1.6 x1 Ghz -> 1.8 x1 Ghz [speed goes from 1.6 Ghz to 1.8 Ghz]
1.8 x2 Ghz -> 1.8 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.0 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.5 x2 Ghz [speed goes from 2.0 Ghz to 2.5 Ghz]
Does this make any sense? No. They also say Apple will sell the current 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 models at a discount along side the new PowerMacs. Uh-huh. That's not the least bit confusing.
1.6 x1 Ghz -> 1.8 x1 Ghz [speed goes from 1.6 Ghz to 1.8 Ghz]
1.8 x2 Ghz -> 1.8 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.0 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.5 x2 Ghz [speed goes from 2.0 Ghz to 2.5 Ghz]
Does this make any sense? No. They also say Apple will sell the current 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 models at a discount along side the new PowerMacs. Uh-huh. That's not the least bit confusing.
It's actually perfectly consistent with the prices they put on the old models (I made a post with the old and new prices, and guesses as to the new models on the previous page). It's not good, but it's obviously all they've got.
It's actually perfectly consistent with the prices they put on the old models (I made a post with the old and new prices, and guesses as to the new models on the previous page). It's not good, but it's obviously all they've got.
If they have a 2.5 Ghz for the top end (according to the ThinkSecret article) then why are the lower two models only 1.8 and 2.0 then? What is with the huge disparity between the models? Oh, and let's not forget the article says they will come with GeForce 5200 graphics or ATI Radeon 9600 at the top end. Never mind the fact the PowerBook has better graphics than this. At this point these are the specs we should be seeing in an iMac. The original 2.2/2.4/2.6 specs made a hell of a lot more sense.
Yes, TS rewrote their article, which makes me wonder. If you get new information, then tell us, don't just change the article and think no one will notice.
If they have a 2.5 Ghz for the top end (according to the ThinkSecret article) then why are the lower two models only 1.8 and 2.0 then? What is with the huge disparity between the models? Oh, and let's not forget the article says they will come with GeForce 5200 graphics or ATI Radeon 9600 at the top end. Never mind the fact the PowerBook has better graphics than this. At this point these are the specs we should be seeing in an iMac. The original 2.2/2.4/2.6 specs made a hell of a lot more sense.
Either:
1. They just don't have enough of the 90nm chips, as we all already know, so they're trying to extend the life of the old chips, or
2. these aren't the new machines, they're just the old, now-discounted ones that TS's source got confused with the new ones.
As for the graphics cards, I personally don't give a whit about those. Keep them as cheap as possible, reduce the price of the PMs, and let people who want them upgrade.
Re: TS rewriting their article - it says "Update" on the article. They weren't trying to hide anything. Although it would probably be better if they left the original up and then put on an addendum rather than actually changing the original article.
Ok, I'll say it again...if TS is dead-on (as they usually are), then this is a result of a delayed speed bump (to the 970fx) but the "source" not knowing if Quads were in the plan? Come on, quads would be made a huge deal of if they were actually coming out. Apple seems to be planting some sort of disinformation. Maybe Steve is taking his rage for Toshiba out on us!
The source said that the company's plans call for an announcement of the long-awaited G5 refresh tomorrow, on Tuesday, June 8, but stressed that announcement dates for speed bumps can be subject to change.
TS is never wrong the day before. Bring it on Apple!
Just found out my order for a 1.6 single has been halted until the new units come out. The order was placed about a week ago BTO at CompUSA but never got a ship confirmation. So cool I have a little delay, get 200 more mhz and maybe the company saves a little $$$. Our contact mentioned today as the release date for the new PowerMacs.
Hm, the TS article is terrible news ... unless the new PowerMacs top at 2499, and the other models get their prices significantly reduced.
But if the top-end stays at $2999, and the 2.0 is just pushed one notch down the line, Apple disappoints again. And turns its believers into a laughingstock, as we've become accustomed to the last few years.
Hmm... I'm not sure whether the updates will come out today - and TS isn't, either:
Quote:
A source said that the company's plans called for an announcement of the long-awaited G5 refresh on Tuesday, June 8, but stressed that announcement dates for speed bumps could easily be shifted to a later date in the week; other indicators suggested that may indeed be the case.
