Well, now apple is offering a free 5GB firefly drive with the purchase of any custom built Power Mac/book. They sure are pressing those things out the door!
not necessarily true. i have proof that the g5 exists and who is building it. will i offer that proof up to anyone else? no. why not? because i'd like to protect the people who know that information. just because YOU don't know the proof doesn't mean proof doesn't exist.
this site is ridiculous. i know a lot of people troll about having information and whatnot. but when people do have information, no one will believe them anyway. it's really a no-win situation here at the ai forums. even people who seemed to have accurate information in the past are constantly "debunked" by others later for no good reason other than personal whimsy of being a dissenter. folks, this is a rumor site! choose to take everything with a grain of salt and use your own cognitive reasoning to figure out what you'll believe. it's not the end of the world one way or the other.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey, take a chill pill and read all of my posts so you have some context.
I'm actually promoting the concept of a realistic open mind to all those posters who wander around various forums - not just this one - claiming that the G5 has been nixed by either by Moto or Apple.
I personally believe it does exist, but I just run an IT consultancy in Guildford so have no proof that I could/would offer to that back that up. There are people who post here who say the opposite and equally have no proof that they could/would offer up. That was my point - nothing else.
To sum up, you're right! A lot of posts here are hysterical and highly opinionated by people who have a desperate desire to have their crank theories listened to (and that's just me) - but then what did you expect? Solid reasoned arguments with documented proof? It's a rumor site, ferchrissake!
Again, I think G5 PMacs will appear at SF '03 and seeing as I'm feeling vaguely prophetic, I'll pitch the base spec at approx 1.4 GHz and the top-end as a dual 1.8GHz.
For a SAN, what matters is throughput to the servers, not (just) to the clients. If the XServe(s) attached to the XServe RAID can get anywhere near 4Gb throughput in practice, Apple will have a lot of very happy customers. Believe me, if Oracle 9i can hit its database at 500MB/s, the people getting the results back will notice, even if they're only getting the results over fast ethernet.
Yep, I've specced and installed SANs and major server installations and I understand that SAN's provide throughput to servers. If the RAID setup has 4Gb aggregate throughput to the servers and is matched to the drive throughput, that's great.
However, my argument (which is aimed at all the doommongers who crticise its' design) is that SCSI is not a prerequisite for every site, especially for SMEs who may only have 25-50 users on a 100-BaseT network or schools who have bought into Apple's wireless vision.
Under these circumstances, the overall speed of performance (from the perspective of the user) is dictated by the speed of the slowest link in the chain which is the 10/11/100 mbit link to the client system (hopefully switched) and the shared 100 Mbit backbone of the whole LAN. Having Ultra160 drives is not necessarily the smartest investment under these circumstance, given that you may never exploit a significant element of the performance for a significant proportion of the installation's lifecycle.
[quote]Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist:
<strong>
Hey, take a chill pill and read all of my posts so you have some context.
I'm actually promoting the concept of a realistic open mind to all those posters who wander around various forums - not just this one - claiming that the G5 has been nixed by either by Moto or Apple.
I personally believe it does exist, but I just run an IT consultancy in Guildford so have no proof that I could/would offer to that back that up. There are people who post here who say the opposite and equally have no proof that they could/would offer up. That was my point - nothing else.
To sum up, you're right! A lot of posts here are hysterical and highly opinionated by people who have a desperate desire to have their crank theories listened to (and that's just me) - but then what did you expect? Solid reasoned arguments with documented proof? It's a rumor site, ferchrissake!
Again, I think G5 PMacs will appear at SF '03 and seeing as I'm feeling vaguely prophetic, I'll pitch the base spec at approx 1.4 GHz and the top-end as a dual 1.8GHz.</strong><hr></blockquote>
well, the information i have leads me to believe that the g5 could be released in new york. i certainly hope so. it seems like they're running tons of promos to get rid of their current towers, so it looks pretty good. it also seems strange to me that they've updated pretty much every machine in their lineup recently except the powermacs. i know, technically, that the pm's were updated after imac2, but honestly they've been stale for a year. i think apple's tipping their hand as far as their intro because the towers are just sitting there with no upgrades.
the g4 isn't really scheduled to hit 1.4 ghz until later in the year than july, again, from what i've heard, so your timing of a 1.4 ghz g4 at mwsf seems about right. i just don't think they'll be in the powermacs by that time.
[quote]What follows is a speculative scenario; I do not claim it is true; I do claim that it is possible and reasonable, and based in (some kind of) reality. I ask you to hold your fire until you've read the whole thing.
