or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple is going to release G5 in MWSF
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple is going to release G5 in MWSF - Page 2

post #41 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Brendon:
<strong>

... I'm not saying anything here just pointing out that it is very odd situation for Apple to take like they are, which is almost lying down.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That might just be their only option.

I hope as much as anyone that the 970 will appear this Jan, but I don't really expect it. Apple may not have been able to swing a deal with IBM that required IBM's total silence on the 970 until Apple's release. Bear in mind that Apple didn't really have any other options, so if IBM says "we don't work that way, take it or leave it" Apple had little choice.

Oh, and for those still unsure whether Apple is even going to USE the 970 (some still seem to doubt), I have no doubt. I have been told by those who would know at IBM that "we have won all Apple business". Think what you like.
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
The people are so happy now, their heads are caving in.
Reply
post #42 of 237
Wow. I've never seen people ignore reality to this extent just to get their hopes up about a product. Well i don't mind you continuing to waste your time posting about how the G5 is gonna come half a year early, just PLEASE don't come on here 10 minutes after the keynote saying "Apple sucks, theyre going out of business".
post #43 of 237
Thread Starter 
From Programmer - Just so long as he doesn't come back here after MWSF moaning about how Apple let him down again.

When did I ever say that? U must have some vision problems. Fuxxking Dick.
post #44 of 237
Thread Starter 
From Clive - But your assumption has no logic to back it up!?

Oh I have no logic. Because IBM stated that they will start sampling 970 in Q2, that means nothing is going to be available earlier. IBM can say anything they want but what they do can be different from time to time. At first, I wasn't completely sure that 970 can be used for the next Mac because early details from IBM did not mention Altivec but did mention some sort of SMD unit with 160 instructions built in. The G4 has 162 instructions, so it is not really the same. Few weeks later. IBM has stated the SMD has 162 instructions as opposed to 160 and its Altivec compatible. So, press release can change from time to time.

Another point makes it even clearer, Apple has been busy rebuilding its base and find new ways to increase market share. Their digital hub, coupled with IPOD, Firewire and now even iSync, Iphoto and iCal , all designed to tap into both everyday business and entertaining needs. With Apple, new software strategy and their new vision to capitalize into newer industry such as Hollywood (Final Cut Pro) and consumer video revolution (iMovie). They really need to stay ahead of time. And as you see, Apple retail store and overall sales outperform the PC market. However, their massive effort still only capitalizes 5% market share. Market share should be at least 10% by now. Doesn't that give you a signal, that something else is missing. There are two main reasons why PC users will not switch to Macs.

Reason number one: Mac platform lacks apps and file formats are not compatible - this issue has been partially addressed by iapps strategy along with some big software makers pledges to develop new apps native for OSX. Apple also uses iSync to find new friends such as syncing with bluetooth phones and Palm without the need for those vendors to develop a separate set of applications for Macs. This helps but that is only half the solution.

As for second reason why PC users will stay away: is clockspeed, Intel loves to bluff numbers and performance with unusual high number of pipelines in order to generate frequency but Intel indeed uses the strategy well, with clockspeed increase substantially coupled with an enhance L2, definitely on par compared with top of the line G4 , and the bus that tries to keep the processor busy, with DDR support for FSB also, where is Motorola on this one. OK, may be numbers are misleading, but few years ago even G3 proclaim Pentium are turtle and few years later, you know the story. Altivec helps but not all apps fly and Motorola hasnt done much since then. So what Apple has done recently on this issue, not much. Since superchips need enhanced process and $$$ for development, Motorola is currently in financial trouble, and Apple is not their priority customer either. Theres not much Apple can expect since Motorola cannot be part of the equation. So Apple must address performance for the next issue. It so happens that IBM seems to have a solution at the right place and may be even the best time, why wont it be possible that Apple will adopt it first. 970 can be use on other computing platform, but which one is more important than Apple. Apple is the largest unix vendor and probably is the only alternative platform capable of rebuilding its market share to compete with PC. IBM probably designs the 970 with Apple in mind since IBM likes SJ strategy and wants to help out. (Remember, SJ wants more market share, meaning more unit sales than current) So Apple is not important, 970 is definitely a Mac priority from IBM.

