Pertaining to the conservative speculation versus optomistic speculating hubub that someone attempted to rationalize as being equivalent.
The idea of Apple putting a G4 Apollo in their next PM revision is an educated guess. The idea of Apple putting a G5 in is indeed speculation.
Pertaining to the right-wing wacko political remarks made by someone (I don't care to look).
If there is any political group who has the "Our way or the Highway" approach it is the Rebpublicans. Take a look at GWB. He likes to use the word compromise in his speeches, but doesn't like to use it in practice.
I especially like the Reps view of "facts". They seem to think that if they believe something, then it's a "fact" and thus if Liberals disagree then they are opposed to it like... Superman to Kryptonite... was that the analogy? Also, many Republicans seem to think that if someone like Rush says something, the bye-golly it must be a "fact." Or for that matter if they hear something on the Faux News Network, then it must be a "fact" as well. Remember that what you perceive as a fact is your own biased perception...and this cuts both ways.
<strong>And yet we live and die by what rumor sites say?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude, relax about the rolleyes (no one was being childish). Good-natured sarcasm is hard to denote on a UBB system, so I did my level best to convey I was just razzin' ya about the Leftist Republican thing.
Anyway, in regard to the comment above...what's this "we" stuff? Lot's of people in here, myself included, don't buy into a word of what the rumor sites publish - unless there is some kind of legit data source accompanying it (almost never happens). Now, I'm not saying I think there will be a G5 or not -- I hope the optimistic side wins out to be sure -- but let's be honest about the rumor site stuff.
As far as Geek.com, what's the deal with them? Are they known to be a reliable source of hardware information
[edit]
...ironically, someone just forwarded me an email from the guy on geek.com's staff (Bob Hughes?)...do you want to know what Bob said in response to "where did you get your information?" Or do you maybe want to acknowledge that geek.com has no *clue* what comes next, anymore than we do?
Amazing how the internet makes legit publishers of everyone, eh?
Anyway, "peace out homey". I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just making a point that nothing constructive results from basing your arguments on links like the two you've noted. You are, in fact, basing your arguments on the information you get from geek.com and similar sources, are you not?
Could it be that Apple hasn't announced a "special event" because they are revealing earnings today? Once this day clears, might the "event we've all been waiting for" finally be posted? Hmmmmmmmmm.
[quote] Dude, relax about the rolleyes (no one was being childish). Good-natured sarcasm is hard to denote on a UBB system, so I did my level best to convey I was just razzin' ya about the Leftist Republican thing. <hr></blockquote>
Sarcasim? I guess you didn't pick up on mine (notice my post called you childish and immature for using rolling eyes and yet I ended my post with it as well, hehe)
[quote] I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just making a point that nothing constructive results from basing your arguments on links like the two you've noted. You are, in fact, basing your arguments on the information you get from geek.com and similar sources, are you not? <hr></blockquote>
Yes, yes I am. I am basing my opinion on everything I've read. The register, mosr, think secret, geek, eweek, macslash, macnn formus, macrumor forums, these forums and os opinion forums.
I am basing my thoughts and opinion on mulitple sources that are just as viable as any source you nay sayers have.
Change my mind. Show me one peice of concrete, clear cut, specific, exacting evidence that says plainly, "the next tower will house an Apollo (or G4) and the G5 is a pipe dream for a year or so".
Show me that. Otherwise I will conitue to post links to people's 'thought' for others to read and form thier own opinion as I have.
a) Oh, you're still here? I thought you were buying a PC.
<hr></blockquote>
->Oh, still the same words at the end of each post. wonderful
[quote]
b) There is no G5. The 85xx generation of Motorola processors is not even scheduled to start sampling until later 2002. However, there is a new G4 coming. It's called Apollo (7460), and it will be out soon. So relax.
<hr></blockquote>
->Or: the 8540 processor is going to start sampling later than the G5 used in new Apple based systems!
[quote]
c) Remember that discussion of products announced at MWSF belongs in Current Hardware. Rants belong in General Discussion.
