Well I'm not surprised. If the 970 is at WWDC, it's to be demoed to developers. I think everyone took the 'at WWDC' to mean they would be buying them at the end of the show. I am not surprised or disappointed by this because I'm still under the impression we are getting a fall release. We may get the 970 earlier but the last official non official and still not confirm that Apple is using the 970 is a fall release. If we get it early, June, July even Sept is a bonus.
Holy cats, it's like a school of pirahnas on crystal meth in here! But I mean that in a good way.
Okay, I know other people posted the fuller quote in context, but I'm going to do it again:
quote:
Meanwhile, we're hearing the faintest rumblings that the Power Mac G5 may actually not be ready for a WWDC introduction after all. We're not putting a whole lot of stock in said rumblings just yet, but we mention them anyway for the cautious souls among you who choose to temper your enthusiasm with a hefty dose of skepticism. 'Nuff said.
Key phrases to note are "faintest rumblings" and "not putting a whole lot of stock in." Who knew that a quick side note expressing certain third-hand parties' skepticism would send scores of distraught Mac fans leaping to their deaths?
This is getting so out of hand I may have to re-address this issue tomorrow. But the bottom line is that all I said is that some other people don't think the 970 will be ready to introduce, and that I didn't exactly believe them.
Personally, the way things are looking, I expect Panther to be demoed on a pre-production G5, but I'm thinking they probably won't be available for another month or so. Note that none of this is really based on anything more than what all of you have already seen a dozen times over. (Well, not much more. )
So relax. When I said "faintest rumblings," I meant "faintest rumblings"; some people do in fact choose not to let their enthusiasm get too out of hand just in case of disappointment, and I thought they might like to hear that some people are casting doubt on a 970 intro. In my own personal opinion, whether the G5 appears or not, people are probably getting their hopes up way higher than is generally healthy. Remember what happened with the summer Expo of 2001 when everyone was expecting LCD iMacs? Man, that was an ugly scene...
Anyway, hope that clears things up a little. Thanx for your time..."
Concering duals: They've been using things like "Two heads are better than one" in commercials for a while, so it would be bad to backtrack, just like it would be bad to all of a sudden drop AltiVec. And Programmer(s) would be pissed off.
Concering duals: They've been using things like "Two heads are better than one" in commercials for a while, so it would be bad to backtrack, just like it would be bad to all of a sudden drop AltiVec. And Programmer(s) would be pissed off.
The current crop has "speed bumped stop gap measure" all over them. Dual 1.6 GHz G4 will only bring out trips to www.depair.com
In a couple of months it has been 4 years since the G4 arrived to the Mac Towers. Considering how glorious those years has been and how satisfied we have been with our shiny "super computers" and the level of envy all Intel and AMD users have felt, we better not reach August 2003 with G4 still in the towers
I don't know what this means, but Apple Finland won't arrange WWDC satellite meeting where you could see Jobs keynote from WWDC in Finland. Previously there has been some satellite broadcast happenings around Macworlds in Finland.
I don't know what this means, but Apple Finland won't arrange WWDC satellite meeting where you could see Jobs keynote from WWDC in Finland. Previously there has been some satellite broadcast happenings around Macworlds in Finland.
On June 12, 1991, CERN, the European Particle Physics Laboratory in Geneva, held a seminar about the World Wide Web, a new hypertext system designed by British computer scientists Tim Berners-Lee during a fellowship at CERN.
In May, Berners-Lee had presented the architecture for the World Wide Web to a CERN committee and released a version of the Web on CERN's computers. Berners-Lee had been developing the system, which allowed Internet documents to "link" to each other easily, since 1989. By 1990, he had created the basic parameters of the World Wide Web, which were posted on the Internet in the summer of 1991. Berners-Lee continued to develop the Web through 1993, working with feedback from Internet users. By late 1991 and early 1992, the Web was widely discussed, and in early 1993, when Marc Andreessen and other graduate students at the University of Illinois released the Mosaic browser (Netscape's precursor), the Web rapidly became a popular communications medium.
