Is Apple making way for the 970?
I'm just wondering if Apple's doing all of these upgrades for the 970 and beyond. Apple's usual upgrade window is 6 months (at least for the powermac), and almost everything in thier line has been bumped up.
We aren't seeing any leaps and bounds here....which leads me to believe that Apple is preparing their machines for the next generation.
With the G4 in thier present state (from what I've read) reaching thier limit, Apple may be getting the small upgrades out of the way in time for this fall
Time will tell
We aren't seeing any leaps and bounds here....which leads me to believe that Apple is preparing their machines for the next generation.
With the G4 in thier present state (from what I've read) reaching thier limit, Apple may be getting the small upgrades out of the way in time for this fall
Time will tell
Comments
The G4 is scaling well enough to add beef to the lower and midrange lineups.
I'd like to see a PPC970 2U or 3U Xserve with more grunt.
The iBook may go G4 in one model soon now that 130nm G4's are coming.
If you look , boot powerbook and i mac 2 lines, you will see that they did not change all the line. The 17 inch and 12 inch powerbook are build upon a new design, the 15 inch is the old design. For the i mac 2 the 17 inch is the new design (with the DDR mobo and ATA 100) and the 15 inch is the old design with a smaller prize.
eMac- 1Ghz G4
iMac- 1.25-1.6 G4
PM- 1.4-1.8 PPC 970.
Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz?
For once we'd have some true seperation between the lines. Hopefully then Apple could offer the same Base connectivity(even down to Gigabit) and the choice to consumers would simply be speed, RAM and HD size.
<strong>If you look , boot powerbook and i mac 2 lines, you will see that they did not change all the line. The 17 inch and 12 inch powerbook are build upon a new design, the 15 inch is the old design. </strong><hr></blockquote>
No, I think we have the old 15" Powerbook still around solely because of inventory purposes. As soon as the channel clears (enough), we should see a 15" AlBook treat.
Screed
[quote] Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz?
<hr></blockquote>
Nope because a 970 at 1.4 Gig would beat the snot out of a 1.6 Gig G4!
It's clear to me that Apple cpu land is like a damn that is about to burst. Years of pent up cpu angst and POW!
970 hits!
G4 gets it's sorry arse kicked into the consumer line. Thought the Powerbook may see a '57' G4 at 1.3 or something.
970 hits the 'power'Macs. It's pretty elementary. Should boost the flagging 'flagship' quite a bit.
We're just going to have to wait another four months or so for it.
Macworld New York. Let's hope Apple saved the best for the last.
Lemon Bon Bon
[quote]eMac- 1Ghz G4
iMac- 1.25-1.6 G4
PM- 1.4-1.8 PPC 970.
<hr></blockquote>
Something like that.
I think the Dead Parrot called it with his assessment of Apple's everything at once revamp.
That's the winter line up.
The Summer line up is looking for a similar revamp but with far deeper reaching ramifications for performance. Hopefully the kind we've been waiting years for.
[ 02-11-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]
[ 02-11-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
That should give the consumer line a decent boost up to the faster Moto chips (and newer low power ones) as well. (Personally, I'm hoping for powerful silent consumer machines.)
However, I suspect MWNY may be too early for a release of the 970 kit. So, do not be disappointed if it doesn't arrive for some time after that late Q3 or early Q4. Then, we'll all be happy, but Apple always takes its sweet time. Plus, it's important they have a flawless (hardware, if not software as well) release. The 970 update needs to be a strong no-brainer for all those with a wait-and-see attitude.
<strong>The thing I have to wonder is how long the OS9-booting PMs are going to hang around. I'd hate to see Apple having to hold off launching the new hardware just because Quark haven't got their act together, and with the announcement of MS Exchange compatibility with X coming along, Xpress is going to be the last bastion of market resistance...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple wont hold off high end computers for Quark. They may continue selling last years dual 1.2 Ghz longer than they stated, though I doubt it. Apple has held off long enough for Quark, and it is cutting into Apples revenues.
<strong>
Apple wont hold off high end computers for Quark. They may continue selling last years dual 1.2 Ghz longer than they stated, though I doubt it. Apple has held off long enough for Quark, and it is cutting into Apples revenues.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Although, if they kept selling the old Dual 1.25 "leafblower" side by side with all-new, screaming 970-based PowerMacs, Quark users might be that much more willing to look at InDesign, or some other alternative.
However, I don't expect Apple to keep the old Dual G4 going past July. Quark was supposed to release XPress this past November. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<strong>Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This shouldn't an issue -- consider the following:
PowerMacintosh G5 with a 1.4 GHz 64-bit processor and SuperBus(tm) technology.
LCD iMac with a 1.6 GHz G4.
Which would you buy?
<strong>Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Steve's a persuasive fellow.
The 64-bitness, the dual FPUs... I can design a DISTURBING demo comparing them -> the Demo-design team's probably been drooling over this chip for a couple of years now. And they've had nothing better to do then tweak for, um, YEARS.
If you call the 970 by a new name (G5, G6, GX, GXtreme, etc.) it'll be the same break as between the G3 & the G4. The 'new chip' >> G4. Major chip changes have always been pretty easy to sell - even when the G3 wasn't comparing well at all to the ppc 604e on numerically intensive code.
PowerMacintosh G5 with a 1.4 GHz 64-bit processor and SuperBus(tm) technology.<hr></blockquote>
Not SuperBus, System Bus Extreme©®?!!! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Also, would it be possible to put a 970 in a PowerBook?
But I wouldn't be surprised to see the lower tower stay with a G4. Know why? To sell to those who see the stunning 20" ACD and crave it but not enough to buy a $1700 970. The G4 could be the headless iMac (a dual 1.25 or single 1.42). Apple would maintain a good profit margin on the combo via selling the big screen.
Leafblower! ha ha ha. (I don't get out that much.)
First of all, "leafblower"? I hadn't heard that one!
<hr></blockquote>
Personally I prefer "PowerMac G4 Turbo" since it has a better connotation.
<strong>First of all, "leafblower"? I hadn't heard that one!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's what people were calling the original MDD PowerMacs on the Apple Support Forums.
<strong>First of all, "leafblower"? I hadn't heard that one!
But I wouldn't be surprised to see the lower tower stay with a G4. Know why? To sell to those who see the stunning 20" ACD and crave it but not enough to buy a $1700 970. The G4 could be the headless iMac (a dual 1.25 or single 1.42). Apple would maintain a good profit margin on the combo via selling the big screen.
Leafblower! ha ha ha. (I don't get out that much.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
you mean $1700 to $2700 G4 and $3700 970. Apple has to get a top of the line machine not just add a new chip to the middle of the run, I'd think.