<hr></blockquote>
Remember to remember that sentences like these belong to 'stupid comments' on suckful.com forums
[quote]
d) It's abbreviated "etc."!!! Not "ect."
<hr></blockquote>
right! things like that belong to future hardware.
sorry, suckful - just have to do this
and as far as we talk about the G5 - i think it will be there in 2002 ... i don't think apple will develop a new motherboard for apollo - the apollo is for:
a) next revisions of iMac2
b) next revisions of TiBook before it switches over to another G5-class proc
I'll bite. This confuses me, if you go to Motorola's website for products, all Power PC products are listed under the "embedded processor" section.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, this is true after their website redesign. Before that (and especially at the time of introduction of both the 7400 and 7450), they were in a "microprocessors" section. The G3 and G4 were announced as desktop processors originally, and the main point I was making is that there have been no dedicated embedded variants of those chips (unlike the 8540 vs. 8500).
[quote]<strong>
Didn't CISCO buy the the G474XX for routers? I could have sworn they bought the same processor as Apple, could be wrong, heck, maybe routers don't use embedded processors, not my area of expertise.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They did indeed.
Still, just because the non-speedstep Pentium III is often used in cheaper notebooks, that doesn't make it a notebook chip. Similarly, I'm not saying that the G3 and G4 cannot be used or are not used in embedded markets nowadays, but that they were originally designed as desktop processors, but because of their relatively low power consumption, some companies use them in embedded solutions today.
If you read through the Ars thread someone mentioned above, you'll discover something very interesting that should shatter your confidence in the lack of a G5:
Just thought you'd like to know. I have no idea how this impacts a possible PowerMac G5, other than it demolishes the one piece of factual evidence I've seen you rely on to counter the G5, the idea that the MPC8540 was not supposed to be taped out until the second half of this year. Clearly, Motorola has gotten ahead of schedule.
Good one...I'm about as much a Jesus freak as Marilyn Manson is a wholesome roll model for today's youth...but even I can laugh at that.
Probably because my sister-in-law *is* a Conservative Christian Freak, or maybe freakishly conservative if one prefers.
An no I have nothing that proves the G5 is a pipe dream. Clearly it exists, but as far as implementation into Mac towers I still have my doubts. Motorola, for the past 24-30 months has done next to nothing to alleviate that doubt. Many expos have come and gone with our starry-eyed wishes trounced again and again, even though they get more reasonable each time just by virue of time itself passing us by with no substantive changes other than the G4e and a slight clock boost....
I admit I'm a pessimist when it comes to these things, but in the case, I have ample reason to be one. The odd thing is, when I do Google searches of various combinations of G5 terminology, inevitably every site (even foreign ones) seems to draw its venom from the Register, which is sad consideirng how completely wrong their recent articles have turned out to be.
I think their source is a total fraud as evidenced by their statements such as "our Motorola source, if indeed that is what he is". I mean if they can't even remotely varify, why get people's hopes up like that? I think what the Register did was borderline irresponsible. If they want to be a MOSR for the UK, fine...but I just think what they've done is lame. They've mislead everyone and not even tried to explain it or offer a retraction or new investigation.
They try to come off as a news and commentary site, but really I think stuff like this bears out how false the news part is. They're hype dressed as solid information IMO....
Hopefully we'll find out soon enough what's in store. Surprised no one pressed Apple on the conference call today in ways that might've gotten them to elaborate on their pro line strategy for 2002. If you think about it, after waiting for basically 12+ months for a legitimate upgrade they would be wise to just say
"Hey, we're working on the next generation of Power Macs. They will be significantly more powerful than any currently available in terms of processing capabilities, expandability, etc. They won't be ready until the second quarter of this calenday year, so in the meantime we're offering a new discount on the existing power mac line beyond, which is _______ ."