Mike. compare the SpecInt and SpecFP for the two machines, then do the math. That's what sells, Mhz means nothing to consumers. They just judge by how impressed the sales people appear to be.
TotU, I know that in all actuality that we would have to compare SpecInt and SpecFP numbers to get a true reading of the actual performance gains over the G4. That wasn't the point of my post at all.
I am talking about MARKETING here for a second. If you told Joe Average about Spec Numbers, you will see for yourself what I commonly call the "Glazed Effect". In short, they will look at you strangely, confused, and then brush you off as "just another techie".
Now, you take the same Joe Average, and you tell him that Apples top of the line contains two 1.8 GHz 970s, all he is going to hear is: "1.8GHz x 2 = 3.6GHz; That's fast!!"
Remember, it was (the lack of) marketing that has gotten Apple to where it is now, and it is going to require Apple to really take it up a couple of notches in order to turn around their market share issue.
Also, if you don't believe me on this, go to your local Frys Electronics, CompUSA, or other computer store. Ask them which would be faster, a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4, or two 1.8 GHz 970s. Then ask them why. You will be amazed at the response you get.
TotU, I know that in all actuality that we would have to compare SpecInt and SpecFP numbers to get a true reading of the actual performance gains over the G4.
Well, not really....
Quote:
I am talking about MARKETING here for a second. If you told Joe Average about Spec Numbers, you will see for yourself what I commonly call the "Glazed Effect". In short, they will look at you strangely, confused, and then brush you off as "just another techie".
Now, you take the same Joe Average, and you tell him that Apples top of the line contains two 1.8 GHz 970s, all he is going to hear is: "1.8GHz x 2 = 3.6GHz; That's fast!!"
In my own experience, even that's not true. To the extent that people latch on to any aspect of the hardware, it's the CPU clock speed. The number of processors doesn't register in any concrete way. So if you release a dual 1.8GHz machine, what you'll hear is "1.8GHz, huh." To get the effect you're looking for you'd have to pull an AMD and give the machine a "speed rating" of 3.6GHz or some crap like that.
Quote:
Remember, it was (the lack of) marketing that has gotten Apple to where it is now, and it is going to require Apple to really take it up a couple of notches in order to turn around their market share issue.
There are a lot of reasons why Apple is where it is now. Marketing is one of them. At this point, they have no choice but to battle hard for every sale, because they're simply not even considered an option by most people - for reasons that vary from simple obliviousness to a notion that they're pretty but incompatible, or different enough that it would be easier to just stick with what's familiar. Once Macs are common enough that most people aren't shocked to see them in coffeehouses, and they're casually familiar with a few happy owners, the brand will gain traction again.
I've seen a lot more iBooks around in the last 6 months than I've seen any kind of Mac portable in the last 10 years. This bodes well.
Quote:
Also, if you don't believe me on this, go to your local Frys Electronics, CompUSA, or other computer store. Ask them which would be faster, a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4, or two 1.8 GHz 970s. Then ask them why. You will be amazed at the response you get.
I've seen a lot more iBooks around in the last 6 months than I've seen any kind of Mac portable in the last 10 years. This bodes well.
Ive been seeing tons of people using powerbooks and ibooks all over NYC lately, in coffee houses and the like. glowing apples everywhere And i just went to a live drum and bass show, and the keyboard player was using a 12". That is major advertising right there for every person there that night that saw that glowing apple. When they see that computer in the store they will either want it, or at least have respect for it.
Comments
Originally posted by - J B 7 2 -
Yeh I'll be happy when WWDC is here for that reason alone. I just want to know either way.
---
I'll PayPal anyone $100 if they nude streak on stage during Jobs' keynote with something like "One more thing!" or "970 now!" painted on their chest.
$100 + plane ticket?
Originally posted by Ernest eMac
sad news?
