or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Updated Apple hardware is coming soon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Updated Apple hardware is coming soon - Page 2

post #41 of 241
Why is it that "Dorsal M" doesn't sound much like the old "Dorsal"?
post #42 of 241
On the contrary. The writing style is very similar. Dorsal was right smack on once, and once quite off. It could be argued that since he seems to deal closely with hardware that he would not be privy to release dates etc for the test boxes he has access to. In other words, we can expect him to be wrong sometimes WRT to dates, but his overall description of feature sets should coalesce at some point.

I read what he/she writes very carefully. Like always, remain sceptical, and believe only as much as you want to believe. For me, Dorsal's posts are entertaining and more true than most.
Registered: Dec 1998
Reply
Registered: Dec 1998
Reply
post #43 of 241
I am sceptical, but inclined to believe that he is the "Real" Dorsal. Doral has always said he tests proto-type machines. That means we cannot either confirm nor disprove what he is saying.

1. Machines he tests might never be released.

2. He claims to have a G5 but the machine may be no where near ready for public release.

3. The enclosure he has "Quicksilver" is unlikely to be used in the model sold to the public.

4. The fact that he has not recieved any duel processors does not mean that they will not exist. In fact it probably means that the G5 is a long way from release.

5. I think he assumption of two pro lines could indeed be true. G4 = PowerMacs G5=SuperMacs Apple has to have models to suit all price levels. If ther G5 is that good and it is expensive, then they cannot aford to abandon the main pro customer base. The G5 will sell and I am sure it is formly aimed at the SGI market place.

6. This is a rumor site, never forget that. Courtesy costs nothing.
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
post #44 of 241
During the last 2 years that I visit this forum I never understood why people believe Dorsal. During these 2 years EVERY statement that he made was wrong or it was what everybody anticipated to be released. He offered not even ONE breakthrough or accurate information and to be on the safe site he just said that he "is testing prototypes" and that he "was surprised that apple did not release the machines that he had tested". But people here just kiss his .... as if he is some kind of God that they are afraid that he will leave the forum.

Bezbozny.
....
And, as his strength
Failed him at length,
He met a pilgrim shadow-
Shadow, said he,
Where can it be-
This land of Eldorado?
....
E.A.P
Reply
....
And, as his strength
Failed him at length,
He met a pilgrim shadow-
Shadow, said he,
Where can it be-
This land of Eldorado?
....
E.A.P
Reply
post #45 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Bezbozny:
<strong>During the last 2 years that I visit this forum I never understood why people believe Dorsal. During these 2 years EVERY statement that he made was wrong or it was what everybody anticipated to be released. He offered not even ONE breakthrough or accurate information and to be on the safe site he just said that he "is testing prototypes" and that he "was surprised that apple did not release the machines that he had tested". But people here just kiss his .... as if he is some kind of God that they are afraid that he will leave the forum.

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


He was right that we would stay at ATA/66 when we all thought it had to be ATA/100. Everyone was shocked. Yes, he has been wrong too.

I am still not sure about his stuff. It would very easy to make it up from publicly available data. And, as others have pointed out, he always seems to give two scenarios, one relatively pessmistic and one moderately to very optimistic. Then, when something close to either one is released, he gains trust.

Watch:

"We have in our possession what we believe to be two different machines from Apple in test box enclosures. They look the same but perform very different. The first, appears to be based on the PPC 7451:

933MHZ
133MHZ Bus
ATA/66
PC133 RAM

The second is much different. It has what appears to be a the PPC 8500 family of processor in it, running at 1.5 GHZ. Performance is staggering. It supports PC 2100 or P2700 and also has some parts moved around for heat dissipation.

We don't know when the products will be released.

Really, what has he said here?

But, my gut still tells me to believe him anyway. Sure, it could be BS.....who knows. But everyone has to make a call here and mine goes FOR him, not against.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #46 of 241
I think that I do believe him.

He was quite right once. True, was not right the second time but it just goes to show that Apple is not going to keep to his product release timeframe. Apple will release new hardware when they are ready.

He really does not say when the G5 would ship. I have to think the specs are pretty close.

