More likely, IMO, is that Apple doesn't want to ship a machine with a massive power profile like those of the dual P4 and (to a lesser extent) the dual Operton. Especially since Delphi's water cooling unit doesn't look like it'll hold water for long. This is the aesthetics-are-paramount rule that THT mentioned raising its, uh, ugly head again.
Assuming that's true, what is Apple going to do about it? Will they just keep releasing bumps until IBM can make the quad-core work without needed crazy power/heat workarounds? There's a PowerMac segment (albeit small) that's just hooked on the idea that their Mac "dream machine" needs to be quad-core. I have to admit that I too have fallen prey to this Quad Mac fantasy, at least to some extent.
No offense to anyone, but it would be interesting to see if all the people complaining about the "insulting 200mhz update" are actually ones that would buy a PM to begin with. How many people out there are really looking to upgrade their 2.5ghz with a faster CPU?
But how many with a 1.8ghz or dual 2.0 ghz are looking to move up?
Even better question is, how many are looking for better gpu options.
We will never know how many back up their claims to want more than they have by purchasing better stuff.
Quote:
Originally posted by bucci
I'd like to see Apple break out with a 3ghz PM as much as the next person. However, I'm not going to jump off a bridge, cursing Apple the entire way down if they don't.
No offense to anyone, but it would be interesting to see if all the people complaining about the "insulting 200mhz update" are actually ones that would buy a PM to begin with. How many people out there are really looking to upgrade their 2.5ghz with a faster CPU?
I'd like to see Apple break out with a 3ghz PM as much as the next person. However, I'm not going to jump off a bridge, cursing Apple the entire way down if they don't.
2.7ghz is still still 35% faster than my 2.0ghz PM. And that's not including any video/hard drive/RAM/etc.. upgrades they may also throw in at the same price or lower than the current pricing scheme.
Seems alright by me.
Yeah I'm looking to buy a powermac, and sure they would do the job well just how they are.
But who wants to buy a 12 month old computer, hence why the complaining when we get news of only a 200mhz bump. Alot of us have been waiting since January, as in theor they should have been updated long ago.
I actually sold my dual 2.0 rev b with a 9600xt to get a powerbook. When I realized the powerbooks weren't going to be efficient enough for my work (software dev, web dev, and 3d modeling), I decided I would wait out for the new powermacs.
They main reason I sold the powermac was for better graphics solutions.
I don't see any reason to buy a powermac that is basically the same hardware as the previous year for the same price. To me that means purchasing outdated hardware at maximum price. I'm not die hard to get a mac right now because all of my mac software development is done and I have to finish the linux and windows versions of the apps. So why should I rush out to blow 2400 (dev discount) on a "brand new" powermac when its sporting 12 month old hardware. As a rule of thumb technology doubles every 18 months, 2/3 of that time and no improvement??? No I'll wait for a better improvement in the Powerbook and Powermac department before I buy a mac again.
I love OS X and apple, this isn't their fault completely. These are hard times for them and I understand, but I don't have 2400 dollars of charity money right now either. When they get their machines back in line, I'll buy one.
I will change my quote however, if they come out with 2.7's and DON'T lower the prices and DON'T offer better graphics solutions, then I will not purchase and be macless until they upgrade the powerbooks or powermacs.
Yes, dual core is old news, for the big iron servers. The Power 4 CPU is too power hungry for a desktop, even water cooled. This is the whole paradox; IBM has been making bitch-ass dual core server CPUs for years, yet they cannot get a dual core desktop CPU on the market, even while CPU makers with no dual core experience are putting out dual core desktop CPUs.
It makes no sense. It's as if Apple is a curse upon any CPU maker that dares to supply Apple with any chips.
Ouch! Didn't think I'd spark that reaction.
I have no faith in the fear that IBM can not make a dual core desktop CPU. There is too much evidence elsewhere to the contrary. The Power4 is old, it had two dual core versions, and the Power5 is a better suited example, and I think IBM would have insisted on it's use to base anything set for large scale production on for Apple.
