Having the Geforce FX in a Mac would be kickass. The trouble would be convincing Nvidia to make a Mac edition. 8X AGP will be a definite on the next Powermac. I sure do hope so.
Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz?
For once we'd have some true separation between the lines. Hopefully then Apple could offer the same Base connectivity(even down to Gigabit) and the choice to consumers would simply be speed, RAM and HD size.
<hr></blockquote>
I don't see why Apple would have any problem explaining this. Apple did such a good job with it before on the G4 vs P4 that AMD used almost the same presentation to explain the new Athlon scheme.
I must say that Apple better pull a rabbit out of it's hat at MWNY, or I'm regrettably going to have to build a Dual Xeon machine, and that will break my bank for some time. Which means money that was allocated for/towards Apple hardware will be spent elsewhere because Apple may not see the need to remain competitive in the MHz arena, but I cant afford to lager behind for another 3 years waiting on a dream machine that will never come to fruition.
Let's just hope the 970 is in full production, and is all we hoped it would be.
We also need a great MOBO revision.
I've been looking on the web for Dual Xeon Mobo's, and everything is starting to show Serial ATA, 8X AGP, PCI-X, (DDR 3700 <- I saw somewhere) 500+ MHz FSB, 6 - USB 2.0,
That's just some of the stuff we need to come up with, or one up by MWNY because everything on the PC side will have it, and we'll look like cr@p because we wont be truely competitive.
My next sig: I need a 3D PowerHouse, and I hope it's a SuperMac
(DDR 3700 <- I saw somewhere)[/b]</strong><hr></blockquote>
That would require DDR2, which I doubt you are seeing anywhere right now outside of graphics cards. Even there it hasn't proven to be a bright choice because of the cost.
Would have been a typo that was meant to read DDR 2700.
..I must say that Apple better pull a rabbit out of it's hat at MWNY, or I'm regrettably going to have to build a Dual Xeon machine, and that will break my bank for some time...<hr></blockquote>
Very weird. I just posted this on Arse:
rickag
posted February 18, 2003 17:55 February 18, 2003 17:55
[quote]NuVector (quoted from NuVector's post @ Arse)
...looks like I may have to wait another 6 mos, but that's OK too. But if Apple doesn't have something worth the price by then, I'll be buying anyway. Probably not a Mac though.<hr></blockquote>
I don't know what you would consider worth the price, but in 6 months, I'm not really expecting much.
Just guessing, but IBM's 970 probably will not be out within the next 6 months. Motorola has a press release stating the MPC 7457 will be in production in the 4th quarter of 2003, so it won't be available either.
Unless Apple pulls a rabbit out of its' hat, looks like you may be buying from some one other than Apple. Frown
Maybe, but very very very unlikely, IBM has a reworked G3 w/ altivec. Haven't they been manufacturing the 750 using a 0.13µm process?? Basically, IBM introduces the MPC7457 w/ a 200MHz FSB, 6 months before Motorola, nawww ain't happening.
Well, I've had some sneaks behind the scenes (not official ones, though). Apple has some cool stuff coming this year to be sure -- including some desktop machines that are outperforming current Intel stuff.
<hr></blockquote>
This falls in line with the 970 arriving. The next comment about what Microsoft is dreaming about for 2005 isn't really any more interesting than the POWER5 discussions -- we know the processor guys are pushing ahead.
Yea that RAM is coming. I saw it while browsing for moboards. It was like some kind of gel looking RAM similar to the extreme 444MHz stuff in the link from programmer.
I have since not found anything better than PC2700 in any existing motherboard, but if the RAM is there the spec, and board will be built soon enough, and I'll bet we'll see some of it by MWNY.
I know Apple will probably not have the 970 ready by MWNY, more like MWSF (if there is one), but I'm looking at Dual Xeon's @ 2.8GHz each with hyper-threading tech, and I can build one for a good price vs. New PowerMac which I wouldn't see for at least 10 months that will probably be @ 1.6GHz MP at the most. By that time I can switch out my mobo, and processors Which will probably be running @ 4++GHz each by then. It's an uphill battle for Apple.
