What's the latest on the towers?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
The place has been quiet. Have we all given up hope on new towers before Fall? I still have a pile of money burning a hole in my pocket and I'm holding out for at least a tower with an updated MB. The G5 would be great but a dual 1.4-1.6 G4 with a new MB for under $3k would suit me fine. Is everyone else caving in and buying a dual gig?
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    yup. oh wait, i just sold my rage128 so i could buy an sonnet temp ata card... but i guess everyone with money burning holes in their pockets is. and prices just dropped on g4500 zifs... mmmmmm. expensive old technology...
  • Reply 2 of 43
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    [quote]Originally posted by AsahiToro:

    <strong>The place has been quiet. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    It sure has been.



    I think after all the MWSF hype and let down for some (no G5's), and recent speed bump, we've exhausted ourselves and resigned to just waiting until a new tower is introduced.
  • Reply 3 of 43
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    "The place has been quiet"



    You know who to blame for that!



    [ 03-02-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
  • Reply 4 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    What speculation there is is centered on MWNY. The most likely top of the line I've heard sofar is: Dual 1.4GHz G4 PowerMacs supporting 266MHz DDR SDRAM on a new motherboard. Those might appear at MWNY, or at Seybold.



    YMMV. The rumor mill's been pretty dry lately. Any announcements before MWNY will almost certainly be software or digital-device announcements.
  • Reply 5 of 43
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    I'm not surprised at all. Apple has let us down, and all the rumor sites who've been "rumoring" lately have been proven wrong, hoaxing, or some other blatant bullshit and everybody has lost trust in them.

    So what is left?

    Apple tell's us no new hardware till after MWTY.

    MWTY is quite a bit off yet, thus we wait.



    My Radeon is ticking in soon.



    G-News
  • Reply 6 of 43
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    The latest on the Powermacs is that they suck.



    There is no hope of Powermacs that don't suck until MWNY at the very earliest, but more likely we will have to wait until MWSF, by which time even a 1.6 GHz G5 will still be merely half the GHz rating of Intel's latest CPU, and Powermacs will still be slower than Wintels at everything save a handful of Photoshop filters.
  • Reply 7 of 43
    spookyspooky Posts: 504member
    Are you listening apple? Your towers truly suck. 1Ghz?, 1.4Ghz G5 coming? Oh Joy. We don't believe the BS no more
  • Reply 8 of 43
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>The latest on the Powermacs is that they suck.



    There is no hope of Powermacs that don't suck until MWNY at the very earliest, but more likely we will have to wait until MWSF, by which time even a 1.6 GHz G5 will still be merely half the GHz rating of Intel's latest CPU, and Powermacs will still be slower than Wintels at everything save a handful of Photoshop filters.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    lmfao. you are just too depressed. a 3GHz p4 with all the goodies will still only be 25% faster than a 2GHz p4. its the sad truth. meanwhile, a dual g5 at 1.6 GHz will be around 75-100% faster than the current dual gig (ya know, faster bus, ddr, better graphics, faster hds and ata 133). while the p4 just gets another almost useless GHz, the powermac will be getting an a$$load. and apple could market that 1.6x2=3.4 if they wanted to.



    also, intel only says they will be at 3GHz. intel says a lot of things.
  • Reply 9 of 43
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    Dam. You guys are making me feel bad for getting a dual GHz .....
  • Reply 10 of 43
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Really! You guys have to remember the Mhz thing is mostly marketing. Yes I think Apple should make faster towers also but, it bothers me when people seem to off the cuff compare Mhz to Mhz between different CPUs like it was a equal comparison. There is other stuff involved influencing the over all speed of the computer.



    However Apple does need to get off their duff and produce some faster ( G5 ) towers. They certainly have got thteir milage out of the Mhz myth. Lets hope we don't have to wait until January again.



    I would buy one today if it was available. Apple are you listening? I have a G4 450/ Radeon/ 640 Mgs of RAM but, the dual Gig isn't enough to make me want to sell that just yet. I mean when you look around and see what else is out there on the PC side.



    [ 03-04-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
  • Reply 11 of 43
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    If Apple's towers truly sucked, I would not have bought one.



    2 GHz P4 --&gt; 3 GHz P4 = 25% faster? Uh no. I have no reason to believe it would be anything other than 50% faster.
  • Reply 12 of 43
    I think Apple is close enough mhz wise for me. Yeah, a dual G4 or G5 around 1.4-1.6 would be great but I'm tired of having yesterday's mb technology. Can Apple at least do something here? I want ATA/100-133, DDR/RAMBUS/whatever, etc. Man, if they wait till 2003 they're going to be way behind unless they can pull something out of their *** . I'm a dedicated Mac user and love the software but I'm not spending a dime on a new machine until Apple shows me that they are serious about being ahead(or at least with) the pack. I have no problem dumping money into a new machine _that I want_ but until I see something appealing, I'll keep buying cheaper/used machines to get me by. I feel like I'd be getting ripped off by putting 3K down on Apple's latest.
  • Reply 13 of 43
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    Apple always rip their customer off. That's old news
  • Reply 14 of 43
    tjmtjm Posts: 367member
    I'm not buying a new tower until it's at least 266DDR on the motherboard. I'd rather see higher, but that's a minimum for me. Even if it's a G4, it'll have some legs under it so I can upgrade it for 5 years or so. The current ones are going to get old in a hurry - like buying a Quadra just before the PowerMacs came out. I just don't see enough of a jump in performance to justify buying anything at the moment. Apple really did need to come out with the G5s at MWSF'02. They're generating so much negativity by dragging their heels on it, it's going to take several years to recover. It may not be their fault, but it's their problem nonetheless.
  • Reply 15 of 43
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eugene:

    <strong>If Apple's towers truly sucked, I would not have bought one.



