Because consumers are so stupid (and I mean that in the nicest way...hi mom! ) and they'll eat anything up if it sounds good, I think Apple should kick Intel in the nuts by hyping the 64bit processor even though it has nothing to do with speed in average consumer apps.
Intel has waved their GHz superiority around in AMD and Apple's face even though their processors aren't necessarly much faster than an AMD chip clocked lower.
Soooo...Apple should wave 64bits in their face and make consumers believe that 64bit processors are ridiculously fast! It wouldn't be a lie...the 970 will be fast, but not because they're 64bits.
But the consumers don't know that. They'll want the latest and greatest thing..."that Intel is 4GHz but OMG, OMG, OMG...that Mac is 64bits!!!!!!!"
Of course...how can you expect consumers to know what the heck a 64bit processor is? It's EXACTLY the same as a consumer trying to understand what MHz or GHz clock speeds are. They don't know squat...all they want to know is bigger numbers are better. And that's all they need to know about 64bit processors.
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Guys, you are dreaming if you think Apple is going to continue to sell the G4 Towers after the 970 towers come out. There also won't be any huge price reduction, maybe $300 or $400 as usual, but not anything earth shattering.
Do you know how much Apple is getting raped on the 1.25 GHz and especially the 1.42 GHz G4s? The prices on these chips are astronomical. To make any type of good margin on the Power Macs, Apple had to cut the SuperDrive out of the mid-range model. Heck, even the eMacs have SuperDrives. Then there is the lack of a built in Airport card or internal bluetooth. These have to be added on the high end machine? Sacrifices had to be made to keep the G4s at these prices (and to keep them as dual processor machines).
Then there are the monitors which have also had a huge price cut recently, so we know Apple isn't making their big money from those either.
Apple is going to release the 970, there is no doubt about that. But things seem hazy now as to what they will actually release. The one thing that is guaranteed, though, is that Apple isn't going to keep the G4 around in any towers.
As for pricing, I think that if they can keep the entry level model down to $1599 or $1699, then they are doing great. I think we'll also see the high end at $2999 (just under the $3000 mark for marketing's sake). It will definitely be an interesting year if Apple can get these machines out the door.
Maybe the big difference in processor speeds will be reflected in the prices (but they will all be duals with the bottom line being a g4+).
well, if the bottemline powermac also has a ppc970 it would be the best sold powermac ever. or they have to squeeze it so hard it will be available only with a 40GB hd and a cd-rom drive. or they have to sell the top of the line only for, say, two months and after that introduce the rest of the line. so the sales will be equalized a little.
I'm a bit scared that the 970 PMac will become the next 17inch powerbook : insufficient supply. Apple has proven before that they're not exactly inventory wizzards...
I know quite a few folks that are planing to buy these macs, includeing a printing office in town whose HW rep told me they'll buy at least 10 of the highend machines when they come out, as they've put all HW purchases on hold since november 2002 and the PMac 867 they're usnig now get kinda long in the teeth :-)
Knowing Apple Belgium, it will be a serious battle to get a 970 : my dad recently ordered an ordinary 15inch flatpanel iMac and had to wait 2 weeks ! Same for the eMac and the iBooks. Only the powerbook seems to be in stock sufficiently. And the PMacs offcourse :-)
My guess is that they'd come out with something along the lines of dual 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 (or dual 1.2, 1.4, 1.6) machines.
Dual 970's on all powermacs would bring the powermacs closer in performace to PC's. In addition, the lower initial 970 speeds would not result in such a large performance delta between the current G4 powermacs and, it would also give Apple some future speed increases on this chip until the next 970 (smaller die size) is ready.
Frankly, I'd be happy as a pig in crap with a dual 970 powermac running at 1Ghz.
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
THUD!!!!
Programmer you've brought me back. Reality has hit. I agree with your post. I just don't see Apple taking the most expensive chip(in my estimation) and doubling up on it. Ahh the agony!
