my overly-optimistic take on recent events

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
this is something in the nature of wild speculation, but here it goes...let's look at recent events:



1) apple continues to acquire companies which produce high end compositing and film software (first nothing real, now rayz). they're obviously going after the high end film market, but what kind hardware would impress people who work on SGI's all day? certainly nothing in the current lineup. it has to be something truly FAST...something that can really run the high-end apps they've already acquired...to me, this means something big that we haven't seen before is coming.



2) spymac reported several months ago that apple was playing around with a quad processor G4. There was even a movie (if you believe what you see) that showed a quad CPU monitor on OSX bouncing as various intensive tasks were performed. is it genuine? who knows...but i've seen the movie and curiously, it's not available from spymac anymore. OSX fully support SMP and the G4 is very scalable, unlike the older G3. coincidence?



3) nobody has real proof that a G5 exists. what we do know is that there are very few RISC based chips that could potentially be used in a next-gen mac. the only real candidates are the moto bookE g4 and IBM's power4. unfortunately, the power4 is expensive, hot, and unsuited a desktop system...it's meant for servers. still, it uses 4 CPU's and the FP numbers are absolutely sick. the book-E is an embedded processor and there is no indication it will ever be a desktop CPU..although elements of it may be incorporated in current G4 design. between the two, the IBM power4 would offer the biggest bang for high-end processing and would allow apple to rely on someone besides motorola...a definite plus.



4) apple recently began an aggressive marketing campaign aimed directly at windows users. the switch campaign talks about all the benefits of the mac, except speed...which is the one big area where the G4 and OSX have issues. why push hard at wintel people who are naturally going to say, "it may be easier, but will it run any FASTER?"





putting all these things together, i'm left with one inescapable conclusion. apple has something big in the pipeline. we may not see it in new york, but it's coming..... the G4 has room to grow, but not enough room for the wintel crowd that apple wants to attract with the "switch" campaign.. the G4 is fast...but not fast enough for film professionals who apple is clearly pitching to. what closes this gap?



i'm hoping that apple is working with IBM on a desktop version of the power4 to be teamed with a 64bit version of OSX. now you have a system that would interest not only hollywood, but the scientific community. it would be big, fast and brutal.



best of all, steve could have a new kind of macworld bakeoff...one where he says, "the new quad G5 can sequence and models the human genome 45% faster than the fastest pentium on the planet, and it'll deliver these kinds of results in every task you do...from burning a DVD, to ripping some Mp3's, to discovering the nature of the universe. it's all faster now on a mac."



we can dream, right???
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 23
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    Gotta screw your second point



    SpyMac.....you know? Is one of the worst rumors sites out there (next to MOSR). Nothing the site said had come to reality.
  • Reply 2 of 23
    mokimoki Posts: 551member
    [quote]Originally posted by koffedrnkr:

    <strong>unfortunately, the power4 is expensive, hot, and unsuited a desktop system...it's meant for servers. still, it uses 4 CPU's and the FP numbers are absolutely sick. the book-E is an embedded processor and there is no indication it will ever be a desktop CPU..although elements of it may be incorporated in current G4 design. between the two, the IBM power4 would offer the biggest bang for high-end processing and would allow apple to rely on someone besides motorola...a definite plus.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Just a slight correction -- the current POWER4 implementation is a dual CPU core, that is, two CPUs per core. These are available in single core, dual core, and quad-core packages, in other words, 2, 4, or 8 CPU packages.



    The quad core package looks like a 4 CPU package, but since there are 2 CPUs per core, it should really be considered an 8 CPU package.
  • Reply 3 of 23
    vvmpvvmp Posts: 63member
    One thing is 4 sure...Apple won't be demonstrating the awesome pwr of a program like SHAKE on an entry level G4 class machine. I think they are ready to put the spotlight on some serious new hardware, combined with the speedy new Jaguar and Firewire2. They may announce it at MWNY, but not necessarily ship till later.
  • Reply 4 of 23
    cdhostagecdhostage Posts: 1,038member
    Ooooo baby! Let's run SETI on a 3 GHz Power4 and watch it complete a unit in 2 minutes, 13 seconds.
  • Reply 5 of 23
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,409member
    Well, as I just pointed out in the "high end graphics workstation" thread... apparently IBM will have a workstation-class POWER4 out 2nd half 2002, and nVidia will have its new 120 million transistor DX9-compliant monster graphics chip out in Aug/Sept 2002. Apple could slap these things together and release the 64-bit version of OSX I'm sure they've been working on since Day1 (after all they've had 620's and POWER3s to develop it on).



