Right now Apple is taking care of the back to school market, with the free iPod (by rebate) and I don't believe that Core 2 will see the light of day until that is over.
I've also read about supply problems with Intel chip sets, which might delay things a bit - but not for long.
I seem to remember that Aug 28th was the official release date for Merom so I doubt if anything will happen before then. By then Apple will need to clear supply channels as much as possible, ensure they have sufficient quantities of components (especially processors and chip sets) and then decide what gets the first Core 2s. Can we say MBPs, with MBs to follow later? Then we can worry about the potential of Apple putting the up-coming quad core chip (forget the name) in MBPs.
Right now Apple is taking care of the back to school market, with the free iPod (by rebate) and I don't believe that Core 2 will see the light of day until that is over.
I've also read about supply problems with Intel chip sets, which might delay things a bit - but not for long.
I seem to remember that Aug 28th was the official release date for Merom so I doubt if anything will happen before then. By then Apple will need to clear supply channels as much as possible, ensure they have sufficient quantities of components (especially processors and chip sets) and then decide what gets the first Core 2s. Can we say MBPs, with MBs to follow later? Then we can worry about the potential of Apple putting the up-coming quad core chip (forget the name) in MBPs.
yak!! NO!!! QUAD CORE????!?!?!!!! Dang it! I can't get a MBP with a Core Duo if Core 2 Duo is right around the corner, and I can't get a MBP with Core 2 Duo if a Quad is right around the corner.... /cry make the speed bumps stop, mommy!
Apple announced the iMac a week after Intel announced the release of the processor. At or about that same time other companies announced support for this chip. I believe that by the time that Apple announced the iMac you could go on Dell's web site and configure a Core Duo computer...as I recall Gateway had them as well and I configured one for comparison. I don't know if Apple was the first to actually ship a Core Duo system to customers but I doubt it. The Woodcrest was announced a month before Apple announced the Mac Pro's, and as I understand it other manufacturers were shipping computers using this chip before Apple announced the Mac Pro. The same can now be said for the Core 2 Duo (aka Conroe) desktop chips, again a month after the release and other computer manufacturers shipping units (or at least scheduled to) and Apple has not announced a system using this chip. So Apple started out the year with announcements close to the rest of the industry, in their typical fashion are falling further and further behind. I know a pessimistic view based on the bad old days of the G4/G5 processor but I see the same pattern happening...its not new and it wasn't limited only to the G4 and G5 processors, the same thing happened back in the Clone days when Apple was almost always last to ship the latest and greatest chips, at times well over a month after the less expensive Power Computing models had been on the market and shipping.
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has not announced C2D computers yet.
1- The Mac Pro has just been released, let it have its few weeks of glory...
2- Both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities (according to some PC sites, I now browse sometimes to get general information on Intel chips)
3- Chipsets for both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities, or have been revised since the launch of the cpus (965 series for Conroe) and I'm not sure the Crestline chipset for Merom is shipping yet. While nVIDIA and ATI have announced chipsets for Conroe, they are not yet shipping, and I'm not sure Apple will use any of them soon. But I believe they will on some computers next year (nVIDIA for SLI). Intel's 975 chipset is shipping but I don't think it's the chipset Apple wants for the iMac (if it gets Conroe), it may be the chipset of choice for a mid-range tower, but... it's old news.
I'd rather Apple to wait for new/better chipsets to be available than just drop a faster Yonah or a new Merom in the current machines.
Celemourn: don't worry about a quad-core mobile cpu from Intel, it just won't happen before 2008! The best we could have is a Xeon LV 5148 in a very high-end 17" notebook (dual-core 2.33GHz, 1333 FSB, FD-DIMMs, 40W) but it's unlikely.
Kukito: I am still not sure about Merom or Conroe in the next iMac, I believe the silent feature is still important for the iMac, but with the relatively poor performance bump with Merom vs Yonah at the same speed, Apple may choose Conroe anyway... We'll see.
JCG & others, sept. 5th looks good for releasing at least:
1- new iMacs
2- new MacBook Pros
3- new Mac minis
MacBooks are selling so well, updates can wait (november) for after the new iPods
(october).
And don't worry about Apple, all their computers are now Core based - even the Xeon ones... while Dell, HP, Sony and others are still advertising (and trying to sell) Celeron, Pentium M and D computers!!!