All in all, I think this is pretty reasonable.

post #47 of 241
[quote]A 500Mhz bus would beat intel's P4s bus.<hr></blockquote>

Umm... no. Intel will release P4s on an 800MHz FSB soon.

Dorsal, how is performance on those machines? Are they 64 bit? What OS do they run? how is performance of your apps without recompiling? With recompiling?
Soyons réalistes, Demandons l'impossible.
Reply
Soyons réalistes, Demandons l'impossible.
Reply
post #48 of 241
One thing bugs me why doesn't "Dorsal" post more often or respond to the doubters?

He could address some of the doubters without giving his identity away. Some info obviously would lead to his identification.

It seems starange the he has macnines to test but can't give any real info as to performance of applications.
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
post #49 of 241
Hm now, Intel currently has Quad 100MHz FSB for 400MHz effective, and will be moving to quad 133 for 533 effective. That already mean the have to move to 1066MHz RDRAM, which costs a LOT at the moment. moving to quad 200 or octo 100 for 800 is very unlikely if you ask me, they'd eitehr have to change the Ram controllers to run at the same speed as teh FSB, which is very unlikely, as the FSB is at least 32bit while RDRAM is only 16 bit, thus requires double the Mhz to perform the same.
Concluded that means a 800MHz FSB would need 1.6GHz RDRAM, which I find is way off yet.

I wonder where you read about that 800MHz FSB.

G-news
Matyoroy!
Reply
Matyoroy!
Reply
post #50 of 241
Dorsal has had some very accurate information in the past. Go back and read his previous postings if you want to know what they were. Suffice it to say I put sigificant weight in what he says, but still take it with a grain of salt.
post #51 of 241
800 effective MHz could well be equal to 4*16bit@400 Mhz RAMBUS or 2*16bit@800MHz RAMBUS channels. The downside to this is that RDRAM would have to be added in either groups of four or in pairs.
post #52 of 241
I think most of his most accurate predictions were lost when the AI hosting company disappeared during the last prolonged AI blackout. Those archives were a huge resource and it's a shame that they are gone.

I wish I cad kept some of the more detailed posts.
Registered: Dec 1998
Reply
Registered: Dec 1998
Reply
post #53 of 241
jw pepper

hi!

the original "dorsal" never did post much and rarely responded directly to posters. im one of the old posters from the earlier ai board and remember scrolling through pages, and pages, of posts looking for the rare "dorsal" post.

this "dorsal" "sounds" like the old one.

does anybody here remember last year reading posts about apple delibratly sendnig out test machines with tiny diffrences in them to smoke out nda breakers? i remember "dorsal" from last spring writing about the oddly shaped curved feet of the box he was sent and couldn't picture it in my mind. is that maybe one of those "tiny diffrences" used to check up on testers?

however i read his and other's posts mostly for entertainment
post #54 of 241
As I recall he was dead on the first time around but this was long before AI was down all those months and it seems those messages are long gone. I think he may just get ahead of himself, thinking that what he has now is what will be announced next when in reality it was what he had a few months ago. I think the only thing we can do is dig up what he has said since AI came back online. The comment about there being four USB hubs raises an eyebrow though. Logic would dictate this means two USB ports on the computer and two on the keyboard just as they describe the new iMac as having five USB ports in this manner. I hope he comes back and answers my questions.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: apple.otaku ]</p>
Stuck in an infinite loop waiting for an Apple PDA...

apple.otaku
Reply
Stuck in an infinite loop waiting for an Apple PDA...

apple.otaku
Reply
post #55 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:
<strong>Nostradamus = Dorsal</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, Nostradamus = PowerMac G4/codename from the old AI.
post #56 of 241
the sad thing is at one point i archived the boards daily for awhile as a lark before they went down because they were getting so intresting. and i just assumed ai archived them as well! lol (not that these are the pentagon papers or anything but still)

and now amongst my hundreds of cdrw's i cannot find them! there was a great flame war when i first came on (we got invaded by folks from another board) i usually posted late at night when i got home and decided to save them.

those were the days...
post #57 of 241
Even the posts still in the AI database have a certain credible feel to them, in my opinion. He claims to be a testing engineer of some sort, and his writing reflects that... and so does the content. The complete miss back in May of last year jivves perfectly with the complete miss of anything really new at MWNY -- there is a strong feeling that Apple decided to pull their new PowerMacs at that point. They were probably pulled for parts supply or economic reasons, and nothing has shown up since then because it would make the iMac look like a much bigger leap than it was (a cool new consumer Mac with the performance of the mid-range PowerMac... err, well sorta).

