As most know Apple likes to shock the loyal following and jump start sales. I look for a 19"/20" Powerbook for the professional/video market with duel 7457 processors at 1.4 GHz announced at San Francisco. 8) 8) 8)
An 18" makes more sense but really why? The beauty of the 17" is that it is still portable at least Apple's model is
A G5 PowerBook would be nice - but I'm sort of intrigued by the possibility of a dual G4 PowerBook first. If they couldn't manage to get a G5 into the PowerBooks, then a dual G4 would be pretty darned good! ...heat issues aside, of course.
If you clock the 7447/7457 at 1GHz you still get a massive boost if you use 2 CPUs which avoiding excessive heat emission! Dual 1.25 seems to be about the sme class of problem as fitting a G5 into a PB case, so I guess it won't happen.
I think MWSF is going to be a total consumer show. That said -- and to get this thread back on topic -- I think we'll see PB G4 and PM G5 speed bumps a few weeks after MWSF. No duals in the PB. No G5 in the PB. Just a speed bump.
Oh, and you *might* be able to get a G5 PB for school, but I'd say it's a 50/50 shot right now.
I don't think there will be PowerBook G4 updates until well into the spring. "...a few weeks after MWSF..." for something that just came out a couple of months ago? Knowing how long Apple takes (and has taken) between previous PowerBook revs?
If it's before April or May, I'll be really surprised.
Not a techie, but would a improved front side bus make a huge difference in speed? If so, then I could see a 1.42 gHz PB as an interim speed bump before any G5 PB is unveiled.
Well my Pismo is getting a little flakey. But now I'm paranoid they'll bump the thing right after I buy. When did they intro the alubook 15"? September? I'm thinking no upgrade until like Feb/March.
That would not even be a 100mhz speed boost! lol If apple does this they will just look silly to the public. If they added more VRAM, faster Harddrives, 2MB L3 cache, and more ram standard it would be great though. Who knows.... But the G4 needs every bit of power it can get at this point. A 10% increase with 2MB L3 will be well worth it. The cache really helps with games.
I've just played with a G5 hands-on for the first time (1.6GHz, 512MB, Panther).
Wait for 90nm 970FX with PowerTune, detune it to 1.6GHz, stick it in a Powerbook, watch it fly off the shelves.
It may not be the bleeding edge of performance (i.e. not 2.5GHz), but it would make most Wintel laptops look like a steaming pile, especially with a big black cat at its heart.
Sometimes we need to remember that good can be another way of saying "good enough", as opposed to aiming for the definitive example of excellence with every product.
Is a 1.6 G5 PowerBook better than a G4? Probably.
Is it better than any Wintel laptop? What parameter are you using? Looks? (Yes), Software (Yes), Battery Life (Centrino - questionable ; everything else - probably).
I think Apple and IBM are now playing with us and the rest of the world pretty much the way my friend's cats play with a mouse.
Just because an Apple exec says: "I don't see a Powerbook anytime soon" is no reason to believe him as a) the term 'soon' is subjective and b) what did you think he was going to say?
Do you really think that when Darth Jobs stood up and said 3GHz in a year, he hadn't been shown a 2.5GHz prototype at that time? Or do you think he was prepared to repeat the whole Moto G4 see-saw fiasco again?
At its very soul, Apple now knows that it has headroom in a roadmap that can make the Intel-powered market uncomfortable - from a market leadership standpoint - at a time and market location of Apple's choosing.
Half the fun for a megalomaniacal showman like Jobs is using the art of surprise to disrupt the market or expectations.
We (as a community) are now not expecting a G5 Powerbook until the second half of 2004, whereas I - as an individual am now expecting an initial release of a detuned G5 (1.5/1.8 GHz, with either 3:1 [500/600MHz) or [less likely] 4:1 (375MHz/450MHz) FSB, DDR-II) sometime in the Spring.
As for MWSF, I suspect the 20th anniversary of the Mac needs to be marked by a new consumer machine (1.6/1.8 GHz, 4:1 FSB, standard DDR).
Glad I'm not the only oneout there that has come to the conclusion that Apple is jerking us around big time on performance. Like you said they are toying with us. In my mind they are attempting through marketing to milk the market as much as they can instead of delivering the fastest possible hardware. There is just ot much evidence floating around that the G5 could be running much faster today.
My suspicion is that Job had already seen a 3GHz machine at the point when he made the announcement. What CEO would make such a statement else wise. Especially in the case of Jobs who has been burn't so many times by motorola. This statement more than anything indicates to me that there is alot of potential in the current 970 that is going unused.
