It is not unusual for new Apple hardware to come out two months or more after an announcement. The 17 inch PB announced January 7 won't be out for a week or two more. I believe last year it was similar with the 15 inch iMac. Didn't the slowest model not ship till April?
It might not be bad if Apple announced the 970 in July at MWNY but with a ship date of October 1, assuming that it was necessary to wait that long.
The volume of preorders would give Apple a realistic guide for scheduling production for the next six months.
In the interim people who needed a computer immediately would feel safe in knowing exactly where they stood if they purchased a G4 tower.
Since this is all speculation here anyway, I'll speculate that Apple might have some slower 970s available they could start shipping earlier allowing a staggered release. Just for example, 1.6GHz in August, 1.8GHz in September, something faster in October. These would be sold along side whatever G4 is current then to satisfy those who need a computer ASAP.
1. Intel will have trouble selling anything that is over 3.0ghz as WinXP crashes big style in machines that clock this or over. Whats more it's no small fix either, it will involve a re-write so big that it is only being looked at for the next version. MS have kept this very quiet but it has been spoken of on The Register and a few other places.
Time to giggle later this year? Oh yes!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hogwash. 3.0 GHz isn't like the speed of sound or anything. There is no magical hardware speed limit imposed by MS' software. Stupid things like this get circulated all the time on rumour boards... those boards typically aren't run by technically skilled individuals after all.
[quote]<strong>
2. This 970 thing...Whoever mentioned p*ssing off developers is right. Apple have to put them under NDA at the WWDC if there is to be any chance of software being optimized or even running under the new platform. This could be analagous to the 68k > PowerPC transition, quite a step. If no leaks come from WWDC about this then start panicking.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Complete nonsense. Existing software will run just fine on the new processor. At WWDC Apple will probably, IMO, introduce the 64-bit versions of its APIs even if it doesn't demonstrate/announce hardware outright.
[quote]<strong>
3. I have a feeling that the first G5 Powermacs might run concurrently with G4, with a crossover in the middle of the range.
Why?
Because the 64bit version of OS X will have a totally Cocoa version of the Finder and other key bits of the OS that have until now been Carbon.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, completely incorrect. The existing version of the Finder will run just fine. Carbon and Cocoa will both be updated to be "64-bit clean".
[quote]<strong>
What does this mean?
Well I think they won't even run OS 9 as a classic environment in the G5. It'll be X and only X. I'm pretty sute the reason that the Finder has not had a Cocoa rewrite is because Classic uses the OS X Finder instead of it's own and it has to be Carbon to acheive this.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The classic environment is just another 32-bit application and the lack of a Finder within it is immaterial to its operation. The Finder is most likely Carbon because that was the fastest way to move the existing and familiar app to make it OS X native. They could recode its replacement in Cocoa, but that'll only happen if they are going to build a completely new app. If they are just going to incrementally improve it then staying in Carbon makes a whole lot more sense. Personally I don't expect a completely new Finder, just progressive refinements to its features and performance.
Your message is just spread FUD and is completely baseless. I don't know if you truly believe any of your points (in which case you're a non-technical user falling victim to FUD yourself), or if you are deliberately trolling. Either way, drop it.
Could people stop calling it the G5!? Motorola is almost totally out of the running for having their chip in the next Powermac. And 970 sounds cool enough!
I think the key to the success of the 970 is definately in the way Apple choose to announce and then advertise it.
I'm not saying that Photoshop benchmarks are a bad thing, but how many PC users take them seriously. I've heard too many times "yeah, but Photoshop is optimized for Mac" or "But who uses Photoshop anyway" and "Can it play games...?"
I really think apple need to push hard with the 970 to really FLATTEN the Win/PC guys. Some 'real' benchmarks to show that it's THAT good.
I'm thinking something like what Ford did with the new BA Falcon here in Australia - they had a program called Secrets where they purposefully leaked info about the car to increase the hype surrounding it. For months there were photos around of 'some' bits of the car. The interior was not seen until launch. They hyped the 190kW engine etc. People were talking about it for so long.. it was great.
I really want to see things like Quake III 640*480 figures displayed (any PC'er worth his weight knows this is essentially CPU bound and they count it as a 'fair' measure) we should see RC5-72 crunching, we should see mp3 & 3ivx encoding times.
(Basically all these things are CPU bound and very favorable to AltiVec - if the 970 is half as good as we think - it will cain in these tests)
It would be great to have jobs stand up and say - I can encode mp3s TWICE as fast as the best Intel has to offer....(or similar)
I think people (low & high end) would really be fored to take notice if us Apple-people could walk around and make statements like that. They would have no choice but to recognise us as having a superior computer (OS & Hardware!)
For years at every launch Apple have been telling us how good their machines are.. I talk to PC people who don't even know that Apple are running dual's.. don't even know what X is capable of.. this needs to be BIG!
What does everyone else think about advertising?
-Dan
EDIT: added some more (I'm really passionate about this!)
Having those old subset of PS filters really look fishy. It is far harder to claim that mp3 ripping, Quake III and video compression is tailor made for Apple.
A staggered release or a psudostaggered release. That is lowend aviable at start, and low aviability of midrange for X weeks then ramping up, the same thing for the high end but even more constrained aviabiliy for a longer time. If we assume that the low end is at least a SP 1.4 GHz 970 it will beat the crap out of the DP 1.42 G4 and that the later ones are DP 1.4 and DP 1.6 to 1.8.
I think it would work out. In the begining the buyers would be those who think the lowend is plenty and also compenies who need both the low and high end were the 970 lowend would serve as a temporary high end until the real high end arrive.
But Apple have to make sure that shipping is not hold up by graphical card that is not shipping or such things., it does not look good that the ATI 9700 has not yet arrived for the Mac while the next generation is on its way to the Windows world.
