Laptops outselling Desktops trend is not sustainable. It will reach a saturation point, much faster than Desktops.
The Remote Office still hasn't taken off like they had hoped and the notion that the Enterprise is going to solely go laptop is not a wise choice, from a physical security perspective.
I have one laptop (iBook) and it's not motivating me to buy another one any time soon. My next system will be another desktop system for development and design. The trend of programming on the move will slow down when everyone has a laptop that is 4 or more cores and doesn't need another system for a few more years.
I don't expect to see quad cores for another 3 years as being common place.
I'm hoping the next trend will be low-cost computers in an iMac G5-like enclosure (but thinner), wall-mountable. People will be able to buy a few of these and put them around the house. All connected wirelessly.
With Intel behind the tech, it's going to be possible since the chips will be small and cool enough (without sacrificing speed). All the computer guts will fit in a very thin enclosure and run without the risk of burning a holes through the walls (or melting the screen).
It's fairly average...even pretty low for a single desktop chip. Remember that these chips will be dual-core (eventually quad-core...and *eventually* OMG-super-multi-core). It's certainly very low when compared to what two G5 chips put out.
With these chips Apple will be able to compile Mac OS X to run on 64-bit processors only, putting in place an effective barrier that will keep the system from being hacked and copied onto today's 32-bit x86 run off the mill hardware.
It will still not prevent anyone from installing Windows or Linux on Apple hardware ? it will only have to be 64-bit versions, or perhaps even as a 32-bit partition on the system.
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Wall outlet: 120V. Car battery: 12V. There's a little conversion to be done there. This isn't a laptop, this is for a central computer for a village. Think server-class.
Temp: Read the manual that came with your computer. Operating ambient temperature is maxed at 80deg for most machine. Any hotter, and the thing can't cool appropriately, and will overheat. It's not the internal temp that is 100deg, it's the external.
This community computer is useful in environments where grid electricity and little things like AC are rare - a remote village, etc. Car batteries are cheap and plentiful, greater ruggedness is a big plus, etc. Cool beans.
good one kickaha. that poster obviously thinks that everyone in the world lives in a comfortable suburb with four seasons and wifi hotspots and starbucks at every street corner. or that everyone in the world has or can afford to run air-conditioning in every room in the house/shack 24hours a day
think about africa, south east asia, latin america, south asia, parts of china and a lot of india. think rural parts of australia in summer....
re: hot places. yes, car battery, wiMax receiver, intel machine running for days on end with 100deg F ambient temperature. in the middle of some village. a first-world Dell would overheat and die in a few days... an iMac g5 would run for 5 minutes, run it's fans at full speed, then shut down.
So THIS is why Apple chose Intel. Suddenly everything makes sense.
And all the iLord asked from us was Faith, and look he has delivered unto us the promises he has made. from the Ashes of PowerPC a shiny new Saviour shall rise with PPW* unlike never seen before across the four lands
Laptops now outsell Desktops in US market, trend likely to follow around the world. ....
not that wildly speculative, in most markets around the world they are almost on parity now. remember that also in emerging markets there are a lot of issues with lastMile broadband delivery... so this means wiFi hotspots and wiMax and 3G internet... which means continuing increase in laptop dominance, possibly leading to outselling the desktop in most markets within 5 years.
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Nooooooo, this means that Apple wouldn't have to worry about it being pirated to scads of Windows boxes currently out there. They'd still sell Macintels, and they still *WOULDN'T* sell a shrink-wrap version. The Mac users with older equipment would all be using, um, PPC. Compiling all Intel versions to 64 bit wouldn't affect them at all, now would it?
I'm hoping you're not disappointed if your hope is in vain.
Perhaps what he meant was there is now more logic in Apple producing one, (if they actually can) as there is now a 64bit Intel laptop chip due next year that could be the replacement for a G5. I think we will see a G5 Powerbook at Macworld SF in Jan 06.
good one kickaha. that poster obviously thinks that everyone in the world lives in a comfortable suburb with four seasons and wifi hotspots and starbucks at every street corner. or that everyone in the world has or can afford to run air-conditioning in every room in the house/shack 24hours a day
think about africa, south east asia, latin america, south asia, parts of china and a lot of india. think rural parts of australia in summer....
re: hot places. yes, car battery, wiMax receiver, intel machine running for days on end with 100deg F ambient temperature. in the middle of some village. a first-world Dell would overheat and die in a few days... an iMac g5 would run for 5 minutes, run it's fans at full speed, then shut down.
The concept is that villages in places such as India, China, and places in Africa and other poor or out of reach areas will use a car battery which will be recharged by solar panels. This technology is already used widely around the world to power village televisions, water pumps, radio recievers, and telephones.
Re: tatle's post (also seen in this Wired article, hmm )
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Which older equipment are you talking about which version of OS X not running on?
I think the point is that OS X compiled exclusively for future 64-bit Intel processors will be advantageous for Apple's hardware business by not running on any 32-bit processors, thus making it resistant to hacking for any current 32-bit hardware (if indeed such hackery is technically impossible or unlikely). There's no backwards compatibility needed in hardware for the PPC to Intel transition.