I will however keep my G4, but I'm going to try to find a Xeon motherboard in a rack-mount version rather than case/box. That way I can hopefully slide in a wicked @ss Xserve with it someday if Apple ever gets up to speed. I'm sure you all know Pixar went the intel route... What a disappointing day that was. I was hoping Apple had a powerhouse 3D, or workstation/PowerMac/competitive Gaming machine in their arsenal just waiting for the right processor to be there.
Note: I also can't get Maya Unlimited for the Mac anyway, and that was why I started looking to begin with.
It's a tough battle for Apple when people that have never even used anything other than a Mac (like myself) are considering alternatives.
I had a 9600, (still have it actually) and was holding out for a 1.8 GHz machine when the 867 Quicksilver came out, and settled for that -which is what I have now thinking that it would tide me over until Apple caught up, and that has not happened as I had imagined.
I need more than Apple is offering these day's.
I'm sorry if I went off topic.
The best news I've seen is old news about IBM, and an AMD
I'm not actually sure how dedicated IBM, and Apple are in bringing the PPC back as a processing power to reckon with, but it would be a great day If I had an industry leading 3D workstation that had an Apple logo on it's side.
Hey, uh, Lemon Bon Bon? Yeah, that "power"Mac thing you do was always lame, and now it's old and lame. They're called Power Macs because they use the Power PC processor.
And, the Power Macs are powerful. They're ridiculously powerful compared to the original Macintosh.
[quote] Hey, uh, Lemon Bon Bon? Yeah, that "power"Mac thing you do was always lame, and now it's old and lame. They're called Power Macs because they use the Power PC processor.
And, the Power Macs are powerful. They're ridiculously powerful compared to the original Macintosh.
<hr></blockquote>
Sorry, you t'alkin' tuh me? <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
They were called 'POWER'Macs because they once were. I even owned one once...many, many moons ago. And I loved her like no other...
'power'Macs? Guess they're 'old and lame' like the cell phone cpu they use?
Yeah, it is lame how Apple still call them 'Power'Macs. I agree. Bit like calling mouldy cheese 'cheese'.
I guess they are 'power'ful compared to the Apple I or your cell phone.
To trying to get this meandering thread into the main stream of the topic!
The single 1 GHz introduction in the
1x1GHz-2x1.25-2x1.42 compared to the previous
2x0.867-2x1.00-2x 1.25 did look strange. Even with the price drop there are two obvious problems with the design. First its CPU is weaker than the predecessors secondly the midrange model for not that much more offers 2.5 times the CPU power. A dual 1GHz would have looked more natrual.
However if Apple is planning for single-dual-dual lineup for the 970 due to limited chip supplies in the beginning. The current lineup sets the field up for this. My interpretation is that this is planned to be the last G4 towers.
Step one would be 970 in the towers and shortly there after in the servers. Some updated G4 perhaps with DDR support enter the powerbooks and iMacs.
Step two after die shrink is 970 in the iMacs and it at all possible in the portable as well.
For every CPU Apple buys they support it and share its development cost. For every Motorola CPU they buy they support a CPU with no future on the desktop no matter how good it is in other applications for this reason alone they have to buy as few as possible!
Some think that the IBM chip will come in a Super pro Workstation Macintosh and that the G4 will live on for a long time. I do not think so. A die shrunk 970 will be very competetive for many embedded applications and I am sure that IBM do not mind making money there! My guess is that Apple will not mind using a cool 970 across the lines as soon as it is possible.
My prediction is that the 970 will come to the Mac towers this year and that it will enter the other lines much faster than the G4 migrated from the towers to powerbooks and iMacs. Motorola has supplied CPUs for the Macintoshes since the start in 1984 but I think that will come to and end in 2005.
[quote]For every CPU Apple buys they support it and share its development cost. For every Motorola CPU they buy they support a CPU with no future on the desktop no matter how good it is in other applications for this reason alone they have to buy as few as possible!
