I think that this is potentially the biggest hint of what will be in future Macs that we have had in a long time. And it is far mre reliable than any potential mole.
Sorry if this isnt the appropriate thread to post this in, i wanted to start a new thread but figured the ass-face admins would lock it quicker than you could say "i have no life and i spend all day as an 'admin' on a macinotsh rumors board pretending i have some sort of power".
I just wanted to lay to rest all these thoughts if the iMac def. getting an update at MWNY. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not really. Apple is sitting on 15 weeks of inventory (yes, thats right. inventory of iMacs) and theyre supposed to come out with NEW models in 13 days?
If they update the iMac (hardware specs, no pricing changes or anything like that just to boost sales of current iMac) then i promise i will start a thread in General Discussion of how big of a jackass i am. I'm pretty sure though
<strong>Sorry if this isnt the appropriate thread to post this in, i wanted to start a new thread but figured the ass-face admins would lock it quicker than you could say "i have no life and i spend all day as an 'admin' on a macinotsh rumors board pretending i have some sort of power".
I just wanted to lay to rest all these thoughts if the iMac def. getting an update at MWNY. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not really. Apple is sitting on 15 weeks of inventory (yes, thats right. inventory of iMacs) and theyre supposed to come out with NEW models in 13 days?
If they update the iMac (hardware specs, no pricing changes or anything like that just to boost sales of current iMac) then i promise i will start a thread in General Discussion of how big of a jackass i am. I'm pretty sure though </strong><hr></blockquote>
Umm, I think the Admin's do a decent job and are justified in closing useless and repetitive threads, and they would have been justified in locking this if it was in it's own thread, because this statement has been made in about 8 other threads...
Oh and BTW, Apple isn't the one with the inventory, the dealers are. This is because Apple gave them all a $100 incentive on all iMac's till the end of June. If they do not update the iMac's at MWNY, it will be because they want to focus on Pro machines, not because of inventory that their dealers have.
Yes it WILL be because of inventory. My friend works for a specialist. He checked inventories today with me on the phone at TechData and Ingram. They are swimming in iMacs. No way there will be an iMac update. The fact that dealers got a $100 incentive means nothing if the distribution centers are stocked high with them. Remember when Apple went from 400 - 450 - 500 to 400 - dual 450 and dual 500? They had 11 weeks of Power Mac inventory in the channel and it killed them. It was a disaster. It balooned up to 14 weeks at one point and Apple spent two entire quarters widdling down that inventory with rebates and incentives while also giving price protection to dealers on the older machines. If there were new iMacs coming the channel would be drying up. On another note Ingram doesn't have a single Powerbook at ANY distribution warehouse, they are both backordered...but that is for another thread!
<strong>Yes it WILL be because of inventory. My friend works for a specialist. He checked inventories today with me on the phone at TechData and Ingram. They are swimming in iMacs. No way there will be an iMac update. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I thinl you are right, but if there are 17 and or 19 inch IMacs coming they could slot over the current models (with price reductions).
Myself I think with the Sputtering economy Apple will probably focus on pro equipment. Pros don't buy on novelty, they buy on Specs and need. Apple has some chance to goose sales on pro machines. Consumers aren't buying in mass right now and by the time they are any novelty will have worn off a machine introduced at MWNY.
I thinl you are right, but if there are 17 and or 19 inch IMacs coming they could slot over the current models (with price reductions).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not a chance. Just as faster iMacs would prevent moving that inventory, so would bigger screen iMacs.
[quote]<strong>Myself I think with the Sputtering economy Apple will probably focus on pro equipment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, the problem with Pros is that they tend to react even more severely to ups and downs of the economy. Quite honestly, I don't see anything at MWNY having a substantial impact on Apple's bottom line due to the economy. *Maybe* a low-cost, high-volume device, ala iPod. Certainly Pro hardware would help, but it'll not be received by large sales.
In whole, there's a certain short-term desperation in Apple's actions. Stuffing the channel, inadvertent as it might be is uncharacteristic of them. There is a HUGE and unique effort to get Jaguar out the door. People I know at Apple are working sundays and evenings like never before.
