Well, yes, but if I am not mistaken, Apple said that the first Intel-based Macintosh will be ready for 6/6/2006.
actually, when I watched the keynote, it sounded like to me that he stated by next year, People will already have and be using them, didnt sound like they would start shipping them, so we may get them early next year.
"So, i met this guy. he was great! really nice to me. he was honest, and never coufused me with mixed messeges, or odd behavior. verrrry good looking. he had a garage band, and, made films. he had taken so many pictures, and he showed them all to me anytime i wanted. I kind like nerds, and he was really into unix, it was cute. he never asked me to, but i wanted to - so, when the time came - i did it.
In addition, Yonah-series processors will be adopted by Apple Computer, which agreed to use Intel microprocessors for its Macintosh computers starting in 2006.
I can't wait for dual-core iBooks and PowerBooks (667MHz bus!).
I can't wait for dual-core iBooks and PowerBooks (667MHz bus!).
I would like to see a dual-core iBook also, but the iBooks will most likely get the single-core Yonah which, if I am not mistaken, is a Celeron-M which has a 533 MHz front side bus. The link you posted has a chart showing the chips and it looks like there is going to be a single-core chips with a 667 MHz front side bus. Hopefully, this chip is not a celeron and Apple puts it into the iBooks.
I would like to see a dual-core iBook also, but the iBooks will most likely get the single-core Yonah which, if I am not mistaken, is a Celeron-M which has a 533 MHz front side bus. The link you posted has a chart showing the chips and it looks like there is going to be a single-core chips with a 667 MHz front side bus. Hopefully, this chip is not a celeron and Apple puts it into the iBooks.
Whats wrong with a 533 MHz FSB? Don't you think it's paralyzed now with its 167 MHz FSB...
Whats wrong with a 533 MHz FSB? Don't you think it's paralyzed now with its 167 MHz FSB...
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
dude, i would commit harakiri if i found out they were going to put Celerons in my iBook. the name sends shivers down my spine. nah, no way steve-o is going to use Celerons... bleahhhhh
see? also, we see why Intel is happy to get Apple on board to sex-up all their stuff. "x86" "pentium" and "celeron" all remind a lot of people of the late-90s early-2000s crap, like celeron... Intel also reminds people of windoze and security problems.
with Apple, Intel gets a sexy customer, plus tons of 'free' marketing to boot. (pun not so intended but hey, it works.. )
Man am i lucky!, I picked up a refurb PB 1.25 Superdrive to replace my beloved Ti400 - and its a great machine, I didnt think the current refresh was very good. But now I can just enjoy my PB till a dual core 2.13G - a "nice" little upgrade.
Im guessing it could be a big announcement at MWSF in Jan
Heh, I never thought keeping track of future Mac processors could be so HARD. Not only are there many CPUs on Intel's road map, but they are all bursting at the seams with new technology! I mean, not only does Apple get the choice of one or two cores on their laptop CPUs, but they can decide on bus speed as well. And this is just going to go on and on and on, the new chips just never stop coming! Whoa!
My question, or worry, is now regarding Apple's ability to Do The Right Thing. Will Apple hobble the iBook with the lowest bin of the Yonah series? Will Apple use the top-end Yonah for their Powerbook, and if so, will they give it the chipset it deserves, or choke it with a cheap-ass motherboard? No more excuses, Apple, you've got the power, the only question is, can you handle it?
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
This is completely misguided. Why do you care that the chip internals are the same? How would you even know if somebody didn't tell you? And how do you know that FSB speed isn't more important the CPU internals? And, by the way, the smaller L2 cache was one of the big differentiators in the Celeron.
The iBook is going to be slower than the PowerBook (if they even retain that nomenclature), but that will likely give it better battery life and let it be smaller, more rugged, and cheaper. If you need the performance, get a PowerBook. What they change to achieve their goals is irrelevent to you.
This is completely misguided. Why do you care that the chip internals are the same? How would you even know if somebody didn't tell you? And how do you know that FSB speed isn't more important the CPU internals? And, by the way, the smaller L2 cache was one of the big differentiators in the Celeron.
The iBook is going to be slower than the PowerBook (if they even retain that nomenclature), but that will likely give it better battery life and let it be smaller, more rugged, and cheaper. If you need the performance, get a PowerBook. What they change to achieve their goals is irrelevent to you.
but mommm, the sound of "Celeron" makes me want to throw up...!!