Now Apple has not announced a system using an available chip, the Core 2 Duo desktop variant. There may be many reasons for this from lack sufficient supply from Intel to delays in the custom mother board that Apple needs for their systems, to a marketing decision from Apple to delay the release so that the press concentrates on the Mac Pro to maximize exposure to this system's release. None of these bode well for Apple in my opinion, though the last reason is probably the least worrying if it is the reason. I think that if Apple continues to lag in announcing new systems then part of their image as an innovator, at least on the hardware front, is tarnished since they will be late to market with systems using the new chips. The switch to Intel demands a change in their marketing strategy in this regard so that they are not "following the leader" with new systems as Intel releases new chips.
As you stated in your previous post the MacPro uses the Xeon chip this was an easy change for Apple because these chips and the entire system design is based off a standard desktop configuration.
The imac has far more issues and I dont believe it has to do with supply. The market seems to have plenty of e6300 e6400 chips with the 4meg e6600 and e6700 a bit behind. I dont see a 6800 in a mac ever. The imac will have two issues heat and power. Right now the imac is pushed to the limit when it comes to heat and power supply it has a ati 1600 card which is about as far as you can go without needing extended power for the gpu. Consumers are expecting a gpu upgrade in the next imac.
The fact is Apple needs to stop trying to put out cute hardware and get real if they expect to compete with Dell or HP. I have always said that Steve Jobs is confused thinking Apple is a hardward company and not a software company. There is nothing special about mac hardware even more so now with the move to intel.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design. Make all the cute ipod they want they need to put out a mainstream system that users can upgrade and that you cant cook stuff on because of heat issue.
On a side note if you look at the MacPro hardward spec they are a joke for 2500.00. The cpu is fine, 1gig of ram and a gf 7300 card are a joke. How about dual dvd-rw drives for 2500.00 wouldnt that be a nice change. We could get crazy and also ask for dual hard drives with raid for 2500.00 but that might be going too wild.....
On a side note if you look at the MacPro hardward spec they are a joke for 2500.00. The cpu is fine, 1gig of ram and a gf 7300 card are a joke. How about dual dvd-rw drives for 2500.00 wouldnt that be a nice change. We could get crazy and also ask for dual hard drives with raid for 2500.00 but that might be going too wild.....
I know what you mean, but that's being a bit harsh on Apple. The CPUs, RAM, motherboard and the best case in the business are extremely expensive - so Apple had to go with slightly embarassingly cheap GPU and a few other cut corners just to make the price vaguely acceptable. Personally, the lack of standard BT+WiFi, and front row are appaling, but with the exception of front row, all the deficiencies are easy to upgrade at BTO or later.
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
Thank you. I rather enjoyed the debate. I admit that I was ignorant on a few facts surrounding the Woodcrest CPU and its relation to the Core Duo line, and the debate made me look for information to back up my points, and I learned that you were correct in your assertion that the Woodcrest is a Core chip. I think that my basic point is still correct, but I was talking about product names that Intel is using to market the chips. The way I read your comments you were talking about archetecture, so we were really talking about two different things.
...The imac has far more issues and I dont believe it has to do with supply. The market seems to have plenty of e6300 e6400 chips with the 4meg e6600 and e6700 a bit behind. I dont see a 6800 in a mac ever. The imac will have two issues heat and power. Right now the imac is pushed to the limit when it comes to heat and power supply it has a ati 1600 card which is about as far as you can go without needing extended power for the gpu. Consumers are expecting a gpu upgrade in the next imac.
The fact is Apple needs to stop trying to put out cute hardware and get real if they expect to compete with Dell or HP. I have always said that Steve Jobs is confused thinking Apple is a hardward company and not a software company. There is nothing special about mac hardware even more so now with the move to intel.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design. Make all the cute ipod they want they need to put out a mainstream system that users can upgrade and that you cant cook stuff on because of heat issue...
I hope that this is not the case, because if so then I think that it is rather short sighted of Apple to design the iMac the way it is. If it cannot handle the heat from not only the chips available today but also those that are expected to come out in the next 2 years then it needs a redesign, and since it was originally designed for the G5, which from what I have read is hotter than the new Intel chips it was rather short sighted indead. If the only way they can upgrade the processor is to put in the lower power laptop chips I think that this is short sighted as well, since they would be relying on only one chip line to power 3-4 products most of Apple's computer line would be hurt by constrained supplies. This looks like a bad buisiness decision to me and one that I would hope that Apple had learned from the G4/5 days that are not long past.
I hope that this is not the case, because if so then I think that it is rather short sighted of Apple to design the iMac the way it is. If it cannot handle the heat from not only the chips available today but also those that are expected to come out in the next 2 years then it needs a redesign, and since it was originally designed for the G5, which from what I have read is hotter than the new Intel chips it was rather short sighted indead. If the only way they can upgrade the processor is to put in the lower power laptop chips I think that this is short sighted as well, since they would be relying on only one chip line to power 3-4 products most of Apple's computer line would be hurt by constrained supplies. This looks like a bad buisiness decision to me and one that I would hope that Apple had learned from the G4/5 days that are not long past.
