this is their anniversary year, they wont disappoint
Disappoint or satisfy are relative terms. Apple will do what the available technology and economic climate will allow them to do. I have a feeling that the Powerbooks will remain at current specifications (with perhaps a bump in hard drives and memory) for 9-10 months from now.
I don't think they are going to call the 980, or whatever IBM is calling it a G6. I think it'll still be called the G5.
Quote:
I'm also dying for Softimage to release XSI on OS X.
The chances of that are pretty slim if you ask me. XSI used to be owned my Microsoft, and I think the programmers have no plans on competing with Maya, Lightwave, and C4D on OS X. The share of the Mac market they would gain would be minimal. Although, 3D Studio Max has such a huge presence in 3D chances are it could take some users from the other 3 apps, and make a go at it, but I don't think they have ever considered it, and I for one am hooked on Maya.
The chances of that are pretty slim if you ask me. XSI used to be owned my Microsoft, and I think the programmers have no plans on competing with Maya, Lightwave, and C4D on OS X. The share of the Mac market they would gain would be minimal. Although, 3D Studio Max has such a huge presence in 3D chances are it could take some users from the other 3 apps, and make a go at it, but I don't think they have ever considered it, and I for one am hooked on Maya.
For now, I'm pretty fine with Maya Complete as it's what we're doing at school right now. But - Softimage|XSI has its advantages and it is much more complete in it's biggest edition than even Maya Unlimited. If you ask Softimage about OS X plans they don't tell you they won't consider it, no they'll say that they've been talking to Apple and looking into the subject thoroughly.
For the REAL pro market, comparing Lightwave or C4D to XSI and Maya is like comparing iPhoto to Photoshop (please, nobody feel insulted). Also, 3ds max is so out of line for today's CG just because they have a bad management. (again, no insult)
I like Maya and I'd like to see Softimage|XSI. I'm happy that C4D and LightWave are available, they sure have a reason to stay.
In about two years I will make a buying decision on one package at least. This will mean big bucks, I hope I can make it on a Mac.
In 2003 they released the alubooks (altho the 15" took almost the whole year), the PowerMac G5, and the iBook G4. iMacs and eMacs had only speed bumps. So this year I'm hoping that the iMac will get a G5, and that the VX will come out and be a faster laptop chip. Just those two items will probably fill the calendar.
At the rate Apple has been bringing new products, Apple-watching is getting to be right up there with watching paint dry.
As for the "anniversary product", that IS marketing-speak, just like "year of the laptop" (which became "year of these laptops" )
Yeah, I think the G5 will get to 3GHz, no latter than next autumn.
As for the rest (G5 PowerBook, Gold Cubes, $99 iPods, iBookUltra, something big released every damn week, etc.), please. Grab the reins, just a little.
- G5 update between now and Valentine, low-mid 2GHz range (to set up nicely to the promised 3GHz...otherwise half of you are going to have a stroke)
- Updated PowerBooks in early/mid spring, MAYBE. And yes, they'll still be G4-based. But who the hell really knows? They MIGHT just go on for another 8-10 months, untouched. Apple's done it before, as recently as this past autumn, right? TiBook went for 10 months and the 12" and 17" went from January 2003 until September? 9 months? The PowerBooks MIGHT sit just like they are until they do indeed get a G5 (LATE 2004, at best).
- Healthy iPod updates, I'm sure, probably twice in 2004 (spring and late fall, prior to the holiday shopping frenzy?). The whole iPod thing is currently Apple's bread-and-butter, so I see it always being pampered and given lots of attention!
- iBooks? Modest, expected bump: a little MHz here, 10-20GB more hard drive there, etc. Nothing special or cute. It's solid and is what it is.
- eMacs? I believe it'll get USB 2.0 on its next update, maybe bump up to 1.25GHz and some more hard drive space. Again - like the iBook - nothing earth-shattering...just expected, solid updates for a solid, respectable machine.
