk about rendering, or computing the hypernegativegravometricfulx of a twinkee in a black hole, or getting 11 billion fps in Quake3, I would stack a dual 1.2Ghz Apollo G4 against a P4 2.0/2/4 any day. I have worked on a P4 1.8. Guess what? Windows still sucks. It only sucks faster. It doesn't bother me that we aren't neck and neck with the P4. I think PMQS's are fast and I love 10.1.

I don't know when the G5's will be out, but I'm pretty sure that when they do life will be good. I would rather have them come out after MWSF and be perfect than rushing out a G4.5 or a G5 celeron. (God forbid that a computer maker that has less than 5% market doesn't have the fastest os/processor of all time, all the time.) Until then, I think some people need to ease up on Apple. It's not like they're sitting around the boardroom table playing cards waiting for Mot/IBM to plod along. They are doing the best they can.

Constructive/creative G5 discussion is great, but if they are a no show, I hope this doesn't turn into the Apple sucks board. (At least no more than normal! :D :D :D )

I'm done.

[Tarbash]

I honestly have faith in Applenut's "source", as well as Applenut himself.

G4 iMacs and PowerMac G5s at MWSF.

Steve's opening quote:
"We want to start this year with an even bigger bang than we had last year, and we're going to do a leapfrog in design and performance."

[Mike Eggleston]

[quote]Originally posted by opuscroakus:
<strong>
I don't know when the G5's will be out, but I'm pretty sure that when they do life will be good. I would rather have them come out after MWSF and be perfect than rushing out a G4.5 or a G5 celeron. (God forbid that a computer maker that has less than 5% market doesn't have the fastest os/processor of all time, all the time.) Until then, I think some people need to ease up on Apple. It's not like they're sitting around the boardroom table playing cards waiting for Mot/IBM to plod along. They are doing the best they can.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

You make a very valid point. I have been a die hard fan(atic?) about the Mac ever since its introduction in 1984. I still have one of those 128K machines. And guess what, it still works. Does it have the bells and whistles of the current line? No. Why? Because we moved ahead. And we will continue to move ahead.

What we need to do as a community is stand beside our platform of choice, no matter what sh*t comes out or what blessings are bestowed. We ought to be loyal. And bashing our favorite company just looks bad for the rest of us.

I hope that the G5 comes out in January. I hope that the G4 is in the iMac. However, if those don't happen, sure I am going to be disappointed. I will not begin saying that Apple sucks, because what alternative do I have; Windows??

(P.S. Yes, I know Linux. Unix is out there. Yes, it is a great operating system. However it was not meant to be taken such that I would forget my favorite penguin. :) )

[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Mike Eggleston ]</p>

[byoung]

I was talking to an elite beta tester who showed me his G5 that was in a sealed clear case. He said he also had a g6 coming. There may be hope for a g5 at MWSF.

[Eupfhoria]

[quote]Originally posted by byoung:
<strong>I was talking to an elite beta tester who showed me his G5 that was in a sealed clear case. He said he also had a g6 coming. There may be hope for a g5 at MWSF.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And I doubt this why?

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>I honestly have faith in Applenut's "source", as well as Applenut himself.

G4 iMacs and PowerMac G5s at MWSF.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

As much as we go at it, I have faith in him too.
G5 at MWSF.

[Strangelove]

let me add some fuel to the speculation. a "special friend", who wouldn't bullsh*tting me, told me two hours ago that he personally saw a g5 at adobe. that was in september.
as far as he could see, the case was nothing special except that it was a beige pc-case :)
the main problem -at least back then- was the massive heat dissipation, which require(d) a big heatsink and vents. haven't we read elsewhere that the g5 was 196mm2? seems to fit...

[Toofeu]

:mad:
I think that the main problem is that we have been stuck for too long with the G4..
All those speculations about the forthcoming hardware reveal that the majority of us really want to move ahead...
The computer industry moves at a very fast pace, the Peecee side have the DDR implemented in their system for way too long compared to the PowerMac.
I believe that a big part of us are just frustrated.
I expect a lot from the next event in San Francisco, the last show at New-York really let me down. And trust me, I did not have unrealistic expectation!! Just DDR and a chipset topping around 1GHZ. I do not think that a weenee 135 mhz speed bump and L3 backside cache in 6 months was something acceptable!!

[Logan Cale]

I'm beginning to thing there will be no G5s anytime soon. http://www.sevensquareinches.com/graphitesmilies/frown.gif

[Junkyard Dawg]

If the G5 is indeed going to be ready in the next 3-4 months, then it would be very difficult to keep it under wraps. No matter how powerful the NDA, leaks will occur.

And the fact is, leaks are occuring. There have been too many reports on the G5, and they all jive together, for it to be one person pulling our chains. Rumor sites are guillible but not that bad, I'm sure they do check their sources at least enough that they would know if it was the same person feeding the G5 info to every rumor site.

Added to the rumor sites, several individuals, including Applenut, have claimed knowledge of the G5's imminent release. Applenut doesn't have a history of BS here at AI.

If the G5 is on schedule to be ready by march or even April, then Jobs will announce it. He has no choice...the desktop aren't selling. Apple cannot charge so much for outdated systems...the only way they can get away with their prices is if they put the Power back in Powermacs.

The intriguing part is that it appears from the rumors that two different chips are nearly ready at Motorola: The Apollo G4, and the G5. As a pessimist, I would say that the reports on the G5 are from people who have confused it with the Apollo G4. This makes sense and it wouldn't be all that bad, since the Apollo reportedly clocks up to 1.266 GHz. Thus if we get Apollo Powermacs, they would shape up as:
GHz:
1.0
1.133
1.266
All on either a 133 or 266 MHz system bus. Not too shabby, but not groudbreaking either.

As an optimist, I suggest an alternate explanation. The Apollo is clearly designed for low power consumption and low heat generation, and supposedly low cost. It's made for tight enclosures where heat and space are limited...such as laptops--OR--a desktop without a fan that has a tight enclosure. The new iMac fits this description.

The orginal iMac used a G3 at the time when Powermacs also ran on G3s. So it would be a break from tradition for Apple to introduce a new iMac with a G3. So my guess is that the new iMac will use the Apollo G4, clocked at the above MHz listing. Apple wants the new iMac design to be revolutionary, not evolutionary--and if it ran on a 1 GHz G3 that would be nice but not very exciting. But a 1 GHz+ G4 iMac....that would be groundbreaking for Apple! Which is why I think it's going to happen.

This leaves the Powermacs in question. An Apollo imac leaves two different options for the Powermacs:

Option 1. The iMac is clocked at a single speed for all models, like the iBook:
1.0 GHz iMac Apollo
Powermac:
1.13 GHz Apollo
1.27 GHz Apollo
Dual 1.27 GHz Apollo.

Option 2: This is the more likely option, says my gut:
1 GHz Apollo iMac
1 GHz Powermac G5
1.2 GHz Powermac G5
1.4 GHz Powermac G5
Or the Powermacs clock from 1.2-1.6 GHz.

Now, back to MWNY...why was that show such a bust? There were many rumors surrounding it that suggested something big was cancelled at nearly the last minute. I thiink it was lackluster because two products, the iMac and G4 Powermac, were nearing EOL, and Apple had devoted all their resources to finishing the successors to their desktop line, planning to make the Jan. Expo count. The iMac may have been ready, but Apple didn't want to release a G4 iMac while the Powermacs still ran with G4s. So they waited:

So the optimist in me says that MWSF will bring us G4 iMac Apollos, and Powermac G5s. This lineup makes the most sense. Yes, Apple often introduces lineups that make no sense at all...but this time I suspect it's different. There are too many concurring G5 rumors swirling around the internet for me to believe they are the work of a single person--rumor sites would get suspicious if all the rumors came from people with the same or similar IPs. And most importantly, the only rumors that do conflict report Apollo G4s being introduced. But if we make a leap in judgment and believe BOTH the G5 and Apollo rumors, we get a desktop lineup from Apple both sensible and revolutionary.

I'm taking that leap and buying stock. The worst scenario is that I hold onto the stock for a few years and cash in later. But if I'm right about the desktop lineup at MWSF, then I'll be cashing in much sooner....and with the money in hand I'll have little trouble deciding how to spend it! :p

[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</p>

[KidRed]

The 'predictions' thread has a post that CompUSA has a new PM dual 1ghz due in Jan at $3500. Either that's BS or it may be the G5 and thus the cost. No idea if it's the top, middle or bottom of the line or if it's creditable.