People would be so happy that Apple was straight with them for a change, and offered reason to buy the existing towers in the meantime. I mean the existing dual machine and high-end Mac are clocked slow by todays standards, but they're still pretty damn powerful considering what I can do with my puny G4/500, ya know? People would buy them now (or what's left in the channel) if Apple dropped each by a couple hundred bucks say. I don't know why they're so secretive, given how far behind schedule they really are.
Well, I hate to admit, but now I'm starting to read more "G4s topping out at 1.4ghz and a dual 1.2ghz in the middle with possibly a dual 1.0ghz low end. Or something to that effect.
I want the G5, but i also understand it's as much a reality as the Apollo. So while I want a G5, I will expect a G4 on steroids at 1.4ghz.
Hopefully, it will be here soon, this waiting and not knowing is worse then getting a G4 instead of a G5.
If you read through the Ars thread someone mentioned above, you'll discover something very interesting that should shatter your confidence in the lack of a G5:
Just thought you'd like to know. I have no idea how this impacts a possible PowerMac G5, other than it demolishes the one piece of factual evidence I've seen you rely on to counter the G5, the idea that the MPC8540 was not supposed to be taped out until the second half of this year. Clearly, Motorola has gotten ahead of schedule.
Thanks,
Shadow Knight</strong><hr></blockquote>
I for one am four-square behind the G5-sooner-than-September banner, but I did some checking on this and I think it's bogus.
1) Moto has not issued a press release that it is available.
2) The "Where to buy" link is their generic link to Motorola suppliers in general, not specifically for the 8540.
3) I nosed around the websites of a couple of the listed suppliers:
<a href="http://www.newark.com"; target="_blank">Newark</a> and <a href="http://www.arrow.com"; target="_blank">Arrow</a>. I could find no mention of an MPC8540 anywhere (I even scrolled through their full lists of Moto microprocessors).
I'm not going to mess around with actually e-mailing Moto to see if it is available. It seems pretty clear to me that it isn't.
As an aside, I'm giving up on the G5 speculation in this and other threads. I remain convinced that G5s are coming relatively soon. However, SdC, Moogs, and a couple others seem so thoroughly intent on pissing on everyone's fun that it's just not interesting anymore. I have better things to do with my time.
When the Republicans wanted to reform welfare a few years back, liberals spewed forth dire predictions of millions of people starving in the streets, etc.
Never happened.
<hr></blockquote>
Never happened, or the media simply is not reporting it? Read, the corporate media doesn't choose to cover the effects of welfare reform, because it would take too much effort, and doesn't carry a sensationalist impact that a good sex story does.
Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters.
And unless the drugs are catching up to me, I could swear that welfare reform was a bipartisan effort, signed into law by Clinton. Odd that you use it as an example of a right wing triumph.
But I must agree, conservative or liberal, in the political sense, does not always adhere to dictionary definitions. Life is not so simple, issues are never so simple...it's childish idealism to think otherwise. Of course each party looks out for their own interests..if they didn't then they would be replaced by a party that did understand its interests. Don't blame the individuals, blame the system..a system that requires big money to win, and where big money comes from corporate interests, and in the end a government by the corporations, for the corporations, and of the corporations. Empowered by a public too stupid to think for themselves, who vote for whoever spends the most money in an election (ok, a generalization, but a damn good one). But then, when the same corporations that own and run the government are the ones spoon-feeding "news" to the public, well. ...I think that a democracy is only as good as the quality of the information that the voting public has to base their decisions upon.
Comments
The idea of Apple putting a G4 Apollo in their next PM revision is an educated guess. The idea of Apple putting a G5 in is indeed speculation.
Pertaining to the right-wing wacko political remarks made by someone (I don't care to look).
If there is any political group who has the "Our way or the Highway" approach it is the Rebpublicans. Take a look at GWB. He likes to use the word compromise in his speeches, but doesn't like to use it in practice.
I especially like the Reps view of "facts". They seem to think that if they believe something, then it's a "fact" and thus if Liberals disagree then they are opposed to it like... Superman to Kryptonite... was that the analogy? Also, many Republicans seem to think that if someone like Rush says something, the bye-golly it must be a "fact." Or for that matter if they hear something on the Faux News Network, then it must be a "fact" as well. Remember that what you perceive as a fact is your own biased perception...and this cuts both ways.
