Don't get too excited...
I don't think we'll see huge clock speed increases for the initial launch of the 970. Right now Apple will be trying to figure out how SLOW a clock speed they can get away with.
They'll still want to make an impact, and they'll still want every Apple user and potential switcher tripping over each other to get hold of the new machines. But, it makes sense to build a buffer, so that if IBM should run into trouble further down the line Apple can keep releasing incremental speed bumps. If Apple can achieve the same level of hype with a 1.4GHz 970, then why announce the 2.5Ghz right now?
Apple are in the perfect position that they can hold technology back, because they have a hardware monopoly. This is exactly the reason why cloning was terminated. It really doesn't matter what they release, it's going to be faster than anything else that's available in the marketplace, and people will buy them up.
Why sell a 1.8GHz 970 as the "fast" machine when you can sell it first as the "fastest" machine, then again as the "faster" machine and then finally once more as the "fast" machine?
If Apple are smart (which let's face it they are - they've been selling us underpowered machines for ages), they'll be putting together a tempting "package". We might see "new" features such as AGP 8x, PCI-X, SATA. After the first few seconds of disappointment, we'll say to ourselves "well there are a whole lot of other cool technologies in there, and a 1.8GHz 970 is going to kick ass." And all the time Apple will be stockpiling the 2.5GHz+ parts.
Face it people, Apple are going to take the p!ss out off us again - simply because they can - there is no competition in the market. SJ must thank God every morning for OS X.
Please discuss...
They'll still want to make an impact, and they'll still want every Apple user and potential switcher tripping over each other to get hold of the new machines. But, it makes sense to build a buffer, so that if IBM should run into trouble further down the line Apple can keep releasing incremental speed bumps. If Apple can achieve the same level of hype with a 1.4GHz 970, then why announce the 2.5Ghz right now?
Apple are in the perfect position that they can hold technology back, because they have a hardware monopoly. This is exactly the reason why cloning was terminated. It really doesn't matter what they release, it's going to be faster than anything else that's available in the marketplace, and people will buy them up.
Why sell a 1.8GHz 970 as the "fast" machine when you can sell it first as the "fastest" machine, then again as the "faster" machine and then finally once more as the "fast" machine?
If Apple are smart (which let's face it they are - they've been selling us underpowered machines for ages), they'll be putting together a tempting "package". We might see "new" features such as AGP 8x, PCI-X, SATA. After the first few seconds of disappointment, we'll say to ourselves "well there are a whole lot of other cool technologies in there, and a 1.8GHz 970 is going to kick ass." And all the time Apple will be stockpiling the 2.5GHz+ parts.
Face it people, Apple are going to take the p!ss out off us again - simply because they can - there is no competition in the market. SJ must thank God every morning for OS X.
Please discuss...
Comments
<strong>
Please discuss...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unfortunatly, discussions with trolls can get you eaten. I'm going away, you'll have to find someone else for dinner.
Barto
Get excited by all means, just don't expect your wildest dreams to come true.
<strong>Why sell a 1.8GHz 970 as the "fast" machine when you can sell it first as the "fastest" machine, then again as the "faster" machine and then finally once more as the "fast" machine?
If Apple are smart (which let's face it they are - they've been selling us underpowered machines for ages), they'll be putting together a tempting "package".</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because Apple is waaay behind in speed compared to the peecee side, they know it, and they need everything they got to get a bigger market share.
It is nut just about milking the market for money, because if noone wants to buy, nobody's going to get milked.
Think before you write.
Face it people, Apple are going to take the p!ss out off us again - simply because they can - there is no competition in the market. SJ must thank God every morning for OS X.
Well normally I'd say that this might be the case. But not now.
This time, we have another computer maker who is going to be selling the 970. We didn't see many other companies selling the G4, but the 970 is a whole different beast.
IBM is going to be putting these in servers and perhaps Linux desktops and workstations. Guess what? If IBM is selling these machines with dual 2.5 GHz Power PC 970s and Apple's top of the line Mac is a single 1.8 GHz Power PC 970, we're going to be able to buy IBM's, run Mac on Linux, and have an unbelievably fast machine.
In fact, it will be much faster than Apple's own 'Ultimate' machine.
