or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's halts reseller orders for 17-inch iMac G5, inventory now limited
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's halts reseller orders for 17-inch iMac G5, inventory now limited

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
Apple Computer this week official shifted its PowerPC-based 17-inch iMac G5 offering to "End-Of-Life" status, tipsters tell AppleInsider.

Along with the shift in status, the company began informing resellers in the US that it would accept no new orders for the model. This suggests that Apple's inventory of the 17-inch iMac G5 model is nearly depleted.

The company will reportedly continue to accept individual customer orders for the computer through its online store "while supplies last." Beyond this, the 17-inch iMac G5 will only be available from Apple authorized resellers who hold remaining inventory of the computer at their respective locations.

While informing resellers of the change, Apple made no mention of the 20-inch iMac G5, suggesting it retains slightly more of these model's than the lower-cost 17-inch configuration.

Those customers still looking to secure a 17-inch iMac G5 at discount need to look no further than Amazon.com, which still retains supply of the model and is offering $125 back via a mail-in rebate.
post #2 of 41
so this January apple has been getting people to pay exactly the same price for an obsolete model. nice. so if i was someone making a living (say designing) using macs, now i'm faced with the slower (because of rosetta) imac core duo, or the powermac g5 tower which may be beyond my needs/budget... or an underpowered g4 laptop, or slower (because of rosetta) macbook pro. this along with (understandably) no specific timeline for Universal adobe, macromedia, microsoft office software, the core tools for people that use a mac for work.

i understand that there are lots of counter arguments to my bitchin' above (feel free to mention them) but certainly this is the bitter end of the bittersweet transition to intel, no?

that said, i empathise with apple's position and hope it truly is able to mitigate the risks and dissapointments of the transition while maximising the fun, easy to use, and exhilarating bits of Mac use. hmmm
post #3 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
so if i was someone making a living (say designing) using macs, now i'm faced with the slower (because of rosetta) imac core duo, or the powermac g5 tower which may be beyond my needs/budget...

If your Mac is your livelihood and you can't afford an extra $700 for the tower then perhaps you should wait a couple months for everything to go Intel native.

The real losers are going to be the schools (including universities) who want to put together a lab but for some reason depend on something running in Classic.

All in all, though, I don't think most people will care.
post #4 of 41
Are these the PowerPC or the Intel models?
post #5 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by zunx
Are these the PowerPC or the Intel models?

It is the PowerPC G5 models which are being discontinued.
post #6 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by zunx
Are these the PowerPC or the Intel models?

PowerPC.

post #7 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by Booga
If your Mac is your livelihood and you can't afford an extra $700 for the tower then perhaps you should wait a couple months for everything to go Intel native.

That presumes that you've already got a Mac.

If I was to employ another designer at my place (ha!) then I'd need to buy them a Mac. It'll have to be a refurbished iMac G5 once the iMac is only available as Intel.

PowerMacs are nice but entirely OTT for us.
post #8 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
That presumes that you've already got a Mac.

If I was to employ another designer at my place (ha!) then I'd need to buy them a Mac. It'll have to be a refurbished iMac G5 once the iMac is only available as Intel.

PowerMacs are nice but entirely OTT for us.

I assume that's because he (or she) would be using Adobe CS2 (or programs from that collection). These will probably go Intel in about 12 months. In the meantime, I am sure PPC machines will still be readily available. Heck, you might even save a big chunk of money by buying a second hand iMac G5 at half the price, as most people want the latest and greatest, and they feel the latest and greatest == Intel.
post #9 of 41
Apple needs to clear out these G5's as soon as possible. And they seem to be doing it in great proportions. Our local retail store is clearing out 17" G5/iSights for $899 (cdn$).

Of course, we here know that G5's will still work extremely well for years to come, but the general public doesn't. The sooner the mixed message of having two processors, the better.

Thankfully most see a familiar name in Intel and automatically buy that thinking they can run Windows on it.
post #10 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by Robin Hood
I assume that's because he (or she) would be using Adobe CS2 (or programs from that collection).