[EmAn]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>The 'predictions' thread has a post that CompUSA has a new PM dual 1ghz due in Jan at $3500. Either that's BS or it may be the G5 and thus the cost. No idea if it's the top, middle or bottom of the line or if it's creditable.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Considering it's from a CompUSA employee it probably isn't credible.

[Mike Eggleston]

[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>And the fact is, leaks are occuring. There have been too many reports on the G5, and they all jive together, for it to be one person pulling our chains. Rumor sites are guillible but not that bad, I'm sure they do check their sources at least enough that they would know if it was the same person feeding the G5 info to every rumor site.
This leaves the Powermacs in question. An Apollo imac leaves two different options for the Powermacs:

...

Option 1. The iMac is clocked at a single speed for all models, like the iBook:
1.0 GHz iMac Apollo
Powermac:
1.13 GHz Apollo
1.27 GHz Apollo
Dual 1.27 GHz Apollo.

Option 2: This is the more likely option, says my gut:
1 GHz Apollo iMac
1 GHz Powermac G5
1.2 GHz Powermac G5
1.4 GHz Powermac G5
Or the Powermacs clock from 1.2-1.6 GHz.

Now, back to MWNY...why was that show such a bust? There were many rumors surrounding it that suggested something big was cancelled at nearly the last minute. I thiink it was lackluster because two products, the iMac and G4 Powermac, were nearing EOL, and Apple had devoted all their resources to finishing the successors to their desktop line, planning to make the Jan. Expo count. The iMac may have been ready, but Apple didn't want to release a G4 iMac while the Powermacs still ran with G4s. So they waited:

So the optimist in me says that MWSF will bring us G4 iMac Apollos, and Powermac G5s. This lineup makes the most sense. Yes, Apple often introduces lineups that make no sense at all...but this time I suspect it's different. There are too many concurring G5 rumors swirling around the internet for me to believe they are the work of a single person--rumor sites would get suspicious if all the rumors came from people with the same or similar IPs. And most importantly, the only rumors that do conflict report Apollo G4s being introduced. But if we make a leap in judgment and believe BOTH the G5 and Apollo rumors, we get a desktop lineup from Apple both sensible and revolutionary.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That is such a cool and well though out post Dawg. And anyone out there has to admit that. Think about it folks. When the iPod first became part of the rumor mills, what was said?? A handheld device, more than likely a MP3 player of sorts. What was it?? A MP3 player of sorts, with some added features.

Looking at the frequency of the name 'G5' I have been seeing, and that more and more sites other than rumor mills have been posting reports on the G5. And also there is my gut. So far, my gut has had a lifelong 78.92% accuracy rating when I follow it. So, I am going with it. And I think that Dawg's Option 2 is accurate or close. I think that the iMac might be at 933 MHz (don't want to take away from the GHz-breaking PowerMacs). However I think that would be the only change I could see.

However, time will tell. And tell it will do.

[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Mike Eggleston ]</p>

[SDW2001]

I also agree. G5 is coming. There has never been this amount of rumor with similar specs before...at least since I've been here for two years. There was no where near this amount for even Pismo, which people thought was actually mercury at the time. Cube rumors were all over the place, etc.

I won't repost my argument for it again. Basically, Junkyard Dawg is right on, IMO.

[blabla]

IMHO, The Register and MOSR is sharing the same and only source. Im higly sceptical about this.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by blabla:
<strong>IMHO, The Register and MOSR is sharing the same and only source. Im higly sceptical about this.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And we knew shit about the G4 coming out in fall 99 in Apple's line up. So that doesn't mean anything.

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[Jonathan]

The source that leaks to the Register and MOSR also sent to AI. Credibility... that's another story.

[blabla]

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

And we knew shit about the G4 coming out in fall 99 in Apple's line up. So that doesn't mean anything.

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Motorola detailed the G4 design at the Microprocessor Forum 98. I still have a copy of the original Altivec specification from 98, with a description of the hardware implementation ( not only instruction set, but also pipeline design, functional unit design and more).

If the G5 is released next month, I would say it would be the biggest surprise in the history of the PPC. And it would be the first Motorola chip using SOI and 0.13. seems really risky, if you ask me. Im not saying it is impossible but..

[blabla]

An old link from macintouch:

<a href="http://www.macintouch.com/g4p3.html" target="_blank">http://www.macintouch.com/g4p3.html</a>

( Henry Norr
(henry@norr.com)
Feb. 18, 1999 )

Dont tell me the G4 was a surprise.. It really wasnt. Have you guys seen a detaled description of a desktop G5 chip? No.. Not if you exclude MOSR/The Register.

[Tarbash]

From that link, this caught my eye:
"Intel will officially introduce its new Pentium III processor on February 28, *and until then it isn't disclosing details about the chip's performance and pricing, nor allowing PC makers to announce specifications and prices for systems based on the new chip.*"

The part within the asterixes (sp?) interests me. Is it that hard to imagine that Motorola could be doing the same thing that Intel did with the PIII, and simply NOT be disclosing any details about the G5 to the public? Especially since, unlike the G4 in '98, Apple is playing a much larger role in the G5's development? I can see this as one reason they are keeping a lid on it. Apple of course is mum about their product launches, (iPod, iMac, G4.. hell, everything) why can't Motorola at least act this way with such a revolutionary product like the G5 and share the glory with Apple come MWSF in an event that will send shockwaves through the industry.

BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.

The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced. ;)

[Toofeu]

:(
Look at this statement from Connectix regarding the issue of Vitual PC5 on OS X and its Slowness
""Part of the problem here is the fact that Mac hardware has fallen off the Moore's Law curve (i.e. speeds haven't doubled consistently every 18 months)"...."Mac OS X really needs a 1.0-2.0GHz processor to perform well."

[Cubed]

[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>
BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I enjoy JD's posts because they usually contain a healthy amount of skepticism and realism, unlike most others on this board. But I think the RDF of January is starting to take effect already.

Rumor sites checking their "facts"? :rolleyes:

JD let himself predict what he wants to see, not what he should expect to see based on previous experience.


[quote]
<strong>
The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).

Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:

900Mhz G3 LCD iMac

867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.

The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.

Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by Cubed:
<strong>

The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).

Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:

900Mhz G3 LCD iMac

867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.

The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.

Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't agree with you at all. "always expect minimal processor improvment from Apple?......I assume you have forgotten that it is MOT who screwed Apple. That isn't going to last much longer. We went for 1.5 years at 500mhz. Then, Apple gets involved, and bingo.....233mhz jump at the next show. Then, another 134mhz jump at the next.

This will and has to be corrected. Steve isn't stupid. Don't get me wrong, the whole thing pisses me off....but they know.....

If the best thing after the LCD iMac is reduction in LCD prices then it truly WILL be a dissapointing show.

I don't think Apple is going to market the Apollo as a G5. However, i will concede that the G5 chip may not be what it was orginally planned to be.

Lowering the bar, as you put it, is not appropriate. Apple does not update products often enough, period. As much as I love Apple and will never go back to PC unless forced to, I do think Apple needs to listen a bit more to what people want. And, all people want is a machine that has specs that compete...they are even willing to pay a premium for the design and the OS. But charging $3500 for a machine with a 1.2 GHZ speed gap and a 133mhz bus, without a monitor, well, that is a joke. It may keep ME running MacOS but it won't change anyone's mind either. Selling an iMac with 64MB of RAM for $800 is a joke too.

Were not unreasonable. We just want Apple to stand up and be the company they are in the desktop arena, like they do in the portables.

Having said this, I do have faith they'll straighten it out. Any company that can come up with the ibook AND the TiBook, the iPod, etc...can certainly fix their desktop problems.

[EmAn]

[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

I sure hope so.

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: EmAn ]</p>

[rok]

um, can you imagine a "bake-off" of photoshop 6.5 for OS X (which HAS to be debuted at MacWorld SF, to throngs of cheers from the designer contingent), running on a multi-processor gigahertz machine?!?!?!

it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it. :D

[EmAn]

[quote]Originally posted by rok:
<strong>um, can you imagine a "bake-off" of photoshop 6.5 for OS X (which HAS to be debuted at MacWorld SF, to throngs of cheers from the designer contingent), running on a multi-processor gigahertz machine?!?!?!

it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it. :D </strong><hr></blockquote>

That would be great seeing how it just kicks a P4's ass.

[TigerWoods99]

Take it for what it's worth, but I was just told to expect G5s at slightly lower clockspeeds. That's all I can say.

[EmAn]

[quote]Originally posted by TigerWoods99:
<strong>Take it for what it's worth, but I was just told to expect G5s at slightly lower clockspeeds. That's all I can say.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Who told you this? And was there any reason why?