I, for one, will not buy a new mac if the suggested lineup is selected, unless the top-end sees some very dramatic price reductions, which I consider to be very wishful thinking, if it's a DP2,3 GHz config. I want a dual, and I don't want to shell out for the top-end box, and I don't think a single 1,8Ghz will make the upgrade from a dual gig MDD (even though I'm aware that the single 1,8Ghz PPC970 will kick my MDD's ass) worth my precious money.
I hope they make at least 2 DP configs, with different-speed processors, like a DP 1,8GHz and 2,3GHz, that'll make me kiss my precious money bye-bye, for the DP 1,8 of course, and I think there are alot of people that think like me (especially those who own the same kind of system, a pretty fast dual). There is too big a jump from a single 1,8, to a dual 2,3, a system somewhere is needed IMO (More than a single anything, but less than the fastest dual). And a DP 1,8 would of course kick everything comparable, but the DP 2,3's ass, including the fastest pentiums and athlons
If they only make one dual, they'll take (another) step back, from two different DP systems to one (and an expensive one too), and I don't see any reason to do that.
I think it's bad enough to have a single GHz G4 in the lowest-end tower, it's not offering any processing power to those with little cash and in the need of a pretty affordable tower (a student like me f.ex.).
I hope they won't repeat that when they finally have a truely kick-ass processor like the 970, when they have such a fat bitch to use in their macs, I think they should use the opportynity to sell and market boxes that have lots of lots of processing power at an affordable price.
Even dummies understand that 64 are more than 32. I don't think you have to explain to them why. It's the same deal with the mhz-myth. People expect the highest mhz machine to perform best.
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Well, what if the "worst yields" (2.3DP) are not as bad as we think. If they can hit 2.5, maybe they are holding bk at 2.3 to have better yields and fewer heat issues. Maybe the industial design follows the Ducati NAKED BIKE design and goes with an tubular frame, exposing the internals for cooling purposes
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Unless of course the 2.3GHz is initial production using a 0.09µm process.
A little sarcasm to lighten the mood
Quote:
Originally posted by Vvmp
Well, what if the "worst yields" (2.3DP) are not as bad as we think. If they can hit 2.5, maybe they are holding bk at 2.3 to have better yields and fewer heat issues. Maybe the industial design follows the Ducati NAKED BIKE design and goes with an tubular frame, exposing the internals for cooling purposes
Let's see, that would mean an excess of high end cpu's during initial production. Soooooo, I would buy the 1.4GHz model and overclock it for everything it's worth.
A little more sarcasm to lighten the mood a littler more
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
You mean exactly like they did with the Quicksilver 1Ghz - dual at the top only? Of course it's possible they would put the top chip in the dual. The reason this isn't to be trusted isn't because they woudn't do that, it's because 1) MacBeDoobie has no track record, and 2) because a 2.3Ghz machine isn't consistent with what we currently know about the 970.
These 970 machines will not be PowerMacs. Besides a new form factor they will have a new name. They will initially be aimed at the pro-user and not for g'ds sake sell for $1499. Any new processor based machine has always had a premium price at first intro. Until full speed manufacturing is achieved (with less rejects) don't look for the processor for at least a year in lower priced machines. Apple is going after the movie and graphics industry with these new "extreme" machines, not the gamer in college. Get real people.
These 970 machines will not be PowerMacs. Besides a new form factor they will have a new name. They will initially be aimed at the pro-user and not for g'ds sake sell for $1499. Any new processor based machine has always had a premium price at first intro. Until full speed manufacturing is achieved (with less rejects) don't look for the processor for at least a year in lower priced machines. Apple is going after the movie and graphics industry with these new "extreme" machines, not the gamer in college. Get real people.