Dorsal's late-2001 posts and this one fit together very nicely, and are sufficiently far apart and well thought out that it makes it unlikely that they are completely fake... fakers do it because they like the attention and usually post too frequently and with too much verbosity to be credible. Dorsal has been around long enough, posted rarely enough, and with enough detail and consistency that I tend to believe he is what he claims.

The technical details are very believable. No dual G5s make sense because if it is really that fast then one processor will be enough for now, and shipping duals would impact the supply problems for the new chip. The 4x USB thing posted before was based on the actual existance of the extra posts, so it is plausible and who knows maybe the other poster guessed right and Dorsal is just confirming this. The lack of timeframe is frustrating, but it makes sense that he doesn't know when they will show up on the market since he's just working with prototypes. This does confirm the existance of G5 prototypes in a fairly advanced state.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #58 of 241
ahhh eskimo!
i wondered where codename went to...
why did codename change his codename? lol
post #59 of 241
Dorsal could deliberately give us one right and one wrong, purposely to throw Apple off. Who knows.

Anywayz, how bout we get into specifics then. You didn't mention what graphics cards were in these machines like you previously did. Do you have any prototypes featuring the GeForce 4? Is there any way you can tell whether the system uses AGP8x? Is the PPC8500 system you are in contact with 64-bit or not? And what OS are these machines running on?
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
~Winner of the Official 2003 AppleInsider NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Pool~
Reply
post #60 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by JW Pepper:
One thing bugs me why doesn't "Dorsal" post more often or respond to the doubters?
<hr></blockquote>

Assuming all of this is true. If you have real information about a product and you share it in a public forum why should you feel the need to defend the truth? It would a waste of that individuals time, there will always be people who don't believe and there is no concrete way of proving what you say is correct without revealing who you are and then your NDA busting days will be over since you'll be fired and most likely sued.

[quote]
He could address some of the doubters without giving his identity away. Some info obviously would lead to his identification.
<hr></blockquote>

Assuming he does have real information I'm sure he has more important things to do (i.e. work, family) then hang around the boards answering questions for a company he doesn't work for, he doesn't even claim to work for Apple remember?


[quote]It seems starange the he has macnines to test but can't give any real info as to performance of applications.<hr></blockquote>

That's why it's called a non-disclosure agreement. He's not going to disclose actual perfromance as not only would that get him in trouble with Apple but his own employer to which I would think he has enough loyalty not to betray confidential information like that.
post #61 of 241
Well, after reading fake posts by Junkyard Dawg and vlad1966 (in macrumors forums), I see no reason to believe this one by Dorsal.

(I'll admit that I enjoyed reading it!)

- Mark
post #62 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Eskimo:
<strong>

That's why it's called a non-disclosure agreement. He's not going to disclose actual perfromance as not only would that get him in trouble with Apple but his own employer to which I would think he has enough loyalty not to betray confidential information like that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Assuming he has an NDA, which either he or his company would most certainly have if they are getting access to seed harware, then trust me on this one. He's already violated his NDA.

As for the actual report, some parts of it actually seem rather off to me (especially regarding the G4's), and of course, it doesn't change the fact that you aren't going to see a G5 in a Mac any time soon.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #63 of 241
moki,

So are you really the President of Ambrosia Software, Inc.?

- Mark
post #64 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Dorsal M:
<strong>G5's have a 400 or 500MHz system bus that runs at a 16bit-wide data path. This is the RadipIO bus to a controller that controls most of the onboard peripherals such (...) Processor speeds are 1200/1250MHz to 1400/1500MHz. The processor has a memory controller included on die connected to the core by a 256bit memory bus running at one quarter the processor clock speed. The controller supports 2 memory bus but Apple only uses one so the internal width is cut to 128 bit at one quarter processor core speed. This provides more than enough bandwidth for PC2100 and the controller is designed to handle PC2700 memory ....</strong><hr></blockquote>

a memory bus speed 1/4 of the processor bus speed? on a 1200Mhz System that would be 300Mhz. i don't know how it works - therefor my question: can we use 266Mhz DDR Ram on a 300Mhz 128bit-wide memory bus? and can we use 333Mhz DDR RAM on a 350Mhz 128bit-wide memory bus? same thing as for the 312.5Mhz/375Mhz memory bus of the 1250Mhz/1500Mhz G5...

if there is an expert for this things. please reply to it.

