The 'predictions' thread has a post that CompUSA has a new PM dual 1ghz due in Jan at $3500. Either that's BS or it may be the G5 and thus the cost. No idea if it's the top, middle or bottom of the line or if it's creditable.
<strong>The 'predictions' thread has a post that CompUSA has a new PM dual 1ghz due in Jan at $3500. Either that's BS or it may be the G5 and thus the cost. No idea if it's the top, middle or bottom of the line or if it's creditable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Considering it's from a CompUSA employee it probably isn't credible.
<strong>And the fact is, leaks are occuring. There have been too many reports on the G5, and they all jive together, for it to be one person pulling our chains. Rumor sites are guillible but not that bad, I'm sure they do check their sources at least enough that they would know if it was the same person feeding the G5 info to every rumor site.
This leaves the Powermacs in question. An Apollo imac leaves two different options for the Powermacs:
...
Option 1. The iMac is clocked at a single speed for all models, like the iBook:
1.0 GHz iMac Apollo
Powermac:
1.13 GHz Apollo
1.27 GHz Apollo
Dual 1.27 GHz Apollo.
Option 2: This is the more likely option, says my gut:
1 GHz Apollo iMac
1 GHz Powermac G5
1.2 GHz Powermac G5
1.4 GHz Powermac G5
Or the Powermacs clock from 1.2-1.6 GHz.
Now, back to MWNY...why was that show such a bust? There were many rumors surrounding it that suggested something big was cancelled at nearly the last minute. I thiink it was lackluster because two products, the iMac and G4 Powermac, were nearing EOL, and Apple had devoted all their resources to finishing the successors to their desktop line, planning to make the Jan. Expo count. The iMac may have been ready, but Apple didn't want to release a G4 iMac while the Powermacs still ran with G4s. So they waited:
So the optimist in me says that MWSF will bring us G4 iMac Apollos, and Powermac G5s. This lineup makes the most sense. Yes, Apple often introduces lineups that make no sense at all...but this time I suspect it's different. There are too many concurring G5 rumors swirling around the internet for me to believe they are the work of a single person--rumor sites would get suspicious if all the rumors came from people with the same or similar IPs. And most importantly, the only rumors that do conflict report Apollo G4s being introduced. But if we make a leap in judgment and believe BOTH the G5 and Apollo rumors, we get a desktop lineup from Apple both sensible and revolutionary.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is such a cool and well though out post Dawg. And anyone out there has to admit that. Think about it folks. When the iPod first became part of the rumor mills, what was said?? A handheld device, more than likely a MP3 player of sorts. What was it?? A MP3 player of sorts, with some added features.
Looking at the frequency of the name 'G5' I have been seeing, and that more and more sites other than rumor mills have been posting reports on the G5. And also there is my gut. So far, my gut has had a lifelong 78.92% accuracy rating when I follow it. So, I am going with it. And I think that Dawg's Option 2 is accurate or close. I think that the iMac might be at 933 MHz (don't want to take away from the GHz-breaking PowerMacs). However I think that would be the only change I could see.
However, time will tell. And tell it will do.
[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Mike Eggleston ]</p>
I also agree. G5 is coming. There has never been this amount of rumor with similar specs before...at least since I've been here for two years. There was no where near this amount for even Pismo, which people thought was actually mercury at the time. Cube rumors were all over the place, etc.
I won't repost my argument for it again. Basically, Junkyard Dawg is right on, IMO.
And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.
And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And we knew shit about the G4 coming out in fall 99 in Apple's line up. So that doesn't mean anything.
Motorola detailed the G4 design at the Microprocessor Forum 98. I still have a copy of the original Altivec specification from 98, with a description of the hardware implementation ( not only instruction set, but also pipeline design, functional unit design and more).
If the G5 is released next month, I would say it would be the biggest surprise in the history of the PPC. And it would be the first Motorola chip using SOI and 0.13. seems really risky, if you ask me. Im not saying it is impossible but..
Dont tell me the G4 was a surprise.. It really wasnt. Have you guys seen a detaled description of a desktop G5 chip? No.. Not if you exclude MOSR/The Register.
