I think I want to go on record as saying that I don't think ANYTHING is going to have the G5 - except the just-released Power Mac G5, of course - for a good, long while yet. 2004. Spring. If that.
I think the iMac, eMac and PowerBook are simply in line for another round (maybe two, depending on model and timing) of bumped G4s.
As for the iBook, who knows? G3, G4, pedal power, etc.?
Just seeing the body of the G5 tower, the fans involved, the engineering to make it all work cool and quiet, etc.
Put it this way: it took a fairly massive, from-the-ground-up redesign of the familiar G4 tower to something much larger - and much more perforated - to accomodate this new chip and accompanying architecture, right?
What makes ANY of us think that this G5, then, is simply going to just drop into our other favorite gear without similar sorts of redesign/re-engineering? I don't buy it...I don't think it's that simple, unfortunately.
Maybe it can, maybe it can't. I'm betting on the latter and that's why I believe what I believe. But who knows, maybe they (IBM and Apple) are hard at work on some things that can run the G5 in smaller, tighter spaces and all.
Apple went 13 months before they gave the G4 iMac an update, and its only been like 5 months since that update happened, so I wouldn't plan on anything too soon... which is a shame because the iMac should be updated at least twice a year so it doesn't look too embarrassing to comparable wintels.
I think I want to go on record as saying that I don't think ANYTHING is going to have the G5 - except the just-released Power Mac G5, of course - for a good, long while yet. 2004. Spring. If that.
word
Quote:
Maybe it can, maybe it can't. I'm betting on the latter and that's why I believe what I believe. But who knows, maybe they (IBM and Apple) are hard at work on some things that can run the G5 in smaller, tighter spaces and all.
so it doesn't look too embarrassing to comparable wintels.
Geez, same old same on the whine scale. The new 1 Gig iMac gets top ratings even from PC-oriented publications, yet so-called Apple supporters continue to complain. That being said, look for an update by September. Apple will probably drop the 15" and may add a 19".
I recall a post in Future Hardware (or Temp Insanity, I forget) that speculated that Apple would have 2 lines of towers: the Pro level PowerMac (as seen now), and a smaller but still slightly expandable consumer tower. Could this be the next iMac? It would address the upgradability issues cited before...and somehow I could see Apple heading toward an aluminum theme with everything. Or they could still be white plastic, and keep that look for consumer Mac's. Just a thought...
Running at a lower supply voltage and lower frequency, the G5 dissipates 20 Watts. So we might be tempted to think a G5 would go into an iMac. However, it also needs that new, high speed controller chip and who know what else to make a system. So I don't believe that will happen. Regarding FireWire 800 and Bluetooth, these will need a new motherboard, which is too costly unless the new board can be used for a year or so without change.
What does that mean? It depends on the next generation chip planned for the iMac. This future new chip could be a lower power G5 with a memory controller, or a very fast G4 with a much improved bus and FPU, which might come from IBM or by surprise from Motorola. If this next generation chip is less than say eight to ten months away, I don't think we will see a new motherboard for the iMac. So, no FireWire 800 and such. If the next generation chip is much further away than ten months, than a new motherboard is a good possibility, with several new features.
In any case, there should be a somewhat faster and lower power G4 coming from Motorola in the next few weeks (optimistic) or next few months (realistic). Whether this speed bumped iMac has a new motherboard should tell how soon a really big change in the processor will occur.
Next update most likely 1.25 GHz G4 and that might be announce in NY in july. But I think the Following update will be a G5 but this will not happen until 2nd half of 2004. Apple will have to wait until the G5 is at .09 micron because of the heat. I sure that the first .09 micron G5 will be going into the PowerBooks.
I have a little bit of a problem trying to imagine why Apple would ever design another G4 motherboard. Personally, I think Motorolla just lost their gig. They may find that selling a few milion processors a year in Apple computers probably would have been worth a little R&D.
I recall a post in Future Hardware (or Temp Insanity, I forget) that speculated that Apple would have 2 lines of towers: the Pro level PowerMac (as seen now), and a smaller but still slightly expandable consumer tower. Could this be the next iMac?
I sincerely doubt that. The iMac is an AIO. That's an inseparable part of its consumer appeal: You pull it out, plug it in, turn it on, and off you go. The overwhelming majority of ordinary consumers still buy entire systems and replace them with entire systems - even if they know they don't have to, so upgradeability is a moot point.