I disagree, Apple clearly knows their powermac-line is lacking seriously, and the PPC970 is Apple's salvation. What should they do with their powermacs, if they're not going to use the 970? Stay with the G4 (for another year, and make it 4-5) and let the powermacs and the sales rot? They have to change something, to ignite some sparks again, or they'll BE DOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!!11 :P
I, for one, will not buy a new mac if the suggested lineup is selected, unless the top-end sees some very dramatic price reductions, which I consider to be very wishful thinking, if it's a DP2,3 GHz config. I want a dual, and I don't want to shell out for the top-end box, and I don't think a single 1,8Ghz will make the upgrade from a dual gig MDD (even though I'm aware that the single 1,8Ghz PPC970 will kick my MDD's ass) worth my precious money.
I hope they make at least 2 DP configs, with different-speed processors, like a DP 1,8GHz and 2,3GHz, that'll make me kiss my precious money bye-bye, for the DP 1,8 of course, and I think there are alot of people that think like me (especially those who own the same kind of system, a pretty fast dual). There is too big a jump from a single 1,8, to a dual 2,3, a system somewhere is needed IMO (More than a single anything, but less than the fastest dual). And a DP 1,8 would of course kick everything comparable, but the DP 2,3's ass, including the fastest pentiums and athlons
If they only make one dual, they'll take (another) step back, from two different DP systems to one (and an expensive one too), and I don't see any reason to do that.
I think it's bad enough to have a single GHz G4 in the lowest-end tower, it's not offering any processing power to those with little cash and in the need of a pretty affordable tower (a student like me f.ex.).
I hope they won't repeat that when they finally have a truely kick-ass processor like the 970, when they have such a fat bitch to use in their macs, I think they should use the opportynity to sell and market boxes that have lots of lots of processing power at an affordable price.
I only pray that the 970's will be cheap (enough)
They could be doing it for inventory purposes. If they know that they'll only be able to get 10,000 of the chips this entire year, they may decide that its better to put 8000 of those in 8000 single processor boxes and the rest in 1000 dual processor boxes.
Then when yields increase, they'll offer more duals. At least, that's a thought.
Public perception is that the PowerMac line is fataly underpowered. Apple therefore would certainly not use that name for the new line of 970 computers. Aggressive pricing is neither here nor there. They have lowered prices on consumer machines and the aging PowerMac line (they had no choice on the latter). But prices are still higher then the low-end Dells and Gateways. It is true that on the high-end models by Dell and Gateway, iMacs are very competitive price and feature-wise.
These new 970 machines will certainly be more expensive then the lowest priced PowerMac, you can bet on that.
Comments
Intel has waved their GHz superiority around in AMD and Apple's face even though their processors aren't necessarly much faster than an AMD chip clocked lower.
Soooo...Apple should wave 64bits in their face and make consumers believe that 64bit processors are ridiculously fast! It wouldn't be a lie...the 970 will be fast, but not because they're 64bits.
But the consumers don't know that. They'll want the latest and greatest thing..."that Intel is 4GHz but OMG, OMG, OMG...that Mac is 64bits!!!!!!!"
Of course...how can you expect consumers to know what the heck a 64bit processor is? It's EXACTLY the same as a consumer trying to understand what MHz or GHz clock speeds are. They don't know squat...all they want to know is bigger numbers are better. And that's all they need to know about 64bit processors.
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Do you know how much Apple is getting raped on the 1.25 GHz and especially the 1.42 GHz G4s? The prices on these chips are astronomical. To make any type of good margin on the Power Macs, Apple had to cut the SuperDrive out of the mid-range model. Heck, even the eMacs have SuperDrives. Then there is the lack of a built in Airport card or internal bluetooth. These have to be added on the high end machine? Sacrifices had to be made to keep the G4s at these prices (and to keep them as dual processor machines).
Then there are the monitors which have also had a huge price cut recently, so we know Apple isn't making their big money from those either.
Apple is going to release the 970, there is no doubt about that. But things seem hazy now as to what they will actually release. The one thing that is guaranteed, though, is that Apple isn't going to keep the G4 around in any towers.
