You know, honestly, I see this as a perfect time for consumers to buy iBooks or Mac minis once they're upgraded (I assume) later this year. Both products are cheap and will easily last until the Intel Macs come out. As long as someone doesn't have a pressing need for a lot of power, iBooks and Mac minis will work great as "holdover" computers until the Intel switch. For those who *do* need the power, they're going to buy the fastest Apple hardware, anyway, regardless of whether it will continue to have software written for it for five more years or fifty more years.
That's my thinking exactly. Hopefully the Mac mini will get a speed bump around September time, at which point I will buy one with a 20" display, and just change the computer when Apple starts shipping an equivalent machine with Leopard and Intel some time in 2007. Makes perfect sense.
Yeah, Apple will go from a twin dual-core PPC 970mp system to a MacIntel with some semi-dual core Pentium - and offer a staggering drop in performance. That is very difficult to imagine.
As things stand with IBM, the MacIntels will probably bring us a performance boos in portables and low end desktops, and a performance hit on the Powermacs and perhaps the iMacs.
But I cry for my dual 2.0 GHZ PM with nVidia 6800 Ultra.
Why? When did you buy it? It is not like it will become suddenly useless from the next year. These machines have still life in them. Even in the beginning of 2008, when the transition will be about to be completed, there will be still almost new PPC Power Macs. The software support will continue for at least on year after that, which brings us to 2009 at least. I see no reason to worry about that.
[B]To quote Steve Jobs during today's keynote address:
Argggg. I want to buy a PPC now. Even more now, to last me several years through the move (customers and developers alike) to Intel. I was ready to buy, but ...
We need a speed bump and/or price drop. And 6 months from now is too late because by then it is worth waiting another 6-9 months for the Intel-based Macs.
News today is iPod sales are leveling off (they had to at some point) - and the Intel move could torpedo Mac sales. C'mon Apple, sweeten the deal so we can stay with you (and you with us...)
It's going to be interesting to see whether "evening the playing field" by making Macs use the same processors as PCs will be a good or bad thing. This way, people can easily see which is faster and which is cheaper, without the Mac people being able to hide behind some megahertz myth.
It will also be interesting to see how Mac OS X vs Windows XP runs on the same-spec'd machine. That'll be a a test of OS architecture there.
You would. They were spreading FUD. The only real differences are if you are coding in assembly, using altivec and the endianness issue. Applications are more sensitive to the operating system's API than the CPU. Apple's switch the Intel changes only the CPU - the API exposed by the OS remains the same, ergo, only apps which use PPC assembly, inclduing altivec directly are affected.
Any application in which performance matters is going to suffer because of this. Developers were hesitant to spend time to optimize for the Mac before, now there is a further question of which to optimize for. In most cases they simply won't now -- especially if AltiVec optimizations are called for.
On the plus side, it looks like Apple is just going to use Intel's compiler, which is a very strong compiler. It does mean that there might be compiler differences to be dealt with (GCC vs. Intel C), but that's generally fairly easily dealt with. Also on the upside is that x86 optimizations will come across from the WIntel world much more easily. If you've got a PPC Mac, however, don't expect much in the way of careful hand tuning.
I fear that the switch to Intel, is the REASON, why we don't see a MP G5. Apple will not do major update in his G5 line, and will focus all his r&d in developping the new computers.
One of the big plus of the deal with Intel, is that Intel is also a mobo and video maker, so they can help a lot Apple.
You may be right, but it may also be true that the 970MP is a no-show, just like Motorolla's G5 was. The Antares series was supposed to be cooler (PowerBook) and come in multi-core (PowerMac). Maybe IBM just couldn't deliver. Based on rumors, we were expecting to see these at MWSF '05...
Maybe they still can deliver them but it's just obvious to Apple that IBM doesn't care so they are making a strategerie (lolz) move for the future.
It might make IBM feel good to say "screw it" and stop working on Apple's stuff but at the same time I'm sure there are contracts. And honestly, what else can you expect when working with an egomaniac like Jobs?