U guys are all Mac users, so am I, SJ makes solutions and he knows for sure if Mac continues to use PowerPC, processor must continue to excel, otherwise switch to Intel. I think there is more than logic. Programmer even tells me to moan about it. What is that to moan, its just a simple thread, there is no bet involve, no need to give each other a bad name like Jackass and I am definitely not religious. This is only my 50th post. Im entitle to my own opinion, I agree I can be wrong too, I am not god and I am definitely not obsess. If all is missing its just a simple question mark for the topic title, I am sorry about it. I am definitely not trying to jack up the response by using this title either. So fxxk you all very much.
post #45 of 237
Thread Starter 
From WishIwasblack- Yes we do. IBM told everyone flat out, Q3. If they beat that, then it'll be Q2.
We absolutely know for sure based on facts that there will be no G5 at MWSF. No speculation, no special "logic". Just cold, hard facts. Your the jackass here, buddy.

Yea, I see, why don't you just read the newspapers. what the fxck are you posting if you are so fxxking certain. U shouldn't be here at all. I am not your buddy either. Go and bud-fxxk yourself, BUDDY.
post #46 of 237
Everyone take 5, count to 100, grow a thicker skin, whatever you have to do.

I don't want to see any more insults or not-quite-cussing. tiramisubomb, that means you too. Every single one of your latest stream of replies could have - and should have - been made civilly.

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #47 of 237
Thread Starter 
From Big Mac - Unfortunately, I am confident that we won't see 970 Macs at MWSF. I'll be at the keynote, so I'll find out directly. If I am wrong (which I would love to be, but won't), then tiramisubomb can expect $10 from me to his email address once I get back.

Well, Big Mac, I am not that poor, I can afford a Big Mac. Thanks for your concern.
post #48 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Transcendental Octothorpe:
<strong>

That might just be their only option.

I hope as much as anyone that the 970 will appear this Jan, but I don't really expect it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't expect it either, just statng the abvious.
[quote]<strong> Apple may not have been able to swing a deal with IBM that required IBM's total silence on the 970 until Apple's release. Bear in mind that Apple didn't really have any other options, so if IBM says "we don't work that way, take it or leave it" Apple had little choice.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If IBM is using the ApplePI stuff that has been rumored, then they did have to sign an NDA.

<strong> [quote]
Oh, and for those still unsure whether Apple is even going to USE the 970 (some still seem to doubt), I have no doubt. I have been told by those who would know at IBM that "we have won all Apple business". Think what you like.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If we really look at how much coverage that the Apple IBM connection is getting it is unreal. If it were not for the Apple stores and very high demand for the iMac and very good sales of the iBook Apple would be very bad off. I don't think that the executive group would allow this to happen. There are options, none cheap, but there are were options. The Apple system chip is one, glad to see that it is shipping. Quartz extreme is another. ROI was another, I tink that MOTO would have been happy to do that. Maybe ROI is a stopgap looming.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #49 of 237
Thread Starter 
From Amorph -Everyone take 5, count to 100, grow a thicker skin, whatever you have to do.

I don't want to see any more insults or not-quite-cussing. tiramisubomb, that means you too. Every single one of your latest stream of replies could have - and should have - been made civilly.

Thanks for your concern, What r u, my dad? I come here for a simple post. I was polite, and I did not start out anything with anyone. But these AI members are just bunch of pricks. If you want me to behave, tell these punks to behave.
post #50 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by tiramisubomb:
<strong>From Amorph -Everyone take 5, count to 100, grow a thicker skin, whatever you have to do.

I don't want to see any more insults or not-quite-cussing. tiramisubomb, that means you too. Every single one of your latest stream of replies could have - and should have - been made civilly.

Thanks for your concern, What r u, my dad? I come here for a simple post. I was polite, and I did not start out anything with anyone. But these AI members are just bunch of pricks. If you want me to behave, tell these punks to behave.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #51 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by tiramisubomb:
<strong>From Programmer - Just so long as he doesn't come back here after MWSF moaning about how Apple let him down again.