First, a timeline:
SJ returns to Apple, determined to vindicate his vision & hard work by reclaiming Apple & the Mac & returning them to 'respectability'; in doing so, he kills the clones. Motorola, hurt financially by the loss of their clone investment, + sales to other clonemeisters, says, "Apple is just another customer now.
I'll spare us an analysis of the AIM partnership (FTM), except to observe that this was a watershed event: Motorola's turning-away. From this point on MOT has been perceptibly cool on the subject of general-purpose CPUs. Not only did the clone-death cut into their revenue projections, but the endless death-dance of Amiga reduced MOT potential desktop penetration to the point of invisibility (remember, this was before the iMac & the post-Amelio rennaissance). MOT no longer counts on the desktop as a keystone for the future.
Knowing that only the fastest machines - much faster than those then-existing - will be able to support his plans for the future, SJ keeps the G4 under wraps & begins to map out G5 & G6. The G4 is released to much wonder, but trouble surfaces: the design doesn't scale, meaning, the usual tricks for squeezing speed increases out of a CPU design bring no speed increases; not only that, but yield problems lead to a clock downgrade shortly after release. The G4 begins to stagnate, and there are reports that Apple is not merely sinking more money into MOTs processor design unit, but that they're becoming 'more actively involved' in the design process.
As one of the AIM partners, Apple has ALWAYS been heavily involved in PPC design - for damn' good reason: Apple's machines are the only ones that DEPEND on the PPC (of any generation) being a solid, fast, scalable and extensible design.
There are 2 significant pieces in this section of the timeline: the paralysis of the G4, and the news of AAPLs increasing involvement in the design team. In some ways, "G4" is a misnomer: essentially a "G3+AltiVec", the chip might be more accurately called G3.5, rather than a generational leap (as the G3 was over the 6xx, and as G5 is expected to be). I speculate that the failure of G4 is due to fundamental design flaws related to the Altivec bolt-on tactic, and that these proved 'unfixable' in the short term - and this led to the real megaHertz gap. Satisfying as it may be to blame MOT's "stupidity", all it really took was a serious flaw and a lack of motivation...and their motivation was already waning. MOT's eggs were increasingly placed in the telephony/embedded-systems basket, and they lacked enthusiasm for the emergency design surgery AAPL demanded, even with the influx of extra AAPL cash.
In this scenario (here's where my speculation heads for the Outer Limits), faced w/ a public-relations disaster, a seriously black eye among tech types, sales resistance, and an increasingly distracted design partner, AAPL reacts by taking over G5 development. My reasoning is that AAPL must have some contractual leverage to protect them from losing the PPC; despite all the gains expected by each partner, the fact is that AAPL is the most vulnerable of the 3: it needs the PowerPC; not true of the others. So, AAPL being full of pretty smart characters, and some of them being lawyers, it stands to reason that the arrangement between AAPL & MOT would lock in Apple's intellectual property rights, etc., to the PPC, in the event that "changing fortunes" threatened MOT's (or IBM's) abiity or willingness to perform as needed in PPC development...in which case, MOT would be partner no nore, but just a contract chip fabricator (and AAPL "...just another customer".
This being the case, I'd expect that AAPL would have hired certain key people from MOT (perhaps after one of their "layoffs" - you know AAPL loves to travel under the radar) and elsewhere, &push HARD on G5 (w/ an eye toward G6, 'cause that's how these things go), undistracted by cell-phones and satellites. It's been 2 years (?) since then, and what have we heard? Vague rumours about mystery boxes that make Athlons look like dead snails, and pretty much nothing more.
RECAP
AAPL moves from triumph to triumph: G3, SJ's homecoming, iMac, B&W PMG3, PMG4;
Disaster strikes: tho a perfectly acceptable CPU, design flaws cripple its speed and its scalability;
Dismayed by MOT's preoccupation w/ its other products, and faced by destruction in the marketplace, AAPL takes steps: assumes control of PPC development; assigns MOT the task of getting whatever legs they can on the G4; assigns G5 crash priority; plays the situation close to the vest, in order to prevent further humiliation while sorting things out.
With both the iMac & PowerMac lines stale and floundering, a share-price tumble that leaves the entire market gasping, and the Cube fiasco still fresh, light begins to gleam: iMac's re-re-design comes together, OSX matures, and G5 prototypes exceed expectations. The computer industry desperately needs "a compelling reason" for sales to increase, and AAPL is poised to pull the trigger on the most compelling line of computers ever seen.