I'm not totally buying it. But if Quads were just for the top end it would suggest to me that they are going to skip right to dual core to replace the Quad processor systems in the next revision. If Apple go's Quad it's not that easily reversed. I think it does suggest that the dual core systems would be 2x processors / dual cores.
Which is what I would be happy with. I would certainly be really pi$$ed if they suddenly had a dual core processor system, and released it as a substitute for 2x psychical processor setup.
If they are thinking of theoretically using a dual core x2 processor systems in a upcoming prototypes that could explain the recent rumors of the SMU "Shared Memory Unit" that we were talking about in the other thread a few weeks back. Which is all still speculation at this point anyway.
If any of these new rumors are remotely true It all still sounds like Apple and IBM are not going to come through this year, and Intel is going to be at 4GHz 2x XEON P4's before Apple/IBM hit 3GHz.
Another sad year for the Mac. The last PowerMac I had that I was really happy with was my 9600. That's 8 years I've been waiting for Apple to catch back up. I think I've waited long enough.
If they are thinking of theoretically using a dual core x2 processor systems in a upcoming prototypes that could explain the recent rumors of the SMU "Shared Memory Unit" that we were talking about in the other thread a few weeks back. Which is all still speculation at this point anyway.
If any of these new rumors are remotely true It all still sounds like Apple and IBM are not going to come through this year, and Intel is going to be at 4GHz 2x XEON P4's before Apple/IBM hit 3GHz.
Another sad year for the Mac. The last PowerMac I had that I was really happy with was my 9600. That's 8 years I've been waiting for Apple to catch back up. I think I've waited long enough.
The SMU was in reference to the new system ID tag, PowerMac8,1, which indicates an iMac, so nothing to do with this thread. I think IBM is working on much more amazing things with Apple than Motorola ever has (except maybe the leap to PPC). Things do not happen overnight, but the night began long ago, so I am confident they will come out with some great things shortly. Patience, Camille.
Comments
1.6 x1 Ghz -> 1.8 x1 Ghz [speed goes from 1.6 Ghz to 1.8 Ghz]
1.8 x2 Ghz -> 1.8 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.0 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.5 x2 Ghz [speed goes from 2.0 Ghz to 2.5 Ghz]
Does this make any sense? No. They also say Apple will sell the current 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 models at a discount along side the new PowerMacs. Uh-huh. That's not the least bit confusing.
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
So according to ThinkSecret's revised article:
1.6 x1 Ghz -> 1.8 x1 Ghz [speed goes from 1.6 Ghz to 1.8 Ghz]
1.8 x2 Ghz -> 1.8 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.0 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.5 x2 Ghz [speed goes from 2.0 Ghz to 2.5 Ghz]
Does this make any sense? No.
Perhaps this is why the Apple Store is still up
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
So according to ThinkSecret's revised article:
1.6 x1 Ghz -> 1.8 x1 Ghz [speed goes from 1.6 Ghz to 1.8 Ghz]
1.8 x2 Ghz -> 1.8 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.0 x2 Ghz [speed remains the same]
2.0 x2 Ghz -> 2.5 x2 Ghz [speed goes from 2.0 Ghz to 2.5 Ghz]
Does this make any sense? No. They also say Apple will sell the current 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 models at a discount along side the new PowerMacs. Uh-huh. That's not the least bit confusing.
It's actually perfectly consistent with the prices they put on the old models (I made a post with the old and new prices, and guesses as to the new models on the previous page). It's not good, but it's obviously all they've got.
Originally posted by Existence
Don't forget the crap-tasticular GeForce 5200 Apple is going to include with these "Power"Mac systems in the year 2004.
LOL
Originally posted by nathan22t
LOL
Yes, in PC land, you can buy a new 128MB GeForce 5200 for $60, the same price as Apple's one-button PRO-mouse.
Originally posted by BRussell
It's actually perfectly consistent with the prices they put on the old models (I made a post with the old and new prices, and guesses as to the new models on the previous page). It's not good, but it's obviously all they've got.
If they have a 2.5 Ghz for the top end (according to the ThinkSecret article) then why are the lower two models only 1.8 and 2.0 then? What is with the huge disparity between the models? Oh, and let's not forget the article says they will come with GeForce 5200 graphics or ATI Radeon 9600 at the top end. Never mind the fact the PowerBook has better graphics than this. At this point these are the specs we should be seeing in an iMac. The original 2.2/2.4/2.6 specs made a hell of a lot more sense.
