Centrino: How Does Apple Respond?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
The title says it all--Inte;'s new chipset is cooler, more efficient and gives pretty great battery life, as confirmed by CNET tests. A lot of Apple's superiority rests in these areas...how will they respond? *Can* they respond? Is a PPC970 variant possible that really makes long battery life a reality?



[ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: mrmister ]</p>
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 63
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    .....developers developers developers.......
  • Reply 2 of 63
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    The 1.2v (low voltage) variant of the 970 has already been announced.
  • Reply 2 of 63
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    .13u G4's. It's well in hand.



    Also keep in mind that Intel is pushing this spec solitaire, they aren't licensing the chip set to third party logic board makers, though I think they can get themselves a banias chip and role their own.



    7457's were listed on Mot's site but iDunno what happened to mention of it, and they will positively sip power while bumping L2 to 512KB and adding a minimum 167Mhz FSB (and probably 200Mhz) and then 266-333DDR when 7457rm arrives. Remember, what Apple gets from it's laptops it manages with .18u CPU's, a drop to .13u will be quite dramatic.
  • Reply 4 of 63
    spookyspooky Posts: 504member
    they won't.
  • Reply 5 of 63
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Um, yeah. How does Apple respond to something they've been having for over a year?



    Centrino specifies



    - integrated WLAN using the 'a' and 'b' specs. The 'a' spec is useless. The 'b' spec is AirPort Classic.



    - weight no higher than 3 kg. My iBook is 2.2 kg.



    - battery life of up to 8 hours. When an Intel representative at CeBit was asked for actual numbers, she said "the best implementation so far offers up to 5 theoretical and 4 actual hours". The iBook 14 inch has 6 *real* hours.



    - I don't think there's anything more interesting to it. It's just a specification for a low-power laptop with wireless capabilities.
  • Reply 6 of 63
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    [quote]Originally posted by Chucker:

    <strong>Um, yeah. How does Apple respond to something they've been having for over a year?



    Centrino specifies



    - integrated WLAN using the 'a' and 'b' specs. The 'a' spec is useless. The 'b' spec is AirPort Classic.



    - weight no higher than 3 kg. My iBook is 2.2 kg.



    - battery life of up to 8 hours. When an Intel representative at CeBit was asked for actual numbers, she said "the best implementation so far offers up to 5 theoretical and 4 actual hours". The iBook 14 inch has 6 *real* hours.



    - I don't think there's anything more interesting to it. It's just a specification for a low-power laptop with wireless capabilities.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I have an iBook 14" and it does not have 6 *real* hours of battery life. More like 4.
  • Reply 7 of 63
    coolmaccoolmac Posts: 259member
    I think the bottom line is that Intel keeps innovating their processors while Apple stagnates with the G4 processor.



    Until Apple actually changes processors to IBM or Intel this wil be the situation.



    I can understand why Apple fans (of which I am one) don't like Windows as an OS compared to OS X, but give credit where credit is due.



    Why an innovative company like Apple is still using a stagnant chip like the G4 is beyond me when AMD, Intel and IBM are creating faster and better processors.



    Apple should quickly pull their own "switch" campagn when it comes to the processors they use.
  • Reply 8 of 63
    kidredkidred Posts: 2,402member
    Ah, ok. The G4 sucks, Apple should just give up and close shop. Even tho the 970 has been in the works for a while now and even tho the 970 will DESTROY almost everything available, Apple's current chip shortcomings should lead them to close it down.



    As noted above not many advantages over Apple's ' 'stagnant' G4 . Do you even own an iBook or pBook?
  • Reply 9 of 63
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Actually, this is just Intel playing catch-up. Apple has not been sitting still, as anyone following the 970 rumors can attest. I can guarantee that they're more frustrated with the G4 than anyone here, and they haven't been sitting on their hands.



    I think it says something that, basically, they've caught up to the G3 iBook.
  • Reply 10 of 63
    spookyspooky Posts: 504member
    [quote]Originally posted by KidRed:

    <strong>Ah, ok. The G4 sucks, Apple should just give up and close shop. Even tho the 970 has been in the works for a while now and even tho the 970 will DESTROY almost everything available, Apple's current chip shortcomings should lead them to close it down.



    As noted above not many advantages over Apple's ' 'stagnant' G4 . Do you even own an iBook or pBook? </strong><hr></blockquote>





    how exctly will the 970 destroy almost evrything available. from what I've read so far the 970 will at least keep pace with current top of the line offerings from intel. By the time the 970 comes out and given apple's staggering inability to see the great gap (and their willingness to happily offer under powered/specced hardware) the competition will kill the 970. what are mac users supposed to do? hang on until the 970 matures? just we're supposed to hang on until X matures ?

  • Reply 11 of 63
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    [quote]Originally posted by spooky:

    <strong>





    how exctly will the 970 destroy almost evrything available. from what I've read so far the 970 will at least keep pace with current top of the line offerings from intel. By the time the 970 comes out and given apple's staggering inability to see the great gap (and their willingness to happily offer under powered/specced hardware) the competition will kill the 970. what are mac users supposed to do? hang on until the 970 matures? just we're supposed to hang on until X matures ?