It would be nice if they learned from their mistakes however they seem to keep creating the same problems with their laptops. Apple loves to make 12 and 13 inch laptop screens yet they still continue to have heat issues. Before intel chips Apple stayed with a G4 chip in their laptops not because it was good enough to work its because a G5 would have toasted them and they could never figure out the heat issue. On the flip side this could work to the consumers advantage, Apple might have no choic but to go to a 23" imac for the simple fact it gives added internal space.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design.
It would be nice if they learned from their mistakes however they seem to keep creating the same problems with their laptops. Apple loves to make 12 and 13 inch laptop screens yet they still continue to have heat issues. Before intel chips Apple stayed with a G4 chip in their laptops not because it was good enough to work its because a G5 would have toasted them and they could never figure out the heat issue. On the flip side this could work to the consumers advantage, Apple might have no choic but to go to a 23" imac for the simple fact it gives added internal space.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has not announced C2D computers yet.
1- The Mac Pro has just been released, let it have its few weeks of glory...
2- Both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities (according to some PC sites, I now browse sometimes to get general information on Intel chips)
None of the Core 2 Duo models are difficult to acquire. Especially buying them in quantity from Intel.
Quote:
3- Chipsets for both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities, or have been revised since the launch of the cpus (965 series for Conroe) and I'm not sure the Crestline chipset for Merom is shipping yet. While nVIDIA and ATI have announced chipsets for Conroe, they are not yet shipping, and I'm not sure Apple will use any of them soon. But I believe they will on some computers next year (nVIDIA for SLI). Intel's 975 chipset is shipping but I don't think it's the chipset Apple wants for the iMac (if it gets Conroe), it may be the chipset of choice for a mid-range tower, but... it's old news.
As Merom is a drop-in replacement to Yonah, and P965 isn't hard to buy, chipsets wouldn't be a roadblock at all.
Quote:
I'd rather Apple to wait for new/better chipsets to be available than just drop a faster Yonah or a new Merom in the current machines.
What feature are you looking for in Bearlake? (mid 2007) WYSIWYG until then.
Wrong! You are as ignorant as you are stubborn. G4 and G5 use different cores. Woodcrest, Conroe (Core 2 Duo for desktops) and Merom (Core 2 Duo for laptops) are based on the same core. For your edification, I refer you to this page:
As you can see, Woodcrest (Xeon 5100 series) is a faster version of the same core used for Conroe and Merom.
You're right but,
There is some reason for confusion. From the Intel site you referenced, under the heading "Mainstream Server Platforms" which describes the Xeon, no where does in mention Core 2 ® Duo. If I had the time or inclination, Intel probably does mention Core 2 ® Duo somewhere the white papers for the Xeon processor.
Maybe Digital Disasta should have specified Conroe in the original post.
It really just does boil down to the fact that some manufacturers have introduced desktops with Core 2 ® Duo processors and as yet Apple hasn't. I'm betting they will very soon, though.
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
Maybe I am misunderstanding what you're saying, but if you mean that the Core 2 ® Duo isn't available in desktops here is a list from Intel with about 8 models.
How so? Mac is recalling laptop batteries just like eveyrone else. Mac has had major heat issue with their laptops. Do you disagree with these statements? Apple is not a hardware company in spite of Steve Jobs being delusional about that fact. Their power is in their OS and the way it allows OEM softward to function within that OS. I will agree that the little teen girls playing with the iMac at the mall like how cute they are but I think Apple needs to get by that.
Computers are tools, they perform a function the hardware should be designed based on performance not looks.
How so? Mac is recalling laptop batteries just like eveyrone else. Mac has had major heat issue with their laptops. Do you disagree with these statements? Apple is not a hardware company in spite of Steve Jobs being delusional about that fact. Their power is in their OS and the way it allows OEM softward to function within that OS. I will agree that the little teen girls playing with the iMac at the mall like how cute they are but I think Apple needs to get by that.
Computers are tools, they perform a function the hardware should be designed based on performance not looks.
Ok... IGNORING the misuse of Mac vs Apple, and assuming that it's simple carelessness rather than lack of understanding...
From what I've read, the heat problems were assembly line SNAFUs. Too much thermal paste being used. Also not that widespread, I think, or we'd see MUCH more complaining going on, and eventually a recall.