400Mhz to 500Mhz RapidIO is correct. the 8540 has 500Mhz RapidIO...

greets,
krassy
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #65 of 241
Hot Rumor + Eugene + Cold Water = Made my Day

Thanks Eugene.

"Carry On"
AI ate my old profile and won't return my emails :o(
Reply
AI ate my old profile and won't return my emails :o(
Reply
post #66 of 241
Okay, let's break this down to see what new information we really have.

CPU: Either a 7450 variant from 866MHz to over 1GHz or an 8500 at 1.2GHz to 1.4GHz.

AGP: Either 4X or 8X

USB: Some have 2 ports, some more.

IDE: Present

RAM: G4s-SDRAM G5s-Either PC2700 or PC2100

Dorsal's Guess: "We may see one or the other, but I think we might see both G4s and G5s".

What's up now?

*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #67 of 241
Since moki keeps emphasizing that there wont be any G5 anytime soon (which fewer an fewer people believe), I'll further on reply to his threads with the following line:

The G5 and EV Nova will be released the same day.

G-news
Matyoroy!
Reply
Matyoroy!
Reply
post #68 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Eskimo:
<strong>

No, Nostradamus = PowerMac G4/codename from the old AI.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah we all knew that, I was just thinking maybe he added another multiple personality to the mix.

BTW: Welcome back, you came out from your igloo!
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
I'm making plastics right now!
Reply
post #69 of 241
A system bus can run asynch. from the memory bus.

Most Athlon motherboards to do this.
You can run 133 Mhz memory with a 100 Mhz main bus, for example.

(replace 133 by 266 if you wish, but saying "266 Mhz" is misleading, as it is still running at 133 Mhz, with a bandwith theorically equivalent to 266 Mhz).

DDR 2700 is running at 166 Mhz ("equivalent to 333"), but can be used with current Athlon processors running on a 133 Mhz, while keeping the full memory speed. Just running async.

Now, I seriously doubt Apple would make the system bus run at 1/4th of the processor speed. Simply because it would be a nightmare to design such a motherboard. Especially if the bus has to be kept a relatevely even multiplier with PCI (33 Mhz) or AGP (66 Mhz).

A 400 Mhz main bus with DDR memory could meen two things:
- DDR 1600 memory, running by pairs (that's what is done with Pentium 4 + Rambus : 100 Mhz x 2 x 2). Running synchronously with main bus.
- DDR 2100 memory, 133 Mhz x 2, running asynchronously.

Since the G5 has its own memory controller, which is no longer located on the northbridge, itself located on the main bus, I will let you guess which answer is right.

Bruno
(G5 IS coming)
post #70 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by brunobl:
<strong>A system bus can run asynch. from the memory bus.</strong><hr></blockquote>

right. but dorsals quote was, that the system bus of G5 will run at 400 or 500Mhz and the memory bus will run at 1/4 the processor speed. so will this work? 300Mhz memory bus (not system bus) with 266 DDR Ram(PC2100?) ...

thx for info...
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #71 of 241
[quote]posted by Dorsal M:

Processor speeds are 1200/1250MHz to 1400/1500MHz. <hr></blockquote>

It could be that Some test boxes were 1200-1400 MHz but these were definately overclocked prototypes.

You will get G5's but only 800/1000/1200 for the time being.
==================================
"It's Happening. Fact."

Ilann Hepworth.
Reply
==================================
"It's Happening. Fact."

Ilann Hepworth.
Reply
post #72 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by moki:
<strong>
it doesn't change the fact that you aren't going to see a G5 in a Mac any time soon.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Mr. Welch, you'll have to forgive us if we don't take your arguments seriously. There are a couple of possibilities:

- If you were under NDA and had prototype machines you wouldn't admit to knowing anything with your name attached to each message

- Ambrosia is hardly a large and important software developer (sorry), so correct operation of your products on the day that they ship machines isn't exactly critical. And on the flip side, I'm sure Apple employees love testing your products on all the new hardware. Its probably very extensive testing too. This means you aren't first in line for what is always a limited number of prototypes.