Without the optical you could have two battery bays !!!
Yes. That would be nice. Know what would be nicer? If Apple would allow you to choose which you wanted. Apple should bring the Duo back. It was such a damn cool idea. I'm sure it'd sell enough to justify the deployment cost. Sigh. Seriously, the Duo is reeeally a good idea. I might be one. See, I'm starting to get sick of laptops, for their limitations, however, if you had a Duo with a Duo Dock, via PCIe or some other sort of connection, you could have a faster drive in it, a nice optical drive, maybe even an option to have a slot in there for a desktop graphics card. It was a good idea. Then again so was the PDA and the digital camera, both of which Apple invented. Hm. Once they up Mac market share to 15% they should get back to developing cool stuff like PDAs, Tablets, and Duos.
Comments
Originally posted by TednDi
hey we got 3.6 ghz by summer of 2005 !!
only problem is the chip is intel and it is a dev platform.
i'm willing to overlook that
ah. 3.6 ghz in June 2005. in a MaciNtel "G6" no less
edit OMFG what am i saying?!!! i must be going delirious from lack of sleep since WWDC keynote....!!!!
where the hell is nebagaKid? i hope he's alright
Originally posted by PB
Well, yes, but if I am not mistaken, Apple said that the first Intel-based Macintosh will be ready for 6/6/2006.
actually, when I watched the keynote, it sounded like to me that he stated by next year, People will already have and be using them, didnt sound like they would start shipping them, so we may get them early next year.
"Intel Pentium M Merom - your bube will crap her pants"
I know it's a joke, but I actually think that would be a fantastic ad campaign. Just get some Jewish comedians to go ass wild with it.
We out here in middle America won't know what the hell they're talking about, but we'll love them for it.
Maybe even come out with a JewMac edition, complete with Star of David laser-engraved on the side.
I'm really liking this offensive ad campaign idea.
"So, i met this guy. he was great! really nice to me. he was honest, and never coufused me with mixed messeges, or odd behavior. verrrry good looking. he had a garage band, and, made films. he had taken so many pictures, and he showed them all to me anytime i wanted. I kind like nerds, and he was really into unix, it was cute. he never asked me to, but i wanted to - so, when the time came - i did it.
I'm ellen feinstein - i converted"
Think Kosher.
Let's assume that Intel knew Apple was bringing over OSX
so.... Intel appropriately renames the entire Apple product lines
with biblical names, just in time for the battle of all time.
Armageddon it!
Take the price and divide by 1/4 that's about the cost to the OEM.
Originally posted by MACchine
I have a very simple and basic question, but perhaps it can't be answered ?
Are these prices REAL, are they realistic, or are they just for the consumption of the press and Intel share holders ??
And do the actual prices drop RAPIDLY as quantities increase, more rapidly then IBM or AMD ???
I bet they DO but I have no evidence.
Digitimes confirms Apple will use the Yonah in early 2006:
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20050609A2006.html
In addition, Yonah-series processors will be adopted by Apple Computer, which agreed to use Intel microprocessors for its Macintosh computers starting in 2006.
I can't wait for dual-core iBooks and PowerBooks (667MHz bus!).
Originally posted by Existence
Confirmed!
Digitimes confirms Apple will use the Yonah in early 2006:
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20050609A2006.html
I can't wait for dual-core iBooks and PowerBooks (667MHz bus!).
I would like to see a dual-core iBook also, but the iBooks will most likely get the single-core Yonah which, if I am not mistaken, is a Celeron-M which has a 533 MHz front side bus. The link you posted has a chart showing the chips and it looks like there is going to be a single-core chips with a 667 MHz front side bus. Hopefully, this chip is not a celeron and Apple puts it into the iBooks.
Originally posted by troberts
I would like to see a dual-core iBook also, but the iBooks will most likely get the single-core Yonah which, if I am not mistaken, is a Celeron-M which has a 533 MHz front side bus. The link you posted has a chart showing the chips and it looks like there is going to be a single-core chips with a 667 MHz front side bus. Hopefully, this chip is not a celeron and Apple puts it into the iBooks.
Whats wrong with a 533 MHz FSB? Don't you think it's paralyzed now with its 167 MHz FSB...
Originally posted by ZoranS
Whats wrong with a 533 MHz FSB? Don't you think it's paralyzed now with its 167 MHz FSB...
you mean 133mhz fsb on the iBooks currently
http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html
Originally posted by ZoranS
Whats wrong with a 533 MHz FSB? Don't you think it's paralyzed now with its 167 MHz FSB...
