<strong>Easily, total boredom. The Macintosh is so completely irrelevant to the real x86 fanatics that one might be talk about the Power5, for all the relevance it would have to them.
It's not the x86-olites that are of any concern. It's the Mac purchasers and would-be purchasers that Apple must cultivate. Apple shouldn't be planning its releases based on the need to provide ammunition in the platform wars. It must meet the needs of those who are actually using, or are going to use Macintoshes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Easily, total boredom. The Macintosh is so completely irrelevant to the real x86 fanatics that one might be talk about the Power5, for all the relevance it would have to them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is true in general. However, if someone was to tap them on the shoulder and point to some machine that kick's their machine's butt, don't you think they'd take notice?
Sure, it's not Mustang vs. (the currently non-existent) Camaro, but it's always good to keep an eye on the other camp, just to see if you're still King of the Hill.
This Apple vs. Wintel war was lost years ago. I just want faster hardware so iMovie & iDVD are more useful, and because I like shiny things.
[quote] Don't forget that most of the case changes in the current models that we might consider to be "970 ready" are internal. They could easily change the plastic mouldings and colouring of the exterior for a fresh new look. I hope they totally revamp the look of the enclosure for the 970! <hr></blockquote>
Tom, with a processor that is an order of magnitude faster than the current dual towers, I don't think Apple is going to have a hard time convincing anybody.
(I know your job is 'Captain Sceptic/RealismTM' but...but there's a few 'BUTS' that kinda auger well...so I hope you don't mind if I pour sunshine on your cloudy forecast...)
ie, for Mac towers, things can't get any worse than they've already been over the last several years. Heh, heh. It can ONLY get better. And it has. Slightly. But the next half a year to a year will be more than slightly.
60% of workstation buyers are going Mac this year. That covers alot of markets. Alot of them hardball x86 heads over the last few years. The Mac was virtually dead in these markets a few years back...y'know...the Mac in the corner that does the Photoshop work?
I wonder what they've been told?
As to jaded 'mhz-olites', 'boredom' at an incremental update. Yeah. Just like me, 'bored' at sloooooow progress on the Mac cpu front. Yeah, Intel and AMD are giving them more of the same. But imagine...a decent OS, 64 bit...and running on a CPU that will out perform theirs two to one? Four to one if you count duals? That's not yer average sub-linear 10% cpu spike.
The 970 is a different proposition. It, some supposed four years in the making, should turn a few heads. Mac or x86. It threatens to, at 2.5 to absolutely trouce a dual 1.4 gig G4. FPU performance, on paper will strike the G4 right otta the park.
It's going to give any x86-olites the chance who thinkt the current Mac towers are overpriced and underperforming...a chance to jump on board. I figure their could be quite a few gamers, Unix/Linux and M$ ('Oh, no...not Palladium...') heads that will seriously consider the Mac once a compelling arguement comes along.
That 'growth' may not be take the whole 95% in one go. But maybe one or two people may agree the 970 will be the start of something beautiful.
Yeah, there's inertia. But isn't going to stop the '970' (if things come to pass...) from wiping the floor with current Mac tower sales...and putting the Apple sales engine back on the map.
Let's face it. A 970. A virtually guaranteed new case. Quark 6. Mac Os 10.3.
Somehow, I don't think Apple will have a problem selling their next gen' tower kit.
When Moki says you'll have to fight him to be first in the queue to buy these new machines...I'll be standing behind him with a smiley laden baseball bat. (No offence, Moki... )
Can you imagine the reaction if Apple deliver this. On time. At Macworld New York?
Oh, and I don't accept the Mac 'lost the war' either. Apple haven't lost. They're not out of business. They're still competing. They're, at least on moral grounds, winning the 'war'.
That might not be the way the other 95% see it. But then, they're wrong and we're right. Eh?
"The Gates Guard is, as we speak, bombing the Macworld Expo building in a hope to destroy a computer that could destroy the Wintel world in a single clock cycle. But the superfast dual processor 970 is fitted with a sleak, svelt, and sexy titanium-aluminum-supercoolium enclosure, succcesfully deflecting all the plutonium charges targeted at it Insanely Greatness. Sit tight, because we'll be back with a report on how all Mac users that got to test-drive the 970 have developed maniacal laughs and grins that will have to be sugically removed."