A less expensive headless solution would be a great professional workstation for people who don't need much in the way of expansion, and who don't need the raw muscle of the G5 - people in offices, or in publication, etc. (especially if they rely heavily on servers for storage and extra processing power). It could also serve people who place a premium on silent operation. It might be attractive to gamers, and more value-conscious buyers, or PC converts who still crave some measure of upgradeability as a security blanket. With the advent of the 7457 - at half the price and half the power consumption of the 7455 - it could even be a duallie. Even a single 970 would still beat it, but at a higher price.
It's a possibility, certainly. If it doesn't happen, the iMac gets a whole lot of room to stretch out, given that a complete G5 system starts at $2500. I'd say there's all kinds of room for an iMac update.
I have a little bit of a problem trying to imagine why Apple would ever design another G4 motherboard. Personally, I think Motorolla just lost their gig. . .
A blazingly fast G4 with high speed bus, built in memory controller and improved FPU would be great for the majority of Mac users. It could be made cheaper than the 970 and run at a much lower power. Such a chip will be with us for a long time I believe. It may come from IBM and they may call it the 750 VX Mojave, but Apple will call it a G4.
I think I want to go on record as saying that I don't think ANYTHING is going to have the G5 - except the just-released Power Mac G5, of course - for a good, long while yet. 2004. Spring. If that.
Not ANYTHING? I'm guessing that a G5 version of the Xserve will come along sooner than later.
As for the iMac... oh, I won't be shocked if all we get is another G4 speed bump next. If that's what happens, I think the speed bump would likely take the form of a new 7457 G4. I'm going to go a little out on a limb, however, and guess that after the Xserve, the iMac will be next for the G5.
Why? The iMac 2, after a brief initial flurry of interest, has been a slow seller. Apple can't cut the price too much to improve sales, or it would simply take a away eMac sales. I'll believe in the Tooth Fairy before I believe that Apple is going to both cut iMac prices by a few hundred dollars, and also do the same to the eMacs at the same time -- maybe someday, but not soon.
So the only thing left to do is improve the value proposition, and the sizzle, of the iMac. The G5 could do that. I think it might be possible that 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s will be able to work in the iMac enclosure without melting the plastic shell or bursting into flames. 1.2 GHz G5s are supposed to be able to function at 21W, right?
It may be that there's more to the power consumption story than the processor itself, but even if a G5 at any clock speed is going to result in more power consumption and heat than a G4, solving the heat dissipation problem is going to be easier for the desktop iMac than for a PowerBook.
Before I can predict (not that anyone is waiting for my predictions ), I have a question for my more learned colleagues:
For the software developers, would there be an advantage in having more of Apple's computer line using 64 bit chips? Would they feel a greater incentive to write applications optimized for 64-bit if it were not only the Power Macs using the 970?
The power programs will be written with the 970 in mind anyway, but what about the lesser programs, like Photoshop Elements (aka Photoshop Jr.)? If this is a factor at all, then I think Apple would want its midlevel machines get to 64 bit ASAP.
If no one answers this question, I refuse to predict. Oh, and if my question does not make sense, be gentle with me.
New programs may be written with the 970 in mind, but they will run on other macs as well.
Let's separate your question into two categories:
1. Apps that are optimized for the 970. When a significant portion of the high-end becomes 970, developers will change the optimization in compilers to suit the 970. This is true for high-end programs only. Although optimized for the 970, they will run acceptably fast on all G4s and G3s.
2. Apps that are 64-bit. The only ones that are coming out will be from Apple or some very highly-specialized things where 64-bit will make a huge performance difference. No program any1 has ever heard of will be like that. As long as Apple sells any G3 or G4, and for about three years after that, all apps will run OK on these. So, no 64-bit.
It is remotely possible that some high-end apps will come in dual versions, but that will only happen if the 64-bit version runs much faster.
Quote:
Originally posted by reynard
For the software developers, would there be an advantage in having more of Apple's computer line using 64 bit chips? Would they feel a greater incentive to write applications optimized for 64-bit if it were not only the Power Macs using the 970?
The power programs will be written with the 970 in mind anyway, but what about the lesser programs, like Photoshop Elements (aka Photoshop Jr.)? If this is a factor at all, then I think Apple would want its midlevel machines get to 64 bit ASAP.
If no one answers this question, I refuse to predict. Oh, and if my question does not make sense, be gentle with me.
