New PowerMac specs

[skittlebrau]

yourdailymac.com claims to have new PowerMac Specs.

Fast:
1.2 GHz G4
512 MB DDR RAM (finally!)
60 GB HD
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce4MX 64 MB DDR
$1599

Faster:
1.4 GHz G4
512 MB DDR RAM
80 GB HD
SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce4MX 64 MB
$2199

Fastest:
Dual 1.6 GHz G4
1 GB DDR RAM
120 GB HD
SuperDrive
ATI Radeon 9700 128 MB
$2999

Build-to-order options:
Up to 4 GB DDR RAM
Ultra160 SCSI
nVidia GeForce4MX (standard), nVidia GeForce4 Ti ($150 more), ATI Radeon 9700 ($150 more), or Matrox Parhelia ($250 more)
Zip drive
AppleCare
All systems include:
Gigabit Ethernet
GigaWire (1394b)
USB 2.0
AGP 8x
PCI-X 133 MB/sec
56k modem
AirPort ready
Bluetooth built-in
New "snow" case (similar to spy photos)
DynaCool turbine cooling

They seem optimistic to me, but I suppose anything is possible.<a href="http://www.yourdailymac.com" target="_blank">link</a>

[keyboardf12]

this guy has been so wrong in the past. i'll judge the specs in the morning

[BrunoBruin]

Sweet if true, but they seem a bit optimistic, especially at those price points. And I'm highly suspicious of USB 2 and Gigawire. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

Not that I'm saying it will happen, but I personally would like to see a duallie in the midrange too. Like a dual 1.2GHz for around $2,000. That would be a swell replacement for the dual 450s we have in the office. A $3,000 top-end machine would be a harder sell!

[MFfan310]

Hey! That's my prediction post from the MacAddict forums they're using! :D Sure sounds accurate, but I might be wrong. (BTW, I have no ties to Apple except people who know me at one of Apple's retail stores-I won't tell you the location) :)

[G-News]

those specs actually sound good, thus they can't be real. He pulled em out of his ***.

G_News

[Iridium]

IMHO very optimistic.
Please note that they provided some information on new displays --

no 15" TFT anymore and a new 19", but still keeping the 22" Cinema.

And a new (only BTO) Powerbook case in black.

Sorry, but I find that hard to believe.

Even if I'd like to believe the rest ... but no black PB case ... never ....

And this disqualifies the whole bit of information ...

Even if 1.6GHz would be desireable...


IMO Fake ...

Cheers,
Martin

[DaveGee]

"Matrox Parhelia ($250 more)"

Ummm that sure seems strange since I'm sure I read that Matrox wasn't going to support Mac with that card.

[cinder]

He blew it with the 'USB 2.0', PCI-X, Matrox, and 'DynaCool' junk he threw in there.

BS

Not to mention, no GeForce4 Ti in any basic set up?

No way.
they said they would soon be the primary graphics supplier for Apple.
They didn't say "our cheap crap will ship in Macs'


Try harder next time.
Do your homework.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: cinder ]</p>

[Hagen Kirk]

They may be optimistic but they would definitely be a nice thing to have. Maybe we'll see a return of a BTO option for the single procs to be duals. I believe that used to be an option back when there were 5 G4s in the mix instead of 3.

Also of interest are the price drops on monitors and new powerbook specs. Yet another case of optimistic but if they're true they rock. If the 7" is dropping to 600 bucks and remaining non widescreen, you'll see more folks pick it up than at 1000 bucks, but still not as many as if it were widescreen and say...700 bucks. I know if it were a 17" wideescreen like the new iMac for $700 I would pick one up along with one of the new Powermacs. Hell, even the 22" monitor for 1500 is a significant price drop. Is the 22" Cinema Display a widescreen aspect ratio already? I wanna say it is, hence the name

[hmurchison]

I BELIEVE THEM!

These systems will form a nice segue to the 64bit IBM chip that will be used next year. Wow Dual 1.6ghz with a 9700 Pro. That system will kick A-R-S-E.

[JohnHenry]

This all really sounds bogus. The thing that excited me most though was the drop in price of the 22" LCD. Oh man, we can only hope...

[monsterjaeger]

BTO Matrox Parhelia... *mhmmm*
Must be expensive stuff they smoke... it's even better than RDF!

btw. PCI-X is 533MB/s if I'm not completely mistaken...
Rather over-optimistic. We'll see...

[Appleworm]

Not enough FAST !
Too expensive !

Steve you have a night to give us 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 GHz G5 and all the speedy technologies around in one, dual and quad-processors, at not more than 3000$ !!!!


Aw :)

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Appleworm ]</p>

[BrunoBruin]

I just checked the article and the other predictions make me discount the whole lot. Of course with Apple anything is possible, but does anybody seriously believe that the 800MHz PowerBook that was introduced less than four months ago is going to get DDR RAM (will the chip even support it? or are the PowerBooks going to the 7470?), a 64MB Radeon, a black case, and drop to $2,399?! And the top model is going to get a SuperDrive, which as far as anyone knows doesn't even EXIST for slot-loaders? :eek:

[BRussell]

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

1.6Ghz

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

I'll eat this post if that's true.

[Appleworm]

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

1.6Ghz

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

I'll eat this post if that's true.</strong><hr></blockquote>

So,

with

this

post

you

will

have

more

paper

to

eat

;)


Aw :)

[BrunoBruin]

[quote]I'll eat this post if that's true. <hr></blockquote>

I'll believe 1.6 before I'll believe a SuperDrive and DDR RAM in a black PowerBook for $2,999. :D

[Blackcat]

As far as PowerMacs go, all those specs are doable, we just need a G4 that does DDR - the mythical 7470.

The Powerbook specs, although deeply yummy, are let down by the black enclosure - you can't colour titanium black, blue, purple, yellow, even rainbow - but not black.

I'd love a purple one.

[Masker]

So the 22 inch Cinema display is $1000 cheaper?

SuperDrive in the hi-end PowerBook?

A new 19 inch cinema display for $999?

This couldn't be more optimistic.

Don't believe this. Prepare to be let down if you do.

MSKR

[Masker]

[quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:
<strong>The Powerbook specs, although deeply yummy, are let down by the black enclosure - you can't colour titanium black, blue, purple, yellow, even rainbow - but not black.

I'd love a purple one.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You can anodize aluminum to a black color.
Also, they can paint the titanium any color they want. Maybe it's a paint job abd not an anodizing?

I'll believe when I see it, touch it, feel it, own it.

MSKR

[gwhylow]

[quote]Originally posted by monsterjaeger:
<strong>BTO Matrox Parhelia... *mhmmm*
Must be expensive stuff they smoke... it's even better than RDF!

btw. PCI-X is 533MB/s if I'm not completely mistaken...
Rather over-optimistic. We'll see...</strong><hr></blockquote>


The grand-daddy of PCI-X, a PCI-X controller running at 133MHz has a staggering 1066MBytes/s of bandwidth. However, only one device is supported without the use of a bridge. Only the most hungry of peripherals (Fibre Channel, Gigabit Ethernet) will take advantage of PCI-X 133.

[Appleworm]

More seriously :
- OS X (preemptive multitask, protected memory, multiple users, true GUI)
- Good hardware (if these specs are true, best will be the "G5" at 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 GHz)
- lower price (if this is true)

THE 3 BEST REASONS TO SWITCH...

All the reasons that PC users blame to the mac are killed (no protected memory, not multitask, to oexpensive, too sloww)
NEXT step : a iOffice with compatibility with msOffice and Wintel will be very bad.

Well done Steve.

Aw :)

[keyboardf12]

Macrumors.com are reporting that these specs are _WWWWWRRRRRRRROOOOOONNNNNGGGGGGGGGG____

(wrong) :)

[skittlebrau]

I guess the specs were too good to be true.

<a href="http://www.macrumors.com" target="_blank">link</a>

[Nonsuch]

From MacMinute:
[quote]New Power Mac G4 systems to be unveiled tomorrow with speeds up to 1.25GHz
August 12 - 16:33 EDT Apple will unveil new Power Mac G4 systems tomorrow, MacMinute has learned. Sources inform us that three configurations will be offered: dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299). The dual-1GHz and dual-1.25GHz models will feature ATI Radeon 9000 series graphics cards; additional system-specific details are not available. The dual-867MHz configuration is slated to ship by the end of the week, while the new dual-1GHz model will ship towards the end of the month. Availability of the high-end dual-1.25GHz model is being pegged at sometime in September. Current Power Mac G4 systems will be reduced in price as follows: 800MHz ($1,299), 933MHz ($1,499) and dual-1GHz ($2,199). Additionally, Apple will introduce a SuperDrive-equipped eMac for $1,499, sources say, and will reduce the price of CD-RW and Combo Drive iMacs by $100 to $1,299 and $1,499, respectively.<hr></blockquote>

[Leonis]

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>

[Appleworm]

The specs post by macosrumors.com on Thursday 8 August are nearly the same (1, 1.2 and 1.4 GHz with 1.2 and 1.4 being the 7470)...


Aw :)

[Outsider]

1.25GHz? What's the bus speed?
hint:
166MHz * 7.5

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[whoami]

that sucks if true! i guess i was too hyped up by those overly optimistic specs above! hehehehe. i'm not buying til' january anyway!

[Amorph]

All duals. Not staggering, but nice. The closeout price on the old dual GHz isn't bad, either.

It looks like the old mobo stays for one more round...

[Leonis]

MacMinute reported the top end will be only 1.25GHz at $3,300

doesn't seem like good thing for Apple. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[Nonsuch]

FWIW, I don't ever recall MacMinute being wrong with any 11th-hour predictions like these.

[Appleworm]

1.25 GHz <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

Steve, are we $-cows ?

I will wait tomorrow and if this is true, I really switch to PC-Linux.

An no update for the powerbook ?

Aw :mad:

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Appleworm ]</p>

[Leonis]

Fine...I think I should now keep using my SlowSilver(tm) until next year.

[cthulu]

"configurations will be offered: dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299)."


Now this sounds like apple! Thanks apple for letting me keep my money another 6+ months! :mad:

[Bodhi]

I have yet to remember when MacMinute was wrong so I must say that if these machines have SDRAM... :mad: I think we will continue to hear Fred Anderson in earnings calls blaming low Power Mac sales on no Quark for OSX.

:mad:

[JLL]

[quote]Originally posted by cthulu:
<strong>"configurations will be offered: dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299)."


Now this sounds like apple! Thanks apple for letting me keep my money another 6+ months! :mad: </strong><hr></blockquote>

Since they will sell the current Dual 1 GHz for $300 less than the new one, there will be more than just updated processor speeds.

[oranjdisc]

I can't think of a time when MacMinute has been wrong either. And the news is...yet again...dissapointing beyond belief.

The price drop is the only thing interesting me (dual 1Ghz dropping $500).

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: oranjdisc ]</p>

[Amorph]

I don't think MacMinute has ever been wrong with last-minute specs either. They're good.

Before people start :mad: 'ing and running off to PCs: All we know is processor speed, video card and price. That's not much. I'd be surprised if DDR RAM appears, but if there's a move to the 166MHz MPX bus, that's about a 25% increase in CPU bandwidth to go with a 25% increase in CPU clockspeed. It's not astonishing, but it's a solid upgrade. Also, the bottom end machine is a duallie now, not a crippled single-processor runt. Who can complain that the cheap machine is now a much better value?

And who seriously expected a PowerBook update?! There's no way that's happening until November. They got a significant revision not long ago, and the current models are sweet.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>

[Toofeu]

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I'm starting to be very tired of apple and its products, I can't believe that the specs are so low...
the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!
I'll keep my old system for another 6 months.
:mad:
But this shouldn't come as a surprise, Apple knows so well how to let us down...

[xype]

actually I think a dual 867 at the bottom is great. and dual 1.25 is great, too. this is PowerPC after all, no Pentium 4 schit. I guess a dual 867 with a Radeon 9700 card would make a kick-ass machine. and if it comes in snow-white, all the better - it shines more that way.

[sc_markt]

Thinksecret is reporting the same speeds.

Hopefully these chips can use real DDR memory, not the hack seen in xserve.

Depressing. Really depressing but expected.

[Richard]

Reading this forum for a couple month now, first post ever:

How about getting ready for nothing more than a moderate speed bump, say the 1.25ghz claimed by macminute?

It seems odd to me that Apple didn't announce the update, one would think they'd do so, if it really was an important one.

I think they are keeping it quiet until the update is ready (involving IBM's new desktop processor).

[cthulu]

"Before people start 'ing and running off to PCs: All we know is processor speed, video card and price. That's not much. I'd be surprised if DDR RAM appears, but if there's a move to the 166MHz MPX bus, that's about a 25% increase in CPU bandwidth to go with a 25% increase in CPU clockspeed. It's not astonishing, but it's a solid upgrade."

Well the 867 cant be on a 166 bus its still 133.The 1 gig could be 166 and the 1.25 must be.
Which means those who cant aford a 3300 computer are screwed once again.Since most software doesnt use the second processor and most programs that do get only a modest boost this is in reality a sorry 67 mghz bump.Pathetic.This deserves two :mad: :mad: faces!

[Appleworm]

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>I don't think MacMinute has ever been wrong with last-minute specs either. They're good.

Before people start :mad: 'ing and running off to PCs: All we know is processor speed, video card and price. That's not much. I'd be surprised if DDR RAM appears, but if there's a move to the 166MHz MPX bus, that's about a 25% increase in CPU bandwidth to go with a 25% increase in CPU clockspeed. It's not astonishing, but it's a solid upgrade. Also, the bottom end machine is a duallie now, not a crippled single-processor runt. Who can complain that the cheap machine is now a much better value?

And who seriously expected a PowerBook update?! There's no way that's happening until November. They got a significant revision not long ago, and the current models are sweet.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

25% performance increase is not enough. It will make the mac being equal to CURRENT PCs. Now, imagine, you're at Christmas. You want to make a gift to your son you buy a computer :
- Dual PM 1.25 GHz &gt; 3000$
- 3.0 GHz P4 &lt; 3000$
- 2.8 GHz Athlon &lt; 3000$
You know about the MHz Myth but you have foubn on internet a benchmarks PC is 25% faster and a little bit cheaper... WHAT COMPUTER WILL YOU BUY ?

Didn't they update the iBook twice this year ? For the QE support with the 700 MHz ?

Aw :mad:

[hmurchison]

[quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I'm starting to be very tired of apple and its products, I can't believe that the specs are so low...
the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!
I'll keep my old system for another 6 months.
:mad:
But this shouldn't come as a surprise, Apple knows so well how to let us down...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Keep your chin up man. There are many things worse in life than a computer company not hitting expected speeds in their new line. OSX
10.2 is gonna scream with snappiness with these boxes.

[sc_markt]

[quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:
<strong>
the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I hope Apple allows you to configure it so that you can get it at a lower price. Nevertheless, it's not going to be an incentive for me to buy one.

This is pathetic. The way Apple is going, it may be 2004 before they hit 2GHz.

[viking]

If those specs are true, Apple is going to have 5 months of pretty poor sales until MWSF.
:(

[Matsu]

Well, like I posted in another thread, the all DP upgrade would be OK if it came with DDR (even a hacked up Xserve version) and AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.

As it is (hypothetically of course) a DP 867 for $1600 isn't bad, worth considering over an iMac (if you already own a decent monitor) but the top end wouldn't be worth it.