As for pricing, I think that if they can keep the entry level model down to $1599 or $1699, then they are doing great. I think we'll also see the high end at $2999 (just under the $3000 mark for marketing's sake). It will definitely be an interesting year if Apple can get these machines out the door.
Originally posted by Bigc
Maybe the big difference in processor speeds will be reflected in the prices (but they will all be duals with the bottom line being a g4+).
well, if the bottemline powermac also has a ppc970 it would be the best sold powermac ever. or they have to squeeze it so hard it will be available only with a 40GB hd and a cd-rom drive. or they have to sell the top of the line only for, say, two months and after that introduce the rest of the line. so the sales will be equalized a little.
I know quite a few folks that are planing to buy these macs, includeing a printing office in town whose HW rep told me they'll buy at least 10 of the highend machines when they come out, as they've put all HW purchases on hold since november 2002 and the PMac 867 they're usnig now get kinda long in the teeth :-)
Knowing Apple Belgium, it will be a serious battle to get a 970 : my dad recently ordered an ordinary 15inch flatpanel iMac and had to wait 2 weeks ! Same for the eMac and the iBooks. Only the powerbook seems to be in stock sufficiently. And the PMacs offcourse :-)
Dual 970's on all powermacs would bring the powermacs closer in performace to PC's. In addition, the lower initial 970 speeds would not result in such a large performance delta between the current G4 powermacs and, it would also give Apple some future speed increases on this chip until the next 970 (smaller die size) is ready.
Frankly, I'd be happy as a pig in crap with a dual 970 powermac running at 1Ghz.
Originally posted by sc_markt
Frankly, I'd be happy as a pig in crap with a dual 970 powermac running at 1Ghz.
ROTFLMAO
Originally posted by Programmer
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
THUD!!!!
Programmer you've brought me back. Reality has hit. I agree with your post. I just don't see Apple taking the most expensive chip(in my estimation) and doubling up on it. Ahh the agony!
I hope they make at least 2 DP configs, with different-speed processors, like a DP 1,8GHz and 2,3GHz, that'll make me kiss my precious money bye-bye, for the DP 1,8 of course, and I think there are alot of people that think like me (especially those who own the same kind of system, a pretty fast dual). There is too big a jump from a single 1,8, to a dual 2,3, a system somewhere is needed IMO (More than a single anything, but less than the fastest dual). And a DP 1,8 would of course kick everything comparable, but the DP 2,3's ass, including the fastest pentiums and athlons
If they only make one dual, they'll take (another) step back, from two different DP systems to one (and an expensive one too), and I don't see any reason to do that.
I think it's bad enough to have a single GHz G4 in the lowest-end tower, it's not offering any processing power to those with little cash and in the need of a pretty affordable tower (a student like me f.ex.).
I hope they won't repeat that when they finally have a truely kick-ass processor like the 970, when they have such a fat bitch to use in their macs, I think they should use the opportynity to sell and market boxes that have lots of lots of processing power at an affordable price.
I only pray that the 970's will be cheap (enough)
Originally posted by NETROMac
Even dummies understand that 64 are more than 32. I don't think you have to explain to them why. It's the same deal with the mhz-myth. People expect the highest mhz machine to perform best.
"PowerMac G5: double the bits"
Just wait... The Powermac 36.. G4 + 32 bit..
Originally posted by Programmer
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Well, what if the "worst yields" (2.3DP) are not as bad as we think. If they can hit 2.5, maybe they are holding bk at 2.3 to have better yields and fewer heat issues. Maybe the industial design follows the Ducati NAKED BIKE design and goes with an tubular frame, exposing the internals for cooling purposes
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
Just wait... The Powermac 36.. G4 + 32 bit..
err... that would be 970 + 64 then : 1034
but since teh G4 is allready 32, it's only + 32 :
970+32 = 1002
and since it's a dual, that would be x 2
2 x (970+32) = 2004
now THAT's a nice number :-)
Originally posted by Programmer
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
I don't buy it... and I think its too early for Apple to have committed to this decision.
