"Great PowerPC products in the pipeline."

1234579

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 172
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,457member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Smircle

    "Great PowerPC products" is so typical Steve Jobs. There are no exciting products with this CPU coming out of Apple anymore and he knows it. Maybe some 1.8Ghz Powerbook and a 3Ghz water-cooled overclocked 970, yes, but that's it.



    Jobs kicked IBM and - to a lesser degree, since they are fading into oblivion anywayse, Freescale - publicly in the teeth. I don't expect IBM to take this gracefully or even to accellerate their product development. They obviously are focussing on servers and game consoles for the next years.



    PPC is over for Apple, the last releases are incremental updates, nothing more.




    Perhaps, but it really depends on how bad things have gotten on IBM's PPC roadmap. Apple needs the lead time to get through the transition, so they have to start now even though there might be one more generation of IBM PPC products that will serve them well (e.g. 970MP). If they have contracts in place with IBM and the products are almost ready then we may see the best PowerMacs yet in 2006. The PPC's big weakspot is the notebook space, and since notebook sales are overtaking (or have overtaken) desktop sales this is critical to Apple and the primary motivator of the x86-switch. IBM has no interest in the notebook market -- they are going after game consoles and servers.
  • Reply 122 of 172
    macchinemacchine Posts: 295member
    ITS ALL A CONSPIRACY !!!





    Apple went to Intel to get certain important intellectually properties.







    Which they will promptly convert to PPC and change just enough so they can patent them for their own.



    Then the PPC roadmap will suddenly become wonderful again...





    ... then Apple will go back to PPC.





    A couple of years later when Intel realizes what SJ did to them they will through a fit fire the current CEO and get a new one.
  • Reply 123 of 172
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    I suspect this move to Intel was driven by IBM's unwillingness to develop a low-power variant of the PPC 970 or 980. I find it hard to believe that Apple would move the Powermacs to Intel last, a whole two years from now, unless they had something that would carry the towers during this time.



    My money is on the 970mp. In two year's time, Intel will debut CPUs that will serve as honorable successors to the 970mp, and prior to this time a twin dual-core Powermac may reign superior to anything else on the desktop PC market.



    I predict dual 970mp Powermacs sometime this year, which will start with a bang and then fade since IBM won't be investing any more R&D on products for Apple.
  • Reply 124 of 172
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg



    My money is on the 970mp. In two year's time, Intel will debut CPUs that will serve as honorable successors to the 970mp, and prior to this time a twin dual-core Powermac may reign superior to anything else on the desktop PC market.



    I predict dual 970mp Powermacs sometime this year, which will start with a bang and then fade since IBM won't be investing any more R&D on products for Apple.




    Alright, now we are getting back on track. Let us see what we have now:



    Portables:



    (1) iBook: G4 up to 1.33 GHz.



    (2) Powerbook: G4 up to 1.67 GHz.



    Desktops:



    (1) Mac mini: G4 up to 1.42 GHz.



    (2) eMac: G4, 1. 42 GHz.



    (3) iMac: G5, up to 2.0 GHz.



    (4) Power Mac: G5, up to 2 x 2.7 GHz.



    The "Great PowerPC products" means for me that there will be updates to some or all the existing lines with PowerPC processors until the hardware transition starts. Nothing surprising. And with the G5 Power Mac surviving until the transition ends (two and half years from now), or so we believe, there probably will be two more G5 updates. But what? And when?



    The 970MP seems like an obvious choice for the Power Mac line but we don't know anything precise beyond the leaked IBM document some months ago. What about the iMacs? Will they survive as G5 machines up to the end with the Power Macs or they will get Intel chips before the Power Macs do? For the G4 machines, I believe that Apple will update them first with Intel processors from the next year.
  • Reply 125 of 172
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Smircle

    Jobs kicked IBM and - to a lesser degree, since they are fading into oblivion anywayse, Freescale - publicly in the teeth. I don't expect IBM to take this gracefully or even to accellerate their product development.



    That's a very strong point, Smircle. I think future PowerPC products are doomed from what has transpired, and this was sort of the sentiment I was trying to garner when I posted this thread. I think this means ? and has always meant ? that we will seen Intel-based Macs sooner rather than later. I'm not talking about Mac Expo Paris, but at least by MacWorld in January. The "great PowerPC products in the pipeline" stuff is all to keep the life in the hardware sales while they wrap up development of Intel Macs, which is what most consumers will wait for.
  • Reply 126 of 172
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Smircle



    Jobs kicked IBM and - to a lesser degree, since they are fading into oblivion anywayse, Freescale - publicly in the teeth. I don't expect IBM to take this gracefully or even to accellerate their product development.




    So it looks like:



    Several executives close to the last-minute dealings between Apple and I.B.M. said that Mr. Jobs waited until the last moment - 3 p.m. on Friday, June 4 - to inform Big Blue [IBM]. Those executives said that I.B.M. had learned about Apple's negotiations with Intel from news reports and that Apple had not returned phone calls in recent weeks

  • Reply 127 of 172
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PB

    So it looks like:



    Several executives close to the last-minute dealings between Apple and I.B.M. said that Mr. Jobs waited until the last moment - 3 p.m. on Friday, June 4 - to inform Big Blue [IBM]. Those executives said that I.B.M. had learned about Apple's negotiations with Intel from news reports and that Apple had not returned phone calls in recent weeks





    That's Steve Jobs for you. If this true, he might have to make his switch a little sooner than he planned. I don't expect big blue being too cooperative.
  • Reply 128 of 172
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    well, IBM was lame in developing the G5. so screw them!

    Plus the promise of a 3ghz chip made Steve mad.

