Wwdc - Page 17

I seriously hope that English is not your first language. That said, you should revoke your license to Sci-Fi fandom for failing to recognize a HHGTG reference.

If I may say so, I think the rumor-mongers over-exaggerated. Once Apple put that one out there, speculation just went from wild to preposterous. I suppose you could argue that it wasn't beyond, it was simply way over laterally, as we were all thinking new iMacs, just nothing like how they turned out.

[added:]I still do not see any real purpose to buying SGI. Buying Roxio would make much more sense. Hell, buying Quark, as bad an idea as that would be, would be a better idea than buying SGI. Alias-Wavefront might be another matter, but that's out there. I don't know if Apple is ready to deal with a platform about 9 times more complex than FCP, and with so much baggage in the non-Mac world.

sgi owns AW

I know, but why buy the whole company? Buy the product or something, and that's a dubious idea anyway. SGI has little to add to Apple's war chest.

SGI is only $250 million.

That is small change for Apple.
It includes Alias|Wavefront.
Most importantly that price tag includes two very important brands: SGI (and A|W).

Think of it as a marketing move.

The SGI brand complements Apple very nicely at the high end.
It's markets are similar. Customers are similar.

Apple could try very hard (and have very decent products) but may not be able to penetrate the high end digital media markets becuase of the Apple brand.

Can you see big iron branded with an Apple logo?
More importantly can you see govt., research and higher ed buying into big iron with an Apple logo? I don't think so

$250 million is small change to be able to allow Apple to extend into those markets.

Be sure that it will allow for high end Mac OS X superclusters and superservers. Perhaps even high end workstations and visualization systems. Make those 8-16 way PPC970 Macs a reality.
All SGI branded of course.

Sun is spending $500 million on remarketing Java.

Think of this as a $250 million Apple marketing campaign to penetrate the high end of its markets.

Under Steve Jobs and Apple, i'm sure the SGI brand can be rejuvinated and used to Apple's great advantage. It's a perfect aquisition at bargain basement tag.

Roxio is another rumor ala UMG.
It owns PressPlay (or whatever) and that is sure to give it an overvalued inflated price tag. Steve Jobs may not be jewish, but he was certainly brought up in jewish tradition, so be sure he ain't gonna pay a dear price for anything. (Not meaning to be anti-semitic in anyway - i'm black and gay).

The most incredulous part for me is the rebranding aspect, not based on any rational thought, just a hunch that Jobs and Apple see Apple as a plenty good brand to develop an enterprise presence with. If not the Apple brand, I would think they lean on their NeXT client list and accomplishments in the enterprise arena. Would Apple need rebranding in the graphics/3D market via the SGI name? Like I said, this is just my gut feeling about Apple's attitude about buying SGI, kit and caboodle.

Los Alamos National Laboratories was, and might still be, the largest single installation of Macs anywhere. There are thousands in NASA, in the NSA, in the Pentagon, and in various other sectors of government where high-performance computing is essential. When iMacs came out, I remember reading that the FBI was seriously considering stocking up on them, because it had no writable media drive and so it would be that much more difficult to remove information from the computer clandestinely. I believe the NIH has a fairly substantial installation as well. http://www.army.mil is famously served on a Mac.

Macs have all kinds of cred in Gov't research, and OS X is gaining lots of cred in higher education, mostly by being a quality, inexpensive UNIX-alike. Of course, they can always sell more into those areas, but for now there are other markets where they're scarce, such as nearly every market controlled by commercial IT.

No i'm not talking about Macs not being in those markets.
Of course they are...with DESKTOPS and WORKSTATIONS.

Not as BIG IRON - mainframe class machines - superservers and superclusters. I think i said BIG IRON WITH AN APPLE LOGO.

Apple underwent a soul searching mission in the late 80s early 90s Scully Era that almost destroyed Apple - he tried to turn the Apple brand into something it wasn't and something it could never be - a business brand.

It wasn't until the late 90s when Apple acknowledged itself as a premium commodity brand in it's candy coloured 'coming out' era of Steve Jobs second tenure, that it finally realised its true nature and value of its brand. And that it is not worth trying to be something you are not.

Similarly now Apple is unlikely to produce Apple branded high end servers. Those classed as big iron.