Unless of course the 2.3GHz is initial production using a 0.09µm process.
A little sarcasm to lighten the mood
Originally posted by Vvmp
Well, what if the "worst yields" (2.3DP) are not as bad as we think. If they can hit 2.5, maybe they are holding bk at 2.3 to have better yields and fewer heat issues. Maybe the industial design follows the Ducati NAKED BIKE design and goes with an tubular frame, exposing the internals for cooling purposes
Let's see, that would mean an excess of high end cpu's during initial production. Soooooo, I would buy the 1.4GHz model and overclock it for everything it's worth.
A little more sarcasm to lighten the mood a littler more
Originally posted by Programmer
Personally I don't think the suggested lineup makes any sense -- put the chip with the worst yields and highest heat output in the only DP machine? Weird. I would expect at least the mid-range machine to be DP as well, or have 4 machines in the lineup with the 2.3DP being "Ultimate" (and priced accordingly).
You mean exactly like they did with the Quicksilver 1Ghz - dual at the top only? Of course it's possible they would put the top chip in the dual. The reason this isn't to be trusted isn't because they woudn't do that, it's because 1) MacBeDoobie has no track record, and 2) because a 2.3Ghz machine isn't consistent with what we currently know about the 970.
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
These 970 machines will not be PowerMacs. Besides a new form factor they will have a new name. They will initially be aimed at the pro-user and not for g'ds sake sell for $1499. Any new processor based machine has always had a premium price at first intro. Until full speed manufacturing is achieved (with less rejects) don't look for the processor for at least a year in lower priced machines. Apple is going after the movie and graphics industry with these new "extreme" machines, not the gamer in college. Get real people.
I disagree, Apple clearly knows their powermac-line is lacking seriously, and the PPC970 is Apple's salvation. What should they do with their powermacs, if they're not going to use the 970? Stay with the G4 (for another year, and make it 4-5) and let the powermacs and the sales rot? They have to change something, to ignite some sparks again, or they'll BE DOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!!11 :P
Originally posted by r-0X#Zapchud
I, for one, will not buy a new mac if the suggested lineup is selected, unless the top-end sees some very dramatic price reductions, which I consider to be very wishful thinking, if it's a DP2,3 GHz config. I want a dual, and I don't want to shell out for the top-end box, and I don't think a single 1,8Ghz will make the upgrade from a dual gig MDD (even though I'm aware that the single 1,8Ghz PPC970 will kick my MDD's ass) worth my precious money.
I hope they make at least 2 DP configs, with different-speed processors, like a DP 1,8GHz and 2,3GHz, that'll make me kiss my precious money bye-bye, for the DP 1,8 of course, and I think there are alot of people that think like me (especially those who own the same kind of system, a pretty fast dual). There is too big a jump from a single 1,8, to a dual 2,3, a system somewhere is needed IMO (More than a single anything, but less than the fastest dual). And a DP 1,8 would of course kick everything comparable, but the DP 2,3's ass, including the fastest pentiums and athlons
If they only make one dual, they'll take (another) step back, from two different DP systems to one (and an expensive one too), and I don't see any reason to do that.
I think it's bad enough to have a single GHz G4 in the lowest-end tower, it's not offering any processing power to those with little cash and in the need of a pretty affordable tower (a student like me f.ex.).
I hope they won't repeat that when they finally have a truely kick-ass processor like the 970, when they have such a fat bitch to use in their macs, I think they should use the opportynity to sell and market boxes that have lots of lots of processing power at an affordable price.
I only pray that the 970's will be cheap (enough)
They could be doing it for inventory purposes. If they know that they'll only be able to get 10,000 of the chips this entire year, they may decide that its better to put 8000 of those in 8000 single processor boxes and the rest in 1000 dual processor boxes.
Then when yields increase, they'll offer more duals. At least, that's a thought.
These new 970 machines will certainly be more expensive then the lowest priced PowerMac, you can bet on that.