Faced w/ an abundance of riches, AAPL chooses to release the iMac first; this will give it an undiluted spotlight, and allow time for orders, production and enthusiasm to gear up; it will also allow time to put the finishing touches on the new PowerMac G5.
After the G4 fiasco, AAPL is taking no chances: the PowerMac G5 is compelling: state of the art, from mobo to I/O - the latest & greatest buzzword compliance, drool factor 11; to make it so, the extra time will all go into the legendary AAPL fit & finish; but when to announce? After all new iMac models are shipping: once that's done, the decks are cleared for introduction of the PMG5. Beyond that: any major software releases on the horizon? How's 10.2 coming along? Any big events coming up?
The piece of resistance: as soon as possible after G5 introduction, move all non-G5 machines to 1+gHz. The fastest, most capable, most attractive computers ever made: half a dozen compelling reasons to buy not just a new computer, but a new Macintosh.
Hardware & software developers, desperate for a selling platform to support (& thereby generate sales of their own), flock to the Mac: gadget and peripheral makers fall over each other to be part of the digital hub.
This is me speculating. Not predicting, not claiming, not reporting. Speculating.<hr></blockquote>
[quote]Originally posted by Mark- Card Carrying FanaticRealist:
<strong>However, my argument (which is aimed at all the doommongers who crticise its' design) is that SCSI is not a prerequisite for every site, especially for SMEs who may only have 25-50 users on a 100-BaseT network or schools who have bought into Apple's wireless vision.</strong><hr></blockquote>
When I talk about the G5, I am not referring to the "roadmap", or to any putative chipID (eg, '8500', etc). I'm talking about the G4 replacement CPU. If AAPL is to maintain and persevere, it must be able to hold its own in a field dominated by the Pentium 4's successors; to do that, there must be a chip than builds on & moves beyond the G4. I refer to this chip as G5 ('generation 5'). I'm not a chip engineer, but I expect that such a chip would need 3-5 years of development - or more - before starting production. Since it needs to be deployed Real Soon Now, logic requires that it have been in development for at least 3 years (and perhaps 4) at this point.
Basically, all we know about the G5 PPC is that it will use RapidIO and be Book-E compliant.
My point about the G5 is not that I think it will definitely be released in NY, but that it exists. It must exist, because without it, Apple has nothing to look forward to beyond the G4. I don't think that's a viable plan for the future!
I think that IF they can either release it or show it in July, they will: all eyes will be watching for big news about the PowerMacs; G5 would be too big a win to hold back if they have it.
However, I think there are more interesting things going on without trying to intuit a detailed analysis of G5. A lot of them are in XServe.
The plot thickens. There sure seem to be a lot of people proclaiming that the G5 is going to be ready soon, and that with it Apple will have nothing to worry about with respect to performance. To me, this says something. There are far to many reports like this to be the work of only trolls.
Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the possible buyers of a PPC G5 CPU:
Apple
Cisco
Amiga
Any others? Among these buyers, is there enough demand to warrant the big bucks in R&D that would be required to design and fab a pentium 4 killer?
This is kind of a sideways answer to JYDs post. I think really the progress Apple makes on its next generation architecture is probably more significant in the long run than how fast the G5 is out of the gate. That's not to say the new G5 doesn't need to be fast, but let's be realistic folks, even if there are 1.6 Ghz G5s released as MW?? that are DDR capable we can expect Moto probably is not going to be scaling as fast as Intel and AMD.
Sure a 1.6 Ghz G5 with 333 Mhz DDR memory will feel good, real good. But you now that come the next MacWorld everyone will be going nuts saying "if Apple doesn't release a 2.0 Ghz G5 with 400 Mhz DDR I'm out of here."
Most likely we are going to have to live with the "Next Big Thing"? for a good long time. Probably Apple will be with the same basic Architecture for 2+ years. That's why I think when the G5 comes the big story will be what the G5 is attached to?
I thought Dorsal's idea of each CPU having its own memory was intriguing. I know that NUMA has some advocates (AMD, IBM, et al). Whatever it is as the Register said the key for Apple to keep in the performance race will probably be in being able to go wider.
Moto will still need to scale. MP won't solve everything. Most portables won't be MP for the foreseeable future. The e/iMac probably won't either. But to keep the PowerMacs bringing in $3500 given the realities of Motos cycles, Apple needs an architecture that can work with 4-8 processors (even though they will probably start with 1-2) so they have some options in a year or so other than piling on rebates and slashing prices. I'd rather see upgrades than price cuts any day.