[salty chips]

I once dreamed of a bright future, that dream is gone.

i'm getting angry at Apple for not delivering the goods. How do they think to sell anything of that crap.

[SkullMac]

Alright, a bit of speculation on my part in regards to the MacMinute specs, but bear with me.

As for the current bus speed ratios:
800/133 = 6
933/133 = 7
1000/133 = 7.5

As for the upcoming ratios, let's try a 133 MHz bus speed.
867/133 = 6.5 (this works)
1000/133 = 7.5 (again, this works)
1250/133 9.39 (this doesn't work, it'd have to be either a 1197MHz or 1264MHz G4. I doubt they would short change themselves and round 1264MHz down to 1250.)

What about a 166 MHz bus?
867/166 = 5.22 (nope)
1000/166 = 6 (this works)
1250/166 = 7.5 (works as well)

What does this mean? If the proc speeds reported by MacMinute are 100% correct, then the following points hold:
- The 867 machine MUST have a 133 MHz bus, or some multiple thereof (i.e. 266)
- The 1000 machine can have a bus of either 133 or 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333)
- The 1250 machine must have a bus of 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333).

A quick check of available ram types reveals that for SDR RAM, only 66, 100, 133, and 150 MHz models were ever made.

So, if the 1250 machine must have a 166 MHz bus, then it holds that only 166 MHz DDR RAM (333MHz effective) could sit on such a bus.

EDIT:
In short, 333 DDR RAM is almost guaranteed in the 1250 model.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: SkullMac ]</p>

[Appleworm]

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong>Well, like I posted in another thread, the all DP upgrade would be OK if it came with DDR (even a hacked up Xserve version) and AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.

As it is (hypothetically of course) a DP 867 for $1600 isn't bad, worth considering over an iMac (if you already own a decent monitor) but the top end wouldn't be worth it.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Oooohh no, not with the hacked up XServe please !!!!! WITH TRUE DDR AT LEAST !!!!! AND "G5" !!!!


Aw :mad:

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Appleworm ]</p>

[JLL]

[quote]Originally posted by cthulu:
<strong>Since most software doesnt use the second processor…</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, but Mac OS X does, and you can run one program on one of the processors while running another on the other.

[Toofeu]

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong>an AGP 8X, and maybe Apple could be nice and supply a multi-channel ATA100 controller on the MoBo. That would save digital A/V pros an expensive outlay on SCSI/Raid and could make the purchase worth it for some.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Yeah sure....
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Don't think that apple can implement all those goodies, we are still hoping that they finally decide to implement something that exists for almost two years now.. the DDR.
So for the AGP8X well maybe next year if we are lucky.
By then all pros will be using AMD boxes.

[Appleworm]

For more than one year Apple has mac running at 2.0 GHz+ so give them to us !!!!!


Aw :mad:

[hmurchison]

Unless they've crippled the Entry Level unit too much it's price rocks. I'm not buying now but this gives me a target for early next year. I think the $3300 top unit is pretty spendy..I hope it's beefed up configurationwise.

[Matsu]

I look for the silver lining and people jump down my throat, damn. The site did mention ATI Radeon 9700, which is an 8X AGP part, but I suppose Apple could just run it across a 4X bus.

[zaz]

My guess is they are spot on (though ATI vid cards seem odd)

In detail, I would bet the 1699 unit stays with PC133 (effectively same as a QS) and the upper 2 go to DDR and a new platform.

[xype]

1] Anyone who expected a .5 ghz jump expected, well, too much

2] We don't know for sure till tomorrow

3] Top of the line would be DUAL 1.25 ghz, that's 2.5 ghz total. That's 2.5 ghz total of AltiVec, PowerPC goodness.

I say let's wait and see them in action before we complain like stupid.

[hmurchison]

[quote]Originally posted by zaz:
<strong>My guess is they are spot on (though ATI vid cards seem odd)

In detail, I would bet the 1699 unit stays with PC133 (effectively same as a QS) and the upper 2 go to DDR and a new platform.</strong><hr></blockquote>


That's cool because DDR is not going to make a huge difference. Geeks will just miss it for the bragging rights.

[Jonathan]

For whoever said that no software uses DP, you're wrong. Plain and simple.

OS X automatically uses DP. :rolleyes:

I'm concerned about this update for two reasons:

1. differing bus speeds across line. 133 on a theoretical 867 mhz system, 166 on a 1.25.
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

2. If they can't get a true DDR implementation in this rev, it's pretty damn sad.

a Dual 867 for 1599 is pretty good, though, if it's got DDR.

[Sybaritic]

I know we'll hear a lot of bitching and moaning--some of it relatively legitimate--from various quarters here. But I for one will be happy with a modest speed bump and a revamped motherboard. I'm buying.

The reason is simple: I have too much work to do. Those of you who want the Power4 model will just need to wait, but Apple will be kicking some serious derriere in the coming years, I predict. Their software acquisitions have been too promising for us not to see great hardware down the line.

Look at this PowerMac revision not as a stopgap but as a movement toward easing the gap. The PC world will still win the races, but by a more narrow margin. In six to fourteen months, we'll have dramatic gains, but those of us with a lot of work to do don't have time to moan and whine.

-----------------------------------------
Waiting Until Tomorrow in Nashvegas

[Kioskmovie.com]

1,2 Ghz for ThinkSecret (which means we can be stuck at 133 FSB) and 1,25 GHz for Macminute...

I hope that MacMinute is right but I fear ThinkSecret is...

I need to buy the next mid-level PowerMac, but I think I will have the bare minimum from what I expected :(

[hmurchison]

Don't forget those sexy new cases :D

[Toofeu]

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong> The site did mention ATI Radeon 9700, which is an 8X AGP part, but I suppose Apple could just run it across a 4X bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The site mentions ATI 9000 serie not specifically the 9700 card...
I don't think that we are getting this one for a long time
:o

[Agent Cooper]

I'm not dissapointed. I knw these specs aren't what most everyone wanted, but I'm surprised that all of you even care what apple CPU speeds are compared to wintel speeds. What does it matter? Its fast, its fast for our apps, and its still faster than wintel, and we don't need to put up with a crappy OS. Grow up!

I'd be lying if I said I didn't want a 9Ghz G5 with QDR Ram, or something like that, but even a dual 800 G4 with SDR Ram works fine for RealTime Rendering of High Res Video - That says something.

Heres the essential problem - most apple users are suffering from Ghz Envy. Most of us are running around saying "Mhz doesn't mater!" but all you have to do is look at this board to see that most of you don't really believe that.

I agree that apple could improve its product speed bumps, They haven't been exactly forthcoming. But, as long as the quality of the product improves, why do you care if it doesn't look the same as the corresponding Wintel Speeds? What is the source of this insecurity?

Bottom line - I'm buying a PowerMac when they're announced tomorrow. And so are quite a few of you. If you want to wait - coolio. If you want to switch to PC so you can have a 3Ghz peice of garbage that processes Wintel vomit then you are a shallow hack and deserve the telephone charges you can look forward to getting when you have to start calling M$ tech support. Enjoy.

[hmurchison]

[quote]Originally posted by Agent Cooper:
<strong>I'm not dissapointed. I knw these specs aren't what most everyone wanted, but I'm surprised that all of you even care what apple CPU speeds are compared to wintel speeds. What does it matter? Its fast, its fast for our apps, and its still faster than wintel, and we don't need to put up with a crappy OS. Grow up!

I'd be lying if I said I didn't want a 9Ghz G5 with QDR Ram, or something like that, but even a dual 800 G4 with SDR Ram works fine for RealTime Rendering of High Res Video - That says something.

Heres the essential problem - most apple users are suffering from Ghz Envy. Most of us are running around saying "Mhz doesn't mater!" but all you have to do is look at this board to see that most of you don't really believe that.

I agree that apple could improve its product speed bumps, They haven't been exactly forthcoming. But, as long as the quality of the product improves, why do you care if it doesn't look the same as the corresponding Wintel Speeds? What is the source of this insecurity?

Bottom line - I'm buying a PowerMac when they're announced tomorrow. And so are quite a few of you. If you want to wait - coolio. If you want to switch to PC so you can have a 3Ghz peice of garbage that processes Wintel vomit then you are a shallow hack and deserve the telephone charges you can look forward to getting when you have to start calling M$ tech support. Enjoy.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Right on AgentCooper!

Wintel doesn't run Final Cut Pro or OS X or Logic(soon) hehehehe. I'm not complaining ...I want OS X to fly..the hardware will come.

[Appleworm]

[quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:
<strong>


Yeah sure....
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Don't think that apple can implement all those goodies, we are still hoping that they finally decide to implement something that exists for almost two years now.. the DDR.
So for the AGP8X well maybe next year if we are lucky.
By then all pros will be using AMD boxes.</strong><hr></blockquote>


I agree.

Their hardware is like some of the new features of OS X an their iApps; iDevice : THEY DIDN'T THINK DIFFERENT.

They think as the other, but 1 or 2 years after, or they redo what they did (folder opening in jaguar and os 9, little speed bump) and selle that to us saying that they made big improvments.

e.g.:
iCal is not a new idea.
syncing data between a computer and a phone is not new (even the most coolest and easiest it is)


Moreover they make computer slower than all other and they sell them more expensive than other (A dual PM 1.25-DDR vs a dual Athlon 2.8-DDR), but they are the MACINTOSH myth so they can do that but until when ?

Mac folk wake-up !!!!


Aw :mad:
iApple : Selling the coolest slow hardware for years...

[JohnHenry]

The slight speed increase is fine if not for the price increase to go along with it...
Of course 'other details not avail.' could mean it will be worth the money, but if all we get is the speed increase with a price bump.... :mad:
Well at least the 'old' 800 will be avail. on the cheap. Dual procs aren't worth the extra money for most people. They don't show speed increases for most applications...
BTW when does apple update for this sort of thing? Will it be avail. in the AM? (Based on, say, the last silent speed bump)

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>For whoever said that no software uses DP, you're wrong. Plain and simple.

OS X automatically uses DP. :rolleyes: </strong><hr></blockquote>It's virtually useless unless the software is multi-threaded. You can run two compute-intensive programs at once faster. But your non-multi-threaded apps aren't going to be faster.
:rolleyes:


BTW, did anyone else notice the fairly hefty price increases that go along with these machines?

[Spart]

[quote]Originally posted by cthulu:
<strong>Well the 867 cant be on a 166 bus its still 133.The 1 gig could be 166 and the 1.25 must be.
Which means those who cant aford a 3300 computer are screwed once again.Since most software doesnt use the second processor and most programs that do get only a modest boost this is in reality a sorry 67 mghz bump.Pathetic.This deserves two :mad: :mad: faces!</strong><hr></blockquote>

What part of your a** did you pull "67 mghz bump" [sic] from?

Even if you aren't counting the extra processor, 1250 - 1000 = 250 (I write this out because obviously you can't do simple subtraction.)

In any event you must factor in the added bandwidth of the 166MHz MaxBus, (maybe even 333Mhz, effectively either a 33MHz or a 200MHz bump) and the reduced latency and speed of 333MHz DDR RAM.

It is you, who is pathetic. With Jaguar this new beast is going to be kickin'.

[Agent Cooper]

::whistle::
Boy, this thread sure did get angry quick.....

[keyboardf12]

i saw a price decrease. don't know about you but know i get an extra chip for the same or less price.

[Moonraker]

If this is the true speed bumps without a decent DDR boost it is simply the biggest load of BS Apple has ever spilled. Pure and Simple............

For all you saying " it's all right really" need help. Me I waited since last year to update. Jobs could stick this up his arse and I will go buy a PC until he sorts this fiasco out.

OS X 10.2 is a great update but this news, if true makes it meaningless in the real world.

It's a disgrace.. nothing less............

[hmurchison]

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

There are you people happy? Enough with the Manic Depressive posts!


Please!!!!! :p

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: hmurchison ]</p>

[Jonathan]

Next person to use the :mad: smiley in here gets their posting access turned off for a day.

It's a ****ing computer. Get over it.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Moonraker:
<strong>If this is the true speed bumps without a decent DDR boost it is simply the biggest load of BS Apple has ever spilled. Pure and Simple............

For all you saying " it's all right really" need help. Me I waited since last year to update. Jobs could stick this up his arse and I will go buy a PC until he sorts this fiasco out.

OS X 10.2 is a great update but this news, if true makes it meaningless in the real world.

It's a disgrace.. nothing less............</strong><hr></blockquote>


Enjoy your date with the Dell Dude, Dude. Don't trip over your skirt on the way out.... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[Toofeu]

[quote]Originally posted by Agent Cooper:
<strong>
Bottom line - I'm buying a PowerMac when they're announced tomorrow. And so are quite a few of you. If you want to wait - coolio. If you want to switch to PC so you can have a 3Ghz peice of garbage that processes Wintel vomit </strong><hr></blockquote>

SWITCH You said the magic word!!!!

We need to enlarge the base of mac users!!! The more we'll be the stronger we are!!!
We are not living in a closed world apart from the reality of the market!!
We need to have a solid base of users in order to push programmers to develop applications on our platform.
Do you really think that more people will go to the mac with those pricing and specifications???
The megahertz gap is a reality for normal people and believe me, if they compare a pricey mac running at 1ghtz against a cheap 3ghtz wintel box the choice will not be at our advantage.

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[hmurchison]

[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>Next person to use the :mad: smiley in here gets their posting access turned off for a day.

It's a ****ing computer. Get over it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thank you Jonathan!!!

:D :D <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

[salty chips]

[quote]Originally posted by Moonraker:
<strong>If this is the true speed bumps without a decent DDR boost it is simply the biggest load of BS Apple has ever spilled. Pure and Simple............

For all you saying " it's all right really" need help. Me I waited since last year to update. Jobs could stick this up his arse and I will go buy a PC until he sorts this fiasco out.

OS X 10.2 is a great update but this news, if true makes it meaningless in the real world.

It's a disgrace.. nothing less............</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree, BTW 10.2 is finaly getting where it should have been 1 year ago . i've been waiting 3 years now for a decent upgrade. I will pass this one also .

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: salty chips ]</p>

[keyboardf12]

[quote]
It's a ****ing computer. <hr></blockquote>

maybe to you. to me its a vital tool that allows me to create things and generally live a happy life since i get to do what i love for a living. compared to a office worker hack or a guy at macdonalds i feel lucky. its the mac that is the the tool that allows for that.

[Xaqtly]

THANK you Agent Cooper. The soothing voice of reason, finally. :D You're damn right that I'm not going to buy a Wintel box no matter how many GHz they get up to. There's a lot of reasons I use Macs, and processor speed is not among them. Like you, I of course would love more speed, and we are going to get it. But it's not of paramount importance to me, and in fact not important enough for me to even consider getting a PC for any reason.

OS X, iApps, the way the Mac looks/feel/works, usability, productivity... why should I give any of that up? I'm in the market for a new Mac now too, and I'm thinking now is just about the right time for me to get one... even if it's "only" a dual 1.25 GHz Mac with a 166 MHz bus. With Jaguar on it, it will bloody SCREAM. It already moves pretty quickly on my 800 MHz iMac... it'll be massively responsive on a system like that.

I wouldn't get a Wintel box if it had a googolhertz Pentium 37... Wintel boxes don't work for me.