Some think that the IBM chip will come in a Super pro Workstation Macintosh and that the G4 will live on for a long time. I do not think so. A die shrunk 970 will be very competetive for many embedded applications and I am sure that IBM do not mind making money there! My guess is that Apple will not mind using a cool 970 across the lines as soon as it is possible.
My prediction is that the 970 will come to the Mac towers this year and that it will enter the other lines much faster than the G4 migrated from the towers to powerbooks and iMacs. Motorola has supplied CPUs for the Macintoshes since the start in 1984 but I think that will come to and end in 2005.
<hr></blockquote>
Some excellent points here.
I take your point about every cpu Apple buys from IBM supports the development costs of a longer term road map. Apple will probably get a better deal on the 970 the more lines it migrates to...die shrink pending reducing costs, temperature for iMac and laptop lines etc.
Apple get a ROADMAP for cpus! It gives them massive power and flexibility and a future for their entire line up. And IBM aren't sitting on their behinds with regards other types of cpus that could be used in Apple gadjets. Four million cpus per year. That could certainly ease the R&D of any company I would have thought. Sure, IBM may serve up 970 Linux boxes...but four million cpu orders from Apple with the prospect of growth? IBM are once again interested in the desktop...but also servers. Apple watchers rejoice as we say, 'X-serve' and 'POWER'Macs.
And it would be in Apple's interests to be aggressive with the CPU Powerlite roadmap. It will address the performance issue. Add a compelling performance argument for PC tower users...gamers...Unix users who are still looking longingly. It will give the switch campaign a boost.
As for the G4. I think you're right. Motorola could, 'could' be on their way out by 2005. Unless they create a more compelling product. The G4 can stick around in laptops and iMac2 for a while...especially with a Rio set up come early 2004. There is a 'road map' there. But is it compelling enough? And will the 'new' Apple be prepared the tepid rate of updates to the G4? At this rate of going...any 1.8 gig G4 on Rio may not see the light of day til late 2004 or early 2005. In contrast, IBM have better fabs, compelling cpu designs, a 2nd to none road map and aren't losing billions.
Competition is good. And even after Ati's 'keynote' cock-up, Apple didn't drop them. And wisely so. Less than a year later...Ati was back in the game...delivering more compelling products and it's now the 9700 Ati card that is BTO option...not, surprise, surprise, the much heralded GeforceFX. Competition is good. It has been for Mac graphic cards. I remember thinking, 'Now Nvidia is on the Mac, Ati are dead. Nvidia will be all over the Mac product lines.' It didn't turn out that way...canny, canny Apple. You can see what they're up to. In a 'mini-me small market monopoly' they have to stimiluate artificial competition at the least. They couldn't go on with Rage video cards in the top end 'power'Mac costing 3K.
I'm not a fan of the G4 these days...or of Motorola. But they've been a long time partner of Apple. IBM may introduce a bit of real competition. It looks, if Moki's hints are anything to go by..., like Moto' dropped the ball or delayed the ball on any desktop G5. Moto', by any accounts, have had real problems over the last several years, financial and technical. IBM, maybe at Apple request, have stuck a VMX unit on a Powerlite cpu and stepped in to pick up the ball. At least for the 'power'Macs.
There is a remote chance that Motorola may step back into the game. Pick up the ball on a G6. Maybe. Or repair or go back to a G5 design and offer it to Apple's consumer line or let's not rule out the possibility that we may even see a G5 desktop from Motorola this Summer with a 970 to follow. With Apple. You never know.
But I feel, unless Motorola can do better with their current cpu line up...they'll be out of the game in the next couple of years. The Apple/Moto' relationship must be close to breaking point. The slow pace of G4 updates. The 18 month stall. Being twice as 'slow' on mhz. Apple's 'power'Mac sales taking a beating. What ever Apple did to Moto on clones...Moto' have more than 'returned' the compliment indirectly to Apple on lost 'power'Mac sales. Ouch.