- Apple is running a tight ship these days so where you may have been aware of future processors in the past, that may no longer be the case because of their efforts to plug leaks. That you post here at all probably increases your "leak risk" in Apple's eyes.

- The G5 is purported to be fully compatible with the G4. You may have had advanced warning of the G4 because Apple was privately talking up AltiVec to developers well in advance of the chip's arrival. For the G5 there is no new software technology to prime developers with, so prototypes will only go to those affected by the new hardware -- PCI card developers, for example.

So, no offense, but we can't really take what you say here very seriously.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #73 of 241
Personally if phil is right 1.2 ghz is enough for the high end. I am not very tech savvy but it seems with all the chip and motherboard advances that would be introduced with the g5 it would at least compete with intel and amd if not more.
Hopefully we get it soon
post #74 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by Rmh1572:
<strong>Personally if phil is right 1.2 ghz is enough for the high end. I am not very tech savvy but it seems with all the chip and motherboard advances that would be introduced with the g5 it would at least compete with intel and amd if not more.
Hopefully we get it soon</strong><hr></blockquote>

Bah, that's the wrong attitude and I'm pretty sure its not the one Apple has. They should be aiming to leap as far ahead of the current WIntel machines as possible because they leap less often, and the competition usually catches up in a series of rapid steps.

This speculation is irrelevent, however, because the speeds that arrive are determined by processor yields and costs. Apple will ship the fastest machine that they can manage and still be price competitive and have sufficient supply. They will not ship a 1.2 instead of a 1.5 because it is "fast enough", they will do it because they can't get enough fast chips.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #75 of 241
Man you guys are tough n Dorsal. He simply posts what's he had the chance to play on, the machines and what he believes are in these machines. He makes no predictions, he doesn't use the "Confirmed" word, he doesn't say expect the G5 by next week, and yet a few of you are calling for the death of his dog simply for sharing his own personal experiences.

And you wonder why there's no real inside info here, the insiders are probably scared to get lynched by posting info that won't be believed not to mention their posting history or creditabilty.
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
All Your PCs Are Belong To Trash
Reply
post #76 of 241
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

He was right that we would stay at ATA/66 when we all thought it had to be ATA/100. Everyone was shocked. Yes, he has been wrong too.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Who was shocked?
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #77 of 241
I did not mean to take an attitude I more was asking a question in a statement form. I know I make no sense sorry. I agree apple should put out their best because they don't update as often but I really wanted to know if I was right. Would a g5 compete at 1.2 ghz
post #78 of 241
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

No delusion like self-delusion.

Eugene is fundamentally correct. Dorsal has not said a single thing in his post that hasn't already been speculated to death in here over the last three months. He's combined and regurgitated all the most reasonable predictions / rumors in his own writing style knowing that 80% of you will bow at his feet, thanking him for his "wisdom."


Maybe he's seen prototypes recently and maybe he hasn't, but he himself admits he doesn't know what's coming or when - how is that of any benefit to anyone? To know that there might be a G5 prototype out there helps you, even though you may not see one for a year or more? Based on his post, there's just as much chance we'll see one a year and a week from now, as there is that we'll see one in a week. He basically came right out and said "I have no idea what's next" and yet you thank him as if he's graced us with some amazing piece of information. Use your heads, people.

Remember also that with enough reasonable guesses the law of averages pretty much dictates a person will hit the proverbial bullseye sooner or later. He hit his sooner and has pretty much been wrong ever since as far as I can tell.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ]</p>
Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #79 of 241
on the other hand, does no one else see the post by dorsal m as a post that should not be criticized in the infantile way that eugenechan.com continually does? it used to be entertaining, eugene, now it is isnt. just stop it, kid. it doesnt make you big in any of our estimations.
post #80 of 241
Never mind. Not worth the effort. Can't be bothered.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
Chicanery.
Reply
Chicanery.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Updated Apple hardware is coming soon