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by SkullMac:
<strong>Alright, a bit of speculation on my part in regards to the MacMinute specs, but bear with me.

As for the current bus speed ratios:
800/133 = 6
933/133 = 7
1000/133 = 7.5

As for the upcoming ratios, let's try a 133 MHz bus speed.
867/133 = 6.5 (this works)
1000/133 = 7.5 (again, this works)
1250/133 9.39 (this doesn't work, it'd have to be either a 1197MHz or 1264MHz G4. I doubt they would short change themselves and round 1264MHz down to 1250.)

What about a 166 MHz bus?
867/166 = 5.22 (nope)
1000/166 = 6 (this works)
1250/166 = 7.5 (works as well)

What does this mean? If the proc speeds reported by MacMinute are 100% correct, then the following points hold:
- The 867 machine MUST have a 133 MHz bus, or some multiple thereof (i.e. 266)
- The 1000 machine can have a bus of either 133 or 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333)
- The 1250 machine must have a bus of 166 or a multiple thereof (i.e. 333).

A quick check of available ram types reveals that for SDR RAM, only 66, 100, 133, and 150 MHz models were ever made.

So, if the 1250 machine must have a 166 MHz bus, then it holds that only 166 MHz DDR RAM (333MHz effective) could sit on such a bus.

EDIT:
In short, 333 DDR RAM is almost guaranteed in the 1250 model.</strong><hr></blockquote>This post deserves repeating.

Here's a question that may bear on the 133/166 issue: why does Macminute say the dual 1ghz model won't be shipping yet? Maybe they're moving to a new mobo for that machine and the 1.25, while the 867 will stay at 133.

I honestly doubt it, because I'm guessing this is still Apollo, and Mot's specs say Apollo uses a 133 bus, not 166. But maybe...

[BrunoBruin]

[quote]BTW, did anyone else notice the fairly hefty price increases that go along with these machines? <hr></blockquote>

That's a matter of perspective. Most people would look at today's dual-1GHz for $2,999 compared to the rumored dual-1GHz for $2,499 and think that was a $500 price DROP.

[Jonathan]

[quote]Originally posted by keyboardf12:
<strong>

maybe to you. to me its a vital tool that allows me to create things and generally live a happy life since i get to do what i love for a living. compared to a office worker hack or a guy at macdonalds i feel lucky. its the mac that is the the tool that allows for that.</strong><hr></blockquote>


so, if your current mac allows you to be happy and healthy and achieve nirvana...

why are you so damn pissed about new ones not being all that much better than the current one?

I mean, look at that, if the current one is that wonderful, then these new, faster ones MUST be EVEN MORE WONDERFUL.


thus concludes this session of logic 101.

[keyboardf12]

[quote] the rumored dual-1GHz for $2,499 an <hr></blockquote>

your basing your disapointment on a rumor?

you need look up the meaning of the word rumor.

[scottiB]

Curious to see if the 867x2 will have L3 cache of any significance. It'll have a SuperDrive (cripes, the eMac's getting a SuperDrive). Grab a cheap CRT 21" monitor, and that's a pretty good DV/DVD authoring system.

[kraig911]

I agree with you Xaqtly, its not the processor speed that makes the computer its the computer :)
You all need to just chill out, macs are still faster than PC's I think. I use the damned things everyday for 3d studio max, and such and generally speaking macs run overall faster I feel in productivity apps. Sure you may want to run internet exploder faster or play some stupid game at 3 fps faster, but thats just ridiculous. Add real productivity, and stable OS X in the mix you got a killer combo. I hate rebooting 5 times a day or more, and having to deal with IT saying that "macs are hard to network, macs mess up our database, macs suck"

if you don't like it quite whining go buy a pc and see for youself, your in for a world of hell

[iMud]

Yea pc's have alot of mghz but your options are limited, Windows or Linux, Neither offer anything as great as OS X. Nine short months ago the top of the line system was a dual 800 that costed $3500 now you can get a dual 867 for $1699. For those of us that were about to dish out $1999 for a 17" imac these new PowerMacs look awesome and at a good price. I just hope the new cases are less noisy than the current ones...

[BrunoBruin]

[quote]your basing your disapointment on a rumor?<hr></blockquote>

I wasn't expressing disappointment. Read my post again. I said that most people in the market for a Mac will be thrilled that the machine that cost $3,000 yesterday is $2,500 today.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: BrunoBruin ]</p>

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:
<strong>

SWITCH You said the magic word!!!!

We need to enlarge the base of mac users!!! The more we'll be the stronger we are!!!
We are not living in a closed world apart from the reality of the market!!
We need to have a solid base of users in order to push programmers to develop applications on our platform.
Do you really think that more people will go to the mac with those pricing and specifications???
The megahertz gap is a reality for normal people and believe me, if they compare a pricey mac running at 1ghtz against a cheap 3ghtz wintel box the choice will not be at our advantage.

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Applications! you said the Magic word!

The mac platform exists because higher caliber applications run better here than anywhere else. If you're worried about Apple drying up and dying - stop worrying. Application developers need apple just as badly as apple needs them.

Granted - there are less, much less. applications available for mac than PC. But how many computer makeover apps do you need? how many greeting card apps? how many of the other garbage apps that make up %90 of those staggeringly large numbers of apps available for PC?

Granted - People will hesitate to switch to the Apple if it has a significantly lower CPU speed. But they won't switch at all if the apps they want to use aren't here. You'll notice thats what apple stresses in the "switch" campaign - software compatiblity - most of which already exists. Apple is putting their money where its mouth currently is - building a more user freindly OS and Consumer Usable Apps. Beleive it or not, processor speed is insignificant to most people looking to buy a new computer. Most of the people who stress over Mhz, are gaming nerds, hardware nerds, sys admins (nerds), and AI posters. Ahem.

Why are most people so unconcerned about Mhz? Becuase it really doesn't matter. If the hardware does what it needs to do, who cares what number is associated with it?

You say market Mhz. I say market Ease of use - and so does apple.

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by BrunoBruin:
<strong>That's a matter of perspective. Most people would look at today's dual-1GHz for $2,999 compared to the rumored dual-1GHz for $2,499 and think that was a $500 price DROP.</strong><hr></blockquote>Well, that's an interesting perspective.

If these numbers are true, they've upgraded the specs, as continually happens in this industry. But they've also increased the prices substantially across their range.
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>Next person to use the :mad: smiley in here gets their posting access turned off for a day.</strong><hr></blockquote>How typical.

[foamy]

Since Thinksecret is now reporting 867/1000/1200 speeds, so the new PMs may be more depressing than previously thought.

867/133 = 6.5
1000/133 = 7.5
1200/133 = 9.0

With those numbers there is a distinct possibility that the FSB may remain at 133.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: foamy ]</p>

[Merlion]

[quote]Originally posted by foamy:
<strong>Since Thinksecret is now reporting 867/1000/1200 speeds, so the new PMs may be more depressing than previously thought.

867/133 = 6.5
1000/133 = 7.5
1200/133 = 9.0

With those numbers there is a distinct possibility that the FSB may remain at 133.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: foamy ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Depressing is an understatement for these lame specs. Apple is losing too much ground.

[jacinto46]

Anyone who actually expected 1.5 or 1.6 GHz tomorrow is crazy. For better or for worse, Apple's top clock speed is not going to be 50% faster tomorrow than it is today.

[apple.otaku]

I must say that yourdailymac.com has never never never never never ever been right but I think most of you knew that already. In fact, MOSR's Ryan Meader is a prophet compared to them. Just needed to clarify.

The MacMinute/Think Secret specs sound correct though. I believe them. I can see why there will be no special event for these. I think it shows that the G4 is reaching its limits or at least Motorola is. The DP 867 model sounds like Yikes! revisited. This should be enough to hold them over until the IBM Power4 derived processor (hopefully) and other goodies like 802.11g and 1394b are ready. I feel that internally the new case is ready for the next generation processor already but when that day comes I expect a more revolutionary change externally to the case.

Actually I see this as good news. If improvements such as DP across the board, DDR Ram, 166Mhz bus, etc., are only deserving of a press release... then what will they have in store for us next year at a big event like Macworld? That is the silver lining in my opinion. This is just a stop-gap and Apple knows this. You can tell from their actions regarding this release.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Merlion:
<strong>

Depressing is an understatement for these lame specs. Apple is losing too much ground.</strong><hr></blockquote>

All these specs show are the CPU SPEED!!!! For all you know the new PowerMacs could hold a whole crapload of suprises yet to be revealed - faster system bus, faster ram, on chip memory controller... the possibilities are limitless. I think you WANT to be dissapointed, becuase you've jumped on this first rumor that doesn't say what you want to hear and begun to pout... pout away.

FACT - My G3 350 is till fast enough to keep me happy. the only reason I'm buying one of the new PowerMacs is so that I can run DVDSP.

FACT - Even if the speeds DON'T GO UP, they're still great machines.

FACT - NO ONE CARES if you want to switch to PCs because the G4s haven't breached the 3Ghz barrier. Switch - no one will miss you.

[jeromba]

[quote]Originally posted by foamy:
<strong>there is a distinct possibility that the FSB may remain at 133.</strong><hr></blockquote>

There is something wrong with that. Why the OLD 1 Gig goes to $2199 and the NEW 1 Gig goes to $2499 at the end of the month... strange if it's the same MB.

To Agent Cooper : You're the One, man !

I'm thinking seriously to buy the 1.25 IF it's a full DDR implementation and ATA 100, and I'm coming from a Dual 800.

I think that a lot of people who are complaining don't even have a QuickSilver (I'm not talking to you Leonis :D )

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>

[Jet Powers]

Anyone who won't buy because of MHz rating is the kind of person who obsessively worries about the size of other things in his life, too.

Yeah, it's a penis joke.

Anyway, I don't know what you people expect. I like the idea that "I'm pissed because this machine is so much faster than my machine is right now which is good enough so I'm not upgrading anyway". That's pure ****ing comedy gold.

Ah, well. The next line is: "I care about the platform! Waaaa-waaaa-waaaa!" No you don't. If you really cared about the platform, you'd see the strength and vibrancy of a platform depends on the software, and things haven't looked this good on the software side ever.

If the question is performance vs. speed rating or user experience vs speed rating, I'll take the former over the latter EVERY TIME.

I would rather you people switched back to Intel and left the rest of us alone than continue your inane braying about how Apple is always letting you down. There is a weird self-hating vibe to these kinds of posts that leads me to believe you all need some serious help.

Jet

[Aussie John]

for all those doomsayers saying Pc buyers will see 2.5-3.0 GHz machine against a 1.25GHz. I say they will see 1.25+1.25=2.5 - The Mhz myth gap has been reduced significantly.

Also for those who say 2 CPU dont add up to a faster computer for general useage then for general use most ppl wont be using the "speed' of 3 GHz PC.

To be honest I am sick of all the whinning and bitching and threats to go PC ( you must pirate all your software to consider it an economic proposition).

When Apple finally breaks free of the motorala debarkle will you all be wanting to jump back?

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Aussie John ]</p>

[Bodhi]

My gut tells me we have a Powerbook type situation here. Like when the 550 and 667 Powerbooks were announced. the dual 867 will be 133MHz bus, the Dual GHz and Dual 1.2 will have ddr ram and ddr FSB, hence the difference in price between the new Dual GHz and the discontinued Dual GHz.

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by jeromba:
<strong>There is something wrong with that. Why the OLD 1 Gig goes to $2199 and the NEW 1 Gig goes to $2499 at the end of the month... strange if it's the same MB.
</strong><hr></blockquote>Hmm, good point. What's going on?

1. Either something is wrong with Macminute's info, or
2. There are some other advances here that we don't know about yet, like a DDR and/or 166 bus. But even that wouldn't justify the price increase.

Even though the price increase sucks, I'm holding out hope that there will be some other substantial improvements that Apple is using to justify the price increase.

[Telomar]

[quote]Originally posted by salty chips:
<strong>

I agree, BTW 10.2 is finaly getting where it should have been 1 year ago </strong><hr></blockquote>

Windows is only barely touching on where it should have been half a decade ago ;)

[OverToasty]

[quote]Originally posted by Merlion:
<strong>

Depressing is an understatement for these lame specs. Apple is losing too much ground.</strong><hr></blockquote>

... but what a chance to start a cottage industry selling paper shame-bags with Apple logo's on 'em.

C'mon, Think Different guys!

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Jet Powers:
<strong>Anyone who won't buy because of MHz rating is the kind of person who obsessively worries about the size of other things in his life, too.

Yeah, it's a penis joke.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thats kind of what I was getting at too, I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. Thank you for expressing this thought more clearly than I had.

I'm also tired of people holding the metaphoric gun of "switching to PC cuz apple is a meanie" to thier own heads. I'm inclined to treat them the same way I would treat a person with a real gun to their head - c'est la vie.

And bring on the new Macs. I think the people who are bitching today will be singing thier praises tomorrow, I can hear it now....

"Oh, I was sooooo pleased to see the new PowerMacs. I was a little dissaponted at first when I saw the CPU speeds on AI, but that two button mouse really won me over! now I see what a great deal this is...."

:p

[rampancy]

Amen to that, Jet Powers.

If people are so pissed off at SJ & Co., why are they still using a Mac? There's nothing stopping you from using the latest and greatest P4-based wintel box.

The evidence is too strong to refute: we WILL be seeing Macs that will close the percieved performance gap between Macs and PC's. We WILL be seeing Macs released soon (Tomorrow? the 24th? Seybold?) that will be superior in performance and value to today's Macs. Smart consumers will see that it's ease-of-use, not Mhz/Ghz that really matters in a computer.

Good things come to those who wait.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: rampancy ]</p>

[shannyla]

Any of you who consider this "speed increase" as much of a disgrace as I do really should check out the Dell Perfomance Workstation range. Dual 2.4 ghz Xeon for around GBP 2500. Windows XP is a fine operating system and I have had no trouble with it whatsoever, be it "hardware compatibility", "crashing for no reason", "only allowing 8.3 names" or any of the other Windows 95 bollocks that are the sacred cows around here. (By the way, if you weren't there, System 7 really sucked as well...) In fact I had way more problems with a dual 533 G4 and OsX.

It's what I "switched" to, and I have had no regrets whatsoever. And if Apple keep going the way they are, I won't be switching back anytime soon.

Thank you and goodnight. Flame me, stop my posting priveledges, whatever, I don't give a shit.

[lundy]

[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>This post deserves repeating.

Here's a question that may bear on the 133/166 issue: why does Macminute say the dual 1ghz model won't be shipping yet? Maybe they're moving to a new mobo for that machine and the 1.25, while the 867 will stay at 133.

I honestly doubt it, because I'm guessing this is still Apollo, and Mot's specs say Apollo uses a 133 bus, not 166. But maybe...</strong><hr></blockquote>

But Skullmac's analysis is right on. IF, IF the 1.25 gHz speed is correct, and not 1.20 gHz, then the dual-1.25 and the dual-1000 MUST have DDR-333. Because there isn't any SDR-166 RAM.

[Agent Cooper]

OK, that wasn't very nice....

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Agent Cooper ]</p>

[Matsu]

You all know I like to flame Apple harder than anyone, but a Superdrive DP867 for 1699 seems fairly OK to me. The high end? Forget it, but the low end seems decent.