"Intel will officially introduce its new Pentium III processor on February 28, *and until then it isn't disclosing details about the chip's performance and pricing, nor allowing PC makers to announce specifications and prices for systems based on the new chip.*"
The part within the asterixes (sp?) interests me. Is it that hard to imagine that Motorola could be doing the same thing that Intel did with the PIII, and simply NOT be disclosing any details about the G5 to the public? Especially since, unlike the G4 in '98, Apple is playing a much larger role in the G5's development? I can see this as one reason they are keeping a lid on it. Apple of course is mum about their product launches, (iPod, iMac, G4.. hell, everything) why can't Motorola at least act this way with such a revolutionary product like the G5 and share the glory with Apple come MWSF in an event that will send shockwaves through the industry.
BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.
The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced.
Look at this statement from Connectix regarding the issue of Vitual PC5 on OS X and its Slowness
""Part of the problem here is the fact that Mac hardware has fallen off the Moore's Law curve (i.e. speeds haven't doubled consistently every 18 months)"...."Mac OS X really needs a 1.0-2.0GHz processor to perform well."
BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I enjoy JD's posts because they usually contain a healthy amount of skepticism and realism, unlike most others on this board. But I think the RDF of January is starting to take effect already.
Rumor sites checking their "facts"?
JD let himself predict what he wants to see, not what he should expect to see based on previous experience.
[quote]
<strong>
The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced. </strong><hr></blockquote>
The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).
Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:
900Mhz G3 LCD iMac
867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.
The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.
Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.
The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).
Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:
900Mhz G3 LCD iMac
867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.
The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.
Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't agree with you at all. "always expect minimal processor improvment from Apple?......I assume you have forgotten that it is MOT who screwed Apple. That isn't going to last much longer. We went for 1.5 years at 500mhz. Then, Apple gets involved, and bingo.....233mhz jump at the next show. Then, another 134mhz jump at the next.
This will and has to be corrected. Steve isn't stupid. Don't get me wrong, the whole thing pisses me off....but they know.....
If the best thing after the LCD iMac is reduction in LCD prices then it truly WILL be a dissapointing show.
I don't think Apple is going to market the Apollo as a G5. However, i will concede that the G5 chip may not be what it was orginally planned to be.
Lowering the bar, as you put it, is not appropriate. Apple does not update products often enough, period. As much as I love Apple and will never go back to PC unless forced to, I do think Apple needs to listen a bit more to what people want. And, all people want is a machine that has specs that compete...they are even willing to pay a premium for the design and the OS. But charging $3500 for a machine with a 1.2 GHZ speed gap and a 133mhz bus, without a monitor, well, that is a joke. It may keep ME running MacOS but it won't change anyone's mind either. Selling an iMac with 64MB of RAM for $800 is a joke too.
Were not unreasonable. We just want Apple to stand up and be the company they are in the desktop arena, like they do in the portables.
Having said this, I do have faith they'll straighten it out. Any company that can come up with the ibook AND the TiBook, the iPod, etc...can certainly fix their desktop problems.
<strong>The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced. </strong><hr></blockquote>
um, can you imagine a "bake-off" of photoshop 6.5 for OS X (which HAS to be debuted at MacWorld SF, to throngs of cheers from the designer contingent), running on a multi-processor gigahertz machine?!?!?!
it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it.
<strong>um, can you imagine a "bake-off" of photoshop 6.5 for OS X (which HAS to be debuted at MacWorld SF, to throngs of cheers from the designer contingent), running on a multi-processor gigahertz machine?!?!?!
it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That would be great seeing how it just kicks a P4's ass.
Comments
<strong>The 'predictions' thread has a post that CompUSA has a new PM dual 1ghz due in Jan at $3500. Either that's BS or it may be the G5 and thus the cost. No idea if it's the top, middle or bottom of the line or if it's creditable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Considering it's from a CompUSA employee it probably isn't credible.
<strong>And the fact is, leaks are occuring. There have been too many reports on the G5, and they all jive together, for it to be one person pulling our chains. Rumor sites are guillible but not that bad, I'm sure they do check their sources at least enough that they would know if it was the same person feeding the G5 info to every rumor site.