When did I ever say that? U must have some vision problems. Fuxxking Dick.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This reply is out of line. I believe the Programmer comment to be tongue-in-cheek humor, nothing more. If it is something more than it would be the first time for Programmer that I have seen. Correct me if I'm wrong please.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #52 of 237
<a href="http://www.angermgmt.com/angertoolkit.html" target="_blank">here you go tb.</a>
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
post #53 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by 709:
<strong><a href="http://www.angermgmt.com/angertoolkit.html" target="_blank">here you go tb.</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm from Indiana, we throw chairs, and from-time-to-time throttle! Works for me.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #54 of 237
Thread Starter 
From BR

quote :o riginally posted by tiramisubomb:
I firmly believe IBM can deliver the chips in lower frequency earlier, perhaps as soon as Q103.
Based on what evidence? Is it based on what you want to happen? Bah, how religious of you to believe without any evidence.
_________________

If u want evidence, go to talk to a guy who got caught by Apple. This is a forum, I am not in court. I believe what I like and what the fxck does that have to do with religious. Another fuxking idiot who think himself is funny. Diu Lee Lo Mo
JOIN THE PRO-DEATH MOVEMENT! Yea, why don't u kill yourself too. Thats for you too Xidius
post #55 of 237
Thread Starter 
To Brendon,

This is nothing to do with you. No offense to you anyway. I don't post here often. But these guys are really fxxking insulting. I have no grudge, but I am not a punch bag. Its just me. I don't care. They can shove it up their asxholx
post #56 of 237
gimme an eye!! gimme a bee!!! gimme an elle!!!!

(first and only. I promise )
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
Reply
post #57 of 237
Man, I saw how quickly this thread grew and I thought Dorsal was posting in here or something.
Guess I was wrong.......
I think somebody needs a prozac smoothie!
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #58 of 237
Long time, no post.

I don't have the slightest clue as to when we will see an overhauled PowerMac that sports the 970 chip. However, I will not be overly surprised if it's announced early in 2003. The potential reasons have been covered: Silence from Apple regarding IBM's announcement, the timing from IBM's announcement having the potential for significantly lower sales of current PM hardware for quite a few months, etc.

What also should be considered (not a new thought) is that the new case designs from Apple (Windtunnel) appeared almost too far in advance of their real need if we are not to see the new chips until the second half of 2003. I can't recall one good reason for the Windtunnel case being needed for current G4-based designs. I could see Apple wanting to get them out there ahead of the 970 so if any possible flaw turns up, they will have the chance of correcting it for the 970 intro. Apple has done this before but not, IIRC, upwards of a year ahead of time.

Also, when IBM talks about 3Q2003 availability, they could be referring to general availability. By and large, a public announcement usually refers to general availability. Does that mean that the chip is not available to a partner (ie non-public customer) beforehand?
post #59 of 237
post #60 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Hudson:
<strong>
(Windtunnel) appeared almost too far in advance of their real need ..... . I can't recall one good reason for the Windtunnel case being needed for current G4-based designs.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Many people have posted similar statements. But, as far as I know we have no spec.'s on the 1.25GHz Motorola G4's. Maybe they do need the windtunnels high velocity, maximum torque, massive heat sink cooling, especially in dual machines. Why hasn't Motorola published spec.'s yet, could it be this cpu will never see the light of day outside of the windtunnels?

I could be wrong, er, uh, wait a minute, I didn't say anything, so I can't be wrong but I might not be right.



[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #61 of 237
Hi all.

I don't want to throw a fly in the oinment here, but when IBM talks releases dates, are they talking physical or fiscal calenders?

Apple's fiscal calender (and much of the computer industry I believe) begins in October, so January would be Q2 to Apple.

That's not saying that there will be a 970 at MWSF, but April could be a reasonable time, which fits in with the previous, once removed, PM update.