It is remarkable that Apple produced the Xserve, especially given that Steve Jobs had stated in the past that Apple would "never" produce servers. The reason is the one i mention...Apple's brand is now firmly established in the hearts and minds of consumers around the world as a premium commodity brand. And one that sells Macs.

This doesn't however Apple pursuing those markets under a differnt brand. SGI is perfect for Apple.
It's markets are similar...and as you point out it has similar customers at the other end of the market.

SGI will allow Apple to produce, sell and support Mac OS X super servers and super clusters into the HIGH END spectrum of its markets.

So not only will it be able to sell to govt., research/edu and media companies desktops and workstations but ALSO high end super clusters and render farms as SGI.

This is not rebranding as much as an expansion.

Apple will spend more than the $250 million price tag of SGI to penetrate the high end of its markets.

And no i'm not talking about the enterprise market either. Just the high end digital media and 3D markets.

Think about it.
Already at NABB most of the special demonstrations of solutions are based on Apple and SGI machines working together.

Alias|Wavefront would make an excellent addition to Apple's portfolio of brands (FileMaker, eMagic). Not to mention that Shake would probably be more at home at Alias|Wavefront than at Apple.

As for NeXT, well, part of Apple's problem in selling into the high end - that is mainframe class machines - is it's support and sales channel. The arrogance that persists there is one of the main reasons large clients back are won over instead by the likes of IBM, HP, etc...
NeXT was worse.

And the NeXT brand was not really a fully established brand. Unlike Apple, i don't think that NeXT ever 'found itself'. So no. NeXT was successful in that it was an important lesson in technology and diplomacy for Steve Jobs as well as an opportunity to develop some very forward looking technology that evolved into Mac OS X, Sherlock, Mail, Apple's Dev tools - ProjectBuilder & Interface Builder, Cocoa, Quartz, Velocity Engine (formally DSP) and not to mention WebObjects.

SGI is a very established and recognized brand, if only that it's image has eroded recently due to rebranding (Silicon Graphics -> SGI) which IMHO was a terrible move and the start of SGI's downturn, poor products due to diminishing of the MIPS architecture, stretching itself too thin (with the purchase and later sale of Cray Supercomputer), and now with competition from the low end - Mac OS X, Windows XP and Linux.

I'm sure with Apple's technology (PPC, HyperTransport - which SGI belongs to, Mac OS X) SGI may be able to produce powerful and eye catching workstations akin to those of it's glory days - Silicon Graphics Indigo, Crimson, Iris.

Remember them?

Is the development on IRIX is going?

In ADC News #354


Just wondering why someone bothers making 64-bit compiler...

Teppo

Well, there is that little (*cough*) cluster at UCLA...

My point was that Apple already has a presence in those markets because of their utility to science. They're not used frivolously or lightly now. The fact that Apple doesn't make big iron is actually a point in their favor, because big science is moving away from big iron, and toward Beowulf clusters and the like - except that those are a pain to set up and maintain. Enter Apple, a company known for reliable machines with tremendous ease of setup and transparent networking. They have all the credibility they need in all the right areas right now.

SGI, on the other hand, is dying. I don't know how valuable a name associated with $20,000 workstations and commercial-van-sized supercomputers is to a market that's more interested in clustering racks full of, say, Xserves. Look at the cluster named Green Destiny: It doesn't eat lots of electricity, doesn't require pulling special cabling in or any sort of environmental control beyond a stout air conditioner, it was cheap to build with out of off-the-shelf parts, etc. That's the future of high-end computing. Now, imagine the same basic idea, but with Apple's plug-and-play.


Yup. I had a "Professional Macintosh" once. The 8600/200. Solidly built (and how!) but bland. That's the wrong tangent, I agree. The Xserve is much closer to the right idea: Make the function attractive to your customer, and keep the style and flair pure Apple.


Also, servers just aren't what they used to be - in a good way. They used to be more remote, before networking got as fast as it is. They used to be headless, or command-line-oriented; or alternately, they required expensive clients (we spent $10K on an Xterm, back in the day), and they ran a different class of operating system.

Now, because of the shift in technology, servers are easy and cheap and convenient and common, and because of OS X, an iBook is a credible server. The whole landscape has changed. Clustering is crowding out big iron at the high end, and all this plays directly to Apple's long-cultivated strengths. (I remember a network in college that was a bunch of toaster Macs linked up via serial Appletalk to a Mac II running a client/server version of Word. It was slow, but it worked and it worked well. And this was, oh, 1988-89, I think?).