IBM is making custom order multiple core CPU's for the XBOX 360 which is being demo'd on MTV in a few weeks, and the PS3 will be showing a week after that at E3. Those are two multi core, high powered CPU's that absolutely must generate less heat than one would expect from a PowerMac IMO.
I think if Apple wishes to they can get Power5 based dual core processor out of IBM into a PowerMac by WWDC without any fuss, and still make use of dual core Power4 based processors for servers if need be.
If it came to it Apple and IBM could deal 2 servers at different price points for The 970, and 980 Dual core based PPC processors.
Apple is getting hot, and IBM can capitalize on the Mac. IBM is a company that invests in long term, and Apple is a relatively sort - long term investment if they choose to provide Apple with adequate processors to keep the spirit of technological competitiveness, progress, and the power of IBM.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave J
Several of us are in that camp apparently. Onlooker promised to put together some killer DC AMD kit for us when and if it's biz as usual at WWDC.
(18 years of loyalty - first Mac an SE)
I'm still really counting on Apple here but I've already configured it in alienware, BOXX, and BYO (build your own). It's expensive, but it should last the test of time vs. $$$ if it comes to it. But if I do I probably wont be buying another Mac for a long time. I think the odds are in Apples favor. For once these guys deserve to come out on the up side of the competition.
ia sd so fucked up i had a n waesome steak din ner and r4o5r4jn hookers. aplle sorovcks poweretbooks rockzorores c axc my soi ckodofgigfrg . omfg i can;t typoe straigfhggtr i aN DRIHI8UNKL;
ia sd so fucked up i had a n waesome steak din ner and r4o5r4jn hookers. aplle sorovcks poweretbooks rockzorores c axc my soi ckodofgigfrg . omfg i can;t typoe straigfhggtr i aN DRIHI8UNKL;
OMFG! Hilarious! The PM wait has driven Algol straight off the deep end (and right to the bottom of a barrel!!)
ia sd so fucked up i had a n waesome steak din ner and r4o5r4jn hookers. aplle sorovcks poweretbooks rockzorores c axc my soi ckodofgigfrg . omfg i can;t typoe straigfhggtr i aN DRIHI8UNKL;
LOL WTF did you have LOL WTF BuMseX with them>?!
If Apple had come out with a stripped down, regular-sized G5 machine, chances are it'd still be more expensive than the competition and it would lose the distinction of being interesting in some way. Apple doesn't really have any general hardware advantage over the PC industry, but it does have a kick ass industrial design team. Perhaps on the low end, Apple is just trying to differentiate itself the best it can.
guys, I have been using Tiger for about 24 hrs now, it will take one wicked fast PC to get me to switch to windows over the power, productivity and stability that X brings to the table. XP is a freaking joke in comparison, and my shop runs both every day. I thought Panther was amazing... you all have so much to look forward to with Tiger, Apple rocks the house once again, and I'm no fanboy, this OS is more than I could have hoped for, and it's only running on a dual G4 and and iBook. I have been bitching about slow towers for a year now, (justifiably so) but the thought of actaully going through with my idle threats to get a high end PC for my main workstation are vapour at best. Maybe if longhorn rocks and X stays still, and were freaking out about dual FX 2.9's rumored for WWDC '06 i'll be closer to realizing that nasty reality, but right now switching to XP on ANY hardware would be ten steps back. Speed is great but it comes down to billable hours done each week, and in my business (large format print/design) this is THE platform by a very large margin. It's like comparing a high end Porsche to an American muscle car. Straight off the line is great, but come on...
I very much agree with mikenap on tiger and OS X. I've been using Tiger since WWDC until I sold my 2.0. It is an AMAZING system. Its absolutely the best OS available by far. It really needs to be seen in person before one can even speak on it.
