"New iMac Based On G5"-Oppenheimer

nittanyliontoshnittanyliontosh
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
"The next generation iMac will be based on the G5 from IBM", said Oppenheimer in the Apple Q3 conference call. He said that Apple usually doesnt comment about the future of its product but Apple feels that the public should know about the iMac and that IBM manufacturing issues have caused the delay. Apparently IBM says they are back on track and Apple will announce and ship the new iMac in September, like they said at the beginning of this month.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 82
    nittanyliontoshnittanyliontosh Posts: 182member
    He said the ones that IBM was having trouble with were the 1.8's, 2.0's and also the 2.5's. So it's either the 1.8's or the 2.0's.



    Tim Cook just said that the reason for the G5 pinch is not because of heat issues, but it's purely the availability of the G5 at 90nm.
  • Reply 2 of 82
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    Whoa! Good news in the midst of some bad (at the moment) regarding chip yields.
  • Reply 3 of 82
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    Freakin' IBM!



    "The processor is the most critical factor"



    Well it's nice to get confirmation.
  • Reply 4 of 82
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    When will we see pics of the iMac 3?
  • Reply 5 of 82
    bborofkabborofka Posts: 230member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by NittanyLionTosh

    He said the ones that IBM was having trouble with were the 1.8's, 2.0's and also the 2.5's. So it's either the 1.8's or the 2.0's.



    Tim Cook just said that the reason for the G5 pinch is not because of heat issues, but it's purely the availability of the G5 at 90nm.



    This is shitty. What if Apple released a G5-based Mac that actually sold well and increased their marketshare? IBM wouldn't be able to keep up, just like Motorola couldn't...
  • Reply 6 of 82
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bborofka

    This is shitty. What if Apple released a G5-based Mac that actually sold well and increased their marketshare? IBM wouldn't be able to keep up, just like Motorola couldn't...



    Not necessarily. The low yields of the 970fx chips should only be a temporal issue. Once IBM gets caught up everything should be fine. It's obvious that IBM can hit the clock they just need to up the yields. Motorola had problems clocking and yielding.
  • Reply 7 of 82
    mike egglestonmike eggleston Posts: 719member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bborofka

    This is shitty. What if Apple released a G5-based Mac that actually sold well and increased their marketshare? IBM wouldn't be able to keep up, just like Motorola couldn't...



    I wouldn't be so sure about that. The main problem with the supply has been getting good yields out of the 90 nm process. Every manufacturer has been having this same issue. I say that IBM will be able to produce these in great quantity once all the yield bugs are quashed.
  • Reply 8 of 82
    macsrgood4umacsrgood4u Posts: 3,007member
    The yields will go up to more normal levels eventually. The problem is when is "eventually"? IBM says in 4 months. Making computer chips is not the same as cookies, although some people think it is. This is high tech state of the art stuff folks. Why do you think such things as OLED screens haven't come to the front yet? It's one thing to make pre-production products on a lab or short runs, but another to ramp up to necessary yields. Patience will be rewarded.



    Now is time for A.I. to publish the "sketch" although it won't be particularly accurate.
  • Reply 9 of 82
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    So, we're looking at pooling resources on getting yields of 1.8 and 2 gig up.



    Makes sense as X-Serve, PowerMacs, iMac 3 will be based upon these and no doubt Powerbook G5 (perhaps a version of 'Fx' with powertune inside...?) Surely saving costs by standardizing cpu speeds/parts etc...



    This is in the interests of IBM to solve with almost a million cpus sold per quarter and with rising sales in the Mac 'division.' Get the Powerbook, eMac and iBook into G5 land and you're talking about a Mac division that could break the million mark!



    We could well see sales spikes on Powerbooks, iMacs, iBooks, eMacs and then there's the obvious and now apparent halo iPod effect...with hPod and iPod Mini international to hit.



    If IBM are serious about standing up to Intel then the 'serious resources' being put behind solving supply has to be significant.



    In short, I trust IBM and Apple to resolve this going forwards.