Yep. That's what I am hoping for. But without all the carnage and debris. Those Speedmark scores should knock my socks off And hopefully give all windows users heart attacks. Hopefully the price won't give me a heart attack... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
A single range of computers using Power 4+, Power 5, 970, 980 and 405 could go from massively parallel supercomputers to PDAs.
It would not be impossible to port OSX to all of them.
It would not be impossible to integrate all of them into a supercomputer-on-demand PDA/phone or laptop or desktop or workstation. An IBM Deep Blue in your pocket, anyone?
Apple needs to widen its spectrum of products and services. How about a professional edition of .Mac? That would work extremely well. And hardware. Imagine being able to work anywhere in your house with a dainty little frosty white tablet, while the five 970-based server nodes in your basement crunch the data sent by the tablet. Apple would succeed as a home-based data infrastructure, interconnected to all the little chips in the house.
We are saying the same thing. I consider the design to be the internal layout, structure and cooling. This is engineering. The outside appearance is industrial design, and that is what I referred to as cosmetic changes in my original post.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well then, instead of simply saying 'design' and meaning interior or enginerring, say 'internal design' or 'structural design'. I don't think many of us would argue against leaving the inside alone with the swing door, it's the outside that we all predict to change. Though, I thought I read that the inisde layout does need to be tweaked for the 970.
The swing-door has to be dampened. One of the guys at the Apple store said that one of the doors has been opened and it dropped, smashing the GPU, etc. I would like it to have the kind of movement that a car trunk has.
<strong>Some are expecting a new case / enclosure for the G5 / 970 PowerMac. I don't think so. The existing one was built for the IBM 970, and the present PowerMacs are just its shake down cruse, to get any mechanical bugs fixed. Getting the case designed early was good strategy. Apple will be busy enough with the new motherboard and chip set. There will likely be some cosmetic changes to the case, so people can easily identify the G5 PowerMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
The swing-door has to be dampened. One of the guys at the Apple store said that one of the doors has been opened and it dropped, smashing the GPU, etc. I would like it to have the kind of movement that a car trunk has.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes. If something like this happens with a totally new G5 PowerMac case, it would be far more serious considering how many will be sold. If Apple stays with the present mechanical design, some parts of the structure will evolve to take care of problems Apple is finding now. Thanks for supporting what I said in part of my original post:
"Some are expecting a new case / enclosure for the G5 / 970 PowerMac. I don't think so. The existing one was built for the IBM 970, and the present PowerMacs are just its shake down cruise, to get any mechanical bugs fixed. Getting the case designed early was a good strategy. . ."
Just how much the exterior overlays change remains to be seen. I believe it will be enough to make it easy to recognize a PowerMac with an IBM 970 in it. Maybe more, and maybe not.
Edit: Thanks for the spelling tip, which is reflected in the quote above.
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
[image of X-serve like case snipped]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" /> I hope it looks cool!
This pictures shows something that is bland and functional - the way a rack mounted case should be. I would like to see something as radical as the first iMac and the original incarnation of the current PowerMac enclosure (G3?) were at the time of their release. I don't like the 4 handles at the corners of the PM case and think that Apple's industrial design team can some up with a Really Good Design.
It won't be like anything we currently have thought of. :cool:
Hmmmm...my Beige G3 might be worth enough to be sold as an antique instead of a computer any day now. Selling an ancient and historical artifact to get a 970? I think so! :cool:
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh yes . . . I remember that mock-up. Was wondering when someone would present it. Liked it then, like it now. Thanks "SC"! I sincerely hope that Apple comes out with a similarly styled case design.
And the "MacWhispers" info would appear to fit within timelines. Although, like the rest of you, I'd like to see an Apple 970 release date very, very soon.
Comments
<strong>Easily, total boredom. The Macintosh is so completely irrelevant to the real x86 fanatics that one might be talk about the Power5, for all the relevance it would have to them.
It's not the x86-olites that are of any concern. It's the Mac purchasers and would-be purchasers that Apple must cultivate. Apple shouldn't be planning its releases based on the need to provide ammunition in the platform wars. It must meet the needs of those who are actually using, or are going to use Macintoshes.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Great post.