[TigerWoods99]

I honestly can't say.

[cdhostage]

Very mysterious of you, Tiger.

I don't expec twel;; see G5s anytime soon. they haven't had enough time to iron out the desing.

[TigerWoods99]

G5 has been in development for quite a while.

[peperone]

TigerWoods99:

Lower than 1.2 GHz or what do you mean?

[Rmh1572]

yea tiger. lower than what. lower than the speeds NOW :eek: or what. lower than 1.6ghz. Lower than 1.2 for jsut base model. lowerthan 1.2 for all please clarify

[Michael Grey]

[quote]G5 has been in development for quite a while. <hr></blockquote>

Wow! New inside info!

[TigerWoods99]

Lower than 1.6 GHz.

Patience is a virtue.

[EmAn]

Can you tell us how much lower?

[TigerWoods99]

Im not certain but speeds are 1.0, 1.2, and 1.4 GHz. The reason 1.6 GHz may be out of the question is apparently due to Apple's lack of trust that Motorola can provide sufficient quantities in time to ship the G5. Also, marketing may play a factor in what speeds they opt to intro at MWSF. Everything else seems to be pretty much in line, although no one really knows what's coming off the pipeline. Who knows.

I will try to get more info. I've e-mailed him now. I don't know when I'll get a response. I'm trying to get as much info as possible, and I'm not sure how much I can say.

[jj]

G5's, at any clock speed above 1ghz with dual configs in the line up... will make me very happy. I'll snag the fastest dual G5 I can for work.
From what I've heard, late first quarter 02 is when we would first see the G5. I am begining to wonder if we will see singles in jan and duals later in march. A split g4/g5 lineup seems more and more possible.

[Addison]

This is all very interesting but where does it leave IBM?

Will IBM ever be let in the door by Apple, if they slam it shut IBM may loose interest for ever.

[TigerWoods99]

IBM may help fab the G5.

[KidRed]

TigerWoods- Do you knpw anything about DDR or system bus? Also, what about a new case?

At least we are hearing more positive news/rumors after a week of negative ones.

[TigerWoods99]

The only thing I would know of is mainly processor related. However, I could find out about DDR.

There is the odd chance that I will get info on other things like the case. I'll see.

[AirSluf]

[TigerWoods99]

I'm working on it.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>

Where's the beef? Thr Reg and MOSR said the same thing single source. Archintosh report was rephrased and obfuscated but really sounded like a report on a report found elsewhere (like MOSR/Reg). I could say that too based on the rumor sites. The sources so far have been one except for a couple folks on the boards. I think the G5 is probably coming just from a gut feel and plan to be early to the show floor for the keynote video feed. Until then or a REAL (read different source) CONFIRMATORY leak nobody will know for sure.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Maybe all the specs from different places are the same because that's what they really are? Dunno, just a hunch :)

[thentro]

apple would NOT have a 1Ghz G4 and call it a G5. Thats crazy. How then could they tout the great things in the real G5 if they started with a G4!

[EmAn]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>


Maybe all the specs from different places are the same because that's what they really are? Dunno, just a hunch :) </strong><hr></blockquote>

Yep. Makes sense.

[AirSluf]

[KidRed]

The only quoting I see is when one site quotes another's article. However, I have seen the G5 mentioned on at least 6 sites. So either each site took a creative license with the info or the site received similar info from there own source. Either way, not much "quoting" going on.

[Junkyard Dawg]

[quote] Im not certain but speeds are 1.0, 1.2, and 1.4 GHz. The reason 1.6 GHz may be out of the question is apparently due to Apple's lack of trust that Motorola can provide sufficient quantities in time to ship the G5. Also, mark <hr></blockquote>

1, 1.2, 1.4 are exactly the speeds I've been predicting. It would be smart of Apple to offer processors a bit slower than Moto can provide, and instead offer dual configuratoins.

MWSF is going to be sweet!

[Phrogman]

[quote]Originally posted by TigerWoods99:
<strong>Im not certain but speeds are 1.0, 1.2, and 1.4 GHz. The reason 1.6 GHz may be out of the question is apparently due to Apple's lack of trust that Motorola can provide sufficient quantities in time to ship the G5. Also, marketing may play a factor in what speeds they opt to intro at MWSF. Everything else seems to be pretty much in line, although no one really knows what's coming off the pipeline. Who knows.

I will try to get more info. I've e-mailed him now. I don't know when I'll get a response. I'm trying to get as much info as possible, and I'm not sure how much I can say.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hehe hehe :D

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>

1, 1.2, 1.4 are exactly the speeds I've been predicting. It would be smart of Apple to offer processors a bit slower than Moto can provide, and instead offer dual configuratoins.

MWSF is going to be sweet!</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well I would put money on at least one dual, maybe a dual 1ghz in place of the 1.4ghz?

[TigerWoods99]

Probably duals in the lower speeds, dual 1 GHz. Just my thought, not based on info though.

[Junkyard Dawg]

A dual 1 GHz wouldn't make any sense if there were 1.2 and 1.4 powermacs. More likely that we see dual 1.2 powermacs.

I'd rather see a dual 1.4, but Apple has a history of making the duals the midrange...which is confusing, because then the question is, which is faster, the dual or the faster single?

[KidRed]

I don't think 1.4 would make it in Jan. Too big a jump. THat's why I said the dual 1.0ghz making the 1.2 top end. The 1.4 would prob wait till July.

(of course assuming we see the G5 at these speeds :) )

[TigerWoods99]

Steve's nickname will be Johnny Blaze after MWSF 2002.

[Junkyard Dawg]

[quote]I don't think 1.4 would make it in Jan. Too big a jump. THat's why I said the dual 1.0ghz making the 1.2 top end. The 1.4 would prob wait till July <hr></blockquote>

Oh. Well, 1.4 wouldn't be too big a jump if there were a wide range of speeds, like:

867-933
1
1.2
1.2 dual
1.4

I suppose it's possible that the low end Powermacs will be G4s, and the high end will be G5s. Then Apple could charge a premium for the G5s, and make a killing on the early adopters. Then later in the year, the entire Powermac line migrates to the G5. A businessman would cream his pants at the idea of selling G5s only at $2500+ prices.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:
<strong>

Oh. Well, 1.4 wouldn't be too big a jump if there were a wide range of speeds, like:

867-933
1
1.2
1.2 dual
1.4

I suppose it's possible that the low end Powermacs will be G4s, and the high end will be G5s. Then Apple could charge a premium for the G5s, and make a killing on the early adopters. Then later in the year, the entire Powermac line migrates to the G5. A businessman would cream his pants at the idea of selling G5s only at $2500+ prices.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The thing is, is that I don't see Apple going with more then 3 models.


So I think-
1ghz
dual 1ghz (or dual 933)
1.2ghz

or something like that. I just hope they are G5s!! Or at least G4's with new system bus and DDR.

[Mandricard]

Are these machines about which we are talking running true G5 chips or are they running Apollo G4s which could be called the "G4e"? :confused:

The issue is getting confused: perhaps we should stick to Apollo and G5 to keep things straight...

Would someone please help clarify this?

Mandricard
AppleOutsider

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Mandricard:
<strong>Are these machines about which we are talking running true G5 chips or are they running Apollo G4s which could be called the "G4e"? :confused:

The issue is getting confused: perhaps we should stick to Apollo and G5 to keep things straight...

Would someone please help clarify this?

Mandricard
AppleOutsider</strong><hr></blockquote>

It all depends on who you believe and what you read.

I believe the G5s will debut in Jan. I believe that the Apollos were meant for the iMac and tiBook. The Apollo will debut in Jan like maccentral, moto and a few sites say-but that doesn't mean in a tower.

So we say G5s but to be safe we also say 'or G4s".

[Junkyard Dawg]

Agreed, except I think the Apollo is meant for the iMac and the Titanium. The iBook will probably use a G3 until it's next major revision.

Alternatively, the Titanium could use the Apollo at one speed, and the iBook at a lower speed. Then the individual Ti and iBook models are differentiated by HDs, GPU, etc. This is a good idea for Apple, I think, because if they use only a single CPU speed for each model, it lowers manufacturing costs.

[TigerWoods99]

True G5.

[Bodhi]

Tiger -

All I have to say is that you have been around here as long as a lot of us. I take your word for it but I do not think I need to remind you what happens to people here when they come here predicting this and that and it turns out they were yanking our chains...for your sake of course.

