Reason for Delayed Power Macs

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Does it strike anyone else as odd that Apple would delay the introduction of Power Macs just a few weeks? If the rumor sites are correct, they will be introduced after the current sales promotion on the PM line. Some say it is to get rid of excess inventory, but I don't think a few weeks will solve that problem. I suspect there is another reason, and here is one I came up with.



Apple and nVidea (Sp?) are cooperating on something big. MWNY is too early for nVidea to announce, so the introduction is delayed. It may also require version 10.2 of OS X to work. Possible?



So what other reasons are there for Apple to hold back Power Macs from MWNY? Any other ideas for the delay? In the past Apple announced products that did not ship until several weeks later, so something else is stopping them, if the rumors are true that is.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 45
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    Who know....but let's just see if I can't crack some info out of an old friend right now......
  • Reply 2 of 45
    penheadpenhead Posts: 45member
    Like you said, they probably aren't with the powermacs because of the powermacs, but probably because they are announcing something else and they don't want the powermacs to steal any of the thunder.



    I don't think a bigger/better imac will fit that bill, so it might be something totally new á la a tablet or pda.



    On the other hand, they might just announce the new powermacs to make TS look bad
  • Reply 3 of 45
    vvmpvvmp Posts: 63member
    Apple is building up their CPU inventory for an August itroduction of QUAD G5s. And yes, they will require the new Jaguar OS update.
  • Reply 4 of 45
    tigerwoods99tigerwoods99 Posts: 2,633member
    Right. And I've been to another planet where life exists.
  • Reply 5 of 45
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    Wow, you been to Nevada!
  • Reply 6 of 45
    gumby5647gumby5647 Posts: 241member
    It could be something as simple as Motorola had a slight (read: small) production problem with the new .13nm CPU's. Therefore Apple had to delay the into of the new towers until they could build up inventory...



    or something to that effect.
  • Reply 7 of 45
    Apple did exactly this six months ago at MWSF, so I don't think it unreasonable that they'll do it again.



    Jet
  • Reply 8 of 45
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    [quote]Originally posted by penhead:

    <strong>Like you said, they probably aren't with the powermacs because of the powermacs, but probably because they are announcing something else and they don't want the powermacs to steal any of the thunder.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No way. I have a multimedia/publishing mag at home. It's dated febuary/01. It has ~10 pages of MWSF coverage.



    MacWorlds do generate pro press as well, not just mainstream.



    Apple has killer software and a killer OS. It needs better hardware, it needs to be seen to produce better hardware, to keep/win back/convert pros to the Mac platform.



    Barto
  • Reply 9 of 45
    If the towers are delayed it could be to spread out the press coverage. If they announce too much at once it will push some things out of the limelight. This pre-supposes that there is some other announcement that is more interesting than new towers. Alternatively, it's just a small bump and so they'll sneak them out quietly.
  • Reply 10 of 45
    gullivergulliver Posts: 122member
    [quote]Originally posted by snoopy:

    <strong>Does it strike anyone else as odd that Apple would delay the introduction of Power Macs just a few weeks? If the rumor sites are correct, they will be introduced after the current sales promotion on the PM line. Some say it is to get rid of excess inventory, but I don't think a few weeks will solve that problem. I suspect there is another reason, and here is one I came up with.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I think they are holding back the upgrade because they want to release it together with 10.2 Jaguar. Since rumors speak of speedbumps between 1,2 and 1,6 GHz, depending on the source, the hardware-speedbump will not be big enough to "sell" it as a major step towards closing the MHz-gap. Together with 10.2 and especially QuartzExtrem Steve could sell even 1,2GHz-machines as "twice as fast as the former top-model". Doesnt that sound better than just a "20% speedbump"?



    [ 07-15-2002: Message edited by: Gulliver ]</p>
  • Reply 11 of 45
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    [quote] So what other reasons are there for Apple to hold back Power Macs from MWNY? Any other ideas for the delay? <hr></blockquote>



    I think the reason that Powermacs won't be announced at MWNY, is that Apple doesn't want them to get any press. It's a repeat of MWSF: Apple could have easily introduced Powermacs at MWSF, and if I remember correctly, the Powermacs shipped BEFORE iMacs did. But Apple didn't want much attention drawn to the Powermacs because their specs are so lame. The last thing Apple wanted was press hyping Apple reaching 1 GHz, over a year after Wintel has.



    IF no Powermacs are introduced at MWNY, then I think it's safe to assume that the update will be the following:



    933 MHz G4, 1 GHz, G4, Dual 1.2 GHz G4.

    133 MHz system bus.

    DDR memory controller, with PC2100 DDR RAM, connected to the CPU at the same damn 133 Mhz speed as before.



    In this case, the DDR RAM will give negligible performance gains, it is essentially a marketing ploy, a buzzword to throw around. Apple isn't stupid, they will want to make this a silent update, duck and hope that nobody throws old shoes or rotten fruit.



