G5 at NAB

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 78
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    With 125,000 iMacs sold and 5,000 going out the door every day, I really don't think Apple's earnings are going to suck. The iMac and portable lines will sustain not so hot PowerMac sales, although the Dual GHz model hasn't been selling as bad as some may think.
  • Reply 42 of 78
    Um, there is no way Apple would release something as significant as the G5 at anything other than either MWNY or MWSF. (not necessarily the coming MWNY or MWSF. My money is on MWNY 2003).
  • Reply 43 of 78
    [quote]Originally posted by Horned_Frog:

    <strong>Um, there is no way Apple would release something as significant as the G5 at anything other than either MWNY or MWSF. (not necessarily the coming MWNY or MWSF. My money is on MWNY 2003).</strong><hr></blockquote>



    If they wait that long, they will be dead! Unless MOT releases some REALLY FAST G4s REALLY SOON!



    At least 1.5 GHz comps by MWNY
  • Reply 44 of 78
    tarbashtarbash Posts: 278member
    I'd say at least 1.5 GHz G5s but MWNY.
  • Reply 45 of 78
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Apple just had MWTY and completely skipped Seybold NY (formerly Seybold Boston). Why would they release the machine/processor that their next 3-4 years are based on at a show with little Mac fanatic presence?



    Seriously- when the G5 comes out, I'm expecting the iBook to get a G4, and seeing as the iBook was just updated a few months ago, I'm not expecting any thing as big as a new "G5" until MWNY at the earliest.
  • Reply 46 of 78
    wwworkwwwork Posts: 140member
    [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

    <strong>Apple just had MWTY and completely skipped Seybold NY (formerly Seybold Boston). Why would they release the machine/processor that their next 3-4 years are based on at a show with little Mac fanatic presence?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Because someone has to be the first to say "the G5 will appear at this (x) tradeshow". I mean, why not say it? The consequences are small. Remember that guy Philbot?



    If you look at whoever made the first post you will see that his/her previous posts are about getting the flash pluggin or minor hardware and video issues. Nothing to indicate any knowledge more special than random guesses.
  • Reply 47 of 78
    [quote]Originally posted by Horned_Frog:

    <strong>Um, there is no way Apple would release something as significant as the G5 at anything other than either MWNY or MWSF. (not necessarily the coming MWNY or MWSF. My money is on MWNY 2003).</strong><hr></blockquote>



    As has been mentioned before, I can't remember the last time Apple released a new processor architecture at a Macworld. If you start with the G3, it was released at an Apple event. I was working at Turner at the time, and a couple of us went up to the Market Center in Atlanta to see the "event" Apple was hosting. They even had machines there for us to play with.



    The G4 dropped at Seybold, in the Fall I believe. Seybold San Francisco, right? I was out of the country, didn't even notice until I got back



    Even the iMac was unveiled at an Apple Event, completely separate from a Macworld. I don't think you should bet the farm on a G5 at a Macworld, and at a Macworld only.
  • Reply 48 of 78
    According to french sources, we should have a 933MHz PB really soon alongside with DVD studio pro v1.5.. At NAB ?
  • Reply 49 of 78
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    NAB : no apple bump
  • Reply 50 of 78
    Think about this... Apple's really been going after the high end film and broadcast market for some time now. Final Cut Pro, George Lucas video at MacWorld Expo, Purchase of Nothing Real and Spruce Technologies not to mention the rumours flying around about Apple trying to buy either Maya or Lightwave.



    High end film and broadcast is clearly a market that Apple wants a bigger piece of. NAB is a big show - perhaps the biggest, in this market. It would a good idea for them to try and get the attention of the professionals at NAB by doing something big - even announcing the G5. I'd be surprised if they did, but it's not impossible. At any rate, it's one to watch, because I think Apple will surprise us with something there.
  • Reply 51 of 78
    I thought that the G5 won't be ready for mass consumption before January 2003 MacWorld Expo San Francisco. What keeps me from buying is the lack of evolution on the motherboard NOT what processor is attached to it. I have been waiting for a 266 or 400 MHz DDR RAM bus, 1394b Firewire, and USB 2 motherboard. I'll settle for the fastest dual G4 available as long as they get that current and relevant motherboard working and shipping in a vanilla ATX case if necessary. I can't believe they have been sitting on the same OLD 133 MHz bus motherboard for 15 months now. A dual G4 based on such a modern motherboard would be plenty fast for now. But to choke those dual 1 GHz G4s on that OBSOLETE motherboard they are currently shipping borders on the criminally INSANE.
  • Reply 52 of 78
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    [quote]Originally posted by Multimedia:

    <strong>

    500 Mhz G4 Silent Cube

    1.5 GB ram,

    100 GB HD inside

    160 GB outside

    500 MHz B&W G3

    1 MB ram, 155 GB inside

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    You have ONE MEG of RAM in your B/W ???? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
  • Reply 53 of 78
    blackcatblackcat Posts: 697member
    [quote]Originally posted by Multimedia:

    <strong>I thought that the G5 won't be ready for mass consumption before January 2003 MacWorld Expo San Francisco. What keeps me from buying is the lack of evolution on the motherboard NOT what processor is attached to it. I have been waiting for a 266 or 400 MHz DDR RAM bus, 1394b Firewire, and USB 2 motherboard. I'll settle for the fastest dual G4 available as long as they get that current and relevant motherboard working and shipping in a vanilla ATX case if necessary. I can't believe they have been sitting on the same OLD 133 MHz bus motherboard for 15 months now. A dual G4 based on such a modern motherboard would be plenty fast for now. But to choke those dual 1 GHz G4s on that OBSOLETE motherboard they are currently shipping borders on the criminally INSANE.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Why do people keep saying this? The current G4s can not use DDR RAM, so to release a DDR m/board now would be a waste of Apples money (and ours buying it).



    The other thing I don't get is why do people seem think Apple is sat in their offices waiting for a DDR G4 before they build a m/board for it? They will have a load of different m/boards ready to go depending on what Moto come out with.



    They will definately have advanced prototypes of new processors, new firewire controllers, USB2 chips etc etc so there will be a new board when (and only when) everything is ready.
  • Reply 54 of 78
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    [quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:

    Why do people keep saying this? The current G4s can not use DDR RAM, so to release a DDR m/board now would be a waste of Apples money (and ours buying it).<hr></blockquote>





    HUH? What do you mean they "can't use" DRR? The only reason there is no DDR is because Apple / MOT, for whatever reason (most people in this field think it's because they're developing a RIO-based UMA) have not created memory controllers for use with DDR. THere is nothing about the G4 itself that precludes using it with DDR....
  • Reply 55 of 78
    thttht Posts: 3,951member
    <strong>Originally posted by Moogs ?:

    HUH? What do you mean they "can't use" DRR? The only reason there is no DDR is because Apple / MOT, for whatever reason (most people in this field think it's because they're developing a RIO-based UMA) have not created memory controllers for use with DDR. THere is nothing about the G4 itself that precludes using it with DDR....</strong>



    It can use PC2100 RAM, but there isn't much point when the 7455 is limited to a single data rate 133 MHz 64 bit processor bus. Ie, there would be a bottleneck at the processor bus and the extra bandwidth from DDR SDRAM would be wasted. The G4 processor bus is Motorola's sole responsibility for improving. Apple has to wait.
  • Reply 56 of 78
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Right...I just meant there is nothing about the G4 processor that makes it incompatible with DDR RAM. Its the lack of memory controllers / sped up bus that has put us where we are. And yes, it is Motorola's responsibility in large part.
  • Reply 57 of 78
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,410member
    [quote]Originally posted by Moogs ?:

    <strong>Right...I just meant there is nothing about the G4 processor that makes it incompatible with DDR RAM. Its the lack of memory controllers / sped up bus that has put us where we are. And yes, it is Motorola's responsibility in large part.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The point is that the bus speed limitation is built into the G4 itself, so while the G4 may not be "incompatible" with DDR it won't see any performance difference at all between SDRAM and DDR. Since "DDR" means "double data rate", and the G4 doesn't support any increase in the data rate, this can be viewed as an incompatibility.
  • Reply 58 of 78
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Why would they build a bus speed limitation into the chip, as opposed to making it as upward-compatible as possible? Seems backwards that the chip would be bus-dependant and not the other way around....
  • Reply 59 of 78
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    [quote]Originally posted by Programmer:

    <strong>The point is that the bus speed limitation is built into the G4 itself, so while the G4 may not be "incompatible" with DDR it won't see any performance difference at all between SDRAM and DDR.</strong><hr></blockquote>When you say 'G4,' you mean 'the current G4,' right? The 7441s, 7451s, and 7455s that are currently being used are limited to a 133 Mhz bus, but there is no inherent limitation in the architecture, is there?



    Theoretically, they could release a 7460 (or whatever - maybe a 7500?) that would be completely compatible with current chips, but could use a faster bus, right?
  • Reply 60 of 78
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
Sign In or Register to comment.