Jonathan -

I have a question. I have been curious - How does a rumor site fact check a rumor? What lends credibility to one source over another...unless of course that source has a history with correct predictions. What would an anonymous email to AI regarding fairly accurate sounding info be construed as a bad source?

the only reason I ask is in regards to your comment about the MOSR/Register mole. Now MOSR I take not even a grain of salt, but the Register has stated that this source has indeed been correct in the past. Just curious, if you can share insight that would be great.

[mslee]

Bodhi,

Are you threatening tigerwoods99? What the hell is wrong with you? If Apple doesn't come out with a G5 at the Keynote, the world will not end, and you will wake up the next morning. Calm down.

After all these are message boards on a rumor site, for crying out loud, with people posting anonymously...I think abandoning credibility is necessary when you post at AI, or even read posts.

.

[TigerWoods99]

I'm not trying to to make predictions or anything, I'm just going off what I've been told. Nobody really knows exactly what Apple will release, not even Apple employees. They may have a fair idea, but things change up until the last minute. Just trying to provide some light on the situation.

[KidRed]

Wow, some people take this 'rumor/speculation' thing really serious :)

[mslee]

Sorry, tigerwoods, it wasn't my intention to imply that you were fabricating information.

I choose not to assume anything, vis a vis truthfulness or credibility.

I'm just saying, that these message boards aren't exactly SEC filing statements or set in stone--it seems pointless to get all butthurt about MOSR or people's posts when they aren't fulfilled.

So..tell us more tigerwoods. Lets talk performance..I don't care at what speed the CPU clocks at...I want instant reponse in InDesign 2.0 and to never, ever see that spinning disc again.

[Pegges]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>Wow, some people take this 'rumor/speculation' thing really serious :) </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, that's why we're here ;)

[applenut]

[quote]Originally posted by TigerWoods99:
<strong>I'm not trying to to make predictions or anything, I'm just going off what I've been told. Nobody really knows exactly what Apple will release, not even Apple employees. They may have a fair idea, but things change up until the last minute. Just trying to provide some light on the situation.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, I'm pretty sure they know what will be released by now. they have to make the marketing materials, packaging, test production runs, etc.

people know, they just aren't saying :)

[Tarbash]

"Apple employees" Applenut, is a very general term. Fact is, only a fraction of them probably know about the G5 and new iMac. I've interned out there and I know what its like. Employees work on their own individual team projects, and they only know what they need to know to complete that project. The Apple retail team, for example, knows nothing about the products being released at MWSF.

Now the marketing people obviously know, as do the engineers of course, and case designers, but employees in these departments have no urge to leak any info, because they truly honor their NDAs, and they take such pride in Steve taking everyone by surprise at Macworld. A lot of people here would be surprised how much Apple employees working on sensitive projects truly respect the NDAs.

[Bodhi]

[quote]Originally posted by mslee:
<strong>Bodhi,

Are you threatening tigerwoods99? What the hell is wrong with you? If Apple doesn't come out with a G5 at the Keynote, the world will not end, and you will wake up the next morning. Calm down.

After all these are message boards on a rumor site, for crying out loud, with people posting anonymously...I think abandoning credibility is necessary when you post at AI, or even read posts.

.</strong><hr></blockquote>

mslee -

Who are YOU?? Please read my post:

[quote]All I have to say is that you have been around here as long as a lot of us. I take your word for it<hr></blockquote>

I have all the respect in the world for Tiger and his "Mecury Rising" post! ;) But I think that if you had been around here long enough, some people really took advantage of people's hopes here in the past and at times it got ugly. Not implying that Tiger is doing that at all. There was nothing threatening in the least bit in my post. And yes this is a rumor board and yes people are going to disagree with each other and yes you will not agree with everything as I will not agree with everything so just deal with it.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

[Junkyard Dawg]

[quote]I do not think I need to remind you what happens to people here when they come here predicting this and that and it turns out they were yanking our chains...for your sake of course. <hr></blockquote>

Well at least you didn't tell him how nice his family is.....for his sake.

[AirSluf]

[Bodhi]

I'm starting to wonder if Apple may pull a Pismo/iBook situation here. If supplies from Mot are as tight as they seem and have been in the past then it may make more sense for Apple to announce these at MWTK. What I mean by iBook/Pismo is that when the iBooks were bumped to the Lime Green color, they were actually faster than the Powerbook at the time, just a slower bus. Apple bumped the Powerbook hard drive sizes and bundled iMovie2 with it to try and make the difference up. Could Apple actually do this again with the iMac / Powermac?

For once I am just very uncertain of a Powermac bump at MWSF. With Apple's track record this year it's obvious they are trying to prevent the "people stop buying hardware a month or more before a show" syndrome. Plus shouldn't we be seeing by now a shortened supply of Powermacs in the channel?

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Pegges:
<strong>

Well, that's why we're here ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

My post was in reply to an aggressive poster threatening another post because of predictions. Predictions and rumors are for fun, not to be taken too seriously.

[Tarbash]

Bodhi, the iBook never outperformed the PowerBook. The Pismo G3s came out at MWT 2000 in Feb. running at 400 and 500 MHz. The key lime iBooks didn't come out until Apple Expo Paris in the Fall, and they topped out at 466 MHz.

[Bodhi]

KidRed and EVERYONE -

In no way did I threaten anyone because of rumors, nor did I threaten anyone at all. Has anyone ever been misconstrued over email or AOL IM? Someone thought you said something that you didn't say at all, but they read it the wrong way and BAM you are accused of something? I was just telling Tiger about how some people that used to be on this board way back in the day were ridiculed for BSing about rumors, that is all. I have been a member of AI since the begininng of 1999 and have no history of this whatsoever. Jesus, give it a break. You read something wrong, let it go! Talk about taking something too seriously...it came across wrong. MOVE ON..... :rolleyes:

Aggressive poster....me....Hilarious! :D KidRed to the rescue! :p

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>KidRed and EVERYONE -

In no way did I threaten anyone because of rumors, nor did I threaten anyone at all. Has anyone ever been misconstrued over email or AOL IM? Someone thought you said something that you didn't say at all, but they read it the wrong way and BAM you are accused of something? I was just telling Tiger about how some people that used to be on this board way back in the day were ridiculed for BSing about rumors, that is all. I have been a member of AI since the begininng of 1999 and have no history of this whatsoever. Jesus, give it a break. You read something wrong, let it go! Talk about taking something too seriously...it came across wrong. MOVE ON..... :rolleyes:

Aggressive poster....me....Hilarious! :D KidRed to the rescue! :p

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yep, that's me :) You tell someone to watch what happens to someone and yea, I guess it comes off as a threat. You move on. Someone misread my post as you seem to claim about yours and I was clarifying it. So, get a grip, deal with it, we all read things differently and that's what the smiles are for. I saw none in your post so I didn't misread anything, you mis- wrote it. If i assuse you, you will know
:rolleyes:

So, when ever you are ready, we ALL can move on <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[Outsider]

No way is 1.4GHz a huge jump. Maybe in terms of the PowerMac speed but for a radically different processor it's mild. It's 10-14 stage pipeline (no one has concrete info on this). That's already a huge jump from the 7 stage of the 7450. And some people can overclock those to 1GHz! Add to that the fact that it will be made using SOI on a 130nm process and 1.4GHz seems absolutely mild. But it is a new process and there is bound to be glitches. So maybe 1.4GHz is a good top end ofr now but it should quickly scale to 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0GHz as the process matures. By MWNY 2002 (if they DO release the G5 this winter) they should have 1.4, 1.6, and 1.8 in their line up.

[TigerWoods99]

You want me to do speed tests? LOL I'm not a prototype tester! I haven't seen a G5 or anything....I can only give information about the CPUs.

I know how that is when people take something you say online the wrong way, my girlfriend does. :(

Anywayz I'll try to update.

[rickag]

Any one seen the latest article @ OsOpinion by Kelly McNeil
<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/15194.html" target="_blank">http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/15194.html</a>

If anything, one of the replies in the forum had an outstanding review of rumors and facts by Ed M.

<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/cgi-bin/w3t4/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=talkbackforum&Number=23354&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5#Post23354" target="_blank">http:/ /www.osopinion.com/cgi-bin/w3t4/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=talkbackforum&Number=23354&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5#Post23354</a>

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

[Powerdoc]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>Any one seen the latest article @ OsOpinion by Kelly McNeil
<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/15194.html" target="_blank">http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/15194.html</a>

If anything, one of the replies in the forum had an outstanding review of rumors and facts by Ed M.

<a href="http://www.osopinion.com/cgi-bin/w3t4/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=talkbackforum&Number=23354&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5#Post23354" target="_blank">http:/ /www.osopinion.com/cgi-bin/w3t4/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=talkbackforum&Number=23354&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5#Post23354</a>

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I prefer to do not see G5 in january if it is to say that you can buy it one in march, we see this for the 7450 one time it's enough.