<strong>And no suckfuldotcom, you don't have a ****ing clue about that either.
G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sez you. You are entitled to your opinion as to what I know and what I think I know.
SdC
Thank you.
mm, no. Actually this one is better-
<a href="http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm"; target="_blank">http://www.geek.com/procspec/apple/g5.htm</a>;
<strong>And yet we live and die by what rumor sites say?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude, relax about the rolleyes (no one was being childish). Good-natured sarcasm is hard to denote on a UBB system, so I did my level best to convey I was just razzin' ya about the Leftist Republican thing.
Anyway, in regard to the comment above...what's this "we" stuff? Lot's of people in here, myself included, don't buy into a word of what the rumor sites publish - unless there is some kind of legit data source accompanying it (almost never happens). Now, I'm not saying I think there will be a G5 or not -- I hope the optimistic side wins out to be sure -- but let's be honest about the rumor site stuff.
You Ultra Right-Wing Hippie, you!
[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
[edit]
...ironically, someone just forwarded me an email from the guy on geek.com's staff (Bob Hughes?)...do you want to know what Bob said in response to "where did you get your information?" Or do you maybe want to acknowledge that geek.com has no *clue* what comes next, anymore than we do?
Amazing how the internet makes legit publishers of everyone, eh?
Anyway, "peace out homey". I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just making a point that nothing constructive results from basing your arguments on links like the two you've noted. You are, in fact, basing your arguments on the information you get from geek.com and similar sources, are you not?
[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: Dave Hagan ]</p>
Sarcasim? I guess you didn't pick up on mine
[quote] I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just making a point that nothing constructive results from basing your arguments on links like the two you've noted. You are, in fact, basing your arguments on the information you get from geek.com and similar sources, are you not? <hr></blockquote>
Yes, yes I am. I am basing my opinion on everything I've read. The register, mosr, think secret, geek, eweek, macslash, macnn formus, macrumor forums, these forums and os opinion forums.
I am basing my thoughts and opinion on mulitple sources that are just as viable as any source you nay sayers have.
Change my mind. Show me one peice of concrete, clear cut, specific, exacting evidence that says plainly, "the next tower will house an Apollo (or G4) and the G5 is a pipe dream for a year or so".
Show me that. Otherwise I will conitue to post links to people's 'thought' for others to read and form thier own opinion as I have.
Conservative christian freak!
[added smiley so you don't think I'm mad]
[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: KidRed ]</p>
<strong>
Frequent responses:
</strong>
a) Oh, you're still here? I thought you were buying a PC.
<hr></blockquote>
->Oh, still the same words at the end of each post. wonderful
[quote]
b) There is no G5. The 85xx generation of Motorola processors is not even scheduled to start sampling until later 2002. However, there is a new G4 coming. It's called Apollo (7460), and it will be out soon. So relax.
<hr></blockquote>
->Or: the 8540 processor is going to start sampling later than the G5 used in new Apple based systems!
[quote]
c) Remember that discussion of products announced at MWSF belongs in Current Hardware. Rants belong in General Discussion.
<hr></blockquote>
Remember to remember that sentences like these belong to 'stupid comments' on suckful.com forums
[quote]
d) It's abbreviated "etc."!!! Not "ect."
<hr></blockquote>
right! things like that belong to future hardware.
sorry, suckful - just have to do this
and as far as we talk about the G5 - i think it will be there in 2002 ... i don't think apple will develop a new motherboard for apollo - the apollo is for:
a) next revisions of iMac2
b) next revisions of TiBook before it switches over to another G5-class proc
c) next revisions of iBook
thank you for listening,
krassy
<strong>sorry, suckful - just have to do this
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh.
Heh.
He he.
Heh.
Suckfol, your siggy is getting infamous, no?
<strong>The reason I believe we'll see a G5 in 2002 is that the original expected launch date was Q4 '01 or Q1 '02. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, it was originally due in 2000, back when it was known as the G2000...
