I think if there is to be any more revisions to the G4 it will be for everything but the Power Mac. The Power Mac is just squeezing what little MHz it can get out of the G4. I think this is the end of a Power Mac G4 as we know it. The next Power Mac revision could very well be the IBM.
<strong>I think if there is to be any more revisions to the G4 it will be for everything but the Power Mac. The Power Mac is just squeezing what little MHz it can get out of the G4. I think this is the end of a Power Mac G4 as we know it. The next Power Mac revision could very well be the IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup you said it. The PowerMac G4 is on its way out. I just don't see another upgrade before the 970. I don't even think we will see the 7457 in a mac... except maybe the iBook. mmm
Doesn't anyone have any real info as to where apple got a 7455 that runs as fast as the 7457 was supposed to on its first release. I mean the rumors said that Motorola was having trouble making the 7457 go faster than 1.4Ghz so how the hell did they get the 7455 to go 1.4Ghz?!!!! It makes no sense!
<strong>15" iMac sales are stagnent. </strong><hr></blockquote>
...But 17" iMac sales aren't. Individual models don't need to sell so well, it's getting the whole line moving that's important. The 15" is really just to get you in the store (or thinking about macs or whatever).
Apple has _never_ wanted you to by the lowest end of any product line. Margins are lowest on those.
<strong>We know the 7457 is coming soon because of the March conference notes that specifically mention it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not that I doubt you, but do you have a link to some info? And not that pdf that came out a bit ago that every took to be real proof. What kind of info did they talk about it (or was it just a quick blip on the radar?)
Just looking at this last microprocessor meeting where IBM announced the 970, there was NO WORD from MOT about the 7457. And IBM anounced that the 970 would be shipping about a year after the anouncement. With no public anouncement from MOT, why do people think it is coming anytime soon?
I know it is stupid to say that the G4 is dead, but it may be. Every chip has an EOL. MOT stopped work on the G3 at one point, when they started the G4. I don't believe that they produced both G3s and G4s at the same time. And now MOT has started work on there next gen processor (based on the 8540 series I believe). I am by no means saying this is coming to a desktop near you, but why would it be hard to belive that the G4 is EOLed, and the future chips from MOT with be this 8540 wether Apple buys them or not.
I think this "mythical" 7457 is vaporware. I would be very (very) schocked to see it period (in a mac or anywhere). With the G4's now at 1.4 GHz, the consumer machines would have some leg room to grow before moving to the 970. And since the 970 can clock down to 1.2GHz and run at low wattage, the iMac/PowerBook may never see another G4 again.
One measure of problem with ramping up speed is if the computer line is very compressed. That is a small difference in speed between the low and high end.
The G4/400-450-500 was a classical example with a 1:1.25 ratio far from the 1:1.5 ratio of th B&W towers G3/300-450 or the current pentium 4 that range from 2-3GHz.
The widest ratio was during the 604 era with a ratio somewere 1:2 to 1:3 with the high end 9600/350 and the low end at 120-180 MHz 7600 and 7300. At this time IBMs 604E was faster or as fast as the Intel/AMDs of the time
The previuos lineup had a 1:1.44 ratio (0.867-1.25).
For the current lineup the singel 1 GHz is both cheaper and weaker than the dual 0.867 so I take the dual 1.25 as the lowend replacement. Using that the speed ratio is only 1:1.136 this is more compressed then ever.
So the high end has progressed by a minor speed bump 1.25 to 1.42 that is 170 MHz. The low end has ( with a minor price bump) increased the CPU speed by 383 MHz added a substantially better graphical card and a bigger HD.
So it do seem that every tower except the very weak single CPU is very close to the GHz limit for Motorola.
One interpretatio of the single CPU G4 tower is that it is setting the stage for having a real lowend single 970 tower in the future.
the 7457 is coming.. there were references on Mot's site about some upcoming sessions in March at the Smart Networks Developer Forum, but they've since been removed..
also, in two weeks, the 7457 is up for the High Performance Embedded Processor award here...
A lot of "hopefully" and "what if" going around since the last product refreshes. Pathetic. The high end got a bit better all around, but the low end just became a worse deal. And the mid range is not even the deal it seems (not that it's a deal to begin with, but anyway...) it doesn't include the SuperDrive so add 200USD to make it the equivalent of the old DP1Ghz. Also drops down to 1MB of L3 instead of 2, but since it replaces the DP1Ghz in the line-up that's OK.