Apple can't afford to *not* use IBM's fastest chip because IBM is going to use their fastest chip. It's an interesting position for Apple to be in. Remember that IBM has alreay announced 970 based servers. If the Xserve isn't up to that speed, why would you buy one, especially if you could boot Mac OS X server on the IBM machine with MOL?
Also, this thing is supposed to scale quite nicely, so why should Apple hold back and 'stockpile'?
If they do that and IBM scales up to 3.0 GHz, or 3.2 GHz without a problem in 6 months, the it was kind of foolish to buy all of those top of the line 2.5 GHz chips when they were so expensive instead of waiting for the new processors to be introduced so the price could be lowered.
Apple should and will strike while the iron is hot. We've been waiting for years for this type of machine. If Apple holds back, you are going to see them continue to lose market share, especially in the desktop market.
Remember, it's not a surprise that we're nearing a point where half of Apple's sales are from laptops- that's the only market they seem to be competitive in.
no, worse, it's bad to have a 1.8Ghz as fastest option
why not get excited about the fact that we actually get faster machines and there is plenty of room to grow even faster. do you actually plan to buy a new tower if they're available? or is a 1.4Ghz ppc970 too shabby for $1500.00?
but as usual: fran441's ideas about this subject are more logical than mine... <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
(damn, i wish i'd done a real study instead of art)
[ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: gar ]</p>
no, worse, it's bad to have a 1.8Ghz as fastest option <hr></blockquote>
It's human nature. People want to have the best (especially when it comes to computers). If IBM hadn't announced their 2.5 GHz 970, we'd still be excited about the 1.8 GHz 970, of course. But now that we're talking about a substantially faster chip with production ready to start, it's hard to not get excited. After all, we're talking about a chip that could potentially blow Intel's offerings out of the water. We've been waiting for this chance again since the days of the 604/G3 (when it really *was* top of the line).
People buy a machine (not an OS), this is a balance of PRICE, PERFORMANCE, and EXPERIENCE. Mebbe Apple provides a better experience, but it gets so soundly thrashed in the areas of price and performance, that it's still losing quarterly sales (especially in the pro line). The iBook has been one of their best selling machines. Why? because it's the closest they come to providing a cheap machine with relatively competitive performance. That means that OSX has LOTS of COMPETITION whether or not Apple chooses to recognize it or stick their faces in the sand for another 4 years.
This is the last chance Apple will see to make any serious inroads in their market-share -- which absolutely MUST INCREASE if Apple wants to remain a viable platform for another decade -- with the wintelon world's 64 bit path far from clear, and easily 18-24 months from offering the kind of reach a PPC970 might offer, this is the time to strike.
Not only do the machines need to be the fastest they can possibly be, they also need to, at a minimum, begin to drive their entire desktop line (consumer and pro) from 200-500USD cheaper on each and ever model.
If they choose to eek out the speed gains, people will hold off, the machines need to be basically irresistable. Jobs needs to get on stage and run the baddest photoshop/video/3-d bake off you've ever seen, something against a top shelf PC, not a carefully hobbled one, and when he does it, the mac has to win by at least half, but more like two thirds or three quarters. What takes 2 minutes on the mac, has to take 5 or more on the PC. Apple won't get there by holding back. Take stock of just how many pro customers they've lost, PM sales are a joke, and those customers aren't coming back unless they see dramatic performance increases. Remember they're now on a different platform, getting them to switch back after they've shelled out for PC systems and software won't be easy for the same reasons that many stuck with the mac for so long in the first place, switching platforms costs money and simply isn't worth it just to be a bit faster, you've gotta be 200-400% faster at the prices Apple is looking to charge. Or you gotta be a much more competitively priced! simple.
Furthermore, if Apple were to follow that path just think of the MAJOR impact that will make at MacWorld NY! It will certainly start too turn heads and you will see the "Switcher" campaign really take off.
Last point, although I understand the point of starting with the 1.8Ghz 970, I don't see why they wouldn't go with the 2.5Ghz 970. IBM will certainly continue development of the 970 to increase processor speed so it really doesn't make sense not to go with the fastest chip possible. Apple needs to gain marketshare; that's the bottom line. Busting out with the 2.5Ghz 970 will get the ball rolling!
I must say that the initial arguement isn't totally sound (they will do it because they can and we have no choice), but I do agree with the final outcome. I really think we will see a lineup along the lines of single 1.2, single 1.4, dual 1.6.