Y'know, like saying goodbye to an old friend you no longer have anything in common with. That maybe Apple and Moto' come 2005.
In short, I kinda agree with the above post on what available evidence we have.
Xeon is the ultimate Hyper-Threaded P4, and is Wicked Fast! Benchmarks put it over the Power4, but IBM's new PPC 970 is being hyped up to best it. More hype by users, and tech guy's that read the spec sheets, and draw conclusions from that than anybody. I'm not sure how much IBM has said about it.
But! I have found some good news that may be a sign of good things to come. In this <a href="http://www.3dfestival.com/story.php?story_id=774"; target="_blank">ARTICLE</a> I found at <a href="http://www.3dfestival.com/"; target="_blank">3dfestival</a> it says that 68% of major studios are planning on buying Macintosh systems this year.
I hope these are some serious 3D workstations they are talking about. Because I could put my purchase on hold for that.
[quote] But! I have found some good news that may be a sign of good things to come. In this ARTICLE I found at 3dfestival it says that 68% of major studios are planning on buying Macintosh systems this year.
I hope these are some serious 3D workstations they are talking about. Because I could put my purchase on hold for that.
<hr></blockquote>
Hmmm. Maybe those studios know something we don't?
Maybe the lure of Maya 4.5 on Mac OS X is too much.
If I was a studio? A 970 Mac X with a 23 inch LCD running Maya or Lightwave? vs some x86 workstation? No contest.
I'm dying to see what Apple have up their sleeve. Hope they include the Quadros as well.
Comments
It would if the 'power'Mac wasn't cpu bound in terms of pushing these graphic cards to their limits.
The guy in the Omni interview said as much.
It's alright have the Ati or latest Nvidia, but we really need the 970 to push a card like that over the top. And a decent motherboard.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Hmmmm could we see.
eMac- 1Ghz G4
iMac- 1.25-1.6 G4
PM- 1.4-1.8 PPC 970.
Would Apple face issues explaining that a PPC970 at 1.4 Ghz is much faster than a G4 @ 1.6Ghz?
For once we'd have some true separation between the lines. Hopefully then Apple could offer the same Base connectivity(even down to Gigabit) and the choice to consumers would simply be speed, RAM and HD size.
<hr></blockquote>
I don't see why Apple would have any problem explaining this. Apple did such a good job with it before on the G4 vs P4 that AMD used almost the same presentation to explain the new Athlon scheme.
I must say that Apple better pull a rabbit out of it's hat at MWNY, or I'm regrettably going to have to build a Dual Xeon machine, and that will break my bank for some time. Which means money that was allocated for/towards Apple hardware will be spent elsewhere because Apple may not see the need to remain competitive in the MHz arena, but I cant afford to lager behind for another 3 years waiting on a dream machine that will never come to fruition.
<strong>
It would if the 'power'Mac wasn't cpu bound in terms of pushing these graphic cards to their limits.
The guy in the Omni interview said as much.
It's alright have the Ati or latest Nvidia, but we really need the 970 to push a card like that over the top. And a decent motherboard.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Let's just hope the 970 is in full production, and is all we hoped it would be.
We also need a great MOBO revision.
I've been looking on the web for Dual Xeon Mobo's, and everything is starting to show Serial ATA, 8X AGP, PCI-X, (DDR 3700 <- I saw somewhere) 500+ MHz FSB, 6 - USB 2.0,
That's just some of the stuff we need to come up with, or one up by MWNY because everything on the PC side will have it, and we'll look like cr@p because we wont be truely competitive.
My next sig: I need a 3D PowerHouse, and I hope it's a SuperMac
I am Sci Fi
~onlooker
<strong>
(DDR 3700 <- I saw somewhere)[/b]</strong><hr></blockquote>
That would require DDR2, which I doubt you are seeing anywhere right now outside of graphics cards. Even there it hasn't proven to be a bright choice because of the cost.
Would have been a typo that was meant to read DDR 2700.