Apple is a hardware company because hardware sales are its primary source of revenue. These sales are powered by the strength of their OS.
OEMs make hardware, not software, but we get your point.
Different strokes for different folks. The appeal that Macintosh has to you is not the only valid reason for owning one. The aesthetic appeal, the ease of use, the cool factor, and the fact that a MacPro would make an excelent boat anchor (how much does it weight, 55 lb? and those handles would grab the ground pretty well too!) are all valid reasons. As long as a customer recieves the benefit from the purchase that they expected, they had a valid reason for buying it, regardless of what that actual reason may be.
If you decided to learn how to use the phrases, "I feel," "I think," "It seems to me," and "I believe," I suspect that you might start to sound less like a crazed zelot, and more like a reasonable, mature, thinking individual whose opinions are worth considering and are likely to be a positive contribution to whatever discussion is taking place.
Ok... IGNORING the misuse of Mac vs Apple, and assuming that it's simple carelessness rather than lack of understanding...
From what I've read, the heat problems were assembly line SNAFUs. Too much thermal paste being used. Also not that widespread, I think, or we'd see MUCH more complaining going on, and eventually a recall.
Apple is a hardware company because hardware sales are its primary source of revenue. These sales are powered by the strength of their OS.
OEMs make hardware, not software, but we get your point.
Different strokes for different folks. The appeal that Macintosh has to you is not the only valid reason for owning one. The aesthetic appeal, the ease of use, the cool factor, and the fact that a MacPro would make an excelent boat anchor (how much does it weight, 55 lb? and those handles would grab the ground pretty well too!) are all valid reasons. As long as a customer recieves the benefit from the purchase that they expected, they had a valid reason for buying it, regardless of what that actual reason may be.
If you decided to learn how to use the phrases, "I feel," "I think," "It seems to me," and "I believe," I suspect that you might start to sound less like a crazed zelot, and more like a reasonable, mature, thinking individual whose opinions are worth considering and are likely to be a positive contribution to whatever discussion is taking place.
But you'll figure that out when you get older.
Thanks for saving me the time to reply to him about Mac's strategy plan, eh mac?
extremeskater-You have twice now clearly displayed your ignorance of the Mac platform (1. Your insistence that Apple could not do what they have already done wrt iMac. 2. Your decision that S.J. is delusional about the strategy of the company he is the CEO of )
Thanks for saving me the time to reply to him about Mac's strategy plan, eh mac?
extremeskater-You have twice now clearly displayed your ignorance of the Mac platform (1. Your insistence that Apple could not do what they have already done wrt iMac. 2. Your decision that S.J. is delusional about the strategy of the company he is the CEO of )
Excellent link! Very uh...... damnit, how do I spell that word??? susinct? DAMN THIS WINDOWS PC AND ITS AINT-GOT-NO-SPELL-CHECKER WEB BROWSERS!!!!!!!!!! GAR!!!!!
*EDIT* I'm gonna get a tablet computer here pretty quick. I'm holding out till the upcomming phase of Mac updates is complete just on the off chance that Apple bestows a boon on us... I'm gonna be really pissed if I have to get another windows machine. I think I'm gonna be pissed.
Comments
Is it just me, or does this post look disturbingly like the majority of the messages in my SPAM box?
What do you want to know p.s. if you dont like my post how do I take it down ?
Steve is gonig to uvale Core 2 Duo prossers. (France)
But who is gonig to uvale them if not steve
I've also read about supply problems with Intel chip sets, which might delay things a bit - but not for long.
I seem to remember that Aug 28th was the official release date for Merom so I doubt if anything will happen before then. By then Apple will need to clear supply channels as much as possible, ensure they have sufficient quantities of components (especially processors and chip sets) and then decide what gets the first Core 2s. Can we say MBPs, with MBs to follow later? Then we can worry about the potential of Apple putting the up-coming quad core chip (forget the name) in MBPs.
Right now Apple is taking care of the back to school market, with the free iPod (by rebate) and I don't believe that Core 2 will see the light of day until that is over.
I've also read about supply problems with Intel chip sets, which might delay things a bit - but not for long.
I seem to remember that Aug 28th was the official release date for Merom so I doubt if anything will happen before then. By then Apple will need to clear supply channels as much as possible, ensure they have sufficient quantities of components (especially processors and chip sets) and then decide what gets the first Core 2s. Can we say MBPs, with MBs to follow later? Then we can worry about the potential of Apple putting the up-coming quad core chip (forget the name) in MBPs.
yak!! NO!!! QUAD CORE????!?!?!!!! Dang it! I can't get a MBP with a Core Duo if Core 2 Duo is right around the corner, and I can't get a MBP with Core 2 Duo if a Quad is right around the corner.... /cry make the speed bumps stop, mommy!