Since macbidouille is reporting that we'll see the 970 demoed at WWDC in May, perhaps it would be a specs only demo. Leave the salacious, yummy new case design in question until MWNY 03. That would be left as the icing on the cake...and very suspenseful.
Comments
It might not be bad if Apple announced the 970 in July at MWNY but with a ship date of October 1, assuming that it was necessary to wait that long.
The volume of preorders would give Apple a realistic guide for scheduling production for the next six months.
In the interim people who needed a computer immediately would feel safe in knowing exactly where they stood if they purchased a G4 tower.
Since this is all speculation here anyway, I'll speculate that Apple might have some slower 970s available they could start shipping earlier allowing a staggered release. Just for example, 1.6GHz in August, 1.8GHz in September, something faster in October. These would be sold along side whatever G4 is current then to satisfy those who need a computer ASAP.
YES.
When?
NOWNOWNOWNOWNOW!!!!!
<strong>
1. Intel will have trouble selling anything that is over 3.0ghz as WinXP crashes big style in machines that clock this or over. Whats more it's no small fix either, it will involve a re-write so big that it is only being looked at for the next version. MS have kept this very quiet but it has been spoken of on The Register and a few other places.
Time to giggle later this year? Oh yes!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hogwash. 3.0 GHz isn't like the speed of sound or anything. There is no magical hardware speed limit imposed by MS' software. Stupid things like this get circulated all the time on rumour boards... those boards typically aren't run by technically skilled individuals after all.
[quote]<strong>
2. This 970 thing...Whoever mentioned p*ssing off developers is right. Apple have to put them under NDA at the WWDC if there is to be any chance of software being optimized or even running under the new platform. This could be analagous to the 68k > PowerPC transition, quite a step. If no leaks come from WWDC about this then start panicking.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Complete nonsense. Existing software will run just fine on the new processor. At WWDC Apple will probably, IMO, introduce the 64-bit versions of its APIs even if it doesn't demonstrate/announce hardware outright.
[quote]<strong>
3. I have a feeling that the first G5 Powermacs might run concurrently with G4, with a crossover in the middle of the range.
Why?
Because the 64bit version of OS X will have a totally Cocoa version of the Finder and other key bits of the OS that have until now been Carbon.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Again, completely incorrect. The existing version of the Finder will run just fine. Carbon and Cocoa will both be updated to be "64-bit clean".
[quote]<strong>
What does this mean?
Well I think they won't even run OS 9 as a classic environment in the G5. It'll be X and only X. I'm pretty sute the reason that the Finder has not had a Cocoa rewrite is because Classic uses the OS X Finder instead of it's own and it has to be Carbon to acheive this.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The classic environment is just another 32-bit application and the lack of a Finder within it is immaterial to its operation. The Finder is most likely Carbon because that was the fastest way to move the existing and familiar app to make it OS X native. They could recode its replacement in Cocoa, but that'll only happen if they are going to build a completely new app. If they are just going to incrementally improve it then staying in Carbon makes a whole lot more sense. Personally I don't expect a completely new Finder, just progressive refinements to its features and performance.
Your message is just spread FUD and is completely baseless. I don't know if you truly believe any of your points (in which case you're a non-technical user falling victim to FUD yourself), or if you are deliberately trolling. Either way, drop it.
I'm not saying that Photoshop benchmarks are a bad thing, but how many PC users take them seriously. I've heard too many times "yeah, but Photoshop is optimized for Mac" or "But who uses Photoshop anyway" and "Can it play games...?"
I really think apple need to push hard with the 970 to really FLATTEN the Win/PC guys. Some 'real' benchmarks to show that it's THAT good.
I'm thinking something like what Ford did with the new BA Falcon here in Australia - they had a program called Secrets where they purposefully leaked info about the car to increase the hype surrounding it. For months there were photos around of 'some' bits of the car. The interior was not seen until launch. They hyped the 190kW engine etc. People were talking about it for so long.. it was great.
I really want to see things like Quake III 640*480 figures displayed (any PC'er worth his weight knows this is essentially CPU bound and they count it as a 'fair' measure) we should see RC5-72 crunching, we should see mp3 & 3ivx encoding times.
(Basically all these things are CPU bound and very favorable to AltiVec - if the 970 is half as good as we think - it will cain in these tests)
It would be great to have jobs stand up and say - I can encode mp3s TWICE as fast as the best Intel has to offer....(or similar)
I think people (low & high end) would really be fored to take notice if us Apple-people could walk around and make statements like that. They would have no choice but to recognise us as having a superior computer (OS & Hardware!)
For years at every launch Apple have been telling us how good their machines are.. I talk to PC people who don't even know that Apple are running dual's.. don't even know what X is capable of.. this needs to be BIG!
What does everyone else think about advertising?
-Dan
EDIT: added some more (I'm really passionate about this!)
[ 03-10-2003: Message edited by: Grecy ]</p>
Having those old subset of PS filters really look fishy. It is far harder to claim that mp3 ripping, Quake III and video compression is tailor made for Apple.
A staggered release or a psudostaggered release. That is lowend aviable at start, and low aviability of midrange for X weeks then ramping up, the same thing for the high end but even more constrained aviabiliy for a longer time. If we assume that the low end is at least a SP 1.4 GHz 970 it will beat the crap out of the DP 1.42 G4 and that the later ones are DP 1.4 and DP 1.6 to 1.8.
I think it would work out. In the begining the buyers would be those who think the lowend is plenty and also compenies who need both the low and high end were the 970 lowend would serve as a temporary high end until the real high end arrive.
But Apple have to make sure that shipping is not hold up by graphical card that is not shipping or such things., it does not look good that the ATI 9700 has not yet arrived for the Mac while the next generation is on its way to the Windows world.