It is strange to consider that in january a new chip made for the first time from Mot with SOI like the appolo will be consider to a chip for the cheaper macs. In the future why not, but now ...
There is chance that the chip for i mac will be the sahara from IBM, and not a G4 anyway.

The G5 is on the way, but i guess january is a little short for this kind of happening. The appolo chip is not even noticed on the Motorola site, it would be a merry christmas if we see in junuary G5 for power mac, and G4 appolo for I mac. Like everyone here i would not be desapointed if such a chip was launched, but the problem with mervellous dream is to wake-up.

[SDW2001]

TigerWoods99 writes....

[quote]The reason 1.6 GHz may be out of the question is apparently due to Apple's lack of trust that Motorola can provide sufficient quantities in time to ship the G5. <hr></blockquote>

Gee, why would Apple think that? :rolleyes:

[Bodhi]

[quote]Originally posted by Tarbash:
<strong>Bodhi, the iBook never outperformed the PowerBook. The Pismo G3s came out at MWT 2000 in Feb. running at 400 and 500 MHz. The key lime iBooks didn't come out until Apple Expo Paris in the Fall, and they topped out at 466 MHz.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes they topped out at 466 while the Pismo was 400MHz, and the iBook was hundreds cheaper. People thought that Apple would never do anything like that but they did. My point being that the fact that iMacs are coming in Jan. doesn't necessarily mean we will see updated Powermacs. Apple could very well do exactly what they did with the Powerbook G4, do not increase processor speed, just go from a G3 to a G4.

[rickag]

powerdoc

I agree that the G5 in all probability will not be ready for MWSF in Jan., but if you read the article and especially the post by Ed M. it gives the most detailed history I've seen concerning the rumors and facts surrounding the G5.

Worth it to just copy Ed M.'s post to have easy access to the URL's.

That said, I wouldn't be disappointed to be completely wrong and the G5 come out in Jan.

Regardless, I'm up to $1630 and will be buying a new computer in Jan. I have been putting away $5 -$10 a week away for a LONG LONG LONG time to accumalate the money. :)

[Tarbash]

Ok Bodhi, I understand now. I thought you meant the fastest PowerBook was 400 MHz.

I still think though that we will see new PowerMacs as well. It's been 6 months since each line has had an update and all the portables were just updated.

[Bodhi]

Tarbash -

I hope you are right I just hope that Apple doesn't take the "we are doing things differently" approach and not update the Powermacs like everyone expects. I am getting ready to put my Powermac up for sale and I do not want to be stuck without a machine for a long time. :p

[Chemistry Nerd]

Over the last few years, the surest indicator that new products were coming out has been watching the "special deals" at the Apple Store. The last month or so before release of a new product, they always run these to clean out the inventory channels.

Current specials at the Apple Store:
Free printer with iMac.
$500 off a monitor with a PowerMac.
Double RAM offer on PowerBook.

Additionally, Apple is offering 180 days free financing on all products.

All this points to major inventory clearage, and new PMs, PBs, and iMacs in January. :) Exactly what the new models will be, I don't care to guess (although I'm am desperately hoping for G5 PMs). I'm planning my budget for a new CPU come next month. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[MacGregor]

Chemistry Nerd,

It could also mean trying to move inventory in December during an industry slow down, too.

Other than increasing megahurtsogood and an iMac revision, I am hoping for more in the appliance line myself. MPEG4 and a handheld QT player need to get in the mix soon.

[Alexander]

I think you're right-on for the most part, ChemNerd. However, I think that the "free memory" promotion for the PowerBooks is really more of a clever way of marketing the increased memory on the new models -- it's been like that since their introduction.

Gimme my new iMacs and towers! (Well, I really only want a tower, but I wouldn't turn an iMac down if you wanted to give it to me. ;) )

Alex

[Chemistry Nerd]

[quote]Originally posted by MacGregor:
<strong>Chemistry Nerd,

It could also mean trying to move inventory in December during an industry slow down, too.

Other than increasing megahurtsogood and an iMac revision, I am hoping for more in the appliance line myself. MPEG4 and a handheld QT player need to get in the mix soon.</strong><hr></blockquote>


That certainly is possible (and I never ignore the possiblility that I'm completely full of it... :D ).

I would tend to agree if this were going on in September. However, the correlation is too good for me to discount it. *Every* time they have introduced a major revision to a product line, it is *always* preceded by a month of specials on the current model. Given that MWSF is a traditional venue for new product intros, it seems a reasonable conclusion at this point.

As a corollary, I would not expect a major change to the iBook for the same reason. Maybe a speed bump (perhaps this is where the "Sahara" chip is going), but no major architecture changes.


I am with you in being hopeful that there will be more appliances. Since they're new, I don't have any tea leaves to read about them, but the iPod is obviously meant to be more that a deluxe MP3 player. It would be reasonable to follow it up with more "digital hub" devices in January.

We'll see in a few weeks, anyway.

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by Chemistry Nerd:
<strong>As a corollary, I would not expect a major change to the iBook for the same reason. Maybe a speed bump (perhaps this is where the "Sahara" chip is going), but no major architecture changes.</strong><hr></blockquote>Actually, the iBook has the best and most unusual deal of them all - $100 off, no strings attached.

Apple almost never does this - they usually have a mail-in rebate or "buy a &lt;blank&gt; and get &lt;blank&gt; for $100 off," or something like that.

So by your theory, the iBook should get the best update of them all!

Actually, I think it is strange that they have this iBook deal, with it already selling so well, and it having just been updated. Hmmm...

[applenut]

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>Actually, the iBook has the best and most unusual deal of them all - $100 off, no strings attached.

Apple almost never does this - they usually have a mail-in rebate or "buy a &lt;blank&gt; and get &lt;blank&gt; for $100 off," or something like that.

So by your theory, the iBook should get the best update of them all!

Actually, I think it is strange that they have this iBook deal, with it already selling so well, and it having just been updated. Hmmm...</strong><hr></blockquote>

the iBook deal is a mailin rebate.


portables are definitely not being updated. the channel is just finall getting full. it would be an inventory nightmare. I'm surprised they have introduced price cuts on the current desktops yet to clear out the channel

[Bodhi]

Does anyone here have an Ingram Micro contact?

[Willoughby]

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>Does anyone here have an Ingram Micro contact?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, why?

[Bodhi]

How is the channel on Powermacs? Usually by now the low end machine is becoming scarce.

[Willoughby]

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>How is the channel on Powermacs? Usually by now the low end machine is becoming scarce.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I will ask them tonight. Maybe they can even tell me if they've been EOL'd. Though I doubt it. I guess they can look in the IM system and see but I'm not sure about that one. I'll let you know.

[Alexander]

[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>the iBook deal is a mailin rebate.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Only if you buy from a reseller; if you buy from the Apple Store (online, I don't know about physical), it's an instant rebate.

Now that you mention it, it is awfully unusual. Ends Dec. 31st. We'll see...

Alex

[Outsider]

I've been doing some research on 'Gigawire'. From the descriptions of the trademark I've seen, it leads me to believe that it's the name for Apple's new bus technology. we've seen the specs floating around... 400MHz (is this 2X or 4X or just 1X?); will it be point-to-point; will it be 16, 32, 64 bit? How much bandwidth? We all know Apple needs some serious work in that area. I wonder if the new iMacs will share this new technology with the Powermacs. It could mean that Apple will be targeting the imac to a new market. They may have something up their sleeve.... notice how defensive Jobs became when word of the MS settlement broke.

[Willoughby]

About Ingram Micro:

S/He said they get shipments from Apple sometimes weekly. They're not having any problem filling their orders from the resellers and they aren't having any problems getting the machines from Apple. So as far as s/he can tell there isn't a supply shortage. They also aren't EOL'd apparently.

They don't have exact numbers of course and they assured me that all of this could change when they place their next order.

So that was probably of no help whatsoever :(

[super]

Well i just got back from my local "Apple Store" down here in Australia. The owner, let me know that Apple Australia has been on his back for weeks to clear any and all G4 stock before January. He said they don't want anything left in the channel. I thought that was interesting. Would Apple Australia know what was coming or is it just common sense ?

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>

Yes they topped out at 466 while the Pismo was 400MHz, and the iBook was hundreds cheaper. People thought that Apple would never do anything like that but they did. My point being that the fact that iMacs are coming in Jan. doesn't necessarily mean we will see updated Powermacs. Apple could very well do exactly what they did with the Powerbook G4, do not increase processor speed, just go from a G3 to a G4.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, but Pismo also had a 100mhz BUS and a 14.1 inch TFT, removable bays, etc.