Apple announced the iMac a week after Intel announced the release of the processor. At or about that same time other companies announced support for this chip. I believe that by the time that Apple announced the iMac you could go on Dell's web site and configure a Core Duo computer...as I recall Gateway had them as well and I configured one for comparison. I don't know if Apple was the first to actually ship a Core Duo system to customers but I doubt it. The Woodcrest was announced a month before Apple announced the Mac Pro's, and as I understand it other manufacturers were shipping computers using this chip before Apple announced the Mac Pro. The same can now be said for the Core 2 Duo (aka Conroe) desktop chips, again a month after the release and other computer manufacturers shipping units (or at least scheduled to) and Apple has not announced a system using this chip. So Apple started out the year with announcements close to the rest of the industry, in their typical fashion are falling further and further behind. I know a pessimistic view based on the bad old days of the G4/G5 processor but I see the same pattern happening...its not new and it wasn't limited only to the G4 and G5 processors, the same thing happened back in the Clone days when Apple was almost always last to ship the latest and greatest chips, at times well over a month after the less expensive Power Computing models had been on the market and shipping.
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
1- The Mac Pro has just been released, let it have its few weeks of glory...
2- Both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities (according to some PC sites, I now browse sometimes to get general information on Intel chips)
3- Chipsets for both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities, or have been revised since the launch of the cpus (965 series for Conroe) and I'm not sure the Crestline chipset for Merom is shipping yet. While nVIDIA and ATI have announced chipsets for Conroe, they are not yet shipping, and I'm not sure Apple will use any of them soon. But I believe they will on some computers next year (nVIDIA for SLI). Intel's 975 chipset is shipping but I don't think it's the chipset Apple wants for the iMac (if it gets Conroe), it may be the chipset of choice for a mid-range tower, but... it's old news.
I'd rather Apple to wait for new/better chipsets to be available than just drop a faster Yonah or a new Merom in the current machines.
Celemourn: don't worry about a quad-core mobile cpu from Intel, it just won't happen before 2008! The best we could have is a Xeon LV 5148 in a very high-end 17" notebook (dual-core 2.33GHz, 1333 FSB, FD-DIMMs, 40W) but it's unlikely.
Kukito: I am still not sure about Merom or Conroe in the next iMac, I believe the silent feature is still important for the iMac, but with the relatively poor performance bump with Merom vs Yonah at the same speed, Apple may choose Conroe anyway... We'll see.
JCG & others, sept. 5th looks good for releasing at least:
1- new iMacs
2- new MacBook Pros
3- new Mac minis
MacBooks are selling so well, updates can wait (november) for after the new iPods
(october).
And don't worry about Apple, all their computers are now Core based - even the Xeon ones... while Dell, HP, Sony and others are still advertising (and trying to sell) Celeron, Pentium M and D computers!!!
Now Apple has not announced a system using an available chip, the Core 2 Duo desktop variant. There may be many reasons for this from lack sufficient supply from Intel to delays in the custom mother board that Apple needs for their systems, to a marketing decision from Apple to delay the release so that the press concentrates on the Mac Pro to maximize exposure to this system's release. None of these bode well for Apple in my opinion, though the last reason is probably the least worrying if it is the reason. I think that if Apple continues to lag in announcing new systems then part of their image as an innovator, at least on the hardware front, is tarnished since they will be late to market with systems using the new chips. The switch to Intel demands a change in their marketing strategy in this regard so that they are not "following the leader" with new systems as Intel releases new chips.
As you stated in your previous post the MacPro uses the Xeon chip this was an easy change for Apple because these chips and the entire system design is based off a standard desktop configuration.
The imac has far more issues and I dont believe it has to do with supply. The market seems to have plenty of e6300 e6400 chips with the 4meg e6600 and e6700 a bit behind. I dont see a 6800 in a mac ever. The imac will have two issues heat and power. Right now the imac is pushed to the limit when it comes to heat and power supply it has a ati 1600 card which is about as far as you can go without needing extended power for the gpu. Consumers are expecting a gpu upgrade in the next imac.
The fact is Apple needs to stop trying to put out cute hardware and get real if they expect to compete with Dell or HP. I have always said that Steve Jobs is confused thinking Apple is a hardward company and not a software company. There is nothing special about mac hardware even more so now with the move to intel.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design. Make all the cute ipod they want they need to put out a mainstream system that users can upgrade and that you cant cook stuff on because of heat issue.
