IMO, Apple, OR ANYBODY ELSE, would be ashamed to demo their new stuff on such anemic machines to professionals who will also be looking at dual core Opteron's. Hence, TS' info is unreliable (for whatever reason) OR incomplete (no Pro line news).
I think anemic is a little harsh. I mean, at least Apple doesn't have an anemic OS.
The front side bus stats look funny from the 2.5 to the 3 and 3.5 because of
the way dual core works, i.e. much bigger throughputs. The 2.5 is pretty much the same as now except it's back to fan cooled. I can also guarantee when you see how the high end compare to what is high end now you'll think J.C. came back not for the end of the world but to bless Apple.
Ok basically I know they have released speed bumps in the past like what ts is saying. Remember though ts is in a lawsuit were they are supposed to give their sources up. Since that lawsuit they havent "guessed" right, yet. I believe they're eroding the credibility of their sources to try and protect them. I have great respect for Nick and the site. He has done a great job and this whole situation is not to good. Antares was supposed to start out at 3.0ghz the cooling article may have said 2ghz, but I'm sure they weren't going to put all the specs for different processors in there. Believe me if you are hearing about it. They've been working with it for years. Apple has probably had there hands on this since a few months before the 2.5 came out. Maybe even longer. The fact is no matter how much you search
you won't get info on it. Unless you know someone inside.
I can tell you guaranteed that a few things being said here on these boards simply would never fly at this point.
1. Some have said there will be 2.7 and 2.8 ghz powermac systems. Apple won't be making a powermac without a 500 mhz increase for a while. When they do make one that is not 500 because it'll be something higher. You will never again see bumps lower than 500 mhz.
2. Even if there a 4 cores and not dual processors the chip speed wil not go down from where they are currently. Apple has given little thought to the mhz myth in the past. But look in some of the posts around various sites of people dropping there powermac for an AMD machine. Believe me Apple is aware of how this mhz myth plays out now. You wont catch them slipping again, especially not after last year.
3. Remember when the mini and shuffle were released before earnings for the 1st quarter? Among all the speculation of tiger release dates i only saw one person on various forums saying tuesday before earnings was the day.
In case you didn't notice the new ipod lineup that was released in march was released on a wednesday. Powerbooks came on a monday. Apple has changed the entire release schedule's because of people not buying on the expected new release of certain products. You can be sure apple will never have a regular release schedule again because of this.
4. Intel and Amd love telling the press what could be accomplished by them. Steve is more an element of surprise type. Think of intel's theoretical mac mini they showed off and the press it got. Well now you've got hordes of people waiting for these new processors from Intel and AMD. Everyday you read an article about them. By the time there out they're already telling you what's coming next. So again people wait and think well maybe I can wait for a few more months. Now they're basically cutting into their own sales. But, wait where's Apple and IBM in all this? Well they're quietly waiting to usher in the powermac's and show the world they've been ahead all this time, they just know how to keep a secret. You see folks when that happens how does that affect the market? You've got 2 companies with a roadmap of where they'll be, and one company seemingly coming out of the blue with what appears to be a knockout punch (that will take the others years to catch up to). Where does that leave the other guys? SOL.
5. TS will not even be in the ballpark on the powermac's.
6. As long as iMac's continue to sell your not going to get any crazy upgrades on them. Maybe a few nice things next time around, certainly not dual core or speed's above 2ghz."
^^^ I don't buy those specs for a second. Just another low self-image teenager looking for quick attention. Unfortunately the backlash on reputation won't help the self-image in a couple weeks.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave J
Then you would have to call IBM's OWN spokesman an unreasonable rumor monger since it was he who FIRST bred the expectations (in June of 03).
Oh don't be an tool. IBM said 3.0 and they had problems, but they still delivered substantial performance upgrades, even if not the original 3.0.
It's the unreasonable rumormongers saying IBM sucks and Apple is doomed because they didn't make it to 3.0. That is what's BS. Everyone today is having trouble, IBM is still improving. But Moto couldn't find it's ass with both hands while everyone else passed it by.
It's the unreasonable rumormongers saying IBM sucks and Apple is doomed because they didn't make it to 3.0. That is what's BS. Everyone today is having trouble, IBM is still improving.
Unreasonable rumormongers aside, the facts are that AMD has a desktop dual core announced and soon to ship. Intel also. IBM/Apple??
Unreasonable rumormongers aside, the facts are that AMD has a desktop dual core announced and soon to ship. Intel also. IBM/Apple??
When they actually ship, make the comparison. It's OK to wonder what IBM apple have up their sleeve, but comparing no info to an announcement that an announcement will take place is a bit of a stretch. It's only a few days until it will be valid to really bitch or jump for joy.
Wintel/AMD has a long history as a platform for companies announcing with a splash then maybe delivering a drib-drab for quite awhile before it really hits volume production, if they deliver at all. Just look at Intels mini-killer. It was just an empty cardboard/plastic box at a hastily called press conference to try to shore up investor sentiment in the face of a competing product.
Apple says they will have a Sunday conference, suddenly Intel/AMD announce they will have announcements Monday. That's just marketing playing catch-up and could very well be out of synch by a few weeks to months with engineering/manufacturing. Let's just see what everyone actually has to say about actual timelines before we doom a platform again or try to claim victory.
Before any of us get all too confident and excited, lets consider
cost.
We hope Apple will be able to deliver all this new technology
at some reasonable cost.
Generally predictions assume that Apple will still be able to come in under $3000 for their NEW top of the line tower, but can they?
Does anyone have accurate prices for these dual core chips?
Well considering that IBM's yields have gone from (expensive) crap to really good (and cheap) without Apple changing their prices, I suspect a 90 nm dual core 970 will not pinch Apple's margins badly enough that they'll have to bump prices. Also consider that Intel's single core Prescott is 112 sq mm and the 970MP will purportedly be around only 154 sq mm (based on 970FX at 66 sq mm, plus a cache bump to 1 MB/core).
Comments
Originally posted by Dave J
IMO, Apple, OR ANYBODY ELSE, would be ashamed to demo their new stuff on such anemic machines to professionals who will also be looking at dual core Opteron's. Hence, TS' info is unreliable (for whatever reason) OR incomplete (no Pro line news).
I think anemic is a little harsh. I mean, at least Apple doesn't have an anemic OS.
Originally posted by Hiro
Just not as fast as unreasonable rumor mongers would like.
Then you would have to call IBM's OWN spokesman an unreasonable rumor monger since it was he who FIRST bred the expectations (in June of 03).
Originally posted by the cool gut
I think anemic is a little harsh. I mean, at least Apple doesn't have an anemic OS.
The OS is fantastic, agreed.
Go luck into TS message boards... someone in there has "inside knowledge" of the REAL specs...
Let me just say... "3.5"
BZ
Dual 2.5ghz
* Dual 1.25ghz frontside buses
Quad(sounds funny doesn't it) 3GHz
* Quad 2.0Ghz frontside buses
Quad (Ready for this) 3.5 ghz processors
* Quad 2.5GHz frontside buses
The front side bus stats look funny from the 2.5 to the 3 and 3.5 because of
the way dual core works, i.e. much bigger throughputs. The 2.5 is pretty much the same as now except it's back to fan cooled. I can also guarantee when you see how the high end compare to what is high end now you'll think J.C. came back not for the end of the world but to bless Apple.
Ok basically I know they have released speed bumps in the past like what ts is saying. Remember though ts is in a lawsuit were they are supposed to give their sources up. Since that lawsuit they havent "guessed" right, yet. I believe they're eroding the credibility of their sources to try and protect them. I have great respect for Nick and the site. He has done a great job and this whole situation is not to good. Antares was supposed to start out at 3.0ghz the cooling article may have said 2ghz, but I'm sure they weren't going to put all the specs for different processors in there. Believe me if you are hearing about it. They've been working with it for years. Apple has probably had there hands on this since a few months before the 2.5 came out. Maybe even longer. The fact is no matter how much you search
you won't get info on it. Unless you know someone inside.
I can tell you guaranteed that a few things being said here on these boards simply would never fly at this point.
1. Some have said there will be 2.7 and 2.8 ghz powermac systems. Apple won't be making a powermac without a 500 mhz increase for a while. When they do make one that is not 500 because it'll be something higher. You will never again see bumps lower than 500 mhz.
2. Even if there a 4 cores and not dual processors the chip speed wil not go down from where they are currently. Apple has given little thought to the mhz myth in the past. But look in some of the posts around various sites of people dropping there powermac for an AMD machine. Believe me Apple is aware of how this mhz myth plays out now. You wont catch them slipping again, especially not after last year.
3. Remember when the mini and shuffle were released before earnings for the 1st quarter? Among all the speculation of tiger release dates i only saw one person on various forums saying tuesday before earnings was the day.
In case you didn't notice the new ipod lineup that was released in march was released on a wednesday. Powerbooks came on a monday. Apple has changed the entire release schedule's because of people not buying on the expected new release of certain products. You can be sure apple will never have a regular release schedule again because of this.
4. Intel and Amd love telling the press what could be accomplished by them. Steve is more an element of surprise type. Think of intel's theoretical mac mini they showed off and the press it got. Well now you've got hordes of people waiting for these new processors from Intel and AMD. Everyday you read an article about them. By the time there out they're already telling you what's coming next. So again people wait and think well maybe I can wait for a few more months. Now they're basically cutting into their own sales. But, wait where's Apple and IBM in all this? Well they're quietly waiting to usher in the powermac's and show the world they've been ahead all this time, they just know how to keep a secret. You see folks when that happens how does that affect the market? You've got 2 companies with a roadmap of where they'll be, and one company seemingly coming out of the blue with what appears to be a knockout punch (that will take the others years to catch up to). Where does that leave the other guys? SOL.
5. TS will not even be in the ballpark on the powermac's.
6. As long as iMac's continue to sell your not going to get any crazy upgrades on them. Maybe a few nice things next time around, certainly not dual core or speed's above 2ghz."