[Bodhi]

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Yes, but Pismo also had a 100mhz BUS and a 14.1 inch TFT, removable bays, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exactly my point. Powermac has a 133MHz bus, iMac has a 100MHz bus. Apple could increase the iMac processor speed and not necessarily increase the Powermac speed until later.

Thanks for the Ingram Micro info. Not a good sign if you ask me, its getting close to three weeks away...

[Leonis]

Regarding Ingram.....that reminds me a thing that my reseller friends told me a while ago....

Back to the BW G3 to G4 time.

The distributors didn't know G4 was coming and there was NO signs at all.

After the sudden G4 announcement in Seybold 1999....there were bunch of B/W G3s left in the warehouse and the distributors couldn't even return them to Apple. They ate the loss by cutting the price in order to get rid of them. Remember that we saw some BW towers in Costco???

The same could happen again.....

[KidRed]

Yea, especially if Apple wants to stun the world. Why give hints?

[KD5MDK]

I wonder what Dell knows. I'm sur all major corporations have some people who try to find out what the others are up to. It wouldn't break any NDAs to release other companies' trade secrets, would it? ;)

[Bodhi]

I doubt that will happen again. Does anyone remember the Dual 450 500 fiasco? Apple could not give away the towers they had built up in the warehouses and ended up with around 11 weeks of inventory. That hurt their share price in a big way. Apple's channel and inventory management is what helps them, they are a niche product and cannot afford especially in these times to have a lot of old product out there when something is introduced. They have been doing a VERY good job with this lately. Before the iBook announcement there were none to be found, in July the Powermacs were scarce and had 12 day ship times at the Apple Store. It makes no sense from a managament perspective to allow inventory to remain in the channel just for the element of surprise. Apple's board nor Fred Anderson would allow that....that's my guess.

[AaronS]

[quote]
After the sudden G4 announcement in Seybold 1999....there were bunch of B/W G3s left in the warehouse and the distributors couldn't even return them to Apple. They ate the loss by cutting the price in order to get rid of them. Remember that we saw some BW towers in Costco???

The same could happen again.....
<hr></blockquote>
-That would be a bad thing however, because it pisses off the distributors that have to eat the costs, and it's not good business practice to piss off your distributors...

_aarons

[iCom]

[quote]Originally posted by Willoughby:
<strong>About Ingram Micro:

S/He said they get shipments from Apple sometimes weekly. They're not having any problem filling their orders from the resellers and they aren't having any problems getting the machines from Apple. So as far as s/he can tell there isn't a supply shortage. They also aren't EOL'd apparently.

They don't have exact numbers of course and they assured me that all of this could change when they place their next order.

So that was probably of no help whatsoever :( </strong><hr></blockquote>

Ingram in Belgium has 90 units on order of the low end model, they should have been delivered november 29th, they think no new delivery will be made until jan. 2002 .

[SDW2001]

[quote]Originally posted by iCom:
<strong>

Ingram in Belgium has 90 units on order of the low end model, they should have been delivered november 29th, they think no new delivery will be made until jan. 2002 .</strong><hr></blockquote>

Interesting.....though all it really says it something will be updated.....I suppose that is nothing new.

[TigerWoods99]

Bump.

Interesting stuff......

[Bozo the Clown]

Yes, we are getting new powermacs in less than one month.

Somehow, I'm not surprised...

[Falcon]

Which leaves us right back where we started: Whats going to be in them?

[the Belgian waffle]

[quote]Originally posted by Falcon:
<strong>Which leaves us right back where we started: Whats going to be in them?</strong><hr></blockquote>

A G5 in powermacs. White case, two full front drive bays.

A (n apollo) G4 in iMacs (or whatevr the successor is called). iBook like configuration, different modles with different optical drives.

A (n apollo) G4 in powerbooks, all on 133 MHz bus.

Sahara G3 in iBooks.

That is not only what I at least want and expect, that's what's really needed.

I can get an Athlon XP 1600 machine here in Belgium for 24.000 BEF. That's less than half the price of the low 500 MHz CD-ROM iMac. That has to hurt Apple, both in the consumer and pro space. Reghardless of how much I like Apple's OS. This is not going to make me swith to winamd/tel, but it is letting me hang on to my old Apple hardware just that wee bit longer.

[Alexis]

[quote]Originally posted by Mac The Fork:
<strong>My sources report that it is more likely that the G5 will be delayed until Apple is done creating their Raycer graphics processor.</strong><hr></blockquote>

What's the "Raycer graphics processor" supposed to have that other companies have not yet provided?

--Alexis

P.S. Why would I have to re-register?

[rickag]

Well, that tears it. No G5's.

Steve Jobs is giving the keynote a day earlier that projected and Apple needed the extra day to be able to ensure an adequate supply of G5's for sale. :mad:

[Outsider]

Maybe they have so much G5's they will have more than enough. Perhaps Steve got so excited because their shipment of 1.6GHz G5's came early and they'll have more than enough to offer for sale that he moved up the keynote one day early! Think positive!

[rickag]

Actually, I just think it's kind of comical that any one would speculate about potential product announcements by when or how long the keynote will be. Long live the rumor mill. :)

[OverToasty]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>Well, that tears it. No G5's.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

I donna thinka so ...

Let's figure this: Uncle Steve, being a man who really-really likes to be admired from a safe distance ... would seriously think twice about pissing off his admirings fans (or those fan's journalist's) by screwing up their hotel plans.

Thus - he must have calculated something - that's the kind of mind he's got.

The math?

The weight of pissing off a small fraction of the admiring flock by way of their hotel plans - vs - the thunder loss of a day early security leak.

He must of thought simply this "tis nobler to freak out with full force the hundreds of thousands of fans who can't show up, than saving the hotel plans of the thousand or so who do, and risking a leak".

You do the "math": Uncle Steve's got something big: he wouldn't risk pissing on the warm glow of a thousand or so local admirers otherwise; my guess (and it's only a guess), is G5's.

Since Bake-offs take time: and 2.5 hours is about right for the monster chiller horror theatre of LCD iMacs and especially G5's mopping the floor with x86's. I think we're likely gonna see G5's, cause an Apple branded Ginger ain't gonna cut it.

And yes, it is about friken time.

[Outsider]

Especially if the bake off is going to include Photoshop 7, Maya, Office v.X, InDesign, QXP, etc.

[rickag]

you just gotta love rumor sites :)

RightOnMac chimes in
<a href="http://rightonmac.com/articles/01/12/13-earlykeynote.html" target="_blank">http://rightonmac.com/articles/01/12/13-earlykeynote.html</a>

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>

[othello]

he's moved the keynote (as has been posted in other threads) so that the booths can be set-up on the sunday, with no-one milling around.

[Leonis]

[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>Especially if the bake off is going to include Photoshop 7, Maya, Office v.X, InDesign, QXP, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Again...there's no way to do the bake off using Maya.

This app is slow, no MP support and half version behind other platform.

[Outsider]

What if it's being updated?

[cowerd]

no MP support on MAYA until the next major release.

[Addison]

OS X does the MP support

[cowerd]

Lets try this again. Unless the program is specifically coded to take advantage of a second processor in OSX, the only thing a second processor will allow is the offloading of other tasks while the app is running, i.e.
app=processor1
OS overhead and other tasks=processor2
[quote]The next major release of Maya will feature support for AltiVec and multiprocessing machines, Andrew Pearce, director of Maya technologies, told MacCentral.<hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0112/13.maya.php" target="_blank">http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0112/13.maya.php</A>
for similar accounts with other OSX proggies see Connectix VPC5 read me.

[Rmh1572]

YOURDAILYMAC's informant says he saw new imac and new tower that was vastly superior. <a href="http://www.phasedreality.com/yourdailymac/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.phasedreality.com/yourdailymac/index.html</a>

[TigerWoods99]

All I can say is Maya wasn't ported to OS X for an Apollo and my source ISNT talking now. Before he was all for telling me the processor situation at Motorola.

[TigerWoods99]

By telling me about processor information before I mostly mean the G4+ (V'Ger) which he gave me correct details on fall of 2000. He has told me a little about G5, but now I can't contact him.

[Daver]

... and combined with everything else we've heard lately, it means that I'm convinced that the G5 will be announced at MWSF. :eek:

[Bodhi]

mmmmmmmm.....G5

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

[Toofeu]

Miammm G5.....
(French translation) ;)

[Daver]

ACK! ACK ACK ACK! ACK ACK!
(Martian translation) :D

[Bodhi]

http://www.kidmoe.com/hpictures/homer23.gif

MMMMMMMMM......G5......