As moki has hinted, I think that Apple had intended to get more substantial hardware on the street by now. There really hasn't been anything released in a while to get the Pro market itching to buy. The recent acquisitions suggest that Apple is finally looking for new revenue streams, and perhaps that a substantial pro offering is soon to arrive.
The Marvell press release is *very* encouraging. 8GB DDR @ 366MHz, but don't expect anything beyond a 74xx chip. Push up the clock to maybe 1.4GHz, and a dual box will go a very long ways to catching up with AMD/Intel. Toss in Jaguar and Quartz Extreme and pro users could conceivably see a performance jump of 100% over what they have today in 10.1.5 and the dual 1GHz. Let's hope.
i don't get it - why the shortfall of iMac sales? i thought a few month ago they had preorders for at least two month production time? did the 100$ increase have this effect? is the iMac less attractive because new PowerMacs are on their way? hmmm.... strange....
Consumers aren't buying PCs with the previous fever pitch, certainly.
However, news on Macworld site shows that PC makers, having achieved the landmark 1 billion(th) in PC sales can expect to sell as many again in quicker time (probably due to emerging markets like China...)
While home markets are relatively saturated...Apple has the advantage that it has 95% of the market to go at. (Hell, Dell ((that rhymes...)) is selling plenty...so someone is buying even in a saturated market...)
Specs, I feel, while not the be all and end all, don't help Apple here. Forgeting the super drive on the top end iMac and... Geforce 2 Mx? They can do better than a card that is two years old. It was dirt cheap when first launched. So it must be helping Apple's margins here. At least offer the Geforce 4mx. Gawd.
Even budget PCs have big bus and DDR. Let's hope the imac can get at least 133 bus and ATA 100.
And that price jack. Come on Apple, drop the price. Half a year later, the price on the iMac has gone from reasonable to over priced.
So, the economy may be stopping some people from buying but...Apple doesn't always help itself with the gawdamn out a date specs.
It stops me from buying. There may be 'one or two' like me.
My point is, bar the superb styling and the superdrive, the top end iMac would look over priced in a beige box.
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.4 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....
Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!"
As you regular posters know, I'm in no way CPU technical.
Whoever wrote that passage has no idea about processors. A 1.7Ghz athlon doesn't come anywhere close to destroying a 2.4Ghz P4. The P4 is ahead in most tasks and it destroys the Athlon in any streaming media task. Plentiful benchmarks and timed tests in the PC publication world confirm this. This guy's head is in his ass.
However, I to did hear something about the way Intel counts cycles in the P4 and that a particular part of the proc performs twice as fast (but half as much work) as the rest of it. hence 2.4/1.2. BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER, P4 has the MOST OUTRIGHT PERFORMANCE of ANY CONSUMER DESKTOP CHIP.
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz....... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, so All the overclockers who set the multiplier and bus clock themselves just haven't noticed? FOr this kind of deception to Work, Intel would need the cooperation of the motherboard and BIOS makers to keep it a secret. Via and Intel are such good friends, too. If I was intel I'd be putting "assymetrical clock" to use in portable products and advertising it on those processors as Well.
<strong>What worries me is the other thread about an Apple Camera maybe being released also.
Jobs won't put 2 very big things in one event
(aka G5(or very big powerMac upgrade) and a new device).
So I hope the camera is for later</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's so great about an apple-branded camera??? The market is already flooded and I seriously doubt Apple will enter this space. I also doubt that we'll see a very big powermac upgrade.
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.4 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....
Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!"
As you regular posters know, I'm in no way CPU technical.
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Not only does the P4 run at 2.53 Ghz currently, its integer units also run at twice that frequency internally, which is 5 Ghz for the current top of the line.
That's the bit. The interger units run at twice the speed of the rest of the CPU. I just didn't know if it was 1.2/2.4 or 2.4/4.8. I guess it's the latter (but I'm not sure) though it matters not since the P4 remains the fastest commercial desktop chip money can buy, period.