A blazingly fast G4 with high speed bus, built in memory controller and improved FPU would be great for the majority of Mac users. It could be made cheaper than the 970 and run at a much lower power.
The newly introduced IBM 970 has 118 million transistors compared to the RSN MPC7457 has 98 million transistors. It won't be much cheaper than the IBM and depending on yields and may even be more expensive. In addition, to be competitive the MPC7457 uses very expensive L3 cache, negating any cost advantage, even if there were one to begin with.
Hoping for a G4 with an improved high speed FSB is, in my opinion, futile. Motorola is pushing the MPC8540/MPC8560 as the next improvement on FSB. The G4 core using Rapid I/O, switched fabric interface blah blah blah has been shown on a Motorola document as only "proposed" and it didn't mention anything concerning an on die controller.
The G4 (MPC7457) on a 200MHz FSB may be acceptable for laptops, but if Apple IS SERIOUS about gaining market share the iMac and eMac won't capture ANY MORE market share if they still are based on Motorola's MPC7457.
I don't know what the answer is for Apple, but the G4 in consumer desktops, AIO's etc. ain't it.
Been thinking about what the iMac should be getting and it has to be the 1.42 G4.
Bottom line Power Mac is 1.6 G5, so why not? No speed comparisons, not even close.
The iMac has suffered from a serious power outage (200 mhz increase in a year and a half) and a 420 mhz bump, even with the G4, would be a nice improvement until it maybe gets the G5 next Spring.
Give it a speed boost, the ATI 9000, and it'll be just fine. (Oh, knock down the price another $100 or so.)
. . . Hoping for a G4 with an improved high speed FSB is, in my opinion, futile. . .
I wasn't discussing a Motorola G4. The last line in my posting says, "It may come from IBM and they may call it the 750 VX Mojave, but Apple will call it a G4." The 7457 is just a stop gap processor. It gives Macs a little boost until a fast new consumer-grade G4 is available. I expect Mojave to be inexpensive and lower power so it can address the embedded market too. I suspect it will be 2 GHz and up.
Apple began working with IBM on the 970 years ago, because Apple saw the need for this processor in the high end Macs. It was Apple's first priority. I believe they also saw the need for a really competitive G4 as well, and it is Apple's second priority. While we have focused our attention on the 970, the next generation G4 was also under development, in my opinion.
I think the question is wether the iMac gets the 1.25 Ghz G4 or the 1.42 overclocked G4...
I think Apple will stay with the first one, but then again, they must have a nice amount of 1.42 Ghz chips ready...
Or maybe even faster chips, now that the Powemac line has gone 2x2.0 Ghz? I would have made sense if the Powermac went 1.6 Ghz G4 about now, if the G5 hadnt entered the courtyard..
Comments
Originally posted by axdigital
faster G4?
bluetooth ready?
new graphic cards?
is there a possibility of g5?
Were I a gambling man, I'd say that the first three are likely and the last one is a longshot, at least in the next iteration.....
When was the iLamp updated most recently, anyway?
I think the iMac, eMac and PowerBook are simply in line for another round (maybe two, depending on model and timing) of bumped G4s.
As for the iBook, who knows? G3, G4, pedal power, etc.?
Just seeing the body of the G5 tower, the fans involved, the engineering to make it all work cool and quiet, etc.
Put it this way: it took a fairly massive, from-the-ground-up redesign of the familiar G4 tower to something much larger - and much more perforated - to accomodate this new chip and accompanying architecture, right?
What makes ANY of us think that this G5, then, is simply going to just drop into our other favorite gear without similar sorts of redesign/re-engineering? I don't buy it...I don't think it's that simple, unfortunately.
Maybe it can, maybe it can't. I'm betting on the latter and that's why I believe what I believe. But who knows, maybe they (IBM and Apple) are hard at work on some things that can run the G5 in smaller, tighter spaces and all.
Originally posted by pscates
I think I want to go on record as saying that I don't think ANYTHING is going to have the G5 - except the just-released Power Mac G5, of course - for a good, long while yet. 2004. Spring. If that.
word
Maybe it can, maybe it can't. I'm betting on the latter and that's why I believe what I believe. But who knows, maybe they (IBM and Apple) are hard at work on some things that can run the G5 in smaller, tighter spaces and all.
ibm puts these baby's in bladeservers? no?
so it doesn't look too embarrassing to comparable wintels.
