Where's the scoop?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Apple stopped a lot of hearts beating for a few moments with their announcements of a new iMac (originally scheduled for mid-July - aghhh) and no more old versions available.



Since then it has been silence. Nothing from Apple. Nothing on the boards.



What's happening? Where's the scoop on why the new iMac was delayed? Shortages of the 970FX? Other component problems? Graphics card? Motherboard?



I can understand that information on the new iMacs is going to be almost impossible to get, but what are contacts saying? "Don't call me, I'll call you"?



Personally, I'm not that worried about the missing inventory of old iMacs - I believe that the next generation will be so dynamic that the older ones would not have cleared very well after the new version was introduced.



I can also wait a few more weeks before buying a G5 iMac - I've been waiting since March/April and I think it will be worth the wait.



It's just driving me nuts that no one seems to be able to get the scoop on why the announcement was delayed.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    About the only thing solid I have found is this:



    Unaffected by the production snafu are Apple's new line of G5 Power Macs, as well as its entry-level eMac and its lines of notebook computers. from this news posting.



    I guess we can rule out 970fx problems then, if the PowerMac supplies are OK. This late in the game, I would guess quality control problems at Quanta.
  • Reply 2 of 28
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kenaustus

    Apple stopped a lot of hearts beating for a few moments with their announcements of a new iMac (originally scheduled for mid-July - aghhh) and no more old versions available.



    Since then it has been silence. Nothing from Apple. Nothing on the boards.




    It's been what a whole 5 or is it 6 days too!



    Sorry but the way I started reading your post it was as if it's been MONTHS without any news. Apple ain't 'officially' talking and anyone in hardware is so in fear of loosing their job due to 'leaks' that I'm shocked ANY hardware news leaks out any more.



    Hell those folks have 'real' jobs - would you risk your livelihood just to dish dirt? I know I wouldn't.



    Dave
  • Reply 3 of 28
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    About the only thing solid I have found is this:



    Unaffected by the production snafu are Apple's new line of G5 Power Macs, as well as its entry-level eMac and its lines of notebook computers. from this news posting.



    I guess we can rule out 970fx problems then, if the PowerMac supplies are OK. This late in the game, I would guess quality control problems at Quanta.




    Or...



    (cue the orchestra) Dump-dump-dump - and this'll kill the G5 iMac fanclub - MOT (uh Freescale uh whatever) could be fuchin up just like the MOT of old. Now, if that's the case... Looks like Mot has to go and look around for another company name for the CPU group!



    Dave
  • Reply 4 of 28
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    I guess we can rule out 970fx problems then, if the PowerMac supplies are OK. This late in the game, I would guess quality control problems at Quanta.



    Well the PowerMacs and Xserves don't have PowerTune enabled. It's quite possible Apple is waiting for that.
  • Reply 5 of 28
    formatc2formatc2 Posts: 176member
    My guess is that the new design makes manufacturing it a challenge.



    The current iMac has a round motherboard. That's got to be hard to manufacture.



  • Reply 6 of 28
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    Isn't this the first Apple being made in mainland China? Quality control could indeed be an issue... especially with Apple already smarting over the iBook mainboard fiasco.



    BTW, gorgeous pic, FormatC2.
  • Reply 7 of 28
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    Isn't this the first Apple being made in mainland China? Quality control could indeed be an issue... especially with Apple already smarting over the iBook mainboard fiasco.



    I think it is a Chinese company that outsources it's production to Taiwan.
  • Reply 8 of 28
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,409member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Rhumgod

    I guess we can rule out 970fx problems then, if the PowerMac supplies are OK.



    I disagree. Of the 3 PowerMacs, two of them use the 130 nm 970 and the one using the 90 nm 970FX won't ship until sometime this month. The Xserve G5 is apparently a huge hit and Apple has been scrambling for some time now to fill all the orders (at 2 processors per unit). An iMac G5 will very likely be a huge seller, assuming they do it well, and that means an order of magnitude more processors will be required than they currently have. If they are still waiting for this level of volume from IBM (and remember, IBM is not used to shipping such volume) then this could easily delay the introduction by two months.



    So no, we can't rule out 970FX problems.
  • Reply 9 of 28
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,408member
    Good point programmer,



    I didn't realize there was that huge of a demand for the XServes. I'm assuming that its not that huge compared to what a iMac would bring to the table of g5 demand.