<strong>
hahaha, if you are going to make some leftist republican extremist freak statement like that about liberals... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, the 'consevative' Repbublicans stance was once known as liberal. Today we call it classically liberal.
...actually, that probably does a better job of describing the Libertarians.
Go Libertarians!
That' not a contradiction? Or was it liberal to other extreme republican?
Oops, Yes! I hope we get a G(x) at 1.4ghz with new mobo, bus, DDR & modified case
<strong>
I'll bite. This confuses me, if you go to Motorola's website for products, all Power PC products are listed under the "embedded processor" section.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, this is true after their website redesign. Before that (and especially at the time of introduction of both the 7400 and 7450), they were in a "microprocessors" section. The G3 and G4 were announced as desktop processors originally, and the main point I was making is that there have been no dedicated embedded variants of those chips (unlike the 8540 vs. 8500).
[quote]<strong>
Didn't CISCO buy the the G474XX for routers? I could have sworn they bought the same processor as Apple, could be wrong, heck, maybe routers don't use embedded processors, not my area of expertise.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They did indeed.
Still, just because the non-speedstep Pentium III is often used in cheaper notebooks, that doesn't make it a notebook chip. Similarly, I'm not saying that the G3 and G4 cannot be used or are not used in embedded markets nowadays, but that they were originally designed as desktop processors, but because of their relatively low power consumption, some companies use them in embedded solutions today.
Bye,
RazzFazz
If you read through the Ars thread someone mentioned above, you'll discover something very interesting that should shatter your confidence in the lack of a G5:
The MPC8540 is available for sale right now.
<a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8540&nodeId=01M98655"; target="_blank">Link to Motorola website where you can get the specs and even "Where to buy"</a>
Just thought you'd like to know. I have no idea how this impacts a possible PowerMac G5, other than it demolishes the one piece of factual evidence I've seen you rely on to counter the G5, the idea that the MPC8540 was not supposed to be taped out until the second half of this year. Clearly, Motorola has gotten ahead of schedule.
Thanks,
Shadow Knight
<strong>Conservative christian freak!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
*LOL*
Good one...I'm about as much a Jesus freak as Marilyn Manson is a wholesome roll model for today's youth...but even I can laugh at that.
Probably because my sister-in-law *is* a Conservative Christian Freak, or maybe freakishly conservative if one prefers.
An no I have nothing that proves the G5 is a pipe dream. Clearly it exists, but as far as implementation into Mac towers I still have my doubts. Motorola, for the past 24-30 months has done next to nothing to alleviate that doubt. Many expos have come and gone with our starry-eyed wishes trounced again and again, even though they get more reasonable each time just by virue of time itself passing us by with no substantive changes other than the G4e and a slight clock boost....
I admit I'm a pessimist when it comes to these things, but in the case, I have ample reason to be one. The odd thing is, when I do Google searches of various combinations of G5 terminology, inevitably every site (even foreign ones) seems to draw its venom from the Register, which is sad consideirng how completely wrong their recent articles have turned out to be.
I think their source is a total fraud as evidenced by their statements such as "our Motorola source, if indeed that is what he is". I mean if they can't even remotely varify, why get people's hopes up like that? I think what the Register did was borderline irresponsible. If they want to be a MOSR for the UK, fine...but I just think what they've done is lame. They've mislead everyone and not even tried to explain it or offer a retraction or new investigation.
They try to come off as a news and commentary site, but really I think stuff like this bears out how false the news part is. They're hype dressed as solid information IMO....
Hopefully we'll find out soon enough what's in store. Surprised no one pressed Apple on the conference call today in ways that might've gotten them to elaborate on their pro line strategy for 2002. If you think about it, after waiting for basically 12+ months for a legitimate upgrade they would be wise to just say
"Hey, we're working on the next generation of Power Macs. They will be significantly more powerful than any currently available in terms of processing capabilities, expandability, etc. They won't be ready until the second quarter of this calenday year, so in the meantime we're offering a new discount on the existing power mac line beyond, which is _______ ."
