or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Don't get too excited...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Don't get too excited... - Page 2

post #41 of 88
Oh, and be excited. Be very excited!

[ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #42 of 88
[quote] Jobs needs to get on stage and run the baddest photoshop/video/3-d bake off you've ever seen <hr></blockquote>

This is one of the best statements i have ever read in my life. A statement like this rises my hopes up. To see the title on the newspapers "The Mac Still lives" would be cool.

Oh, yeah. I forgot. AMEN

[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: nx7oe ]</p>
Amma start posting a whole mess of crap just so my post count can rise and the Junior Member Status i have can become a regular Member.
Reply
Amma start posting a whole mess of crap just so my post count can rise and the Junior Member Status i have can become a regular Member.
Reply
post #43 of 88
Thread Starter 
[quote]
Originally posted by vinney57:

Apple will release the fastest possible processor that is reliable and that they have in sufficient quantity to meet projected demand. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous

<hr></blockquote>

[quote]
Originally posted by Kurt:

I couldn't agree more. To me it is very troll like behavior to suggest that Apple would hold back the fastest processor they can offer. Do that many people really buy a new machine after every price bump? I find it hard to believe that would make anymore money holding back.

<hr></blockquote>

1GHz G3?

[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: Messiah ]

[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: Messiah ]</p>
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #44 of 88
[quote] The premise that there is no competition is too flawed for words. If there was no competition for OSX, Apple's market share would be steadily climbing despite whatever insane price tag they put on their machines. Since they have actually lost more marketshare since Jobs' return, it must be the case (as it was before) that for the overwhelming majority of people windows offerings are not only competitive, they are superior.
People buy a machine (not an OS), this is a balance of PRICE, PERFORMANCE, and EXPERIENCE. Mebbe Apple provides a better experience, but it gets so soundly thrashed in the areas of price and performance, that it's still losing quarterly sales (especially in the pro line). The iBook has been one of their best selling machines. Why? because it's the closest they come to providing a cheap machine with relatively competitive performance. That means that OSX has LOTS of COMPETITION whether or not Apple chooses to recognize it or stick their faces in the sand for another 4 years.

This is the last chance Apple will see to make any serious inroads in their market-share -- which absolutely MUST INCREASE if Apple wants to remain a viable platform for another decade -- with the wintelon world's 64 bit path far from clear, and easily 18-24 months from offering the kind of reach a PPC970 might offer, this is the time to strike.

Not only do the machines need to be the fastest they can possibly be, they also need to, at a minimum, begin to drive their entire desktop line (consumer and pro) from 200-500USD cheaper on each and ever model.

If they choose to eek out the speed gains, people will hold off, the machines need to be basically irresistable. Jobs needs to get on stage and run the baddest photoshop/video/3-d bake off you've ever seen, something against a top shelf PC, not a carefully hobbled one, and when he does it, the mac has to win by at least half, but more like two thirds or three quarters. What takes 2 minutes on the mac, has to take 5 or more on the PC. Apple won't get there by holding back. Take stock of just how many pro customers they've lost, PM sales are a joke, and those customers aren't coming back unless they see dramatic performance increases. Remember they're now on a different platform, getting them to switch back after they've shelled out for PC systems and software won't be easy for the same reasons that many stuck with the mac for so long in the first place, switching platforms costs money and simply isn't worth it just to be a bit faster, you've gotta be 200-400% faster at the prices Apple is looking to charge. Or you gotta be a much more competitively priced! simple.

<hr></blockquote>

Absolutely correct. 100%

Lemon Bon Bon :cool:

[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
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 #45 of 88
When I saw that the Powermac line was the failure of last quarter, I was scared that Apple would drop the Powermac line and become a consumer-only company. But then I saw the first update that intoduced the 20" cinema display, and I realized, with elation and extreme happiness, that the opposite would happen. The Powermac line would be furthered into a Pentium killing weapon, and the Apple marketshare will soar as more and more people, and companies, make the switch after being pissed off by the "subscription" style windows software licencing.

[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: os10geek ]</p>
post #46 of 88
Right, they're going to switch straight from Windows to linux, they're used to paying an IT dept anyway, might aswell keep the cheap boxes, get an even cheaper OS/applications/licences, and save a bundle. Ain't no corporation gonna shell out for macs at the current prices.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #47 of 88
You guys have veered off the road and entered your own persona Reality Distortion Field.

Apple will eventually close the speed gap.

They will polish OSX into one hell of an OS

but they will not EVER have anything close to a 200-400% speed advantage and nor with they hack their prices down too low.

You can huff and puff but it will do no good. Apple has a Culture that is defines that Tech and Art can and will be given equal consideration. This is Apple. Even in their darkest moments they refused to deliver the shoddy work seen in your typical PC as far as casing, design etc.

I realize that businesses will never use Macs on a large scale and I'm fine with that. Why use a Mercedes for a Taxi Cab when the Ford is much cheaper.

Yes Marketshare has dropped since Jobs took over but the market is much larger at the same time.

Never underestimate good looks and what that does to people. Erase the speed deficit and keep the Art and the consumers will be lined up with Credit Cards in hand. <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #48 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>I realize that businesses will never use Macs on a large scale and I'm fine with that. Why use a Mercedes for a Taxi Cab when the Ford is much cheaper. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Funny, in Norway most taxi cabs are Mercedes.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #49 of 88
Arrrrrgh

[QUOTEFunny, in Norway most taxi cabs are Mercedes.[/QUOTE]

I knew I was going to get called to the table for that

Yes I should have avoided the dreaded car analogy at all costs.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #50 of 88
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #51 of 88
What kind of bake off will it take for the PC crowd to understand how fast the 970 is/will be?

Won't Intel continue to spin 3Gh+ vs the 1.8Gh or 2.5? What will be their spin? Will the other side ever believe a processor in a mac could be faster?

I've hoped for this so long myself that I won't believe it till I see it. (I am from Missouri, so show me, please...)
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
iPad2 16 GB Wifi

Who is worse? A TROLL or a person that feeds & quotes a TROLL? You're both idiots.....
Reply
post #52 of 88
All it will take is a Quake 3/Doom 3 bake off.

Carmack already has Q3 optimized for dual PPC. Bribe him to add a few altivec optimizations, stand back, and be amazed.

It would be something else to see hard-core gamers start buying Powermacs because they get 1.5-2X the framerates of Wintels!
post #53 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>

...they will not EVER have anything close to a 200-400% speed advantage and nor with they hack their prices down too low.

You can huff and puff but it will do no good. Apple has a Culture that is defines that Tech and Art can and will be given equal consideration. This is Apple. Even in their darkest moments they refused to deliver the shoddy work seen in your typical PC as far as casing, design etc.

I realize that businesses will never use Macs on a large scale and I'm fine with that. Why use a Mercedes for a Taxi Cab when the Ford is much cheaper.

Yes Marketshare has dropped since Jobs took over but the market is much larger at the same time.

Never underestimate good looks and what that does to people. Erase the speed deficit and keep the Art and the consumers will be lined up with Credit Cards in hand. <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

NO, they won't. Apple was still in bad shape when they had clearly faster machines. PRICE must also come down as performance goes up. They are far far out of sync with the general desktop performance of the industry.

Let's forget the percentages for a second and deal with multiples since I always cock-up perccentages. 2-4X, There are quite a few tasks now where a powermac is 2X or more slower than an equivalently priced PC, so why is it so odd to expect macs to reverse that at the VERY HIGH desktop pricepoints they've set. No one is asking an iMac to anihilate an X86 workstation, but a powermac is supposed to do that. Or if that is indeed an impossibility, and performance is in the relative ballpark, THEN PRICES SHOULD ALSO BE COMPETITIVE, which they clearly are not.

If they want to actually gain marketshare, they're going to have to find a way to offer performance and price even when they're ahead on performance.

Furthermore, computers are not like cars. Apple's marketshare is absolutely critical because they represent the entire mac platform, if anyone of the PC makers suffers, even the largest, that's not more than 15% of all PC's sold, Windows would be fine if Dell bit the dust. As the market grows, marketshare (of a platform) becomes even more critical, not less. Why? if the market tripled and Apple still sold the same number of computers, they'd have slightly less the 1% of the market. For ever one million macs, there'd be 99 million PC's sold that year. AS a developer you have to seriously think about whether the mac is even worth your time, even if you reach only 1 out of a hundred PC users, you've already sold as much as you could sell if your product made on to each and every single mac users desk that year.

If you must think about cars, imagine there were only two makes of car in the whole market (many models, but only two makes). 99% of all cars are PC, use the same gas and parts. 1% are Macs, use different gas and require a completely different service training and equipment. Outfitting your shop to service both makes will cost twice as much as servicing PC's only. I think you know what to do. There may be mac specialty shops for enthusiasts, but they'll be few and far between and expensive. Cool maybe, but impractical. You're going to buy a car, which make will you buy? I suspect your car buying decision woiuld be nothing like your computer buying answer. Cars != computers. Apple simply cannot continue to lose marketshare, it doesn't matter how big the market gets, they threaten to make themselves insignificant with any more market share loss.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #54 of 88
Apple, to me...are at the point where they can't afford to get much smaller. How many times can you downsize your company before your purchasing volume on parts leaves you with such a massive disparity with Dell that your products will look ridiculously priced. ie you can, theoretically, get to a point where Apple can't compete on hardware prices and will, logically, throw in the towel and be a software only company.

They need to start heading in the 5% range first and quickly build on any momentum to 10% and a little on. And keep building on that.

Freddy Anderson says Apple are looking to 5%. They're going to have to get alittle more competitive on price, I'm afraid. They doing this with the laptops, but I question their desktop range. It's underpowered and wayyyyy over priced.....not to mention inflexible and hard to buy on an average high street. Especially here in the UK. Maybe Apple stores will become international over the next couple of years. An Apple Store in the major UK cities would be a start.

Advertising. Gotta raise that profile. Say why you should use 'X' and a Mac and show people. Show people using IT!

What does this mean for the 970 Towers?

I hope Apple keep the current prices while boosting to G5 level of performances. I'd settle for that.

Though, I do think if they could trim another 100-200 off tower prices while increasing the standard and build to order options...with optional and further discounts if you buy with Apple displays...then Apple may provide a compelling tower switcher argument.

And yes. Apple SHOULD release the fastest CPUs they can. If they have 1.8-2.5 to go. Let's have them.

It's funny, I was reading through my old Macworld mags just now. And there's a clear quote by Jobs saying he intended to close the speed gap in 2001. That's two years ago folks.

Simon Jary saying in his editorial that don't expect G5/Rapid Io style products until 2003/2004. Well folks. 2003 first half is rapidly on its way.

2004 is only nine months ish away.

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 #55 of 88
a)
in my opinion -- the fact, that the 970 has such a superior bus-technology compared to the G4-MaxBus, is the reason why it is so important that apple goes all dual again. at least the mid-range PowerMac must be a dualie... with os x AND the 970 it would be the worst decision ever to switch back to single-cpu-systems.
b)
if IBM is able to deliver high quantities of 2.5Ghz 970s then apple would be foolish not to sell these beasts. the question is not if they can milk their PowerMac-customers with lower-speed-970s but if Apple can open new markets with absolutely high-end-machines... with the 2.5Ghz 970s and the option to bring out quad-970s at 2.5Ghz each cpu(!!!!) apple has the chance to get into the high-end graphics/video/movie-production market and eat other alternatives (wintel/linux/siliconGraphix or whatever) with it's own killer-machines... price rates could be:

PowerMac
(entry) 1.4Ghz single - 1499$
(mid) 1.6Ghz dual - 1999$
(high) 1.8Ghz dual - 2499$

PowerMac "Extreme/RenderMac"
(entry) 1.8Ghz quad - 3499$
(mid) 2.2Ghz quad - 4099$
(high) 2.5Ghz quad - 4899$

how about this? all about options... apple could milk the market and all will be happy... every customer has the chance to buy what he'll need...
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
go AAPL, go to $70 !!! © 2004
Reply
post #56 of 88
[quote] PowerMac
(entry) 1.4Ghz single - 1499$
(mid) 1.6Ghz dual - 1999$
(high) 1.8Ghz dual - 2499$

PowerMac "Extreme/RenderMac"
(entry) 1.8Ghz quad - 3499$
(mid) 2.2Ghz quad - 4099$
(high) 2.5Ghz quad - 4899$

how about this? all about options... apple could milk the market and all will be happy... every customer has the chance to buy what he'll need...

<hr></blockquote>

Krassy. That's m'boy!

100% agreed.

This is exactly the growth machine Apple needs.

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 #57 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by Krassy:
<strong>a)
in my opinion -- the fact, that the 970 has such a superior bus-technology compared to the G4-MaxBus, is the reason why it is so important that apple goes all dual again. at least the mid-range PowerMac must be a dualie... with os x AND the 970 it would be the worst decision ever to switch back to single-cpu-systems.
b)
if IBM is able to deliver high quantities of 2.5Ghz 970s then apple would be foolish not to sell these beasts. the question is not if they can milk their PowerMac-customers with lower-speed-970s but if Apple can open new markets with absolutely high-end-machines... with the 2.5Ghz 970s and the option to bring out quad-970s at 2.5Ghz each cpu(!!!!) apple has the chance to get into the high-end graphics/video/movie-production market and eat other alternatives (wintel/linux/siliconGraphix or whatever) with it's own killer-machines... price rates could be:

PowerMac
(entry) 1.4Ghz single - 1499$
(mid) 1.6Ghz dual - 1999$
(high) 1.8Ghz dual - 2499$

PowerMac "Extreme/RenderMac"
(entry) 1.8Ghz quad - 3499$
(mid) 2.2Ghz quad - 4099$
(high) 2.5Ghz quad - 4899$

how about this? all about options... apple could milk the market and all will be happy... every customer has the chance to buy what he'll need...</strong><hr></blockquote>

All PowerMacs should be Duals or better, this will give developers incentive to optamize professional programs for MP systems, which will be even more important as we move to Dual core and Hyperthreading processors. I would also like to see MP systems make it into the consumer lin-up. The reason that I see this as benefitial is that as consumers are doing more with computers, there will be a higher demand for multiple tasks to be carried out at the same time. As good as AltiVec is, it will only go so far in making the processors better able to multi-task, and MP systems can do this better than SP systems can.

Think about it, what is a Digital Hub, and what tasks will consumers be using it for in 2-5 years? If FireWire 800 does make inroads into AV system connectivity, which seams to be a logical place for it, then what will be the demand of that on systems? I can see a lot of potential tasks being carried out at the same time at home. Burning CD's/DVD's, surfing the Web or playing a game, rendering an iMovie, streaming a movie to your TV in the other room, and listending to music all at the same time. MP systems will make this a more enjoyable experience than SP systems can, even if the MP systems are running at a slower (ie more economical) speed.
post #58 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by Messiah:
<strong>I don't think we'll see huge clock speed increases for the initial launch of the 970. Right now Apple will be trying to figure out how SLOW a clock speed they can get away with.

Face it people, Apple are going to take the p!ss out off us again - simply because they can - there is no competition in the market. SJ must thank God every morning for OS X.

Please discuss...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sure... I think the sentiments you express have no merit. Apple has been providing the fastest machines it has been capable of providing; they have not tried to hold anything back, they have been hamstrung by a chip supplier (Motorola) that has lost interest in the desktop market.

Everything from the processor to the resulting bus design/speed has been dependent on the processors MOT delivered. It is unreasonable to state that Apple wants to sell slow hardware because they have no competition. It is quite clear, especially for the Pro market, that Apple faces competition from all sides. Professionals may have a platform they prefer, but they will also be realistic about it, and use the fastest machine they can, if it makes a difference to their bottom line.

It is absolutely in Apple's best interests to release the fastest machines they possibly can, in the shortest timeframe they possibly can. I submit to you that they've been doing this all along, they simply have been limited in what they can accomplish because of MOT's relative disinterest in pushing the PPC architecture for the desktop.

Apple is well aware that they need machines that meet or exceed solutions running on x86 with Windows XP in terms of performance. I expect they'll step up to the plate.
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 #59 of 88
Moki, laying on the smack down.
All of the sudden, I've got the urge for a little EV Nova
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 #60 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>Apple, to me...are at the point where they can't afford to get much smaller. How many times can you downsize your company before your purchasing volume on parts leaves you with such a massive disparity with Dell that your products will look ridiculously priced. ie you can, theoretically, get to a point where Apple can't compete on hardware prices and will, logically, throw in the towel and be a software only company.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Eeeeeeh!

... and switch the OS to the x86 platform, trying to hold on to ever shrinking niches while hoping for a buyer?

Hmmmmmm, I wonder if the Deja Vu alone would make Steve Jobs squeal like Mini-Me down a laundry shoot?
In life, as in chess, the moves that hurt the most, are the ones you didn't see ...
Reply
In life, as in chess, the moves that hurt the most, are the ones you didn't see ...
Reply
post #61 of 88
Well, Overtoasty, I didn't say it would be pretty!

Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Moki's defence of Apple is appropriate here. I don't like the G4 or Moto, inadvertant or otherwise, leaving Apple in the lurch.

(The lack of G5 hints that Moto' either cut it due to bleeding red $...or one hell of a major tech' difficulty held it up or Apple decided to go with IBM a looooong time ago following the G4 at 500mhz debacle. All the PR noises coming out of Moto for the last few years seems to indicate that desktop cpus are off their map. And a Canadian Rep was reputed to say (in a Macworld interview...) that the G5 wasn't even on their radar. Either way, I can't see how Apple can be blamed for Moto's problems. In this sense, Moto's problems have also become Apple's. Apple have probably done the best they can. The stuttering 'power'Mac bumps...must have left Steve Jobs purple in the face.)

I'm with Moki. Sooner or later, Apple will stand up to the plate and...STRIKE.

I feel they have to.

Everything else about the Steve Jobs era indicates this, the cpu/performance issue, is the last major stone left unturned. Everything else is looking great for Apple. The 970 really would be one of the final pieces in the puzzle.

Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
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 #62 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon:
<strong>
I'm with Moki. Sooner or later, Apple will stand up to the plate and...STRIKE.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Whoa... Think you meant "out of the park grand slam."
post #63 of 88
I'm amazed no one realizes one of the biggest gems in Apple's crown is not just OS X, but Cocoa. It's one helluva powerful AppKit and I believe Apple is making a ton of headway by finally including Developer Tools with every machine sold and allowing free access to it on the Net.

A lot of people stick with Windows because it was the easiest to rapidly develop in house apps on (NeXTStep not included) with VisualBASIC and Visual C++.

Now, however, the shoe is on the other foot. MSFT is charging big dollars for dev tools and Apple is giving away very advanced development kits for free, and even better its on a UNIX system. And with the ability to use terminal commands inside a Cocoa app, it makes giving user unfriendly command line utils an easy to build front end.

I dare say that the geeks will be getting stoked as they learn more about Cocoa. And, well, where the programmers are is were the programs are.

The 970 will be huge and help draw more folks into the Mac, but Cocoa will help keep them here with a wider variety of apps for the platform.
post #64 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by mooseman:
<strong>I'm amazed no one realizes one of the biggest gems in Apple's crown is not just OS X, but Cocoa. It's one helluva powerful AppKit and I believe Apple is making a ton of headway by finally including Developer Tools with every machine sold and allowing free access to it on the Net.

A lot of people stick with Windows because it was the easiest to rapidly develop in house apps on (NeXTStep not included) with VisualBASIC and Visual C++.

Now, however, the shoe is on the other foot. MSFT is charging big dollars for dev tools and Apple is giving away very advanced development kits for free, and even better its on a UNIX system. And with the ability to use terminal commands inside a Cocoa app, it makes giving user unfriendly command line utils an easy to build front end.

I dare say that the geeks will be getting stoked as they learn more about Cocoa. And, well, where the programmers are is were the programs are.

The 970 will be huge and help draw more folks into the Mac, but Cocoa will help keep them here with a wider variety of apps for the platform.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The big problem with Cocoa is that it is Object C. Which is not in itself the problem, but the vast majoriaty of progrmmers do not know this varient of the C programming language.
post #65 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by @homenow:
<strong>The big problem with Cocoa is that it is Object C. Which is not in itself the problem, but the vast majoriaty of progrmmers do not know this varient of the C programming language.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Its not that much of a problem, actually. Obj-C is a very simple extension to C and Cocoa is the only framework I've used so far (out of about half a dozen) in which I've managed to build a reasonably complex application in mere days... without having to fight with the framework to make it happen. Instead I can just deal with the parts of my app which make it my app. I must say that I'm quite impressed. I haven't tried it but apparently Java can be used in place of Obj-C if that's more to your liking (its not to mine).

Apple can't rest on its laurels, however, because Microsoft's .NET environments (MC++, C#, etc) are quite impressive as well. And Apple's development tools have some stability issues which I'm currently struggling with (of course, so does .NET!).
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #66 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by Programmer:
<strong>

Its not that much of a problem, actually. Obj-C is a very simple extension to C and Cocoa is the only framework I've used so far (out of about half a dozen) in which I've managed to build a reasonably complex application in mere days... without having to fight with the framework to make it happen. Instead I can just deal with the parts of my app which make it my app. I must say that I'm quite impressed. I haven't tried it but apparently Java can be used in place of Obj-C if that's more to your liking (its not to mine).
.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'd have to completely agree with Programmer - my day job is Carbon, and I've been playing with Cocoa, and doing some UI prototyping for usability testing with it, and I was amazed at how quickly I got something really nice up and running.

Others have told me Cocoa gets in the way with large apps, but those who have told me this are old, old Carbon & framework folks, who have no experience with Cocoa. Judging by apps like iPhoto and iDVD though, I think it's like anything, the more experience you have with a framework, the better app you can write.
post #67 of 88
no one seems to have tackled one issue apple must be concerned about if/when they release a 970 based powermac.

the large jump in clock speed and performance will take its toll on the perceived power of apple's other products. true, the xserve may go 970 based as new powermacs are rolled out, but with the reported Mhz limitations on the current iteration of the G4, won't there be a tremendous disparity between powermacs and portables and consumer machines?

it is quite a leap of faith to think that apple would rev their whole product line simulatiously in order to address this. moving emacs and imacs to 1/1.25 or 1.42 Ghz G4s, a 1Ghz+ G3 or even a G4 for the iBook, and some serious Mhz leaps for the current 3 Powerbooks would seem like the most likely option. even if the 970 is intro'd at a max 1.8Ghz, those other machines will look increasing beleagured in terms of price, especially to consumers comparing them to the lastest x86 machines on the shelves, never mind the new cool looking pro macs.

the original post didn't seem to propose this as one reason apple may be in a pricing and perception quandary in the future. how apple promotes and prices the new 970 based powermacs will have a tremendous impact on their bottom line. i'm sure that, if apple can deliver the new machines on time and without too many migratory kludges, they will sell like hotcakes. if they complement g4 powermacs in the product range they can be priced higher, but will still sell to many pros if they are fast and at the bleeding edge.

however, apple will have difficulty maintaining current price points on their other products. surely they must be aware of this potential problem. how will they deal with it? pin their hopes on the power of 970s and X 10.3, and strong new sales in core and developing markets? promote an aggressive hardware business more focused on the digital hub, and thus a potential lucrative and non Mhz dependent revenue stream? run consumer and laptop prices down to an even tighter set of profit margins to try and stimulate the mac market share, whilst making their machines look cheaper compared to x86s?

personally, i'm stuck on how to get around it. i don't doubt that the 970 is coming to macs this year. i just don't know how they will keep it from affecting the rest of the company's hardware products, without some other 'magic' restorative component. mebbe a new killer app or device. a new hitherto unknown processor or scaling technique to allow other machines to keep pace in the 970's slipstream more gracefully. or something we really don't know about ... a strategic alliance with another company, or some revolutionary new way of using a mac. answers on a postcard please ....
Nothing but sunshine, it's all sunshine ....
Reply
Nothing but sunshine, it's all sunshine ....
Reply
post #68 of 88
[quote]Earlier in the month, I reported on the possibility that the PPC 970 might be released at 2.5GHz. This was big news, but it seems like most of us might have been a little too optimistic. I just ran across a link at Ace's to an older ZDNET article with the following tidbit in it:
The company first revealed its plans for the chip at last October's Microprocessor Forum, and at the time said the chip would run up to 1.8GHz, suggesting that a manufacturing process upgrade would be necessary before higher clock speeds could be achieved. IBM says a later PowerPC 970 will reach 2.5GHz using a 90-nanometre manufacturing process.

The first run will be out of IBM's 0.13u SOI Fishkill, NY fab, so it looks like we won't see the 2.5GHz version as soon as we'd hoped. (Also, while you're flaming me about the Salon post below, be sure and flame me about Part II of the PPC 970 article. My Inbox has been a little empty lately, and I'm beginning to feel unloved.)<hr></blockquote>


uh oh

<a href="http://www.arstechnica.com" target="_blank">www.arstechnica.com</a>
post #69 of 88
Jobes,

I think that Apples portables are in good shape. They will probably get another revision in late spring to early summer. Right now they are Apple most competative products in price performance. Also Laptops tend to lag behid in top end speed from their desktop cousins.

The big question I have is in the consumer market. Apple went 13 months last year without a speed bump, and when it came they were pretty conservative with it. The certainly had room to push the high end at least up to 1.25 Ghz, but didnt. Now I know all the arguments about what is really needed for home use and all, but the iMacs are too slow to truely be competative in their market. Everyone likes car analogies (Not! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> ), so to put it another way, Apple is trying to market a Ferrarie with an Escort engine in it with the current crop of iMacs, and it dosnt look like the new G4's will come along in time, or to go to Dual's. The only way out that I see is for them to move them to 970's as well. If rumour of 2 new mother boards bieng ready for production holds true, I would think that these are for the PM and Xserve, and we will see another lackluster iMac speed bump in late summer to early fall.
post #70 of 88
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>
uh oh

<a href="http://www.arstechnica.com" target="_blank">www.arstechnica.com</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

I wouldn't fret about it -- this looks like its based on a mix of new and old information, all of it supposition. The 0.13 micron version can probably reach 2.5 GHz, it will just generate a whole lot of heat (65 W according to the French site). I doubt Apple will use such a hot processor in an MP machine.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #71 of 88
&gt;however, apple will have difficulty maintaining current &gt;price points on their other products. surely they must &gt;be aware of this potential problem. how will they deal &gt;with it? pin their hopes on the power of 970s and X &gt;10.3, and strong new sales in core and developing &gt;markets? promote an aggressive hardware business &gt;more focused on the digital hub, and thus a potential &gt;lucrative and non Mhz dependent revenue stream? &gt;run consumer and laptop prices down to an even &gt;tighter set of profit margins to try and stimulate the mac &gt;market share, whilst making their machines look &gt;cheaper compared to x86s?


No one seems to address one issue which ought to be obvious. The components which Apple uses in its hardware cost them about the same as they cost every other manufacturer subject to volume pricing differentials (one advantage of selling more machines).

[ 03-10-2003: Message edited by: RBR ]</p>
post #72 of 88
Regarding the upcoming performance gap between the 970 and non 970 iSomething computers. With 970 in Towers ans Servers the performence gap will get begger than today, but: First of all there alredy is a big difference one 1 GH G4 in top of the line iMac and iBooks compared to the duals in the Towers. Secondly if you really want performence in the first place you do not buy a iMac.

The power requirment of the first generation of 970 at 1.2 GHz are compatible with both mobile use and things like the iMac. So my guess for 970 inplementation order is 1. Tower 2. Server. 3. PBook. 4 iMac. 5. iBook. 1&2 will com at the same time more or less, 3 not that far behind and the other at a later time 2 or 3 upgrade cycles behind the start. (all this assuming that there are no bus or memory suff that is problematic in the confinements of a BP or iMac)

AppleNut!
You do not have to don the asbestos shirt due to me flaming you, but I am really eager to read that part II about 970
post #73 of 88
Quote:
Originally posted by Flounder
Moki, laying on the smack down.
All of the sudden, I've got the urge for a little EV Nova

Heh, heh! Just fired up EVN again last night. Still trying to figure out the Auroran thread.

Way to say it Moki. Apple has taken Motorola's mediocre production and wrung every ounce of performance out of it. They have NOT held back. There is no reason to think they will start now.

If you want to look at theoretical numbers, the P4 3.06 should be more then twice as fast as a single 1.42 G4. In the real world while it is a lot faster, it isn't even close to twice as fast. (and we are not talking Altivec or multiprocessor here). Apple has done some amazing things with what they had to work with. Now they have something more astounding to work with and there is not a single indication in their history under Jobs that indicates they will hold anything back on the top line PowerMacs. I fully expect them to wring every ounce of performance out of the 970 that they can, and to use the fastest chips that IBM can provide them in sufficient volume.

As to the rumored 2.5ghz? It was a chip in a lab that demonstrated what the current process was capable of on the high end, not what is expected of current volume production. A dual 1.8ghz PowerMac will be a heck of a machine but some folks wouldn't be satisfied if it was a quad 5ghz. They would probably still insist that Apple was holding back.
Mac User since '86 and Apple II before that.
Reply
Mac User since '86 and Apple II before that.
Reply
post #74 of 88
Quote:
Originally posted by jobes
No one seems to have tackled one issue Apple must be concerned about if/when they release a 970 based powermac.

The large jump in clock speed and performance will take its toll on the perceived power of apple's other products. true, the xserve may go 970 based as new powermacs are rolled out, but with the reported Mhz limitations on the current iteration of the G4, won't there be a tremendous disparity between powermacs and portables and consumer machines?

Not if they adjust the prices accordingly. The problem now is justifying a $1,499 + $799 Power Mac and 17" Studio Display over a $1799 iMac. If the 970 Power Macs force a lower iMac price, then it's a good thing.
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #75 of 88
I curious about how often Apple will update its powermacs now that Moto isn't doling out the speed bumps. If Apple has to wait long between 970 speed bumps, it would make sense for them to bump Powermacs more often to maximize profits. Something like this:

IBM's 970 (top end):
1.8 GHz June 03
2.5 GHz June 04
3.4 GHz June 05

Powermacs (top end):
1.4 GHz June 03
1.8 GHz Jan 04
2.2 GHz June 04
2.5 GHz Jan 05
3.0 GHz June 05
3.4 GHz Jan 06

Of course this makes sense for maximizing profits only if IBM bumps the 970 at long intervals. If IBM is giving Apple speed bumped 970s every 4 months, it wouldn't make sense for Apple to bump the towers every two months, the cost of manufacturing switchover and inventory management would be too high. My question is, how often will Apple bump the Powermacs? If Apple has the option to bump them every 5 months, will they? Every 6 months? And how often will IBM bump the 970? If IBM is bumping it every 6 months, then Apple won't have much of a choice in the matter, they've got to offer the best they have, since their only alternative would be to speedbump the towers every 3 months.

Yes, there is of course the need to offer very conservatively bumped Powermacs to maintain a buffer against IBM hitting their own speedbumps in scaling the 970. But with the 970, IBM has an interest in scaling it for themselves, since they will use it in blade servers. Self-interest, along with a killer reputation at crafting silicon, should render this "moto-buffer" strategy obsolete.

Besides GHz, Apple could hold back on dual CPUs...this is more probably but still unlikely. I like to think that Apple knows about the roaring inferno under their ass, and is prepared to offer the fastest Powermacs possible.
post #76 of 88
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
I curious about how often Apple will update its powermacs now that Moto isn't doling out the speed bumps. If Apple has to wait long between 970 speed bumps, it would make sense for them to bump Powermacs more often to maximize profits. Something like this:


JD,
I think one way of looking at how fast they are going to roll them out is look at the present PMs. Apple is using the fastest chips that are available. At least according to Motorola's website. Nowhere on their website (that I am aware of) does it discuss 1.42 GHz G4s, yet Apple is using them. I think what Moki discussed above is correct. Apple knows they are behind and is doing everything they can to catch up. They will release the fastest 970s that IBM can supply.
post #77 of 88
Quote:
The premise that there is no competition is too flawed for words. If there was no competition for OSX, Apple's market share would be steadily climbing despite whatever insane price tag they put on their machines. Since they have actually lost more marketshare since Jobs' return, it must be the case (as it was before) that for the overwhelming majority of people windows offerings are not only competitive, they are superior.
People buy a machine (not an OS), this is a balance of PRICE, PERFORMANCE, and EXPERIENCE. Mebbe Apple provides a better experience, but it gets so soundly thrashed in the areas of price and performance, that it's still losing quarterly sales (especially in the pro line). The iBook has been one of their best selling machines. Why? because it's the closest they come to providing a cheap machine with relatively competitive performance. That means that OSX has LOTS of COMPETITION whether or not Apple chooses to recognize it or stick their faces in the sand for another 4 years.

This is the last chance Apple will see to make any serious inroads in their market-share -- which absolutely MUST INCREASE if Apple wants to remain a viable platform for another decade -- with the wintelon world's 64 bit path far from clear, and easily 18-24 months from offering the kind of reach a PPC970 might offer, this is the time to strike.

Not only do the machines need to be the fastest they can possibly be, they also need to, at a minimum, begin to drive their entire desktop line (consumer and pro) from 200-500USD cheaper on each and ever model.

If they choose to eek out the speed gains, people will hold off, the machines need to be basically irresistable. Jobs needs to get on stage and run the baddest photoshop/video/3-d bake off you've ever seen, something against a top shelf PC, not a carefully hobbled one, and when he does it, the mac has to win by at least half, but more like two thirds or three quarters. What takes 2 minutes on the mac, has to take 5 or more on the PC. Apple won't get there by holding back. Take stock of just how many pro customers they've lost, PM sales are a joke, and those customers aren't coming back unless they see dramatic performance increases. Remember they're now on a different platform, getting them to switch back after they've shelled out for PC systems and software won't be easy for the same reasons that many stuck with the mac for so long in the first place, switching platforms costs money and simply isn't worth it just to be a bit faster, you've gotta be 200-400% faster at the prices Apple is looking to charge. Or you gotta be a much more competitively priced! simple.

I hope Apple remembers this as the 970 hits and tumbles into the consumer range come 2004.

If it becomes that pervasive...it should be much cheaper than the G4 is now for Apple. That means lower prices AND profits. Except bigger profits. In that context and for the foreseeable future...single cpu supplier = This is a Good ThingTM.

Why? Because they'll be selling more of everything.

Roll on 2004.

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 #78 of 88
Thread Starter 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by moki
Quote:
Sure... I think the sentiments you express have no merit. Apple has been providing the fastest machines it has been capable of providing; they have not tried to hold anything back, they have been hamstrung by a chip supplier (Motorola) that has lost interest in the desktop market.

With respect I think you're wrong. I think Apple are in the business of holding back - whether it be due to neccesity or profit. Their primary concern is their share price, and giving away the biggest break they've had in years isn't going to win them any friends on the stockmarket.

The evidence:

1. The illusive 1GHz G3 part, that's been mentioned on these very boards on countless occasions. This part is STILL not used in any Apple product - that's what I would call holding back! It would have been in the iBook by now if Apple weren't trying to make the Power Book G4 look more powerful by comparison.

2. Power Mac G4 line up is currrently 867MHz/1.25GHz/1.42GHz. What happened to the 933MHz & 1.0GHz parts? Did Motorola lose the plans overnight? The 867MHz part debuted in the initial Quicksilver G4 for fecks sake! If apple were in the business of delivering the fastest parts they could lay their hands on, the Power Mac G4 family would be at 1GHz/1.25GHz/1.42GHz. Again, they're not putting the 933MHz or 1GHz parts into the entry level machine because the two other machines need to look fast by comparison.

I can guarantee, that they'll be looking at the parts that are available to them, and figuring out a way of squeezing every last penny out of this new CPU. Apple have always done this, it means you can sell the same machine to three different customers at the highest price that each of those customers is willing to pay. You don't just sell it at the cheapest price! Look at all the money you'd lose!

The frequencies themselves don't mean anything. I'm not about to predict the exact frequencies that we'll see. What's important is that the new machines must deliver more bang per buck than anything that has gone before. I can guarantee that if they released a 1.0GHz/1.2GHz/1.4GHz G5 family it would sell, because each of those machines is considerably faster than the machine it replaces.

What they won't do is release the fastest parts available to them on day one, and then sit on their hands and hope blindly that IBM can deliver on it's promise.

Just because a 2.5GHz part is available, we won't see a 2.3GHz/2.4GHz/2.5GHz line up. We might see a 1.4GHz/2.0GHz/2.4GHz line up, with Apple having all the freqencies in between as options for the future.

They might CLAIM that they are the fastest parts available, but they'll play it smart, they'll dripfeed us the parts and make extra profits on the speed bumps, whilst stockpiling faster parts so that they can plan ahead. It's good business sense, and ergo: we'll end up paying top dollar for whatever they produce on the day, only to have them wave it under our noses at a vastly reduced price shortly thereafter.

Just because you know more about the Mac than most people, and want the fastest processor available, isn't enough to actually make it happen.

Time will tell!
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #79 of 88
Quote:
Originally posted by Messiah
If apple were in the business of delivering the fastest parts they could lay their hands on, the Power Mac G4 family would be at 1GHz/1.25GHz/1.42GHz.

uhh, it is.
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 #80 of 88
Quote:
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Carmack already has Q3 optimized for dual PPC. Bribe him to add a few altivec optimizations, stand back, and be amazed.

It would be something else to see hard-core gamers start buying Powermacs because they get 1.5-2X the framerates of Wintels!

Actually Quake 3 IS optimized for Altivec.

Steve needs to do a Photoshop bakeoff... If he doesnt, well, then PC speeds is still in the lead.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Don't get too excited...