Other than SubEthaEdit, TextMate and the iLife/iWork apps, everything else is PowerPC and will be for some time. I couldn't get by without Photoshop/ImageReady and many web designers can't get by without Dreamweaver/Flash/Fireworks. Until Adobemedia get their act together the Intel Macs are a non-starter for most web design and development.

And please, nobody suggest I use the Gimp for image work.
post #11 of 41
But really, people are looking at this from the standpoint of the G5 being obsolete when that's not the case at all. I bought a new G5 the sunday before MacWorld, not expecting at all they'd update a product the updated less than 6 months earlier. What did I lose in the transition??? 1) Dual Core computing power, 2) Faster bus speed, 3) Higher powered graphics card. What did I gain? 1) I got a new computer at a fair price that still replaces my G4, lovingly called "The Brontosaurus". 2) I'm not crippled using Adobe and Office through rosetta 3) Ican still play Unreal Tournament 2004 (and it looks DAMN good on the iMac).

I thought about taking the G5 back and getting the Core Duo model, but I decided against it primarily because of having to use rosetta until UB's come out, and then, I'm a college student! Would Adobe or MS charge me for the UB? I don't know ... probably so, meaning I couldn't afford it anyway.

For some people, the G5 is going to be perfect and get them through the next few years. I'll be sad to see the G5 go, but it's for the better. I only wish apple didn't rush the iMac to market. Now Steve has to deal with the people trying to disprove his benchmark claims and people upset that certain things aren't running as well. They should have waited until a few more people were on board with UB's. In any case, I'm glad the switch came and it makes you wonder ... is hell just a little bit colder???
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
post #12 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
I thought about taking the G5 back and getting the Core Duo model, but I decided against it primarily because of having to use rosetta until UB's come out, and then, I'm a college student! Would Adobe or MS charge me for the UB? I don't know ... probably so, meaning I couldn't afford it anyway.

I don't think we'll see universal binaries of Creative Suite, Macromedia's tools or MS Office until Adobe and Microsoft are ready to update their products in the normal cycle. So, it'll be part of the usual upgrade to CS3, Studio v9 and Office 2006/7.

What's in it for Adobe or Microsoft having to redo CS2, Studio8 (which is only just out) and Office2004?
post #13 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
That presumes that you've already got a Mac.

If I was to employ another designer at my place (ha!) then I'd need to buy them a Mac. It'll have to be a refurbished iMac G5 once the iMac is only available as Intel.

PowerMacs are nice but entirely OTT for us.

You could by them a refurbished Powermac G5 1.8 with 17 inch LCD monitor for $1299. For about $200 more you could be OTT as well. You could buy them a Mac Mini, 17 inch monitor and a load of ram for much much less to get by for a couple months. There are plenty of folks still getting by doing professional work on G4's. You can buy refurbished iMac G5's for a while. You could hit ebay for goodness sakes.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #14 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
You could by them a refurbished Powermac G5 1.8 with 17 inch LCD monitor for $1299. For about $200 more you could be OTT as well. You could buy them a Mac Mini, 17 inch monitor and a load of ram for much much less to get by for a couple months. There are plenty of folks still getting by doing professional work on G4's. You can buy refurbished iMac G5's for a while. You could hit ebay for goodness sakes.

Nick

That's the point though. It'd have to be a refurb or second hand. I'm fine with that but I imagine many larger businesses aren't fine with it.
post #15 of 41
It depends on how much money flows through the machine, and the person using it, who costs far more than the machine itself. When I had someone working PS on a PM, the PM would have cost me about $5,500 with the way we tended to load it (including monitor). But the person working it cost me upwards of $52,000 a year, plus medical care, insurance, etc.

The cost of the machines were the least of my worries. Most companies not operating on the margins will think the same way. With a typical job flowing through the workplace going for $1,000, and an average of five of those jobs per week, per station, the cost of the machines are not significant.
post #16 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It depends on how much money flows through the machine, and the person using it, who costs far more than the machine itself. When I had someone working PS on a PM, the PM would have cost me about $5,500 with the way we tended to load it (including monitor). But the person working it cost me upwards of $52,000 a year, plus medical care, insurance, etc.

The cost of the machines were the least of my worries. Most companies not operating on the margins will think the same way. With a typical job flowing through the workplace going for $1,000, and an average of five of those jobs per week, per station, the cost of the machines are not significant.

