G5 Trinity @ WWDC

1192021222325»

Comments

  • Reply 481 of 492
    seanlseanl Posts: 39member
    Haven't been following this, but why not this:



    powermac 7,3 = new 1.8/2.0



    powermac 8,1 = new 2.5



    Maybe with new proc, powertune, or processor controlled cooling pump it justifies a new designation.



    I would probably know why this is wrong if I just read this whole thread.
  • Reply 482 of 492
    I don't wanna burst anyones bubble, but unless Jobs plans on running a prometeia mach II there's no way in hell he'll be showcasing a 3ghz G5.



    I don't know why people continue to go on about a 3ghz G5... its not like(Edited- used to be Apple) will magically be able to bump clockspeeds another 500mhz... especially not after releaseing a water cooled 2.5 ghz unit.



    3ghz just isn't feasible right now nor will it be for months to come.



    edit: excuse my ignorance..... i realize that IBM and Motorola manufacture the processors for apple, but its mostly Apples ass on the line in temrs of the 3ghz being out or not.
  • Reply 483 of 492
    bigcbigc Posts: 1,224member
    Apple doesn't make processors...
  • Reply 484 of 492
    zapchudzapchud Posts: 844member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Bigc

    Apple doesn't make processors...



    That needs to be put in the FAQ. ;-)
  • Reply 485 of 492
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SeanL

    Haven't been following this, but why not this:



    powermac 7,3 = new 1.8/2.0



    powermac 8,1 = new 2.5





    I'm pretty sure we've proven that even numbers represent iMacs...
  • Reply 486 of 492
    mccrabmccrab Posts: 201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by discstickers

    I'm pretty sure we've proven that even numbers represent iMacs...



    "Proven" is rather a strong word in the circumstances. For example, where could a headless enterprise or consumer offering (such as the cube) fit?
  • Reply 487 of 492
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    IIRC, the Cube was 5,1.
  • Reply 488 of 492
    seanlseanl Posts: 39member
    Isn't it possible that it isn't a 'rule' that iMacs are even #s...just that it has fallen that way because of release and update cycles?
  • Reply 489 of 492
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SeanL

    Isn't it possible that it isn't a 'rule' that iMacs are even #s...just that it has fallen that way because of release and update cycles?



    no, not based on history. check it out over at the apple museum you can clearly see that they don't simply 'pick the next number' for each new machine, it follows a very clear pattern. Of course, a couple of interesting things come out of studying the lists...first, the very first iMac (rev.s A through D) is identified as iMac,1 but all subsequent iMacs are clearly labeled as even numbered "PowerMac,"s. Also, and more telling, is that the 12" PowerBooks are all lumped in with the iBooks as part of the "PowerBook6," category. Also, notice that the convention of odd numbers for "pro" machines (vs. even for "consumer" machines) is even used with the "RackMac" identifier, the one id category in which it wouldn't matter, as there aren't any "consumer" rack macs. This should make it very clear that this even vs. odd breakdown is not coincidence, but rather a well maintained policy.



    And the fact that the 12" powerbooks are even doesn't really imply that Apple see's them as consumer laptops, but rather that their "guts" are based on the previously engineered consumer iBook's guts, which we all already knew.



    Very interesting stuff...
  • Reply 490 of 492
    seanlseanl Posts: 39member
    Thanks for the apple museum link.



    According to the apple museum, 2nd gen G5's are all 970fx...



    (click on their hyperlink on the list page)
  • Reply 491 of 492
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SeanL

    According to the apple museum, 2nd gen G5's are all 970fx...\\



    Yup it also (only) mentioned 90nm construction on the IBM G5 page over at Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.