I hope that Intel CEO doesn't get used to getting those awkward on-stage hugs from Steve.
To quote Steve Jobs during today's keynote address:
Is this why we haven't seen an iBook revision? Was the iBook revision preempted by the Intel for Mac announcement so that iBooks could prove that there's still life left to Apple's product line until Intel?
What could these new great PowerPC products be? When do you think they will materialize?
Is an iBook speedbump a *great* PowerPC product? A G5 iMac revision? With what? Hotter 970FX's?
Discuss.
Speedbumps only. It was more or less a marketing ploy in order to keep people buying Apple's stuff.
I don't see any amazing products coming down the pipeline in the Powermac, powerbook arena. maybe PB G4 will reach 1.8 or 2.0 and Powermac maybe in a year finally reach 3.0. That's about it. I think Steve's keynote basically state the incompetence of IBM in reaching the roadmap they originally said they would achieve. So don't get your hopes too high.
Maybe the Great PPC products in the pipeline are something else besides computers.
I think this is what will happen in the next two years:
1. PowerBook to be the first to get an Intel Chip. Will see speedbumped G4s till say Jan 2006. MWSF 2006 will be launch slot. possibly with mobile pentium D.
2. ibook, iMac, emac and Mac mini next. The imac cannot go beyond maybe 2.0 Ghz as liquid cooling will be required. Maybe 2.3 with crippled FSB.
3. Powermac and Xserves will be the last. because a Dual 2.7 G5 still kicks Pentiums ass. The FSB still unmatched by any Pentium. Until Intel can match the performance and liquid cooling is an option, PMs will stay with the PPC.
So, I think I will buy the very last PPC imac unless the Pentium D offers better performance than the crippled G5.
I don't think SJ closed all doors on the PPC. If PPC is still outperforming the Pentium and liquid cooling is an option, we'll see them in PMs.
1. PowerBook to be the first to get an Intel Chip. Will see speedbumped G4s till say Jan 2006. MWSF 2006 will be launch slot. possibly with mobile pentium D.
I think that's optimistic. Steve said products "this time next year" and given Apple's track record, I would not expect them one moment sooner. Besides, despite assurances to the contrary, I'm sure there is a lot of heavy lifting to be done at Apple before this stuff is really ready for consumers. They are going to need this coming year.
I agree that the Power Macs will go last, but I think the iMac will be second to last. The G4 machines are where Apple has seriously fallen behind. The iMacs, for the moment at least, are a good value. Whether or not they will be in 2006, of course, is another matter. But notebooks are where the market is growing, and notebook chips are probably where Apple read the roadmaps and realized they were boned.
I was going to say something about Apple wanting to get the most out of the iMac's form factor before moving it to Intel, but then it occurred to me that there might NOT be significant form-factor changes with this shift. Apple may want to reinforce, even if subliminally, the fact that all that's changing is the chip. Keeping the current cases for a while longer might be part of the plan. Hmm.
I was going to say something about Apple wanting to get the most out of the iMac's form factor before moving it to Intel, but then it occurred to me that there might NOT be significant form-factor changes with this shift. Apple may want to reinforce, even if subliminally, the fact that all that's changing is the chip. Keeping the current cases for a while longer might be part of the plan. Hmm.
I would imagine that this will be the case, just to reassure people that Apple computers remain as clearly defined as ever (and that there won't be a significant difference in their 'feel').
Correct me if I am wrong, but I could have sworn he said, "by this time next year," meaning that in less than a year we will start to see the transition to x86 hardware commence. Steve also said that a lot of work has already been done, and if you are to believe that the demo was legit (i.e. done on a single Pentium 4 3.6GHz), and saw how well OS X ran on the x86 box, even in Rosetta emulation, it doesn't seem like these Intel Macs are that far off from trickling into Apple's product line. Just enough time to allow developers to get the native PPC applications recomplied for Intel and out the door.
Maybe they still can deliver them but it's just obvious to Apple that IBM doesn't care so they are making a strategerie (lolz) move for the future.