Originally posted by Dave J
Then you would have to call IBM's OWN spokesman an unreasonable rumor monger since it was he who FIRST bred the expectations (in June of 03).
Oh don't be an tool. IBM said 3.0 and they had problems, but they still delivered substantial performance upgrades, even if not the original 3.0.
It's the unreasonable rumormongers saying IBM sucks and Apple is doomed because they didn't make it to 3.0. That is what's BS. Everyone today is having trouble, IBM is still improving. But Moto couldn't find it's ass with both hands while everyone else passed it by.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1786643,00.asp
As you will see, I posted a comment that those specs are hotly disputed.
</sarcasm>
Originally posted by Hiro
News about rumors. Now there's a bastion of journalistic example...
</sarcasm>
The power of rumors
Let's see......
TS posts disappointing specs the same day Apple posts their
amazing 2nd quarter results, then Apple stock drops like a rock
the same afternoon after Apple's flat and conservative 3rd quarter forecast falls short of analyst expectations.
Now imagine if you know that those specs are totally bogus and you buy Apple stock, the Friday before they announce the all new
Apple QuadraMac
Just a thought
Originally posted by Flounder
Apple dropped like a rock in large part because the whole market dropped like a rock
The whole market didn't drop more than 10% over 2 days.
This may have nothing to do with the TS specs posted, but I considered the possibility.
I also considered that IBM failed to meet it's expectations and put the 2 together.
The other possibility is that Apple itself was more conservative with
their 3rd quarter forecasts and analysts may wonder how Apple's growth
will continue facing large scale competition from AMD and Intel now that they have both ofiicially announced dual cores.
Or..... the whole market is dropping because shipping costs and other petrolium based commodities are killing everyone and eating into profits.
Originally posted by Hiro
It's the unreasonable rumormongers saying IBM sucks and Apple is doomed because they didn't make it to 3.0. That is what's BS. Everyone today is having trouble, IBM is still improving.
Unreasonable rumormongers aside, the facts are that AMD has a desktop dual core announced and soon to ship. Intel also. IBM/Apple??
Interesting how during the dark G4 era, Intel's product line was irrelevant, but now Intel's GHz rating is used to defend Apple hardware lameness.
Originally posted by Dave J
Unreasonable rumormongers aside, the facts are that AMD has a desktop dual core announced and soon to ship. Intel also. IBM/Apple??
When they actually ship, make the comparison. It's OK to wonder what IBM apple have up their sleeve, but comparing no info to an announcement that an announcement will take place is a bit of a stretch. It's only a few days until it will be valid to really bitch or jump for joy.
Wintel/AMD has a long history as a platform for companies announcing with a splash then maybe delivering a drib-drab for quite awhile before it really hits volume production, if they deliver at all. Just look at Intels mini-killer. It was just an empty cardboard/plastic box at a hastily called press conference to try to shore up investor sentiment in the face of a competing product.
Apple says they will have a Sunday conference, suddenly Intel/AMD announce they will have announcements Monday. That's just marketing playing catch-up and could very well be out of synch by a few weeks to months with engineering/manufacturing. Let's just see what everyone actually has to say about actual timelines before we doom a platform again or try to claim victory.
.
cost.
We hope Apple will be able to deliver all this new technology
at some reasonable cost.
Generally predictions assume that Apple will still be able to come in under $3000 for their NEW top of the line tower, but can they?
Does anyone have accurate prices for these dual core chips?
I read somehere that the new Intel 800 Extreme chips were running
about $1000 each.
What will a single 64 bit dual core AMD processor cost for the part alone?
The current top of the line Alienware ALX tower gets rolling at about the $5000 range, so it may take a while before people start flocking over to
this new bleeding edge technology.
And... Spending THAT amout of money for a machine running
Windows XP will give many others second thoughts,
especially if Longhorn fails to be fully backward compliant.
I guess all of us will be asking ourselves how much we are willing to spend in the near future if we want the best.
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Before any of us get all too confident and excited, lets consider
cost.
We hope Apple will be able to deliver all this new technology
at some reasonable cost.
Generally predictions assume that Apple will still be able to come in under $3000 for their NEW top of the line tower, but can they?
Does anyone have accurate prices for these dual core chips?
Well considering that IBM's yields have gone from (expensive) crap to really good (and cheap) without Apple changing their prices, I suspect a 90 nm dual core 970 will not pinch Apple's margins badly enough that they'll have to bump prices. Also consider that Intel's single core Prescott is 112 sq mm and the 970MP will purportedly be around only 154 sq mm (based on 970FX at 66 sq mm, plus a cache bump to 1 MB/core).
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Does anyone have accurate prices for these dual core chips?
I read somehere that the new Intel 800 Extreme chips were running
about $1000 each.
What will a single 64 bit dual core AMD processor cost for the part alone?
Don't confuse cost and price. Intel and AMD are charging a lot of money for dual-core chips, but the chips are not expensive to manufacture.