Most of my stuff at the moment is open source software development and given away for free. It's an interesting business model. ;-)
post #17 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Most of my stuff at the moment is open source software development and given away for free. It's an interesting business model. ;-)

I trust that you don't have the philosophy of losing money on every copy, but thinking that the more you give away, the more money you'll make.

Hopefully, you charge for service?
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I don't think we'll see universal binaries of Creative Suite, Macromedia's tools or MS Office until Adobe and Microsoft are ready to update their products in the normal cycle. So, it'll be part of the usual upgrade to CS3, Studio v9 and Office 2006/7.

Exactly. I'm not buying, "We'll see Photoshop et al. Universal in a few months." Regardless if Adobe cares or not, if their code isn't inside Xcode it will take time. Hell even if it was some of their code in Photoshop I'm sure is ancient stuff.

If anything this will show how real Adobe's commitment is to Mac. Yes they make a lot of money off Mac users, but then you have the removal of Premiere.

Still, I'm not expecting CS3 or CS2 i386 by Spring. One of the reasons I jumped on a dual-processor G4 upgrade for my work computer
/* styling for my posts */
.intelligence {display: none;}
Reply
/* styling for my posts */
.intelligence {display: none;}
Reply
post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by IonYz
Exactly. I'm not buying, "We'll see Photoshop et al. Universal in a few months." Regardless if Adobe cares or not, if their code isn't inside Xcode it will take time. Hell even if it was some of their code in Photoshop I'm sure is ancient stuff.

If anything this will show how real Adobe's commitment is to Mac. Yes they make a lot of money off Mac users, but then you have the removal of Premiere.

Still, I'm not expecting CS3 or CS2 i386 by Spring. One of the reasons I jumped on a dual-processor G4 upgrade for my work computer

What's interesting about all of this is that even Mathamatica, which was demoed during the dev conv, to great public acclaim, is not yet available as a universal binary!

They have both 32 and 64 bit versions available for the MacPPC machines.

And, that was supposed to have been easy!
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Most of my stuff at the moment is open source software development and given away for free. It's an interesting business model. ;-)

That is an interesting business model. What do you like to give away?

Several times you have mentioned how you liked the internal design of the earlier G5 iMacs. Those are the first ones introduced with the 'display is the computer', with nVidia 5200 gpus, and with the ddr 400 RAM, right? Some times we refer to a revision A, and I think that must mean the one that came after the first model, as how could it be a revision, if it is the first model? Anyway, those are the ones you liked the internal design on, righto?
post #21 of 41
People should really give Adobe a break on this one. Think about it this way:

1) The overwhelming majority of creative users on the Mac side use PowerMacs. The minority are on PowerBooks. A small fraction use iMacs or iBooks. Only their second largest installed base even has the possibility to upgrade to Intel at the moment. Thats a lot of work (I believe that they have to move to Xcode) to appease a fairly small number of customers that will be upgrading in the timeframe before CS3 is released.

2) Adobe's efforts right now are concentrated on merging their and Macromedia's products. I think we will see the value of the Creative Suite rise significantly within the next two revisions. Imagine the combined strengths of Imageready and Fireworks, Illustrator and Freehand, GoLive and Dreamweaver, PDF and Flash. Wouldnt you want them to bring us more value than to waste time updating programs that wont be used by many? Rest assured, CS3 and all its variants will be Intel native.

I realize that there will probably be a short gap in time between the time that the PowerMac replacements come out and CS3 is released, but I would venture that this will hurt Apple more than customers, since many will postpone their upgrades until CS3 is released. Besides, I wouldnt be too thrilled about a version 1 product...

3) Why do people even bother bringing up Premiere as an issue with Adobe's loyalty (loyalty is a bad word really, its all about money anyway) to the Mac platform?

Premiere has had an overwhelming amount of competition since Final Cut was released, even on the PC only side there has been fierce competition. At the time, Avid and Media 100 were covering the high end and Premiere had the low-mid end. When Final Cut was released at a similar price, with more features and an arguably better workflow, Premiere sales on the Mac plumited. Even when Adobe made Premiere more competetive, it was too late, Final Cut was dominating and Avid Express was covering the rest of the market. It made no sense for Adobe to continue to sell Premiere for the Mac in such a market.