    2 GHz P4 --&gt; 3 GHz P4 = 25% faster? Uh no. I have no reason to believe it would be anything other than 50% faster.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    FYI a 2GHz P4 is only 25% faster than a 1GHz P4. Therefore a 3GHz P4 would probably be about 16% (did my math wrong earlier) faster than a 2GHz...and this is assuming the P4 scales linearly, which it doesn't. The P4 is meant only to get sky-high GHz ratings, not actual speed. The P3 is actually faster at equivalent MHz/GHz but Intel couldn't make it scale as fast.
  • Reply 16 of 43
    I'd buy a new machine every year or two if Apple gave me something worth upgrading to over what I have. Of course Apple wants us to buy a new machine instead of attempting to upgrade what we have. They're in the business of selling computers. I'm OK with that. The only problem is they don't offer anything worth upgrading to. They cut their own neck in a way. Hell, if the machines were worth it, I'd be a happy Apple customer and buy one every year or two regardless of if they were forcing the issue with things such as compatibility and upgradeablity. It's like they have a total disregard for their customers anymore. Do they want us to become the Borg and just comply like the MS freaks?
  • Reply 17 of 43
    [quote]Originally posted by Eugene:

    <strong>If Apple's towers truly sucked, I would not have bought one.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>





    Eugene, your actions do not decree or reflect the truth.



    The fact is, Apple's towers are vastly underpowered and overpriced. Dual processors, even in OS X, do not make a significant difference unless multitasking. Other than a few niche applications, even the top-of-the-line PowerMacs are outmoded by the cheaper sub-$1500 1.6-1.8GHz Pentiums and 1.2-1.5GHz Athlons. The main memory bus utilizing SDRAM is now a joke compared to now commonplace DDR and Rambus buses. It's getting to the point now that mobile P4's systems in the competition's laptops will outperform the PowerMacs in processing power and memory bandwidth.



    As performance is concerned, Apple is hopelessly behind and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Dwindling sales over the last two years are a testament to the market's opinion of the PowerMacs.
  • Reply 18 of 43
    [quote]Originally posted by AsahiToro:

    <strong>I'd buy a new machine every year or two if Apple gave me something worth upgrading to over what I have. Of course Apple wants us to buy a new machine instead of attempting to upgrade what we have. They're in the business of selling computers. I'm OK with that. The only problem is they don't offer anything worth upgrading to. They cut their own neck in a way. Hell, if the machines were worth it, I'd be a happy Apple customer and buy one every year or two regardless of if they were forcing the issue with things such as compatibility and upgradeablity. It's like they have a total disregard for their customers anymore. Do they want us to become the Borg and just comply like the MS freaks?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    you somewhat accidentally touched on a really interesting topic...

    Although many of us complain that Apple's machines aren't cutting edge enough, etc., we rarely stop to acknowledge the clear lifespan advantage of apple hardware. Search ebay for about 30 minutes for used apple hardware. consider the prices vs. the original sticker prices. then try doing the same with old Dells. no comparison. clearly, Apple hardware has at least, a perceived, though i would argue real, lifespan advantage. personally, i find my beige G3 MT 300MHz (oc'd to 333MHz), which is now exactly four years old, much more useful than my 500MHz Celeron (less than three years old). in fact, the only useful thing i find to do with the celeron is act as a Freesco router.



    of course, the G3 was top-of-the-line when it was purchased, and the celeron was not. but the point still holds. (in general)



    [ 03-03-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</p>
  • Reply 19 of 43
    You don't think there's a connection between Apple's inability to get faster hardware out the door and the high resale value of used Macs?



    If Apple charges $2000 for a brand new machine that is only marginally better than a 3 year old machine, then yes, used Apple hardware will retain it's value quite well.



    If clockspeeds were to double across the board tomorrow, what do you think would happen to the value of the 3 year old hardware?
  • Reply 20 of 43
    [quote]Originally posted by concentricity:

    <strong>



    you somewhat accidentally touched on a really interesting topic...

    Although many of us complain that Apple's machines aren't cutting edge enough, etc., we rarely stop to acknowledge the clear lifespan advantage of apple hardware. Search ebay for about 30 minutes for used apple hardware. consider the prices vs. the original sticker prices. then try doing the same with old Dells. no comparison. clearly, Apple hardware has at least, a perceived, though i would argue real, lifespan advantage. personally, i find my beige G3 MT 300MHz (oc'd to 333MHz), which is now exactly four years old, much more useful than my 500MHz Celeron (less than three years old). in fact, the only useful thing i find to do with the celeron is act as a Freesco router.



    of course, the G3 was top-of-the-line when it was purchased, and the celeron was not. but the point still holds. (in general)



    [ 03-03-2002: Message edited by: concentricity ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't disagree that Apple computers hold their value longer. I feel though a lot of the reason is that there is not that much of a technology jump in 2-3 year old Macs and today's latest offerings. People can save alot of money buying a used Mac and still have much of the capability of the newer machines. In the PC world it's different. There are constant changes and upgrades that machines become dated quickly and don't hold their value. Thus PC manufacturers sell more PC's. To take it a step further, add economies of scale in there from the higher volume they move and that's one reason they can keep their new PC prices lower. Maybe Apple can learn from this(I know, I know. Steve isn't stupid). Again, give us we want, something worth upgrading to and they will sell more Macs. This increased volume could even increase their margins by lowering their cost since most Mac users are used to paying a premium over PC's anyway. Mac users generally don't complain about the price, only what they are getting for that price. With OS X and the other great software available, Apple could sell Macs like crazy if they could just give us a reason to upgrade.
Sign In or Register to comment.