TheFly
theFly
Reply
theFly
Reply
post #62 of 237
That's the thing, IBM uses both fiscal and real Q-dates. It's rare that they distinguish, so for all we know it may be real or fiscal. Optimism says it's fiscal, but reality says they are talking about a real Q2.
post #63 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>
Not really, ATI leaked full product specs and a description of Apple's Cube about 36 hours before it's unveiling, IBM has said plenty about it's chip--not an Apple product (I'm fuzzy on whether IBM has even said "Apple is the customer"---I don't think so). Just about every non-IBM reference I have seen about the 970 has been made by an analyst saying what they expect, not what IBM has released.

IBM is playing the marketing angle very well by conservatively creating the buzz while not making an overt Apple connection, even though everyone "knows" that is the major customer.

Apple seems to show it knows this and is responding by placing as much attention as possible on the non-PowerMac lines as possible. Few think there will be a 970 in a iMac or Powerbook in the immediate future so those sales will be relatively un-hindered by the Q3 arrival of a new PowerMac. Apple is steeling for a continuing decline in PM sales by trying to boost up everything else.

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: AirSluf ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

What I've seen is that the buzz that IBM is creating about an Apple connection which is about as far as one can go and not just say it. "Apple should use this chip", and after much press speculation "The chip includes a SIMD unit Altivec" So from my point of view these statements are not being countered by Apple saying "We have no intention of using the 970, and we do not discuss future products." A statement would go a long way towards boosting sales to those that thought that they could just wait a few more months and get a much better machine. I too see IBM playing the marketing side but this is a desktop processor, so who would use it other than IBM?? I mean in quanity of course. If IBM will use it and they said they would, why go out of the way to attempt a connection to Apple if Apple is not going to use it. Like I said before this can only hurt Apple sales, and Apple dosen't seem to mind if the press at large is drawing this conclusion and reporting it. What ATI did did not appear to hurt Apple that much and was not widely published. The Apple/IBM connection has been in the mainstream press and is continuely promoted by statements from IBM that go unchecked. Let's look at MOTO Apple keeps them quiet. What I'm saying is that these unchecked statements are costing Apple. I wonder what the sales forcast is like for desktops for the next six months. If they were bad before they are about to become much worse.
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
Please consider throwing extra cycles at better understanding Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (CJD), ALS, and Parkinson's disease go here <a href="http://folding.stanford.edu/" target="_blank">http://folding....
Reply
post #64 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:
<strong>

Actually it does. Saying Q3 03 pretty much kills PMac sales from now on. Apple knows we wait and it hates it.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, that would be logical if Apple had said "we're going to launch new processors Q3 03", but they didn't.

IMO Apple shot themselves in the foot by deciding that new machines would boot X only from 2003 - a double whammy, not only is there resistance to "could be another processor around the corner" but also "I don't wanna change".

47% decrease in PowerMac sales over two years is a serious issue.

[quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:
<strong>
Which is worse, poor profit for 2 quarters or asking IBM to promote the worst case scenario then release early?.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm sure Apple would have preferred them to say nothing at all. No?

[quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:
<strong>
Remember Q3 '03 is full production. Apple might not need full production.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sorry? Just who else is buying these chips do you think? Apple needs "full production" because Apple is the only customer.
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #65 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>IMO Apple shot themselves in the foot by deciding that new machines would boot X only from 2003 - a double whammy, not only is there resistance to "could be another processor around the corner" but also "I don't wanna change".
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Only a few of Apple's customers "don't wanna change".

80% of new buyers use Mac OS X.

[quote]<strong>Sorry? Just who else is buying these chips do you think?</strong><hr></blockquote>

IBM!

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #66 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by tiramisubomb:
<strong>Oh I have no logic. Because IBM stated that they will start sampling 970 in Q2, that means nothing is going to be available earlier...</strong><hr></blockquote>

What are you on!? First you're saying 970s for MWSF, now you're talking Q2 03, which in a worst case is going to be close to six months later.

You have no logic because you have no understanding of what "sampling" means - test units, in small quantities, not for production.
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #67 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>

Sorry? Just who else is buying these chips do you think? Apple needs "full production" because Apple is the only customer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

IBM Semiconductor's biggest customer - by far - is IBM. They sell excess capacity to other customers.