[shannyla]

[quote] quote: Originally posted by Agent Cooper
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by shannyla:

I have a small penis and I'm angry about it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case Closed.
<hr></blockquote>

But almost certainly larger than yours, you sad masochistic, apologistic loser. Plus I'm not angry, I'm beatifically happy... I can go home at night when my rendering is actually finished...

Case still open.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: shannyla ]</p>

[rampancy]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong> "It's what I "switched" to, and I have had no regrets whatsoever. And if Apple keep going the way they are, I won't be switching back anytime soon. Thank you and goodnight. Flame me, stop my posting priveledges, whatever, I don't give a shit."</strong><hr></blockquote>


You should have read the posting guidelines for this forum, shannyla.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

But almost certainly larger than yours, you sad masochistic, apologistic loser.

Case still open.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I thought you said you didn't give a poo if people flamed you?

[anakin1992]

[quote]Originally posted by Agent Cooper:
<strong>

All these specs show are the CPU SPEED!!!! For all you know the new PowerMacs could hold a whole crapload of suprises yet to be revealed - faster system bus, faster ram, on chip memory controller... the possibilities are limitless. I think you WANT to be dissapointed, becuase you've jumped on this first rumor that doesn't say what you want to hear and begun to pout... pout away.

FACT - My G3 350 is till fast enough to keep me happy. the only reason I'm buying one of the new PowerMacs is so that I can run DVDSP.

FACT - Even if the speeds DON'T GO UP, they're still great machines.

FACT - NO ONE CARES if you want to switch to PCs because the G4s haven't breached the 3Ghz barrier. Switch - no one will miss you.</strong><hr></blockquote>

yeah, you don't need a supersonic plane in order to get to new york from san francisco. you could walk. the better side of it is that it does your body good and maybe safer.

i am kind always amazed to hear people kept saying the their old g1, g2 or g3 are working fine. i am sure that peolpe are still using mac plus. then does it mean that apple should stick to mac plus?

if speed does not go up, it _IS_NOT_ a good machine, no matter how elegant the internal is. you could have the finest and fastest horses on this planet, yet they could outrun a decent modern combustion engine metal block - usually called automobile.

yes, you could upgrade the internal interconnect on the motherboard. but yet, the easiest is still the clocking cpu up.

if apple will not put out a g5 base machine tomorrow, they will show people that there is something wrong with their plan. maybe they really should have switched to intel chip long time ago.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: anakin1992 ]</p>

[shannyla]

[quote]I thought you said you didn't give a poo if people flamed you? <hr></blockquote>

I'm merely amusing myself until I get banned...

[TigerWoods99]

B8tch b8tch b8tch whine whine whine whine yawn yawn yawn yawn yawn.....

Apple's machines faster than PCs PFFFFFFFT AHAHAHAHA <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

No doubt a P4 2 GHz isn't anything to write home about (I've used one), but I'm sure the 3 GHz P4 these Macs will go up against will mean something. And the Athlon Xp are fast. I've seen my friends.

Do you people ever get tired of not letting anyone criticize Apple? We are talking about a business here, one that must produce not only for Mac users, but for share holder & those they want to so eagerly steal away from the Wintel platform.


Some people are also power-crazed....give them a little, they like to take a lot. Go figure :rolleyes:

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by anakin1992:
<strong>
yes, you could upgrade the internal interconnect on the motherboard. but yet, the easiest is still the clocking cpu up.
[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: anakin1992 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

If the Mainboard is the bottleneck, cranking up the CPU won't do anything significant to the real processing power of the unit.

The MLB Bus speed is the limiting factor of the current G4s, its worth waiting through a few minor chip updates if they offer significan MLB updates - which I think is what we're looking at in the very near future.

and on another subject:

If PC users are so happy with their wintel boxes, why are they speding so much time on Apple discussion boards?

[kraig911]

I don't know what your talking about cheap dual xeons from dell shannyla, I mean they are fricken expensive, a comparibly equiped mac is going to be about under $4,000. And why the hell do you render on dell in windows XP, you can gain about 33% more speed in opengl in linux at the least. OS X still mops the floor with XP, I've sat and ran shake and maya on different platforms and on windoze it blows. hehe give it till MWSF you'll be sad you bought that dell ;) its just too sad I'm so sorry for you. Weren't you the person that said that insane post about how every one is switching to digital domain's nuke? HAHA thats a laugh.

[Blizaine]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>Any of you who consider this "speed increase" as much of a disgrace as I do really should check out the Dell Perfomance Workstation range. Dual 2.4 ghz Xeon for around GBP 2500. Windows XP is a fine operating system and I have had no trouble with it whatsoever, be it "hardware compatibility", "crashing for no reason", "only allowing 8.3 names" or any of the other Windows 95 bollocks that are the sacred cows around here. (By the way, if you weren't there, System 7 really sucked as well...) In fact I had way more problems with a dual 533 G4 and OsX.

It's what I "switched" to, and I have had no regrets whatsoever. And if Apple keep going the way they are, I won't be switching back anytime soon.

Thank you and goodnight. Flame me, stop my posting priveledges, whatever, I don't give a shit.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Have fun


Why are you even in this forum?

Those "fast" processors should come in handy when you are reformatting XP every 3-6 months <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

(BTW- I have my MCSE, so I would love to get into a "Wintel Knowledge" pissing contest with you... :) )

I spend all day fixing Dell’s and Compaq’s (with XP Pro)… This is precisely why I choose to have a Mac at home. You clearly have not used your XP box long enough <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[zaz]

We must also note that while we have CPU speeds we do not know what version the CPU is or what the particulars are if it is a new rev.

That, along with improved bus, could make this the most significant increase in PMAC speed since the original G4.

And even after tomorrow we will need to wait a week or more to get benchmarks.

I have a DP 533 and I am more than certain the 1699 entry model will mop the floor with my 1 year old machine. And my DP is fast enough for damn near anything.

In all reason apple may score a coup with the DP 867 in the consumer marketplace.

[Leonis]

Starting today. Steve Jobs will not have any decent night of sleep until IBM comes for the rescue ;) ;) <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[shannyla]

[quote] If PC users are so happy with their wintel boxes, why are they speding so much time on Apple discussion boards? <hr></blockquote>

Because some of us "think differently" enough to consider all the possible options for doing their jobs better, faster, cheaper, whatever, rather than sticking blindly to dogma and ideology...

In my case, because Apple bought Shake, killed it for Windows, and I want to see what their going to offer in exchange... At the moment, it seems to be a slap in the face and a kick in the b*llocks.

Were I to consider buying some Macs for my company to run shake on, the performance Apple offers simply doesn't make it viable. And I know all about the two for one offer, still not worth it...

[Gandalf the Semi-Coherent]

Some people are only happy when they're complaining.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

I'm merely amusing myself until I get banned...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't think anyone is going to ban you for having different taste in computers, but the s-word might get you a frown from the admins.

Honestly, i still don't get what a PC user is doing in an Apple disscussion forum. If you don't have anythign to prove, or a chip on your shoulder, then why do you come in to apple boards? Looking for a little validation for post-purchase depression?

As for the fact that you're not an angry person, i would tend to disagree - Wintel is an act of anger.

I've always maintained my position about PC users - don't bother us. It holds true for mac users who've switched to PC- don't bother us, go flaunt your inferiority complex somewhere else... Doesn't M$ have a discussion board yet?

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Agent Cooper ]</p>

[Plaster]

I think that you people don't get it. The people complaining about Apple in these forums are the people who care the most about their company. They are complaining because they know that if they don't release good enough specs people will never buy macs and will buy a pc that is alot cheaper. Come on people, for more than 3000$ you get only a dual 1,2. Sure for photoshop and rc5 it's fast but what about the rest, 3d, games, video? Stop fooling yourselves people, its not worth that much money. I agree, 10.2 is by far the best os. But paying 129$ for it is enough, i dont have to pay more for a computer that is tech wise more than a year old, because it can run 10.2. The mac went from being the fastest with the intro of the g4 to dog slow. Ok moto is to blame cuz of its poor results but apple could put new technologies in their mobo that aren't dictated by the cpu. like agp 8X, firewire2, ata133. I'm tired of apple charging us more because we love them so much.

[FlashGordon]

If anything these specs are boring, but come on...they are not end of the Mac world numbers. But seriously Mac is not exiting anyone with these numbers, so they will probably exite people with a really cool case...that is Apple's style.

[sniffer]

[quote]Originally posted by lundy:
<strong>

But Skullmac's analysis is right on. IF, IF the 1.25 gHz speed is correct, and not 1.20 gHz, then the dual-1.25 and the dual-1000 MUST have DDR-333. Because there isn't any SDR-166 RAM.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, 333 doesn't go into 1.25 Ghz very well. Unless there are new clock multipliers that work at 3.75x, it appears unlikely that 1.25 is a real number. I'm sure someone over at ThinkSecret did the same calculations and came to the same conclusion.

266 * 4.5 = 1197 (~1.2)
333 * 3.5 = ~1166
333* 4 = ~1333

Take your pick....

[shannyla]

[quote] Those "fast" processors should come in handy when you are reformatting XP every 3-6 months

(BTW- I have my MCSE, so I would love to get into a "Wintel Knowledge" pissing contest with you... )

I spend all day fixing Dell’s and Compaq’s (with XP Pro)… This is precisely why I choose to have a Mac at home. You clearly have not used your XP box long enough
<hr></blockquote>

Aw, you'll be fixing those "Dell's and Compaq's" all day till you learn the correct use of apostrophes... and you're only fixing them because you're got an MCSE... don't you get them at 7-11 these days?

I guess XP breaks for you because it knows you don't love it in that special way.

[quote] Weren't you the person that said that insane post about how every one is switching to digital domain's nuke? <hr></blockquote>

Not me, big boy, you confuse me with someone else

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: shannyla ]</p>

[kraig911]

Dudes, do you notice on how these are all duals? I mean its a deal and a steal you get a dual processor for just a little more than a windoze machine, go compare prices for a dual windoze machines the prices are much more on the same field then. I wish I just had enough money I'd get the dual 867 probably, so that I can sit at home and mess around on message boards even faster :D people lighten up

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>
In my case, because Apple bought Shake, killed it for Windows, and I want to see what their going to offer in exchange... At the moment, it seems to be a slap in the face and a kick in the b*llocks.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Mac hasn't killed shake for PC yet, acctually.

Windows and Linux system requirements
* 550MHz Pentium III, Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon processor
* Windows NT 4.0 (with Service Pack 5 or later), Windows 2000 (with Service Pack 1 or later), or Linux (with glibc 2.1 or later; for example, Red Hat 7.1 or 7.2)

Requirements seem pretty light too.

[Blizaine]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

Aw, you'll be fixing those "Dell's and Compaq's" all day till you learn the correct use of apostrophes... and you're only fixing them because you're got an MCSE... don't you get them at 7-11 these days?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Please clarify?... I don't speak idiotanese...

[shannyla]

[quote] Mac hasn't killed shake for PC yet, acctually. <hr></blockquote>

Dead for Windows after version 2.5, Linux is way too much of a pain in the butt for anyone that's actually got work to do.

I love the way mac users talk about linux, don't you realise it makes windows 3.1 look user-friendly... which is why you bought a mac I guess, as it certainly wasn't for the scintilating performance.

[shannyla]

[quote] Please clarify?... I don't speak idiotanese... <hr></blockquote>

Or English it seems... apostrophes make a noun possessive, not plural. But whatever...

[anakin1992]

[quote]Originally posted by Agent Cooper:
<strong>

If the Mainboard is the bottleneck, cranking up the CPU won't do anything significant to the real processing power of the unit.

The MLB Bus speed is the limiting factor of the current G4s, its worth waiting through a few minor chip updates if they offer significan MLB updates - which I think is what we're looking at in the very near future.

and on another subject:

If PC users are so happy with their wintel boxes, why are they speding so much time on Apple discussion boards?</strong><hr></blockquote>

a.c.,

let us forget about how happy pc user are on their wintel boxes. it is not the issue here.

yes, apple could do all kinds of designs on the interconnects between different devices on the mobo and increase the performance. in addition, you could even optimize compiler to increase performance as well. but apple are not doing any of them, at least from what is happening. by the way no matter what, you won't avoid upgrading the clock, which is the easiest way to do. sj maybe right that once apple could get jaguar out they could focus on the hardware. but i really did not see any execuses for apple not doing hardware at the same time with their os.

by increasing the clock, you _have_ to upgrade the interconnect interfaces, such as memory bus, or peripheral bus. it is a given, otherwise, it does not make any sense to upgrade clock.

yes, motorola is doing chip for apple and the overhead on it is hugh. then cut it loose or do it yourself as long as apple wants to use chip different from intel.

[Bioflavonoid]

Why must our precious little machines be cursed with the Mhz myth? It's numero uno on my hate list. And, besides, if they were crappy like people think; hey baby, it's not the Mhz count, it's how you use it. I think a cheap dual powermac would kick---I may change my iMac plans and get a dual 867...hehe.

[gar]

[quote]Originally posted by Jet Powers:
<strong>There is a weird self-hating vibe to these kinds of posts that leads me to believe you all need some serious help.</strong><hr></blockquote>

like most of the people in the netherlands
where complaining is a calvinistic tradition

I think most of the people complaining about this speedbump never intended to buy a new Powermac in the first place.
They want a sort of value for money allthough they'll never use the entire value. 50 % at most, that means even a emac is to blassing fast for them and they stick to thier G4 400 for a couple of years.

[kraig911]

hehe shannyla, you can get around shake, but you can't get around linux? haha I mean you should check out After Effects or somethen if all you use is the standard set of tools for shake

ooooo I can do gaussion blurs fasters than ever...

You can't say you don't use shake till you get into scripting and programming for it. That in there lies why its so cool, and that which I might add is way easier on a mac or linux :)

[jeromba]

I'm not sure anymore but the bus multiplier are this, no ?

133,33 x 6,5 = 866,64 = 867 MHz
133,33 x 7,5 = 999,97 = 1 GHz
166,66 x 6,0 = 999,96 = 1 GHz
166,66 x 7,5 = 1249,95 = 1.25 GHz (MacMinute)
133,33 x 9,0 = 1199,97 = 1.2 GHz (Think Secret)

[Blizaine]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

Or English it seems... apostrophes make a noun possessive, not plural. But whatever...</strong><hr></blockquote>

and "you're only fixing them because you're got an MCSE" is good English I suppose?

[MFfan310]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>Any of you who consider this "speed increase" as much of a disgrace as I do really should check out the Dell Perfomance Workstation range. Dual 2.4 ghz Xeon for around GBP 2500. Windows XP is a fine operating system and I have had no trouble with it whatsoever, be it "hardware compatibility", "crashing for no reason", "only allowing 8.3 names" or any of the other Windows 95 bollocks that are the sacred cows around here. (By the way, if you weren't there, System 7 really sucked as well...) In fact I had way more problems with a dual 533 G4 and OsX.

It's what I "switched" to, and I have had no regrets whatsoever. And if Apple keep going the way they are, I won't be switching back anytime soon.

Thank you and goodnight. Flame me, stop my posting priveledges, whatever, I don't give a shit.</strong><hr></blockquote>

FALSE.