The iMac? I have NO idea...I could see it going in one of three directions, each more far out and freaky than the previous. So much so, that I'm embarrassed to even say...
But I think it'll be something pretty mindblowing and COMPLETELY out of left-field and will, honestly, reclaim some of the attention and excitement sparked by the original jellybean 4 years ago. I simply think the current iMac is either a) too expensive for its market or b) kinda old hat and heading into its third year. I don't think, for a number of reasons, they ever quite took off or took hold. At least in no way like its gumdrop predecessor.
If Apple wants lightning to hit twice, in terms of the iMac, they're going to have to go for cuteness AND affordability. Otherwise, why not just buy an eMac, an iBook, etc.
Nothing, other than that nice 20" screen, very compelling or "must have" about the current iMacs. They're great and cool. But there's just something missing, you know?
Anyway, that's my sane, rational and drug-free take on 2004.
Oh, and I suppose some sort of major OS X upgrade in the fall? 10.4? Ocelot? Bobcat? Manx? I don't know...
The move tot he 90 nm chips will be based on how fast IBM can get them out the door and that should be soon for the PM. 2.6 is possible if sufficient volume is achieved.
The 3.0 for summer is a shoe in. It's nice that Steve J indicated it would be there, but an IBM VP went on stage and said it would be there - which is a commitment on IBM's part to deliver. That leaves another possible speed bump by the end of 2004.
iMacs? I think that the 90 nm chips will make this possible and IBM will want those revenues as soon as possible. I can almost see the iMac for single G5s and the PM for duals within a few months. The other option would be a G5 iMac for the Anniversary Mac - my credit card is ready!
The G5 PB will be announced when the cooling problems are worked out and you can be sure that Apple's engineers are working on it rather hard these days. Unless we are lucky I would guess summer to early fall.
10.4? I think Steve wants another $129 from me and you before the year is out.
New displays are a probable - the only question is if there will also be a headless iMac available to generate display revenues at the consumer level.
Yes, kenaustus kinda touches on my iMac thoughts...
It's the 20th anniversary. The iMac has become the symbol of Apple to many. It's THE perfect digital hub machine. IBM seems poised to NOT be Motorola. Haven't heard much from Mr. Ive and the gang throughout 2003. Jobs says they're going to really release some great stuff in 2004 AND be mindful of it being the 20th anniversary, and mark it accordingly.
Take all that into account...
An iMac to make you wet your pants and sell your children.
Just watch.
Matsu will be reduced to a trembling, sobbing wreck of pure joy and never be able to say a bad thing about Apple again, murbot will buy 3 of them (and actually KEEP them!), I'll sell my PowerBook to Fellowship and buy one, groverat will switch to the Mac full-time and wholeheartedly, applenut won't have anything nasty to say about it or Apple, ShawnPatrick will buy one and stick "Dean in '04" stickers all over it, etc.
I'd love to see an anodized Alu Cube Anniversary Macintosh. Forget the name 'Cube' and just call it 'Macintosh'. Stick a 1.6-8 G5 in it and it will sell out as a limited edition no doubt.
Even better, make it the new 'iMac 3'. Headless. Make all Apple displays have the 'chrome' arm and adustable. All the 'Cube' form factor iMac 3 headless machines could come in the iPod mini colours. Alu anodized in pink, green, gold, blue and alu of course.
Bungle deals with iPod mini! Mix and match! Maybe colours will come back to the iMac range. They sold more when they had colours...and the range seemed more exciting wondering what colours Apple would do next...! The Cubes would have looked awesome in Ruby, Emerald, Saphire etc...
The iMac 2 had never really gained traction. Get rid of the pudding. Take the ergonomic arm and stick it on Apple displays (it would justify the fat premium...) and the iMac could become a cheap headless mini-tower with a Cube-boid form factor.
Apple would sell more iMacs that way. Way more. The imacs would look more gorgeous that way. The Cube looks far sexier than the pudding base.
