There are some (not "all") pro level PCs with dual-duals, but they don't use Intel processors. Woodcrests in late 2006 will be $1k+ each chips, so I wouldn't expect them in PMs.
You guys can all be optimistic, go ahead. I hope, with you, that I'm proved wrong.
I can't think of many pro level PC's other than BOXX, and Alienware, and they both have Dual Duals.
Im assuming that the release of the next PM's will be the dual cores mentioned by IBM that have been finalized and ready to be used. So with that note do you all think those will be the final PPC for the PM's that apple will use (and with what Jobs mentioned about more PPC product coming down the pipeline) ?
Yeesh. The recent 'non-update' to the PowerMac seems years away. Was it really only 5 months ago?
Seems longer.
I'm looking for dual core 2.3 or 2.5 at the low end.
(It should be 2.5! Because the 2.5 got mysteriously dropped from this update. Because I think Apple knew the dual core would have a 2.5 ceiling. Ergo? Next Update offers dual dual core 2.5, middle dual core 2.5, dual core 2.3 for low end. A marketing slight of hand...)
Yeesh. The recent 'non-update' to the PowerMac seems years away. Was it really only 5 months ago?
Seems longer.
I'm looking for dual core 2.3 or 2.5 at the low end.
(It should be 2.5! Because the 2.5 got mysteriously dropped from this update. Because I think Apple knew the dual core would have a 2.5 ceiling. Ergo? Next Update offers dual dual core 2.5, middle dual core 2.5, dual core 2.3 for low end. A marketing slight of hand...)
Hmmm...
Lemon Bon Bon
Yea Id be happy with a ual core 2.3 or 2.5, as long as the 2.5 dosnt have a liquid cooling system in it, which im not really keen on having inside a computer...liquid and electronics dont mesh to well sometimes ya know?
Im assuming that the release of the next PM's will be the dual cores mentioned by IBM that have been finalized and ready to be used. So with that note do you all think those will be the final PPC for the PM's that apple will use (and with what Jobs mentioned about more PPC product coming down the pipeline) ?
In assuming your correct that would mean that Apple is putting resources into a new motherboard design for the PPC just for one revision, and I highly doubt that as a possibility being their PPC designs are supposed to last the for like a minimum of 4 revisions. I really don't see the PPC getting anything new from Apple.
In assuming your correct that would mean that Apple is putting resources into a new motherboard design for the PPC just for one revision, and I highly doubt that as a possibility being their PPC designs are supposed to last the for like a minimum of 4 revisions. I really don't see the PPC getting anything new from Apple.
So do you think that the G5's will not see the light of day with dual core chips? I mean if not, we'll all have to wait until 2007 before we see the macintels in the power towers according to Jobs. Or, do you suppose IBM will deleiver single core chips that might reach 3 ghz in the meantime? I doubt that...
Jobs never said the PowerMac (or Mac tower) would be the last mac to get intel processors. He said all macs would have intel processors by the end of 2007. If intel produces dual core processors that are not for mobile computers before they make their mobile line why do you think Apple would wait? THey will release in the order that intel has processors ready.
I just can't imagine intel making all of their laptop, and mid size processors before they make their Xeon replacments. I think we'll see new PowerMacs get intel processors sooner than "some" of the other Macs.
Jobs never said the PowerMac (or Mac tower) would be the last mac to get intel processors. He said all macs would have intel processors by the end of 2007.
He said also that the transition will be bottom-up, from weak G4 machines to the more strong G5 ones. Besides, what 64-bit capable desktop CPU Intel has or will have before mid-2006? I don't see anytime soon a Xeon or Itanium based Power Mac, even more an iMac.
intel is introducing 64-bit support into its products from the top down, with the mobile processors not getting 64-bit support until late 2006/early 2007.
That is from the same article, and actually I didn't see a steve jobs quote in that article anywhere. If Apple is not introducing 64-bit, or even dual core technology into the lineup from the get go I really don't see the need for an upgrade being that everyone will know they are coming with the next revision. Apple already made that mistake once before with announcing the PowerMac would be at 3GHz in one year.
When people know newer better technology jumps are coming one upgrade away many don't bother to upgrade until it happens. Apple knows this. Or maybe they forgot. If they did they are probably in for a rude awakening.
Where exactly is a quote from Apple saying it would be bottom-up? I've never seen it, and it just seems to be an assumption that grew a life of its own.
That being said, also, it's not a rule that motherboards have to survive X number of product updates. They're transitioning platforms. The rules changed, if there ever was a rule in the first place. If you think short lifespans are bad, wait until they switch to Intel where motherboards change practically every other weekend to stay on the cutting edge.
Since we're not looking at a complete transition for another 2 years, current products don't have to sit stagnant. That's why I don't think a low-powered G5 PowerBook is entirely out of the question yet. A theoretical 2 year life would be plenty long enough for the platform.