On a side note if you look at the MacPro hardward spec they are a joke for 2500.00. The cpu is fine, 1gig of ram and a gf 7300 card are a joke. How about dual dvd-rw drives for 2500.00 wouldnt that be a nice change. We could get crazy and also ask for dual hard drives with raid for 2500.00 but that might be going too wild.....
On a side note if you look at the MacPro hardward spec they are a joke for 2500.00. The cpu is fine, 1gig of ram and a gf 7300 card are a joke. How about dual dvd-rw drives for 2500.00 wouldnt that be a nice change. We could get crazy and also ask for dual hard drives with raid for 2500.00 but that might be going too wild.....
I know what you mean, but that's being a bit harsh on Apple. The CPUs, RAM, motherboard and the best case in the business are extremely expensive - so Apple had to go with slightly embarassingly cheap GPU and a few other cut corners just to make the price vaguely acceptable. Personally, the lack of standard BT+WiFi, and front row are appaling, but with the exception of front row, all the deficiencies are easy to upgrade at BTO or later.
David
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
Thank you. I rather enjoyed the debate. I admit that I was ignorant on a few facts surrounding the Woodcrest CPU and its relation to the Core Duo line, and the debate made me look for information to back up my points, and I learned that you were correct in your assertion that the Woodcrest is a Core chip. I think that my basic point is still correct, but I was talking about product names that Intel is using to market the chips. The way I read your comments you were talking about archetecture, so we were really talking about two different things.
...The imac has far more issues and I dont believe it has to do with supply. The market seems to have plenty of e6300 e6400 chips with the 4meg e6600 and e6700 a bit behind. I dont see a 6800 in a mac ever. The imac will have two issues heat and power. Right now the imac is pushed to the limit when it comes to heat and power supply it has a ati 1600 card which is about as far as you can go without needing extended power for the gpu. Consumers are expecting a gpu upgrade in the next imac.
The fact is Apple needs to stop trying to put out cute hardware and get real if they expect to compete with Dell or HP. I have always said that Steve Jobs is confused thinking Apple is a hardward company and not a software company. There is nothing special about mac hardware even more so now with the move to intel.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design. Make all the cute ipod they want they need to put out a mainstream system that users can upgrade and that you cant cook stuff on because of heat issue...
I hope that this is not the case, because if so then I think that it is rather short sighted of Apple to design the iMac the way it is. If it cannot handle the heat from not only the chips available today but also those that are expected to come out in the next 2 years then it needs a redesign, and since it was originally designed for the G5, which from what I have read is hotter than the new Intel chips it was rather short sighted indead. If the only way they can upgrade the processor is to put in the lower power laptop chips I think that this is short sighted as well, since they would be relying on only one chip line to power 3-4 products most of Apple's computer line would be hurt by constrained supplies. This looks like a bad buisiness decision to me and one that I would hope that Apple had learned from the G4/5 days that are not long past.
I hope that this is not the case, because if so then I think that it is rather short sighted of Apple to design the iMac the way it is. If it cannot handle the heat from not only the chips available today but also those that are expected to come out in the next 2 years then it needs a redesign, and since it was originally designed for the G5, which from what I have read is hotter than the new Intel chips it was rather short sighted indead. If the only way they can upgrade the processor is to put in the lower power laptop chips I think that this is short sighted as well, since they would be relying on only one chip line to power 3-4 products most of Apple's computer line would be hurt by constrained supplies. This looks like a bad buisiness decision to me and one that I would hope that Apple had learned from the G4/5 days that are not long past.
It would be nice if they learned from their mistakes however they seem to keep creating the same problems with their laptops. Apple loves to make 12 and 13 inch laptop screens yet they still continue to have heat issues. Before intel chips Apple stayed with a G4 chip in their laptops not because it was good enough to work its because a G5 would have toasted them and they could never figure out the heat issue. On the flip side this could work to the consumers advantage, Apple might have no choic but to go to a 23" imac for the simple fact it gives added internal space.
Apple can not jam a good gpu, cpu, 2 gigs of ram and 250gigs of hard drive space, expect to power it correctly and keep it cool into the current imac design.
It would be nice if they learned from their mistakes however they seem to keep creating the same problems with their laptops. Apple loves to make 12 and 13 inch laptop screens yet they still continue to have heat issues. Before intel chips Apple stayed with a G4 chip in their laptops not because it was good enough to work its because a G5 would have toasted them and they could never figure out the heat issue. On the flip side this could work to the consumers advantage, Apple might have no choic but to go to a 23" imac for the simple fact it gives added internal space.