People would be so happy that Apple was straight with them for a change, and offered reason to buy the existing towers in the meantime. I mean the existing dual machine and high-end Mac are clocked slow by todays standards, but they're still pretty damn powerful considering what I can do with my puny G4/500, ya know? People would buy them now (or what's left in the channel) if Apple dropped each by a couple hundred bucks say. I don't know why they're so secretive, given how far behind schedule they really are.
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
Well, I hate to admit, but now I'm starting to read more "G4s topping out at 1.4ghz and a dual 1.2ghz in the middle with possibly a dual 1.0ghz low end. Or something to that effect.
I want the G5, but i also understand it's as much a reality as the Apollo. So while I want a G5, I will expect a G4 on steroids at 1.4ghz.
Hopefully, it will be here soon, this waiting and not knowing is worse then getting a G4 instead of a G5.
<strong>To suckfuldotcom:
If you read through the Ars thread someone mentioned above, you'll discover something very interesting that should shatter your confidence in the lack of a G5:
The MPC8540 is available for sale right now.
<a href="http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC8540&nodeId=01M98655"; target="_blank">Link to Motorola website where you can get the specs and even "Where to buy"</a>
Just thought you'd like to know. I have no idea how this impacts a possible PowerMac G5, other than it demolishes the one piece of factual evidence I've seen you rely on to counter the G5, the idea that the MPC8540 was not supposed to be taped out until the second half of this year. Clearly, Motorola has gotten ahead of schedule.
Thanks,
Shadow Knight</strong><hr></blockquote>
I for one am four-square behind the G5-sooner-than-September banner, but I did some checking on this and I think it's bogus.
1) Moto has not issued a press release that it is available.
2) The "Where to buy" link is their generic link to Motorola suppliers in general, not specifically for the 8540.
3) I nosed around the websites of a couple of the listed suppliers:
<a href="http://www.newark.com"; target="_blank">Newark</a> and <a href="http://www.arrow.com"; target="_blank">Arrow</a>. I could find no mention of an MPC8540 anywhere (I even scrolled through their full lists of Moto microprocessors).
I'm not going to mess around with actually e-mailing Moto to see if it is available. It seems pretty clear to me that it isn't.
As an aside, I'm giving up on the G5 speculation in this and other threads. I remain convinced that G5s are coming relatively soon. However, SdC, Moogs, and a couple others seem so thoroughly intent on pissing on everyone's fun that it's just not interesting anymore. I have better things to do with my time.
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: TJM ]</p>
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: TJM ]</p>
KidRed,
When the Republicans wanted to reform welfare a few years back, liberals spewed forth dire predictions of millions of people starving in the streets, etc.
Never happened.
<hr></blockquote>
Never happened, or the media simply is not reporting it? Read, the corporate media doesn't choose to cover the effects of welfare reform, because it would take too much effort, and doesn't carry a sensationalist impact that a good sex story does.
Not that right wingers would even care IF people were starving in the streets, as long as enough police were available to bust up riots and beat the crap out of protesters.
And unless the drugs are catching up to me, I could swear that welfare reform was a bipartisan effort, signed into law by Clinton. Odd that you use it as an example of a right wing triumph.
But I must agree, conservative or liberal, in the political sense, does not always adhere to dictionary definitions. Life is not so simple, issues are never so simple...it's childish idealism to think otherwise. Of course each party looks out for their own interests..if they didn't then they would be replaced by a party that did understand its interests. Don't blame the individuals, blame the system..a system that requires big money to win, and where big money comes from corporate interests, and in the end a government by the corporations, for the corporations, and of the corporations. Empowered by a public too stupid to think for themselves, who vote for whoever spends the most money in an election (ok, a generalization, but a damn good one). But then, when the same corporations that own and run the government are the ones spoon-feeding "news" to the public, well. ...I think that a democracy is only as good as the quality of the information that the voting public has to base their decisions upon.