Everyone is so excited with the chance to finally be competitive on the performance front they are taking rumors as fact. We have no real facts on how many chips are being produced. We have no facts on the frequency of those chips.
What we do know is the current top end machine is a Dual 1.42 G4 - in 6 months if Apple can release a Dual 1.6 970 at the same price point with an effective performance increase of 4X, that is going to not only satisfy your average user, it will boost sales. And sales are the bottom line.
Everyone keeps saying this chip will scale rapidly and easily - and then the move to .09 micron production and then the 980, and then dual cores and then and then...
If you had a business which has been burnt MANY times in the past by expectations on the production capabilities of another company (out of your hands for the most part), what would you do? Play it safe and profitable - giving yourself some maneuvering room if there are production problems down the line - or blow your whole wad on an initial release with no safety net if something were to go wrong in the future?
We have an IBM roadmap which we all hope they can stick to - they have shown good ability in the past. When you start believing all of it like it is not only IBM's roadmap, but Apple's also, that is when you are going to once again cry foul and wail, "This is the last time - really! I am switching to Wintel! I mean it this time!"
A roadmap is just that - a map. The actual road can, and many times is, radically different than what is on that piece of paper. IBM has a map - but this road doesn't even exist yet. Would you be willing to bet your company that the road is going to match that map exactly? I don't think I would.
I totally agree with the title of this thread. Don't get too excited. We all want a Dual 2.5GHz 970 - I do too. These forums are overrun with wild speculation and rampant foreshadowing of Intel ass-kickin . That is great. That is what rumors are all about. But if you get too excited about a product based on those speculations, of course you are going to be let down.
"I don't think we'll see huge clock speed increases for the initial launch of the 970. Right now Apple will be trying to figure out how SLOW a clock speed they can get away with."
Apple is a conservative company at times and they may choose to put slower chips in initially than is available. Remember Apple has to think about all of their product lines and how they will be affected. If Apple releases dual 2.5 Ghz 970 machines at the top end, and say single 1.8 ghz at the low end, who would buy their iMac at a 1Ghz G4 or especially their eMac at a 700-800mhz G4? Also, the 970's bus is going to require some heafty RAM to support it's massive bus, it may not be feasable for Apple to come out with a 2.5 Ghz 970 simply because they can't feed it with good enough memory for a low enough price. Remember that the faster the RAM, the more expensive it gets.
However, I don't agree when Massiah said
"Face it people, Apple are going to take the p!ss out off us again - simply because they can - there is no competition in the market. SJ must thank God every morning for OS X."
Their is big competition in the market from the Wintel side of the fence, so Apple does have to update it's products with competitive products. I would argue that a dual 1.8 Ghz 970 IS competitive!
Also, don't get too excited, that is the big message here. Remember, Apple hasn't said anything about the 970, they might not use it at all. As gloomy as that sounds, this forum has blown up with as much 970 enthusiasm as it did this time last year with G5 enthusiasm, and we all know how that went.
As for gar's statement:
"i don't understand you people. first, a couple of weeks ago everybody is very, very, very pleased with a sweet 970 running 1.8Ghz max. and bonk their heads against their crt screens about how they would love it to have such a machine on their desktop and now it isn't good enough. "
I don't think that is true, before the whole 2.5 ghz thing came out, quite a few people (maybe not in this forum, but around the Internet) were looking at the spec scores and the such and saying, wow, 1.8ghz 970 is good, but, Intel will probably have a 4 Ghz P4 by the time it comes out, so, while it will be fast, it won't be as fast as Intel's offerings. The promise of the 2.5 ghz 970 is that if it were to come out in late 2003 or even early 2004 it would womp a$$ with Intel's latest and greatest.
Thank you Matsu, The Pie Man, and even Massiah for getting home the point. Get excited, but don't get too excited, Apple may not want or be able to fulfill your ultimate PowerMac fantasy.
Skipp
<strong>The premise that there is no competition is too flawed for words. If there was no competition for OSX, Apple's market share would be steadily climbing despite whatever insane price tag they put on their machines. Since they have actually lost more marketshare since Jobs' return, it must be the case (as it was before) that for the overwhelming majority of people windows offerings are not only competitive, they are superior.