Hey, that's strangely in sync with what I've been saying since last August. I wonder if I will become "The Next Big Thing" in rumour-mongering?
I think we'll at least see Steve demo the new hardware.
Originally posted by Programmer
Hey, that's strangely in sync with what I've been saying since last August. I wonder if I will become "The Next Big Thing" in rumour-mongering?
I think we'll at least see Steve demo the new hardware.
...and maybe announcing pre-orders for delivery in August.
"From That AtAT Guy
Holy cats, it's like a school of pirahnas on crystal meth in here! But I mean that in a good way.
Okay, I know other people posted the fuller quote in context, but I'm going to do it again:
quote:
Meanwhile, we're hearing the faintest rumblings that the Power Mac G5 may actually not be ready for a WWDC introduction after all. We're not putting a whole lot of stock in said rumblings just yet, but we mention them anyway for the cautious souls among you who choose to temper your enthusiasm with a hefty dose of skepticism. 'Nuff said.
Key phrases to note are "faintest rumblings" and "not putting a whole lot of stock in." Who knew that a quick side note expressing certain third-hand parties' skepticism would send scores of distraught Mac fans leaping to their deaths?
This is getting so out of hand I may have to re-address this issue tomorrow. But the bottom line is that all I said is that some other people don't think the 970 will be ready to introduce, and that I didn't exactly believe them.
Personally, the way things are looking, I expect Panther to be demoed on a pre-production G5, but I'm thinking they probably won't be available for another month or so. Note that none of this is really based on anything more than what all of you have already seen a dozen times over. (Well, not much more. )
So relax. When I said "faintest rumblings," I meant "faintest rumblings"; some people do in fact choose not to let their enthusiasm get too out of hand just in case of disappointment, and I thought they might like to hear that some people are casting doubt on a 970 intro. In my own personal opinion, whether the G5 appears or not, people are probably getting their hopes up way higher than is generally healthy. Remember what happened with the summer Expo of 2001 when everyone was expecting LCD iMacs? Man, that was an ugly scene...
Anyway, hope that clears things up a little. Thanx for your time..."
Originally posted by Aquatic
Concering duals: They've been using things like "Two heads are better than one" in commercials for a while, so it would be bad to backtrack, just like it would be bad to all of a sudden drop AltiVec. And Programmer(s) would be pissed off.
"A superbrain is better than two brain deads"?
The current crop has "speed bumped stop gap measure" all over them. Dual 1.6 GHz G4 will only bring out trips to www.depair.com
In a couple of months it has been 4 years since the G4 arrived to the Mac Towers. Considering how glorious those years has been and how satisfied we have been with our shiny "super computers" and the level of envy all Intel and AMD users have felt, we better not reach August 2003 with G4 still in the towers
Originally posted by Stratosfear
I don't know what this means, but Apple Finland won't arrange WWDC satellite meeting where you could see Jobs keynote from WWDC in Finland. Previously there has been some satellite broadcast happenings around Macworlds in Finland.
WWDC and Macworld are two very different events.
1991 CERN seminar on WWW
On June 12, 1991, CERN, the European Particle Physics Laboratory in Geneva, held a seminar about the World Wide Web, a new hypertext system designed by British computer scientists Tim Berners-Lee during a fellowship at CERN.
In May, Berners-Lee had presented the architecture for the World Wide Web to a CERN committee and released a version of the Web on CERN's computers. Berners-Lee had been developing the system, which allowed Internet documents to "link" to each other easily, since 1989. By 1990, he had created the basic parameters of the World Wide Web, which were posted on the Internet in the summer of 1991. Berners-Lee continued to develop the Web through 1993, working with feedback from Internet users. By late 1991 and early 1992, the Web was widely discussed, and in early 1993, when Marc Andreessen and other graduate students at the University of Illinois released the Mosaic browser (Netscape's precursor), the Web rapidly became a popular communications medium.