Ah, but desktops are fast becoming workstations - heck, some laptops are credible workstations - and they're also being recruited for server farms and clusters, scaling as high as you please. Big iron will still be useful for other things (a cluster of Macs or Linux boxes can't hope to replace the AS/400 in the basement of an insurance company) but those markets are of much less interest to Apple.

No, they are just trying to get id to release Doom III for Xbox at the same time as the Windows, Linux and Mac versions.

1995 John Atanasoff dies

John Atanasoff developed a precursor of the digital computer in the late 1930s. Atanasoff, working with Clifford Berry, developed the Atanasoff Berry Computer (ABC), which could solve differential equations with binary math. The computer used vacuum tubes and other key components of later electronic computers, although it did not have a CPU.
In 1941, Atanasoff invited John Mauchly, a University of Pennsylvania physicist with an interest in automatic calculators, to see the ABC machine in Iowa. The visit and later correspondence about computers sparked controversy many years later over who had really invented the computer. In 1973, a judge overturned Mauchly's (and his associate, Presper Eckert's) patent claims to the computer in favor of Atanasoff. Atanasoff, who later headed two engineering firms, received the Computer Pioneer Medal in 1981 and the National Medal of Technology in 1990.

_

I'm not saying that APPLE produce big iron...i'm saying SGI produce Mac OS X super servers and super clusters.

I don't see IBM, HP or Sun going out of business?


Indeed they are

But does that mean that you would rather be content with dual PPC970 boxes when say you could have Mac OS X running on 8-16 PPC970 SGI boxes?

PowerMacs are pretty inexpensive these days...there is gap opening up at the high end. I think it would be in Apple's interest to play in that market...it's lucrative after all.

Apple could go it alone and produce it's own machines to compete with Sun, HP and IBM workstations. Or it could just aquire SGI and brand, market and sell them that way.

It's all about brands and labels...

I do think. Or rather, I think Apple CAN do anything it sets its mind to. Given the current strong leadership, anything is possible.

Quarter of a billion is alot of money for a brand. Hmmm. 65% of workstation people are going or 'intend' going Apple this year. That's without the 'SGI' brand ('Silcon Graphics' sounded better in my opinion...)

Apple have got 'X-Raid', 'X-Serve' and soon a Tower line that is Schizo split(?) into consumer and uber-Pro lines (see 'Desperate Dan' thread...) by Sept...why...why would Apple want SGI?

Maya. I could see Shake and Maya becoming a very potent team. But, a quarter of a billion for it?

Personally, I'd love to see Apple buy Maya and Quark. Virtual guaranteed Apple existence for the next 20 years..?

Considering Apple can't buy Adobe and the 'muted' 'insolence' coming from Adobe then Quark would be a cheaper retort to the growing threat of Adobe ever pulling the plug. Much in the way eMagic was bought to prevent Apple's music market being threatened Apple could buy Quark (in a way it could never buy the 4 billion Adobe?), pull the plug on PC Quark and Apple will bloom.

Apple could buy a big chunk of the game developer and workstation market by aquiring Maya. But I've got the sneaky feeling SGI won't let Alias Wavefront go without them being included?

'BIG IRON'? Let IBM keep it. Apple can do just as well without doing what SGI did to aquire Cray. Apple may encroach alittle but only with a view to the creative markets, I think. X-serves/X-grid/970 uber box strategy. An X-Station and an X-Grid? I dunno. I think Apple have got something cookin'. They're eying the 3D space like that eyed the video space...

...how are they going to 'cut the legs' off the workstation opposition?

Lemon Bon Bon

Yeah. I wouldn't discount your theory altogether.

Lemon Bon Bon

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
I do think. Or rather, I think Apple CAN do anything it sets its mind to. Given the current strong leadership, anything is possible. [QUOTE]

Very patriotic indeed.

This is more a relection of Steve Jobs' leadership than the boy scout loyalty or blind faith of mac addicts worldwide.

However, believe me Apple is developing its brand in the right direction with the iMac, the iPod and now with applemusic.com (iTunes Music Store).

A digital lifestyle brand:
a premium consumer brand.


This is a good idea and something methinks that will happen too.

First it was the iBook with two 'sizes'.
Then the PowerBook G4 with three.

It makes sense to visually differentiate single and dual processor PowerMacs. A mid range and a high end box.