At any rate, I just wanted to add another perspective that was not quite so harsh for Adobe : )
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by 4fx
1) The overwhelming majority of creative users on the Mac side use PowerMacs. The minority are on PowerBooks.

I think "overwhelming majority" is a little too much. Sure the Power Mac makes up a large percentage of pro users but PowerBooks are also important here. With Developer kits out there for a while I'm hoping the hard work is done.

Also I don't buy, "companies needed public Intel machines released BEFORE they begin work." All the heavy lifting in the conversion should have began work the instant Apple released Developer kits. Now they can just further testing on these new machines.

That doesn't mean I see fast turn-around for an application like Photoshop though .

Quote:
Wouldnt you want them to bring us more value than to waste time updating programs that wont be used by many?

Am I wrong in remembering Adobe releasing (free) point releases during the OS9 to OS X transition? The conversion was horrible in place, cough cough, but they were free and got us out of using Classic.

If I was a MacBook user I'd rather have a "raw" conversion to i386 then use Rosetta or wait it out.

Quote:
Why do people even bother bringing up Premiere...
When Final Cut was released at a similar price, with more features and an arguably better workflow, Premiere sales on the Mac plumited.

I never remember Final Cut being even priced. Wasn't Premiere around $500 and Final Cut a grand? Personally I don't really care although I used it for a long time in OS 9. And your right loyality is a wrong word, its all money. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if they stopped offering a Mac version of Photoshop et al.. Just as Apple did when they bought out Emagic.
/* styling for my posts */
.intelligence {display: none;}
Reply
/* styling for my posts */
.intelligence {display: none;}
Reply
post #23 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by IonYz
That doesn't mean I see fast turn-around for an application like Photoshop though .



Am I wrong in remembering Adobe releasing (free) point releases during the OS9 to OS X transition? The conversion was horrible in place, cough cough, but they were free and got us out of using Classic.

If I was a MacBook user I'd rather have a "raw" conversion to i386 then use Rosetta or wait it out.


I wouldn't be surprised, however, if they stopped offering a Mac version of Photoshop et al.. Just as Apple did when they bought out Emagic.



*Half of Adobe's Photoshop customers must be Mac users.*
post #24 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by IonYz
I think "overwhelming majority" is a little too much. Sure the Power Mac makes up a large percentage of pro users but PowerBooks are also important here. With Developer kits out there for a while I'm hoping the hard work is done.

Also I don't buy, "companies needed public Intel machines released BEFORE they begin work." All the heavy lifting in the conversion should have began work the instant Apple released Developer kits. Now they can just further testing on these new machines.

That doesn't mean I see fast turn-around for an application like Photoshop though .



Am I wrong in remembering Adobe releasing (free) point releases during the OS9 to OS X transition? The conversion was horrible in place, cough cough, but they were free and got us out of using Classic.

If I was a MacBook user I'd rather have a "raw" conversion to i386 then use Rosetta or wait it out.



I never remember Final Cut being even priced. Wasn't Premiere around $500 and Final Cut a grand? Personally I don't really care although I used it for a long time in OS 9. And your right loyality is a wrong word, its all money. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if they stopped offering a Mac version of Photoshop et al.. Just as Apple did when they bought out Emagic.

Releasing machines will certainly speed development up. Several programs that were seemingly sliding on have been suddenly released.

PS actually isn't too bad under Rosetta. I was playing with it the other day on a friends new 20". But, it does need more memory for rosetta to work well. Also, Rosetta stores instructions that have been translated. So, when you use the program for the beginning of the session is seems slower than it does later, after you've used the various commands more than once.

As long as you're not using 100Mb files it's not too bad. The 20", is certainly faster than using it on a 1.67GHz PB was!!! And if you were using that, then there shouldn't be many complaints.

From what I'm reading about the MacBook Pro, it should compare fairly well to the PB.

It's not as though ALL people have the latest models. How many people do you know who buy new machines every year?

