They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!
This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.
Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.
Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.
I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.
Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.
I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.
I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.
Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.
I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.
Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.
Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.
I agree. I am hoping they will release a 23" iMac then. Freek, I need more screen with resolution independence. I will take the 23" iMac now and Leopard in the spring.
I will be in Paris just after the Expo. Complete bummer.
It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.
Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.
Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999
I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!
It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.
Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.
Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999
I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!
The LV model may not be much easier to cool. Except for the 3 GHz version, all the normal Xeons have a 65 watt max use draw. The problem is that the LV requires the same FB DIMMS, which have a much bigger draw than standard DIMMS. Using two of those DIMMS brings the total draw back up to the power requirements of the Conroe, with no real advantage in performance, but for substantially more money.
The performance advantage for a laptop is debatable when coupled with a 2 hour, or less, battery life, and much more heat than the Meroms will consume.
Don't forget that the Merom uses max 35 watts, with much less draw on the memory as well. Also, the cooling requirements for FB DIMMS, as we are seeing, are substantial.
I can see some 15 - 20 pound PC laptops using this. But not a Mac. The same argument holds for the Mini.
I wonder if Apple is going to make larger Xserves that are 2 or 4 U form. They have the Xraid enclosure. I think a rack mounted workstation would be great, lots of people do prefer rack mounted solutions like the video and audio crowd tend to have lots of outboard gear that is rack mounted.
I wonder if Apple is going to make larger Xserves that are 2 or 4 U form. They have the Xraid enclosure. I think a rack mounted workstation would be great, lots of people do prefer rack mounted solutions like the video and audio crowd tend to have lots of outboard gear that is rack mounted.
This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.
This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.
Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.
remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.
Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.
remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.
That's wishful thinking.
large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:
Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.
Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do that?even for their large customers.
Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturers?no substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.
On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.
Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.
Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.
There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.
large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:
Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.
Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do that?even for their large customers.
Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturers?no substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.
On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.
Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.
Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.
There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.
Well, let's see how much of what you said doesn't hold water. Just my 2 cents.
1. Apple currently sells Xserves to plenty of Fortune 1000 companies and many are waiting for the Intel Xserves to be released.
2. Oracle Database and 10G apps run on Xserves.
3. Apple does have user installable service parts for their Xserves.
4. Plenty of high end Enterprise apps run on xserves including Remedy, SAP, and others that Enterprise Customers need.
5. They don't need the security software like the others since you can lock down an Xserve so it doesn't get hacked into. There is a White Paper issued by the CIA. Oh, the CIA doesn't use Windows from my understanding. It isn't secure.
6. Plenty of abilities out there and it is always going to get better.
7. The Roll Out strategy of having computers for three years is not what companies do since the others are always changing their systems around just like Apple. Some may have these requirements, but not ALL. Computer technology doubles every 18 months.
8. Apple does support older computers. AppleCare is a three year service contract.
Also, Microsoft charges for file/print, mail, streaming server, etc. And customers are looking for a less costly to implement and support option.
I know, I used to sell Microsoft crap into corporate and government accounts for years and the customers would always complain about Microsoft ripping them off.
Comments
This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.
They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!
This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.
While I certainly think that's possible, I prefer drblank's idea of a Woodcrest powered Mini.
LOL
How about TWO Conroe chips in the iMac Pro line? In a 23 or 30 monitor, I think they might have the room.
LOL
Don't push your luck.
I think the next gen MacBook Pros should have user replaceable drives like the MacBook. that is a cool idea.
I thought they were!
They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!
This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.
Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.
Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.
I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.
Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.
I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.
I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.
Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.
I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.
Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.
Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.
I agree. I am hoping they will release a 23" iMac then. Freek, I need more screen with resolution independence. I will take the 23" iMac now and Leopard in the spring.
I will be in Paris just after the Expo. Complete bummer.
There's a Xeon LV in the works that should be available in october or so:
Xeon 5148: dual-core 2.33GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 1333 FSB, DTP = 40W!!! Bulk price $519.
It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.
Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.
Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999
I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!
My thoughts about Woodcrest chips in another form factor Mac.
There's a Xeon LV in the works that should be available in october or so:
Xeon 5148: dual-core 2.33GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 1333 FSB, DTP = 40W!!! Bulk price $519.
It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.
Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.
Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999
I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!
The LV model may not be much easier to cool. Except for the 3 GHz version, all the normal Xeons have a 65 watt max use draw. The problem is that the LV requires the same FB DIMMS, which have a much bigger draw than standard DIMMS. Using two of those DIMMS brings the total draw back up to the power requirements of the Conroe, with no real advantage in performance, but for substantially more money.
The performance advantage for a laptop is debatable when coupled with a 2 hour, or less, battery life, and much more heat than the Meroms will consume.
Don't forget that the Merom uses max 35 watts, with much less draw on the memory as well. Also, the cooling requirements for FB DIMMS, as we are seeing, are substantial.
I can see some 15 - 20 pound PC laptops using this. But not a Mac. The same argument holds for the Mini.
I wonder if Apple is going to make larger Xserves that are 2 or 4 U form. They have the Xraid enclosure. I think a rack mounted workstation would be great, lots of people do prefer rack mounted solutions like the video and audio crowd tend to have lots of outboard gear that is rack mounted.
This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.
This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.
Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.
remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.
Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.
remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.
That's wishful thinking.
large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:
Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.
Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do that?even for their large customers.
Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturers?no substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.
On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.
Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.
Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.
There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.
That's wishful thinking.
large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:
Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.
Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do that?even for their large customers.
Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturers?no substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.
On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.
Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.
Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.
There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.
What's your background? What is your current job?
What's your background? What is your current job?
You can look at my profile, and then ask me more.
Hmmm.....
Well, let's see how much of what you said doesn't hold water. Just my 2 cents.
1. Apple currently sells Xserves to plenty of Fortune 1000 companies and many are waiting for the Intel Xserves to be released.
2. Oracle Database and 10G apps run on Xserves.
3. Apple does have user installable service parts for their Xserves.
4. Plenty of high end Enterprise apps run on xserves including Remedy, SAP, and others that Enterprise Customers need.
5. They don't need the security software like the others since you can lock down an Xserve so it doesn't get hacked into. There is a White Paper issued by the CIA. Oh, the CIA doesn't use Windows from my understanding. It isn't secure.
6. Plenty of abilities out there and it is always going to get better.
7. The Roll Out strategy of having computers for three years is not what companies do since the others are always changing their systems around just like Apple. Some may have these requirements, but not ALL. Computer technology doubles every 18 months.
8. Apple does support older computers. AppleCare is a three year service contract.
9. Apple does have a Consulting Services. http://www.apple.com/services/consulting/
10. What Audio Company did you work for?
I know, I used to sell Microsoft crap into corporate and government accounts for years and the customers would always complain about Microsoft ripping them off.