But beyond 4 processors and say the $10,000 mark and one would certainly be in workstation territory. I'm sure there's a market for 4-8 or 8-16 PPC970 Mac OS X boxes...and that would be best served by a different brand. (SGI).

I appreciate that the future of high end computing is changing.
But that is not the point.

It's about sales & support: brand & marketing.

Apple is not established as a brand that sells high performance servers. Nor is it very good at selling into those markets. Xserve is a great product and appears to be doing promisingly. However...

As a brand Apple is moving in the other direction (as a digital lifestyle brand) and that is far more strategic and important.

That doesn't mean it should ignore the high end computing space. I'm saying that it would be simpler to employ a brand and a sales & marketing team (SGI) that is already in that space and is probably a very good if not perfect match/fit for Apple.

Apple and Steve Jobs will most likely direct product R&D and strategy at SGI anyway once aquired, so be sure that it will take SGI to the 'future of high end computing', be it inexpensive, easy to use Xserve class renderfarms.

Just imagine the kind of products Apple would be able to produce with the SGI logo?

No, it used to be about that. Now it's about cost and performance. You're seeing more and more computing clusters being built out of off-the-shelf hardware and linux. Penguing Computing 1U racks and linux is a cheap setup, and people are less and less willing to pay for marketing and support these days - becuase it's not good value for the money in this arena.

Apple and IBM might be able to compete in this arena provided that they can provide more performance for less cost than comparable Intel setups.

What i mean by marketing and sales is:
Can you see Apple servers putting IBM, HP or Sun out of business?

Indeed blade and cluster computing may be the future, but be sure that Apple is not going to dethrone either IBM, HP or Sun anytime soon because of...brand recognition (i.e marketing), sales and support of IBM, Sun and HP.

Apple sales channel don't know how to sell to premium customers...unlike other vendors Apple has not had a tradition of real competition. IBM, HP and Sun compete with each other...but Mac users either buy a Mac from Apple or not at all...so this is the reason for arrogance in Apple sales force. I believe this is changing for the better now, but large sales require a much greater level of customer service...Apple sales force doesn't know what it means to obige a customer, or humility or humbleness.

This is one reason Apple fails in the enterprise.
It's also the main reason NeXT failed in the enterprise.

Coming from the NeXT/WebObjects arena and having worked on several large projects, i've witnessed this first hand. This is the main reason NeXT (and WebObjects) loose its big customers.

Unfortunately, i don't see Apple changing it's sales force or corporate culture in order to 'fit in'.
It doesn't have to.
It's found that it's attitude towards customers and it's sales channel is fine or tolerated int he consumer space. Apple's found itself as it were.

But just because Apple can PRODUCE server hardware doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be successful selling them...they are completely different things.

Yes, perhaps Apple will find a niche in the growing economy/low-end server with Xserve, but larger sales will continue to be difficult for Apple. I'm sure Apple acknowledges this...it is where having SGI under its belt would be beneficial.

Apple could produce the hardware that SGI brands, markets and sells.

No image or brand recognition problems.
No sales and support problems.

SGI already has a sales structure that manages large accounts and has a history and tradition of selling big iron and managing customer relationships.

Apple is not going to repeat the Scully mistake...however tempting it may be. Either it will stay out of the 'big iron' market altogether or it will partner with one of IBM, HP, Sun or SGI...i'm betting/hoping that it will be SGI (via aquistion).

I can see some reason for Apple buying SGI or the Cray component as a way of getting into the high-end stuff, but I don't see Apple spending any time and money on anything that isn't OSX. The iPod, QuickTime and future apps may run on Windows and such, but I think Jobs decided along time ago that all Apple computers would run one OS without a "lite" version and probably even now without a "heavy" version. That's why we see no pda's or tablets...yet.

I feel Apple will continue to evolve toward higher end hardware, but only based on the one OS to "rule them all." I think it is perfectly reasonable to assume that Panther will run at 32 and 64-bit modes and that the 970 will hopefully work well in single and multiple chip archetectures and that the OS will take both in stride. At least I hope that is what happens.

We could then have "big iron" software like Shake run on OSX.5 at 64 bits in dual core, quad chip boxes, while iTunes runs at 32 bit mode single chip iBooks, with the exact SAME OS. I think that is Steve's hope. This can only be done with a unix-based, scaleable OS using newly adopted industry standards. This future makes all of Steve's comments sensible and puts the Mac in the one position no other company can imitate for years to come.