Nooooooo, this means that Apple wouldn't have to worry about it being pirated to scads of Windows boxes currently out there. They'd still sell Macintels, and they still *WOULDN'T* sell a shrink-wrap version. The Mac users with older equipment would all be using, um, PPC. Compiling all Intel versions to 64 bit wouldn't affect them at all, now would it?
Well, it would only be a temporary safeguard at most, since most PCs will soon be 64-bit too. It also means that Apple must maintain two separate pre-compiled versions of OS X code, a 64/32-bit for older PPC Macs and a 64-bit only for Intel Macs. All this is totally unnecessary. By using EFI on the MacTels, this will automatically exclude older generic PCs, and most newer ones too for quite some time.
Re: tatle's post (also seen in this Wired article, hmm )
Which older equipment are you talking about which version of OS X not running on?
I think the point is that OS X compiled exclusively for future 64-bit Intel processors will be advantageous for Apple's hardware business by not running on any 32-bit processors, thus making it resistant to hacking for any current 32-bit hardware (if indeed such hackery is technically impossible or unlikely). There's no backwards compatibility needed in hardware for the PPC to Intel transition.
Firstly, this won't happen with Leopard. Secondly it's highly unlikely that it would happen with the version after Leopard. Thirdly, Apple won't cut out a vast user base, so until the PPC user base shrinks to a small proportion of the whole, Apple will upgrade the OS to accommodate it. Fourthly, if Apple does use the G5 in a Powerbook (if it's at all possible), that doesn't gaurantee that they will or can do so in an iBook. Fifthly, well there isn't one, it just sounded funky.
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
This picture was part of Intel's slide show today.
what if those 2 computers on the right were developer Intels... that would be funny.
Originally posted by mdriftmeyer
Laptops outselling Desktops trend is not sustainable. It will reach a saturation point, much faster than Desktops.
The Remote Office still hasn't taken off like they had hoped and the notion that the Enterprise is going to solely go laptop is not a wise choice, from a physical security perspective.
I have one laptop (iBook) and it's not motivating me to buy another one any time soon. My next system will be another desktop system for development and design. The trend of programming on the move will slow down when everyone has a laptop that is 4 or more cores and doesn't need another system for a few more years.
I don't expect to see quad cores for another 3 years as being common place.
I'm hoping the next trend will be low-cost computers in an iMac G5-like enclosure (but thinner), wall-mountable. People will be able to buy a few of these and put them around the house. All connected wirelessly.
With Intel behind the tech, it's going to be possible since the chips will be small and cool enough (without sacrificing speed). All the computer guts will fit in a very thin enclosure and run without the risk of burning a holes through the walls (or melting the screen).
Originally posted by w_parietti22
what if those 2 computers on the right were developer Intels... that would be funny.
What are the watts for the current G5?
65 seems high to me even for desktop.
Originally posted by salmonstk
What are the watts for the current G5?
65 seems high to me even for desktop.
It's fairly average...even pretty low for a single desktop chip. Remember that these chips will be dual-core (eventually quad-core...and *eventually* OMG-super-multi-core). It's certainly very low when compared to what two G5 chips put out.
Do you think they got a Mactel on there?
Originally posted by salmonstk
What are the watts for the current G5? 65 seems high to me even for desktop.
It's actually quite low for a desktop. Very low for G5 chips.
Standard voltage 970fx CPUs, maximum power consumption:
2.0 GHz: 60 Watts
2.2 GHz: 76
2.5 GHz: ~95
2.7 GHz: ~110
The low voltage power optimized ones will be available, but will be limited in clock rate. Maximum power consumption:
1.6 GHz: 21 Watts
2.0 GHz: 50
2.2 GHz: 60
Athlon 65 and P4 TDPs are also above 85 Watts.
Originally posted by tatle
With these chips Apple will be able to compile Mac OS X to run on 64-bit processors only, putting in place an effective barrier that will keep the system from being hacked and copied onto today's 32-bit x86 run off the mill hardware.
It will still not prevent anyone from installing Windows or Linux on Apple hardware ? it will only have to be 64-bit versions, or perhaps even as a 32-bit partition on the system.
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Wall outlet: 120V. Car battery: 12V. There's a little conversion to be done there. This isn't a laptop, this is for a central computer for a village. Think server-class.
Temp: Read the manual that came with your computer. Operating ambient temperature is maxed at 80deg for most machine. Any hotter, and the thing can't cool appropriately, and will overheat. It's not the internal temp that is 100deg, it's the external.
This community computer is useful in environments where grid electricity and little things like AC are rare - a remote village, etc. Car batteries are cheap and plentiful, greater ruggedness is a big plus, etc. Cool beans.
good one kickaha. that poster obviously thinks that everyone in the world lives in a comfortable suburb with four seasons and wifi hotspots and starbucks at every street corner. or that everyone in the world has or can afford to run air-conditioning in every room in the house/shack 24hours a day
think about africa, south east asia, latin america, south asia, parts of china and a lot of india. think rural parts of australia in summer....
re: hot places. yes, car battery, wiMax receiver, intel machine running for days on end with 100deg F ambient temperature. in the middle of some village. a first-world Dell would overheat and die in a few days... an iMac g5 would run for 5 minutes, run it's fans at full speed, then shut down.