Now I don't know what apple thinks about having head room over the intel world. From my perspective if they really wanted to out distance the intel world they simply could have added another 200 MHz to their machines. Instead they delivered machines that are parity with current intel hardware or slightly faster. There certianly was no effort put into providing an undeniable lead! Maybe that is what is going to happen in January - a big 3GHz whalop to the head of the intel world. Wishful thinking I.m sure but a 2.5 GHz machine will be a little to little by Febuary.
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist
I'll tell you what!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>snipped
I think Apple and IBM are now playing with us and the rest of the world pretty much the way my friend's cats play with a mouse.
Just because an Apple exec says: "I don't see a Powerbook anytime soon" is no reason to believe him as a) the term 'soon' is subjective and b) what did you think he was going to say?
Do you really think that when Darth Jobs stood up and said 3GHz in a year, he hadn't been shown a 2.5GHz prototype at that time? Or do you think he was prepared to repeat the whole Moto G4 see-saw fiasco again?
At its very soul, Apple now knows that it has headroom in a roadmap that can make the Intel-powered market uncomfortable - from a market leadership standpoint - at a time and market location of Apple's choosing.
Glad I'm not the only oneout there that has come to the conclusion that Apple is jerking us around big time on performance. etc.
Dave
There are, of course, numerous interpretations possible for this model of behaviour, quite apart from my theory that Jobs is a theatrical megalomaniac (half-PT Barnum, half-Kublai Khan).
There is a distinct possibility that much of this 'sandbagging' is actually the side-effect of product development cycles; my personal belief is that 970 in its first iteration was actually rushed to market by IBM to fulfil Apple's need for a more competitive processor for its professional market, as is being used - rather like 601/G1 - as a technology demonstrator for the benefits of 64-bit in the mainstream, whilst 601 was a demonstrator for the benefits of RISC in the mainstream.
970FX is analogous to 603; smaller than 970/601 respectively and capable of better power management.
Which means that 980 may actually be the processor we really want for our desktop, as it will be the analogue of 604/G2 which was actually not a bad processor for its day (1996). 970FX will probably spawn three subtle variant strands of development: one optimsed for power consumption and designed for full function laptops (Powerbook, think 603e), one with smaller caches and less capable technology aimed at entry-level markets (eMac, de-specced like a Celeron) and a hybrid for iBooks.
I know the G5 powerbook will come. But I think that time is far enough away to require the next Powerbook upgrade to remain G4 based.
Along those lines, I think we'll see a powerbook with a redsigned mobo that makes use of L3 cache, bumps the system bus to 200 mhz, and maybe, just maybe, increases chip speeds to 1.4 Ghz.
This won't be the longest lived powerbook model...but I suggest investment costs will recouped by using it as the basis for the next iBook, once the G5 is ready to handle the Powerbook.
Comments
Originally posted by Mr. Bob
As most know Apple likes to shock the loyal following and jump start sales. I look for a 19"/20" Powerbook for the professional/video market with duel 7457 processors at 1.4 GHz announced at San Francisco.
An 18" makes more sense but really why? The beauty of the 17" is that it is still portable at least Apple's model is
Originally posted by Mac+
A G5 PowerBook would be nice - but I'm sort of intrigued by the possibility of a dual G4 PowerBook first. If they couldn't manage to get a G5 into the PowerBooks, then a dual G4 would be pretty darned good! ...heat issues aside, of course.
If you clock the 7447/7457 at 1GHz you still get a massive boost if you use 2 CPUs which avoiding excessive heat emission! Dual 1.25 seems to be about the sme class of problem as fitting a G5 into a PB case, so I guess it won't happen.
Oh, and you *might* be able to get a G5 PB for school, but I'd say it's a 50/50 shot right now.
If it's before April or May, I'll be really surprised.
NEXT up is the G5 Powerbook - January !!!
THEN the G5 iBook - January 2005 !!!
One more years baby!
Originally posted by Dr_Holistic
NEXT up is the G5 Powerbook - January !!!
I suppose there's nothing wrong in being optimistic.
I've just played with a G5 hands-on for the first time (1.6GHz, 512MB, Panther).
Wait for 90nm 970FX with PowerTune, detune it to 1.6GHz, stick it in a Powerbook, watch it fly off the shelves.
It may not be the bleeding edge of performance (i.e. not 2.5GHz), but it would make most Wintel laptops look like a steaming pile, especially with a big black cat at its heart.
Sometimes we need to remember that good can be another way of saying "good enough", as opposed to aiming for the definitive example of excellence with every product.
Is a 1.6 G5 PowerBook better than a G4? Probably.
