Apple tell TS to publish this bogus story as part of a settlement agreement ... doesn't make sense, but could be possible in order to make everyone blow their loads when the real specs ARE released
or
These specs are spot on, but are, in fact, dual-core chips instead of single-core ...
use it, don't use it.
I just can't believe that after an entire year, all they can muster up is a paltry 200Mhz bump - I don't think even Apple are that bad. surely?
I think the reason is the new yearly or so update cycle Apple seems to have established for the G5 machines
Historically Apple likes to update every 6 to 8 months on the "Power" machines. They, and IBM have had G5 issues to deal with that has slowed the process. Yearly updates is not a new PowerMac standard that is set in stone. It's an issue that is being dealt with in the best way possible for us, and Apple.
Yearly updates is not a new PowerMac standard that is set in stone. It's an issue that is being dealt with in the best way possible for us, and Apple.
Of course it is not set in stone, but the rather slow evolution of the G5 may impose a slower update cycle, seemingly around one year. I don't think it is something G5-specific, rather a reflection of what happens in the CPU industry sometime now already.
i guess if apple was planning on slowing down the update cycle we would have already seen more price cuts on the powermac lineup. it just doesn't seem reasonable otherwise.
Could have what??? They haven't announced anything and you are second guessing what they could have done??? Saying something about after a year. If you are talking about updates you have to wait a couple months--like July before you can talk about a year passing. Do you own a time machine? Or have you just lost perspective?
Its this complete sudden near global acceptance of the worst rumor to come along as ground truth, despite real evidence that superior hardware exists someplace, and incredibly loose date math, which leads to WRONG statements disguised as past tense fact that is absolutely inane.
Easy buddy, we are in a thread talking about speculation from a website. Please read all post in this thread with that in mind.
Besides, I was stating that as fact. I am just proposing if the rumor is true, you think they could have made better advancements in places besides CPU land where they have options in front of them. That's it.
one ray of hope seems to be Steves involvment with ultra high end video, and Apples passion for high end production software. Why make this amazing stuff like FCP studio to compete with Avid, only to have it run on lackluster equipment? Theres more to loose with Apple dropping the ball on the PM line than just PM sales.
I wonder if Apple wants to base everything around the Xgrid thing, sell moderatly powerful clients, with racks of Xserves to help when needed??? this would obviously be only for the high end however.
I can understand disappointment, because we are eager to see a Power Mac with dual core chips. However, I don't see any reason to be pessimistic, as a few seem to be. Dual core Power Macs will be here when they are ready. I'm sure no one wants them more than the crew at Apple, so Power Macs begin selling well.
If the 970MP is really ready to go, then Think Secret is wrong and we'll see new Power Macs any day now. If the chips are not ready, we'll likely see the predicted speed bump now, with all new Power Macs later this year.
I feel certain that the chip is the critical path, not the Apple hardware, and that is not a reason to criticize IBM. It's a tough job making the best possible CPU, and IBM want it to be right too, for use in their blade servers.
That's fine and all with the cpu's... if IBM can only make 2.7ghz fine. But why not upgrade anything else? The graphics card, the graphics card slot, the ram, the hard drives, the case, the dvdrw's... etc. There is so many things apple could have upgraded, but according to the rumored specs they have ONLY added 200mhz to the clockspeed.
Apple waited a year to roll out new hardware for a reason. It's apparent that they're waiting for WWDC now. I won't speculate on what's going to ship, but I only see 2.7GHz if they've taken this time to seriously cut costs on the Powermac and a big price cut accompanies.
But I still think TS is wrong.
The reason??? The fact that supply vs demand is way off. Their supply is so much higher than demand at this point. They are swamped with Powermacs, everyone has been waiting and waiting for the 3ghz barrier and numerous other things (pci-e). They will continue to wait until the machines contain these specs, at the same time the powermac sales will suffer. Apple will try to ride the wave as long as they can to get rid of as many machines possible.
Easy buddy, we are in a thread talking about speculation from a website. Please read all post in this thread with that in mind.
Besides, I was stating that as fact. I am just proposing if the rumor is true, you think they could have made better advancements in places besides CPU land where they have options in front of them. That's it.
I am, but you have been writing in difinitive past tense. The hypothetical "I was stating something as hypothetical fact" is a complete garbage after the fact cop-out. If you want to make comments on the rumor hypothetically, make it explicitly clear in the post. Anything else is irresponsible and doesn't help anyone.
You aren't the only one with this same weakness though, this thread and it's realitives all over the net all have the same misplaced past tense judgmental tone about them without any upfront mention that it only applies it the rumor is true. This may just be a rumor site, but that doesn't make sloppy communication OK.