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
<a href="http://www.xtremeddr.com/products/x_pc3500+.shtml"; target="_blank">http://www.xtremeddr.com/products/x_pc3500+.shtml</a>;
Wow as a Gamer I'm entitled to buy special memory. I feel L33t
..I must say that Apple better pull a rabbit out of it's hat at MWNY, or I'm regrettably going to have to build a Dual Xeon machine, and that will break my bank for some time...<hr></blockquote>
Very weird. I just posted this on Arse:
rickag
posted February 18, 2003 17:55 February 18, 2003 17:55
[quote]NuVector (quoted from NuVector's post @ Arse)
...looks like I may have to wait another 6 mos, but that's OK too. But if Apple doesn't have something worth the price by then, I'll be buying anyway. Probably not a Mac though.<hr></blockquote>
I don't know what you would consider worth the price, but in 6 months, I'm not really expecting much.
Just guessing, but IBM's 970 probably will not be out within the next 6 months. Motorola has a press release stating the MPC 7457 will be in production in the 4th quarter of 2003, so it won't be available either.
Unless Apple pulls a rabbit out of its' hat, looks like you may be buying from some one other than Apple. Frown
Maybe, but very very very unlikely, IBM has a reworked G3 w/ altivec. Haven't they been manufacturing the 750 using a 0.13µm process?? Basically, IBM introduces the MPC7457 w/ a 200MHz FSB, 6 months before Motorola, nawww ain't happening.
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: rickag ]
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: rickag ]</p>
Here's the interesting snippet:
[quote]
Well, I've had some sneaks behind the scenes (not official ones, though). Apple has some cool stuff coming this year to be sure -- including some desktop machines that are outperforming current Intel stuff.
<hr></blockquote>
This falls in line with the 970 arriving. The next comment about what Microsoft is dreaming about for 2005 isn't really any more interesting than the POWER5 discussions -- we know the processor guys are pushing ahead.
I have since not found anything better than PC2700 in any existing motherboard, but if the RAM is there the spec, and board will be built soon enough, and I'll bet we'll see some of it by MWNY.
I know Apple will probably not have the 970 ready by MWNY, more like MWSF (if there is one), but I'm looking at Dual Xeon's @ 2.8GHz each with hyper-threading tech, and I can build one for a good price vs. New PowerMac which I wouldn't see for at least 10 months that will probably be @ 1.6GHz MP at the most. By that time I can switch out my mobo, and processors Which will probably be running @ 4++GHz each by then. It's an uphill battle for Apple.
I will however keep my G4, but I'm going to try to find a Xeon motherboard in a rack-mount version rather than case/box. That way I can hopefully slide in a wicked @ss Xserve with it someday if Apple ever gets up to speed. I'm sure you all know Pixar went the intel route... What a disappointing day that was. I was hoping Apple had a powerhouse 3D, or workstation/PowerMac/competitive Gaming machine in their arsenal just waiting for the right processor to be there.
Note: I also can't get Maya Unlimited for the Mac anyway, and that was why I started looking to begin with.
It's a tough battle for Apple when people that have never even used anything other than a Mac (like myself) are considering alternatives.
I had a 9600, (still have it actually) and was holding out for a 1.8 GHz machine when the 867 Quicksilver came out, and settled for that -which is what I have now thinking that it would tide me over until Apple caught up, and that has not happened as I had imagined.
I need more than Apple is offering these day's.
I'm sorry if I went off topic.
The best news I've seen is old news about IBM, and an AMD
partnership. <a href="http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/daily_column/article/1579/"; target="_blank">LINK</a> I would like to see Apple get in on this somehow.
I'm not actually sure how dedicated IBM, and Apple are in bringing the PPC back as a processing power to reckon with, but it would be a great day If I had an industry leading 3D workstation that had an Apple logo on it's side.
I dream of that day.
And, the Power Macs are powerful. They're ridiculously powerful compared to the original Macintosh.