Sometimes I forget what an amazing OS apple produces when I'm on a PC. (I just built a 3.6ghz p4 and oc'd it to 4.0ghz)... so I still have a hard on for it. I really hope that aple comes out with faster powermacs than stated above...
If they don't... I'm going to renig on my statement above... I'm going to get a 1.67ghz powerbook temporarily until the PCI-E powermacs come out.
Usually alcohol makes things foggier, but tonight they made things clear again.
Both Intel and AMD describe the benefits of dual core processors
as a way to help improve multitasking.
This is something we've been able to do for years with OSX.
The OS was not designed for it, and wont see as much improvements as OS X, but well have to see. Linux is also way better suited for this kind of multiprocessor support.
Here's the one thing I've never understood about Apple. They are so progressive when it comes to design, but are so conservative when comes to marketing their products. They don't do anything to rock the boat and instead of being agressive, they fully expect things to come to them.
The OS was not designed for it, and wont see as much improvements as OS X, but well have to see. Linux is also way better suited for this kind of multiprocessor support.
It's not only the operating system that wasn't designed for it, the apps weren't designed for it either. The second core is only being used for background tasks. AMD was smart to release the professional opterons before the consumer athlons, the software (and operating systems) the opterons use will actually make use of that second core,
Just an interesting thought... AND WHY I think the graphic cards being the same is complete BS...
Go to apple's website, and BTO a powermac.
What do you see under graphics cards for the dual 2.0?
NVidia 5200 Ultra (standard)
ATI 9600xt
NVidia 6800 Ultra
2 Months ago you would have also seen
ATI 9800XT
&
NVidia 6800 GT
So what happened to these cards? My guess is they sold out of them and don't have any plans to replace them... why wouldn't they replace them if the next machines were going to be AGP? This is why I think they are moving to the PCI-E standard. I believe apple is trying to blow all of their AGP cards out of stock, instead of ordering more. About 4 months ago we heard rumors of apple receiving stocks of x700's... I wonder how true these rumors were
I seriously believe at the very least we will see a graphics card and graphics card bus update in the next version. Or just a graphics card update with better cards... 6600GT's do come in agp format now... It will be interesting to see why these graphics cards have disappeared from the custom build site.
Ok guys finally some good news...one of my friends works at an apple store as a mac specialest (told me to say no more because of obviouse reasons) and his store just recieved a shipment of PM boxes over the weekend. First this points to a PM update sometime this week, and second he told me these machines are defiantly not 200mhz updates and that well be in for a suprise. Take this as you will, for all I know he could be yanking my chain, but im still hoping.
Why is it when there are pending updates, there is *always someone who knows someone who works at an Apple store - which has received "shipments" and knows what's going to be released? Why is that?
Comments
Originally posted by Programmer
More likely, IMO, is that Apple doesn't want to ship a machine with a massive power profile like those of the dual P4 and (to a lesser extent) the dual Operton. Especially since Delphi's water cooling unit doesn't look like it'll hold water for long. This is the aesthetics-are-paramount rule that THT mentioned raising its, uh, ugly head again.
Assuming that's true, what is Apple going to do about it? Will they just keep releasing bumps until IBM can make the quad-core work without needed crazy power/heat workarounds? There's a PowerMac segment (albeit small) that's just hooked on the idea that their Mac "dream machine" needs to be quad-core. I have to admit that I too have fallen prey to this Quad Mac fantasy, at least to some extent.
Originally posted by bucci
No offense to anyone, but it would be interesting to see if all the people complaining about the "insulting 200mhz update" are actually ones that would buy a PM to begin with. How many people out there are really looking to upgrade their 2.5ghz with a faster CPU?
But how many with a 1.8ghz or dual 2.0 ghz are looking to move up?
Even better question is, how many are looking for better gpu options.
We will never know how many back up their claims to want more than they have by purchasing better stuff.
Originally posted by bucci
I'd like to see Apple break out with a 3ghz PM as much as the next person. However, I'm not going to jump off a bridge, cursing Apple the entire way down if they don't.