<strong>The plot thickens. There sure seem to be a lot of people proclaiming that the G5 is going to be ready soon, and that with it Apple will have nothing to worry about with respect to performance. To me, this says something. There are far to many reports like this to be the work of only trolls.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The problem is that I haven't seen many people talking it up who I would believe any farther than I could throw them. There is no real information out, nor anybody whom I'd really put money on. Everybody could just be talking up the latest Dorsal post, and if they repeat it to enough people they start hearing it come back in a slightly modified form and consider it confirmation. Eventually we're all caught up in this fantasy of speculation with no basis in fact. Two different and official sounding people send it to TheRegister and MOSR, and bam! its a rumour and it kicks up the vortex of speculation to the next level. Capt. Obvious' rather obvious deductions just add fuel to the fire.
There are very few pieces of information that we really know for sure (or at least with a high degree of confidence):
Apple is very likely going to introduce a new PowerMac in the next 2-3 months, probably @ MWNY
Apple has started to support DDR with the Xserve
Motorola's only statements about the MPX bus are that it is not a point-to-point bus, their customers love it the way it is, and it will not go DDR or faster than 166 MHz
Their direction on the 8540 is towards an on-chip memory controller and RapidIO connectivity bus
There are lots of rumours about a RapidIO based Mac design with on-chip DDR memory, and they have been circulating for almost a year now controller
Apple runs a tight ship, and keeps Motorola quiet about coming developments -- they can deliver a surprise if they want to, and SJ really likes to
The 8540 is a modular design, and a couple of years ago we heard that Apple had significantly stepped up its involvement in the PPC design process
The 8540 is due to ship 2nd half of calender '02
The most commonly held opinions are for a G5 introduction in '03
Before Xmas, MacWorld UK ran a couple of articles which mentioned the 'G5' (as in Mot's next generation chip). They discussed possible timelines of introduction and even interviewed some people about it (Paul Clark of Motorola?). Anyway, there are quotes from him that say that the 'G5 is progressing well' (admittedly a while ago, and makes no reservations about Apple nixing the G5 or anything) and that although the 'G4 has legs' they didn't expect it to scale much past 1 Ghz (yes, even Apollo).
So, someone at Motorola has been on record to state the the 'G5' does exist somewhere in a development house at Mot (which is not unsurprising, given that technology advances). Now, the idea that the G4 has been scaling well (and will continue to do so with a die shrink) are all very qualifiable, but the development money spent on the G4 replacement (started as soon as Mot realised the G4 was knackered back in '99) must have yielded something.
Moto (as Programmer states) feel the MPX bus is sufficient, and yet they harp about the 8540's on-die 333Mhz memory controller and RapidIO spec. Apple would also be quite foolish to release a PM based on the quasi-DDR effort that the Xserve utilises.
Let us also not forget that the latest incarnations of the PM were released pretty quietly (and even then, were thought of as 'holdovers').
And if Motorola really had given up on the desktop PPC, do you really think that they would keep all of their future products as secret as they do (it can only be due to Apple that they do this)?
I think that all these things point to something big coming quite soon (hopefully summer). Whilst I don't necessarily believe it will be a 'G5', I do feel that it will be something quite impressive. I think Apple will have it right.
I did (and do) believe dorsal was the real deal... I'm 90% sure I know who s/he worked (works?) for. For reasons you might imagine I will not go into any more detail on that.
Does that mean EVERYTHING dorsal said was on the level? I don't think so.. and here's why:
You have to know Apple monitors boards such as these (I'm betting most Apple oriented boards are scanned for people giving out tips when they shouldn't)... That being the case people giving 'first hand' tips are pretty non-existant.
Dorsal was a rare case since he didn't work directly for Apple and that made him feel a little more insulated. All the same Dorsal had to know that he was taking a fair bit of risk giving out that info. Dorsal could have been feeding out some 'less than true' reports from time to time just ot keep those who monitor boards like these guessing...
As I said before... I seriously doubt that Dorsal will return and that's very sad... but for me knowing he was the real deal has caused me re-read his postings and think happy thoughts about the future...
Comments
<strong>
not necessarily true. i have proof that the g5 exists and who is building it. will i offer that proof up to anyone else? no. why not? because i'd like to protect the people who know that information. just because YOU don't know the proof doesn't mean proof doesn't exist.
this site is ridiculous. i know a lot of people troll about having information and whatnot. but when people do have information, no one will believe them anyway. it's really a no-win situation here at the ai forums. even people who seemed to have accurate information in the past are constantly "debunked" by others later for no good reason other than personal whimsy of being a dissenter. folks, this is a rumor site! choose to take everything with a grain of salt and use your own cognitive reasoning to figure out what you'll believe. it's not the end of the world one way or the other.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey, take a chill pill and read all of my posts so you have some context.