Originally posted by Tomb of the Unknown
Some people are SO literal.
Mike. compare the SpecInt and SpecFP for the two machines, then do the math. That's what sells, Mhz means nothing to consumers. They just judge by how impressed the sales people appear to be.
TotU, I know that in all actuality that we would have to compare SpecInt and SpecFP numbers to get a true reading of the actual performance gains over the G4. That wasn't the point of my post at all.
I am talking about MARKETING here for a second. If you told Joe Average about Spec Numbers, you will see for yourself what I commonly call the "Glazed Effect". In short, they will look at you strangely, confused, and then brush you off as "just another techie".
Now, you take the same Joe Average, and you tell him that Apples top of the line contains two 1.8 GHz 970s, all he is going to hear is: "1.8GHz x 2 = 3.6GHz; That's fast!!"
Remember, it was (the lack of) marketing that has gotten Apple to where it is now, and it is going to require Apple to really take it up a couple of notches in order to turn around their market share issue.
Also, if you don't believe me on this, go to your local Frys Electronics, CompUSA, or other computer store. Ask them which would be faster, a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4, or two 1.8 GHz 970s. Then ask them why. You will be amazed at the response you get.
Originally posted by Mike Eggleston
TotU, I know that in all actuality that we would have to compare SpecInt and SpecFP numbers to get a true reading of the actual performance gains over the G4.
Well, not really....
I am talking about MARKETING here for a second. If you told Joe Average about Spec Numbers, you will see for yourself what I commonly call the "Glazed Effect". In short, they will look at you strangely, confused, and then brush you off as "just another techie".
Now, you take the same Joe Average, and you tell him that Apples top of the line contains two 1.8 GHz 970s, all he is going to hear is: "1.8GHz x 2 = 3.6GHz; That's fast!!"
In my own experience, even that's not true. To the extent that people latch on to any aspect of the hardware, it's the CPU clock speed. The number of processors doesn't register in any concrete way. So if you release a dual 1.8GHz machine, what you'll hear is "1.8GHz, huh." To get the effect you're looking for you'd have to pull an AMD and give the machine a "speed rating" of 3.6GHz or some crap like that.
Remember, it was (the lack of) marketing that has gotten Apple to where it is now, and it is going to require Apple to really take it up a couple of notches in order to turn around their market share issue.
There are a lot of reasons why Apple is where it is now. Marketing is one of them. At this point, they have no choice but to battle hard for every sale, because they're simply not even considered an option by most people - for reasons that vary from simple obliviousness to a notion that they're pretty but incompatible, or different enough that it would be easier to just stick with what's familiar. Once Macs are common enough that most people aren't shocked to see them in coffeehouses, and they're casually familiar with a few happy owners, the brand will gain traction again.
I've seen a lot more iBooks around in the last 6 months than I've seen any kind of Mac portable in the last 10 years. This bodes well.
Also, if you don't believe me on this, go to your local Frys Electronics, CompUSA, or other computer store. Ask them which would be faster, a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4, or two 1.8 GHz 970s. Then ask them why. You will be amazed at the response you get.
"What's a 970?"
Originally posted by Amorph
I've seen a lot more iBooks around in the last 6 months than I've seen any kind of Mac portable in the last 10 years. This bodes well.
Ive been seeing tons of people using powerbooks and ibooks all over NYC lately, in coffee houses and the like. glowing apples everywhere
Originally posted by Amorph
There are a lot of reasons why Apple is where it is now.
You are absolutly right. I know I was way overly generalizing things. I was just saying the marketing is probably the most obvious of all of them.
"What's a 970?"
It has been in my experience though, that most people would in fact multiply the two numbers together, because that is all they have to go by.
"We know internally that Apple has been replacing the acronym WWDC with the phrase "We Will Delight Crowds."
Crowds of developers or crowds of consumers?
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Crowds of developers or crowds of consumers?
Maybe both?
Originally posted by Outsider
Maybe both?
Hope so.