or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by G-News

No offense dude, but there have been far too many post of "an Apple rep told me"... If all those posts were true, there would have been about 1000 Apple reps at MWSF and everyone would have told something else. I don't buy this crap anymore. Speculation is fine, but saying false things about others isn't really ok anymore. If you have a theory about future hardware, post it under your own label, and not that of some innocent Apple rep you probably didn't even see, even...
All due respect to you, Sir, but that Sig sucks. That being a sidenote. I see teh lack of speed bump and comparison rather as a hint to a soon-to-come speed revolution. If Steve can deliver a 1.6GHz G5, and if the G5 is really that much faster as some sources told us, then he'll be glad to beat the P4 2.2GHz by a factor of 2 or even more. Of course that is the more optimistic version, the pessimist would say that Apple is going to be dead by 2003. G-News
It's hard to say. There are basically two things that might happen: If the G5 isn't coming anytime soon, they'll release new PowerMacs with new motherboards and DDR RAM (if possible, not sure, but think so) together with the Apollo chip, that'd make sense. But if he G5 is coming soon and they decide to give us another speed bump before the first G5 Macs are actually released, then there will be only a MHz bump, no other changes to the mainboard, that would be a waste of...
Two things that might clarify a few questions: -The G5, if there is a version for Apple or from Apple even, might well start at above 1GHz, even if the G4 doesn't clock well at all, simply because the G5 is a completely new architecture, it'sn not an evolutionary step as from the 603 to the G3 and from the 604 to the G4, the G5 is based on the Bluebook (or similar) called architecture idea that is a co-development of IBM and Moto. -AMD is currenty having trouble getting...
Speed is less important to Sun, as all their servers come in MP configurations anyway. And the workstations don't have to compete with PCs anywhere, they have their own scientific marketshare. a 72 way SMP Ultra Sparc 3 supercomputer beats every wintel machine, there's no need to change the chip. G-News
If it's evolutionary, it's going to be a QS case with an extra 5.25" bay, thus a little higher. If it's going to be revolutionary, which is more likely, I doubt anyone will be able to design it, they failed with the iMac too, altogether. However I think it's going to be a more use and less looks oriented design. Square shapes a more stackable and more space effective, and with Apple wanting to enter the server market, it'd make sense. Maybe there will even be a 19"...
That makes sense, and I hope it's going to be like that, yet I doubt it, since Apple so far always failed to actually outrun the PC performance wise. Their design keeps being revolutionary, but even the GeForce 3 on Mac first, was just a lie or a misunderstanding...too bad. G-News
I'd embrace it as an option for BTO, but not as standard. Wireless keyboards and mice are generally a lot less responsive than their corded brethren, thus not suitable for graphics artists, gamers and the like. G-News
I'd also say that we'll see an increase in screen size for the new iMac, whenever the next biggest screen has dropped in price to the level of the prior used one. I hope that isn't too complicated to understand. ie 17" LCD in a year latest. G-News
not too hard, the jump from teh last P2 core to the first P3 core (Katmai) was rather a slip than a jump. Later P3 cores where quite different though. The P4 also varies already. Northwood si partially a lot faster than Willamette, especially since it has more L2 cache.
New Posts  All Forums: