Nice catch, Tink on the 'Cad' files rumours. For a 'rumour' site, Macwhispers were eerily adept at picking up 'production' clues. Shame they closed themselves down over 'prediction date' accuracy. I think their 'Make My Newton' story upset somebody. Maybe they were strong armed... I'm sure Apple don't like people sniffing around their manufacturing facilities...
For me, this is a very telling rumour. Apple appear to be ahead of the game. We're looking increasingly likely for a New York annoucement with a August/September shipping date.
With a 10.3 preview.
It's an irrestible show-stopper. Apple launches dual 970s upto 2.5 gig? With 64 bit OS? That's a growth machine. It's Apple's best chance in years to attack the Wintel dominated workstation markets...to increase their stranglehold on Video editing...and fend off Wintel from the Print industry. A shockwave amongst gamers when they get a dual 970 paired with a Ati 9700!!!
We have to ask ourselves why, 'WHY' 60% of the workstation market are going with Apple product in the near future. Mama, I don't think we're talking dual 1.42 G4s... There's a Shake out going down...
If Intel have miscalculated with their own 64 bit problems...then Apple have the best chance in years to put the boot in the b*ll*cks of Wintel TM.
<strong>Nice catch, Tink on the 'Cad' files rumours. For a 'rumour' site, Macwhispers were eerily adept at picking up 'production' clues. Shame they closed themselves down over 'prediction date' accuracy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not to make this a accuracy debate... but MacWhispers stopped speculating for good reason. They were 100% wrong. I can't think of one thing they actually got right.
<strong>I dunno. I think that Apple should still include a G4 in the Performace (or lack there of) lineup.</strong><hr></blockquote>
but in your line up the slowest tower will be 2.5 times slower than the mid range. isn't it much cheaper to built one mobo for all towers instead of two? they won't sell any low end G4 models anymore or in your line up the 970's should be much more expensive than the faster/fastest towers of today.
You are right. A 1.4/1.6/1.8/Dual 1.8 ghz lineup would be good. But I think that four isn't a traditional Apple lineup...maybe drop the 1.6. But we need a DP model.
<strong>You are right. A 1.4/1.6/1.8/Dual 1.8 ghz lineup would be good. But I think that four isn't a traditional Apple lineup...maybe drop the 1.6. But we need a DP model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
long time ago you could buy an Imac sans firewire, an Imac DV, an Imac DV+ and an Imac DV SE. that makes four.
more recent: a 12" Ibook cd-rom, a 12" Ibook dvd , a 12" Ibook cdr+rw and a 12" Ibook combo.
even more recent: a 12" Ibook cd-rom, a 12" Ibook dvd , a 12" Ibook combo and a 14" Ibook combo.
and now you can buy a 12"pb 867Mhz, a 15"pb 867Mhz, a 15"pb 1Ghz and a 17"pb 1Ghz.
but you're right: it's not a tradition, or as we say in dutch:
Not to make this a accuracy debate... but MacWhispers stopped speculating for good reason. They were 100% wrong. I can't think of one thing they actually got right.</strong><hr></blockquote>
For a company like Apple it is extremely difficult to predict their behavior even if you know a lot of details. MacWhispers did the intellectually honest thing and switched from making predictions to just providing raw information and letting everyone draw their own conclusions. I respect that a lot.
<strong>In the history of AI has everyone been this sure about something before and it turn up not to be true? Just wondering. </strong><hr></blockquote>
How about every year before any major Apple exhibition like MWSF, MWT, MWNY, WWDC, Paris Expo, etc.? AI is littered with the broken expectations of G5s, PDAs, flat screen iMacs, ultraportable notebooks, wireless screens, tablets, PVRs, to name a few.
That is why it is so much fun to visit here. :cool:
<strong>You are right. A 1.4/1.6/1.8/Dual 1.8 ghz lineup would be good. But I think that four isn't a traditional Apple lineup...maybe drop the 1.6. But we need a DP model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
iMacs will go 7457 and all 17" at 1 Ghz / 1,25 Ghz (maybe 1.4 Ghz)
PowerMacs will go 970 ... 1.4 Ghz Single / 1.6 Ghz dual / 2.0 Ghz dual
iBook will go 1Ghz G3. later - just in time when the PowerBooks will go 970 - the iBook will get a G4 7457
my PowerMac G4 will go in the corner and will be a nice server with apache, mysql, tomcat, php, perl, sendmail, bind, ftp, smd and many cron-jobs... on my desk i will add a 20" TFT which will be a perfect primary display beside my 19" CRT - i will use 2 displays (YEAH) ... and i will use the mid-range dual 1.6Ghz 970 ...
Maybe I'll have enough welfare money saved up by then... But we need a metal Powermac enclosure. Yes! That's it! Maybe Apple will decide that the Pro line will be decked out in Aluminum armor, while the Consumer macs will have white Lucite. Its kin of strange that the Powerbook is the only computer, other than the Xserve, to have a metal enclosure.
It's an irrestible show-stopper. Apple launches dual 970s upto 2.5 gig?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
While your now-found optimism about Apple is great, I'm afraid that IBM stuffed up in their press release (which is why it was removed). The 970 will not reach 2.5GHz, the 970+ will. Look for that nid-late next year.
As long as Apple doesn't play any weird games and uses the fastest chips it can get as soon as it can get them. They cannot afford to get cute, they're in no position at all for something like that. If 1.8 is all they can get and they use it, great. If they can get faster chips and they use less than the fastest, then
For a company like Apple it is extremely difficult to predict their behavior even if you know a lot of details. MacWhispers did the intellectually honest thing and switched from making predictions to just providing raw information and letting everyone draw their own conclusions. I respect that a lot.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess... but you are assuming they have accurate info in the first place... which is not clear.
That would put Apple in the same position they're in now. They need to have a clear delineation between their consumer lineup and Powermacs. Sure this isn't popular with consumers but that's the biz.
There is a clear definition.. powermacs have dual processors. Shouldn't need any more than that. There is no reason that an iMac should have a out of date processor once something competitve becomes available.
Comments
For me, this is a very telling rumour. Apple appear to be ahead of the game. We're looking increasingly likely for a New York annoucement with a August/September shipping date.
With a 10.3 preview.
It's an irrestible show-stopper. Apple launches dual 970s upto 2.5 gig? With 64 bit OS? That's a growth machine. It's Apple's best chance in years to attack the Wintel dominated workstation markets...to increase their stranglehold on Video editing...and fend off Wintel from the Print industry. A shockwave amongst gamers when they get a dual 970 paired with a Ati 9700!!!
We have to ask ourselves why, 'WHY' 60% of the workstation market are going with Apple product in the near future. Mama, I don't think we're talking dual 1.42 G4s... There's a Shake out going down...
If Intel have miscalculated with their own 64 bit problems...then Apple have the best chance in years to put the boot in the b*ll*cks of Wintel TM.
It's looking 'game on' for growth.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
[ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
<strong>Nice catch, Tink on the 'Cad' files rumours. For a 'rumour' site, Macwhispers were eerily adept at picking up 'production' clues. Shame they closed themselves down over 'prediction date' accuracy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not to make this a accuracy debate... but MacWhispers stopped speculating for good reason. They were 100% wrong. I can't think of one thing they actually got right.
<strong>I want the 970 in a Newton!
Palm who??
Low end: Single G4 1.4ghz, 167 bus
Mid-range: Single 1.8 ghz 970
High end: Dual 1.8ghz 970's
Low end: Single 1.4 ghz 970
Mid-range: Dual 1.6ghz 970's
High end: Dual 1.8ghz 970's
<strong>I dunno. I think that Apple should still include a G4 in the Performace (or lack there of) lineup.</strong><hr></blockquote>
but in your line up the slowest tower will be 2.5 times slower than the mid range. isn't it much cheaper to built one mobo for all towers instead of two? they won't sell any low end G4 models anymore or in your line up the 970's should be much more expensive than the faster/fastest towers of today.