    Hopefully with Intel we are not having this kind of problem anymore.
  • Reply 129 of 172
    cj171cj171 Posts: 144member
    my money's on Steve never mentioning a future processor speed goal ever again
  • Reply 130 of 172
    The dual core chips for XBox are being delivered to game developers. Was there a processor run on XBox chips that bumped the run of Apple 970MP chips or are they the same chip.



    When XBox starts using 3 dual core chips per machine in the 4th Quarter of this year will Apple get all the chips that they want?



    When the Cell processor goes into production next year for Sony will Apple get priority on the fab line?



    This stuff has been coming for two years. This is not a surprise to Steve or IBM. The development of the game machines has been going on for a long time. Apple has had the Intel project going for 5 years.



    The last straw for Steve was the fact that both Sony and Microsoft went IBM for their game machines letting Apple know exactly where they stand with respect to development.



    The 970 is very capable but it is headed in a different direction than what Apple needs. It is headed to game machines which has never been Apples thing. A dual dual Apple would still be a hell of machine but it won't sell laptops. Laptops is where the computer market is going. Computers as game machines are dead once the new XBox and Playstation come out.
  • Reply 131 of 172
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gugy

    well, IBM was lame in developing the G5. so screw them!

    Plus the promise of a 3ghz chip made Steve mad.

    Hopefully with Intel we are not having this kind of problem anymore.




    We have to get to intel first. What if IBM says forget it, we're making any more chips for you?
  • Reply 132 of 172
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BenRoethig

    We have to get to intel first. What if IBM says forget it, we're making any more chips for you?



    Won't happen. There is for sure a contract obligating them to produce chips until certain date. Believe me Steve is aware IBM is not happy now, so he would not take any chances.
  • Reply 133 of 172
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gugy

    Won't happen. There is for sure a contract obligating them to produce chips until certain date. Believe me Steve is aware IBM is not happy now, so he would not take any chances.



    Remember, this is the same guy who throw a temper tantrum and kept (superior) ATI radeon chips out of PowerMacs for a month because they jumped the gun a little bit. His ego doesn't exactly think things through at times.
  • Reply 134 of 172
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    very possible indeed. The Steve decisions must go trough Apple's board. So something important like chips would not be so easy for him to have a tantrum and put the whole production of computers in jeopardy.
  • Reply 135 of 172
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gugy

    very possible indeed. The Steve decisions must go trough Apple's board. So something important like chips would not be so easy for him to have a tantrum and put the whole production of computers in jeopardy.



    While I think Steve's temper can get the best of him, I don't think he's always irrational. I think his tantrums are a result of not being in control or when he's backed into a corner. With Intel, he has all the leverage he needs.
  • Reply 136 of 172
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    I expect most of the R&D on potential upcoming PPC chips is already done. If so, surely IBM and Freescale would want to sell those chips to Apple for upcoming upgrades over the next 18 months, to recoup the money already spent. While IBM and Freescale probably are not happy about Apple's plans, business decisions that involve many millions of dollars aren't usually made based on hurt feelings.
  • Reply 137 of 172
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,427member
    this has been going on for 5 years, it's a board approved stategy no surprise to apple leadership. it made sense then and it makes special sense now. apple decided it didn't want to be held back or held hostage by a chip vendor. products have been designed that have specific chip needs, that is known to steve and the board and we will surprised. 5 years is forever in this market so many projects are working. I bet when steve first started that was made clear to make os the star and not the chip
  • Reply 138 of 172
    tubgirltubgirl Posts: 177member
    i think all models will probably get atleast one more ppc based bump, afterall the intels are 12-24 months down the road.



    this is a scenario how the ppc->x86 transition could look like;



    1 - "soon" 2005: ibook and powerbook speed bump

    nothing extraordinary, only a few mhz. but the ibook will get a (low clocked) 9600 gfx-chip an maybe 512mb of 'bolt on' ram.



    2 - autum/fall 2005: mac mini speed bump.

    like what the ibook got.



    3 - early 2006: g5 speed bump

    a good speed bump for the g5 based machines (imac and powermac). but dont expect more than 2 cores for the pmac (dual singel core or single dual core).



    4 - summer 2006: *books go x86.

    with price and performance ranging from dirt cheap (good value) to outstanding (expensive),

    the bottom line ibook will probably stay 12" with use-time and portability/sturdiness as keywords and the fastest powerbook really, well... fast.



    5 - later 2006: mini goes x86

    the mini turned out to be quite a success, so apple decides to explore this concept further by splitting it into two:

    a) 'i cant belive its not a thin client'-sized model with really small footprint (maybe 'standing on a side' stylee) with specs and features in the spirit of the current mini.

    b) beefed up shuttle-sized model with limited expansion/configuraion capabilities, one fast pcie slot with a

    cheap graphics card (something like the nvidia 'turbo cache'-models), an extra 'slow' pcie slot and a resonable numner of memory slots (ie. more than one)

    apple can just use one of intels boards and make some minor adjustments.



    6 - spring/summer 2007: powermac goes x86

    dual intel-chips, two full speed pcie slots for dual graphics cards, a few 'ordinary' slots and whatever more

    you can expect from a top of the line workstation.





    -but what happened to the imac?!

    the new minis doesnt leave any room for the imac, so they're out.
  • Reply 139 of 172
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tubgirl

    -but what happened to the imac?!

    the new minis doesnt leave any room for the imac, so they're out.




    Wrong.
  • Reply 140 of 172
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    I think XServes could get upgraded sooner rather than later. The main apps you want are already heavily x86-based and I don't see your average LAMP (Linux Apache MySQL PHP) server needing the features of the G5.



    XAMP - OS X, Apache, MySQL, PHP.



    I think XAMP servers could be boosted by intel in addition to reducing power consumption. But who knows.
Sign In or Register to comment.