You, my friend, are NUTS.
It doesn't bother me that Apple has not announced C2D computers yet.
1- The Mac Pro has just been released, let it have its few weeks of glory...
2- Both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities (according to some PC sites, I now browse sometimes to get general information on Intel chips)
None of the Core 2 Duo models are difficult to acquire. Especially buying them in quantity from Intel.
3- Chipsets for both Conroe and Merom are not yet shipping in quantities, or have been revised since the launch of the cpus (965 series for Conroe) and I'm not sure the Crestline chipset for Merom is shipping yet. While nVIDIA and ATI have announced chipsets for Conroe, they are not yet shipping, and I'm not sure Apple will use any of them soon. But I believe they will on some computers next year (nVIDIA for SLI). Intel's 975 chipset is shipping but I don't think it's the chipset Apple wants for the iMac (if it gets Conroe), it may be the chipset of choice for a mid-range tower, but... it's old news.
As Merom is a drop-in replacement to Yonah, and P965 isn't hard to buy, chipsets wouldn't be a roadblock at all.
I'd rather Apple to wait for new/better chipsets to be available than just drop a faster Yonah or a new Merom in the current machines.
What feature are you looking for in Bearlake? (mid 2007) WYSIWYG until then.
Wrong! You are as ignorant as you are stubborn. G4 and G5 use different cores. Woodcrest, Conroe (Core 2 Duo for desktops) and Merom (Core 2 Duo for laptops) are based on the same core. For your edification, I refer you to this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_C...roarchitecture
and this one:
http://www.intel.com/technology/arch...icro/index.htm
As you can see, Woodcrest (Xeon 5100 series) is a faster version of the same core used for Conroe and Merom.
You're right but,
There is some reason for confusion. From the Intel site you referenced, under the heading "Mainstream Server Platforms" which describes the Xeon, no where does in mention Core 2 ® Duo. If I had the time or inclination, Intel probably does mention Core 2 ® Duo somewhere the white papers for the Xeon processor.
Maybe Digital Disasta should have specified Conroe in the original post.
It really just does boil down to the fact that some manufacturers have introduced desktops with Core 2 ® Duo processors and as yet Apple hasn't. I'm betting they will very soon, though.
I apologize for calling you ignorant. That wasn't very nice of me. And I agree that Apple should offer a more affordable desktop than the Mac Pro, aside from the iMac. I don't blame you for being confused about the code names vs retail names. That's Intel for you.
However, I have already provided all the documentation I needed to make my point so it's up to you to believe it or not. Apple was not only the first OEM to ship Core Duos but it still is the only major OEM to use them in desktop systems. The rest of the OEMs chose to use the slower, hotter, noisier and architecturally inferior Pentium D for desktops. (Or the superior, until last month, Athlon 64 X2s.) If you can supply proof to the contrary be my guest. Woodcrest is a better CPU than Conroe for the reasons you yourself have mentioned. If you don't believe me that's your problem. I will not waste any more of my time trying to convince you (with facts) of something that you absolutely refuse to believe.
Maybe I am misunderstanding what you're saying, but if you mean that the Core 2 ® Duo isn't available in desktops here is a list from Intel with about 8 models.
http://www.intel.com/buy/desktop/pc/core2duo.htm
If I misunderstood you I apologize in advance.
None of the Core 2 Duo models are difficult to acquire. Especially buying them in quantity from Intel.
As Merom is a drop-in replacement to Yonah, and P965 isn't hard to buy, chipsets wouldn't be a roadblock at all.
What feature are you looking for in Bearlake? (mid 2007) WYSIWYG until then.
Most of Dell's C2D offerings won't be shipping before the 2nd week of september.
There is no C2D notebook offering in Dell web site yet.
Isn't P965 a desktop chipset only?
According to Intel docs: P965, G965, Q965 and Q963 are all desktop chipsets, that work with socket 775 cpus.
Apple may use it for iMacs with Conroe (socket 775) cpus.
Can it be used in the Mac mini (Yonah or Merom = socket m479)? I don't think so.
I though a mobile version of the 965 chipset was in the works for Merom chips (965GM) featuring the GMA3000 integrated graphics...
I am not talking about the Santa Rosa chipset for Merom+ (socket p479) rumored for Q2 2007.
965GM + Yonah/Merom would be a great upgrade for Mac minis and MacBooks.
P965 + Conroe for standard iMacs.
Q963 or Q965 + Conroe for edu iMacs.
You, my friend, are NUTS.