I think if Apple could combine the best bits from the cube and iMac they'd have a winner. Separate display though.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon Bungle deals with iPod mini!
Hey, I'm sure they will. Just give it some time!
"We'll give you this iPod mini if you give us a garden hose and a freshly severed finger. No wait, that was messed up. We'll give YOU the hose and finger...haha...no wait, not "the finger", but...let me start over, my man...what I was trying to sa..."
I think the BIG 20TH ANNIVERSARY THING or B2AT or BAT? will be something that we will no be able to comprehend. Just like NO ONE though the new iMacs would look like they do, and NO ONE made a mockup of buttons on the scroll wheel for the iPodmini... NO ONE will be able to predict the BAT?
yet
,,,
If I were going to, I would say the BAT? is not a cube, and will be something that Apple can sell and not a limited edition
We'll give you this iPod mini if you give us a garden hose and a freshly severed finger. No wait, that was messed up. We'll give YOU the hose and finger...haha...no wait, not "the finger
I don't mind who 'fingers' who as long as you give me the iPod mini in return...
Softimage|XSI has its advantages and it is much more complete in it's biggest edition than even Maya Unlimited.
Toby
I disagree. So would Weta Digital, and ILM.
Without Maya, the Maya API, and MEL scripting language we would still be seeing CG that looks like film's from ten, twenty years ago.
Can you say Gollum? Yoda, Boba Fett vs. Obi-Wan Kenobe, Dex. Alias doesn't need me to start listing the credits they are well known.
XSI has improved, and made some take notice in niche categories compared to Maya, but it's just a ploy to get Alias to get on the ball with some long asked for feature requests.
If you haven't noticed everywhere (in film) that uses XSI still uses Maya as their backbone. (even after years with XSI) The truth is Maya still leads, and others follow. Pixar bought a ton of XSI equipment, and still in the DVD extras of all their films all I ever see is Maya.
Without Maya, the Maya API, and MEL scripting language we would still be seeing CG that looks like film's from ten, twenty years ago.
Can you say Gollum? Yoda, Boba Fett vs. Obi-Wan Kenobe, Dex. Alias doesn't need me to start listing the credits they are well known.
XSI has improved, and made some take notice in niche categories compared to Maya, but it's just a ploy to get Alias to get on the ball with some long asked for feature requests.
If you haven't noticed everywhere (in film) that uses XSI still uses Maya as their backbone. (even after years with XSI) The truth is Maya still leads, and others follow. Pixar bought a ton of XSI equipment, and still in the DVD extras of all their films all I ever see is Maya.
First, there is a huge difference between a complete package and something like Maya. I just said that in its fullest version, XSI is much more usable than Maya Unlimited. And even Weta, ILM, Framestore and other would agree. All of them use Maya because they write their own extensions.
I am a standalone user of 3D packages who neither has the time nor the expertise to write my own hair plugins and other stuff. XSI does this for me already. I was at the mental images anniversary where ESC gave a presentation of what they did for the second and third Matrix. They said they use Maya because it's flexible, but they'd never use Maya things like fur because it just is far away from being useable for a professional production.
A big production house uses Maya big time. For smaller projects and about everything I do, I can't afford customizing my Maya environment for about three months before actually start working.
Every package has its advantages, but I already said that.
Comments
Originally posted by ipodandimac
this is their anniversary year, they wont disappoint
Disappoint or satisfy are relative terms. Apple will do what the available technology and economic climate will allow them to do. I have a feeling that the Powerbooks will remain at current specifications (with perhaps a bump in hard drives and memory) for 9-10 months from now.
Originally posted by tfworld
Wow Fat Freddy, even more optimistic than I am!
Correctly or not at all
In June at WWDC:
- Power Mac G6 (PPC980) 2.8GHz 1799$
- Power Mac G6 (PPC980) Dual 2.6GHz 2499$
- Power Mac G6 (PPC980) Dual 3.0GHz 3499$
I don't think they are going to call the 980, or whatever IBM is calling it a G6. I think it'll still be called the G5.