Pretty pathetic move on Apple's part not throwing in another PPC in the 1499 machine. A Ghz G4 with L3 cache barely costs a 100 bucks. Combo-drives are dirt cheap, as are 60GB HDD's and GF4MX. The sad thing about the SP1GHz tower is that is shouldn't cost a penny more than 1249, and even there it's expensive and carrying a huge margin, anybody else selling computers toady would be able to do it for 999.
it's not an idiotic baseless whine. 15" iMac sales are stagnent. is it DEFINITELY because they are under-spec'd and overpriced? not necessarily. it is possible people just aren't into the whole iMac idea. furthermore, some might contend that apple will keep with the 15" lcd at a not particularly appealing price/performance ratio. i don't agree either notion, but calling the idea idiotic is simply unnecessary.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So a 15" bump up to 1ghz and a price drop to under $1k won't do anything for sales? That's why I think it's idiotic. Just because it's a 15" screen and the imacs haven't been updated in a quarter of a decade abouts doesn't mean it's grasping it's last breathe. Apple needs a really good machine right at $1k. I don't think the 17" could get to the $1k level and the eMac just isn't an iMac.
Based solely on the little bit at MWSF about borrowing the 17" iMac screen for LapZilla, I'm going to predict that if Apple keeps the 15" alive, it'll use the same screen as the next 15" PowerBook (now that the 15" Studio Display is dead). That means a widescreen or widescreen-ish aspect, and perhaps a slightly higher pixel density.
I really do think that a non-replaceable 1024x768 screen in a desktop is what fails to appeal to people. It doesn't need to be 1600x1200 or anything silly (and impractically dense). It just needs to offer a wee bit more real estate than it currently does to be attractive.
I dunno. It's a consumer machine. Every average Joe I know mac or PC, all have 15" screens. It's those that know computers or are power users/coders type that need the biger screen. The iMac isn't that. It's a step up from a school machine but not quite a pro machine. It's a bridge of sorts, and because of that i think the 15" is needed. My wife has the 15" iMac LCD and my folks have the 15"iMac CRT ruby, and I've never heard a peep about wishing their monitors were bigger. Same with my neighbors who use PCs, they have 3 pcs, all have 15" monitors. They would get macs but are too expensive. Enter the sub $1k iMac 15" LCD
<strong>I dunno. It's a consumer machine. Every average Joe I know mac or PC, all have 15" screens. It's those that know computers or are power users/coders type that need the biger screen. The iMac isn't that. It's a step up from a school machine but not quite a pro machine. It's a bridge of sorts, and because of that i think the 15" is needed. My wife has the 15" iMac LCD and my folks have the 15"iMac CRT ruby, and I've never heard a peep about wishing their monitors were bigger. Same with my neighbors who use PCs, they have 3 pcs, all have 15" monitors. They would get macs but are too expensive. Enter the sub $1k iMac 15" LCD </strong><hr></blockquote>
Most average people I know now have between 17-19" monitors. I know I wish my LCD was able to go beyond 1024x768 because there just isn't enough screen space.
At first I thought that heat may be causing the problems, but it seems to me that if they have laptops with 1ghz processors, they shoud be able to get away with it in iMacs too.
So I guess it must be something to do with the re-engineering of theformfactor to include bluetooth, as there doesn't appear to be any where to locate a BT module so it will have to be built in. Secondly they will have to add FW800 and the new airport extreme port. This would amount to an extensive amount of re-engineering.
No consider that the G4 is close to to end of life because it is to be replaced with a new processor 7457-rm, Gobi, 970 etc who knows. Then the cost of having to re-engineer the machine twice in just a few months means that they have decided to soldier on as things are.
I think it is much easier to modify the PM's than the iMac, so we have seen the Pm revision, but for the iMac we may just have to sit tight for a few months.
God, I hope I am completly wrong and new machines are announced next week!
So a 15" bump up to 1ghz and a price drop to under $1k won't do anything for sales? That's why I think it's idiotic. Just because it's a 15" screen and the imacs haven't been updated in a quarter of a decade abouts doesn't mean it's grasping it's last breathe. Apple needs a really good machine right at $1k. I don't think the 17" could get to the $1k level and the eMac just isn't an iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
we are in agreement on the main point, i just thought using "idiotic" in regards to an opinion was kind of harsh/mean
<strong>I dunno. It's a consumer machine. Every average Joe I know mac or PC, all have 15" screens. It's those that know computers or are power users/coders type that need the biger screen. The iMac isn't that. It's a step up from a school machine but not quite a pro machine. It's a bridge of sorts, and because of that i think the 15" is needed. My wife has the 15" iMac LCD and my folks have the 15"iMac CRT ruby, and I've never heard a peep about wishing their monitors were bigger. Same with my neighbors who use PCs, they have 3 pcs, all have 15" monitors. They would get macs but are too expensive. Enter the sub $1k iMac 15" LCD </strong><hr></blockquote>
the problem is that the people who buy at $1199 DO care about the display-resolution ... i think the next iMac-Lineup has to be a 15" widescreen with 1280*854 pixel at $999 to $1199... the 17" will probably go from $1399 to $1799 ...