So I think if Apple would by SGI it may be to gain credibility and name rec and an experience big-iron workforce, but it will not use any rebranded software, it will be to use OSX.

Nobody spoke of 'rebranding' anything.

Apple will be Apple.
SGI will be SGI (or Silicon Graphics).

It's just that SGI could brand, market and sell (Apple engineered) Mac OS X high end workstations and super servers. SGI would make Mac OS X its strategic platform in favor of Linux and migrate it's IRIX/MIPS developers and users onto Mac OS X.

The most significant products i imagine that would emerge out of such an aquisition would be top class high end "flagship" workstations that would be the envy of every Mac user: 4-8 or 8-16 PPC970 boxes with a high end graphics subsystem.(NVIDIA is working on workstation class chipsets, i believe?)

Just as importantly would be Apple/SGI's solutions for high performance computing: renderfarms, superservers and single-image superclusters. Xserve and XRAID would just be the beginning...

^----and exactly how is this related to WWDC?

Apple need to get into expanding markets not contracting ones like the one of super computers and main frames. The only reason to get SGI or Cray is if they have patented technology in hard or software that Apple can use in OS X.

When Apple started selling music over the internet they did not have any experience with but nor does the competition. OTOH if the jump into mainframes and super computers, Apple would still have no experience while the competition would have a lot of it.

Anyone remember the killing of the clones and the ill feelings at Motorola and what happened after that? I do not want that to happen with IBM. However this does not mean that Apple have to stay out of blade servers and work stations. As long as IBM make substantially more money on selling 970 CPUs for the ordinary Mac products than loosing money on Apple making inroads into IBMs workstation and blade market IBM should be happy. Money talks

Content creep....and no new news.

This is the quote of the month. Or two? Or three?! Please put it on AI's front page.

1995 Microsoft antitrust settlement reinstated

An antitrust agreement between Microsoft and the government was reinstated on June 16, 1995. A federal judge had rejected the 1994 agreement as being too lenient.
Microsoft first ran afoul of the government in 1990, when the Federal Trade Commission, and later the Justice Department, began a broad investigation into many of Microsoft's business practices. A complaint filed in the summer of 1994 only dealt with the company's operating systems, however, and the resulting agreement restructured Microsoft's licensing fees. The reinstatement of the agreement was seen as a victory for Microsoft.

IDG just announced that Greg Jozwiak will hold the MWCPNY keynote. IMO, this signals that the Steve Jobs keynote at WWDC will focus (almost) exclusively on software, i.e. Panther, and Jozwiak's MWCPNY keynote will focus on (new) hardware. What do you guys think?

Escher

I don't think SGI would be a smart purchase for Apple. That move could be construed as an attack on IBM, and Apple needs all the momentum it can get.

Focus is the key here-Apple needs to sell Macs to survive. Every square in the "4-box matrix" needs to have a strong offering. Right now, the iBook (consumer portable) is the only really strong offering, the Powerbook (pro portable) is slightly above its competitors, the iMac (consumer desktop) is slightly behind, and the Powermac (pro desktop) is far behind.

Gadgets like the iPod are helping Apple remain profitable, but with strong offerings in the "4 box matrix," Apple need not rely on it for such a large percentage of its sales. The Xserve is an experiment at this point; it's still too early to see whether or not it will pan out.

Hopefully at WWDC we will see Powermacs that return to parity with their PC competitors, and maybe even a Powerbook that'll beat back the Centrino nipping at its heels.

If you're saying someone other than he of the jeans and black turtleneck is going to introduce the G5, I say "look at that flying pig!"

I dunno. With Steve Jobs' ego being what it is, I don't think he would allow anyone else to make the announcement for the Powermacs. Of course, July 14 for Powermacs would be just fine for me...right before my birthday!

there is no way there will be hardware announcements of any importance. steve does though...

they may announce speed bumps but the keynote will be a rehash of past ones and a 'how great are apple...' type thing

IBM of all companies is very MARKET DRIVEN.

That is i doubt there is much intersection between IBM's and SGI's customers. Both potentially serve different markets - IBM: enterprise and commercial IT, SGI: 3D, digital media/film.

SGI is really a small niche player in the high end computing sphere. It wouldn't make much difference if Apple aquired it and started producing Mac OS X Servers.