[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Bodhi ]</p>

[SDW2001]

Well I also wish yourdailymac is correct with their "source"......but the guy sent an EMAIL? What, from Apple? From home?

Sure, no way to track that......

[KidRed]

HAHAHA, have you guys seen what yourdailymac says will be the new iMac??

<a href="http://www.phasedreality.com/yourdailymac/newimac.jpg" target="_blank">YourDailyMac</a>


But this is an old AppleLe rendition of the PowerBook last year-
<a href="http://www.applele.com/powerfulbook2_a.jpg" target="_blank">AppleLe PowerBook</a>

HAHAHAHAHA

[myahmac]

In theory osx tries to divide the threads going to each processor not the actual application. so depending on how it is written, osx by it self would not make it nulit proc. but help out a bit. i think...

[zaustin]

Maya is threaded. OSX can divy out threads to any processor it wants, but it favors keeping threads that share local data on the same processor (less register loading/unloading). Since Maya, like most applications, runs multiple threads on multiple sets of data, Maya can be spread onto two processors fairly effectively. If A|W decides to optimize Maya's MP performance on OSX, they can thread their application with two processors in mind, and increase MP performance this way.

[river-wind]

Ok, look at the back hinges of the case in the <a href="http://www.phasedreality.com/yourdailymac/newimac.jpg" target="_blank">yourdailymac new imac picture</a>

You notice how the reflections are flat horizonal lines? Well, this pretty much never happens in real life, and I doubt that the guy who "took" the picture set up an entire lighting rig to get that effect. When an object reflects light in the real world, it never reflects just one light source. There are always many different objects and light to reflect. The curve of the hinges should be reflecting lightS, the table the thing is sitting on, the room around it, etc.

It's called environment reflection. If it isn't there, it's because the person took alot of time and money to set up the shot to specifically avoid it- or its a 3-d render. Even 3d-renders can fake an environment reflection, you can even do it in photoshop. But to not have one is pretty sad.
It 's too bad, too. The email that I assume came with the pictures sounded so promising.

[Arty50]

Yeah, as Kid-red figured out, yourdailymac ripped off Isamu Sanada ( <a href="http://www.applele.com" target="_blank">www.applele.com</a> ). If you go over to his site, you'll see a ton of alternate Mac designs. All photoshopped of course.

[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Arty50 ]</p>

[macaddict]

I'm not sure if he used Photoshop or not, but Applele's designs are some of the best I've seen. They follow Apple's design direction very well and look very sleek.

[SDW2001]

The case for and against the G5:

For:

---Steve has said the MHZ gap would be closed by "then end of this year". 7 days after the new year is close enough for me. Though, this could refer to a blazing Apollo chip.

---Several different rumor sites reporting the G5's are coming, they think. The Register source sounds very credible to me. If these things are a hoax then I will be surprised. The detail and timing are very good if so.

---Dorsal has backed up and said his superiors may be working with G5 prototypes after all.

---The pushing of the keynote coincided almost exactly with the rumored first production run on 12 December.

---My own personal research tells me that it is indeed possible to go from a final revision on a chip to it being used in quantity in a shipping product in 60 days. We heard the chip was very close to final in November.....it almost seemed that they had a little EXTRA time to iron out the bugs ["Apple could probably sign off now....but...."]

---There are some folks here on these boards who are not known for screwing with us telling everyone that they know G5's are coming in Q1.

---Even asthappleturns has all but jumped on the wagon. When they drop, you know something is up.

---No official denials from Apple or MOT (see below however)

Against:

1) ThinkSecret says "nope". Though, this should almost be in the other column considering the source's track record.

2) Apollo just got done. Will they really put it in the iMac and Tibook only? (Will they "skip" over Apollo if it is running at like 1.4GHZ?)

3) I admit the possibility of a 600-800 mhz speed increase in six months is unlikely. Not impossible, but when put that way, it diminishes the chances.

4) The statement for MOT about not wanting to get people's hopes up "beyond what is really possible". Though the rest of the article is open to interpretation....it could even strengthen the case FOR a G5.

5) They just changed the G4 case. Six months later they are going to totally revamp the towers? Again, though depending on interpretation and opinion, this could support the case FOR a G5...they could have had the case redesign done and ready, then had problems with MOT again.


That is about all I can think of. Overall though, I think there are just too many coincidences in support of a G5 coming out to ignore. One, two , or even three of the "for" column may not sway opinion, but all of them?

The only thing we can do as people that AREN'T "in the know" is draw conclusions from what we have seen. I think if one looks at the case "for" it is significantly stronger than the case "against". But, it is not irrefutable. We'll see. You know what I'm hoping for and what I think will happen.

[ 12-16-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>

[Cobra]

If they really do have the Apollo at 1.4 GHZ, it would mean NO G5 in SF.

That said, I find it hard to believe that MOTO would have gotten 500 MHZ out of the G4 this fast. 867 to 1.4 GHZ, in 6 months?

Hell, it took damn near 2 years to go from 500 to 867MHZ

:rolleyes:

[KidRed]

Yes, but the G5 will come in at 1ghz, 1.2ghz, 1.4ghz and so on. The jump from a 867 to a say a dual 1.2 top of the line wouldn't be that big of a jump. We have no way of knowing what speeds the G5 will come in at if it does come at all.

Why go with the Apollo for just one more run when it's about topped out. This Jan show for G4s would be the definate last G4 in a tower. So if G4s show up in towers in Jan, then it's the end of the line and G5s will debut in June.

It comes down to are the G5s ready and/or does Apple want to squeeze one more rev out of the G4s.

Also, the Apollo could very well be for the iMac and PB, that's why Moto said the Apollo was ready an that's why the G4 has life left. If the Apollo can scale to 1.2 -1.4ghz, come out with 3 models of iMac all at 1ghz, then you have 6 months and speed bump up to 1.2ghz, then another 6 months to 1.4ghz. By then the G5 should be close to 2.0ghz and the iMac could get a 1.2- 1.4ghz G5.

So many theories, I hope for a G5.

[SDW2001]

KidRed writes:

[quote]It comes down to are the G5s ready and/or does Apple want to squeeze one more rev out of the G4s. <hr></blockquote>

I agree. I think that is what this keynote change is about. They had the iMac G4 done...and the back-up plan was a G4 PM @ 867, 1.0 single and 933 dual. That way they could put the 800's in the iMacs and no one would bitch. But now, they have the G5 done and can go to 1GHZ with the Apollo's in the iMac. I think that this week there are going to be about a quadrillion iMacs and G5's rolling off the lines*


*confimed: the above is what I think but is also rampant speculation.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

hey had the iMac G4 done...and the back-up plan was a G4 PM @ 867, 1.0 single and 933 dual.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I will soooooo disappointed if we get G4s where the top of the line is a dual 1.0ghz. That would be like taking away a new bike from a kid on Christmas after he already opened it. Simply devestating. At least get to dual 1.2's but even then, I might be compelled to wait till June for the G5s hopeful appearence. Hell, maybe I'll get an iMac to hold me off some til June, lol. (not)

[rickag]

I don't know if any one has posted a link to Architosh , but they have a revised version of their previous article.

Maybe sanity is coming back to the rumors.

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml</a>

Personally, I question the implementation of hypertransport in the next G4 revision, but it would defenitely be a great upgrade.

[Bozo the Clown]

Sounds reasonable; however you still can make a case for the G5 showing up in three weeks from what they say. Perhaps they've shipped out two classes of prototypes: one with the guts of a G5 Tower, one with the guts of a G4 iMac.

The fact that the supposed prototype G5s aren't supposed to be returned to Apple until february could simply be a result of the new machines not shipping until around that time.

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>I don't know if any one has posted a link to Architosh , but they have a revised version of their previous article.

Maybe sanity is coming back to the rumors.

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml</a>

Personally, I question the implementation of hypertransport in the next G4 revision, but it would defenitely be a great upgrade.</strong><hr></blockquote>

[AirSluf]

[Mithral]

Well, the usually-reliable (?) <a href="http://www.appleturns.com" target="_blank">As the Apple Turns</a> just reported that there's no G5. Their lava lamp seems pretty emphatic on this issue. Plus, the Register's mole has been silent for over a month. And then Architosh, this morning.

Oh well. Good thing I wasn't getting my hopes up. (well, maybe just a little)

;)


-mithral

[Bozo the Clown]

Well, by that scenario, the bottom of the line G4 will best the current top of the line. That hasn't happened in recent memory.