Here in America, a Dell Precision Workstation 530 with comparable specs to the dual 1 GHZ PowerMac G4 costs $5,509-$2,510 MORE than the PowerMac. With the money you save, you can get a Cinema Display! OUCH! And don't even get me started on the Xeon's slow performance and Windoze XP............. :mad:

[shannyla]

[quote] hehe shannyla, you can get around shake, but you can't get around linux? <hr></blockquote>

Ah, but that's not what I said... I've been working on Irix boxes for years. Linux is just a pain in the ass in many ways, is what I'm saying.

[shannyla]

[quote] and "you're only fixing them because you're got an MCSE" is good English I suppose? <hr></blockquote>

Eh, correct. I'd like to say "it ain't so" but, sorry, it is.

[theMagius]

The question here is not whether a bus utilizes SDRAM or DDR. Nor is it relevant how many processors a given machine may utilize. The question ultimately is: will Apple’s new hardware convince PC users to switch to a Macintosh?

Let’s take a look at the RUMORED Apple hardware for US $1699:
2 Motorola Processors Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Macintosh OSX Video Card SuperDrive (DVD-RW) Modem Ethernet


Now, let’s take a look at a DELL Dimension 4500 for US $1247:
1 Intel Processor Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Windows XP Home Edition 17” CRT Monitor Video Card DVD-RW Drive Harmon Kardon speakers Modem Ethernet 6 Months Free Internet

Because of certain AMBIGUITIES regarding processor speeds and RAM types/speeds, I’ve eliminated any hardware references to SDRAM, DDR, MHz, etc. It’s also assumed that the video cards and Hard Drives are equivalent in both cases (pending tomorrow’s announcement).

Now, looking at these numbers, can someone tell me how Apple is going to convince a potential “switcher” to pay US $452 more for Macintosh tower that does NOT include a CRT, speakers and internet?

Respectfully,
-theMagius

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

Dead for Windows after version 2.5, Linux is way too much of a pain in the butt for anyone that's actually got work to do.

I love the way mac users talk about linux, don't you realise it makes windows 3.1 look user-friendly... which is why you bought a mac I guess, as it certainly wasn't for the scintilating performance.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Acctually you're close to right there - the main reason I bought the Mac was the user friendly aspect - which M$ hasn't come anywhere near matching. Even MacOSX, which i find less User friendly than OS 9, is more freindly than XP.

However, you're not totally right, as the G3 I bought still performs fine. Mac Users ugprade their machines on average every 4 to 5 years - PC users upgrade on average every 2 years. Performance over time seems to be better for mac users, I don't know why.

No one is asking you to drop your PC, dude, no one cares. If you want to justify your purchase, i'm sure there are support groups for insecure PC users. As for linux, its not so bad, you do need some programming experience to get it to run really well, but some installers take care of all the work for you.

I keep coming back to the fact that no one missed you when you switched to PC. I'm sorry no one threw together an intervention party for you, but you can stay there.

[- J B 7 2 -]

It's really looking like we're headed towards DDR 166 on the high end models me thinks. This could be somewhat awkward.

And BTW, speed is important to me as well, and no it's not a penis thing, K? K. I can assure anyone here who claims that "speed doesn't matter" that apple doesn't feel the same. Just take a look around Apple.com to find a ludicrous amount of words like "fast," "blazing," and "speed."

I'm probaly going to buy the dual 1.25 if it happens tomorrow, but I'd certainly feel a lot better about the purchase if it was faster for $3300. And it sure as fek better not howl like a banshee like the previous El Capitains (I've suspected that the new case designs have more to do with keeping quiet then cooling a monster.)

[shannyla]

[quote] I'm sorry no one threw together an intervention party for you, but you can stay there. <hr></blockquote>

Aw, gee, thanks. Ok then, I will.

Night night all.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by anakin1992:
<strong>
by increasing the clock, you _have_ to upgrade the interconnect interfaces, such as memory bus, or peripheral bus. it is a given, otherwise, it does not make any sense to upgrade clock.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is exactly the point I am trying to make. They've been moving the proccessor speed up but doing nothing - or very little - to boost the FSB speed. Now they have to play catch up with the MLB, bring the bus speed up so that the faster cpus will have somewhere to put all that data they crunch

[bunge]

Why do people complain about the speed of CURRENT HARDWARE in the FUTURE HARDWARE forum? Specifically the day before new FUTURE HARDWARE is rumored to become CURRENT HARDWARE?

I mean, who cares if the current Dual GHZ machine is too slow for you if a new machine is supposed to arrive tomorrow?

And how can anyone complain about FUTURE HARDWARE if it hasn't yet become CURRENT HARDWARE?

In reality a Dual 800 MHZ machine could run faster than a Dual GHZ if the 800 MHZ machine had significantly greater bandwidth. Or a different processor. Or whatever the hell you care to think about.

Anyone complaining about tomorrow supposed offerings is just being idiotic. No offense intended.

[blabla]

[quote]Originally posted by BrunoBruin:
<strong>(will the chip even support it? or are the PowerBooks going to the 7470 </strong><hr></blockquote>

The 7470 was a product of MOSR, not Motorola...

:rolleyes:

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>Why must our precious little machines be cursed with the Mhz myth? It's numero uno on my hate list. And, besides, if they were crappy like people think; hey baby, it's not the Mhz count, it's how you use it. I think a cheap dual powermac would kick---I may change my iMac plans and get a dual 867...hehe.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I've long been an advocate of changing apple's motto to "Its not the meat, its the motion..."
:)

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]6 Months Free Internet <hr></blockquote>
Umm, one little typo...it should appear like this: "6 months of selling your soul to MSN."

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Bioflavonoid ]</p>

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]Originally posted by Agent Cooper:
<strong>

I've long been an advocate of changing apple's motto to "Its not the meat, its the motion..."
:) </strong><hr></blockquote>
hehe, that's better.

[Clive]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>Aw, you'll be fixing those "Dell's and Compaq's" all day till you learn the correct use of apostrophes...[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: shannyla ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would propose that you fault the grammar of others' if you can do better yourself:

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>In my case, because Apple bought Shake, killed it for Windows, and I want to see what their going to offer in exchange...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think you mean "they're".

[MFfan310]

[quote]Originally posted by theMagius:
<strong>The question here is not whether a bus utilizes SDRAM or DDR. Nor is it relevant how many processors a given machine may utilize. The question ultimately is: will Apple’s new hardware convince PC users to switch to a Macintosh?

Let’s take a look at the RUMORED Apple hardware for US $1699:
2 Motorola Processors Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Macintosh OSX Video Card SuperDrive (DVD-RW) Modem Ethernet


Now, let’s take a look at a DELL Dimension 4500 for US $1247:
1 Intel Processor Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Windows XP Home Edition 17” CRT Monitor Video Card DVD-RW Drive Harmon Kardon speakers Modem Ethernet 6 Months Free Internet

Because of certain AMBIGUITIES regarding processor speeds and RAM types/speeds, I’ve eliminated any hardware references to SDRAM, DDR, MHz, etc. It’s also assumed that the video cards and Hard Drives are equivalent in both cases (pending tomorrow’s announcement).

Now, looking at these numbers, can someone tell me how Apple is going to convince a potential “switcher” to pay US $452 more for Macintosh tower that does NOT include a CRT, speakers and internet?

Respectfully,
-theMagius</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, a truly similar Dell costs $1658. Seems good at first, but Apple gives you a DVD-RW drive instead of an inferior DVD+RW drive, all of the iApps, far better tech support (believe it or not, Dell's US consumer tech support is from INDIA and keeps you on hold for HOURS), a faster processor, a superior OS, gigabit Ethernet, 4 FREE expansion slots (the Dell only has 1), 64-bit PCI instead of 32-bit PCI, and much more extras that Dell can't match.

[NerV]

[quote]Originally posted by anakin1992:
<strong>yeah, you don't need a supersonic plane in order to get to new york from san francisco. you could walk. the better side of it is that it does your body good and maybe safer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Then you've never driven through Scary, Indiana. It's much safer to be 35,000 feet over that place.

[rampancy]

[quote]Originally posted by gar:
<strong> and they stick to thier G4 400 for a couple of years.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hey! Don't knock the G4/400, man. I love my 3 year old Sawtooth! :D ;)

[rogue27]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

Because some of us "think differently" enough to consider all the possible options for doing their jobs better, faster, cheaper, whatever, rather than sticking blindly to dogma and ideology...

In my case, because Apple bought Shake, killed it for Windows, and I want to see what their going to offer in exchange... At the moment, it seems to be a slap in the face and a kick in the b*llocks.

Were I to consider buying some Macs for my company to run shake on, the performance Apple offers simply doesn't make it viable. And I know all about the two for one offer, still not worth it...</strong><hr></blockquote>


Great post! This means you must have seen how Shake performs on Apple's new G4s, right? Of course you have, because you wouldn't just be making up nonsense like everybody else in here!

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]6 Months Free Internet <hr></blockquote>
Umm, one little typo...it should appear like this: "6 months of selling your soul to Microsoft."

[Bioflavonoid]

Dangit, why does this keep happening to me, I keep listing numerous postings without knowing it.

[jante99]

Could the new Power Macs have 200 mhz bus (400 DDR)? That would be:
200*5 = 1000
200*6 = 1200

That would work very well accept for the 867 mhz model which will probably be only 133 mhz ram.
With that bus speed the Power Macs would be extremely fast and be able to compete with PC's, and maybe over take them.

[BrunoBruin]

[quote]Dudes, do you notice on how these are all duals? I mean its a deal<hr></blockquote>

I agree. From an ordinary buyer's perspective this is good news. The base model goes up $100 but for that you go from a single 800 to dual 867s?! I'll take five! Seriously, unless Apple does something stupid like ship them with no L3 cache or something, I can make the case that these are at least twice as fast as the DP450s in my office. They'll probably run about $1,500 educational, and that's $1,000 less than those 450s cost two years ago.

[gar]

[quote]Originally posted by rampancy:
<strong>

Hey! Don't knock the G4/400, man. I love my 3 year old Sawtooth! :D ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

that's what I mean, you're to contended

:D

[MCQ]

[quote]Originally posted by theMagius:
<strong>The question ultimately is: will Apple’s new hardware convince PC users to switch to a Macintosh?

Let’s take a look at the RUMORED Apple hardware for US $1699:
2 Motorola Processors Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Macintosh OSX Video Card SuperDrive (DVD-RW) Modem Ethernet


Now, let’s take a look at a DELL Dimension 4500 for US $1247:
1 Intel Processor Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Windows XP Home Edition 17” CRT Monitor Video Card DVD-RW Drive Harmon Kardon speakers Modem Ethernet 6 Months Free Internet

Because of certain AMBIGUITIES regarding processor speeds and RAM types/speeds, I’ve eliminated any hardware references to SDRAM, DDR, MHz, etc. It’s also assumed that the video cards and Hard Drives are equivalent in both cases (pending tomorrow’s announcement).

Now, looking at these numbers, can someone tell me how Apple is going to convince a potential “switcher” to pay US $452 more for Macintosh tower that does NOT include a CRT, speakers and internet?

Respectfully,
-theMagius</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay, from that point of view yes it looks a bit hard for a person considering a Switch. However, try this again with what I think is a fairer comparison (because it sounds like you're talking about the average consumer):

Rumored Superdrive eMac for US $1499
1 Motorola Processor Memory Hard Drive Keyboard Mouse Mac OS X 17” CRT Monitor (built-in) Video Card DVD-RW Drive built-in speakers Modem Ethernet

I don't consider internet access to be a point of comparison... if for some reason you don't have internet access by now, you save $60-$120, but most people who have a computer already likely have an ISP already.

So you're paying $250 more for an Apple consumer system with OS X. It's the premium you pay for an Apple product, and I think some would be willing to pay for it.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: MCQ ]</p>

[Bioflavonoid]

I don't know if anyone has already posted this because I didn't bother to check, but, doesn't a 1699 dollar dual 867 g4 seem a little cheap? I mean, I could get a single 800 MHz G4 iMac with a 17 inch screen for 1999 (not to mention the superdrive included). If I were to guess, I would say that it would be closer to 1999 than 1699.
? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Bioflavonoid ]</p>

[BRussell]

[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>My gut tells me we have a Powerbook type situation here. Like when the 550 and 667 Powerbooks were announced. the dual 867 will be 133MHz bus, the Dual GHz and Dual 1.2 will have ddr ram and ddr FSB, hence the difference in price between the new Dual GHz and the discontinued Dual GHz.</strong><hr></blockquote>I want to repost this because I agree and Bodhi usually has very good instincts.

The only thing I would change is that I'm guessing it's not a DDR FSB, but rather a plain 166 FSB with (x-serve-style) DDR RAM in the top two models. I just doubt Apollo can use a DDR FSB, but I'd believe a 166 bus.

Overall, I think if that's true, it's a decent, but not fantastic, upgrade. I'm just annoyed at the price increase. They're trying to .mac their loyal user base to death through the downturn, not innovate.

[flofighter]

[quote]
New Power Mac G4 systems to be unveiled tomorrow with speeds up to 1.25GHz
August 12 - 16:33 EDT Apple will unveil new Power Mac G4 systems tomorrow, MacMinute has learned. Sources inform us that three configurations will be offered: dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299). The dual-1GHz and dual-1.25GHz models will feature ATI Radeon 9000 series graphics cards; additional system-specific details are not available. The dual-867MHz configuration is slated to ship by the end of the week, while the new dual-1GHz model will ship towards the end of the month. Availability of the high-end dual-1.25GHz model is being pegged at sometime in September. Current Power Mac G4 systems will be reduced in price as follows: 800MHz ($1,299), 933MHz ($1,499) and dual-1GHz ($2,199). Additionally, Apple will introduce a SuperDrive-equipped eMac for $1,499, sources say, and will reduce the price of CD-RW and Combo Drive iMacs by $100 to $1,299 and $1,499, respectively.<hr></blockquote>

That's crap!

Macminute isn't right every time. Think Secret is as reliable as Mosr.com and maccn only hope for being right by copying that crap.

1,25 Ghz ?
How?

166 * 7,5=1,25 Ghz...166 SDRAM ?--&gt; NO

333* 4=1333 / 333 * 3,75 seems very impossible for me....i dont think these multipiers exist..

166/333 DDR Hack? No! They could have released DDR Hack at Powermac line when they introduced XServe.

1,2 Ghz is also unlikely, cause 133 with a multiplier of 9 (remember the times when a multiplier of 5 was HIGH; remeber the 604 with 350 Mhz=50*7)is crappy. That won't be a performance gain over the 1GHz...

I think of 1GHz/333 true DDR, 1,333Ghz/333 DDR, Dual 1333Ghz/333...

[Jet Powers]

Another good thing about the top speed being racheted up to ~1.2 GHz:

iMac GHz+
TiBook GHz-ish
iBook G4 (?)

1) iMac: Despite everyone (including Apple themselves) talking about how iMac is a marvel because of it's small design, it's still plenty big enough to include enough heat sinks and fans to power any chip Motorola has. I suspect that the price on the newest fast chips are quite high, so don't expect any 1.2 GHz iMacs, but I don't think 1 GHz is unreasonable.

2) TiBook: Apple uses a low-powered Powermac chip in TiBooks. If the standard powered ones go above 1.2 GHz, then certainly that means their fabs have improved. If so, their yields of low powered chips at greater speeds has improved. Since the fastest TiBook chip is 80% of the fastest Powermac chip at 1 GHz, then at 1.2 GHz you get chips in the 960 MHz range or so. This would be around 166.67x5.5 (917) or 166x6.0 (1000).