<strong>You are right. A 1.4/1.6/1.8/Dual 1.8 ghz lineup would be good. But I think that four isn't a traditional Apple lineup...maybe drop the 1.6. But we need a DP model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
long time ago you could buy an Imac sans firewire, an Imac DV, an Imac DV+ and an Imac DV SE. that makes four.
more recent: a 12" Ibook cd-rom, a 12" Ibook dvd , a 12" Ibook cdr+rw and a 12" Ibook combo.
even more recent: a 12" Ibook cd-rom, a 12" Ibook dvd , a 12" Ibook combo and a 14" Ibook combo.
and now you can buy a 12"pb 867Mhz, a 15"pb 867Mhz, a 15"pb 1Ghz and a 17"pb 1Ghz.
but you're right: it's not a tradition, or as we say in dutch:
"de uitzondering bevestigt de regel"
[ 03-10-2003: Message edited by: gar ]</p>
<strong>
Not to make this a accuracy debate... but MacWhispers stopped speculating for good reason. They were 100% wrong. I can't think of one thing they actually got right.</strong><hr></blockquote>
For a company like Apple it is extremely difficult to predict their behavior even if you know a lot of details. MacWhispers did the intellectually honest thing and switched from making predictions to just providing raw information and letting everyone draw their own conclusions. I respect that a lot.
<strong>In the history of AI has everyone been this sure about something before and it turn up not to be true? Just wondering.
ROTFLOL <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
How about every year before any major Apple exhibition like MWSF, MWT, MWNY, WWDC, Paris Expo, etc.? AI is littered with the broken expectations of G5s, PDAs, flat screen iMacs, ultraportable notebooks, wireless screens, tablets, PVRs, to name a few.
That is why it is so much fun to visit here. :cool:
<strong>You are right. A 1.4/1.6/1.8/Dual 1.8 ghz lineup would be good. But I think that four isn't a traditional Apple lineup...maybe drop the 1.6. But we need a DP model.</strong><hr></blockquote>
iMacs will go 7457 and all 17" at 1 Ghz / 1,25 Ghz (maybe 1.4 Ghz)
PowerMacs will go 970 ... 1.4 Ghz Single / 1.6 Ghz dual / 2.0 Ghz dual
iBook will go 1Ghz G3. later - just in time when the PowerBooks will go 970 - the iBook will get a G4 7457
my PowerMac G4 will go in the corner and will be a nice server with apache, mysql, tomcat, php, perl, sendmail, bind, ftp, smd and many cron-jobs... on my desk i will add a 20" TFT which will be a perfect primary display beside my 19" CRT - i will use 2 displays (YEAH) ... and i will use the mid-range dual 1.6Ghz 970 ...
ho ho ho - just 4-6 months to wait...
[ 03-08-2003: Message edited by: os10geek ]</p>
<strong>
It's an irrestible show-stopper. Apple launches dual 970s upto 2.5 gig?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
While your now-found optimism about Apple is great, I'm afraid that IBM stuffed up in their press release (which is why it was removed). The 970 will not reach 2.5GHz, the 970+ will. Look for that nid-late next year.
ZDNet get it right!
Not to say that the 970 won't get above 1.8GHz, but it won't go to 2.5GHz (perhaps 2.0-2.1).
<strong>
For a company like Apple it is extremely difficult to predict their behavior even if you know a lot of details. MacWhispers did the intellectually honest thing and switched from making predictions to just providing raw information and letting everyone draw their own conclusions. I respect that a lot.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess... but you are assuming they have accurate info in the first place... which is not clear.
PowerMacs
Dual 1.4
Dual 1.6
Dual 1.8
iMacs
Single 1.4
Single 1.6
Single 1.8
PowerBooks
Single 1.2 (regardless of screen size)
All released straight off. If you are going to make an impact it might as well be a big one.
That would put Apple in the same position they're in now. They need to have a clear delineation between their consumer lineup and Powermacs. Sure this isn't popular with consumers but that's the biz.