In fact, it probably would be BETTER overall for IBM and the server market once SGI stops selling Linux machines and adds diversity (with Mac OS X Servers) to the market.

(If it were Sun, i'd expect IBM to be worried, cos Sun plays in pretty much the same market as itself).

--

I will agree that Apple's product quadrangle has gone awry...and Apple does need to focus it's products again.

I think this will happen in the form of updated iMacs taking over from eMacs. Maybe this is obvious.
iBooks being overhauled with a REVOLUTIONARY design akin to the original iMac, later this year...making it the real flagship Apple product in terms of revenue and sales.

--

Also i agree that the thread has meandered somewhat.

How it would be linked to the thread is if Mac OS X (Server) were ever to be ported to Intel/IA64 bet your bottom dollar that it will be announced at a WWDC. So maybe this year? Who knows? A surprise?

If that were to happen, be sure that the port will be linked to a partnership with one of IBM, HP, Sun or SGI. Like the NeXT days. However, those who rememeber their NeXT history will also know that those deals fizzled out every time...even with the best of intentions. The safest bet would be to aquire the partner - SGI being the most likely and easiest target.

Like most people here, I'm having a hard time imagining Steve wouldn't want to announce something as big as the first 970 systems himself.

However, since this Joswiak is Apple's hardware VP, perhaps he'd be announcing something like a 970 version of the Xserve. Most of the Xserve announcements so far have been fairly low key -- not Stevenote kinda stuff -- and MWCPNY would be a good audience for server hardware.

This is pure speculation on my part. I've not heard anything yet myself that hints at new Xserve hardware being on the way.

if it is new hardware, SJ himself will present it...VP of hardware WILL NOT introduce new PM nor new PB nor new anything of real interest...SJ will talk at WWDC and show us, quickly, lots of stuff...most "not available yet, but pre-order at the apple store soon", Joz will go over what SJ showed at WWDC and give updates on availability and expand on it's speed, abilities, etc


g

WWDC, Apple is partly setting itself up as the 'new SGI' anyhow. Stick a tiered 'Power'Mac line based upon the 970, an 'X-Station' Workstation Tower (a true Mac Workstation...with a decent graphics card as standard...), X-Grid/Raid and Serve solutions...then Apple can make their own street cred'. 65% of Workstation folks are going Apple this year. Apple don't need SGI for that. They don't need to buy Maya (though a Maya and Shake combo' could be a killer...) cos Alias already have Maya 4.5 on Mac. Apple are setting there 'Iron' up to support their education infrastructure that is still intact. They're moving big time into video. They're making a shift to the workstation market big time. 'Shake' aquistion painted a sign on Apple's head 'Wintel, we're about to own you'.

SGI purchase..? Not gonna happen.

Apple will show us why not at WWDC.

You don't need an SGI with a dual 970 and a decent ATI/Nvidia card with bags of ram. Apple are putting their own solutions up. Quarter of a billion? That's almost a year R&D for Apple.

Apple have already said they're going to stick to small aquisitions.

Apple have a better brand these days than SGI. A brand that will shine brighter come the 970...cometh the Panther.

IBM's 970 product will stick to their Server market.

Apple's 970 product will penetrate creative markets, print, workstation, edu', bio-enterprise and small business.

Apple and IBM are the new SGI. When Pixar finally orders a renderfarm of 970 X-serves it will be cast in stone.

Lemon Bon Bon

Agreed.

iCreate or whatever the Cancelled Macworld New York show is called these days is more about creative solutions.

I'm guessing Joz will show 970 solutions eg Final Cut 4 with rendering times four times faster or something. That integrated with DVDPro2 etc.

iMac2 showing off the digital hub.

eMagic for Music pros blazing away with a million audio plug-ins on Jag'/970.

Seems Apple is bringing alot of the timing for stuff away from shows and onto a more flexible 'when it's ready' release schedule that makes more sense for them.

I think at the very least, a 970 behind closed doors. Bumped Al laptops at the least...G4 1 gig for 12, 1 gig G4 and better graphic card for 15 inch Al. A lengthy preview of Panther. This is what the show is really about. Any more is a bonus, I guess.

Lemon Bon Bon

I have been hearing this statement around here lately, I must have missed it, where did it come from?

Stick to what they said they'll announce or showcase, and you won't go wrong.