Geez, same old same on the whine scale. The new 1 Gig iMac gets top ratings even from PC-oriented publications, yet so-called Apple supporters continue to complain. That being said, look for an update by September. Apple will probably drop the 15" and may add a 19".
The iMac does have more room and a large fan..........you never know there might be enough room and cooling to pull it off (G5 wise).
I wonder what the heat and space requirements are for an AMD 64-bit processor are?
Originally posted by aircft.sys.spec.
I wonder what the heat and space requirements are for an AMD 64-bit processor are?
why?
does that actually matter? it doesn't fit, it's to hot, to big and there is one place they can stick it in...
What does that mean? It depends on the next generation chip planned for the iMac. This future new chip could be a lower power G5 with a memory controller, or a very fast G4 with a much improved bus and FPU, which might come from IBM or by surprise from Motorola. If this next generation chip is less than say eight to ten months away, I don't think we will see a new motherboard for the iMac. So, no FireWire 800 and such. If the next generation chip is much further away than ten months, than a new motherboard is a good possibility, with several new features.
In any case, there should be a somewhat faster and lower power G4 coming from Motorola in the next few weeks (optimistic) or next few months (realistic). Whether this speed bumped iMac has a new motherboard should tell how soon a really big change in the processor will occur.
Originally posted by VanDeWaals
I recall a post in Future Hardware (or Temp Insanity, I forget) that speculated that Apple would have 2 lines of towers: the Pro level PowerMac (as seen now), and a smaller but still slightly expandable consumer tower. Could this be the next iMac?
I sincerely doubt that. The iMac is an AIO. That's an inseparable part of its consumer appeal: You pull it out, plug it in, turn it on, and off you go. The overwhelming majority of ordinary consumers still buy entire systems and replace them with entire systems - even if they know they don't have to, so upgradeability is a moot point.
A less expensive headless solution would be a great professional workstation for people who don't need much in the way of expansion, and who don't need the raw muscle of the G5 - people in offices, or in publication, etc. (especially if they rely heavily on servers for storage and extra processing power). It could also serve people who place a premium on silent operation. It might be attractive to gamers, and more value-conscious buyers, or PC converts who still crave some measure of upgradeability as a security blanket. With the advent of the 7457 - at half the price and half the power consumption of the 7455 - it could even be a duallie. Even a single 970 would still beat it, but at a higher price.
It's a possibility, certainly. If it doesn't happen, the iMac gets a whole lot of room to stretch out, given that a complete G5 system starts at $2500. I'd say there's all kinds of room for an iMac update.
Originally posted by norfa
I have a little bit of a problem trying to imagine why Apple would ever design another G4 motherboard. Personally, I think Motorolla just lost their gig. . .
A blazingly fast G4 with high speed bus, built in memory controller and improved FPU would be great for the majority of Mac users. It could be made cheaper than the 970 and run at a much lower power. Such a chip will be with us for a long time I believe. It may come from IBM and they may call it the 750 VX Mojave, but Apple will call it a G4.
Originally posted by pscates
I think I want to go on record as saying that I don't think ANYTHING is going to have the G5 - except the just-released Power Mac G5, of course - for a good, long while yet. 2004. Spring. If that.
Not ANYTHING? I'm guessing that a G5 version of the Xserve will come along sooner than later.
As for the iMac... oh, I won't be shocked if all we get is another G4 speed bump next. If that's what happens, I think the speed bump would likely take the form of a new 7457 G4. I'm going to go a little out on a limb, however, and guess that after the Xserve, the iMac will be next for the G5.
Why? The iMac 2, after a brief initial flurry of interest, has been a slow seller. Apple can't cut the price too much to improve sales, or it would simply take a away eMac sales. I'll believe in the Tooth Fairy before I believe that Apple is going to both cut iMac prices by a few hundred dollars, and also do the same to the eMacs at the same time -- maybe someday, but not soon.
So the only thing left to do is improve the value proposition, and the sizzle, of the iMac. The G5 could do that. I think it might be possible that 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s will be able to work in the iMac enclosure without melting the plastic shell or bursting into flames. 1.2 GHz G5s are supposed to be able to function at 21W, right?
It may be that there's more to the power consumption story than the processor itself, but even if a G5 at any clock speed is going to result in more power consumption and heat than a G4, solving the heat dissipation problem is going to be easier for the desktop iMac than for a PowerBook.