I'm also dying for Softimage to release XSI on OS X.
The chances of that are pretty slim if you ask me. XSI used to be owned my Microsoft, and I think the programmers have no plans on competing with Maya, Lightwave, and C4D on OS X. The share of the Mac market they would gain would be minimal. Although, 3D Studio Max has such a huge presence in 3D chances are it could take some users from the other 3 apps, and make a go at it, but I don't think they have ever considered it, and I for one am hooked on Maya.
- Power Mac G5 2.4GHz
- Power Mac G5 Dual 2.2GHz
- Power Mac G5 Dual 2.6GHz
24th january:
-- Something ****ing awesome XXXX$
In February at MWT:
- iTMS Japan
In March:
- iTMS Australia
- iTMS Europe
In April:
- Powerbook G5 (PPC970M) 12" 1.4GHz
- Powerbook G5 (PPC970M) 15" 1.8GHz
- Powerbook G5 (PPC970M) 17" 1.8GHz
In June:
- iPod Mini 2GB 100$
- iPod Mini 4GB 200$
- iPod 20GB 299$
- iPod 40GB 399$
- iPod 60GB 499$
In June at WWDC:
- Power Mac G5 (PPC970M) 2.8GHz
- Power Mac G5 (PPC970M) Dual 2.6GHz
- Power Mac G5 (PPC970M) Dual 3.0GHz
I am putting 10 AI Credits on the whole lot!
EDIT: Took me out some prices...
Originally posted by onlooker
The chances of that are pretty slim if you ask me. XSI used to be owned my Microsoft, and I think the programmers have no plans on competing with Maya, Lightwave, and C4D on OS X. The share of the Mac market they would gain would be minimal. Although, 3D Studio Max has such a huge presence in 3D chances are it could take some users from the other 3 apps, and make a go at it, but I don't think they have ever considered it, and I for one am hooked on Maya.
For now, I'm pretty fine with Maya Complete as it's what we're doing at school right now. But - Softimage|XSI has its advantages and it is much more complete in it's biggest edition than even Maya Unlimited. If you ask Softimage about OS X plans they don't tell you they won't consider it, no they'll say that they've been talking to Apple and looking into the subject thoroughly.
For the REAL pro market, comparing Lightwave or C4D to XSI and Maya is like comparing iPhoto to Photoshop (please, nobody feel insulted). Also, 3ds max is so out of line for today's CG just because they have a bad management. (again, no insult)
I like Maya and I'd like to see Softimage|XSI. I'm happy that C4D and LightWave are available, they sure have a reason to stay.
In about two years I will make a buying decision on one package at least. This will mean big bucks, I hope I can make it on a Mac.
Toby
Originally posted by tfworld
Wow Fat Freddy, even more optimistic than I am!
Optimistic? He's positively euphoric!
In 2003 they released the alubooks (altho the 15" took almost the whole year), the PowerMac G5, and the iBook G4. iMacs and eMacs had only speed bumps. So this year I'm hoping that the iMac will get a G5, and that the VX will come out and be a faster laptop chip. Just those two items will probably fill the calendar.
At the rate Apple has been bringing new products, Apple-watching is getting to be right up there with watching paint dry.
As for the "anniversary product", that IS marketing-speak, just like "year of the laptop" (which became "year of these laptops"
Originally posted by Mr. Bob
Why is cubist so negative?
Even at its worst the next Power Mac will start at 2.4 MHz and we should see that by month's end.
dont you mean 2.4 GHZ? i should hope we see 2.4 mhz by the months end.... ok back on topic.....
Yeah, I think the G5 will get to 3GHz, no latter than next autumn.
As for the rest (G5 PowerBook, Gold Cubes, $99 iPods, iBookUltra, something big released every damn week, etc.), please. Grab the reins, just a little.