Premiere first came out at $500. But, by the time it was discontinued, it was up to $700. FCP came out at $1,000, and even though Apple has added more programs to the mix, stayed at $1,000. Now that they have the suite, it's only $1,300 for the whole bundle. A really good deal.

Premiere, which was an amateur program simply couldn't compete.
post #25 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by NordicMan
"That doesn't mean I see fast turn-around for an application like Photoshop though .



Am I wrong in remembering Adobe releasing (free) point releases during the OS9 to OS X transition? The conversion was horrible in place, cough cough, but they were free and got us out of using Classic.

If I was a MacBook user I'd rather have a "raw" conversion to i386 then use Rosetta or wait it out.


I wouldn't be surprised, however, if they stopped offering a Mac version of Photoshop et al.. Just as Apple did when they bought out Emagic.
[/QUOTE"


*Half of Adobe's Photoshop customers must be Mac users.* [/B]

27% of PS's customers are on Macs, at the latest count (as of June 2005).
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
27% of PS's customers are on Macs, at the latest count (as of June 2005).

Well, it looks like I must be quite behind in understanding that picture. I was one of the former photoshop customers, but since I honestly don't need it, now anyway, I am out.
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I trust that you don't have the philosophy of losing money on every copy, but thinking that the more you give away, the more money you'll make.

Hopefully, you charge for service?

It's Karma building just now. The hard sell service stuff comes later.
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
27% of PS's customers are on Macs, at the latest count (as of June 2005).

Wasn't it near 50% at some point?
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Wasn't it near 50% at some point?

Only a few years ago, it was right about half. I just held that in my mind.
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Wasn't it near 50% at some point?

It was 100% at one point!
post #31 of 41
I phone Apple on Wednesday of last week to discuss the pro's and con's of iMac G5 and iMac Duo Core.

I was told that the G5 was a current model and would remain one for some time. Subsequently I purchased a G5 model from a local reseller and I have to say I'm very happy with it. However, now they've been end of lined I feel cheated. Surely they will drop the prices to shift them. I've probably paid over the odds.

Poor show Apple.
Information is
not knowledge
Knowledge is
not wisdom
Wisdom is not truth
Truth is not beauty
Beauty is not love
Love is not music
Music is THE BEST...
Reply
Information is
not knowledge
Knowledge is
not wisdom
Wisdom is not truth
Truth is not beauty
Beauty is not love
Love is not music
Music is THE BEST...
Reply
post #32 of 41
Look, the 20 inch isnt EOLd, so you "pros" that use iMacs can sleep easy, if you wnat a new mac before Adobemedia catches up, the 20 inch will be availible, and hell, for my money using PSCS2, the bigger screen is worth the money, you can make the price differance back with a couple of simple projects if you are any good
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
so this January apple has been getting people to pay exactly the same price for an obsolete model. nice. so if i was someone making a living (say designing) using macs, now i'm faced with the slower (because of rosetta) imac core duo, or the powermac g5 tower which may be beyond my needs/budget... or an underpowered g4 laptop, or slower (because of rosetta) macbook pro. this along with (understandably) no specific timeline for Universal adobe, macromedia, microsoft office software, the core tools for people that use a mac for work.

It is kind of a bummer, right now is kind of a "no man's land" for professional Mac users. You want the faster system, but the native pro apps aren't available yet, and those that use third party plug-ins probably also have to wait until there is a native plug-in. While I don't use pro apps, I am waiting the software transition out before I jump, for other reasons as well.

Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
Look, the 20 inch isnt EOLd, so you "pros" that use iMacs can sleep easy, if you wnat a new mac before Adobemedia catches up, the 20 inch will be availible, and hell, for my money using PSCS2, the bigger screen is worth the money, you can make the price differance back with a couple of simple projects if you are any good

I think that is a good point, pros that need visual apps would be better suited with the larger display. I am not sure if that means much though, it seems that the 20" was harder to sell anyway, they may be doing the EOL once they run out of stock.
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
Look, the 20 inch isnt EOLd, so you "pros" that use iMacs can sleep easy

Give it a month. It will be. They've just got more left.
post #35 of 41
Yeah, i guess that's the thing. If the EOL of iMac G5 17" is true then the ENTIRE PowerPC line is in a bit of a shady area.