It's no secret that IBM is planning to use the 970 in entry-level (for IBM) Linux solutions, and in its RS/6000 line of workstations and servers.

Look at it this way: It's designed to scale up to something like 64-way MP, which strongly implies that Apple is not the only customer.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #68 of 237
I see all the different points of view and I think like everyone else I too would love to see the 970 or something comparable in a Mac at my desk like yesterday. Unfortunately, I don't have anything constructive to add, but I would like to ask this:

Being that Apple plans to remove OS 9 "proper", either entirely as Steve previously stated/promised/swore or even partially, am I wrong in assuming that it would not be a smart policy to implement, without upgrading all affected product lines in some compelling way?

Regardless the merit of the MHz myth, the general public (sans geeks) believes in the relative metric of system performance as assessed by MHz. Equally would not the same public potentially think, (slow Mac)+(MAC OS 9)+(OS X)=3 buying points vs. (barely less slow Mac)-(Mac OS 9)+(OS X)=less value(two buying points)?

Just thought I'd ask.

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: ArkAngel ]</p>
post #69 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>

80% of new buyers use Mac OS X.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Funny, I installed 8 new machines last week, not one was running X. That 80% is just bollocks. The statement from Apple was "80% of our professional users are now 'ordering' (huh!?) X as their default OS".

What's "professional" PowerMac buyers? Well, news for you, only 25% of sales last year were PowerMacs.

"Ordering", no clue what that means - you buy a Mac, it comes with two systems, you install the one you want.

If that wasn't enough, PowerMac sales down 47% over two years - yes, twice as many PowerMacs sold two years ago as in the year just past.

Apple is aiming for 20% of the userbase using X by the end of the year - they've already admitted that a native Photoshop did little to boost PowerMac sales (and thus X adoption), so can we stop the hype?
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #70 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>Look at it this way: It's designed to scale up to something like 64-way MP, which strongly implies that Apple is not the only customer. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Ok, we can be optimistic. But IBM is going to shelve its plans so Apple can have the pick of the chips? We've seen it all before, you need proper full scale production before these chips start going into Apple machines.

Or shall we have (yet) another announce now, ship in three monts fiasco?
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #71 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>
Funny, I installed 8 new machines last week, not one was running X. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Funny, I installed 10 iBooks in the last couple of months - all running Mac OS X.

Do you represent every Mac user? Do I? No!

[quote]<strong>The statement from Apple was "80% of our professional users are now 'ordering' (huh!?) X as their default OS".</strong><hr></blockquote>

"Apple's professional customers are rapidly adopting Mac OS X, with more than 80 percent now choosing Mac OS X as their default OS."

Choosing - not ordering!


[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>If that wasn't enough, PowerMac sales down 47% over two years - yes, twice as many PowerMacs sold two years ago as in the year just past.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And that should keep Apple from implementing a Mac OS X only strategy? Mac OS 9 users aren't buying anyway.

[quote]<strong>Apple is aiming for 20% of the userbase using X by the end of the year</strong><hr></blockquote>

And? That's 20% of the 25 million Mac users - 25 million Macs where much less than half can run Mac OS X.

Only 16% of Windows user use WinXP btw.

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: JLL ]

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #72 of 237
Trying to go back on topic...

It's safe to completely, totally, 100% assume that the "G5" (at least, as we would know it) is dead, right? I've followed AI as well as the stories from Architosh as well as other sites and it's my general understanding that for all intents and purposes, you can pretty much stick a fork in the G5...

I'd like to know from the more technically-minded people here just how possible it is for these reputed new versions of the G4 (7457, 7457-RM) to actually be produced. From what I understand, trying to graft on a faster bus or DDR-support onto the G4 would be almost impossible...
"Do you know this company was on the brink of bankruptcy in '85? The same thing in '88, '90, and '92. It will survive. It always has."
-Former Apple CEO Michael Spindler
Reply
"Do you know this company was on the brink of bankruptcy in '85? The same thing in '88, '90, and '92. It will survive. It always has."
-Former Apple CEO Michael Spindler
Reply
post #73 of 237
"What's "professional" PowerMac buyers? Well, news for you, only 25% of sales last year were PowerMacs.