Agreed.
Originally posted by bucci
No offense to anyone, but it would be interesting to see if all the people complaining about the "insulting 200mhz update" are actually ones that would buy a PM to begin with. How many people out there are really looking to upgrade their 2.5ghz with a faster CPU?
I'd like to see Apple break out with a 3ghz PM as much as the next person. However, I'm not going to jump off a bridge, cursing Apple the entire way down if they don't.
2.7ghz is still still 35% faster than my 2.0ghz PM. And that's not including any video/hard drive/RAM/etc.. upgrades they may also throw in at the same price or lower than the current pricing scheme.
Seems alright by me.
Yeah I'm looking to buy a powermac, and sure they would do the job well just how they are.
But who wants to buy a 12 month old computer, hence why the complaining when we get news of only a 200mhz bump. Alot of us have been waiting since January, as in theor they should have been updated long ago.
They main reason I sold the powermac was for better graphics solutions.
I don't see any reason to buy a powermac that is basically the same hardware as the previous year for the same price. To me that means purchasing outdated hardware at maximum price. I'm not die hard to get a mac right now because all of my mac software development is done and I have to finish the linux and windows versions of the apps. So why should I rush out to blow 2400 (dev discount) on a "brand new" powermac when its sporting 12 month old hardware. As a rule of thumb technology doubles every 18 months, 2/3 of that time and no improvement??? No I'll wait for a better improvement in the Powerbook and Powermac department before I buy a mac again.
I love OS X and apple, this isn't their fault completely. These are hard times for them and I understand, but I don't have 2400 dollars of charity money right now either. When they get their machines back in line, I'll buy one.
I will change my quote however, if they come out with 2.7's and DON'T lower the prices and DON'T offer better graphics solutions, then I will not purchase and be macless until they upgrade the powerbooks or powermacs.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Yes, dual core is old news, for the big iron servers. The Power 4 CPU is too power hungry for a desktop, even water cooled. This is the whole paradox; IBM has been making bitch-ass dual core server CPUs for years, yet they cannot get a dual core desktop CPU on the market, even while CPU makers with no dual core experience are putting out dual core desktop CPUs.
It makes no sense. It's as if Apple is a curse upon any CPU maker that dares to supply Apple with any chips.
Ouch! Didn't think I'd spark that reaction.
I have no faith in the fear that IBM can not make a dual core desktop CPU. There is too much evidence elsewhere to the contrary. The Power4 is old, it had two dual core versions, and the Power5 is a better suited example, and I think IBM would have insisted on it's use to base anything set for large scale production on for Apple.
IBM is making custom order multiple core CPU's for the XBOX 360 which is being demo'd on MTV in a few weeks, and the PS3 will be showing a week after that at E3. Those are two multi core, high powered CPU's that absolutely must generate less heat than one would expect from a PowerMac IMO.
I think if Apple wishes to they can get Power5 based dual core processor out of IBM into a PowerMac by WWDC without any fuss, and still make use of dual core Power4 based processors for servers if need be.
If it came to it Apple and IBM could deal 2 servers at different price points for The 970, and 980 Dual core based PPC processors.
Apple is getting hot, and IBM can capitalize on the Mac. IBM is a company that invests in long term, and Apple is a relatively sort - long term investment if they choose to provide Apple with adequate processors to keep the spirit of technological competitiveness, progress, and the power of IBM.
Originally posted by Dave J
Several of us are in that camp apparently. Onlooker promised to put together some killer DC AMD kit for us when and if it's biz as usual at WWDC.
(18 years of loyalty - first Mac an SE)
I'm still really counting on Apple here but I've already configured it in alienware, BOXX, and BYO (build your own). It's expensive, but it should last the test of time vs. $$$ if it comes to it. But if I do I probably wont be buying another Mac for a long time. I think the odds are in Apples favor. For once these guys deserve to come out on the up side of the competition.