This leaves the Powermacs in question. An Apollo imac leaves two different options for the Powermacs:
...
Option 1. The iMac is clocked at a single speed for all models, like the iBook:
1.0 GHz iMac Apollo
Powermac:
1.13 GHz Apollo
1.27 GHz Apollo
Dual 1.27 GHz Apollo.
Option 2: This is the more likely option, says my gut:
1 GHz Apollo iMac
1 GHz Powermac G5
1.2 GHz Powermac G5
1.4 GHz Powermac G5
Or the Powermacs clock from 1.2-1.6 GHz.
Now, back to MWNY...why was that show such a bust? There were many rumors surrounding it that suggested something big was cancelled at nearly the last minute. I thiink it was lackluster because two products, the iMac and G4 Powermac, were nearing EOL, and Apple had devoted all their resources to finishing the successors to their desktop line, planning to make the Jan. Expo count. The iMac may have been ready, but Apple didn't want to release a G4 iMac while the Powermacs still ran with G4s. So they waited:
So the optimist in me says that MWSF will bring us G4 iMac Apollos, and Powermac G5s. This lineup makes the most sense. Yes, Apple often introduces lineups that make no sense at all...but this time I suspect it's different. There are too many concurring G5 rumors swirling around the internet for me to believe they are the work of a single person--rumor sites would get suspicious if all the rumors came from people with the same or similar IPs. And most importantly, the only rumors that do conflict report Apollo G4s being introduced. But if we make a leap in judgment and believe BOTH the G5 and Apollo rumors, we get a desktop lineup from Apple both sensible and revolutionary.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is such a cool and well though out post Dawg. And anyone out there has to admit that. Think about it folks. When the iPod first became part of the rumor mills, what was said?? A handheld device, more than likely a MP3 player of sorts. What was it?? A MP3 player of sorts, with some added features.
Looking at the frequency of the name 'G5' I have been seeing, and that more and more sites other than rumor mills have been posting reports on the G5. And also there is my gut. So far, my gut has had a lifelong 78.92% accuracy rating when I follow it. So, I am going with it. And I think that Dawg's Option 2 is accurate or close. I think that the iMac might be at 933 MHz (don't want to take away from the GHz-breaking PowerMacs). However I think that would be the only change I could see.
However, time will tell. And tell it will do.
[ 12-08-2001: Message edited by: Mike Eggleston ]</p>
I won't repost my argument for it again. Basically, Junkyard Dawg is right on, IMO.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.
<strong>IMHO, The Register and MOSR is sharing the same and only source. Im higly sceptical about this.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
And Motorola have yet to detail anyting about the desktop CPU design. Remember: They released the G4e info at the Microprocessor Forum october 99. They detailed the new G4e altivec-design, the new pipeline and other things.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And we knew shit about the G4 coming out in fall 99 in Apple's line up. So that doesn't mean anything.
[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
<strong>
And we knew shit about the G4 coming out in fall 99 in Apple's line up. So that doesn't mean anything.
[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Motorola detailed the G4 design at the Microprocessor Forum 98. I still have a copy of the original Altivec specification from 98, with a description of the hardware implementation ( not only instruction set, but also pipeline design, functional unit design and more).
If the G5 is released next month, I would say it would be the biggest surprise in the history of the PPC. And it would be the first Motorola chip using SOI and 0.13. seems really risky, if you ask me. Im not saying it is impossible but..
<a href="http://www.macintouch.com/g4p3.html"; target="_blank">http://www.macintouch.com/g4p3.html</a>;
( Henry Norr
([email protected])
Feb. 18, 1999 )
Dont tell me the G4 was a surprise.. It really wasnt. Have you guys seen a detaled description of a desktop G5 chip? No.. Not if you exclude MOSR/The Register.
