The lack of a Paris keynote has no bearing on PowerBook updates. There's absolutely no way that Steve would have announced a 7448 PowerBook in a keynote. I still think they're coming whenever they get 7448 into it, probably in the next few weeks, but think of it this way - if they don't come this fall, that probably means they're going Intel in January and they just decided not to bother with another G4 for a few months.
I'm very skeptical about the PBs with Intel CPUs happening very soon. Maybe a year from now or MWSF 2007. It is not that they couldn't easily make a PB with an Intel chip. It is that the whole system of computers and software is not complete and has not been tested on a large scale. If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
Personally, I'll buy the last G4/G5 PB and then wait about two years (my standard cycle) for the bugs to get worked out on the Intel boxes before switching.
Off topic: I've almost given up on SPSS, it sucks so bad. They just released the update to make it run on Tiger about a week ago, or I was going to switch to Stata. Who knows what they'll do with the Intel switch.
Off-topic: I'm a grad student and my university requires SPSS, so it's not like I had a choice. I, too, was upset that it took SPSS (the company) so long to release a Tiger update. I also let them have it for failing to keep the Mac version as up-to-date as the PC version.
I think some of you, mostly ka2357, underestimate how much easier are such transitions with a good operating system. I come from the Unix world, and there it is not that much important, for most apps, what chips sit inside the box as long as the Unix flavor running on it conforms to standards. Major and most popular apps (including things like sendmail, apache and other servers that really make the current Internet work) compiled without a single problem on a whole myriad of hardware configurations and Unix flavors years ago.
As Apple said their Darwin-based (or BSD based) OS X was compiled on Intel for years just to make sure their GUI add-ons didn't spoil that portability ? and they didn't. Because of that I'm quite confident that porting well designed apps to new MacIntels would be much simpler than with previous transition and there would be much less issues than is widely expected.
My assumptions are additionally underpinned by reports of developers and hackers who have OS X x86 running on various Intel-based configurations who say that Rosetta is working very well and native PPC apps mostly run with acceptable speeds.
All in all, I won't be that much afraid to get a MacTel, although I don't expect something like this to be unveiled this year. So, it's more likely we will get a PPC update on PBs next week or not long afterwards.
Sounds like something is going to be announced if by no other reason that Jobs will be there to take questions from the media. I can't imagine them NOT announcing something, because what the hell is the press going to ask about? "How was your summer, Steve?" Oh yay, that's real exciting.
Oh, they can always ask "Where are those great PPC products you told us you have in your pipeline, Steve?".
I'm very skeptical about the PBs with Intel CPUs happening very soon. Maybe a year from now or MWSF 2007. It is not that they couldn't easily make a PB with an Intel chip. It is that the whole system of computers and software is not complete and has not been tested on a large scale. If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
Personally, I'll buy the last G4/G5 PB and then wait about two years (my standard cycle) for the bugs to get worked out on the Intel boxes before switching.
Since we know that Steve said that by next July there WOULD be Intel Macs released, we know that its by then at the worst. Since PowerBooks are in the worst shape, it just stands to reason.
If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
I don't know, I can see problems either way. They sell a whole lot more iBooks than PowerBooks, and if the iBooks went first, they'd have more problems simply because there would be more of them out there. And they'd be more likely to be in the hands of schools and grandmas who wouldn't have a clue about Rosetta or the Intel transition. The PowerBooks are at least more likely to be purchased by the "pros" who might be better able to deal with the transition, and would know exactly when the dual binary version of their software is due.
I'm not suggesting that going first with the PowerBooks would be a cake walk either, just that the alternative isn't necessarily any easier and has its own problems.
But in the end, my guess is that the PowerBook will be the first to go, for the simple reason that it needs the shot in the arm the most. But I also could see the mini going first, which was always more of a switcher machine anyway. I doubt the iBook is going Intel before the PowerBook though. I just can't see Apple's lower-end portable going to a new chip architecture before the higher-end.
But in the end, my guess is that the PowerBook will be the first to go, for the simple reason that it needs the shot in the arm the most. But I also could see the mini going first, which was always more of a switcher machine anyway. I doubt the iBook is going Intel before the PowerBook though. I just can't see Apple's lower-end portable going to a new chip architecture before the higher-end.
It's also my feeling:
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
What purpose is there in trying to predict what Apple will do two years from now? This thread was started to discuss the current status of the PowerBooks. Casting speculations that far in the future aren't useful to the members.
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
SC Yonah iBooks? I doubt it. Running mostly emulated software there will be little performance gain over current iBooks. It'd be a shot in the foot. This is part of why the Merom timetable for the PowerBook intorduction looks a lot more reasonable. DC Xeons in PowerMacs? Not a hairy chance in hell.
Why does everyone think Apple's going to spew out intel macs like they have diarreah? this isn't going to be a quick process folks.
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
The lack of a Paris keynote has no bearing on PowerBook updates. There's absolutely no way that Steve would have announced a 7448 PowerBook in a keynote. I still think they're coming whenever they get 7448 into it, probably in the next few weeks, but think of it this way - if they don't come this fall, that probably means they're going Intel in January and they just decided not to bother with another G4 for a few months.