That's fine and all with the cpu's... if IBM can only make 2.7ghz fine. But why not upgrade anything else? The graphics card, the graphics card slot, the ram, the hard drives, the case, the dvdrw's... etc. There is so many things apple could have upgraded, but according to the specs they have ONLY added 200mhz to the clockspeed.
No, according to the rumored specs they MIGHT only add 200Mhz to the CPU speed. It's a rumor, treat it as such, not like you would comment as if it was last weeks shipping product.
Not only a big difference language-wise there but ask yourself this. When has Apple EVER only made a tiny bump in CPU speed without changing anything else after 9-10 months? Does this make you look a the rumor any differently? Even the last low key PB speed bumps (only 1.33-> 1.5Ghz) upgraded the HD, graphics, Bluetooth and Airport Extreme availability -- and slightly lower prices.
This quote reminded me of the story - oh about 3 months ago - of the Apple division chief who suddenly left. Wasn't he in hardware? Anybody know the whys and wherefores of the story?
He has been layed off since the next Power Mac update was going to bring only a 200 MHz speed bump in the high end, the old Radeon 9600 as GPU in the standard configuration, no PCIe nor PCI-X 2.0, no Blue-Ray superdrives, and no 970MP processors, only the old 970FX .
No, according to the rumored specs they MIGHT only add 200Mhz to the CPU speed. It's a rumor, treat it as such, not like you would comment as if it was last weeks shipping product.
Not only a big difference language-wise there but ask yourself this. When has Apple EVER only made a tiny bump in CPU speed without changing anything else after 9-10 months? Does this make you look a the rumor any differently? Even the last low key PB speed bumps (only 1.33-> 1.5Ghz) upgraded the HD, graphics, Bluetooth and Airport Extreme availability -- and slightly lower prices.
Actually that was the 1.5ghz -> 1.67ghz upgrade they did all that. The 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade all they added was another 133mhz AND the OPTION to upgrade the vram to 128mb from 64mb on the top of the line 17" and 15". Everything else stayed teh same after 10 months
And if you look at my previous posting you'll notice on the last line I put "rumored specs" for clarification. I'm not saying anything is set in stone, but TS has had a pretty damn good track record. Even if their announcement dates have been off in the last year, their specs have been dead on except for the powermacs that were last updated, they said they were going to be dual 2.6 and they ended up being dual 2.5.
Actually that was the 1.5ghz -> 1.67ghz upgrade they did all that. The 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade all they added was another 133mhz AND the OPTION to upgrade the vram to 128mb from 64mb on the top of the line 17" and 15". Everything else stayed teh same after 10 months
And if you look at my previous posting you'll notice on the last line I put "rumored specs" for clarification. I'm not saying anything is set in stone, but TS has had a pretty damn good track record. Even if their announcement dates have been off in the last year, their specs have been dead on except for the powermacs that were last updated, they said they were going to be dual 2.6 and they ended up being dual 2.5.
The airport extreme/bluetooth being added as standard happened during the 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade. That's when I bought mine.
I believe they also upgraded the 12" PB's graphics from the 420go chip to the 5200 series chip at that time.
I don't see any reason to be pessimistic, as a few seem to be. Dual core Power Macs will be here when they are ready. I'm sure no one wants them more than the crew at Apple, so Power Macs begin selling well.
If the chips are not ready, we'll likely see the predicted speed bump now, with all new Power Macs later this year.
It's a tough job making the best possible CPU, and IBM want it to be right too, for use in their blade servers.
I remember similar platitudes from when we were all waiting for Motorola's mythical 8400 G5. The Register even had articles on Moto's new G5 beast, that was supposedly going to be on Hypertransport muthaboard and would have a fast on-die memory controller.
The Motorola G5 was NEVER ready. What if Apple's IBM relationship has taken a turn down the same road? What if the reason IBM won't deliver a dual-core CPU to Apple is that it's not worth the investment because the Apple's volumes are too tiny?
This is why I hope TS's reputation craters with the release of new Powermacs.
Of course, TS could be pumping out knowingly false info in an effort to break their own reputation with Apple as a solid source, thereby making them look like more of the little guy in court... that's a much larger obstacle to their continued existence than one wrong prediction.
I don't buy that at all. All of Apple's evidence has already been gathered over YEARS. And since Nick claims to have such high journalistic standards, I find it doubtful he would want to do that.
The Motorola G5 was NEVER ready. What if Apple's IBM relationship has taken a turn down the same road? What if the reason IBM won't deliver a dual-core CPU to Apple is that it's not worth the investment because the Apple's volumes are too tiny?
If this relationship has tanked like moto's did, Apple's remaining options are slim indeed. Fab their own? (huge investment, 2 year latency, not really Apple's strength). And AMD is not an option IMO.