<strong>Macwhispers have access to production info. In this sense they are stating facts. They have stopped doing 'Mosr'.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Correction...
they claim to have access to production info.
<strong>
Easily, total boredom. The Macintosh is so completely irrelevant to the real x86 fanatics that one might be talk about the Power5, for all the relevance it would have to them.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is true in general. However, if someone was to tap them on the shoulder and point to some machine that kick's their machine's butt, don't you think they'd take notice?
Sure, it's not Mustang vs. (the currently non-existent) Camaro, but it's always good to keep an eye on the other camp, just to see if you're still King of the Hill.
This Apple vs. Wintel war was lost years ago. I just want faster hardware so iMovie & iDVD are more useful, and because I like shiny things.
<strong>
i'm building the plastics right now</strong><hr></blockquote>
HUAHUA HUA HUAHUA HUA HUAHAUHUA
YAY, there we go again!! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
i love this guy.
where´s bodhi when you need him??
Tom, with a processor that is an order of magnitude faster than the current dual towers, I don't think Apple is going to have a hard time convincing anybody.
(I know your job is 'Captain Sceptic/RealismTM' but...but there's a few 'BUTS' that kinda auger well...so I hope you don't mind if I pour sunshine on your cloudy forecast...)
ie, for Mac towers, things can't get any worse than they've already been over the last several years. Heh, heh. It can ONLY get better. And it has. Slightly. But the next half a year to a year will be more than slightly.
60% of workstation buyers are going Mac this year. That covers alot of markets. Alot of them hardball x86 heads over the last few years. The Mac was virtually dead in these markets a few years back...y'know...the Mac in the corner that does the Photoshop work?
I wonder what they've been told?
As to jaded 'mhz-olites', 'boredom' at an incremental update. Yeah. Just like me, 'bored' at sloooooow progress on the Mac cpu front. Yeah, Intel and AMD are giving them more of the same. But imagine...a decent OS, 64 bit...and running on a CPU that will out perform theirs two to one? Four to one if you count duals? That's not yer average sub-linear 10% cpu spike.
The 970 is a different proposition. It, some supposed four years in the making, should turn a few heads. Mac or x86. It threatens to, at 2.5 to absolutely trouce a dual 1.4 gig G4. FPU performance, on paper will strike the G4 right otta the park.
It's going to give any x86-olites the chance who thinkt the current Mac towers are overpriced and underperforming...a chance to jump on board. I figure their could be quite a few gamers, Unix/Linux and M$ ('Oh, no...not Palladium...') heads that will seriously consider the Mac once a compelling arguement comes along.
That 'growth' may not be take the whole 95% in one go. But maybe one or two people may agree the 970 will be the start of something beautiful.
Yeah, there's inertia. But isn't going to stop the '970' (if things come to pass...) from wiping the floor with current Mac tower sales...and putting the Apple sales engine back on the map.
Let's face it. A 970. A virtually guaranteed new case. Quark 6. Mac Os 10.3.
Somehow, I don't think Apple will have a problem selling their next gen' tower kit.
When Moki says you'll have to fight him to be first in the queue to buy these new machines...I'll be standing behind him with a smiley laden baseball bat. (No offence, Moki...
Can you imagine the reaction if Apple deliver this. On time. At Macworld New York?
Oh, and I don't accept the Mac 'lost the war' either. Apple haven't lost. They're not out of business. They're still competing. They're, at least on moral grounds, winning the 'war'.
That might not be the way the other 95% see it. But then, they're wrong and we're right. Eh?
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>Can you imagine the reaction if Apple deliver this. On time. At Macworld New York?</strong><hr></blockquote>
MmMMmm... Riots... MmMMmm...
Now we just need a new trade-in rebate so that I can get rid of my Sawtooth 400!
"The Gates Guard is, as we speak, bombing the Macworld Expo building in a hope to destroy a computer that could destroy the Wintel world in a single clock cycle. But the superfast dual processor 970 is fitted with a sleak, svelt, and sexy titanium-aluminum-supercoolium enclosure, succcesfully deflecting all the plutonium charges targeted at it Insanely Greatness. Sit tight, because we'll be back with a report on how all Mac users that got to test-drive the 970 have developed maniacal laughs and grins that will have to be sugically removed."