Where exactly is a quote from Apple saying it would be bottom-up?
First, Arstechnica has not the reputation of making up things. Second, I remember either having hear it during the keynote, or some Apple executive said it after that (Phil Shiller perhaps, I don't remember). Now that I watch again the keynote, this statement is gone .
Now that I watch again the keynote, this statement is gone
It was never there to begin with. The mention of this bottom up thing I think originated from a cnet article. To my knowledge no apple executive has said anything about the plan for the transition besides done before the end of 2007.
It was never there to begin with. The mention of this bottom up thing I think originated from a cnet article. To my knowledge no apple executive has said anything about the plan for the transition besides done before the end of 2007.
I remember very clearly there was some statement like that, real and not from some rumor. But since I cannot prove anything, let's just say that I am wrong and continue the discussion on this basis.
Now the news is that Steve Jobs will not make the keynote presentation at Paris after all, though he will attend. I hope this doesn't mean possible new/upgraded hardware plans are delayed.
I'm still looking to buy a dual-(dual?) G5 and final cut studio... preferably soon.
Don't be fooled by his words. If the past can teach us something, "great products" means for him the regular updates Apple makes in the existing lines. The cases where it means more are rather the exception than the rule.
actually, i believe that now is the right time to design a new motherboard for the powermac line. a lot of pro's, including myself, are considering waiting for intel. but if apple came out with a compelling (re: fast) machine right now based on the g5 then i'd probably buy it and wait it out for rev. 2 of the macintels. a dual dual 2.5 would convince me to buy because i believe it could hold me over long enough to make the transition easier in the future.
I'm becoming concerned that Powermacs will linger in their current state for awhile. Waiting 2 years should just about kill off the line.
Even if "great new PPC products" are not in the coming Powermac lineup, it seems apple could release an updated version with PCI express, 8x dual-layer burner, faster bus etc etc - perhaps at a lower price point. This at least could "tide me over" until the Macintel rev. 2.
Those wanting Powermacs may be in for a long wait. It's that or windows...
I'd like to hold out hope for Paris, but that seems highly unlikely now ... unless something like the above was released to (minimal) fanfare.
I'll jump in and agree with Onlooker: PM's get Intels first.
Reasons: (1) History: the PM has always gotten the new processors first. (2) Ease of design: Just throw a standard motherboard in a box (hopefully smaller than the G5 case used for the dev kits). (3) Developers: they need the new platform first, and the dev kit is not a good solution. (4) Quickness: Intel's current chips are power hogs, and their dual-core chips are kludges, but in a tower case, so what?
Releasing PMs with Intels first is a quick win for Apple. I don't see why they wouldn't go for it.
Shortly: Presler Extreme Q1'06 "Numbered the 955, the processor will be dual core, support four threaded computing, have a total of 4MB of cache, support VT and clock at 3.46GHz with a 1066MHz bus."
Comments
Originally posted by cubist
I was just supplying the reasons as requested.
There are some (not "all") pro level PCs with dual-duals, but they don't use Intel processors. Woodcrests in late 2006 will be $1k+ each chips, so I wouldn't expect them in PMs.
You guys can all be optimistic, go ahead. I hope, with you, that I'm proved wrong.
I can't think of many pro level PC's other than BOXX, and Alienware, and they both have Dual Duals.
Seems longer.
I'm looking for dual core 2.3 or 2.5 at the low end.
(It should be 2.5! Because the 2.5 got mysteriously dropped from this update. Because I think Apple knew the dual core would have a 2.5 ceiling. Ergo? Next Update offers dual dual core 2.5, middle dual core 2.5, dual core 2.3 for low end. A marketing slight of hand...)
Hmmm...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Yeesh. The recent 'non-update' to the PowerMac seems years away. Was it really only 5 months ago?
Seems longer.
I'm looking for dual core 2.3 or 2.5 at the low end.
(It should be 2.5! Because the 2.5 got mysteriously dropped from this update. Because I think Apple knew the dual core would have a 2.5 ceiling. Ergo? Next Update offers dual dual core 2.5, middle dual core 2.5, dual core 2.3 for low end. A marketing slight of hand...)
Hmmm...
Lemon Bon Bon
Yea Id be happy with a ual core 2.3 or 2.5, as long as the 2.5 dosnt have a liquid cooling system in it, which im not really keen on having inside a computer...liquid and electronics dont mesh to well sometimes ya know?
Originally posted by hypoluxa
Im assuming that the release of the next PM's will be the dual cores mentioned by IBM that have been finalized and ready to be used. So with that note do you all think those will be the final PPC for the PM's that apple will use (and with what Jobs mentioned about more PPC product coming down the pipeline) ?
In assuming your correct that would mean that Apple is putting resources into a new motherboard design for the PPC just for one revision, and I highly doubt that as a possibility being their PPC designs are supposed to last the for like a minimum of 4 revisions. I really don't see the PPC getting anything new from Apple.