It might make IBM feel good to say "screw it" and stop working on Apple's stuff but at the same time I'm sure there are contracts. And honestly, what else can you expect when working with an egomaniac like Jobs?
I hope that Intel CEO doesn't get used to getting those awkward on-stage hugs from Steve.
the powermacs still blow away most pcs for its price range...just the future looked gloomy with ibm
More than anything it is the extreamly tuned OS that allows a 1.2 ghz proc in a mac mini to hold its own in this moddern world, insain ammounts of tweaking, tuneing, and pollishing make OSX fast, not the hardware per-se, the intel stuff will smoke the PPC g4/g5 stuff when the OS and apps are not only compiled for but OPTIMIZED for the intel mac. and yes 64 bit does matter as by 2k7 I expect some hi-end laptops to accomidate 4+ gb ram and all desktops to have 2-4 gb standard. When intel ships the 64bit pentium 4/pentium 5 all of the mac stuff, much like windows on a new intel chip, it will "just work" and the next version of the OS will bring the full 64-bitness to life
Seriously though, nomatter what the greatest and latest IBM chips maybe, apple won't jeopardize the Intel line by introducing them, it would also proves to be a hard sell from the GHZ parity, the MHZ myth is still here
Correct me if I am wrong, but I could have sworn he said, "by this time next year," meaning that in less than a year we will start to see the transition to x86 hardware commence.
He did indeed say "by this time next year," but I still think that means "something will ship in June 2006." This is still Apple we're talking about.
I'm sure Apple has a very carefully-contrived roadmap of what products will ship when, based on necessity for updates and expected bumps to the current lines. Really, it's to their advantage to make the change happen in the entire line in as narrow a window as possible, because once the first Intel machines are out there, it will be worse for sales of the other lines than what we have now, which is just the knowledge that they're coming eventually. We saw that with the G5; the very first question was, "What about the PowerBook?"
Comments
Originally posted by Gamrin
You know, honestly, I see this as a perfect time for consumers to buy iBooks or Mac minis once they're upgraded (I assume) later this year. Both products are cheap and will easily last until the Intel Macs come out. As long as someone doesn't have a pressing need for a lot of power, iBooks and Mac minis will work great as "holdover" computers until the Intel switch. For those who *do* need the power, they're going to buy the fastest Apple hardware, anyway, regardless of whether it will continue to have software written for it for five more years or fifty more years.
That's my thinking exactly. Hopefully the Mac mini will get a speed bump around September time, at which point I will buy one with a 20" display, and just change the computer when Apple starts shipping an equivalent machine with Leopard and Intel some time in 2007. Makes perfect sense.
Originally posted by Outsider
I bet the MP will still make an appearance.
LMAO!
Yeah, Apple will go from a twin dual-core PPC 970mp system to a MacIntel with some semi-dual core Pentium - and offer a staggering drop in performance. That is very difficult to imagine.
As things stand with IBM, the MacIntels will probably bring us a performance boos in portables and low end desktops, and a performance hit on the Powermacs and perhaps the iMacs.
But I cry for my dual 2.0 GHZ PM with nVidia 6800 Ultra.
Originally posted by msantti
But I cry for my dual 2.0 GHZ PM with nVidia 6800 Ultra.
Why? When did you buy it? It is not like it will become suddenly useless from the next year. These machines have still life in them. Even in the beginning of 2008, when the transition will be about to be completed, there will be still almost new PPC Power Macs. The software support will continue for at least on year after that, which brings us to 2009 at least. I see no reason to worry about that.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
I wished S.J. had stated something like:
"From now on we have more options than ever
to satisfy our customers. Folks, say welcome to Intel,
from now on they are on board. From now on, we
will deliver the very best and fastes Macs ever.
From now on it doesn't matter if Intel or PPC
is under the hood. We just take the best available.
This spurs competition, right?"
I just can't believe they ditched the PPC once and
for all, leaving NO backdoor open.
I agree with you 100%. I wonder why they did it like this. And why now. I wonder if this is just Steve being pissed with IBM.