I'm actually promoting the concept of a realistic open mind to all those posters who wander around various forums - not just this one - claiming that the G5 has been nixed by either by Moto or Apple.
I personally believe it does exist, but I just run an IT consultancy in Guildford so have no proof that I could/would offer to that back that up. There are people who post here who say the opposite and equally have no proof that they could/would offer up. That was my point - nothing else.
To sum up, you're right! A lot of posts here are hysterical and highly opinionated by people who have a desperate desire to have their crank theories listened to (and that's just me) - but then what did you expect? Solid reasoned arguments with documented proof? It's a rumor site, ferchrissake!
Again, I think G5 PMacs will appear at SF '03 and seeing as I'm feeling vaguely prophetic, I'll pitch the base spec at approx 1.4 GHz and the top-end as a dual 1.8GHz.
<strong>
For a SAN, what matters is throughput to the servers, not (just) to the clients. If the XServe(s) attached to the XServe RAID can get anywhere near 4Gb throughput in practice, Apple will have a lot of very happy customers. Believe me, if Oracle 9i can hit its database at 500MB/s, the people getting the results back will notice, even if they're only getting the results over fast ethernet.
[ 05-22-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yep, I've specced and installed SANs and major server installations and I understand that SAN's provide throughput to servers. If the RAID setup has 4Gb aggregate throughput to the servers and is matched to the drive throughput, that's great.
However, my argument (which is aimed at all the doommongers who crticise its' design) is that SCSI is not a prerequisite for every site, especially for SMEs who may only have 25-50 users on a 100-BaseT network or schools who have bought into Apple's wireless vision.
Under these circumstances, the overall speed of performance (from the perspective of the user) is dictated by the speed of the slowest link in the chain which is the 10/11/100 mbit link to the client system (hopefully switched) and the shared 100 Mbit backbone of the whole LAN. Having Ultra160 drives is not necessarily the smartest investment under these circumstance, given that you may never exploit a significant element of the performance for a significant proportion of the installation's lifecycle.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
Hey, take a chill pill and read all of my posts so you have some context.
I'm actually promoting the concept of a realistic open mind to all those posters who wander around various forums - not just this one - claiming that the G5 has been nixed by either by Moto or Apple.
I personally believe it does exist, but I just run an IT consultancy in Guildford so have no proof that I could/would offer to that back that up. There are people who post here who say the opposite and equally have no proof that they could/would offer up. That was my point - nothing else.
To sum up, you're right! A lot of posts here are hysterical and highly opinionated by people who have a desperate desire to have their crank theories listened to (and that's just me) - but then what did you expect? Solid reasoned arguments with documented proof? It's a rumor site, ferchrissake!
Again, I think G5 PMacs will appear at SF '03 and seeing as I'm feeling vaguely prophetic, I'll pitch the base spec at approx 1.4 GHz and the top-end as a dual 1.8GHz.</strong><hr></blockquote>
well, the information i have leads me to believe that the g5 could be released in new york. i certainly hope so. it seems like they're running tons of promos to get rid of their current towers, so it looks pretty good. it also seems strange to me that they've updated pretty much every machine in their lineup recently except the powermacs. i know, technically, that the pm's were updated after imac2, but honestly they've been stale for a year. i think apple's tipping their hand as far as their intro because the towers are just sitting there with no upgrades.
the g4 isn't really scheduled to hit 1.4 ghz until later in the year than july, again, from what i've heard, so your timing of a 1.4 ghz g4 at mwsf seems about right. i just don't think they'll be in the powermacs by that time.
[ 05-23-2002: Message edited by: admactanium ]</p>
Updated iMac
900, 800, 800MHz G4
100MHz Bus
256, 256, 128MB RAM
60, 40, 40GB Hard Drive
32MB Radeon 7500
SuperDrive, Combo Drive, or CD-RW
15" LCD 1024X768
Pro Speakers on all
1900, 1600, $1400
Updated Power Mac
Dual 1.2GHz, Dual 1GHz, 1GHz G4
2MB DDR L3 cache on all
133MHz Bus
1GB, 512, 512MB DDR266 RAM
100, 80, 60GB Hard drive
64MB Radeon 8500, 64MB Radeon 8500, 64MB GF4 MX (128MB GF4 Ti BTO)
SuperDrive on all
Same Enclosure
3000, 2300, $1600
To refresh our collective memories, a previous post of mine in this forum:
posted 01-30-2002 04:12 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]What follows is a speculative scenario; I do not claim it is true; I do claim that it is possible and reasonable, and based in (some kind of) reality. I ask you to hold your fire until you've read the whole thing.