    Alternatively, it is possible that the towers will not be ready until September or October. Apple would want to delay the introduction until August so that there isn't too long a wait on shipping. If this is the reason for the delay, then we can expect some impressive improvements to the Powermac line, but I still am not going to get my hopes up for anything tremendous, like true support for DDR on the CPU, speeds in excess of 1.4 GHz, or a new case with an extra external drive bay.
  • Reply 12 of 45
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    This feels like the time to remind people that 3 years ago the G4 was at 100/500Mhz.



    If Motorola followed Moore's Law, we would be at 400/2GHz.



    Same with the G3. Instead we have Apple, cruising at 1/2 Moore's Law.



    It's time to catch up, but I don't think the G4 is gunna do it.



    This has zilch to do with the MHz myth.



    If Apple catches up with a G5 or a Power4, I'll be relieved. Cause I like Mac OS X.



    Back to the thread, MWSF had the iMac. BIG news. Max coverage needed.



    If the Power Macs are delayed because they arn't ready (that is, announced now shipping in a month ready), thats fine. But Apple would have to have something at least as special as the new iMac if the pmac is delayed because of press coverage.



    Like I said, I'm expecting 166/1.5GHz G4s, with DDR333, AGP 8X, 800Mb FireWire, ATA-133. In other words, not just the Xserve. The generation after the Xserve.



    All based on the 1GHz CPU upgrades, and the fact that all of this tech is here.



    Barto
  • Reply 13 of 45
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>In this case, the DDR RAM will give negligible performance gains, it is essentially a marketing ploy, a buzzword to throw around.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    A theoretical 64-bit 66-MHz DMA PCI (533MB/s), AGP 8X (2133MB/s) and 166MHz MPX (1333MB/s) would make DDR266/333 worthwhile, probably. Especially with Quartz Extreme eating away at that AGP bus. Programmer, where art thou ?



    Barto
  • Reply 14 of 45
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    Oh absolutely. A 166 MHz MPX bus would be a substantial improvement in bandwidth. Not as good as a true DDR bus running at 266 or even 333 MHz, but still a definite improvement over the current Powermacs.
  • Reply 15 of 45
    warpdwarpd Posts: 204member
    [quote] Barto: Like I said, I'm expecting 166/1.5GHz G4s, with DDR333, AGP 8X, 800Mb FireWire, ATA-133. In other words, not just the Xserve. The generation after the Xserve. <hr></blockquote>



    Am I mistaken, or has the Xserve only been shipping for about a week now? It seems logical that if Apple had something significantly better (i.e next generation), they would have considered this fact when shipping a monumentally important machine with hopes of breaking into a new market segment. Unless they really had nothing better for their engineers to do than to completely re-engineer the Xserve (which they certainly would need to do, if they were to make this "quantum leap") less than a month after it began shipping. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 16 of 45
    daveleedavelee Posts: 245member
    But SJ said that the release of the Xserve was a 'humble' one. What do you think will attract potential server purchasers more - a) tried and tested and very reliable technology (as is) or b) brand spanking new tech that may come with a whole host of teething troubles (which the PowerMac users are probably more likely to put up with)?



    The Xserve is Apple's break into the server market. Thay want to get it right. They need solid dependency, not necessarily bleeding edge.



    (Not that I make any predictions about what the PowerMacs may or may not come with.)
  • Reply 17 of 45
    warpdwarpd Posts: 204member
    I do not entirely disagree with you, however when Jobs said "it was a humble entry", I do not think he was reffering to the technology inside the server as being "humble" <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    [ 07-15-2002: Message edited by: warpd ]</p>
  • Reply 18 of 45
    rbaldrbald Posts: 108member
    MWNY Apple will announce a going out of business sale! Why not with less then 2% market share they practicaly are!!!!!!
  • Reply 19 of 45
    daveleedavelee Posts: 245member
    [quote] I do not entirely disagree with you, however when Jobs said "it was a humble entry", I do not think he was reffering to the technology inside the server as being "humble" <hr></blockquote>



    That would have been a side of Steve that not many people have seen



    I know that he was not referring to the hardware inside (which is by no means humble for a server). But the sentiment that Apple needed to deliver a solid and reliable solution (and cheap for what it is) still holds.



    For what it is worth I think we will see a vastly different PowerMac to what the Xserve may represent in technological terms.
  • Reply 20 of 45
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Oh absolutely. A 166 MHz MPX bus would be a substantial improvement in bandwidth. Not as good as a true DDR bus running at 266 or even 333 MHz, but still a definite improvement over the current Powermacs.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Ok, I'm likely not fully understanding MPX vs DDR vs the XServe DDR hack, but I know that 333 MHZ has a bus speed of 166 that is effectively doubled because it takes instructions on the rising and falling of the cycle, hence "doubling" the bus speed. IS the XServe hack only hacking the hard drive access by having individual channels for the drives or is it also hacking the memory?



    I realize that the current bus runs at 133MHz, but isn't adding a DDR memory controler on chip making enough of an alteration?



    Serious questions here, don't think I ever really had the XServe hack fully explained...or just didn't have time to read it



    Yes JYD, 333MHz effective bus PMs would be way cool. 533 even cooler, but hey, the RDRAM that currently can do anything with that is pretty damned rare.
Sign In or Register to comment.