<strong>That's the bit. The interger units run at twice the speed of the rest of the CPU. I just didn't know if it was 1.2/2.4 or 2.4/4.8. I guess it's the latter (but I'm not sure) though it matters not since the P4 remains the fastest commercial desktop chip money can buy, period.</strong>[/QUOTE]
It is not the fastest, it is the highest clocked chip (depending on your definition of desktop).
The line between desktop and workstation is very fine these days, and there are other lower clocked chips that have higher SPEC marks (but they are in workstations, many of which can happily live on a desktop)
Comments
[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: wormboy ]</p>
I just wanted to lay to rest all these thoughts if the iMac def. getting an update at MWNY. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not really. Apple is sitting on 15 weeks of inventory (yes, thats right. inventory of iMacs) and theyre supposed to come out with NEW models in 13 days?
If they update the iMac (hardware specs, no pricing changes or anything like that just to boost sales of current iMac) then i promise i will start a thread in General Discussion of how big of a jackass i am. I'm pretty sure though
<strong>Sorry if this isnt the appropriate thread to post this in, i wanted to start a new thread but figured the ass-face admins would lock it quicker than you could say "i have no life and i spend all day as an 'admin' on a macinotsh rumors board pretending i have some sort of power".
I just wanted to lay to rest all these thoughts if the iMac def. getting an update at MWNY. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not really. Apple is sitting on 15 weeks of inventory (yes, thats right. inventory of iMacs) and theyre supposed to come out with NEW models in 13 days?
If they update the iMac (hardware specs, no pricing changes or anything like that just to boost sales of current iMac) then i promise i will start a thread in General Discussion of how big of a jackass i am. I'm pretty sure though
Umm, I think the Admin's do a decent job and are justified in closing useless and repetitive threads, and they would have been justified in locking this if it was in it's own thread, because this statement has been made in about 8 other threads...
Oh and BTW, Apple isn't the one with the inventory, the dealers are. This is because Apple gave them all a $100 incentive on all iMac's till the end of June. If they do not update the iMac's at MWNY, it will be because they want to focus on Pro machines, not because of inventory that their dealers have.
Blizaine
<strong>Yes it WILL be because of inventory. My friend works for a specialist. He checked inventories today with me on the phone at TechData and Ingram. They are swimming in iMacs. No way there will be an iMac update. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I thinl you are right, but if there are 17 and or 19 inch IMacs coming they could slot over the current models (with price reductions).
Myself I think with the Sputtering economy Apple will probably focus on pro equipment. Pros don't buy on novelty, they buy on Specs and need. Apple has some chance to goose sales on pro machines. Consumers aren't buying in mass right now and by the time they are any novelty will have worn off a machine introduced at MWNY.
<strong>
I thinl you are right, but if there are 17 and or 19 inch IMacs coming they could slot over the current models (with price reductions).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not a chance. Just as faster iMacs would prevent moving that inventory, so would bigger screen iMacs.
[quote]<strong>Myself I think with the Sputtering economy Apple will probably focus on pro equipment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, the problem with Pros is that they tend to react even more severely to ups and downs of the economy. Quite honestly, I don't see anything at MWNY having a substantial impact on Apple's bottom line due to the economy. *Maybe* a low-cost, high-volume device, ala iPod. Certainly Pro hardware would help, but it'll not be received by large sales.
In whole, there's a certain short-term desperation in Apple's actions. Stuffing the channel, inadvertent as it might be is uncharacteristic of them. There is a HUGE and unique effort to get Jaguar out the door. People I know at Apple are working sundays and evenings like never before.
As moki has hinted, I think that Apple had intended to get more substantial hardware on the street by now. There really hasn't been anything released in a while to get the Pro market itching to buy. The recent acquisitions suggest that Apple is finally looking for new revenue streams, and perhaps that a substantial pro offering is soon to arrive.
The Marvell press release is *very* encouraging. 8GB DDR @ 366MHz, but don't expect anything beyond a 74xx chip. Push up the clock to maybe 1.4GHz, and a dual box will go a very long ways to catching up with AMD/Intel. Toss in Jaguar and Quartz Extreme and pro users could conceivably see a performance jump of 100% over what they have today in 10.1.5 and the dual 1GHz. Let's hope.