I'm very skeptical about the PBs with Intel CPUs happening very soon. Maybe a year from now or MWSF 2007. It is not that they couldn't easily make a PB with an Intel chip. It is that the whole system of computers and software is not complete and has not been tested on a large scale. If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
Personally, I'll buy the last G4/G5 PB and then wait about two years (my standard cycle) for the bugs to get worked out on the Intel boxes before switching.
Originally posted by BRussell
Off topic: I've almost given up on SPSS, it sucks so bad. They just released the update to make it run on Tiger about a week ago, or I was going to switch to Stata. Who knows what they'll do with the Intel switch.
Off-topic: I'm a grad student and my university requires SPSS, so it's not like I had a choice. I, too, was upset that it took SPSS (the company) so long to release a Tiger update. I also let them have it for failing to keep the Mac version as up-to-date as the PC version.
As Apple said their Darwin-based (or BSD based) OS X was compiled on Intel for years just to make sure their GUI add-ons didn't spoil that portability ? and they didn't. Because of that I'm quite confident that porting well designed apps to new MacIntels would be much simpler than with previous transition and there would be much less issues than is widely expected.
My assumptions are additionally underpinned by reports of developers and hackers who have OS X x86 running on various Intel-based configurations who say that Rosetta is working very well and native PPC apps mostly run with acceptable speeds.
All in all, I won't be that much afraid to get a MacTel, although I don't expect something like this to be unveiled this year. So, it's more likely we will get a PPC update on PBs next week or not long afterwards.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Sounds like something is going to be announced if by no other reason that Jobs will be there to take questions from the media. I can't imagine them NOT announcing something, because what the hell is the press going to ask about?
Oh, they can always ask "Where are those great PPC products you told us you have in your pipeline, Steve?".
Originally posted by neutrino23
I'm very skeptical about the PBs with Intel CPUs happening very soon. Maybe a year from now or MWSF 2007. It is not that they couldn't easily make a PB with an Intel chip. It is that the whole system of computers and software is not complete and has not been tested on a large scale. If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
Personally, I'll buy the last G4/G5 PB and then wait about two years (my standard cycle) for the bugs to get worked out on the Intel boxes before switching.
Since we know that Steve said that by next July there WOULD be Intel Macs released, we know that its by then at the worst. Since PowerBooks are in the worst shape, it just stands to reason.
Originally posted by neutrino23
If I were managing this project I'd like to see all the major apps complete their migration to universal binaries and I'd like to see six months or so of field use by a couple hundred thousand users before releasing the new PBs. I expect to see Mac Minis and iBooks switch to Intel chips before the PBs.
I don't know, I can see problems either way. They sell a whole lot more iBooks than PowerBooks, and if the iBooks went first, they'd have more problems simply because there would be more of them out there. And they'd be more likely to be in the hands of schools and grandmas who wouldn't have a clue about Rosetta or the Intel transition. The PowerBooks are at least more likely to be purchased by the "pros" who might be better able to deal with the transition, and would know exactly when the dual binary version of their software is due.
I'm not suggesting that going first with the PowerBooks would be a cake walk either, just that the alternative isn't necessarily any easier and has its own problems.
But in the end, my guess is that the PowerBook will be the first to go, for the simple reason that it needs the shot in the arm the most. But I also could see the mini going first, which was always more of a switcher machine anyway. I doubt the iBook is going Intel before the PowerBook though. I just can't see Apple's lower-end portable going to a new chip architecture before the higher-end.
Originally posted by BRussell
But in the end, my guess is that the PowerBook will be the first to go, for the simple reason that it needs the shot in the arm the most. But I also could see the mini going first, which was always more of a switcher machine anyway. I doubt the iBook is going Intel before the PowerBook though. I just can't see Apple's lower-end portable going to a new chip architecture before the higher-end.
It's also my feeling:
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
Originally posted by mjteix
It's also my feeling:
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
What purpose is there in trying to predict what Apple will do two years from now? This thread was started to discuss the current status of the PowerBooks. Casting speculations that far in the future aren't useful to the members.
Originally posted by mjteix
It's also my feeling:
PowerBooks (DC Yonah) & Mac minis (SC Yonah) Q1/Q2'06.
Then iBooks (SC Yonah) Q2/Q3'06.
Then in Q3/Q4 DC Merom PowerBooks and DC Yonah iBooks & Minis.
Then Conroe iMacs Q4'06 or Q1'07 and
finally Woodcrest PowerMacs in Q1/Q2'07.
If Apple can't get (enough) DC G5s (970MP) the PowerMacs may switch sooner with DC Xeon chips in 2006 Q2/Q3.
I was hoping for a last rev of PBooks with the 7448 chip in october, this may help with sales in Q4/Q1 and gives Apple more time for preping the 1st switch (3 to 6 months), instead of rushing it for MWSF.
SC Yonah iBooks? I doubt it. Running mostly emulated software there will be little performance gain over current iBooks. It'd be a shot in the foot. This is part of why the Merom timetable for the PowerBook intorduction looks a lot more reasonable. DC Xeons in PowerMacs? Not a hairy chance in hell.
Why does everyone think Apple's going to spew out intel macs like they have diarreah? this isn't going to be a quick process folks.