Comments
Apple tell TS to publish this bogus story as part of a settlement agreement ... doesn't make sense, but could be possible in order to make everyone blow their loads when the real specs ARE released
or
These specs are spot on, but are, in fact, dual-core chips instead of single-core ...
use it, don't use it.
I just can't believe that after an entire year, all they can muster up is a paltry 200Mhz bump - I don't think even Apple are that bad. surely?
Originally posted by PB
I think the reason is the new yearly or so update cycle Apple seems to have established for the G5 machines
Historically Apple likes to update every 6 to 8 months on the "Power" machines. They, and IBM have had G5 issues to deal with that has slowed the process. Yearly updates is not a new PowerMac standard that is set in stone. It's an issue that is being dealt with in the best way possible for us, and Apple.
Originally posted by onlooker
Yearly updates is not a new PowerMac standard that is set in stone. It's an issue that is being dealt with in the best way possible for us, and Apple.
Of course it is not set in stone, but the rather slow evolution of the G5 may impose a slower update cycle, seemingly around one year. I don't think it is something G5-specific, rather a reflection of what happens in the CPU industry sometime now already.
Originally posted by Hiro
Could have what??? They haven't announced anything and you are second guessing what they could have done??? Saying something about after a year. If you are talking about updates you have to wait a couple months--like July before you can talk about a year passing. Do you own a time machine? Or have you just lost perspective?
Its this complete sudden near global acceptance of the worst rumor to come along as ground truth, despite real evidence that superior hardware exists someplace, and incredibly loose date math, which leads to WRONG statements disguised as past tense fact that is absolutely inane.
Easy buddy, we are in a thread talking about speculation from a website. Please read all post in this thread with that in mind.
Besides, I was stating that as fact. I am just proposing if the rumor is true, you think they could have made better advancements in places besides CPU land where they have options in front of them. That's it.
I wonder if Apple wants to base everything around the Xgrid thing, sell moderatly powerful clients, with racks of Xserves to help when needed??? this would obviously be only for the high end however.
Final Cut Studio requires an AGP Quartz Extreme Graphics card.
That's not looking too promising for PCI-E :-(
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Pretty sure someone already covered this, but
Final Cut Studio requires an AGP Quartz Extreme Graphics card.
That's not looking too promising for PCI-E :-(
Apple wouldn't slip up and put PCI-E in an announcement unless they were already shipping PCI-E computers.
Originally posted by snoopy
I can understand disappointment, because we are eager to see a Power Mac with dual core chips. However, I don't see any reason to be pessimistic, as a few seem to be. Dual core Power Macs will be here when they are ready. I'm sure no one wants them more than the crew at Apple, so Power Macs begin selling well.
If the 970MP is really ready to go, then Think Secret is wrong and we'll see new Power Macs any day now. If the chips are not ready, we'll likely see the predicted speed bump now, with all new Power Macs later this year.
I feel certain that the chip is the critical path, not the Apple hardware, and that is not a reason to criticize IBM. It's a tough job making the best possible CPU, and IBM want it to be right too, for use in their blade servers.
That's fine and all with the cpu's... if IBM can only make 2.7ghz fine. But why not upgrade anything else? The graphics card, the graphics card slot, the ram, the hard drives, the case, the dvdrw's... etc. There is so many things apple could have upgraded, but according to the rumored specs they have ONLY added 200mhz to the clockspeed.
Originally posted by johnsonwax
Apple waited a year to roll out new hardware for a reason. It's apparent that they're waiting for WWDC now. I won't speculate on what's going to ship, but I only see 2.7GHz if they've taken this time to seriously cut costs on the Powermac and a big price cut accompanies.
But I still think TS is wrong.
The reason??? The fact that supply vs demand is way off. Their supply is so much higher than demand at this point. They are swamped with Powermacs, everyone has been waiting and waiting for the 3ghz barrier and numerous other things (pci-e). They will continue to wait until the machines contain these specs, at the same time the powermac sales will suffer. Apple will try to ride the wave as long as they can to get rid of as many machines possible.
Originally posted by aplnub
Easy buddy, we are in a thread talking about speculation from a website. Please read all post in this thread with that in mind.
Besides, I was stating that as fact. I am just proposing if the rumor is true, you think they could have made better advancements in places besides CPU land where they have options in front of them. That's it.
I am, but you have been writing in difinitive past tense. The hypothetical "I was stating something as hypothetical fact" is a complete garbage after the fact cop-out. If you want to make comments on the rumor hypothetically, make it explicitly clear in the post. Anything else is irresponsible and doesn't help anyone.
You aren't the only one with this same weakness though, this thread and it's realitives all over the net all have the same misplaced past tense judgmental tone about them without any upfront mention that it only applies it the rumor is true. This may just be a rumor site, but that doesn't make sloppy communication OK.