Keep to topic please
<strong>Uh...wouldn't lagging iMac sales be incentive for Apple to update the machines?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not if they have to give price protection to hundreds or thousands of iMacs.
Specs are not keeping iMacs from selling.
Consumers aren't buying PCs with the previous fever pitch, certainly.
However, news on Macworld site shows that PC makers, having achieved the landmark 1 billion(th) in PC sales can expect to sell as many again in quicker time (probably due to emerging markets like China...)
While home markets are relatively saturated...Apple has the advantage that it has 95% of the market to go at. (Hell, Dell ((that rhymes...)) is selling plenty...so someone is buying even in a saturated market...)
Specs, I feel, while not the be all and end all, don't help Apple here. Forgeting the super drive on the top end iMac and... Geforce 2 Mx? They can do better than a card that is two years old. It was dirt cheap when first launched. So it must be helping Apple's margins here. At least offer the Geforce 4mx. Gawd.
Even budget PCs have big bus and DDR. Let's hope the imac can get at least 133 bus and ATA 100.
And that price jack. Come on Apple, drop the price. Half a year later, the price on the iMac has gone from reasonable to over priced.
So, the economy may be stopping some people from buying but...Apple doesn't always help itself with the gawdamn out a date specs.
It stops me from buying. There may be 'one or two' like me.
My point is, bar the superb styling and the superdrive, the top end iMac would look over priced in a beige box.
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 07-04-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
macrumors newbie
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 11
P4 verse Mac
HOT NEWS!!!!!!
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.4 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....
Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!"
As you regular posters know, I'm in no way CPU technical.
Okay.
Discuss.
Lemon Bon Bon
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
If this is the case, then is there a case for governmental regulations regarding the advertised processor speeds?
However, I to did hear something about the way Intel counts cycles in the P4 and that a particular part of the proc performs twice as fast (but half as much work) as the rest of it. hence 2.4/1.2. BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER, P4 has the MOST OUTRIGHT PERFORMANCE of ANY CONSUMER DESKTOP CHIP.
<strong>"Johnny7896
macrumors newbie
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 11
P4 verse Mac
HOT NEWS!!!!!!
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz....... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, so All the overclockers who set the multiplier and bus clock themselves just haven't noticed? FOr this kind of deception to Work, Intel would need the cooperation of the motherboard and BIOS makers to keep it a secret. Via and Intel are such good friends, too. If I was intel I'd be putting "assymetrical clock" to use in portable products and advertising it on those processors as Well.
[ 07-04-2002: Message edited by: BobtheTomato ]</p>
<strong>What worries me is the other thread about an Apple Camera maybe being released also.
Jobs won't put 2 very big things in one event
(aka G5(or very big powerMac upgrade) and a new device).
So I hope the camera is for later</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's so great about an apple-branded camera??? The market is already flooded and I seriously doubt Apple will enter this space. I also doubt that we'll see a very big powermac upgrade.
<strong>"Johnny7896
macrumors newbie
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 11
P4 verse Mac
HOT NEWS!!!!!!
I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.4 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....
Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!"
As you regular posters know, I'm in no way CPU technical.
Okay.
Discuss.
Lemon Bon Bon
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Not only does the P4 run at 2.53 Ghz currently, its integer units also run at twice that frequency internally, which is 5 Ghz for the current top of the line.
<strong>That's the bit. The interger units run at twice the speed of the rest of the CPU. I just didn't know if it was 1.2/2.4 or 2.4/4.8. I guess it's the latter (but I'm not sure) though it matters not since the P4 remains the fastest commercial desktop chip money can buy, period.</strong>[/QUOTE]
It is not the fastest, it is the highest clocked chip (depending on your definition of desktop).
The line between desktop and workstation is very fine these days, and there are other lower clocked chips that have higher SPEC marks (but they are in workstations, many of which can happily live on a desktop)
[ 07-04-2002: Message edited by: *l++ ]</p>