3) IF TiBooks get high speed G4's up near a GHz, then iBooks could conceivable get even lower power g4 chips around 700-800 MHz. I doubt that Apple will drop the G3 (it's any easy way of generating profit for and thus keeping goodwill towards IBM), but it could happen.

The SWITCH campaign takes place in iWorld, kids. And even faster iMacs and iBooks is where the rubber meets the road.

Jet

[kcmac]

by gar [quote] I think most of the people complaining about this speedbump never intended to buy a new Powermac in the first place.
They want a sort of value for money allthough they'll never use the entire value. 50 % at most, that means even a emac is to blassing fast for them and they stick to thier G4 400 for a couple of years.
<hr></blockquote>

Maybe you are right. I am a person who will probably stick with iMacs and laptops. Currently, however, I feel that until the powermac really turns into a POWERMAC, the whole lineup suffers.

The powermac needs to get way out in front of the iMac. (I'm only referring to speed here, BTW.)This will allow the powerbook to get a little more ahead as well.

While the your daily mac predictions are most probably way too optimistic, what looked good to me was the build to order options where the power user could just keep adding on and increasing the pro model gap.

I love macs, have no intention of switching, have ordered Jaguar and .mac. I just don't think that until the Powermac really gets an increase that the mac lineup will really kick the crap of out of the other side. Maybe that doesn't matter....
:rolleyes:

Seeing the article where the Apple rep states the next quarter being flat to breaking even leads me to believe that the hohum macminute specs are real.

[Big Mac]

Face it, this is what we're getting. 1.2 at the high end is the best we can hope for right now, and gains will continue to be dismal until IBM rescues the platform. An extremely depressing affair to be sure.

[MacsRGood4U]

Also, with a Dell you're getting a computer that has been manufactured with the cheapest available parts. In other words, trouble is a coming to the user. Also the software bundle with the eMac is superior in every way for the average consumer. Dell is leveraging its future on numbers rather than profit margins. Eventually it will have to pay the piper, especially if HP-Compaq gets back into the race. Gateway? Forget it, they're outta here by the end of next year, 2004 at the earliest. Anyway, if you don't like Apple products you have plenty of other stuff to buy. Tomorrow iMacs will be cheaper.

[Marcus]

The more I look at this, the more the 867 looks like a sweet deal...if it is $1699 my mind is made up...

Also, assuming the specs are right, and the 1.25 does ship 'sometime' in Sept, it doesn't bode well for an update at MWSF. 3 months...seems like the IBM 'holy grail' Mac could be further away than we think...

Peace,

Marc

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Marcus ]</p>

[Jet Powers]

[quote]Originally posted by flofighter:
[QB]

That's crap!

rest of post edited for being stupid<hr></blockquote>

Lesson 1: DDR means Double Data Rate over the FSB. In PC land, DDR 266 is on a 133 bus. DDR 333 is on a 166 bus.

Lesson 2: Multipliers work in .5 increments.

Lesson 3: Half of 166 is 83.

Lesson 4: It's actually 133.33 and 166.67, to be more precise.

Therefore:

1250/166.67=7.5

A 1.25 GHz chip is a chip with a 166.67 MHz FSB with a 7.5 multiplier. It's simple math, plus just the tiniest bit of understanding of DDR and FSB.

Jet

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by Jet Powers:
<strong>
The SWITCH campaign takes place in iWorld, kids. And even faster iMacs and iBooks is where the rubber meets the road.

Jet</strong><hr></blockquote>

You know, thats one of the best points made on here all day long. Potential switchers are more likely going to be focused on the iBooks and iMacs, not these new PowerMacs. Sure some people will go straight to the power line, I did when I switched, but most people that they're targeting aren't worried about pure power as much as they are ease of use, and reliablity.

[kcmac]

[quote]Potential switchers are more likely going to be focused on the iBooks and iMacs, not these new PowerMacs. Sure some people will go straight to the power line, I did when I switched, but most people that they're targeting aren't worried about pure power as much as they are ease of use, and reliablity.
<hr></blockquote>

That is a good point. Which is also exactly why the powermac must gain distance on the iMac. It is dragging down (holding back) the rest of the lineup in terms of speed.

Ease of use, etc can surely help make someone switch. But speed and ease of use and reliability will make it even more of a no brainer. Crank up the powermac so the rest of the platform can fly! :D

[Animaniac]

I can't seem to understand why people cannot critize Apple. I can't seem to understand why people fail to accept that the Wintel side is out competition. I can't seem to understand why people constantly pull out the argument "it does what I want I need it do fast enough." OS X isn't that great you know. Sure it's UNIX but everything than you can do on OS X can be done on NT based Windows XP. Sure you get iApps, and what not, but there are freeware apps on the Windows too you know, and believe it or not, they get the same things done that the iApps do. Sure a 1 GHz G4 got most people's work done, but a 1GHz P3 got everyone's work done about the same too. Why do people buy the latest and greatest technology when most of the power goes over their head? Oh, now I know, it's because some of that power trickles down to making their mundane tasks a bit faster. The performance gap between Macs and Wintels is very real. And merely purporting that a 1 GHz G4 is as good as a 2.53 GHz P4 based on the "MHz Myth" is complete bull sh1t that only serves to make people more comfortable with their performance inferior computers. People wake up, if OS X were on x86s we'd all move like one big herd starving for meat. Why is that? Oh because the x86 architecture is much better. OS X only gives you so much. Sure it's nice to look at, and works smoothly, but when it comes down to getting actual work done, Windows XP gets the job done too, and faster--simply, faster. That's the cold hard truth. Because of Motorola we're not even putting up a fight against the Wintel Goliath. Sure there is good news about a 64-bit IBM chip, but that's still long ways down the road. What happens in the mean time? Pro users get the shaft, simple as that. Just because they want to use OS X. Why didn't Apple start working with IBM earlier? They're a big corporation that could have easily handled OS X transitioning and processor transitioning. This is a classic "Give me a break" scenario. Seriously, Apple has to get their act together. Until then, I'm going to go to platform that isn't in a rut.

[blabla]

[quote]Originally posted by Marcus:
<strong>Also, assuming the specs are right, and the 1.25 does ship 'sometime' in Sept, it doesn't bode well for an update at MWSF. 3 months...seems like the IBM 'holy grail' Mac could be further away than we think...
[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Marcus ]</strong><hr></blockquote>


It only means Motorola is having problems again, and right now, Apple really needs to fight hard to break financial even.

I dont think they will move the chip to 0.13micron if those specs are the real deal. The 7470 is a yet-another-fictional-product-from -MacOSRumors.com (tm), and I really doubt we will see a _new_ Motorola PPC design in an Apple product ever again.

The fact that for the last 2 years, Motorola havent talked about any mac-related PPC technology at the Microprocessor Forum, is a proof good enough for me. The very last thing Motorola talked about was a SOI G4e (2 years ago).. Thats the chip in the inside current Powermacs.

[Bodhi]

Those of you having discussions about the specs and what may be released, thanks for your input. The others who are insulting each other cause they disagree..let it go man.

[shetline]

[quote]Originally posted by gar:
<strong>I think most of the people complaining about this speedbump never intended to buy a new Powermac in the first place.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Maybe that's true for others, but not for me.

I was ready to leap at something like a dual 1.4 GHz with full DDR support. I might not even wait until after work to go buy (or reserve one, at least) -- I'd take a long lunch break and head to the local Apple store, credit card in hand.

But for only a speed bump to 1.2 or 1.25 GHz, especially if it's only Xserve-style DDR (or no DDR at all) -- that's not enough to get me excited.

Dual 1.25, if it has full DDR support, is on the borderline to get me to buy a new Mac. But I'd take my time about it, wait for some reviews, see how much of a measured performance increase there was, see how happy new buyers were.

Why does 0.15 GHz matter that much? It's just a threshold-of-excitement thing, I guess. If you imagine all complainers here are cheapskates who wouldn't be buying anything new anyway, consider this:

January: Purchased 667 MHz TiBook. Sold my 11-month old 500 MHz TiBook on eBay.

May: Purchased 800 MHz TiBook -- mainly because it had a DVI video port -- and a 22" Cinema Display. Sold my 4-month old 667 MHz TiBook on eBay.

Early August: Purchased 20 GB iPod.

Apple is getting a fairly big chunk of my disposable income this year!

I don't need a faster Mac because I think it will increase my productivity 25% or help me earn $X/hour more than I do now. Chances are even the most hyper video and graphics artists aren't going to see a noticeable change in their balance sheets from anything less than a doubling of computing power.

Maybe 5% of computer users have legit reasons for claiming they need a really, really fast computer. I think most of upgrade only because we either haven't upgraded in so long that what we currently have is woefully antiquated... or we just want an exciting new toy.

My current TiBook already covers all my legit needs for having a computer. If I don't buy a new Mac tomorrow it's not because I'm switching to Wintel or because I'm not ready to buy anyway. It's because, if the rumors are true, the new Power Macs simply don't excite me enough to buy them. Believe me -- I'd rather be excited and buying something new. I consider the MacMinute/Think Secret news disappointing.

To me, buying a new Mac would be saying "Way to go, Apple!" These specs that are predicted aren't, however, the way Apple should be going.

I really like OS X, and Jaguar sounds like it's going to be even better. I have no complaints with Apple on the software front. But if they can't do better than 1.25 GHz, they're falling terribly behind on the hardware front. If that's all they can do for now -- maybe because it's the best they could get out of Motorola -- I'll stick with my TiBook for now and hope for some Power4-related spin-off next year.

[Edited because I had a brain lapse vis-à-vis UBB Code vs. HTML]

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: shetline ]</p>

[DisgruntledQS733Owner]

[quote]Originally posted by jeromba:
<strong>I think that a lot of people who are complaining don't even have a QuickSilver.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hey there.

[Bioflavonoid]

Lol, I just got more proof that there are going new powermacs tomorrow. I was looking at macmall and I saw that their powermac free ram thing expires today, the 12th---not available on the 13th. hmmmm.... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[newkid]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>Were I to consider buying some Macs for my company to run shake on, the performance Apple offers simply doesn't make it viable.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Over the recent years, Apple has been clearly ahead in terms of performance. However, depending on the application, the gap is much narrower now and there is no clear winner.

Your post might signal to others that performance equals megahertz. Don't fall into that trap. While it might be true for some, this is a very shallow indicator.

Some say that Windows caught on years ago... well... LOL... I am a Windows LAN administrator, I have seen the hype and I have to deal with the crap.

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]Originally posted by newkid:
<strong>

Over the recent years, Apple has been clearly ahead in terms of performance. However, depending on the application, the gap is much narrower now and there is no clear winner.

Your post might signal to others that performance equals megahertz. Don't fall into that trap. While it might be true for some, this is a very shallow indicator.

Some say that Windows caught on years ago... well... LOL... I am a Windows LAN administrator, I have seen the hype and I have to deal with the crap.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sing it brother!!!!!!!!!!!!

[keston]

If the new specs start at 867 and top out at 1.25, this is yet another G4 generation that wont get any of my money. I sold my G4 350 (yikes) last June, anticipating the new PowerMacs. But so far i haven't seen anything that has made me go :eek: :D

Apple keep throwing us small bones every six months. I think we've been hungry for so long, anything more and people go mad, caught up in the RDF. I've developed an immunity to the RDF. I'm starting to think Apple is just rationing the speed to milk us as long as possible. After thier huge rant about dual-this, and dual-that, all the PMs should have been dual in the first place :mad:

I don't see myself switching, but they arent't getting anymore of my money till its something that makes me say... DAMN!! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> In the mean time, my money will go to things like saving for a car, fixing up my place, console gaming, etc. If when they finally get on the ball i'm broke and can't afford a new mac... tough.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: keston ]</p>

[DisgruntledQS733Owner]

[quote]Originally posted by shannyla:
<strong>

I'm merely amusing myself until I get banned...</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's the spirit.

[marcsiry]

[quote] If the new specs start at 867 and top out at 1.25, this is yet another G4 generation that wont get any of my money. I sold my G4 350 (yikes) last June, anticipating the new PowerMacs. But so far i haven't seen anything that has made me go <hr></blockquote>

You're doing yourself a disservice. I have a G4/500 sitting next to a Dual Gig. The Dual Gig makes my 500 feel like a jalopy, especially in OSX. Photobench shows a 100% - 400% improvement in every function.

Buy a new Dual Gig tomorrow and you'll feel a huge difference. Believe me, even a small speed increase adds up over the course of a day.

The best part about it, though, is the user experience- I get impatient when I have to (rarely) do something on the 500 nowadays.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: marcsiry ]</p>

[keston]

I am not a millionaire, and have other expenses. I am a young single guy living on my own, and have to work hard for my money. Mommy and Daddy do not buy the things I own, and I have rent to pay cuz i dont live in thier basement. (Note: that is not any kind of personal attack).

I cannot be dropping money like if it grew on trees. My point is, unless Apple shows me something that warrants getting my money over my other expenses and responsibilities, they wont. For some it seems to easy to say "just get a dual-giger and whatever...". I'll be making do with my Pismo 400 and iMac 333 for now.

Snappier(tm) interface is nice and all, and useless benchmarks, and seti@home boasting rights might be interesting... But what i want is to see my machine leave a P4 in tyhe dust in Office Apps, Graphic Apps, 3D Applications, Gaming, etc AND NOT cost 3 times as much as a comparable PC <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: keston ]</p>

[failedmathematician]

If the bottom computer is really dual processor, then that price seems low (i.e. wrong) to me. So I can't really get too enraged over a rumor that doesn't quite seem right to me. Since I don't post here very often, I will say that if these rumors are basically correct, then I will be:

:mad:

I'm not in the market for a new computer right now, but Apple needs to get on the ball now if they are going to be performance competitive when I do look to buy in about 18 months. I think it is a sign of real desperation that so many are now hoping for a Power4 descendant! Now for those of you who say that current computers are fast enough. I have a Quicksilver 733. It is fast enough for my day to day needs, but just because I am not spending every waking moment doing a 3d render doesn't mean that I should have to wait all day when I do want a render. And until a five year old computer is not considered obsolete, I am always going to want the fastest computer I can afford-- for me that wil usually be the bottom end computer.

Last thought before I get banned for the day: it annoys me to no end that some of you are more or less saying you will only ever buy Apple computers. It just conveys the sense that Apple is independent from the rest of the market, and does not need to be price or performance competitive. Apple clearly takes advantage of this loyalty, but I wouldn't necessary argue that it is a healthy thing. I don't have to switch to Windows to see that they have superior hardware at cheaper cost, and I don't think it is too much to ask that Apple employ mature industry standards like DDR. In fact, I would say that if that is too much to ask, then Apple's economic model has failed.

see ya,

failedmathematician

[BrunoBruin]

[quote]Apple keep throwing us small bones every six months. <hr></blockquote>

But it's not Apple starving us for upgrades, it's Motorola. Apple threw in their lot with the G4 and now they're paying for it. It's not like they have 2GHz+ processors and they're holding them back just to be mean. They can only ship what Moto delivers. Don't you think this burns Apple just as much as it burns us? But they have to sell machines until they can move to a new chip. I personally believe Apple has some big hardware coming. They didn't buy Nothing Real so they could run Shake on 700Mhz eMacs. I will stay nervously optimistic. :D

[Ptrash]

The specs may not be that bad. In fact the low end machine is a decent deal. But I think the reason people are venting at Apple is because they're tired of being let down. Of course in a way we're responsible for the high expectations, but if we didn't have those expectations, where would we be? Most peple on this board are Mac fanatics. A lot are in school, and feeling constantly beseiged by PC users. Anyone working in corporate America is in a similar situation. So there's this continual hope that, come the next Apple product upgrade, we're finally gonna get a computer that holds up hardware-wise (or moreover, spec-wise) to PCs. Only what we get is more dissapointment-once again meager increases in speed and technology-and prices that are way out of line (especially when considering that the new OS is not quite as simple to use as the old one, so you don't have that low IT support cost holding down overall costs like you used to).