Is it better than any Wintel laptop? What parameter are you using? Looks? (Yes), Software (Yes), Battery Life (Centrino - questionable ; everything else - probably).
I think Apple and IBM are now playing with us and the rest of the world pretty much the way my friend's cats play with a mouse.
Just because an Apple exec says: "I don't see a Powerbook anytime soon" is no reason to believe him as a) the term 'soon' is subjective and b) what did you think he was going to say?
Do you really think that when Darth Jobs stood up and said 3GHz in a year, he hadn't been shown a 2.5GHz prototype at that time? Or do you think he was prepared to repeat the whole Moto G4 see-saw fiasco again?
At its very soul, Apple now knows that it has headroom in a roadmap that can make the Intel-powered market uncomfortable - from a market leadership standpoint - at a time and market location of Apple's choosing.
Half the fun for a megalomaniacal showman like Jobs is using the art of surprise to disrupt the market or expectations.
We (as a community) are now not expecting a G5 Powerbook until the second half of 2004, whereas I - as an individual am now expecting an initial release of a detuned G5 (1.5/1.8 GHz, with either 3:1 [500/600MHz) or [less likely] 4:1 (375MHz/450MHz) FSB, DDR-II) sometime in the Spring.
As for MWSF, I suspect the 20th anniversary of the Mac needs to be marked by a new consumer machine (1.6/1.8 GHz, 4:1 FSB, standard DDR).
Glad I'm not the only oneout there that has come to the conclusion that Apple is jerking us around big time on performance. Like you said they are toying with us. In my mind they are attempting through marketing to milk the market as much as they can instead of delivering the fastest possible hardware. There is just ot much evidence floating around that the G5 could be running much faster today.
My suspicion is that Job had already seen a 3GHz machine at the point when he made the announcement. What CEO would make such a statement else wise. Especially in the case of Jobs who has been burn't so many times by motorola. This statement more than anything indicates to me that there is alot of potential in the current 970 that is going unused.
Now I don't know what apple thinks about having head room over the intel world. From my perspective if they really wanted to out distance the intel world they simply could have added another 200 MHz to their machines. Instead they delivered machines that are parity with current intel hardware or slightly faster. There certianly was no effort put into providing an undeniable lead! Maybe that is what is going to happen in January - a big 3GHz whalop to the head of the intel world. Wishful thinking I.m sure but a 2.5 GHz machine will be a little to little by Febuary.
Dave
Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist
I'll tell you what!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>snipped
I think Apple and IBM are now playing with us and the rest of the world pretty much the way my friend's cats play with a mouse.
Just because an Apple exec says: "I don't see a Powerbook anytime soon" is no reason to believe him as a) the term 'soon' is subjective and b) what did you think he was going to say?
Do you really think that when Darth Jobs stood up and said 3GHz in a year, he hadn't been shown a 2.5GHz prototype at that time? Or do you think he was prepared to repeat the whole Moto G4 see-saw fiasco again?
At its very soul, Apple now knows that it has headroom in a roadmap that can make the Intel-powered market uncomfortable - from a market leadership standpoint - at a time and market location of Apple's choosing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..snipped
Originally posted by wizard69
Hi Mark;
Glad I'm not the only oneout there that has come to the conclusion that Apple is jerking us around big time on performance. etc.
Dave
There are, of course, numerous interpretations possible for this model of behaviour, quite apart from my theory that Jobs is a theatrical megalomaniac (half-PT Barnum, half-Kublai Khan).
There is a distinct possibility that much of this 'sandbagging' is actually the side-effect of product development cycles; my personal belief is that 970 in its first iteration was actually rushed to market by IBM to fulfil Apple's need for a more competitive processor for its professional market, as is being used - rather like 601/G1 - as a technology demonstrator for the benefits of 64-bit in the mainstream, whilst 601 was a demonstrator for the benefits of RISC in the mainstream.
970FX is analogous to 603; smaller than 970/601 respectively and capable of better power management.
Which means that 980 may actually be the processor we really want for our desktop, as it will be the analogue of 604/G2 which was actually not a bad processor for its day (1996). 970FX will probably spawn three subtle variant strands of development: one optimsed for power consumption and designed for full function laptops (Powerbook, think 603e), one with smaller caches and less capable technology aimed at entry-level markets (eMac, de-specced like a Celeron) and a hybrid for iBooks.
Along those lines, I think we'll see a powerbook with a redsigned mobo that makes use of L3 cache, bumps the system bus to 200 mhz, and maybe, just maybe, increases chip speeds to 1.4 Ghz.
This won't be the longest lived powerbook model...but I suggest investment costs will recouped by using it as the basis for the next iBook, once the G5 is ready to handle the Powerbook.