First, a timeline:
SJ returns to Apple, determined to vindicate his vision & hard work by reclaiming Apple & the Mac & returning them to 'respectability'; in doing so, he kills the clones. Motorola, hurt financially by the loss of their clone investment, + sales to other clonemeisters, says, "Apple is just another customer now.
I'll spare us an analysis of the AIM partnership (FTM), except to observe that this was a watershed event: Motorola's turning-away. From this point on MOT has been perceptibly cool on the subject of general-purpose CPUs. Not only did the clone-death cut into their revenue projections, but the endless death-dance of Amiga reduced MOT potential desktop penetration to the point of invisibility (remember, this was before the iMac & the post-Amelio rennaissance). MOT no longer counts on the desktop as a keystone for the future.
Knowing that only the fastest machines - much faster than those then-existing - will be able to support his plans for the future, SJ keeps the G4 under wraps & begins to map out G5 & G6. The G4 is released to much wonder, but trouble surfaces: the design doesn't scale, meaning, the usual tricks for squeezing speed increases out of a CPU design bring no speed increases; not only that, but yield problems lead to a clock downgrade shortly after release. The G4 begins to stagnate, and there are reports that Apple is not merely sinking more money into MOTs processor design unit, but that they're becoming 'more actively involved' in the design process.
As one of the AIM partners, Apple has ALWAYS been heavily involved in PPC design - for damn' good reason: Apple's machines are the only ones that DEPEND on the PPC (of any generation) being a solid, fast, scalable and extensible design.
There are 2 significant pieces in this section of the timeline: the paralysis of the G4, and the news of AAPLs increasing involvement in the design team. In some ways, "G4" is a misnomer: essentially a "G3+AltiVec", the chip might be more accurately called G3.5, rather than a generational leap (as the G3 was over the 6xx, and as G5 is expected to be). I speculate that the failure of G4 is due to fundamental design flaws related to the Altivec bolt-on tactic, and that these proved 'unfixable' in the short term - and this led to the real megaHertz gap. Satisfying as it may be to blame MOT's "stupidity", all it really took was a serious flaw and a lack of motivation...and their motivation was already waning. MOT's eggs were increasingly placed in the telephony/embedded-systems basket, and they lacked enthusiasm for the emergency design surgery AAPL demanded, even with the influx of extra AAPL cash.
In this scenario (here's where my speculation heads for the Outer Limits), faced w/ a public-relations disaster, a seriously black eye among tech types, sales resistance, and an increasingly distracted design partner, AAPL reacts by taking over G5 development. My reasoning is that AAPL must have some contractual leverage to protect them from losing the PPC; despite all the gains expected by each partner, the fact is that AAPL is the most vulnerable of the 3: it needs the PowerPC; not true of the others. So, AAPL being full of pretty smart characters, and some of them being lawyers, it stands to reason that the arrangement between AAPL & MOT would lock in Apple's intellectual property rights, etc., to the PPC, in the event that "changing fortunes" threatened MOT's (or IBM's) abiity or willingness to perform as needed in PPC development...in which case, MOT would be partner no nore, but just a contract chip fabricator (and AAPL "...just another customer".
This being the case, I'd expect that AAPL would have hired certain key people from MOT (perhaps after one of their "layoffs" - you know AAPL loves to travel under the radar) and elsewhere, &push HARD on G5 (w/ an eye toward G6, 'cause that's how these things go), undistracted by cell-phones and satellites. It's been 2 years (?) since then, and what have we heard? Vague rumours about mystery boxes that make Athlons look like dead snails, and pretty much nothing more.
RECAP
AAPL moves from triumph to triumph: G3, SJ's homecoming, iMac, B&W PMG3, PMG4;
Disaster strikes: tho a perfectly acceptable CPU, design flaws cripple its speed and its scalability;
Dismayed by MOT's preoccupation w/ its other products, and faced by destruction in the marketplace, AAPL takes steps: assumes control of PPC development; assigns MOT the task of getting whatever legs they can on the G4; assigns G5 crash priority; plays the situation close to the vest, in order to prevent further humiliation while sorting things out.
With both the iMac & PowerMac lines stale and floundering, a share-price tumble that leaves the entire market gasping, and the Cube fiasco still fresh, light begins to gleam: iMac's re-re-design comes together, OSX matures, and G5 prototypes exceed expectations. The computer industry desperately needs "a compelling reason" for sales to increase, and AAPL is poised to pull the trigger on the most compelling line of computers ever seen.