How many times has this happened over the last 2-3 years? And then we have the Motorola situation; now the future of the platform is really up in the air. If Apple was a little more forthcoming, it might ease people's anxieties a bit. But, instead, Apple acts as if everything is fine, and that the only problem is the tanking economy. If anything, people on these boards are too passionate (about their Macs) and too loyal to Apple; the anger comes from feeling that the company take their support for granted.

[Xaqtly]

I'll just say that most of you would actually be very, very pleased with how Jaguar would perform on a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 with a 166 MHz bus and 333 MHz DDR memory. Very pleased. Really, really, really pleased. :)

Jaguar is not the OS X that you're used to... it really is faster, and giving the G4 more bandwidth in addition to higher clock speeds will make you take notice, I guarantee it. So everybody relax.

[Eugene]

Considering the retail Radeon 9700 Mac Edition is about 6 months away, the specs on the first page are pure rubbish.

[MacRonin]

PowerMac G4 Workstation

Quad Motorola PowerPC G4 7470 CPUs @ 1.6GHz
512KB on-die 1:1 L2 cache per CPU
4MB backside 2:1 L3 cache per CPU
333MHz DDR Front Side Bus
4GB PC2700 333MHz DDR SDRAM (4 @ 1GB DIMMs)
Dual ATA133 interfaces (hardware RAID implemented in system controller; supports 4 devices)
Four (4) 120GB ATA133 HDDs (RAID Level 0/Striped; 7,200rpm; 8MB cache per HDD)
Single ATA100 interface (supports 2 devices)
SuperDrive2 optical drive (slot-loading)
CD-R/RW optical drive (slot-loading)
AGP Pro110 8x graphics slot
nVidia/Apple Quartz Extreme OpenGL card (512MB DDR2 RAM; dual NV30 GPUs; dual ADC ports)
Two (2) Apple Cinema HD Displays (23"/1920x1200/32bit)
Four (4) PCI-X expansion slots (133MHz/64bit; dual busses; two slots per bus)
Two (2) FireWire2 ports (800Mbps)
Two (2) FireWire ports (400Mbps)
Four (4) USB ports (12Mbps)
10/100/1000BaseT Ethernet; RJ45 port
Airport2/BlueTooth integrated into single PC Card
Keyboard (USB standard/BlueTooth optional)
Mouse (USB standard/BlueTooth optional; three-button optional)
Mac OS X v10.2 (JagWire) standard

BWAHHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by MacRonin:
<strong>PowerMac G4 Workstation

Quad Motorola PowerPC G4 7470 CPUs @ 1.6GHz
512KB on-die 1:1 L2 cache per CPU
4MB backside 2:1 L3 cache per CPU
333MHz DDR Front Side Bus
4GB PC2700 333MHz DDR SDRAM (4 @ 1GB DIMMs)
Dual ATA133 interfaces (hardware RAID implemented in system controller; supports 4 devices)
Four (4) 120GB ATA133 HDDs (RAID Level 0/Striped; 7,200rpm; 8MB cache per HDD)
Single ATA100 interface (supports 2 devices)
SuperDrive2 optical drive (slot-loading)
CD-R/RW optical drive (slot-loading)
AGP Pro110 8x graphics slot
nVidia/Apple Quartz Extreme OpenGL card (512MB DDR2 RAM; dual NV30 GPUs; dual ADC ports)
Two (2) Apple Cinema HD Displays (23"/1920x1200/32bit)
Four (4) PCI-X expansion slots (133MHz/64bit; dual busses; two slots per bus)
Two (2) FireWire2 ports (800Mbps)
Two (2) FireWire ports (400Mbps)
Four (4) USB ports (12Mbps)
10/100/1000BaseT Ethernet; RJ45 port
Airport2/BlueTooth integrated into single PC Card
Keyboard (USB standard/BlueTooth optional)
Mouse (USB standard/BlueTooth optional; three-button optional)
Mac OS X v10.2 (JagWire) standard

BWAHHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>


..Um.. I'll have what he's having.

[BobtheTomato]

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>Considering the retail Radeon 9700 Mac Edition is about 6 months away, the specs on the first page are pure rubbish.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The issue is drivers, Samples cards are out now and PC product is expected to be shipping in a month, so if Apple wrote the SW it COULD happen sooner (theough I think it would be more like 2-4 Months instead of 6). I hope one way or the other they get it ready soon.

[Analogue bubblebath]

[quote]Originally posted by keston:

<strong>But what i want is to see my machine leave a P4 in tyhe dust in Office Apps, Graphic Apps, 3D Applications, Gaming, etc AND NOT cost 3 times as much as a comparable PC <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, then you might as well switch to PCs, as Intel will always make sure their desktop CPUs are the fastest, are at least close to the fastest processor available. Not even the POWER4 puts the P4 "in the dust", I doubt the next-gen 64-bit IBM PPC will either.

[marcsiry]

[quote] I am not a millionaire, and have other expenses. I am a young single guy living on my own, and have to work hard for my money. Mommy and Daddy do not buy the things I own, and I have rent to pay cuz i dont live in thier basement. (Note: that is not any kind of personal attack). <hr></blockquote>

Ha! I haven't seen my parents in months, I support my wife, and I guarantee I pay more rent than you do :-)

However, I'm also a professional graphic artist, and I presume herein lies the difference. A Mac is not an "extra expense" for me, it's a vital tool. Even a little bit of performance increase has a measurable impact on my bottom line.

If I were to adopt a similar attitude as yours, that would be like a carpenter holding off on buying a hammer until they come out with a model that drives two nails at a time.

I can understand how you're cool to the rumored specs- you probably don't need a Mac to make your living. To me, it's a cut and dried business decision. Will the new machines present a cost/benefit improvement over my current machines?

If the answer is yes, then I'm foolish not to upgrade if I can afford it. In the case of the rumored machines, I don't see a big enough benefit to go $1500 out of pocket to step up to the dual 1.2 gig- unless it provides enough capability that I can make an extra $1500 in three to six months.

If I were a film editor, I might realize that extra income in three weeks. If I used my Mac exclusively to play WCIII, then it wouldn't ever make sense.

As for the comparison with Windows machines, that's a fair one if you're willing to make the concessions that working in that environment requires. A coworker at a recent freelance gig spent a day of downtime because his Windows machine suffered from a conflict between Photoshop and a printer driver- it eventually destroyed his machine, requiring an OS reinstall.

At the rate I'm billing that job, a day's work is at least $600. That's a third of the way to the difference between my current machine and the new topline Mac.

To me, the rumored machines sound pretty good for the money.

[rogue27]

A few thoughts:

People are only disappointed because rumors of 1.4 Ghz were flying all over the place last week.

It's foolish to be complaining about performance of a computer none of you have seen, used, or found benchmarks for. You all say Apple is going to release slow hardware. You don't know that.

The Dual 533 was much faster than the Dual 500, and the performance increase was due to motherboard improvements. The G4 is a very fast chip, but it is starved by the bus. We should be begging for motherboard upgrades, not processor upgrades.

Right now, we don't really know much about the new motherboards, just the processors that run on them.

The 867 sounds like it will be similar to the Yikes. The Yikes wasn't around very long... ;o)

If the rumor is true, it is a 25% speed increase, not including motherboard improvments. If we can get a 25% speed increase every 6 months, we'll stay on pace with Moore's Law.

Jaguar + QE + DDR = fast.

Apple might have a couple 2Ghz chips in a lab for testing. However, that is a far cry from having tens of thousands of them to do a production run.

[lundy]

[quote]Originally posted by sniffer:
<strong>

Actually, 333 doesn't go into 1.25 Ghz very well. Unless there are new clock multipliers that work at 3.75x, it appears unlikely that 1.25 is a real number. I'm sure someone over at ThinkSecret did the same calculations and came to the same conclusion.

266 * 4.5 = 1197 (~1.2)
333 * 3.5 = ~1166
333* 4 = ~1333

Take your pick....</strong><hr></blockquote>

We're talking double-pump here. So for 333 effective, you'd have a 166 mHz processor bus. And the Moto dude said that the current MX bus could do that.

166.666666667 * 7.5 = 1250.000025

Remember, each pulse of the 166 clock gets 2 chunks of data.

[kraig911]

theres some rumors out there that 1.2 is just the faster one, not the fastest. Man I wish I could convince our studio to upgrade i'm on a g3 400 :( anybody hiring graphic artist, I'm experienced in broadcast hehe.

Craig

[scottn]

Was speaking w/ a local apple authorized dealer today about the 933 / flat panel rebate.
He said I shouldn't buy anything right now.
He then said something about new product tomorrow at 9am ET.

He said he 'suspects' - but said it in a way like he maybe knew ??

1.0
1.2
1.4
with faster bus speeds

Said he did not know about pricing, but definitely said I should just wait until tomorrow.

not sure if this is accurate or what

[SuperMatt]

[quote]Originally posted by Toofeu:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I'm starting to be very tired of apple and its products, I can't believe that the specs are so low...
the intel world is reaching the 3 ghtz barrier and we get a 1.25 processor speed for more than 3000 dollars!!
I'll keep my old system for another 6 months.
:mad:
But this shouldn't come as a surprise, Apple knows so well how to let us down...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Give me a break. Do you really think that it's Apple's goal to sell slow computers? Anybody with half a brain can see that the big problem is that they're stuck with Motorola because all classic and carbon apps wouldn't run if they switched architectures, and IBM was concentrating their PowerPC efforts on server hardware. Dual 1.25-GHz machines will be close in performance to the high end p4 and AMD machines, especially for those things that use the vector processing units. Plus, the price drop on the current dual-1GHz tells us that the new machines will have a faster system bus or something else that makes them substantially better than the current offerings. Of course, if you want to go buy a cheapo PC, be my guest. Maybe it will come with Windows ME and it will help you build anger about something else other than "slow" powermac specs.

Matthew

[gfeier]

Interesting that most everyone is assuming that the predictions for the slowest machines are correct. Based on Apple's past performance, that's probably a safe bet, but somehow I'm not entirely convinced. Anyway, we'll know for sure in 12 hours or so.

Hey, lost my "junior" with this post!

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: gfeier ]</p>

[swimfast67]

Hi all, 1st post ever.
Anyways, if you go to the mother ship's web site and search for powermac, powerbook, and/or emac in the lower search bar and check the "starting at" price you see that the emac now starts at 999, not the apple store's 1099 or that the ti book starts at 2199 <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> and that the powermac now starts at 1699. Unless these pages haven't been updated since the stone ages, however it has the emac so this is unlikely, this would lead me to suggest that the leaked specs are right, at least in terms of price. Plus a couple of surprises :) :)

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by swimfast67:
<strong>Hi all, 1st post ever.
Anyways, if you go to the mother ship's web site and search for powermac, powerbook, and/or emac in the lower search bar and check the "starting at" price you see that the emac now starts at 999, not the apple store's 1099 or that the ti book starts at 2199 <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> and that the powermac now starts at 1699. Unless these pages haven't been updated since the stone ages, however it has the emac so this is unlikely, this would lead me to suggest that the leaked specs are right, at least in terms of price. Plus a couple of surprises :) :) </strong><hr></blockquote>

I'll be damned! You're right! Pics the same though... Hmmm...

[iMud]

Hey guys, I was seriously thinking of getting a new 17" imac then i see this dual 867 which actually has expansion slots, sure it doesnt have a nifty 17" widescreen display but apple will prolly make a 17" widescreen studio display.

Then i hear this 'Yikes!' stuff. Sorry I wasn't around for this, so could someone please explain it?

[@homenow]

[quote]Originally posted by Ptrash:
<strong>The specs may not be that bad. In fact the low end machine is a decent deal. But I think the reason people are venting at Apple is because they're tired of being let down. Of course in a way we're responsible for the high expectations, but if we didn't have those expectations, where would we be? Most peple on this board are Mac fanatics. A lot are in school, and feeling constantly beseiged by PC users. Anyone working in corporate America is in a similar situation. So there's this continual hope that, come the next Apple product upgrade, we're finally gonna get a computer that holds up hardware-wise (or moreover, spec-wise) to PCs. Only what we get is more dissapointment-once again meager increases in speed and technology-and prices that are way out of line (especially when considering that the new OS is not quite as simple to use as the old one, so you don't have that low IT support cost holding down overall costs like you used to).

How many times has this happened over the last 2-3 years? And then we have the Motorola situation; now the future of the platform is really up in the air. If Apple was a little more forthcoming, it might ease people's anxieties a bit. But, instead, Apple acts as if everything is fine, and that the only problem is the tanking economy. If anything, people on these boards are too passionate (about their Macs) and too loyal to Apple; the anger comes from feeling that the company take their support for granted.</strong><hr></blockquote>

People are venting becouse:

a) specs for lowered expectations again. Apple (Motorolla) is not delivering what they need to to make the swithch campaign work, or their move on the high end video market. These two moves helped fuel higher expectations.

b) the low end PowerMac, based on this rumour, is going up in price. A few years ago it was at $1499 if I recall, and Apple needs a computer that does not come with a monitor in a lower price range to attract consumers that do not have the money for a top end compter, but will not buy an all-in-one.

As a stock holder, I want Apple to make money. I dont have a problem with them coming out with higher end machines. But I want Jobs to come through with his goal to double market shares, and to do this he cannot ignore a whole product catagory that they can easily market to, which they are currently doing. Also to push into corperate and Video markets they need to get a solution to the dismal performance gains that Motorolla has been delivering.

As a consumer, I see no reason to replace my 450 cube for the forseable future. I have a dual gig at work and it is nice, but for home the 450 works fine. Its not even neccesarely the speed that is the problem, but the price/performance ratio and antiquated motherboard. Apple used to inovate, and stay near the high end in these areas. Lately they have sat still as the rest of the industry moved ahead. Now Apple needs a lot of catching up to do.

Steve, if you are listening, you better work harder for my money.

[Agent Cooper]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Hey guys, I was seriously thinking of getting a new 17" imac then i see this dual 867 which actually has expansion slots, sure it doesnt have a nifty 17" widescreen display but apple will prolly make a 17" widescreen studio display.

Then i hear this 'Yikes!' stuff. Sorry I wasn't around for this, so could someone please explain it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

When Apple first introduced the G4 they had a glut of G3 mainboards from the B&W G3. Legend has it that when SJ heard how many extra G# MainBoards they had he said "yikes!"

So... In order to clear out the inventory, the first generation of the G4s used the same MLB as the G3s. The main board was henceforth called the "yikes" board. Not until after they cleared out this inventory did they introduce the new MLB, sawtooth, which had AGP and the new CPU connector.

[Animaniac]

You think we can see a EST midnight update of the site?