    Not cheap (10K+ easy), but blistering fast workstations and well suited to all of those fancy programs they've been buying up.
  • Reply 6 of 23
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by Leonis:

    <strong>Gotta screw your second point



    SpyMac.....you know? Is one of the worst rumors sites out there (next to MOSR). Nothing the site said had come to reality.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    OFF-TOPIC: Ummm... I have to ask... what's the DEAL with them (MOSR) lately...? They used to be (a year or more ago) a site with DAILY updates and lots to say... now... they update once every week or two and it's usually announcing what has already been released. How is that a rumor...?



    Kinda sad, really...



    Is it the lack of $$$ keeping them afloat...?
  • Reply 7 of 23
    [quote]Originally posted by Scott F.:

    <strong>



    OFF-TOPIC: Ummm... I have to ask... what's the DEAL with them (MOSR) lately...? They used to be (a year or more ago) a site with DAILY updates and lots to say... now... they update once every week or two and it's usually announcing what has already been released. How is that a rumor...?



    Kinda sad, really...



    Is it the lack of $$$ keeping them afloat...?</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Big Ryan has been working over time at Hardees to pay Mom and Dad his rent.
  • Reply 8 of 23
    tsukuritetsukurite Posts: 192member
    [quote]*snip*



    we can dream, right???[/QB]<hr></blockquote>



    Anyone else feel like Apple really has all their ducks in a row? Even from the outside, I get a feeling of confidence from Apple's recent moves. There hasn't been a single one (including the enterprise and educations reorgs) that has made me say "whaaat?" and scratch my head. Every announcement and move have seemed to follow a logical progression. I'm really looking forward to Sybold/NY/etc. The last half of 2002 could be really significant.



    Steve & Co. definate seem to have their sh*t together.



    Go Apple!
  • Reply 9 of 23
    frawgzfrawgz Posts: 547member
    [quote]Originally posted by Leonis:

    <strong>Gotta screw your second point



    SpyMac.....you know? Is one of the worst rumors sites out there (next to MOSR). Nothing the site said had come to reality.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Just gotta point out that they had a story about the imminent 17" iMac about week before the eMac was announced. AFAIK, no one else had any idea it was coming.
  • Reply 10 of 23
    I disagree with point number 4 on the original post. Most PC users don't care at all what the processor speed is. I know this from experience. Somebody was just telling me how they got a cheap "1 megahertz athlon with 80 gigs of memory for $500. Does that sound like a good deal?" Most folks don't know a megahertz from a gigahertz, and don't know the difference between RAM and hard drive space. Believe it or not, stuff like "my computer doesn't crash" and "It looks neat" and "It just works the way your brain works" will go much farther than "this thing has 240 horsepower and 100 zigawatts of memory" unless the person lets their ego coincide with their computer's PERCEIVED power. Of course, when they go to the store and see one is listed at "2.5 GHz" and the other is "dual 1Ghz" it sounds like one is 2.5 times better, and costs less. Athlon deals with that by using the "1800+" rating or whatever that is. Maybe Apple needs some type of similar trickery. The sad truth is that most folks go to their neighborhood computer store and buy a cheap "white box" which holds over 50% of the market. Maybe the key is opening up a lot of neighborhood computer stores offering cheap macs instead of "white box" PCs. The other option is to get Steve Jobs to practice saying "Duuuude".
  • Reply 11 of 23
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    Yeah, I was having a conversation with a friend of mine about making his computer better, I told him to get a new one, but somewhere in the conversation he asked me "Well, were can you get more megaram and what is it?" And the usual "So if I delete all the things I don't need anymore, I will get RAM back right?" But usually people like this don't really care at all, as long as it works. I've even been asked



    A: "Well I got picture off the CD, made the flyer, and now I can't save it back on the CD... What's wrong?"



    Me: "You don't have a CD burner do you?"



    A: "No, but it's already burnt"
  • Reply 12 of 23
    [quote]Originally posted by Scott F.:

    <strong>



    OFF-TOPIC: Ummm... I have to ask... what's the DEAL with them (MOSR) lately...? They used to be (a year or more ago) a site with DAILY updates and lots to say... now... they update once every week or two and it's usually announcing what has already been released. How is that a rumor...?



