Apple leaks G5 specs

1192022242554

Comments

  • Reply 421 of 1072
    cindercinder Posts: 381member
    no they were british i belive not indian



    India was a british colony and still is home to many, many brits.



    Not to mention, many of the english speaking people there would have learned english from british school teachers - therefore picking up the accent.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 422 of 1072
    I dont know if someone has suggested this before (thread is too long to read all posts!) but I have an idea on why the text may have been a different size.



    If you look at the screenshot MacMinute took:







    YOu can see the text. Now, if authentic the only bit of the new PowerMac page that has been accidentaly shown is the specs bit. We dont know what the title will read. Given text is normally formatted to some kind of scale I guess (if authentic) we will see a slightly larger title on the page too, which wold fit with the annoucement of a new model. Also, whatever the new title for that page is I would expect some white space between it and the specs. Its real.



    My 0.2 euros
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 423 of 1072
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Wanna see some interesting pics? go to macrumors, page 6 or 7 "PowerMac G5s info." thread I believe. More believable mock ups? I can't get in there now, can someone else try and start a new thread with the link?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 424 of 1072
    futuremacfuturemac Posts: 242member
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 425 of 1072
    arty50arty50 Posts: 201member
    Can someone please tell me how the hell I'm supposed to sleep tonight?!!!! Must...buy...new...PowerMac...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 426 of 1072
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gilsch

    Wanna see some interesting pics? go to macrumors, page 6 or 7 "PowerMac G5s info." thread I believe. More believable mock ups? I can't get in there now, can someone else try and start a new thread with the link?



    Wow, those shots look totally believeable!

    Very nice!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 427 of 1072
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    I can't get into macrumors right now. Can anyone try and start a new thread with the "new" pics?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 428 of 1072
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 429 of 1072
    Hi,

    great news!

    I'm sure this was posted by accident while preparing the Apple Store for Monday. The specs are real.

    I believe we will see updates to the iMac and PowerBook pretty soon. As I stated earlier in another thread an 1 GHz iMac locks insanely dumb next to a 1.6 GHz G5 given a price difference of a couple of hundred USD. If the iMac gets the G5 soon then Apple will be able to grow marketshare. And that's what it is all about.

    In second half of 2004 I see the PMs and PBs spotting a PPC 980 dual core, the iMac/eMac and iBook a PPC 970.

    Because of the wide performance ratio I see enough room for the Son of the Cube. Limited expandability, single core processor, low price.

    By mid 2004 Apple's line-up will be awesome. *Every* product will be at least on par with Intel offerings. The cutting edge will be out of reach for Intel. The price-performance ratio will be out of reach for any competition.

    Great time to buy Apple Stock.

    Cheers



    cocoa tree
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 430 of 1072
    Are those pics real, where is the mesh/honeycomb/cheesegrater?



    edit: Just noticed in the macrumors thread that williwilli, who posted the link, titled hsi post as mockups. Sorry.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 431 of 1072
    cakecake Posts: 1,010member
    Who cares! I think that design looks great.

    Very Ive-like. Tho', that's the easiest way to make it appear legit by a simple evolution of the current design.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 432 of 1072
    redericrederic Posts: 124member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gilsch

    Wanna see some interesting pics? go to macrumors, page 6 or 7 "PowerMac G5s info." thread I believe. More believable mock ups? I can't get in there now, can someone else try and start a new thread with the link?



    OMG I hope not...



    Those mock-ups have already been dismissed as false.



    Please don't let these specs be spoilt with a shit case rehash like this.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 433 of 1072
    galengalen Posts: 46member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Anders

    That would be strange since all european numbers go to Ireland.



    You sure it wasn´t someone from India?




    I called twice, the first time the person sounded like they had a thick Indian accent, the second time it was a young british sounding girl that had no idea. She put me on hold to go track down a G5 for me.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 434 of 1072
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Yeah, I don't like them either. It looks very dull. By the way, who dismissed them as false?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 435 of 1072
    krassykrassy Posts: 595member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Carson O'Genic

    ARe those pics real, where is the mesh/honeycomb/cheesegrater?



    in my opinion they aren't for real - the older descriptions (and now the fixed one) all use another font-style. the headline of the specs is bold-black and the specs itself are grey and much smaller than those on the picture that "leaked" - if this would be from apple it would look like any other spec-description on the store ...



    question: do you think that apple lets the people set those graphics themselves? i would assume that they have a script for this task, which creates these gif-images (so that they just have to type in the spec-text and will get the resulting image) - so why should they look so different than the rest of the product-spec-images?



    anyway - we'll see on monday
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 436 of 1072
    Dont know if the pics are real or not but supports my suggestin that the leaked specs. gif will look right when its placed in the context of the new content and that it looks big now because it wasnt intended to sit on the G4 page!



    Antonio



    p.s. nice images by the way
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 437 of 1072
    redericrederic Posts: 124member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gilsch

    Yeah, I don't like them either. It looks very dull. By the way, who dismissed them as false?



    I don't recall where it was as I've been watching about 20 sites for the last week.



    These pics were definitely released a few days ago as a mock-up and not as leaked photos.



    The guy big-willy or whatever that's hosting them is trying to drive traffic to his website. I think he did the same sort of thing in January.



    Maybe I'm wrong, I hope not.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 438 of 1072
    this might have been said but did anyonenotice that the format of text with hyphenpoints matches the new quark page and its hyphen points





    8Gb memory now that will have some price ticket.

    I think the dual 2 gig will be verrrrrrry expensive
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 439 of 1072
    Actually, thinking about that spec .gif image futher perhaps it is fake after all. I mean the title: worlds fastest computer should be in bold and the specs in a light shade of grey (without hyphens) if it is to use the existing style guide. Although hyphens are used for specs on the front page and the store front page (and not for product pages), the non-use of bold suggests not real. But this doesnt necessarily mean the specs are wrong. Perhaps someone accidentally picked up an old .gif image, one that was destined for the trash can as it wasnt formatted correctly as per my observations and it got accidentally uploaded .... i.e. one error (not properly deleting a faulty .gif file for the new announcement) leads to another, it then being uploaded by mistake to the site ... that or something like it is more plausible as normal security procedures would have impeded the accidental upload of a final approved .gif image.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 440 of 1072
    krassykrassy Posts: 595member
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.