Originally posted by emig647
That's fine and all with the cpu's... if IBM can only make 2.7ghz fine. But why not upgrade anything else? The graphics card, the graphics card slot, the ram, the hard drives, the case, the dvdrw's... etc. There is so many things apple could have upgraded, but according to the specs they have ONLY added 200mhz to the clockspeed.
No, according to the rumored specs they MIGHT only add 200Mhz to the CPU speed. It's a rumor, treat it as such, not like you would comment as if it was last weeks shipping product.
Not only a big difference language-wise there but ask yourself this. When has Apple EVER only made a tiny bump in CPU speed without changing anything else after 9-10 months? Does this make you look a the rumor any differently? Even the last low key PB speed bumps (only 1.33-> 1.5Ghz) upgraded the HD, graphics, Bluetooth and Airport Extreme availability -- and slightly lower prices.
Originally posted by Dave J
This quote reminded me of the story - oh about 3 months ago - of the Apple division chief who suddenly left. Wasn't he in hardware? Anybody know the whys and wherefores of the story?
He has been layed off since the next Power Mac update was going to bring only a 200 MHz speed bump in the high end, the old Radeon 9600 as GPU in the standard configuration, no PCIe nor PCI-X 2.0, no Blue-Ray superdrives, and no 970MP processors, only the old 970FX
Originally posted by Hiro
No, according to the rumored specs they MIGHT only add 200Mhz to the CPU speed. It's a rumor, treat it as such, not like you would comment as if it was last weeks shipping product.
Not only a big difference language-wise there but ask yourself this. When has Apple EVER only made a tiny bump in CPU speed without changing anything else after 9-10 months? Does this make you look a the rumor any differently? Even the last low key PB speed bumps (only 1.33-> 1.5Ghz) upgraded the HD, graphics, Bluetooth and Airport Extreme availability -- and slightly lower prices.
Actually that was the 1.5ghz -> 1.67ghz upgrade they did all that. The 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade all they added was another 133mhz AND the OPTION to upgrade the vram to 128mb from 64mb on the top of the line 17" and 15". Everything else stayed teh same after 10 months
And if you look at my previous posting you'll notice on the last line I put "rumored specs" for clarification. I'm not saying anything is set in stone, but TS has had a pretty damn good track record. Even if their announcement dates have been off in the last year, their specs have been dead on except for the powermacs that were last updated, they said they were going to be dual 2.6 and they ended up being dual 2.5.
Originally posted by emig647
Actually that was the 1.5ghz -> 1.67ghz upgrade they did all that. The 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade all they added was another 133mhz AND the OPTION to upgrade the vram to 128mb from 64mb on the top of the line 17" and 15". Everything else stayed teh same after 10 months
And if you look at my previous posting you'll notice on the last line I put "rumored specs" for clarification. I'm not saying anything is set in stone, but TS has had a pretty damn good track record. Even if their announcement dates have been off in the last year, their specs have been dead on except for the powermacs that were last updated, they said they were going to be dual 2.6 and they ended up being dual 2.5.
The airport extreme/bluetooth being added as standard happened during the 1.33ghz -> 1.5ghz upgrade. That's when I bought mine.
I believe they also upgraded the 12" PB's graphics from the 420go chip to the 5200 series chip at that time.
Originally posted by snoopy
I don't see any reason to be pessimistic, as a few seem to be. Dual core Power Macs will be here when they are ready. I'm sure no one wants them more than the crew at Apple, so Power Macs begin selling well.
If the chips are not ready, we'll likely see the predicted speed bump now, with all new Power Macs later this year.
It's a tough job making the best possible CPU, and IBM want it to be right too, for use in their blade servers.
I remember similar platitudes from when we were all waiting for Motorola's mythical 8400 G5. The Register even had articles on Moto's new G5 beast, that was supposedly going to be on Hypertransport muthaboard and would have a fast on-die memory controller.
The Motorola G5 was NEVER ready. What if Apple's IBM relationship has taken a turn down the same road? What if the reason IBM won't deliver a dual-core CPU to Apple is that it's not worth the investment because the Apple's volumes are too tiny?
This is why I hope TS's reputation craters with the release of new Powermacs.
Of course, TS could be pumping out knowingly false info in an effort to break their own reputation with Apple as a solid source, thereby making them look like more of the little guy in court... that's a much larger obstacle to their continued existence than one wrong prediction.
</conspiracy hat>
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
The Motorola G5 was NEVER ready. What if Apple's IBM relationship has taken a turn down the same road? What if the reason IBM won't deliver a dual-core CPU to Apple is that it's not worth the investment because the Apple's volumes are too tiny?
If this relationship has tanked like moto's did, Apple's remaining options are slim indeed. Fab their own? (huge investment, 2 year latency, not really Apple's strength). And AMD is not an option IMO.