"Ordering", no clue what that means - you buy a Mac, it comes with two systems, you install the one you want.

If that wasn't enough, PowerMac sales down 47% over two years - yes, twice as many PowerMacs sold two years ago as in the year just past."

Cold hard light of day stuff. Coming from Apple 'no hype' themselves.

They've got to seriously address the 'power'Mac situation.

It's not good.

Okay. So I wouldn't expect an Apple tower under £500 inc Vat.

But jeez, you should be able to get one under £1, 000. A dual 1 gigger for £999 inc VAT and they would sell alot more. They have 3 overpriced models. You shouldn't have to spend almost £1400 to get a monitorless tower with half the speed of PCs half as much. Ahem.

Twice as much, twice as slow.

Quark maybe affecting sales. Maybe the economy. But Dell, HP and Co still seem to sell plenty of towers. I wonder what they're doing that Apple isn't? Apple don't have to be Wallmart. But the Price of their Pro desktops and even the Imac desktops is ridiculous. I haven't bought an Apple desktop in years. Why? I'm waiting for my arm and legs to grow back.

Should just about be there when the 970 turns up.

Apple 'Gee, our 'power'Macs aren't selling and we wonder why? Well, I don't know T.C...' (Said in Brains from Top Cat voice...)

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #74 of 237
[[[But Dell, HP and Co still seem to sell plenty of towers. I wonder what they're doing that Apple isn't?]]]

That's just it, they really aren't selling. People already have enough computer for most of their needs. The only one really selling is Dell. The others will *wash* soon enough. Let's face it, suppose a BUNCH of people decide to buy the new 4 GHz. machines.... oooooooo... exciting isn't it? ;-) These computer companies are going to find it ever more difficult to sell a box to someone every year. The faster they make the machine the more people start to realize that they have enough computer for quite some time. I think Apple has sensed this. Contrary to what you believe, only Dell seems to be getting by these days. Gateway is about finished already. Oh, and in case you forgot, Dell would have posted a MASSIVE loss this last past quarter if they hadn't decided to change the way they report their numbers at the last minute.

kennethhunt.com/archives/000244.html

New York Times article:

If the Storm Worsens, Dell May Need That 'Float'

--
Ed M.
post #75 of 237
On the subject of Apple's claims of Mac OS 9 vs. Mac OS X new users:
"Apple's professional customers are rapidly adopting Mac OS X, with more than 80 percent now choosing Mac OS X as their default OS.",
has anyone asked themselves where Apple gets these numbers? Is it from user/statistical surveys? Do managers sit around a table and make them up?

Since I helped a neighbor set up a new FP iMac last year, this is what I suspect. When you plug-in the machine and switch on, it automatically booted into X. The first thing it asks you to do register -- in OSX. Later, if you switch to OS9 there is also registration -- in OS9. I'm guessing this is Apple's vote/survey mechanism. If so, this is a rigged vote!

Personally, I skipped 10.0 (alpha) and 10.1 (beta). Now that I've tried 10.2 (Jaguar) I kinda like it! Still, I miss the file organization and easy maintenance of OS9.

Back on topic, G3+ forever!
Yes my child, he closed quite a few threads in his day.

Locomotive
Reply
Yes my child, he closed quite a few threads in his day.

Locomotive
Reply
post #76 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>Do you represent every Mac user?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't you know who I am, of course I do, I was voted representative for both Eastern and Western hemispheres just last week!?

[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>Choosing - not ordering! </strong><hr></blockquote>

That'll make all the difference - PR blather, that's all that is. Either way:

"The company said that educational customers are ordering 50% of the its Macs with Mac OS X as the default OS"

<a href="http://www.macnn.com/news.php?id=17729" target="_blank">http://www.macnn.com/news.php?id=17729</a>

[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>

And? That's 20% of the 25 million Mac users - 25 million Macs where much less than half can run Mac OS X.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

C'mon, get real - G3s on the desktop since 1997 - are you really saying that over half the Mac installed base is over five years old!?