    Kinda sad, really...



    Is it the lack of $$$ keeping them afloat...?</strong><hr></blockquote>





    It kind of reminds me of another rumor site that used to update regularly, then every month or so, then twice a year before an expo. Last I heard, that site shut down for a month or two and re-opened as some cheesy BBS where people bitch about how that if Apple doesn't get their act together they're gonna......they're gonna......RICKY! Do something to him!!!!







    [ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Mack Damon ]</p>
  • Reply 13 of 23
    lowb-inglowb-ing Posts: 98member
    [quote]Originally posted by SuperMatt:

    <strong>I disagree with point number 4 on the original post. Most PC users don't care at all what the processor speed is. I know this from experience. Somebody was just telling me how they got a cheap "1 megahertz athlon with 80 gigs of memory for $500. Does that sound like a good deal?" Most folks don't know a megahertz from a gigahertz, and don't know the difference between RAM and hard drive space. Believe it or not, stuff like "my computer doesn't crash" and "It looks neat" and "It just works the way your brain works" will go much farther than "this thing has 240 horsepower and 100 zigawatts of memory" unless the person lets their ego coincide with their computer's PERCEIVED power. Of course, when they go to the store and see one is listed at "2.5 GHz" and the other is "dual 1Ghz" it sounds like one is 2.5 times better, and costs less. Athlon deals with that by using the "1800+" rating or whatever that is. Maybe Apple needs some type of similar trickery. The sad truth is that most folks go to their neighborhood computer store and buy a cheap "white box" which holds over 50% of the market. Maybe the key is opening up a lot of neighborhood computer stores offering cheap macs instead of "white box" PCs. The other option is to get Steve Jobs to practice saying "Duuuude".</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The thing is that the people who don't know (care) one bit about performance, are usualy the ones who go for the $499 computers. They are, coincidentally, also the ones who'd benefit the most from ease of use.



    Apple comps are just to expensive to appeal to this huge crowd. Even the emac. If apple managed to produce a $500 box and market it right, they could gain alot of marketshare, which is something they really need. The original imac proved this, but prices have since come down in the wintel world, and apple's prices have gone in the opposite direction.

    The economics of scale would allow them to lower production costs for their other models as well, since many parts are the same. Overall I think it's a winner in the long-term, even though margins on the $500 boxes themselves would be very small.
  • Reply 14 of 23
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    Yeah, from the marketing point of view, Steve J. is wrong to think that all people on earth think the way he does. When Apple started speaking gigaflops, a colleague of mine decided that it's a misprint. Because having billions of floppy drives sounds a bit odd.

    The recent switch ads are outstandingly banal, but, strange as it may appear, they will work.

    So, getting back to the topic, I believe that Apple may not have new great hardware up the sleeve right now (just some speed-bumped G4s), but they may well gain another 2-3% in marketshare through their ads and stores.



    Anyway, who knows?



    [ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: costique ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 23
    Yeah, maybe not now, but soonish surely...

    Think about it.

    -Apple are making great a great OS and software right now

    - It only runs on their hardware... but rather slowly.

    - Apples recent purchases indicate clearly a big push into graphics/video software....

    - But something like Shake would be a JOKE!! on a dual gig powermac, totally pointless.... SO.....

    I can only draw one conclusion... massive increase in "powermac" power is just round the corner, esp. since there does not seem to be any revolutionary chip coming from Motorola....

    Just my $0.02
  • Reply 16 of 23
    progmacprogmac Posts: 1,850member
    in my opinion, i do not think apple should lower themselves to providing a new $500 computer. $500 PCs for the most part suck, even if only used for email and internet because the parts are of extremely low quality and manufactured often by insanely low paid workers. i don't think anyone benefits from a $500 computer with a $40 motherboard and i doubt any $500 customer would be satisfied with their purchase due to the instability and general crapiness of their machine.



    so, with apple having such a small market share, they cannot manufacture a crappy $500 computer without losing reputation. person A will buy a $500 mac with crappy hardware and then the person will blame the whole experience on the mac platform and go out and give the little dell nerd $1,000.
  • Reply 17 of 23
    larstlarst Posts: 4member
    [quote]Originally posted by koffedrnkr:

    <strong>this is something in the nature of wild speculation, but here it goes...let's look at recent events:



    1) apple continues to acquire companies which produce high end compositing and film software (first nothing real, now rayz). they're obviously going after the high end film market, but what kind hardware would impress people who work on SGI's all day? certainly nothing in the current lineup. it has to be something truly FAST...something that can really run the high-end apps they've already acquired...to me, this means something big that we haven't seen before is coming.