Originally posted by onlooker
I'm still really counting on Apple here
I think we all are Onlooker. Nobody is looking to abandon ship - unless we keep getting these greasy worms for breakfast.
Originally posted by Algol
ia sd so fucked up i had a n waesome steak din ner and r4o5r4jn hookers. aplle sorovcks poweretbooks rockzorores c axc my soi ckodofgigfrg . omfg i can;t typoe straigfhggtr i aN DRIHI8UNKL;
OMFG! Hilarious! The PM wait has driven Algol straight off the deep end (and right to the bottom of a barrel!!)
Originally posted by Algol
ia sd so fucked up i had a n waesome steak din ner and r4o5r4jn hookers. aplle sorovcks poweretbooks rockzorores c axc my soi ckodofgigfrg . omfg i can;t typoe straigfhggtr i aN DRIHI8UNKL;
LOL WTF did you have LOL WTF BuMseX with them>?!
If Apple had come out with a stripped down, regular-sized G5 machine, chances are it'd still be more expensive than the competition and it would lose the distinction of being interesting in some way. Apple doesn't really have any general hardware advantage over the PC industry, but it does have a kick ass industrial design team. Perhaps on the low end, Apple is just trying to differentiate itself the best it can.
Originally posted by wienerdog
OMFG! Hilarious! The PM wait has driven Algol straight off the deep end (and right to the bottom of a barrel!!)
I think his name was supposed to be alcohol but he was too drunk to spell it.
Sometimes I forget what an amazing OS apple produces when I'm on a PC. (I just built a 3.6ghz p4 and oc'd it to 4.0ghz)... so I still have a hard on for it. I really hope that aple comes out with faster powermacs than stated above...
If they don't... I'm going to renig on my statement above... I'm going to get a 1.67ghz powerbook temporarily until the PCI-E powermacs come out.
Usually alcohol makes things foggier, but tonight they made things clear again.
as a way to help improve multitasking.
This is something we've been able to do for years with OSX.
It reminds me of years ago when I outran a corvette through the turns
of a winding road with a Datsun B-210
Comparing benchmarks between a high performance X86 machine
to a Power PC is like comparing a drag racer to an Indy car.
The X86 machine may run a faster quarter mile, but the PowerPC
is built to take the turns in a 500 mile endurance race.
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Both Intel and AMD describe the benefits of dual core processors
as a way to help improve multitasking.
This is something we've been able to do for years with OSX.
The OS was not designed for it, and wont see as much improvements as OS X, but well have to see. Linux is also way better suited for this kind of multiprocessor support.
Originally posted by onlooker
The OS was not designed for it, and wont see as much improvements as OS X, but well have to see. Linux is also way better suited for this kind of multiprocessor support.
It's not only the operating system that wasn't designed for it, the apps weren't designed for it either. The second core is only being used for background tasks. AMD was smart to release the professional opterons before the consumer athlons, the software (and operating systems) the opterons use will actually make use of that second core,
Go to apple's website, and BTO a powermac.
What do you see under graphics cards for the dual 2.0?
NVidia 5200 Ultra (standard)
ATI 9600xt
NVidia 6800 Ultra
2 Months ago you would have also seen
ATI 9800XT
&
NVidia 6800 GT
So what happened to these cards? My guess is they sold out of them and don't have any plans to replace them... why wouldn't they replace them if the next machines were going to be AGP? This is why I think they are moving to the PCI-E standard. I believe apple is trying to blow all of their AGP cards out of stock, instead of ordering more. About 4 months ago we heard rumors of apple receiving stocks of x700's... I wonder how true these rumors were
I seriously believe at the very least we will see a graphics card and graphics card bus update in the next version. Or just a graphics card update with better cards... 6600GT's do come in agp format now... It will be interesting to see why these graphics cards have disappeared from the custom build site.
Every time.
PowerMacX2
QuadraMac
G6 PowerMacX4
or just a speed bump pre-loaded with Tiger