[anand]

Well, that puts a nail in it does it not! 933 mhx to what I wonder. With DDR ram this might not be that bad. Now only if Apple would drop the price on there displays all would be perfect in the world.

[Wrong Robot]

[quote]Originally posted by Cobra:
<strong>
Hell, it took damn near 2 years to go from 500 to 867MHZ

:rolleyes: </strong><hr></blockquote>


well That could easily be shaken off as a bug, on Motos part, I don't know how moto held up back in the beige ages, but I don't recall any year+ setbacks of products.
Perhaps after that fiasco, Jobs' sad to moto "get your act together, or I'm out"
and they said(for some reason unknown to man)"yes mr.jobs sir" and then they hauled ass to produce faster better harder stronger processors, triple checking them to make sure they wouldn't have another scaling problem.
also the g5 would be a totally different processor, which means different fab processes and all that, which means its a different scenario than that of the 500 mhz g4s
or at least partially different.


its possible.

at any rate I'm optimistic about the g5, though a REALLY fast g4 would be welcome as well.
however an apollo g4 sold as a g5 would be unacceptable.

[Telomar]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>Why go with the Apollo for just one more run when it's about topped out. This Jan show for G4s would be the definate last G4 in a tower. So if G4s show up in towers in Jan, then it's the end of the line and G5s will debut in June.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually the G4 could get at least 2 more revisions even assuming the chip can't be scaled anymore.

You could have 867MHz, 1GHz, 1.133GHz at MWSF (dual 1GHz being the top) then 1.133, 1.267 and 1.4GHz in the revision following.

I don't believe that is what will occur but it definitely can. There is also still room for the G4s to scale.

I concur it is really a matter of when the G5 will be ready for release as to when they are released. Personally I would expect MWNY.

[KidRed]

[quote]Originally posted by rickag:
<strong>I don't know if any one has posted a link to Architosh , but they have a revised version of their previous article.

Maybe sanity is coming back to the rumors.

<a href="http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml" target="_blank">http://www.architosh.com/news/2001-12/2001c-1215-g4g5.phtml</a>

Personally, I question the implementation of hypertransport in the next G4 revision, but it would defenitely be a great upgrade.</strong><hr></blockquote>


The one thing about that article is that they say the test boxes will be collected from Apple in Feb.

This means 2 things then-

1) This is BS because Apple is doing all testing inhouse as I read somewhere.

2) It's true, they did send out test machines. If so, doesn't then connect to the VueScan G5 compatabilty thing?

Still can't say one way or the other. The one optimist thing I can think of, Is that the Apollo is for the iMac and is being tested outside Apple and the G5 is in house and kept under wraps. That's why the confliciting G4/G5 reports. Hopefully :)

[DaveGee]

I've heard (from someone that would have no reason to lie to me) that a 'Major Software' developer hasn't gotten test/pre-productions boxes from Apple in quite some time... So that tends to confirm that Apple is only doing 'in house' testing or for whatever reason just that one 'Major Software' developer isn't being sent eval units and I would find that pretty strange.

Then again sitting in front of a computer every day looking for clues / hints / rumors about a yet unreleased products and knowing full well that anything short of a hidden video of Steve Jobs spilling all the beans early will be cut to ribbons by some group of people is pretty strange as well... :D

Dave

[Bodhi]

I put my eggs in the As The Apple Turns basket. They say no G5, Apollo G4's. They have been right on all year.

[KidRed]

So then the Archintosh article is BS about the test machines being returned in Feb. Unless Apple is testing with non-developers which doesn't make much sence.

[DaveGee]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>So then the Archintosh article is BS about the test machines being returned in Feb. Unless Apple is testing with non-developers which doesn't make much sence.</strong><hr></blockquote>

After reading your comment something just clicked and **could** explain why Apple isn't/hasn't been sending out test boxes to (many/most/all?) developers.

OS X! When developers wrote Apps for Mac OS 9 they could play pretty fast and loose with 'apples recommended way to write code' - Apple always wanted developers to use the toolbox calls for doing anything with hardware. Well with OS 9 and below apple couldn't really stop folks from doing pretty much whatever they wanted. Thus the need to send out any new boxes to make sure developers stuff wouldn't break.

Now with OS X I think (I'm not a developer so I'm only going by what I've read other write) many things have changed and Apple doesn't have to worry about folks writing code that does any sorta OS sneak-around.

Maybe some developers could chime in on this... Now if this is true (and just to CONFIRM I am only guessing) then Apple can keep their hardware inhouse alot longer and only release it to folks for other testing reasons... Graphic and or PCI card developers etc.

This sure would explain why some people (software developers) are saying that Apple hasn't sent them new boxes and yet other sources are saying they have seen new boxes...

Dave

[KidRed]

That would fall in line with another thread where a post said a major developer hasn't received a test box in some time. Myave Adobe? Anyways, if a major developer isn't get test boxes, then why would anyone get test boxes? I think this is the reason we don't have many leads to go on. That being said, I think there's still a chance for the G5. How can anyone say no, when know one knows anything?

[GardenOfEarthlyDelights]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>
[...]
1) This is BS because Apple is doing all testing inhouse as I read somewhere.
[...]
</strong><hr></blockquote>

You're saying that one source you read on the internet is better than another source you read on the internet?

Sir, I submit to you that it's all balderdash! Speculate if you must, but please remember the tagline: "This has not been confirmed independently" applies to both the internet and that other world we occasionally hear about.

Let me mix metaphors and non-sequiturs: My kingdom for a pillar of salt!

[mmicist]

[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
<strong>

This means 2 things then-

1) This is BS because Apple is doing all testing inhouse as I read somewhere.

2) It's true, they did send out test machines. If so, doesn't then connect to the VueScan G5 compatabilty thing?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not sending out test machines would be a very bad move. There are a number of people who need these machines, especially when there are such major changes as are supposed to come with the G5, a new processor, memory system, mother board, peripheral connections, these need to be tested with as wide a range of hardware and software as possible so that any errors or problems will show up, Apple simply don't have in-house the capacity to test this thoroughly. Apple really don't want to introduce nice new machines with a lot of ballyhoo, only to have to recall them late on because of some flaw in the design. The greater the differences in the new machines, the more people they will want to test it.
On top of this certain software developers will have been given machines so that they can produce optimised, stable, code for the new systems, if Steve is going to demo these machines, he wants code which is not going to crash and which fully shows off the capabilities of the machine, my guess might be a move away from Photoshop for this, especially if there isn't a OSX version ready for MWSF, and to something light Maya. Alias|Wavefront would, I think, be high on the list of people Apple would want to have test machines.


Michael

[rickag]

Onyxx posted this link @ Macrumors
<a href="http://www.postforum.com/forums/read.php?f=6&i=26730&t=26730" target="_blank">http://www.postforum.com/forums/read.php?f=6&i=26730&t=26730</a>

Me personally, I like one of the posters response that the new alliance will be IBM, Apple, AMD. NO G5, but Athlon. :eek:

[KidRed]

I wish AMD would replace Moto. Could it be a good sign that Moto might be folding shop and on the market to be possibly bought out? Maybe Steve will get nervous and have AMD continue with it's chip production.

The PC whineies wouldn't be able to say the Athlon kicks the Macs ass cause we'd have G5athlons too!!

mmm, amd, mmm They (AMD) could realistically do our chips right?

[Outsider]

Not if you're talking about using Athlons in the PowerMac. No way EVER this would happen. Let me just say it again: NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. But!, if you mean that AMD would take over manufacturing for the PowerPC 8500 and 7460, then yes, there is a chance this could happen and it could be very well likely.

[Addison]

I spoke to a geek last week who had installed OS X on 5 PC's. He could get it to run on only one of them without the GUI. He was just mucking about with Darwin.

He says that the Linux community is very excited about OS X.

[jimbos]

Equipments basic VoIP for termination call is Gateway GSM/UMTS
I can offer you SIMBANK and Gateway GSM/UMTS where you can work with SIM local and

Gateway whereever in the world. You can also have a look on http://voipsolutionreview.com/ more

info.

Regards
jimbos

[Akumulator]

hmmmm....

[psychodoughboy]

Worst. Bump. Ever.

[auslander]

Worst. Bump. Ever.

:lol::lol::lol:

[aiolos]

Worst. Bump. Ever.

:lol: wow

[Karelia]

I'm actually glad for that bump. This topic was interesting. People were speculating 1.2 GHz G5's in late 2001, whereas they actually came out as a minimum of 1.6 GHz in June of 2003.

Makes our current speculations look like they could be way off-base.