I think it is much easier to modify the PM's than the iMac, so we have seen the Pm revision, but for the iMac we may just have to sit tight for a few months.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I doubt Apple started working on the next model recently. They've had a year or so to reengineer it.
James the point I am making is that if the processor change to say 7457-rm or something is just aroung the corner, which will involve a new logic board, then why would the do a major modification now only for the currently available G4's?
Let's assume that we are going to see a huge jump in the PM's and that the iMacs are also going to get a full bore FSB with proper DDR, Bluetooth, FW800, and airport extreme and slot loading drives.
They can't release it now for two reasons, first the 970 isn't here and neither is the 7457-rm(or whatever). Obviously if this level of upgrade was a still long way away then I would have expected the iMacs to have been bumped before Christmas, there would be no reason to hold off the non-processor upgrades.
<strong>A lot of "hopefully" and "what if" going around since the last product refreshes. Pathetic. The high end got a bit better all around, ...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow, Matsu, I see the negativity has gotten hold again!
Look on the bright side, the MAX computer you can buy from the Apple Store via the build-to-order options took a HUGE price drop. Ok, it's not everyone's cup of tea, but it did get a huge price cut & went from Dual1.25 to Dual1.42 simultaneously.
From $15,600, all the way down to $12000
(Of course, the price of the dual mongo LCDs going from $3599 to $1999 helped a wee bit!)
<strong>James the point I am making is that if the processor change to say 7457-rm or something is just aroung the corner, which will involve a new logic board, then why would the do a major modification now only for the currently available G4's?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 7457-RM isn't due for another year, so Apple probably isn't worried about that.
The 7457 (not the RM) should be drop-in compatible with the 7455.
[quote]<strong>They can't release it now for two reasons, first the 970 isn't here and neither is the 7457-rm(or whatever). Obviously if this level of upgrade was a still long way away then I would have expected the iMacs to have been bumped before Christmas, there would be no reason to hold off the non-processor upgrades.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nevertheless, the PowerBooks and PowerMacs were just updated with all the new bells and whistles. Why wouldn't Apple also update the iMacs? Of the totally new processors in the wings, it looks like the first one will be the 970, which will appear in the professional line first. Nothing radical is "around the corner" for the consumer line, processor-wise, unless AIM has managed to keep an entire processor line totally secret (which, I admit, is a distant possibility).
I don't see Apple moving the iMac to a board with an all-new bus until it's necessary - next year. Until then it can easily accomodate an Xserve-style motherboard with a 7457 and FW800, etc., which will tide it through this year. And that's all work that Apple can already have done.
we are in agreement on the main point, i just thought using "idiotic" in regards to an opinion was kind of harsh/mean </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea, I know. It's just there are a lot of these 'sentiments' around here. This should die, that should die, it's another cube, etc. Sorry, but I believe sold a few more units then the cube. Also, my meanness was directed more towards the ridiculous statement here which didn't come across with much thought or opinion in it. Wasn't directed towards anyone with an opinion. Mostly towards those who just spit out words without thinking, kinda like flame bait, trolling, etc. Sorry if i got you upset
Comments
<strong>I think if there is to be any more revisions to the G4 it will be for everything but the Power Mac. The Power Mac is just squeezing what little MHz it can get out of the G4. I think this is the end of a Power Mac G4 as we know it. The next Power Mac revision could very well be the IBM.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup you said it. The PowerMac G4 is on its way out. I just don't see another upgrade before the 970. I don't even think we will see the 7457 in a mac... except maybe the iBook. mmm
<strong>15" iMac sales are stagnent. </strong><hr></blockquote>
...But 17" iMac sales aren't. Individual models don't need to sell so well, it's getting the whole line moving that's important. The 15" is really just to get you in the store (or thinking about macs or whatever).
Apple has _never_ wanted you to by the lowest end of any product line. Margins are lowest on those.
<strong>We know the 7457 is coming soon because of the March conference notes that specifically mention it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not that I doubt you, but do you have a link to some info? And not that pdf that came out a bit ago that every took to be real proof. What kind of info did they talk about it (or was it just a quick blip on the radar?)
Just looking at this last microprocessor meeting where IBM announced the 970, there was NO WORD from MOT about the 7457. And IBM anounced that the 970 would be shipping about a year after the anouncement. With no public anouncement from MOT, why do people think it is coming anytime soon?