<strong>They're ridiculously powerful compared to the original Macintosh.</strong><hr></blockquote>
so is my cell phone, your point?
And, the Power Macs are powerful. They're ridiculously powerful compared to the original Macintosh.
<hr></blockquote>
Sorry, you t'alkin' tuh me? <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
They were called 'POWER'Macs because they once were. I even owned one once...many, many moons ago. And I loved her like no other...
'power'Macs? Guess they're 'old and lame' like the cell phone cpu they use?
Yeah, it is lame how Apple still call them 'Power'Macs. I agree. Bit like calling mouldy cheese 'cheese'.
I guess they are 'power'ful compared to the Apple I or your cell phone.
Score one point for Applenut.
Lemon Bon Bon
'power'Macs. 'power'Macs. 'power'Macs. 'power'Macs.
I feel your pain, brother... Yay, though I walk through the valley of silicon...I shall fear no Intel...
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
<strong>About how fast is a Xeon vs. a Pentium 4? Is it like the amount that a G4 is faster than a G3?
Heh. Non-altiveced, the G4 & G3 are pretty darn close!
The real key piece of the Xeon is it's designed for multi processing though. (And priced sky high accordingly).
A head-to-head comparison though requires saying _which_ Xeon. And _which_ P4.
The single 1 GHz introduction in the
1x1GHz-2x1.25-2x1.42 compared to the previous
2x0.867-2x1.00-2x 1.25 did look strange. Even with the price drop there are two obvious problems with the design. First its CPU is weaker than the predecessors secondly the midrange model for not that much more offers 2.5 times the CPU power. A dual 1GHz would have looked more natrual.
However if Apple is planning for single-dual-dual lineup for the 970 due to limited chip supplies in the beginning. The current lineup sets the field up for this. My interpretation is that this is planned to be the last G4 towers.
Step one would be 970 in the towers and shortly there after in the servers. Some updated G4 perhaps with DDR support enter the powerbooks and iMacs.
Step two after die shrink is 970 in the iMacs and it at all possible in the portable as well.
For every CPU Apple buys they support it and share its development cost. For every Motorola CPU they buy they support a CPU with no future on the desktop no matter how good it is in other applications for this reason alone they have to buy as few as possible!
Some think that the IBM chip will come in a Super pro Workstation Macintosh and that the G4 will live on for a long time. I do not think so. A die shrunk 970 will be very competetive for many embedded applications and I am sure that IBM do not mind making money there! My guess is that Apple will not mind using a cool 970 across the lines as soon as it is possible.
My prediction is that the 970 will come to the Mac towers this year and that it will enter the other lines much faster than the G4 migrated from the towers to powerbooks and iMacs. Motorola has supplied CPUs for the Macintoshes since the start in 1984 but I think that will come to and end in 2005.
Some think that the IBM chip will come in a Super pro Workstation Macintosh and that the G4 will live on for a long time. I do not think so. A die shrunk 970 will be very competetive for many embedded applications and I am sure that IBM do not mind making money there! My guess is that Apple will not mind using a cool 970 across the lines as soon as it is possible.
My prediction is that the 970 will come to the Mac towers this year and that it will enter the other lines much faster than the G4 migrated from the towers to powerbooks and iMacs. Motorola has supplied CPUs for the Macintoshes since the start in 1984 but I think that will come to and end in 2005.
<hr></blockquote>
Some excellent points here.
I take your point about every cpu Apple buys from IBM supports the development costs of a longer term road map. Apple will probably get a better deal on the 970 the more lines it migrates to...die shrink pending reducing costs, temperature for iMac and laptop lines etc.
Apple get a ROADMAP for cpus! It gives them massive power and flexibility and a future for their entire line up. And IBM aren't sitting on their behinds with regards other types of cpus that could be used in Apple gadjets. Four million cpus per year. That could certainly ease the R&D of any company I would have thought. Sure, IBM may serve up 970 Linux boxes...but four million cpu orders from Apple with the prospect of growth? IBM are once again interested in the desktop...but also servers. Apple watchers rejoice as we say, 'X-serve' and 'POWER'Macs.