[Eugene]

[quote]Originally posted by swimfast67:
<strong>Hi all, 1st post ever.
Anyways, if you go to the mother ship's web site and search for powermac, powerbook, and/or emac in the lower search bar and check the "starting at" price you see that the emac now starts at 999, not the apple store's 1099 or that the ti book starts at 2199 <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" /> and that the powermac now starts at 1699. Unless these pages haven't been updated since the stone ages, however it has the emac so this is unlikely, this would lead me to suggest that the leaked specs are right, at least in terms of price. Plus a couple of surprises :) :) </strong><hr></blockquote>

I suspect they haven't been updated in a while. The 550 MHz TiBook was $2199. The low-end 733 QuickSilver was $1699. It seems like the little search bar thingy is updated when new products are announced and forgotten about. The emac was introduced at $999 (institutional pricing.)

[cthulu]

"Interesting that most everyone is assuming that the predictions for the slowest machines are correct"

What bothers me most about the low end is how crippled it is.It is on a 133 bus,the top end is clearly a 166.The middle 1 ghrz could go either way.That sucks! Will it have no L3 cache as well? Think about it,if Apple can ship a 1.25 on a 166 bus then why not give us a 1 ghrz low end on a 166 bus and a middle system at 1166,both single processor.The faster single processor would look better and give better all around performance to the average user than the slower duel system.Only the top end should be duel.But of course Apple doesnt want you to buy the low end.Why not,we are all made of money.Computers for the rich of us! And I have a hard time believing that 1.25 is the fastest the G4 can go.People have been overclocking the 1 gig processors to 1.2 since it came out 6 months ago.I believe motorola has faster G4's.Apple is playing a suck the faithful dry game by shipping slower(cheaper) processors and keeping their profit margins sky high.This kind of lineup makes me dred there will be no imac/emac upgrade anytime (and yes a real upgrade includes faster processors,not slow burning combo drives).

[qazII]

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

I suspect they haven't been updated in a while. The 550 MHz TiBook was $2199. The low-end 733 QuickSilver was $1699. It seems like the little search bar thingy is updated when new products are announced and forgotten about. The emac was introduced at $999 (institutional pricing.)</strong><hr></blockquote>

Bingo. If you look at the file name of the QS image, you'll see the date was 7/18/01.

[swimfast67]

[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>

I suspect they haven't been updated in a while. The 550 MHz TiBook was $2199. The low-end 733 QuickSilver was $1699. It seems like the little search bar thingy is updated when new products are announced and forgotten about. The emac was introduced at $999 (institutional pricing.)</strong><hr></blockquote>

Never mind then... :mad: I was hoping to be the next big winner but I guess it was not to be <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> oh well, try again tomorrow

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: swimfast67 ]</p>

[iMud]

Thanks about the Yikes info.

So what do you think they will name the new case?

[keston]

[quote]Originally posted by marcsiry:
<strong>At the rate I'm billing that job, a day's work is at least $600. That's a third of the way to the difference between my current machine and the new topline Mac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

So basically your job pays for your computer, it it not an expense outside of work. The business is yours yes, but thats essentiually it... you're work pays for your setup. Well, not all of use get free computers from work ;) Alot of people who use macs do other things than work in photoshop <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[O and A]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Hey guys, I was seriously thinking of getting a new 17" imac then i see this dual 867 which actually has expansion slots, sure it doesnt have a nifty 17" widescreen display but apple will prolly make a 17" widescreen studio display.

Then i hear this 'Yikes!' stuff. Sorry I wasn't around for this, so could someone please explain it?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hope the low end has a superdrive
damn very underwhelming specs

[Animaniac]

I think we need a chat with the Steve...

[gsxrboy]

I image that with the 867, 1000 & 1250 speeds for the ddr Pmac the iMac will move up to a 133 bus with 800mhz (133 x 6) and 933mhz (133 x 7) and be bumped at Paris in mid September...

or maybe 867 (6.5) & 1000 (7.5) but I fear they will not do that

[Dual 867]

Hrm, this is odd...The Applestore now lists all models' estimated ship times as "1-2 days". Seems like they may be ready to ship sooner than we thought(I don't even want to mention the alternative).

-Dual 867

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Dual 867 ]</p>

[MacJedai]

Glad to see the Flames die down a bit between the optimists and the pessimists (to make easy generalizations for some folks).

Here's something I thought might be a good reminder for everyone.
----------------------
For those who feel determined to "flame" others who have higher levels of acceptable performance. Please keep in mind ... (related to a post I made long ago more finance related instead of "Yoda Related")

Complacency allows the Emperor to rule without a fight. Much Fear it creates; Fear leads to Pain; Pain leads to Suffering; Suffering leads to ... The Dark Side. Slow and painful it will be. It's better to seek and promote advancement through diligence and perserverance. Tenacious we must be in our our endevours to remind Apple of our "desired" path. Only then will we see advancement in our numbers; as few others see the true reality before them.

And gar, not all will waste the "power to be". Beware of generalizations.
----------------------
The bottom line is, keep your hopes/dreams alive ... and don't knock other peoples hopes or disappointments because you're satisfied with "less" and they aren't. That's why GM makes Chevrolet and Cadillac.

Me, I'm disappointed, but it also makes me optimistic, because if the rumor is true ... then we will be seeing the end of Motorola as the ProLine's CPU manufacturer and the beginning for a new manufacturer for the ProLine (this update is a stop-gap, yikes!). Moto will be "demoted" to the consumer line.

FWIW

[Animaniac]

The homepage (apple.com) isn't loading for me anymore.

[Analogue bubblebath]

[quote]Originally posted by keston:
<strong>

So basically your job pays for your computer, it it not an expense outside of work. The business is yours yes, but thats essentiually it... you're work pays for your setup. Well, not all of use get free computers from work ;) Alot of people who use macs do other things than work in photoshop <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Nice logic. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> Let me explain something to you. Since he owns the business, the money to buy his PowerMac have to come from his own pocket., right? And since he HAS to work to make the money, then he's not using his computer for free, now is he? And graphic designers use more than just Photoshop to do their work. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Analogue bubblebath ]</p>

[iMud]

[quote]
Originally posted by O and A:

Hope the low end has a superdrive
damn very underwhelming specs

<hr></blockquote>

Hmm, didnt think about that... If you take the current low-end powermac (800 mghz which comes with a cd-rw default) and up it to the same hardware as the imac: 80 gig HD, superdrive, GeForce4 MX video, and apple pro speakers, it comes out 59 dollars more than the 17" imac. And the new low-end price will be 100 more... What I need is a sugar-momma! :D

[I Have Questions]

[quote]Originally posted by Animaniac:
<strong>The homepage (apple.com) isn't loading for me anymore.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Works fine. AppleStore is the same.
11:53PM Eastern.

[Analogue bubblebath]

please delete this post

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Analogue bubblebath ]</p>

[rogue27]

It's great to see a level head there, yoda.

However, it doesn't change the fact that nobody knows how these computers actually perform, so there is no basis for all of the stupid ****ing angry faces and shaking head faces people are using. It's really irritating to see that shit every time Apple announces new hardware, especially when people type 3 in a row.

It's obvious that these people don't use their Macs for anything more complex than web surfing and Tetris based on the intelligence lacking in their postings, but they like to bitch and complain because their computers have smaller numbers than their Intel-loving friends.

Well, next time your Intel-Butt-Raiding friends throw numbers at you, just say 128-bit data path or 20 gigaflops and watch their eyes glaze over when they realize they have no ****ing clue what you are saying and spew out another witty comeback like, "huh, huh, 3 Ghz Pentium 4 r00lz!"

[Masker]

[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>guys, it looks like there won't be a new design tomorrow afterall, but I could be wrong. I found this on apple's site. http://search.apple.com/find/results/images/powermac071801.gif See, the price was bumped up 100 dollars. If you look at the current apple store, they say starting at 1599 as it has always been. Still keep your hopes up, I may be wrong.

[ 08-12-2002: Message edited by: Bioflavonoid ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

From another thread... I saw this same graphic while searching <a href="http://www.mammals.org" target="_blank">www.mammals.org</a> for the rterm PowerMac. I guess the point is that it shows the old case with the new pricing

SO no DynaCool technology? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

MSKR

[Nevyn]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Thanks about the Yikes info.

So what do you think they will name the new case?</strong><hr></blockquote>

The 'Oh God I hope an IBM 8CPU Power7 comes real soon now'.

Or maybe the 'Buhbye Motorola'

Apple's 'official' names have gotten very boring. This would be the 'Aug 2002 PowerMac XXXMHz' or something similar.

It was more interesting with code names like 'Cold Fusion' or 'Tsunami'.

[rogue27]

"Throbbin' Meat Slicer" would be a good name for a future PowerMac.

[keyboardf12]

well said rogue27.

[iMud]

Ok, here is something to do if your bored, the pdf for the powermac is <a href="http://a272.g.akamai.net/7/272/2041/e1af30a8eaf5ae/www.apple.com/r/store/infoblock/pdf/PowerMacG4DS_2002.pdf" target="_blank">http://a272.g.akamai.net/7/272/2041/e1af30a8eaf5ae/www.apple.com/r/store/infoblock/pdf/PowerMacG4DS_2002.pdf</a> Lets see if we can figure out the new name and find the pdf for the new powermacs thats prolly sitting there unlinked...

[AVALONdesign]

Ok, I just ordered a Dual 1GHz machine on Aug 02. It still hasn't shipped yet.
I think I'm gonna cancel my order...

[Animaniac]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Ok, here is something to do if your bored, the pdf for the powermac is <a href="http://a272.g.akamai.net/7/272/2041/e1af30a8eaf5ae/www.apple.com/r/store/infoblock/pdf/PowerMacG4DS_2002.pdf" target="_blank">http://a272.g.akamai.net/7/272/2041/e1af30a8eaf5ae/www.apple.com/r/store/infoblock/pdf/PowerMacG4DS_2002.pdf</a> Lets see if we can figure out the new name and find the pdf for the new powermacs thats prolly sitting there unlinked...</strong><hr></blockquote>


In all likelyhood it's on a different Akamai server.

[OverToasty]

Owwww , I can see it now.

"So, you've just spent $3300 for a 1.2 Ghz Apple computer in 2002 ... here's your shame-bag, we'll let you cut your own holes for your eyes ... and if you ever want to switch back, we'll be right here waiting for you ...

... and you'll get to take off the bag!

Sincerely
Michael Dell,
Bill Gates
Blah blah blah"

Man this is gonna hurt, I just hope this transition phase isn't long.

[Xaqtly]

[quote]Originally posted by rogue27:
<strong>"Throbbin' Meat Slicer" would be a good name for a future PowerMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

BWAAHAHAHAHA!

*gasp*

*wipes tear*

[AVALONdesign]

The Order Status page at the Apple store isn't loading...I want to see if my dang computer has shipped yet.

[iMud]

Everyone and there dog is checing the site for any news of the new powermacs, keep trying you will get through :)

[JustAGuy]

Wow, six pages of comments and nobody's looked at this upgrade in terms of Moore's Law yet. If you shrink Moore's Law down to the 6 month scale the increase is, well, 25%.

1.0GHz -&gt; 1.25GHz = about 15-20% improvement (ish)
133 FSB -&gt; 166 FSB = about 20-25% improvement
DDR -&gt; 5-10% improvement

Add all that together and you get 45 - 65 % increase in system performance, roughly double Moore's Law. In short, I'd be impressed if this (the dual 1.2 rumour) is what we see tomorrow. The 1.6 rumour is right out.

Edit: Granted, Moore's Law is variously interpreted to mean a) the # of transistors on a chip b) the processor clock cycle or c) overall system performance. The most commonly used, however, is c.

Edit: Me spel gud

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: JustAGuy ]</p>

[TigerWoods99]

Why is Apple raising prices? You see, when you "improve" a computer model, it does not mean you "improve" the price.

Do you think they'll bundle the new towers with a fire extinguisher if we get that case that was possted? :)

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]Originally posted by JustAGuy:
<strong>Wow, six pages of comments and nobody's looked at this upgrade in terms of Moore's Law yet. If you shrink Moore's Law down to the 6 month scale the increase is, well, 25%.

1.0GHz -&gt; 1.25GHz = about 15-20% improvement (ish)
133 FSB -&gt; 166 FSB = about 20-25% improvement
DDR -&gt; 5-10% improvement

Add all that together and you get 45 - 65 % increase in system performance, roughly double Moore's Law. In short, I'd be impressed if this (the dual 1.2 rumour) is what we see tomorrow. The 1.6 rumour is right out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ya, but doesn't moore's law also say that processor speed would double every 18 months? I could be wrong, I don't really know much about the law, I just heard that.

[iMud]

Dual 1ghz price would actually be 500 dollars lower than it is now for the new model.

[Xaqtly]

Maybe they're raising prices because they're going to offer dual processor models instead of single processor ones. maybe it's because they're adding a standard Superdrive and an extra 256 MB of RAM to the baseline, who knows? Don't jump to conclusions about Apple raising prices when you know nothing about what's coming.

[JustAGuy]

[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>
Ya, but doesn't moore's law also say that processor speed would double every 18 months? I could be wrong, I don't really know much about the law, I just heard that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yup, that's one way to look at it (see my original post for an edit to that effect). If we do look at it in this particular way (and ignore all the other bits and pieces) then we are right on track with Moore's Law at 1.25GHz.

I do believe that the original Moore's Law was simply an observance that the # of transistors on a chip was doubling every 18 months (correct me if I'm wrong).

I find it amusing that the generally accepted Moore's Law we have today is neither a) by Moore nor b) a law (it's just an observation)...

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: JustAGuy ]</p>

[Bioflavonoid]

[quote]Originally posted by JustAGuy:
<strong>

Yup, that's one way to look at it (see my original post for an edit to that effect). If we do look at it in this particular way (and ignore all the other bits and pieces) then we are right on track with Moore's Law at 1.25GHz.

I do believe that the original Moore's Law was simply an observance that the # of transistors on a chip was doubling every 18 months (correct me if I'm wrong).

I find it amusing that the generally accepted Moore's Law we have today is neither a) by Moore nor b) a law (it's just an observation)...

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: JustAGuy ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ya, I don't really know if it is processor or transistors...
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[Eugene]

[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>
Ya, but doesn't moore's law also say that processor speed would double every 18 months? I could be wrong, I don't really know much about the law, I just heard that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Moore's Law is something like "2x transistors every 18 months."

If it took 7 months to get from 1 GHz to 1.25

If you start from 1 GHz and add 25% compounded every 7 months, after 21 months you'd almost be at 2x the clock speed.

[Masker]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Thanks about the Yikes info.

So what do you think they will name the new case?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Maybe the G4 Dual 867 Holy Mary Mother of God?

Depending of course on mobo inventory...

MSKR

[Bioflavonoid]

I would call it reloaded.

[Animaniac]

Moore's law says that transitors will grow exponentially at a base of 10 (10x) every year, I believe. We're no where near that with the G4.

[iMud]

I don't think Moore considered Moto when he made up his law :p

[tsukurite]

[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>I don't think Moore considered Moto when he made up his law :p </strong><hr></blockquote>

Moto is the exception that proves the rule. :D

[Jim Paradise]

Seriously... think about it. iMacs still only 800 mhz? And we would expect PowerMacs to get to what? 1.4 ghz? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />