New PowerMac specs - Page 8

Agent Cooper:

[quote] Why do we let Intel draw on our insecurities and an bully us into a Mhz Pissing match? Threatening to leave the Mac platform every time our own internal expectations aren't met seems childish. <hr></blockquote>

I am not aware of 'threatening' to leave the mac platform before mainly because it has not crossed my mind before.

I also don't believe having realisitc expectations of performance from a Powermac is childish. What is so 'unrealistic' about expecting better perfomance from Apple computers? After all the technology is there but Apple are let down a lot by the progress from Motorola.

The reason for mentioning PC performance is to draw comparisons to what is achievable. Nothing more.

[quote] No, I have no opinion whatsoever on .Mac, and I'm not sure why its assumed I would. <hr></blockquote>

The issue was not what you thought about .mac but that mac users have every right to get up and shout about something that pisses them off. For me it is one of the strengths of Apple that they have this expectation from their community. The same reason why people complain about poor performance mainly due to Motorola letting Apple down and hopefully one of the reasons Apple will move soon to another chip provider like IBM or AMD etc.

[quote]..... but I really don't understand why everyone got so upset at the revalation they weren't getting dual 3Ghz......... g5s. <hr></blockquote>

When did I state that ??????? Only the extreme optomist would expect that. Me, I wish for decent and achievable levels of performance. For me personally that would be a similar level to AMD at 1.8 GHz. I would LOVE to have P4 2.45GHz performance in a Powermac but not at the price of having to use Windows everyday.

I think most punters would be happy at 1.6GHz as a realistic level. More than the GHz part though is the motherboard and present lack of 'proper' DDR support let alone no Rambus. These are the parts readily available in a P which just are not there in a Powermac. Perhaps later today we will have pucka DDR support and faster throughout which will go some way to realsing the latent power we already have. The disappointment comes from the figures quoted being below 'reasonable' expectation especially at a time we have Jaguar 10.2 which cries out for decent power.

[quote] BTW Moonraker, I think you mean "Beyond the rumor sites. Way beyond." which has the American spelling of rumor, not the British. Just thought I'd be a brat about it since you're quoting <hr></blockquote>


That would be English 'humour' haunebu

1.6GHz is not realistic.

There are 2 ways how to predict processor speeds, based on past announcements:
a: % prediction, if that worked, 1470MHz would ahve been the most you could have expected, but %-prediction obviously doesn't work

b: MHz prediction, according to that, we can expect a maximum of 1233MHz. So those 1250 rumored MHz are actually pretty close to it and are probably only above those 233MHz plus, because of the arguable shift to a 166MHz bus. (Ie due to multipliers).

Expecting a 60% speed increase from one generation to the other, without changing CPU class would have been a world first.

The main problem isn't the CPU speed anyway, but the system bus and RAM. And since that is also tied in with the CPU, it all depends on the CPU and thus on Motorola, who have failed to do msot things right in the past 3 years.

Still, 1250MHz, 166MHz bus (the DDR hack being of no importance for desktop use) and OS X 10.2 withb gcc3, we can expect a fairly decent speed bump.

Whether that justifies the considerably higher price on the high-end model is yet to be seen, judging by the other components we don't know of yet.

My 2c.

G-News

hmm...

fast - $100 increase in price
faster - $200 increase in price
fastest - $300 increase in price

why?

fast and faster because +1 CPU
fastest: ??? to show that it's really great?
==&gt; to rip off power users once again.

G-News

apple rumors page, shows us that the 1.2 model is gonna be the highest , if that is so i think that is a bit lame.
they went from, 867 to 1 gig that is a 13,3 procent increase that is not enough, whe might be faster in the adobe stuf, but i recognized a lot of thing on windows that worked much better, games is a known fact
but internet is very weak on a mac, a windows machine, controls it better, but im shure it is al depending on microsoft,im stil my little mac lover and i cant wait for the new powermac

greats <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

well i was going to say because the rumor sites are full of it, but your reasoning sounds much better!

and remember the atari tt, it was 400 mhz with an 86030 proccessor so everything is possible.!!!!


greats

I have read many of the messages on this topic and am not surprised by the feelings that have been expressed - is anyone? Apple produce and market products that are designed to stimulate emotions, from the operating system and associated software, to the case design, to the innards that make a pointed reference to the 'chip'. It is this last point that many people feel aggrieved about, and Apple has, in this instance, become a victim of its own marketing. Who can remember the campaign that stated that the G4's had the power to burn Pentiums? I do. This comparison, along with the bake off methods that we saw on a regular basis at various macworld's created the impression that not only was the software superior, but the hardware was too. We are now more sceptical. Apple has realised this, and sought to counter it with the megahertz myth, possessing a (large) grain of truth. Although helpful, it is ultimately negative, and still leads to a comparison between the Mac and the windows machine. This comparative method has grown since the ‘switch’ campaign. As a long time Mac user, I wished such a campaign had occurred during the ‘dark days’. Although effective, it has once again created a comparison between the two platforms, hence the anger of the supposed specs on the new powermacs. Everyone on the board can list the numerous improvements that PC’s have had in the last few years, and when compared to the Mac as the campaign suggests, we are uneasy. Apple is uneasy too. Comparisons with PC’s involve specs, design and price. We can say with honesty that they have design and user experience (on the whole) down. Can we say the same regarding price and specs?

I am not about to suggest that the sky is falling. I just believe that the disappointment on the board demonstrates the problem Apple has created for itself in a desire to increase its market share against the other 95 per cent. My solutions? Unfortunately, I am nowhere near the 1$ a year guy to make any suggestions that would matter.

in my email....


Arrived at 11:35 PDT

Apple announced new Power Mac G4 and eMac computers today. We are adding extra RAM at no charge, plus free ground shipping. Place your pre-orders today!

Power Mac G4 (Dual 867MHz 256MB PC2100 DDR SDRAM/60GB/ComboDrive(DVD-ROM/CD-RW)/GigEnet/56K modem) with an extra 256MB FREE $1699
Power Mac G4 (Dual 1GHz 256MB PC2700 DDR SDRAM/80GB/SuperDrive(DVD-R/CD-RW)/GigEnet/56K modem) with an extra 256MB FREE $2499
Power Mac G4 (Dual 1.25GHz 512MB PC2700 DDR SDRAM/120GB/SuperDrive(DVD-R/CD-RW)/GigEnet/56K modem) with an extra 512MB FREE $3299

<a href="http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12&a d=mail" target="_blank">http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12&a d=mail</a>

Also, Apple lowered prices on the eMac, and added a SuperDrive model:

eMac (800MHzG4/256MB/60GB/SuperDrive/NVIDIA/Modem) with an extra 256MB FREE $1499

<a href="http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=11&a d=mail" target="_blank">http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=11&a d=mail</a>

Prices on the iMac dropped (the CDRW model is now $1299 and the Combo drive model is $1499).

We also have some great prices on factory-refurbished iBooks and PowerBooks:

iBook G3 600MHz/128MB/15G/DVD 12.1" Apple Refurbished\t$1079.00\t
iBook G3 600MHZ/128MB/20G/COMBO 12.1" Apple Refurbished\t$1185.00
PowerBook G4 667MHz/512Mb/30G/DVD/Airport 15.2" Apple Refurbished $2099

<a href="http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_category.html?CATEGORY_ID=264&ad=mail" target="_blank">http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_category.html?CATEGORY_ID=264&ad=mail</a>

And, as always, remember you earn frequent flyer miles on every purchase!

Thanks,

flymilesmicro.com
an ExperCom site

store is up, 1.25GHz on top, leaked case.

G-news

well its not anymore, but it was for a few secs
powermac page is still the old one, too bad, coz that's the really interesting ones....tech sheet plz...

G-News

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: G-News ]</p>

Well, at least the case isn't WHITE.

Go see there !!!!

<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/viceversa/PhotoAlbum8.html" target="_blank">http://homepage.mac.com/viceversa/PhotoAlbum8.html</a>

6-8 weeks shipping time on the top model, WTF????
why do they even bother announcing that then?

no radeon 9700 BTO either atm, too bad, I'll have to wait.

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: G-News ]</p>

And bravo, if the store page I'm looking at is correct, the 867 model includes 1MB of L3 cache per processor! I was afraid Apple would dump the L3 cache to get the price down. And dual optical drive bays!

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: BrunoBruin ]</p>

This is a fine update, I can't believe the ones complaining. Look at the dual 867 MHz G4 with 2x 1 MB L3 cache for 1699$ !!!!!!!! That's a sweet deal!

compare that to the old single 800 without L3 cache...and just for 100$ more

PLUS more internal expansion (HD, RAM etc.)

This rocks!!

[quote]This rocks!! <hr></blockquote>

Well, I don't know if it ROCKS, but it's a solid upgrade and the base machine is a great value. If Steve had unveiled these at MWNY instead of letting speculation get totally out of hand for a month, I think people would be happier.

166 Mhz FSB, finally. I'm going to replace my G3/266 (oc'd from 233) with the dual 1 Ghz. Do you think I'll notice the difference in OS X?

<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />

Adobe itself admits these new machines are faster than any PC in Photoshop. Makes me wonder if those dual 1GHz tests done over at that Digital Video site were bogus. Either that or the 167MHz bus and DDR-hack help alot.

I'm happy with this update. Small notes:

the machine now has 2 large optical bays; the small ZIP bay is dead.


Hmmm, no speakers or airport with the Best configuration...

GF4 Ti is available as a build to order option (+250 smackers).

I'll keep this open but move it to Current Hardware...