Originally posted by onlooker
In assuming your correct that would mean that Apple is putting resources into a new motherboard design for the PPC just for one revision, and I highly doubt that as a possibility being their PPC designs are supposed to last the for like a minimum of 4 revisions. I really don't see the PPC getting anything new from Apple.
So do you think that the G5's will not see the light of day with dual core chips? I mean if not, we'll all have to wait until 2007 before we see the macintels in the power towers according to Jobs. Or, do you suppose IBM will deleiver single core chips that might reach 3 ghz in the meantime? I doubt that...
I just can't imagine intel making all of their laptop, and mid size processors before they make their Xeon replacments. I think we'll see new PowerMacs get intel processors sooner than "some" of the other Macs.
Originally posted by onlooker
Jobs never said the PowerMac (or Mac tower) would be the last mac to get intel processors. He said all macs would have intel processors by the end of 2007.
He said also that the transition will be bottom-up, from weak G4 machines to the more strong G5 ones. Besides, what 64-bit capable desktop CPU Intel has or will have before mid-2006? I don't see anytime soon a Xeon or Itanium based Power Mac, even more an iMac.
intel is introducing 64-bit support into its products from the top down, with the mobile processors not getting 64-bit support until late 2006/early 2007.
That is from the same article, and actually I didn't see a steve jobs quote in that article anywhere. If Apple is not introducing 64-bit, or even dual core technology into the lineup from the get go I really don't see the need for an upgrade being that everyone will know they are coming with the next revision. Apple already made that mistake once before with announcing the PowerMac would be at 3GHz in one year.
When people know newer better technology jumps are coming one upgrade away many don't bother to upgrade until it happens. Apple knows this. Or maybe they forgot. If they did they are probably in for a rude awakening.
That being said, also, it's not a rule that motherboards have to survive X number of product updates. They're transitioning platforms. The rules changed, if there ever was a rule in the first place. If you think short lifespans are bad, wait until they switch to Intel where motherboards change practically every other weekend to stay on the cutting edge.
Since we're not looking at a complete transition for another 2 years, current products don't have to sit stagnant. That's why I don't think a low-powered G5 PowerBook is entirely out of the question yet. A theoretical 2 year life would be plenty long enough for the platform.
Originally posted by nowayout11
Where exactly is a quote from Apple saying it would be bottom-up?
First, Arstechnica has not the reputation of making up things. Second, I remember either having hear it during the keynote, or some Apple executive said it after that (Phil Shiller perhaps, I don't remember). Now that I watch again the keynote, this statement is gone
Now that I watch again the keynote, this statement is gone
It was never there to begin with. The mention of this bottom up thing I think originated from a cnet article. To my knowledge no apple executive has said anything about the plan for the transition besides done before the end of 2007.
Originally posted by jherrling
It was never there to begin with. The mention of this bottom up thing I think originated from a cnet article. To my knowledge no apple executive has said anything about the plan for the transition besides done before the end of 2007.
I remember very clearly there was some statement like that, real and not from some rumor. But since I cannot prove anything, let's just say that I am wrong and continue the discussion on this basis.
I'm still looking to buy a dual-(dual?) G5 and final cut studio... preferably soon.
C'mon great products in the pipeline,
Brian
Originally posted by bjewett
C'mon great products in the pipeline,
Don't be fooled by his words. If the past can teach us something, "great products" means for him the regular updates Apple makes in the existing lines. The cases where it means more are rather the exception than the rule.
But now that the Paris keynote is cancelled, I am not sure when Powermac will be update. I hope not another year of waiting.
Even if "great new PPC products" are not in the coming Powermac lineup, it seems apple could release an updated version with PCI express, 8x dual-layer burner, faster bus etc etc - perhaps at a lower price point. This at least could "tide me over" until the Macintel rev. 2.
Those wanting Powermacs may be in for a long wait. It's that or windows...
I'd like to hold out hope for Paris, but that seems highly unlikely now ... unless something like the above was released to (minimal) fanfare.
Reasons: (1) History: the PM has always gotten the new processors first. (2) Ease of design: Just throw a standard motherboard in a box (hopefully smaller than the G5 case used for the dev kits). (3) Developers: they need the new platform first, and the dev kit is not a good solution. (4) Quickness: Intel's current chips are power hogs, and their dual-core chips are kludges, but in a tower case, so what?
Releasing PMs with Intels first is a quick win for Apple. I don't see why they wouldn't go for it.
Originally posted by cubist
I'll jump in and agree with Onlooker: PM's get Intels first.
This was just announced.
Shortly: Presler Extreme Q1'06 "Numbered the 955, the processor will be dual core, support four threaded computing, have a total of 4MB of cache, support VT and clock at 3.46GHz with a 1066MHz bus."
Will it be enough?