For the software developers, would there be an advantage in having more of Apple's computer line using 64 bit chips? Would they feel a greater incentive to write applications optimized for 64-bit if it were not only the Power Macs using the 970?
The power programs will be written with the 970 in mind anyway, but what about the lesser programs, like Photoshop Elements (aka Photoshop Jr.)? If this is a factor at all, then I think Apple would want its midlevel machines get to 64 bit ASAP.
If no one answers this question, I refuse to predict. Oh, and if my question does not make sense, be gentle with me.
Let's separate your question into two categories:
1. Apps that are optimized for the 970. When a significant portion of the high-end becomes 970, developers will change the optimization in compilers to suit the 970. This is true for high-end programs only. Although optimized for the 970, they will run acceptably fast on all G4s and G3s.
2. Apps that are 64-bit. The only ones that are coming out will be from Apple or some very highly-specialized things where 64-bit will make a huge performance difference. No program any1 has ever heard of will be like that. As long as Apple sells any G3 or G4, and for about three years after that, all apps will run OK on these. So, no 64-bit.
It is remotely possible that some high-end apps will come in dual versions, but that will only happen if the 64-bit version runs much faster.
Originally posted by reynard
For the software developers, would there be an advantage in having more of Apple's computer line using 64 bit chips? Would they feel a greater incentive to write applications optimized for 64-bit if it were not only the Power Macs using the 970?
The power programs will be written with the 970 in mind anyway, but what about the lesser programs, like Photoshop Elements (aka Photoshop Jr.)? If this is a factor at all, then I think Apple would want its midlevel machines get to 64 bit ASAP.
If no one answers this question, I refuse to predict. Oh, and if my question does not make sense, be gentle with me.
Originally posted by snoopy
A blazingly fast G4 with high speed bus, built in memory controller and improved FPU would be great for the majority of Mac users. It could be made cheaper than the 970 and run at a much lower power.
The newly introduced IBM 970 has 118 million transistors compared to the RSN MPC7457 has 98 million transistors. It won't be much cheaper than the IBM and depending on yields and may even be more expensive. In addition, to be competitive the MPC7457 uses very expensive L3 cache, negating any cost advantage, even if there were one to begin with.
Hoping for a G4 with an improved high speed FSB is, in my opinion, futile. Motorola is pushing the MPC8540/MPC8560 as the next improvement on FSB. The G4 core using Rapid I/O, switched fabric interface blah blah blah has been shown on a Motorola document as only "proposed" and it didn't mention anything concerning an on die controller.
The G4 (MPC7457) on a 200MHz FSB may be acceptable for laptops, but if Apple IS SERIOUS about gaining market share the iMac and eMac won't capture ANY MORE market share if they still are based on Motorola's MPC7457.
I don't know what the answer is for Apple, but the G4 in consumer desktops, AIO's etc. ain't it.
Bottom line Power Mac is 1.6 G5, so why not? No speed comparisons, not even close.
The iMac has suffered from a serious power outage (200 mhz increase in a year and a half) and a 420 mhz bump, even with the G4, would be a nice improvement until it maybe gets the G5 next Spring.
Give it a speed boost, the ATI 9000, and it'll be just fine. (Oh, knock down the price another $100 or so.)
Originally posted by rickag
. . . Hoping for a G4 with an improved high speed FSB is, in my opinion, futile. . .
I wasn't discussing a Motorola G4. The last line in my posting says, "It may come from IBM and they may call it the 750 VX Mojave, but Apple will call it a G4." The 7457 is just a stop gap processor. It gives Macs a little boost until a fast new consumer-grade G4 is available. I expect Mojave to be inexpensive and lower power so it can address the embedded market too. I suspect it will be 2 GHz and up.
Apple began working with IBM on the 970 years ago, because Apple saw the need for this processor in the high end Macs. It was Apple's first priority. I believe they also saw the need for a really competitive G4 as well, and it is Apple's second priority. While we have focused our attention on the 970, the next generation G4 was also under development, in my opinion.
I think Apple will stay with the first one, but then again, they must have a nice amount of 1.42 Ghz chips ready...
Or maybe even faster chips, now that the Powemac line has gone 2x2.0 Ghz? I would have made sense if the Powermac went 1.6 Ghz G4 about now, if the G5 hadnt entered the courtyard..