People buy a machine (not an OS), this is a balance of PRICE, PERFORMANCE, and EXPERIENCE. Mebbe Apple provides a better experience, but it gets so soundly thrashed in the areas of price and performance, that it's still losing quarterly sales (especially in the pro line). The iBook has been one of their best selling machines. Why? because it's the closest they come to providing a cheap machine with relatively competitive performance. That means that OSX has LOTS of COMPETITION whether or not Apple chooses to recognize it or stick their faces in the sand for another 4 years.
This is the last chance Apple will see to make any serious inroads in their market-share -- which absolutely MUST INCREASE if Apple wants to remain a viable platform for another decade -- with the wintelon world's 64 bit path far from clear, and easily 18-24 months from offering the kind of reach a PPC970 might offer, this is the time to strike.
Not only do the machines need to be the fastest they can possibly be, they also need to, at a minimum, begin to drive their entire desktop line (consumer and pro) from 200-500USD cheaper on each and ever model.
If they choose to eek out the speed gains, people will hold off, the machines need to be basically irresistable. Jobs needs to get on stage and run the baddest photoshop/video/3-d bake off you've ever seen, something against a top shelf PC, not a carefully hobbled one, and when he does it, the mac has to win by at least half, but more like two thirds or three quarters. What takes 2 minutes on the mac, has to take 5 or more on the PC. Apple won't get there by holding back. Take stock of just how many pro customers they've lost, PM sales are a joke, and those customers aren't coming back unless they see dramatic performance increases. Remember they're now on a different platform, getting them to switch back after they've shelled out for PC systems and software won't be easy for the same reasons that many stuck with the mac for so long in the first place, switching platforms costs money and simply isn't worth it just to be a bit faster, you've gotta be 200-400% faster at the prices Apple is looking to charge. Or you gotta be a much more competitively priced! simple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: robster ]</p>
<strong>I am afraid that Apple will screw up the 970 somehow... they'll either raise the prices on the PowerMacs to previous levels ($2000/$2500/$3500), or they'll cripple the bottom level one somehow (maybe it'll be a current G4 with a 970 processor instead, and the new features will only be on the higher end ones - like the original G4s, Yikes vs. Sawtooth). I don't think they'll make only the top one or two PowerMacs to be the only 970-powered computers, as they bumped the entire line every other time. Still, I'm afraid they'll do something to "cripple" the low end. Not only that, but it could take a while before the 970 moves to their other computers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
When were they at those price levels?
I think the only way they will "cripple" the low end is to make all but the high end single processor. In fact i think a 4 system line up is ideal, like when we had the DA G4 Powermacs. 2 low end machines, maybe a 1.7GHz and a 2.0GHz, and 2 high end machines, dual 2.2GHz and dual 2.5GHz. I'm putting all my optimistic confidence in IBM that they can produce these speeds in sufficient quantities at reasonable prices. The price points? $1499, $1799, $2299, $2799, respectively.
But we will see Apple 970-based machines by September.
The current dual 1.42 G4 behaves as 1.42 GHz G4 in non SMP stuff and about as a 2.5 GHz G4 at SMP.
one 970 at 1.2 GHz will be on equal to the the dual G4 in integers, have 150% the performance in fpu and totaly kill in non SMP applications.
If Apple "only" started with SP 1.5 DP 1.5 DP1.8 and IBM would hog all the 2.x GHz 970 for six moths or more i still would be extatic
In G4 terms a 1.5 GHz 970 correspond to 3 to 4.5 GHz having a dual of that as a midrange....
And you are still complaining <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Not that I would complain if I got a dual 2.5 that in G4 terms would be 5 to 8 GHz :eek:
As far as the 970 goes, we still don't really know all that much. Yes, there's the document specifying 1.8-2.5GHz, but it was pulled for reasons we don't know of. IBM could easily debut a product with a faster 970 than Apple does simply because they're putting it in a server that they anticipate will sell in much smaller quantities than a PowerMac (or whatever replaces the PowerMac) will, at correspondingly higher prices. Maybe 1.8GHz is the top end 970 that will be initially available at a price and in quantity that Apple can use, even though some 970s are rated for 2.5GHz. We don't know, and the people who seem to know are too busy
Personally, the simple fact of the 970 will be enough to make me happy. The design looks like it'll scale up nicely, the indications we have of price and performance are good and exceptional respectively, and if we don't get to 2.5GHz immediately there'll probably be a reason for it beyond "taking the piss out of customers."