    If the pizza box shape is true I believe this would cut manufacturing costs since the mobo would finally be square, why go to all that trouble of cost to produce a round mobo?
  • Reply 10 of 28
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    The worst part in a round motherboard would be the off cuts. They must waste a massive amount.
  • Reply 11 of 28
    bborofkabborofka Posts: 230member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    The worst part in a round motherboard would be the off cuts. They must waste a massive amount.



    No kidding. Apple needs to let form follow function on the next iMac.
  • Reply 12 of 28
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    Well the PowerMacs and Xserves don't have PowerTune enabled. It's quite possible Apple is waiting for that.



    The iMac shouldn't need PowerTune unless its a portable design...
  • Reply 13 of 28
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    The iMac shouldn't need PowerTune unless its a portable design...



    Why? With heat becoming a greater issue additions like PowerTune, Cool 'n' Quiet by AMD and AAC from Intel, to desktop chips make a lot of sense. Under max load it won't help much but under typical loads you can keep it quieter and cooler.



    Aside from which as it stands the old iMac was a lot closer to a portable design than a desktop one.
  • Reply 14 of 28
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    Why? With heat becoming a greater issue additions like PowerTune, Cool 'n' Quiet by AMD and AAC from Intel, to desktop chips make a lot of sense. Under max load it won't help much but under typical loads you can keep it quieter and cooler.



    Aside from which as it stands the old iMac was a lot closer to a portable design than a desktop one.




    Indeed... and if the new iMac is, as reported, a computer behind the screen, it will get even closer to a portable design. Si I agree with Telomar on PowerTune!
  • Reply 15 of 28
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    I wonder why!
  • Reply 16 of 28
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    I disagree. Of the 3 PowerMacs, two of them use the 130 nm 970 and the one using the 90 nm 970FX won't ship until sometime this month.



    Was that ever confirmed? I thought the Tech Note said that the lower-speed models were 90nm as well.
  • Reply 17 of 28
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,409member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by discstickers

    Was that ever confirmed? I thought the Tech Note said that the lower-speed models were 90nm as well.





    Yes, it has been confirmed repeatedly. Once (at least) my somebody running a test program on the actual hardware.
  • Reply 18 of 28
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Programmer

    I disagree. Of the 3 PowerMacs, two of them use the 130 nm 970 and the one using the 90 nm 970FX won't ship until sometime this month. The Xserve G5 is apparently a huge hit and Apple has been scrambling for some time now to fill all the orders (at 2 processors per unit). An iMac G5 will very likely be a huge seller, assuming they do it well, and that means an order of magnitude more processors will be required than they currently have. If they are still waiting for this level of volume from IBM (and remember, IBM is not used to shipping such volume) then this could easily delay the introduction by two months.



    So no, we can't rule out 970FX problems.




    I highly doubt the iMac is going to be using 2.5GHz processors, maybe a 2.0GHz at the high end. But I think the iMac will be using either lower clocked G5 chips or even something from another vendor. Look at, and listen to, the xServe G5 and think about how they are going to quiet the presumably tiny iMac3 without a voluminous cheese-grater case and system of fans/radiators like the PowerMac G5. No, I think we can rule out processor supply as the issue.
  • Reply 19 of 28
    dfryerdfryer Posts: 140member
    THe implication wasn't that the iMac would use a 2.5 GHz 970FX, just that it would use a 970FX which *may* be in short supply.



    If the current shipping machines are 970's, is apple going to correct the statement that they made somewhere about using the FX part on all the machines? Or did such a statement not exist?
  • Reply 20 of 28
    kenaustuskenaustus Posts: 904member
    I don't see Apple using the 970 chip for the iMac. The engineering (and styling) efforts to bring out a new iMac would indicate to me that it is designed for the next 2 or so years - including the Gx chips that they have in their road map. The 970 is larger, hotter and more expensive than the 970FX and I believe the 970FX is their starting point.



    I would bet that there is now a sufficient supply of the 970FX and that the delay is related to a problem with another component, or something was found that had to be addressed with OS X 10.3.5 since it looks like a last minute problem.
Sign In or Register to comment.