[B]To quote Steve Jobs during today's keynote address:
Argggg. I want to buy a PPC now. Even more now, to last me several years through the move (customers and developers alike) to Intel. I was ready to buy, but ...
We need a speed bump and/or price drop. And 6 months from now is too late because by then it is worth waiting another 6-9 months for the Intel-based Macs.
News today is iPod sales are leveling off (they had to at some point) - and the Intel move could torpedo Mac sales. C'mon Apple, sweeten the deal so we can stay with you (and you with us...)
It will also be interesting to see how Mac OS X vs Windows XP runs on the same-spec'd machine. That'll be a a test of OS architecture there.
Originally posted by UnixPoet
You would. They were spreading FUD. The only real differences are if you are coding in assembly, using altivec and the endianness issue. Applications are more sensitive to the operating system's API than the CPU. Apple's switch the Intel changes only the CPU - the API exposed by the OS remains the same, ergo, only apps which use PPC assembly, inclduing altivec directly are affected.
Any application in which performance matters is going to suffer because of this. Developers were hesitant to spend time to optimize for the Mac before, now there is a further question of which to optimize for. In most cases they simply won't now -- especially if AltiVec optimizations are called for.
On the plus side, it looks like Apple is just going to use Intel's compiler, which is a very strong compiler. It does mean that there might be compiler differences to be dealt with (GCC vs. Intel C), but that's generally fairly easily dealt with. Also on the upside is that x86 optimizations will come across from the WIntel world much more easily. If you've got a PPC Mac, however, don't expect much in the way of careful hand tuning.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
I fear that the switch to Intel, is the REASON, why we don't see a MP G5. Apple will not do major update in his G5 line, and will focus all his r&d in developping the new computers.
One of the big plus of the deal with Intel, is that Intel is also a mobo and video maker, so they can help a lot Apple.
You may be right, but it may also be true that the 970MP is a no-show, just like Motorolla's G5 was. The Antares series was supposed to be cooler (PowerBook) and come in multi-core (PowerMac). Maybe IBM just couldn't deliver. Based on rumors, we were expecting to see these at MWSF '05...
It might make IBM feel good to say "screw it" and stop working on Apple's stuff but at the same time I'm sure there are contracts. And honestly, what else can you expect when working with an egomaniac like Jobs?
I hope that Intel CEO doesn't get used to getting those awkward on-stage hugs from Steve.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
To quote Steve Jobs during today's keynote address:
Is this why we haven't seen an iBook revision? Was the iBook revision preempted by the Intel for Mac announcement so that iBooks could prove that there's still life left to Apple's product line until Intel?
What could these new great PowerPC products be? When do you think they will materialize?
Is an iBook speedbump a *great* PowerPC product? A G5 iMac revision? With what? Hotter 970FX's?
Discuss.
Speedbumps only. It was more or less a marketing ploy in order to keep people buying Apple's stuff.
Maybe the Great PPC products in the pipeline are something else besides computers.
1. PowerBook to be the first to get an Intel Chip. Will see speedbumped G4s till say Jan 2006. MWSF 2006 will be launch slot. possibly with mobile pentium D.
2. ibook, iMac, emac and Mac mini next. The imac cannot go beyond maybe 2.0 Ghz as liquid cooling will be required. Maybe 2.3 with crippled FSB.
3. Powermac and Xserves will be the last. because a Dual 2.7 G5 still kicks Pentiums ass. The FSB still unmatched by any Pentium. Until Intel can match the performance and liquid cooling is an option, PMs will stay with the PPC.
So, I think I will buy the very last PPC imac unless the Pentium D offers better performance than the crippled G5.
I don't think SJ closed all doors on the PPC. If PPC is still outperforming the Pentium and liquid cooling is an option, we'll see them in PMs.
Originally posted by Jamil
1. PowerBook to be the first to get an Intel Chip. Will see speedbumped G4s till say Jan 2006. MWSF 2006 will be launch slot. possibly with mobile pentium D.