    We may be due for a very nice speed bump to all Macs. But we may have to wait until '1 Quarter 2005' to get those 3 gig G5s or 975 based G5 mark IIs.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 10 of 82
    idunnoidunno Posts: 645member
    Maybe it will be the 1.6 chip from the RevA PM's.



    iDunno
  • Reply 11 of 82
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Quote from Oppenheimer Taken from MacCentral Article

    Oppenheimer said that IBM's supply issues are the industry's supply issues -- the switch to 90 nanometer scale production has not been as smooth as anyone in the business expected. He did say that IBM has made progress in working out those issues, however.





    I don't think Apple would back themselves or IBM into a corner. I am almost certain that IBM has assured Apple that they have worked out the majority of the problem and has decent enough yields now for Apple to make such a statement.





    I think it's fantastic that Apple is giving us news on upcoming products BTW.
  • Reply 12 of 82
    altivec_2.0altivec_2.0 Posts: 995member
    THis whole problem with 90nm will pass. It's just a matter of time until someone out there (hopefully IBM not Intel) figures out a way to get good yields of 90nm chips. Then 65nm will be the next challenge, and someone will figure that out too. \\



    I agree with iDunno. It makes sense to use the 1.6Ghz G5 since there's no problems with the chip. It would be a good low end model.
  • Reply 13 of 82
    envelopezenvelopez Posts: 3member
    The new iMac will likely be extremely time consuming to repair. Even what should be simple repairs, like replacing the hard drive might take a seasoned tech 45 minutes.



    Apple needs to give schools (or any large volume purchaser) a break by designing a beautiful machine which requires few tools (and fewer screws) to replace the logic board; i.e. 7600, beige desktop G3



    School districts can ill afford the time and space it takes to repair the current lot of eMacs and iMacs. Great machines; just don't need the maintenance headaches 3 years down the road.
  • Reply 14 of 82
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    envelopez you're making a case based around a very shaky thesis. We don't know anything about the accessibility of the iMac3 internals. It's a bit of a stetch to assume that it will be difficult by default.
  • Reply 15 of 82
    envelopezenvelopez Posts: 3member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    envelopez you're making a case based around a very shaky thesis. We don't know anything about the accessibility of the iMac3 internals. It's a bit of a stetch to assume that it will be difficult by default.



    If the new iMac is to look anything like the new monitors it will be difficult. If it's small and if it might be suffering thermal problems I bet the inside is layer upon layer of emi shield and captan tape all tightly held together with tiny 4 5 and 6 mm screws. Apple does not have a good batting average here.



    The mid towers are easy to fix, but the home user iMac or eMac have never been quick to fix.



    This didn't hit home for me until I had to repair some Dell computers, both laptop and desktop. I'm no fan of Dell but it is possible to replace some hard drives without tools in seconds.
  • Reply 16 of 82
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by envelopez

    The new iMac will likely be extremely time consuming to repair. Even what should be simple repairs, like replacing the hard drive might take a seasoned tech 45 minutes.



    If you're basing that assumption on AIs prediction of the new design, don't be too sure. AI also predicted that heat is the reason for the iMac delay. I guess we now know different.
  • Reply 17 of 82
    kurtkurt Posts: 225member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Motorola had problems clocking and yielding.



    Your know that sounds a little dirty.
  • Reply 18 of 82
    envelopezenvelopez Posts: 3member
    Very true. I certainly do not know what the new iMac holds for us. My point really is headless or not I'd like to see an easy to fix stackable iMac. When I have to deploy move repeatedly and maintain 400+ of them, as do a great many others these are beautiful features.
  • Reply 19 of 82
    idunnoidunno Posts: 645member
    I had to change the pram battery a while ago in my iMac1stGen, AND IT SUCKED! Just to get to it safely I had to remove half the casing, took me about 20 mins just to change a battery.



    So easier access to certain things would be great.



    iDunno.
  • Reply 20 of 82
    moazammoazam Posts: 136member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by envelopez

    If the new iMac is to look anything like the new monitors it will be difficult. If it's small and if it might be suffering thermal problems I bet the inside is layer upon layer of emi shield and captan tape all tightly held together with tiny 4 5 and 6 mm screws. Apple does not have a good batting average here.







    The 20th Anniv Mac (TAM) had this type of design and it was not all that hard to upgrade/repair.



    -M
Sign In or Register to comment.