I know it is stupid to say that the G4 is dead, but it may be. Every chip has an EOL. MOT stopped work on the G3 at one point, when they started the G4. I don't believe that they produced both G3s and G4s at the same time. And now MOT has started work on there next gen processor (based on the 8540 series I believe). I am by no means saying this is coming to a desktop near you, but why would it be hard to belive that the G4 is EOLed, and the future chips from MOT with be this 8540 wether Apple buys them or not.
I think this "mythical" 7457 is vaporware. I would be very (very) schocked to see it period (in a mac or anywhere). With the G4's now at 1.4 GHz, the consumer machines would have some leg room to grow before moving to the 970. And since the 970 can clock down to 1.2GHz and run at low wattage, the iMac/PowerBook may never see another G4 again.
The G4/400-450-500 was a classical example with a 1:1.25 ratio far from the 1:1.5 ratio of th B&W towers G3/300-450 or the current pentium 4 that range from 2-3GHz.
The widest ratio was during the 604 era with a ratio somewere 1:2 to 1:3 with the high end 9600/350 and the low end at 120-180 MHz 7600 and 7300. At this time IBMs 604E was faster or as fast as the Intel/AMDs of the time
The previuos lineup had a 1:1.44 ratio (0.867-1.25).
For the current lineup the singel 1 GHz is both cheaper and weaker than the dual 0.867 so I take the dual 1.25 as the lowend replacement. Using that the speed ratio is only 1:1.136 this is more compressed then ever.
So the high end has progressed by a minor speed bump 1.25 to 1.42 that is 170 MHz. The low end has ( with a minor price bump) increased the CPU speed by 383 MHz added a substantially better graphical card and a bigger HD.
So it do seem that every tower except the very weak single CPU is very close to the GHz limit for Motorola.
One interpretatio of the single CPU G4 tower is that it is setting the stage for having a real lowend single 970 tower in the future.
also, in two weeks, the 7457 is up for the High Performance Embedded Processor award here...
<a href="http://www.mdronline.com/events/dinner/"; target="_blank">http://www.mdronline.com/events/dinner/</a>;
so yes, it's out there...
Pretty pathetic move on Apple's part not throwing in another PPC in the 1499 machine. A Ghz G4 with L3 cache barely costs a 100 bucks. Combo-drives are dirt cheap, as are 60GB HDD's and GF4MX. The sad thing about the SP1GHz tower is that is shouldn't cost a penny more than 1249, and even there it's expensive and carrying a huge margin, anybody else selling computers toady would be able to do it for 999.
<strong>
it's not an idiotic baseless whine. 15" iMac sales are stagnent. is it DEFINITELY because they are under-spec'd and overpriced? not necessarily. it is possible people just aren't into the whole iMac idea. furthermore, some might contend that apple will keep with the 15" lcd at a not particularly appealing price/performance ratio. i don't agree either notion, but calling the idea idiotic is simply unnecessary.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So a 15" bump up to 1ghz and a price drop to under $1k won't do anything for sales? That's why I think it's idiotic. Just because it's a 15" screen and the imacs haven't been updated in a quarter of a decade abouts doesn't mean it's grasping it's last breathe. Apple needs a really good machine right at $1k. I don't think the 17" could get to the $1k level and the eMac just isn't an iMac.
I really do think that a non-replaceable 1024x768 screen in a desktop is what fails to appeal to people. It doesn't need to be 1600x1200 or anything silly (and impractically dense). It just needs to offer a wee bit more real estate than it currently does to be attractive.
<strong>I dunno. It's a consumer machine. Every average Joe I know mac or PC, all have 15" screens. It's those that know computers or are power users/coders type that need the biger screen. The iMac isn't that. It's a step up from a school machine but not quite a pro machine. It's a bridge of sorts, and because of that i think the 15" is needed. My wife has the 15" iMac LCD and my folks have the 15"iMac CRT ruby, and I've never heard a peep about wishing their monitors were bigger. Same with my neighbors who use PCs, they have 3 pcs, all have 15" monitors. They would get macs but are too expensive. Enter the sub $1k iMac 15" LCD
Most average people I know now have between 17-19" monitors. I know I wish my LCD was able to go beyond 1024x768 because there just isn't enough screen space.
So I guess it must be something to do with the re-engineering of theformfactor to include bluetooth, as there doesn't appear to be any where to locate a BT module so it will have to be built in. Secondly they will have to add FW800 and the new airport extreme port. This would amount to an extensive amount of re-engineering.