"Intel will officially introduce its new Pentium III processor on February 28, *and until then it isn't disclosing details about the chip's performance and pricing, nor allowing PC makers to announce specifications and prices for systems based on the new chip.*"
The part within the asterixes (sp?) interests me. Is it that hard to imagine that Motorola could be doing the same thing that Intel did with the PIII, and simply NOT be disclosing any details about the G5 to the public? Especially since, unlike the G4 in '98, Apple is playing a much larger role in the G5's development? I can see this as one reason they are keeping a lid on it. Apple of course is mum about their product launches, (iPod, iMac, G4.. hell, everything) why can't Motorola at least act this way with such a revolutionary product like the G5 and share the glory with Apple come MWSF in an event that will send shockwaves through the industry.
BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.
The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced.
Look at this statement from Connectix regarding the issue of Vitual PC5 on OS X and its Slowness
""Part of the problem here is the fact that Mac hardware has fallen off the Moore's Law curve (i.e. speeds haven't doubled consistently every 18 months)"...."Mac OS X really needs a 1.0-2.0GHz processor to perform well."
<strong>
BTW, Junkyard Dawg, great post. Brilliant. I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with you 100%.
iMac G4s and PowerMac G5s @ MWSF.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I enjoy JD's posts because they usually contain a healthy amount of skepticism and realism, unlike most others on this board. But I think the RDF of January is starting to take effect already.
Rumor sites checking their "facts"?
JD let himself predict what he wants to see, not what he should expect to see based on previous experience.
[quote]
<strong>
The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced.
The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).
Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:
900Mhz G3 LCD iMac
867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.
The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.
Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.
<strong>
The last time we were "blown out of our seats", was it because of processor speed? No, it was product design (TiBook, iBook, Cube, iMac). As it will be this time as well (LCD iMac).
Always expect the minimal processor improvement from Apple:
900Mhz G3 LCD iMac
867Mhz - 1.2Ghz G4 Powermacs
the 867 model will be power by the current G4 chip and called a "G4" by Apple. The upper models will be Apollo powered, and be called G5's by Apple.
The best thing at MW, after the LCD iMac, will be a reduction in the prices of the LCD monitors - which is desparately needed.
Hope that won't disappoint - better lower the bar now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't agree with you at all. "always expect minimal processor improvment from Apple?......I assume you have forgotten that it is MOT who screwed Apple. That isn't going to last much longer. We went for 1.5 years at 500mhz. Then, Apple gets involved, and bingo.....233mhz jump at the next show. Then, another 134mhz jump at the next.
This will and has to be corrected. Steve isn't stupid. Don't get me wrong, the whole thing pisses me off....but they know.....
If the best thing after the LCD iMac is reduction in LCD prices then it truly WILL be a dissapointing show.
I don't think Apple is going to market the Apollo as a G5. However, i will concede that the G5 chip may not be what it was orginally planned to be.
Lowering the bar, as you put it, is not appropriate. Apple does not update products often enough, period. As much as I love Apple and will never go back to PC unless forced to, I do think Apple needs to listen a bit more to what people want. And, all people want is a machine that has specs that compete...they are even willing to pay a premium for the design and the OS. But charging $3500 for a machine with a 1.2 GHZ speed gap and a 133mhz bus, without a monitor, well, that is a joke. It may keep ME running MacOS but it won't change anyone's mind either. Selling an iMac with 64MB of RAM for $800 is a joke too.
Were not unreasonable. We just want Apple to stand up and be the company they are in the desktop arena, like they do in the portables.
Having said this, I do have faith they'll straighten it out. Any company that can come up with the ibook AND the TiBook, the iPod, etc...can certainly fix their desktop problems.
<strong>The Macworld letdown stereotype will come to an end, and I think we will once again return to the "blown out of our seats" feeling like when the original iMac and PowerMac G4 were introduced.
I sure hope so.
[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: EmAn ]</p>
it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it.
<strong>um, can you imagine a "bake-off" of photoshop 6.5 for OS X (which HAS to be debuted at MacWorld SF, to throngs of cheers from the designer contingent), running on a multi-processor gigahertz machine?!?!?!
it'll wipe the freakin' FLOOR with any consumer desktop they put against it.
That would be great seeing how it just kicks a P4's ass.
<strong>Take it for what it's worth, but I was just told to expect G5s at slightly lower clockspeeds. That's all I can say.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who told you this? And was there any reason why?
I don't expec twel;; see G5s anytime soon. they haven't had enough time to iron out the desing.