- G5 update between now and Valentine, low-mid 2GHz range (to set up nicely to the promised 3GHz...otherwise half of you are going to have a stroke)
- Updated PowerBooks in early/mid spring, MAYBE. And yes, they'll still be G4-based. But who the hell really knows? They MIGHT just go on for another 8-10 months, untouched. Apple's done it before, as recently as this past autumn, right? TiBook went for 10 months and the 12" and 17" went from January 2003 until September? 9 months? The PowerBooks MIGHT sit just like they are until they do indeed get a G5 (LATE 2004, at best).
- Healthy iPod updates, I'm sure, probably twice in 2004 (spring and late fall, prior to the holiday shopping frenzy?). The whole iPod thing is currently Apple's bread-and-butter, so I see it always being pampered and given lots of attention!
- iBooks? Modest, expected bump: a little MHz here, 10-20GB more hard drive there, etc. Nothing special or cute. It's solid and is what it is.
- eMacs? I believe it'll get USB 2.0 on its next update, maybe bump up to 1.25GHz and some more hard drive space. Again - like the iBook - nothing earth-shattering...just expected, solid updates for a solid, respectable machine.
The iMac? I have NO idea...I could see it going in one of three directions, each more far out and freaky than the previous. So much so, that I'm embarrassed to even say...
But I think it'll be something pretty mindblowing and COMPLETELY out of left-field and will, honestly, reclaim some of the attention and excitement sparked by the original jellybean 4 years ago. I simply think the current iMac is either a) too expensive for its market or b) kinda old hat and heading into its third year. I don't think, for a number of reasons, they ever quite took off or took hold. At least in no way like its gumdrop predecessor.
If Apple wants lightning to hit twice, in terms of the iMac, they're going to have to go for cuteness AND affordability. Otherwise, why not just buy an eMac, an iBook, etc.
Nothing, other than that nice 20" screen, very compelling or "must have" about the current iMacs. They're great and cool. But there's just something missing, you know?
Anyway, that's my sane, rational and drug-free take on 2004.
Oh, and I suppose some sort of major OS X upgrade in the fall? 10.4? Ocelot? Bobcat? Manx? I don't know...
The 3.0 for summer is a shoe in. It's nice that Steve J indicated it would be there, but an IBM VP went on stage and said it would be there - which is a commitment on IBM's part to deliver. That leaves another possible speed bump by the end of 2004.
iMacs? I think that the 90 nm chips will make this possible and IBM will want those revenues as soon as possible. I can almost see the iMac for single G5s and the PM for duals within a few months. The other option would be a G5 iMac for the Anniversary Mac - my credit card is ready!
The G5 PB will be announced when the cooling problems are worked out and you can be sure that Apple's engineers are working on it rather hard these days. Unless we are lucky I would guess summer to early fall.
10.4? I think Steve wants another $129 from me and you before the year is out.
New displays are a probable - the only question is if there will also be a headless iMac available to generate display revenues at the consumer level.
It's the 20th anniversary. The iMac has become the symbol of Apple to many. It's THE perfect digital hub machine. IBM seems poised to NOT be Motorola. Haven't heard much from Mr. Ive and the gang throughout 2003. Jobs says they're going to really release some great stuff in 2004 AND be mindful of it being the 20th anniversary, and mark it accordingly.
Take all that into account...
An iMac to make you wet your pants and sell your children.
Just watch.
Matsu will be reduced to a trembling, sobbing wreck of pure joy and never be able to say a bad thing about Apple again, murbot will buy 3 of them (and actually KEEP them!), I'll sell my PowerBook to Fellowship and buy one, groverat will switch to the Mac full-time and wholeheartedly, applenut won't have anything nasty to say about it or Apple, ShawnPatrick will buy one and stick "Dean in '04" stickers all over it, etc.
Even better, make it the new 'iMac 3'. Headless. Make all Apple displays have the 'chrome' arm and adustable. All the 'Cube' form factor iMac 3 headless machines could come in the iPod mini colours. Alu anodized in pink, green, gold, blue and alu of course.