How so? Mac is recalling laptop batteries just like eveyrone else. Mac has had major heat issue with their laptops. Do you disagree with these statements? Apple is not a hardware company in spite of Steve Jobs being delusional about that fact. Their power is in their OS and the way it allows OEM softward to function within that OS. I will agree that the little teen girls playing with the iMac at the mall like how cute they are but I think Apple needs to get by that.
Computers are tools, they perform a function the hardware should be designed based on performance not looks.
How so? Mac is recalling laptop batteries just like eveyrone else. Mac has had major heat issue with their laptops. Do you disagree with these statements? Apple is not a hardware company in spite of Steve Jobs being delusional about that fact. Their power is in their OS and the way it allows OEM softward to function within that OS. I will agree that the little teen girls playing with the iMac at the mall like how cute they are but I think Apple needs to get by that.
Computers are tools, they perform a function the hardware should be designed based on performance not looks.
Ok... IGNORING the misuse of Mac vs Apple, and assuming that it's simple carelessness rather than lack of understanding...
From what I've read, the heat problems were assembly line SNAFUs. Too much thermal paste being used. Also not that widespread, I think, or we'd see MUCH more complaining going on, and eventually a recall.
Apple is a hardware company because hardware sales are its primary source of revenue. These sales are powered by the strength of their OS.
OEMs make hardware, not software, but we get your point.
Different strokes for different folks. The appeal that Macintosh has to you is not the only valid reason for owning one. The aesthetic appeal, the ease of use, the cool factor, and the fact that a MacPro would make an excelent boat anchor (how much does it weight, 55 lb? and those handles would grab the ground pretty well too!) are all valid reasons. As long as a customer recieves the benefit from the purchase that they expected, they had a valid reason for buying it, regardless of what that actual reason may be.
If you decided to learn how to use the phrases, "I feel," "I think," "It seems to me," and "I believe," I suspect that you might start to sound less like a crazed zelot, and more like a reasonable, mature, thinking individual whose opinions are worth considering and are likely to be a positive contribution to whatever discussion is taking place.
But you'll figure that out when you get older.
Ok... IGNORING the misuse of Mac vs Apple, and assuming that it's simple carelessness rather than lack of understanding...
From what I've read, the heat problems were assembly line SNAFUs. Too much thermal paste being used. Also not that widespread, I think, or we'd see MUCH more complaining going on, and eventually a recall.
Apple is a hardware company because hardware sales are its primary source of revenue. These sales are powered by the strength of their OS.
OEMs make hardware, not software, but we get your point.
Different strokes for different folks. The appeal that Macintosh has to you is not the only valid reason for owning one. The aesthetic appeal, the ease of use, the cool factor, and the fact that a MacPro would make an excelent boat anchor (how much does it weight, 55 lb? and those handles would grab the ground pretty well too!) are all valid reasons. As long as a customer recieves the benefit from the purchase that they expected, they had a valid reason for buying it, regardless of what that actual reason may be.
If you decided to learn how to use the phrases, "I feel," "I think," "It seems to me," and "I believe," I suspect that you might start to sound less like a crazed zelot, and more like a reasonable, mature, thinking individual whose opinions are worth considering and are likely to be a positive contribution to whatever discussion is taking place.
But you'll figure that out when you get older.
Thanks for saving me the time to reply to him about Mac's strategy plan, eh mac?
extremeskater-You have twice now clearly displayed your ignorance of the Mac platform (1. Your insistence that Apple could not do what they have already done wrt iMac. 2. Your decision that S.J. is delusional about the strategy of the company he is the CEO of
Please read up, become educated. Here this is a good start: discusses Apple's strengths as a "whole product" company. They are emphatically NOT an OS Company.
Thanks for saving me the time to reply to him about Mac's strategy plan, eh mac?
extremeskater-You have twice now clearly displayed your ignorance of the Mac platform (1. Your insistence that Apple could not do what they have already done wrt iMac. 2. Your decision that S.J. is delusional about the strategy of the company he is the CEO of
Please read up, become educated. Here this is a good start: discusses Apple's strengths as a "whole product" company. They are emphatically NOT an OS Company.
Excellent link! Very uh...... damnit, how do I spell that word??? susinct? DAMN THIS WINDOWS PC AND ITS AINT-GOT-NO-SPELL-CHECKER WEB BROWSERS!!!!!!!!!! GAR!!!!!
*EDIT* I'm gonna get a tablet computer here pretty quick. I'm holding out till the upcomming phase of Mac updates is complete just on the off chance that Apple bestows a boon on us... I'm gonna be really pissed if I have to get another windows machine. I think I'm gonna be pissed.
<grumble grumble grumble plot plot plot>