One might even say that Apple intends to phase out* ALL PowerPC Macs by end of 2006, or even middle of 2006. Here I mean that Apple will stop selling *any* PowerPC Macs by mid- or late- 2006 , although 3rd party resellers may have some supplies.

Universal binaries though should be around through 2006 and to the end of 2007, but given upgrade cycles, in 2008 I think Universal binaries which have decent optimisation for PowerPC will be a thing of the past.

I'd say anyone looking at making a PowerPC Mac purchase right now will be looking at a 2 year lifespan for their hardware and software. In mid-2007 one would really have to start looking closely at transitioning fully to Intel-based hardware and Intel-optimised software if they want to stay productive.

That's just my call based on how agressively Apple is looking at the transition. I know with the Mac people can last a long time on older software and hardware, but I guess it all depends how necessary/ desirable it is for someone to stay somewhat up-to-date with the tech

I guess I'm biased, I jumped to OS X pretty fast although I booted into Classic quite a bit in the first year that 10.0 was around \

edit: I know Conroe+Woodcrest(?) isn't supposed to show up until 2007, but PowerMac Intels and maybe even Xserve Intels do seem to fit in with a Macworld January 2007 announcment. So from January 2007, Apple could stop selling all PowerPC Macs.
post #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
edit: I know Conroe+Woodcrest(?) isn't supposed to show up until 2007, but PowerMac Intels and maybe even Xserve Intels do seem to fit in with a Macworld January 2007 announcment. So from January 2007, Apple could stop selling all PowerPC Macs.

I hope not. Conroe/Woodcrest are supposed to land 2nd half of 06 alongside Merom and last WWDC Jobs said the transition would be complete by the end of this year. Sure, they can't ship a PowerMac until there's chips for it (and Yonah doesn't cut it) and it's kind of pointless without software but PowerMacs at MWSF07 would be behind schedule. So far they've been aggressively ahead of schedule.

I'm waiting for OSX 10.5 personally. I'll assess my needs both hardware and software then. The prospect of having to upgrade software as well could make the transition expensive.
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I hope not. Conroe/Woodcrest are supposed to land 2nd half of 06 alongside Merom...

2nd half when? July, September, December? Is there announced a precise time frame? It would be good to know, just to have an idea of when the iMac will take Merom, which allegedly brings significant improvements in the performance/power consumption ratio.
post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
2nd half when? July, September, December? Is there announced a precise time frame? It would be good to know, just to have an idea of when the iMac will take Merom, which allegedly brings significant improvements in the performance/power consumption ratio.

2nd half is all they're saying so far.

http://www.intel.com/technology/computing/ngma/
post #39 of 41
wow, okay. so 65nm conroe, woodcrest, merom in 2nd half 2006, and then 45nm stuff in 2007. so it looks likely we'll see iSteve at WWDC June 06 standing on stage, saying, "The Transition. We Did It." --> then announcing a roundup of all the Universal binaries shipping

i got an idea for a new poll, i'll post the link below soon.
edit: link here

"When do you think the last PowerPC Mac will be sold from official Apple Stores?"
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=60810
post #40 of 41
Both Conroe and Merom are ahead of schedule.

Remember several months ago when it was said that Apple was asking (all right, demanding) that the chips it needed be supplied earlier?

Well, it's just possible this is happening. We might see both Merom and Conroe in the third quarter. Possibly even in the early part of the third quarter.

Assuming that the PM's will use Conroe, which is what most are expecting, all we need is for it to come out by the time Leopard arrives.

The biggest amount of confusion is with the 32 bit 64 bit switchover.

Many seem to think that it will be impossible for Apple to have a 64 bit OS ready for a Merom, or for a Conroe, this year.

I'm not sure that's correct. but the feeling is that Apple will need three OS's out at the same time. A PPC 3264 bit version. A 32 bit AND a 64 bit Intel version.

Then there will be the dicotomy of needing both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of the software for Intel.

It could be a nightmare. This is why I've been seeing reports that Apple made a blunder by coming out with 32 bit machines now.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple's halts reseller orders for 17-inch iMac G5, inventory now limited