Bungle deals with iPod mini! Mix and match! Maybe colours will come back to the iMac range. They sold more when they had colours...and the range seemed more exciting wondering what colours Apple would do next...! The Cubes would have looked awesome in Ruby, Emerald, Saphire etc...
The iMac 2 had never really gained traction. Get rid of the pudding. Take the ergonomic arm and stick it on Apple displays (it would justify the fat premium...) and the iMac could become a cheap headless mini-tower with a Cube-boid form factor.
Apple would sell more iMacs that way. Way more. The imacs would look more gorgeous that way. The Cube looks far sexier than the pudding base.
I think if Apple could combine the best bits from the cube and iMac they'd have a winner. Separate display though.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon Bungle deals with iPod mini!
Hey, I'm sure they will. Just give it some time!
"We'll give you this iPod mini if you give us a garden hose and a freshly severed finger. No wait, that was messed up. We'll give YOU the hose and finger...haha...no wait, not "the finger", but...let me start over, my man...what I was trying to sa..."
Bungled COMPLETELY!
yet
,,,
If I were going to, I would say the BAT? is not a cube, and will be something that Apple can sell and not a limited edition
and of course:
Bungle
I left that one in for you. (There's no fun if I edit it out, eh?)
Lemon Bon Bon (Lemon Bungle Bungle)
We'll give you this iPod mini if you give us a garden hose and a freshly severed finger. No wait, that was messed up. We'll give YOU the hose and finger...haha...no wait, not "the finger
I don't mind who 'fingers' who as long as you give me the iPod mini in return...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by TobyX
Softimage|XSI has its advantages and it is much more complete in it's biggest edition than even Maya Unlimited.
Toby
I disagree. So would Weta Digital, and ILM.
Without Maya, the Maya API, and MEL scripting language we would still be seeing CG that looks like film's from ten, twenty years ago.
Can you say Gollum? Yoda, Boba Fett vs. Obi-Wan Kenobe, Dex. Alias doesn't need me to start listing the credits they are well known.
XSI has improved, and made some take notice in niche categories compared to Maya, but it's just a ploy to get Alias to get on the ball with some long asked for feature requests.
If you haven't noticed everywhere (in film) that uses XSI still uses Maya as their backbone. (even after years with XSI) The truth is Maya still leads, and others follow. Pixar bought a ton of XSI equipment, and still in the DVD extras of all their films all I ever see is Maya.
Originally posted by onlooker
I disagree. So would Weta Digital, and ILM.
Without Maya, the Maya API, and MEL scripting language we would still be seeing CG that looks like film's from ten, twenty years ago.
Can you say Gollum? Yoda, Boba Fett vs. Obi-Wan Kenobe, Dex. Alias doesn't need me to start listing the credits they are well known.
XSI has improved, and made some take notice in niche categories compared to Maya, but it's just a ploy to get Alias to get on the ball with some long asked for feature requests.
If you haven't noticed everywhere (in film) that uses XSI still uses Maya as their backbone. (even after years with XSI) The truth is Maya still leads, and others follow. Pixar bought a ton of XSI equipment, and still in the DVD extras of all their films all I ever see is Maya.
First, there is a huge difference between a complete package and something like Maya. I just said that in its fullest version, XSI is much more usable than Maya Unlimited. And even Weta, ILM, Framestore and other would agree. All of them use Maya because they write their own extensions.
I am a standalone user of 3D packages who neither has the time nor the expertise to write my own hair plugins and other stuff. XSI does this for me already. I was at the mental images anniversary where ESC gave a presentation of what they did for the second and third Matrix. They said they use Maya because it's flexible, but they'd never use Maya things like fur because it just is far away from being useable for a professional production.
A big production house uses Maya big time. For smaller projects and about everything I do, I can't afford customizing my Maya environment for about three months before actually start working.
Every package has its advantages, but I already said that.