No consider that the G4 is close to to end of life because it is to be replaced with a new processor 7457-rm, Gobi, 970 etc who knows. Then the cost of having to re-engineer the machine twice in just a few months means that they have decided to soldier on as things are.
I think it is much easier to modify the PM's than the iMac, so we have seen the Pm revision, but for the iMac we may just have to sit tight for a few months.
God, I hope I am completly wrong and new machines are announced next week!
<strong>
So a 15" bump up to 1ghz and a price drop to under $1k won't do anything for sales? That's why I think it's idiotic. Just because it's a 15" screen and the imacs haven't been updated in a quarter of a decade abouts doesn't mean it's grasping it's last breathe. Apple needs a really good machine right at $1k. I don't think the 17" could get to the $1k level and the eMac just isn't an iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
we are in agreement on the main point, i just thought using "idiotic" in regards to an opinion was kind of harsh/mean
<strong>I dunno. It's a consumer machine. Every average Joe I know mac or PC, all have 15" screens. It's those that know computers or are power users/coders type that need the biger screen. The iMac isn't that. It's a step up from a school machine but not quite a pro machine. It's a bridge of sorts, and because of that i think the 15" is needed. My wife has the 15" iMac LCD and my folks have the 15"iMac CRT ruby, and I've never heard a peep about wishing their monitors were bigger. Same with my neighbors who use PCs, they have 3 pcs, all have 15" monitors. They would get macs but are too expensive. Enter the sub $1k iMac 15" LCD
the problem is that the people who buy at $1199 DO care about the display-resolution ... i think the next iMac-Lineup has to be a 15" widescreen with 1280*854 pixel at $999 to $1199... the 17" will probably go from $1399 to $1799 ...
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: Krassy ]</p>
<strong>
I think it is much easier to modify the PM's than the iMac, so we have seen the Pm revision, but for the iMac we may just have to sit tight for a few months.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I doubt Apple started working on the next model recently. They've had a year or so to reengineer it.
I expect it soon.
Let's assume that we are going to see a huge jump in the PM's and that the iMacs are also going to get a full bore FSB with proper DDR, Bluetooth, FW800, and airport extreme and slot loading drives.
They can't release it now for two reasons, first the 970 isn't here and neither is the 7457-rm(or whatever). Obviously if this level of upgrade was a still long way away then I would have expected the iMacs to have been bumped before Christmas, there would be no reason to hold off the non-processor upgrades.
<strong>A lot of "hopefully" and "what if" going around since the last product refreshes. Pathetic. The high end got a bit better all around, ...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow, Matsu, I see the negativity has gotten hold again!
Look on the bright side, the MAX computer you can buy from the Apple Store via the build-to-order options took a HUGE price drop. Ok, it's not everyone's cup of tea, but it did get a huge price cut & went from Dual1.25 to Dual1.42 simultaneously.
From $15,600, all the way down to $12000
(Of course, the price of the dual mongo LCDs going from $3599 to $1999 helped a wee bit!)
<strong>James the point I am making is that if the processor change to say 7457-rm or something is just aroung the corner, which will involve a new logic board, then why would the do a major modification now only for the currently available G4's?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The 7457-RM isn't due for another year, so Apple probably isn't worried about that.
The 7457 (not the RM) should be drop-in compatible with the 7455.
[quote]<strong>They can't release it now for two reasons, first the 970 isn't here and neither is the 7457-rm(or whatever). Obviously if this level of upgrade was a still long way away then I would have expected the iMacs to have been bumped before Christmas, there would be no reason to hold off the non-processor upgrades.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nevertheless, the PowerBooks and PowerMacs were just updated with all the new bells and whistles. Why wouldn't Apple also update the iMacs? Of the totally new processors in the wings, it looks like the first one will be the 970, which will appear in the professional line first. Nothing radical is "around the corner" for the consumer line, processor-wise, unless AIM has managed to keep an entire processor line totally secret (which, I admit, is a distant possibility).
I don't see Apple moving the iMac to a board with an all-new bus until it's necessary - next year. Until then it can easily accomodate an Xserve-style motherboard with a 7457 and FW800, etc., which will tide it through this year. And that's all work that Apple can already have done.
[ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>
we are in agreement on the main point, i just thought using "idiotic" in regards to an opinion was kind of harsh/mean
Yea, I know. It's just there are a lot of these 'sentiments' around here. This should die, that should die, it's another cube, etc. Sorry, but I believe sold a few more units then the cube. Also, my meanness was directed more towards the ridiculous statement here which didn't come across with much thought or opinion in it. Wasn't directed towards anyone with an opinion. Mostly towards those who just spit out words without thinking, kinda like flame bait, trolling, etc. Sorry if i got you upset