[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>
And that should keep Apple from implementing a Mac OS X only strategy? Mac OS 9 users aren't buying anyway.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Don't be stupid - I just wrote that I installed 8 Macs last week that weren't running X - what do you think they were running 6.0.4?

What it should tell Apple, as with the MS experience on addoption - don't push your users, they'll go when ready.

Whatever way you look at it (c'mon, argue *this* point) X is an immature OS, from every angle, professional user don't want or need that - and neither do developers.

[ 12-23-2002: Message edited by: Clive ]</p>
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #77 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>

Funny, I installed 8 new machines last week, not one was running X. That 80% is just bollocks. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Ok, anecdotal evidence does not equal facts.
Let's remember our statistics 101 class.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #78 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>But jeez, you should be able to get one under £1, 000. A dual 1 gigger for £999 inc VAT and they would sell alot more.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Here's a snippet of historical information to go with your observation. When the B&W G3 was current you could buy one for GBP:995.00, the bottom of the line beige G3 266 could be had while still current for a little less GBP:970.00. This means that Apple's UK prices have risen around 15% over the past three years - when we're told that technology is supposed to get cheaper.


[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>Quark maybe affecting sales.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's not Quark, it's several things, and probably the major one isn't machine speeds or prices.

Apple has a mature market - the prepress and design industries have been buying Macs for the better part of 20 years, the market is saturated, there's no growth area within the "developed" world. Apple is effectively constantly cannibalising its own markets by having to sell better and better kit to the same buyers.

But, they're saying "what I have is good enough".

So, the bait is now, "get a better OS". I don't know about the rest of you, but pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory never seemed like great sales points to me, compared to ease of use and ease of management. I can pretty much only do one thing at a time, so do I care if one processor or another is hogging the CPU? No, actually I'd probably welcome it if it meant getting my task at hand done more quickly.

Now, I don't pretend to represent all Mac users (what I wrote above was a joke!), but my feelings are that Apple have got themselves into a pickle because they've given us an OS that requires better processors - but they haven't delivered them - and is somewhat (gross understatement) more difficult to manage than our old, reliable (and perhaps clapped out) "classic" (see that sig?).

What am I going to do - buy new Macs that really don't offer me much better performance on a task by task basis (pretty much any Mac less than 5 years old and do anything I want quicker than I can think about it), in the promise that I can run the latest and greatest OS (and by all accounts be disappointed with its "snappiness"? Or just stick with what I have until Apple sorts itself out?

Uh, difficult decision?
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #79 of 237
[quote]Originally posted by Flounder:
<strong>

Ok, anecdotal evidence does not equal facts.
Let's remember our statistics 101 class.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think anecdotal evidence is all we have. All I'm seeing is X Server installations, and X "as server" installations. A few people I know are running X fulltime, but they like living on the bleeding edge.

Where does Apple get these stats - as posted above the dice are loaded anyway, X gets installed from scratch, unless you know how to beat it and have a 9.x CD that will boot a Windtunnel (find one of those if you can!?).

Anyway, back on topic - no 970 at MWSF!!!
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
B&W G3/350 22" La Cie II, 12" PowerBook, 67 Mustang, 96 Honda Pan European
Reply
post #80 of 237
Well, while I agree with Clive that there will probably not be a 970 nat MWSF, there are a few things that are not very defensible in the ancillary arguments...

1. anecdotal evidence (especially with such a small "n") is fairly poor.
2. using a macnn quote ("ordering" instead of the actual Apple press release ("choosing"). And, education customers (not individuals, but institutions) DO get to "choose" their OS, iirc.
3. using someone's speculation on how Apple gets their numbers, and then deciding that their numbers are meaningless because of the way the data are gathered....if you don't KNOW how they get the number, you cannot evaluate the accuracy.

But, those points aside - you make some good points, and bottom line - I would bet against a 970 in SFO.

Fish


ps if we are using anecdotal evidence, I offer my own - at my work, probably 75-80 percent of the macs are running OS X. Of course, this is in a University setting, so that is unlikely to be anything like a "random sample".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple is going to release G5 in MWSF