Originally posted by baranovich
So THIS is why Apple chose Intel. Suddenly everything makes sense.
And all the iLord asked from us was Faith, and look he has delivered unto us the promises he has made. from the Ashes of PowerPC a shiny new Saviour shall rise with PPW* unlike never seen before across the four lands
*Performance Per Watt
Originally posted by Thereubster
....
Laptops now outsell Desktops in US market, trend likely to follow around the world. ....
not that wildly speculative, in most markets around the world they are almost on parity now. remember that also in emerging markets there are a lot of issues with lastMile broadband delivery... so this means wiFi hotspots and wiMax and 3G internet... which means continuing increase in laptop dominance, possibly leading to outselling the desktop in most markets within 5 years.
Originally posted by BRussell
This picture was part of Intel's slide show today.
DOWN IN FRONT! stupid head blocking our view of the stage
Originally posted by snoopy
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Nooooooo, this means that Apple wouldn't have to worry about it being pirated to scads of Windows boxes currently out there. They'd still sell Macintels, and they still *WOULDN'T* sell a shrink-wrap version. The Mac users with older equipment would all be using, um, PPC. Compiling all Intel versions to 64 bit wouldn't affect them at all, now would it?
Originally posted by rain
I'm hoping for a g5 ppc laptop.
I'm hoping you're not disappointed if your hope is in vain.
Originally posted by sjk
I'm hoping you're not disappointed if your hope is in vain.
Perhaps what he meant was there is now more logic in Apple producing one, (if they actually can) as there is now a 64bit Intel laptop chip due next year that could be the replacement for a G5. I think we will see a G5 Powerbook at Macworld SF in Jan 06.
Originally posted by sunilraman
good one kickaha. that poster obviously thinks that everyone in the world lives in a comfortable suburb with four seasons and wifi hotspots and starbucks at every street corner. or that everyone in the world has or can afford to run air-conditioning in every room in the house/shack 24hours a day
think about africa, south east asia, latin america, south asia, parts of china and a lot of india. think rural parts of australia in summer....
re: hot places. yes, car battery, wiMax receiver, intel machine running for days on end with 100deg F ambient temperature. in the middle of some village. a first-world Dell would overheat and die in a few days... an iMac g5 would run for 5 minutes, run it's fans at full speed, then shut down.
The concept is that villages in places such as India, China, and places in Africa and other poor or out of reach areas will use a car battery which will be recharged by solar panels. This technology is already used widely around the world to power village televisions, water pumps, radio recievers, and telephones.
It's reliable and cheap long term.
Originally posted by snoopy
This idea doesn't make sense to me. The typical PC will soon be 64-bit, so this would just prevent OS X from running on older PCs. The down side would be a lot of upset Mac users with older equipment, which could not be upgraded, and lost revenue for Apple.
Which older equipment are you talking about which version of OS X not running on?
I think the point is that OS X compiled exclusively for future 64-bit Intel processors will be advantageous for Apple's hardware business by not running on any 32-bit processors, thus making it resistant to hacking for any current 32-bit hardware (if indeed such hackery is technically impossible or unlikely). There's no backwards compatibility needed in hardware for the PPC to Intel transition.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Nooooooo, this means that Apple wouldn't have to worry about it being pirated to scads of Windows boxes currently out there. They'd still sell Macintels, and they still *WOULDN'T* sell a shrink-wrap version. The Mac users with older equipment would all be using, um, PPC. Compiling all Intel versions to 64 bit wouldn't affect them at all, now would it?
Well, it would only be a temporary safeguard at most, since most PCs will soon be 64-bit too. It also means that Apple must maintain two separate pre-compiled versions of OS X code, a 64/32-bit for older PPC Macs and a 64-bit only for Intel Macs. All this is totally unnecessary. By using EFI on the MacTels, this will automatically exclude older generic PCs, and most newer ones too for quite some time.
Originally posted by sjk
Re: tatle's post (also seen in this Wired article, hmm
Which older equipment are you talking about which version of OS X not running on?
I think the point is that OS X compiled exclusively for future 64-bit Intel processors will be advantageous for Apple's hardware business by not running on any 32-bit processors, thus making it resistant to hacking for any current 32-bit hardware (if indeed such hackery is technically impossible or unlikely). There's no backwards compatibility needed in hardware for the PPC to Intel transition.
Firstly, this won't happen with Leopard. Secondly it's highly unlikely that it would happen with the version after Leopard. Thirdly, Apple won't cut out a vast user base, so until the PPC user base shrinks to a small proportion of the whole, Apple will upgrade the OS to accommodate it. Fourthly, if Apple does use the G5 in a Powerbook (if it's at all possible), that doesn't gaurantee that they will or can do so in an iBook. Fifthly, well there isn't one, it just sounded funky.