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Once the 970 reaches the point where it's actually making it's way into machines, it should be past the point of having to mature. OS X is plenty mature.
  • Reply 12 of 63
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    The 7457 is 10W at 1 GHz based on Mot published <a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7457&nodeId=018rH3bTdG865 3" target="_blank">documents.</a> Which isn't to shabby and there back to showing the G5 and G6.
  • Reply 13 of 63
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>.13u G4's. It's well in hand....</strong><hr></blockquote>



    And Motorola has announced in a press release the MPC7457 & MPC7447 will produced in the FOURTH QUARTER of 2003. Hope they don't let that slip too much further or it may not make its' way into very many computer models, if any.
  • Reply 14 of 63
    spookyspooky Posts: 504member
    [quote]Originally posted by iBrowse:

    <strong>



    Once the 970 reaches the point where it's actually making it's way into machines, it should be past the point of having to mature. OS X is plenty mature.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    so where exactly is the evidence that it will destory almost everything? this sounds like a softening up campaign from apple themselves a la megahertz myth. the same Bs was spouted with the "blazing power" of the G4 and look what happened to that.



    and as for X being "plenty mature" I guess that even with the fastest mac hardware out there its still not as fast as 9.2.2. I guess its also why 10.2.4 is so poor.



    As a long time mac fanatic I see no reason for optimism once you cut through all the hype about the 970 that is being heralded as the saviour. It sounds like a fast chip - that's it. tomorrow it will be a reasonably fast chip. the day after it will be a once fast chip. by the time apple impliment it it will be an average chip.
  • Reply 15 of 63
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    Sheesh Spooky your pessimism knows no bounds.



    This is the "New" Apple we're talking about. Their swingin' for the fences on this one.
  • Reply 16 of 63
    spookyspooky Posts: 504member
    I'm desperately hoping That I'm wrong and making a fool of myself. nothing would make me happier than to wake up to headlines about the 970. as a mac user from the beginning the last three years for me have seen stagnated chip speeds, low bus speeds, an aeon to get DDR, no Quadro/wildcat level graphics cards, peeling paint on my tibook, three dead emacs in succession, removing l2 and l3 cache on certain machines, a 1.5GB memory limit. cracks in my cube, 12 studio displays dead inside of 9 months, 10.2.4 totalling my dualie, peripherals that worked in 10.1.5 stopped working in 10.2, bizarre battery behaviour with my brand new ibook under 10.2.4, kernel panics by the truckload until Jagwire and, worst of all, my students are now spending more time at home on their PCs because everything renders faster.



    I wish they'd stop fixating on white surfaces (which keep needing cleaning) and shiny metal (which scratches when you look at it) and focus on the system - hardware and software.



    I want to feel the awe I felt with the original Macintosh, the IIfx and the B&W G3



    maybe the new apple is not for the likes of me
  • Reply 17 of 63
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    Its more than just Intel playing catch-up. The Centrino platform is supposed to be much more powerful clock-for-clock than the P4-M:



    from the Reg:

    Running flat out the 1.6GHz Pentium M can out-perform a 2.5GHz Pentium 4-M by around 12-15 per cent. Early independent reports suggest up to seven hours of battery life.



    And in keeping with Intel's ability to scale processors will be clocking up quite quickly. Its going to go 0.09u fab very soon as well, which means much faster speeds and/or lower power consumption.



    Only things that can hold it back (other than the Wintel thing) is that the 802.11b is supposed to be a crap implementation, (but then again corporate only cares about 802.11a--so the "a" spec is not useless), and mfgs can't really roll their own. They have to buy the whole platform (Centrino isn't a chip but a platform spec), or risk losing Intel advertising dollars if they go a la carte.



    The 7457 isn't here until Q4 2003 at 1.3GHZ. Of course Apple gets unspecified higher clocked chips, but it seems that a 0.09u 970 is the real answer to Centrino.



    [ 03-13-2003: Message edited by: cowerd ]</p>
  • Reply 17 of 63
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    Very well said Spooky.



    We've had a little too much "sizzle" and not enough "steak"



    I'd like to see performance take precedence over looks. I mean I like the Industrial Design but let's make the internal a work of art as well.
  • Reply 19 of 63
    cliveclive Posts: 720member
    [quote]Originally posted by spooky:

    <strong>

    just we're supposed to hang on until X matures ?

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    It's just us slimey limies that hate X, the septics lap it up. :-)



    I think though that you're talking Apples and Oranges (as our cousins across the Atlantic say). The 970 is the beginning of a new round of chip revisions. You'll remember that at the beginning of the last few sets of chip revisions (604/G3/G4) Apple pretty much caught up with or surpassed Intel performance. In some respects (laptops for example) Apple is still way ahead of Intel (though a friend of mine loves showing off his Dell with 1600*1200 screen - running MacOS 8.6.1, some how).



    I think the 970 will show a clean pair of heels to Intel - and it'll have IBM behind it to drive forward performance on their server boxes - rather than Motorola trying to make cheap/low-power applications.



    As to MacOS X - er, yeah, not mature, yet. Some nice features, but really lacking in some basic usability IMO.
  • Reply 20 of 63
    cliveclive Posts: 720member
    [quote]Originally posted by iBrowse:

    <strong>

    OS X is plenty mature.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Ha, ha, ha!



    Do you really believe that, or are you just having us on?
Sign In or Register to comment.