    2) spymac reported several months ago that apple was playing around with a quad processor G4. There was even a movie (if you believe what you see) that showed a quad CPU monitor on OSX bouncing as various intensive tasks were performed. is it genuine? who knows...but i've seen the movie and curiously, it's not available from spymac anymore. OSX fully support SMP and the G4 is very scalable, unlike the older G3. coincidence?



    3) nobody has real proof that a G5 exists. what we do know is that there are very few RISC based chips that could potentially be used in a next-gen mac. the only real candidates are the moto bookE g4 and IBM's power4. unfortunately, the power4 is expensive, hot, and unsuited a desktop system...it's meant for servers. still, it uses 4 CPU's and the FP numbers are absolutely sick. the book-E is an embedded processor and there is no indication it will ever be a desktop CPU..although elements of it may be incorporated in current G4 design. between the two, the IBM power4 would offer the biggest bang for high-end processing and would allow apple to rely on someone besides motorola...a definite plus.



    4) apple recently began an aggressive marketing campaign aimed directly at windows users. the switch campaign talks about all the benefits of the mac, except speed...which is the one big area where the G4 and OSX have issues. why push hard at wintel people who are naturally going to say, "it may be easier, but will it run any FASTER?"





    putting all these things together, i'm left with one inescapable conclusion. apple has something big in the pipeline. we may not see it in new york, but it's coming..... the G4 has room to grow, but not enough room for the wintel crowd that apple wants to attract with the "switch" campaign.. the G4 is fast...but not fast enough for film professionals who apple is clearly pitching to. what closes this gap?



    i'm hoping that apple is working with IBM on a desktop version of the power4 to be teamed with a 64bit version of OSX. now you have a system that would interest not only hollywood, but the scientific community. it would be big, fast and brutal.



    best of all, steve could have a new kind of macworld bakeoff...one where he says, "the new quad G5 can sequence and models the human genome 45% faster than the fastest pentium on the planet, and it'll deliver these kinds of results in every task you do...from burning a DVD, to ripping some Mp3's, to discovering the nature of the universe. it's all faster now on a mac."



    we can dream, right???</strong><hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 18 of 23
    larstlarst Posts: 4member
    Sorry about the other post. Caught me off-guard.



    Power4! Could this really be a possibility?

    Will the Power4 actually be suitable in its state (or slightly modified) for a PowerMac?

    The Reg posted this today (Low-end Power4s):

    <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/25722.html"; target="_blank">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/25722.html</a>;



    Wouldn't that be cool...
  • Reply 19 of 23
    [quote]Originally posted by sickmiller:

    <strong>in my opinion, i do not think apple should lower themselves to providing a new $500 computer. $500 PCs for the most part suck, even if only used for email and internet because the parts are of extremely low quality and manufactured often by insanely low paid workers. i don't think anyone benefits from a $500 computer with a $40 motherboard and i doubt any $500 customer would be satisfied with their purchase due to the instability and general crapiness of their machine.



    so, with apple having such a small market share, they cannot manufacture a crappy $500 computer without losing reputation. person A will buy a $500 mac with crappy hardware and then the person will blame the whole experience on the mac platform and go out and give the little dell nerd $1,000.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The same workers that is assembling your $500 piece-o-crap are the same ones building a $4000 P4-xeon workstation. If Apple could afford to make a $500 'puter, then why not? The parts will have the same quality as our current computers and more people will be able to afford them. It's not a matter as to whether Apple should, it's really only if they can.
  • Reply 20 of 23
    koffedrnkrkoffedrnkr Posts: 170member
    the power4 plot thickens.....



    from <a href="http://www.theregus.com"; target="_blank">www.theregus.com</a>



    "The word on the street is that Big Blue is getting ready to take its Power4 RISC processors to small machines, and that it may do so sooner rather than later, Timothy Prickett Morgan writes. While the details are sketchy, IBM is said to be preparing to brief its sales team and pSeries resellers on the new entry and workgroup machines, which will employ some variant of the Power4 processors ."



    hmmmm......
Sign In or Register to comment.