I think that's optimistic. Steve said products "this time next year" and given Apple's track record, I would not expect them one moment sooner. Besides, despite assurances to the contrary, I'm sure there is a lot of heavy lifting to be done at Apple before this stuff is really ready for consumers. They are going to need this coming year.
I agree that the Power Macs will go last, but I think the iMac will be second to last. The G4 machines are where Apple has seriously fallen behind. The iMacs, for the moment at least, are a good value. Whether or not they will be in 2006, of course, is another matter. But notebooks are where the market is growing, and notebook chips are probably where Apple read the roadmaps and realized they were boned.
I was going to say something about Apple wanting to get the most out of the iMac's form factor before moving it to Intel, but then it occurred to me that there might NOT be significant form-factor changes with this shift. Apple may want to reinforce, even if subliminally, the fact that all that's changing is the chip. Keeping the current cases for a while longer might be part of the plan. Hmm.
Originally posted by BrunoBruin
I was going to say something about Apple wanting to get the most out of the iMac's form factor before moving it to Intel, but then it occurred to me that there might NOT be significant form-factor changes with this shift. Apple may want to reinforce, even if subliminally, the fact that all that's changing is the chip. Keeping the current cases for a while longer might be part of the plan. Hmm.
I would imagine that this will be the case, just to reassure people that Apple computers remain as clearly defined as ever (and that there won't be a significant difference in their 'feel').
Originally posted by BrunoBruin
Steve said products "this time next year"
Correct me if I am wrong, but I could have sworn he said, "by this time next year," meaning that in less than a year we will start to see the transition to x86 hardware commence. Steve also said that a lot of work has already been done, and if you are to believe that the demo was legit (i.e. done on a single Pentium 4 3.6GHz), and saw how well OS X ran on the x86 box, even in Rosetta emulation, it doesn't seem like these Intel Macs are that far off from trickling into Apple's product line. Just enough time to allow developers to get the native PPC applications recomplied for Intel and out the door.
Originally posted by groverat
Maybe they still can deliver them but it's just obvious to Apple that IBM doesn't care so they are making a strategerie (lolz) move for the future.
It might make IBM feel good to say "screw it" and stop working on Apple's stuff but at the same time I'm sure there are contracts. And honestly, what else can you expect when working with an egomaniac like Jobs?
I hope that Intel CEO doesn't get used to getting those awkward on-stage hugs from Steve.
You better hug your bug.
[still can't believe it is real.]
Originally posted by cj171
the powermacs still blow away most pcs for its price range...just the future looked gloomy with ibm
More than anything it is the extreamly tuned OS that allows a 1.2 ghz proc in a mac mini to hold its own in this moddern world, insain ammounts of tweaking, tuneing, and pollishing make OSX fast, not the hardware per-se, the intel stuff will smoke the PPC g4/g5 stuff when the OS and apps are not only compiled for but OPTIMIZED for the intel mac. and yes 64 bit does matter as by 2k7 I expect some hi-end laptops to accomidate 4+ gb ram and all desktops to have 2-4 gb standard. When intel ships the 64bit pentium 4/pentium 5 all of the mac stuff, much like windows on a new intel chip, it will "just work" and the next version of the OS will bring the full 64-bitness to life
Seriously though, nomatter what the greatest and latest IBM chips maybe, apple won't jeopardize the Intel line by introducing them, it would also proves to be a hard sell from the GHZ parity, the MHZ myth is still here
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Correct me if I am wrong, but I could have sworn he said, "by this time next year," meaning that in less than a year we will start to see the transition to x86 hardware commence.
He did indeed say "by this time next year," but I still think that means "something will ship in June 2006." This is still Apple we're talking about.
I'm sure Apple has a very carefully-contrived roadmap of what products will ship when, based on necessity for updates and expected bumps to the current lines. Really, it's to their advantage to make the change happen in the entire line in as narrow a window as possible, because once the first Intel machines are out there, it will be worse for sales of the other lines than what we have now, which is just the knowledge that they're coming eventually. We saw that with the G5; the very first question was, "What about the PowerBook?"