Faced w/ an abundance of riches, AAPL chooses to release the iMac first; this will give it an undiluted spotlight, and allow time for orders, production and enthusiasm to gear up; it will also allow time to put the finishing touches on the new PowerMac G5.
After the G4 fiasco, AAPL is taking no chances: the PowerMac G5 is compelling: state of the art, from mobo to I/O - the latest & greatest buzzword compliance, drool factor 11; to make it so, the extra time will all go into the legendary AAPL fit & finish; but when to announce? After all new iMac models are shipping: once that's done, the decks are cleared for introduction of the PMG5. Beyond that: any major software releases on the horizon? How's 10.2 coming along? Any big events coming up?
The piece of resistance: as soon as possible after G5 introduction, move all non-G5 machines to 1+gHz. The fastest, most capable, most attractive computers ever made: half a dozen compelling reasons to buy not just a new computer, but a new Macintosh.
Hardware & software developers, desperate for a selling platform to support (& thereby generate sales of their own), flock to the Mac: gadget and peripheral makers fall over each other to be part of the digital hub.
This is me speculating. Not predicting, not claiming, not reporting. Speculating.<hr></blockquote>
I'll follow-up on this shortly.
<strong>However, my argument (which is aimed at all the doommongers who crticise its' design) is that SCSI is not a prerequisite for every site, especially for SMEs who may only have 25-50 users on a 100-BaseT network or schools who have bought into Apple's wireless vision.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gotcha.
Thanks for the clarification.
Balto makes some great points in this thread:
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001728"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001728</A>;
Basically, all we know about the G5 PPC is that it will use RapidIO and be Book-E compliant.
My point about the G5 is not that I think it will definitely be released in NY, but that it exists. It must exist, because without it, Apple has nothing to look forward to beyond the G4. I don't think that's a viable plan for the future!
I think that IF they can either release it or show it in July, they will: all eyes will be watching for big news about the PowerMacs; G5 would be too big a win to hold back if they have it.
However, I think there are more interesting things going on without trying to intuit a detailed analysis of G5. A lot of them are in XServe.
"but that it exists. It must exist, because without it, Apple has nothing to look forward to beyond the G4."<hr></blockquote>
Thank you pointing out the uh, well, there's no other way to say it...the obvious
sorry couldn't help it
If nothing else, this is a great story.
Can't wait to see how it turns out.
...
Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the possible buyers of a PPC G5 CPU:
Apple
Cisco
Amiga
Any others? Among these buyers, is there enough demand to warrant the big bucks in R&D that would be required to design and fab a pentium 4 killer?
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</p>
Sure a 1.6 Ghz G5 with 333 Mhz DDR memory will feel good, real good. But you now that come the next MacWorld everyone will be going nuts saying "if Apple doesn't release a 2.0 Ghz G5 with 400 Mhz DDR I'm out of here."
Most likely we are going to have to live with the "Next Big Thing"? for a good long time. Probably Apple will be with the same basic Architecture for 2+ years. That's why I think when the G5 comes the big story will be what the G5 is attached to?
I thought Dorsal's idea of each CPU having its own memory was intriguing. I know that NUMA has some advocates (AMD, IBM, et al). Whatever it is as the Register said the key for Apple to keep in the performance race will probably be in being able to go wider.
Moto will still need to scale. MP won't solve everything. Most portables won't be MP for the foreseeable future. The e/iMac probably won't either. But to keep the PowerMacs bringing in $3500 given the realities of Motos cycles, Apple needs an architecture that can work with 4-8 processors (even though they will probably start with 1-2) so they have some options in a year or so other than piling on rebates and slashing prices. I'd rather see upgrades than price cuts any day.
Think future?
Lowend:
G4 processor at 1 GHZ
266 MHZ FSB
256 PC2100 DDR Ram
80 GB HD
GeForce 4 MX graphics
Superdrive
FireWire 2
Bluetooth
Same Mouse and keyboard
New case
Price: $1699 (Yes, a price hike)
Mid-range:
G4 Processor at 1.2 GHZ
266 MHZ FSB
512 MB PC2100 DDR Ram
100 GB HD
GeForce 4 Ti Graphics
Superdrive
FireWire 2
Bluetooth
Same mouse and keyboard
New Case
Price: $2599 (Yes, a price hike)
High-end:
Dual G4 processors at 1.4GHZ
266MHZ FSB
1 GB PC2100 DDR Ram
120 GB HD
GeForce 4 Ti Graphics
Superdrive
FireWire 2
Bluetooth
Same mouse and keyboard
New Case
Price: $3499
I do see a new case. yeah, the El Capitan has been a good case but it just needs a design refresh. Hell, its going on 3.5 years old now.