And it would be in Apple's interests to be aggressive with the CPU Powerlite roadmap. It will address the performance issue. Add a compelling performance argument for PC tower users...gamers...Unix users who are still looking longingly. It will give the switch campaign a boost.
As for the G4. I think you're right. Motorola could, 'could' be on their way out by 2005. Unless they create a more compelling product. The G4 can stick around in laptops and iMac2 for a while...especially with a Rio set up come early 2004. There is a 'road map' there. But is it compelling enough? And will the 'new' Apple be prepared the tepid rate of updates to the G4? At this rate of going...any 1.8 gig G4 on Rio may not see the light of day til late 2004 or early 2005. In contrast, IBM have better fabs, compelling cpu designs, a 2nd to none road map and aren't losing billions.
Competition is good. And even after Ati's 'keynote' cock-up, Apple didn't drop them. And wisely so. Less than a year later...Ati was back in the game...delivering more compelling products and it's now the 9700 Ati card that is BTO option...not, surprise, surprise, the much heralded GeforceFX. Competition is good. It has been for Mac graphic cards. I remember thinking, 'Now Nvidia is on the Mac, Ati are dead. Nvidia will be all over the Mac product lines.' It didn't turn out that way...canny, canny Apple. You can see what they're up to. In a 'mini-me small market monopoly' they have to stimiluate artificial competition at the least. They couldn't go on with Rage video cards in the top end 'power'Mac costing 3K.
I'm not a fan of the G4 these days...or of Motorola. But they've been a long time partner of Apple. IBM may introduce a bit of real competition. It looks, if Moki's hints are anything to go by..., like Moto' dropped the ball or delayed the ball on any desktop G5. Moto', by any accounts, have had real problems over the last several years, financial and technical. IBM, maybe at Apple request, have stuck a VMX unit on a Powerlite cpu and stepped in to pick up the ball. At least for the 'power'Macs.
There is a remote chance that Motorola may step back into the game. Pick up the ball on a G6. Maybe. Or repair or go back to a G5 design and offer it to Apple's consumer line or let's not rule out the possibility that we may even see a G5 desktop from Motorola this Summer with a 970 to follow. With Apple. You never know.
But I feel, unless Motorola can do better with their current cpu line up...they'll be out of the game in the next couple of years. The Apple/Moto' relationship must be close to breaking point. The slow pace of G4 updates. The 18 month stall. Being twice as 'slow' on mhz. Apple's 'power'Mac sales taking a beating. What ever Apple did to Moto on clones...Moto' have more than 'returned' the compliment indirectly to Apple on lost 'power'Mac sales. Ouch.
Y'know, like saying goodbye to an old friend you no longer have anything in common with. That maybe Apple and Moto' come 2005.
In short, I kinda agree with the above post on what available evidence we have.
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 02-20-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
[ 02-20-2003: Message edited by: onlooker ]</p>
But! I have found some good news that may be a sign of good things to come. In this <a href="http://www.3dfestival.com/story.php?story_id=774"; target="_blank">ARTICLE</a> I found at <a href="http://www.3dfestival.com/"; target="_blank">3dfestival</a> it says that 68% of major studios are planning on buying Macintosh systems this year.
I hope these are some serious 3D workstations they are talking about. Because I could put my purchase on hold for that.
I'm done going off topic.
[ 02-20-2003: Message edited by: onlooker ]</p>
I hope these are some serious 3D workstations they are talking about. Because I could put my purchase on hold for that.
<hr></blockquote>
Hmmm. Maybe those studios know something we don't?
Maybe the lure of Maya 4.5 on Mac OS X is too much.
If I was a studio? A 970 Mac X with a 23 inch LCD running Maya or Lightwave? vs some x86 workstation? No contest.
I'm dying to see what Apple have up their sleeve. Hope they include the Quadros as well.
We need a pro-3D card.
Lemon Bon Bon