Get Ready Everyone!!!
Originally posted by nathan22t
Apple is obviously leaking false info here... To lower our expectations for the 3Ghz 975 PCIe x800 XT BONANZA @ WWDC
Quite possible, but not for the reason you cite. I think more for identifying leakers or dealing with last minute changes.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
Yes, TS rewrote their article, which makes me wonder.
I am sure Nick is reading these boards now. It remains to see if he decides to show up here and tell us more or not.
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
If they have a 2.5 Ghz for the top end (according to the ThinkSecret article) then why are the lower two models only 1.8 and 2.0 then? What is with the huge disparity between the models? Oh, and let's not forget the article says they will come with GeForce 5200 graphics or ATI Radeon 9600 at the top end. Never mind the fact the PowerBook has better graphics than this. At this point these are the specs we should be seeing in an iMac. The original 2.2/2.4/2.6 specs made a hell of a lot more sense.
Either:
1. They just don't have enough of the 90nm chips, as we all already know, so they're trying to extend the life of the old chips, or
2. these aren't the new machines, they're just the old, now-discounted ones that TS's source got confused with the new ones.
As for the graphics cards, I personally don't give a whit about those. Keep them as cheap as possible, reduce the price of the PMs, and let people who want them upgrade.
Re: TS rewriting their article - it says "Update" on the article. They weren't trying to hide anything. Although it would probably be better if they left the original up and then put on an addendum rather than actually changing the original article.
Originally posted by hmurchison
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/g5refresh.html
The source said that the company's plans call for an announcement of the long-awaited G5 refresh tomorrow, on Tuesday, June 8, but stressed that announcement dates for speed bumps can be subject to change.
TS is never wrong the day before. Bring it on Apple!
Just found out my order for a 1.6 single has been halted until the new units come out. The order was placed about a week ago BTO at CompUSA but never got a ship confirmation. So cool I have a little delay, get 200 more mhz and maybe the company saves a little $$$. Our contact mentioned today as the release date for the new PowerMacs.
But if the top-end stays at $2999, and the 2.0 is just pushed one notch down the line, Apple disappoints again. And turns its believers into a laughingstock, as we've become accustomed to the last few years.
A source said that the company's plans called for an announcement of the long-awaited G5 refresh on Tuesday, June 8, but stressed that announcement dates for speed bumps could easily be shifted to a later date in the week; other indicators suggested that may indeed be the case.
greetings,
durandal (who's still hoping for 2x3.0GHz @ WWDC)
Which is what I would be happy with. I would certainly be really pi$$ed if they suddenly had a dual core processor system, and released it as a substitute for 2x psychical processor setup.
If they are thinking of theoretically using a dual core x2 processor systems in a upcoming prototypes that could explain the recent rumors of the SMU "Shared Memory Unit" that we were talking about in the other thread a few weeks back. Which is all still speculation at this point anyway.
If any of these new rumors are remotely true It all still sounds like Apple and IBM are not going to come through this year, and Intel is going to be at 4GHz 2x XEON P4's before Apple/IBM hit 3GHz.
Another sad year for the Mac. The last PowerMac I had that I was really happy with was my 9600. That's 8 years I've been waiting for Apple to catch back up. I think I've waited long enough.
Originally posted by onlooker
If they are thinking of theoretically using a dual core x2 processor systems in a upcoming prototypes that could explain the recent rumors of the SMU "Shared Memory Unit" that we were talking about in the other thread a few weeks back. Which is all still speculation at this point anyway.
If any of these new rumors are remotely true It all still sounds like Apple and IBM are not going to come through this year, and Intel is going to be at 4GHz 2x XEON P4's before Apple/IBM hit 3GHz.
Another sad year for the Mac. The last PowerMac I had that I was really happy with was my 9600. That's 8 years I've been waiting for Apple to catch back up. I think I've waited long enough.
The SMU was in reference to the new system ID tag, PowerMac8,1, which indicates an iMac, so nothing to do with this thread. I think IBM is working on much more amazing things with Apple than Motorola ever has (except maybe the leap to PPC). Things do not happen overnight, but the night began long ago, so I am confident they will come out with some great things shortly. Patience, Camille.