FireWire 2 is a big maybe. its time they got a new high-spec I/O in the machine.
Sincerely,
Dr. L
<strong>The plot thickens. There sure seem to be a lot of people proclaiming that the G5 is going to be ready soon, and that with it Apple will have nothing to worry about with respect to performance. To me, this says something. There are far to many reports like this to be the work of only trolls.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The problem is that I haven't seen many people talking it up who I would believe any farther than I could throw them. There is no real information out, nor anybody whom I'd really put money on. Everybody could just be talking up the latest Dorsal post, and if they repeat it to enough people they start hearing it come back in a slightly modified form and consider it confirmation. Eventually we're all caught up in this fantasy of speculation with no basis in fact. Two different and official sounding people send it to TheRegister and MOSR, and bam! its a rumour and it kicks up the vortex of speculation to the next level. Capt. Obvious' rather obvious deductions just add fuel to the fire.
There are very few pieces of information that we really know for sure (or at least with a high degree of confidence):
- Apple is very likely going to introduce a new PowerMac in the next 2-3 months, probably @ MWNY
- Apple has started to support DDR with the Xserve
- Motorola's only statements about the MPX bus are that it is not a point-to-point bus, their customers love it the way it is, and it will not go DDR or faster than 166 MHz
- Their direction on the 8540 is towards an on-chip memory controller and RapidIO connectivity bus
- There are lots of rumours about a RapidIO based Mac design with on-chip DDR memory, and they have been circulating for almost a year now controller
- Apple runs a tight ship, and keeps Motorola quiet about coming developments -- they can deliver a surprise if they want to, and SJ really likes to
- The 8540 is a modular design, and a couple of years ago we heard that Apple had significantly stepped up its involvement in the PPC design process
- The 8540 is due to ship 2nd half of calender '02
- The most commonly held opinions are for a G5 introduction in '03
[ 05-27-2002: Message edited by: Programmer ]</p>Something also doesn't quite mesh:
Before Xmas, MacWorld UK ran a couple of articles which mentioned the 'G5' (as in Mot's next generation chip). They discussed possible timelines of introduction and even interviewed some people about it (Paul Clark of Motorola?). Anyway, there are quotes from him that say that the 'G5 is progressing well' (admittedly a while ago, and makes no reservations about Apple nixing the G5 or anything) and that although the 'G4 has legs' they didn't expect it to scale much past 1 Ghz (yes, even Apollo).
So, someone at Motorola has been on record to state the the 'G5' does exist somewhere in a development house at Mot (which is not unsurprising, given that technology advances). Now, the idea that the G4 has been scaling well (and will continue to do so with a die shrink) are all very qualifiable, but the development money spent on the G4 replacement (started as soon as Mot realised the G4 was knackered back in '99) must have yielded something.
Moto (as Programmer states) feel the MPX bus is sufficient, and yet they harp about the 8540's on-die 333Mhz memory controller and RapidIO spec. Apple would also be quite foolish to release a PM based on the quasi-DDR effort that the Xserve utilises.
Let us also not forget that the latest incarnations of the PM were released pretty quietly (and even then, were thought of as 'holdovers').
And if Motorola really had given up on the desktop PPC, do you really think that they would keep all of their future products as secret as they do (it can only be due to Apple that they do this)?
I think that all these things point to something big coming quite soon (hopefully summer). Whilst I don't necessarily believe it will be a 'G5', I do feel that it will be something quite impressive. I think Apple will have it right.
I did (and do) believe dorsal was the real deal... I'm 90% sure I know who s/he worked (works?) for. For reasons you might imagine I will not go into any more detail on that.
Does that mean EVERYTHING dorsal said was on the level? I don't think so.. and here's why:
You have to know Apple monitors boards such as these (I'm betting most Apple oriented boards are scanned for people giving out tips when they shouldn't)... That being the case people giving 'first hand' tips are pretty non-existant.
Dorsal was a rare case since he didn't work directly for Apple and that made him feel a little more insulated. All the same Dorsal had to know that he was taking a fair bit of risk giving out that info. Dorsal could have been feeding out some 'less than true' reports from time to time just ot keep those who monitor boards like these guessing...
As I said before... I seriously doubt that Dorsal will return and that's very sad... but for me knowing he was the real deal has caused me re-read his postings and think happy thoughts about the future...
Dave