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
Originally posted by troberts
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
dude, i would commit harakiri if i found out they were going to put Celerons in my iBook. the name sends shivers down my spine. nah, no way steve-o is going to use Celerons... bleahhhhh
see? also, we see why Intel is happy to get Apple on board to sex-up all their stuff. "x86" "pentium" and "celeron" all remind a lot of people of the late-90s early-2000s crap, like celeron... Intel also reminds people of windoze and security problems.
with Apple, Intel gets a sexy customer, plus tons of 'free' marketing to boot. (pun not so intended but hey, it works..
Originally posted by sunilraman
see? also, we see why Intel is happy to get Apple on board to sex-up all their stuff.
Im guessing it could be a big announcement at MWSF in Jan
Heh, I never thought keeping track of future Mac processors could be so HARD. Not only are there many CPUs on Intel's road map, but they are all bursting at the seams with new technology! I mean, not only does Apple get the choice of one or two cores on their laptop CPUs, but they can decide on bus speed as well. And this is just going to go on and on and on, the new chips just never stop coming! Whoa!
My question, or worry, is now regarding Apple's ability to Do The Right Thing. Will Apple hobble the iBook with the lowest bin of the Yonah series? Will Apple use the top-end Yonah for their Powerbook, and if so, will they give it the chipset it deserves, or choke it with a cheap-ass motherboard? No more excuses, Apple, you've got the power, the only question is, can you handle it?
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
..... No more excuses, Apple, you've got the power, the only question is, can you handle it?
i'm more worried if I can handle it
i've got 640mb ram (bought a Apacer 512mb pc2700 chip today) in my iBook 14" g4 933mhz now, so Tiger 10.4.1 is running as smooth as a baby's bottom...
now i've got no excuses not to be able to do whatever work it is i'm supposed to be doing on my iBook
<jack nicholson voice>
you want power? you think you can handle the power? you can't handle the power...!
i'm getting dizzy just thinking about a 2.5ghz dual-core Yonah Powerbook with 800mhz fsb, and DDR2 1gb ram, 100gb 7200rpm drive
oh no... it happened again...
and i just changed my pants
Originally posted by troberts
There is nothing wrong with a 533 MHz FSB, it's just that I would rather not have a Celeron in my iBook. When I see Celeron I think back to the first ones that came out which were complete crap. I do not care if the iBook has a slower FSB, less L2 cache, and slower memory than the PowerBook has, as long as the internals of the chip are the same.
This is completely misguided. Why do you care that the chip internals are the same? How would you even know if somebody didn't tell you? And how do you know that FSB speed isn't more important the CPU internals? And, by the way, the smaller L2 cache was one of the big differentiators in the Celeron.
The iBook is going to be slower than the PowerBook (if they even retain that nomenclature), but that will likely give it better battery life and let it be smaller, more rugged, and cheaper. If you need the performance, get a PowerBook. What they change to achieve their goals is irrelevent to you.
Originally posted by Programmer
This is completely misguided. Why do you care that the chip internals are the same? How would you even know if somebody didn't tell you? And how do you know that FSB speed isn't more important the CPU internals? And, by the way, the smaller L2 cache was one of the big differentiators in the Celeron.
The iBook is going to be slower than the PowerBook (if they even retain that nomenclature), but that will likely give it better battery life and let it be smaller, more rugged, and cheaper. If you need the performance, get a PowerBook. What they change to achieve their goals is irrelevent to you.
but mommm, the sound of "Celeron" makes me want to throw up...!!
Without the optical you could have two battery bays !!!
Yes. That would be nice. Know what would be nicer? If Apple would allow you to choose which you wanted. Apple should bring the Duo back. It was such a damn cool idea. I'm sure it'd sell enough to justify the deployment cost. Sigh. Seriously, the Duo is reeeally a good idea. I might be one. See, I'm starting to get sick of laptops, for their limitations, however, if you had a Duo with a Duo Dock, via PCIe or some other sort of connection, you could have a faster drive in it, a nice optical drive, maybe even an option to have a slot in there for a desktop graphics card. It was a good idea. Then again so was the PDA and the digital camera, both of which Apple invented. Hm. Once they up Mac market share to 15% they should get back to developing cool stuff like PDAs, Tablets, and Duos.