Yep. That's what I am hoping for. But without all the carnage and debris.
It would not be impossible to port OSX to all of them.
It would not be impossible to integrate all of them into a supercomputer-on-demand PDA/phone or laptop or desktop or workstation. An IBM Deep Blue in your pocket, anyone?
Apple needs to widen its spectrum of products and services. How about a professional edition of .Mac? That would work extremely well. And hardware. Imagine being able to work anywhere in your house with a dainty little frosty white tablet, while the five 970-based server nodes in your basement crunch the data sent by the tablet. Apple would succeed as a home-based data infrastructure, interconnected to all the little chips in the house.
<strong>
We are saying the same thing. I consider the design to be the internal layout, structure and cooling. This is engineering. The outside appearance is industrial design, and that is what I referred to as cosmetic changes in my original post.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well then, instead of simply saying 'design' and meaning interior or enginerring, say 'internal design' or 'structural design'. I don't think many of us would argue against leaving the inside alone with the swing door, it's the outside that we all predict to change. Though, I thought I read that the inisde layout does need to be tweaked for the 970.
<strong>Some are expecting a new case / enclosure for the G5 / 970 PowerMac. I don't think so. The existing one was built for the IBM 970, and the present PowerMacs are just its shake down cruse, to get any mechanical bugs fixed. Getting the case designed early was good strategy. Apple will be busy enough with the new motherboard and chip set. There will likely be some cosmetic changes to the case, so people can easily identify the G5 PowerMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
<strong>
The swing-door has to be dampened. One of the guys at the Apple store said that one of the doors has been opened and it dropped, smashing the GPU, etc. I would like it to have the kind of movement that a car trunk has.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes. If something like this happens with a totally new G5 PowerMac case, it would be far more serious considering how many will be sold. If Apple stays with the present mechanical design, some parts of the structure will evolve to take care of problems Apple is finding now. Thanks for supporting what I said in part of my original post:
"Some are expecting a new case / enclosure for the G5 / 970 PowerMac. I don't think so. The existing one was built for the IBM 970, and the present PowerMacs are just its shake down cruise, to get any mechanical bugs fixed. Getting the case designed early was a good strategy. . ."
Just how much the exterior overlays change remains to be seen. I believe it will be enough to make it easy to recognize a PowerMac with an IBM 970 in it. Maybe more, and maybe not.
Edit: Thanks for the spelling tip, which is reflected in the quote above.
[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: snoopy ]</p>
If it actually turns out to be the MegaMac we all desire...
If its impact is as big as it needs to be for Apple..
...it will be the next Bondi iMac.
Not in terms of product placement, but in terms of overall revolutionary design and duty.
The Bondi iMac changed the face of Apple as a whole.
A PowerMac eXtreme, or whatever, will have the same mission.
It will be visually different in as many ways as they can make it while keeping it profitable.
Regardless of its power, Apple is a visual company and it will win as many converts as the raw speed of the 970.
<strong>
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
[image of X-serve like case snipped]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't! <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" /> I hope it looks cool!
This pictures shows something that is bland and functional - the way a rack mounted case should be. I would like to see something as radical as the first iMac and the original incarnation of the current PowerMac enclosure (G3?) were at the time of their release. I don't like the 4 handles at the corners of the PM case and think that Apple's industrial design team can some up with a Really Good Design.
It won't be like anything we currently have thought of. :cool:
MM
<strong>
MmMMmm... Riots... MmMMmm...
Now we just need a new trade-in rebate so that I can get rid of my Sawtooth 400!
yeah ... this is the way to go
<strong>
If there are new powermac cases for the PPC 970, I hope they look like this...
Oh yes . . . I remember that mock-up. Was wondering when someone would present it. Liked it then, like it now. Thanks "SC"! I sincerely hope that Apple comes out with a similarly styled case design.
And the "MacWhispers" info would appear to fit within timelines. Although, like the rest of you, I'd like to see an Apple 970 release date very, very soon.
Edit: grammar
[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: MacJedai ]</p>