Even Apple may not yet know the final transition schedule, so we shouldn't be surprised at shifting rumors.
Well, what I wonder is (assuming this true again) whether Apple might have snookered everyone with " Transition will be complete by the end of 2007."
Quote:
And the term "consumer Mac" could mean different things. Some would say that means ONLY the iBook and Mac Mini. Others would say it means everything except the Xserve.
I suppose that I could agree with that if someone is at the top, looking down.
Oh well, in that case it won't hurt to put a sign next to the computer says "Warning: there are no games for this computer." It's the truth, and since it won't effect sales, why not be truthful?
At least one game in the current iMac's software bundle should be ready:
This doesn't make business sense. Why would Apple introduce new models in January, AFTER the holidays and before the end of the first quarter to prop up the stock price. January is not a peak selling season, like back-to-school, or Christmas, or tax time, or hell, even Mother's Day.
Doesn't fit... I'll believe it when I see it.
This is actually quite normal (releasing new models early January). It's a way to try and get sales up after peak periods.
As an aside though what better time to release your first computers on a completely new platform than when sales are slow? Do you really want to release it in a high volume time then find out you messed up? It doesn't happen much but it can happen.
re: Games, once the first Macintels get released, I expect there will be both more pressure and incentive to release compatible apps. The question is essentially: can you handle several months of Rosetta dependence and "first rev" risk to be part of the future of the platform, instead of the past?
For my part, I'll be wary of the first rev of all the Macintel machines. There are bound to be plenty of small snafus, given that this is the first major release for Apple on the next hardware.
I'm hungry for a new PB, but will probably buy a second-hard 15" to get me by until Merom settles in.
It wouldn't surprise me if the plan had always been to release the first Intel machines much earlier than the publically announced roadmap to bypass any sales slowdown due to transition.
I would also be inclined to keep selling PPC models alongside their Intel counterparts until rev. 2 Intel versions are announced. This should satisfy those people who want the first Intel machines and those that don't. This would also explain why we have just seen an update to various models which may be at the front of the queue for Intel processors. The Intel and PPC versions of each model will have few differences other than the CPU.
At the time of announcement of the first Intel machines I would make it clear that support for PPC machines would last at least 5 years after the last one was made. That should ease some of the fears associated with buying the last PPC models.
Explains why the current iMacs use the single-core G5 rather than the dual-core tho. Dual-core Yonah, hm. For switchers, if they don't like MacOS X, they can install Windows if they want, so they have a little "safety net".
That would require the intel macs to have a BIOS since vista (which supports EFI) will not ship in january.
BTW, I heard that the HDs in the intel development boxes are not formatted in HFS. Is that true?
I am a bit skeptical about the first macintel being an iMac. \
- Why was it updated only three months before MWSF then?
- Will the yonah be faster than the G5?
Me too.
The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.
I wouldn't be so worried about the quad purchase melgross either. The photoshop shootout they've just had on macrumors showed it to completely toast even dual core Opterons. I think it'll continue to toast them for some time to come too. Which makes me wonder about Apple saying they'll transition completely by the end of 2007 to Intel. Unless Intel picks up it's legs and starts competing, they'll be in third place behind AMD and IBM all of 2007.
This is great news! I'm tempted to hold off on any major purchases now.
Don't be disappointed if nothing goes Intel in January. I do think there is a good possibility of at least one line going Intel in January, but if I needed a computer now, I wouldn't torture myself by waiting only to be disappointed.
Also, PowerMac G5's appear to be unaffected. So if you need one of those, there's no reason to wait.
The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.
But, if VPC lets me run AutoCad (yes, I beat this drum in every thread) a lot faster than it does now on my Mac (and possibly gets the mouse cursor correct looking), then I will purchase a new iMac* with intel because I can finally chunk my pc at work. I think this is the market Apple knows about and will get by default when they go with Intel. The several million of us wanting to buy a Mac for work but can't because of that one little program we have to have will probably buy in record numbers once VPC prooves it works. Microsoft with VPC ready to go, would be the answer for Apple in that market, oddly enough. However, I can't make myself believe that VPC would be ready when the new MacIntels are on the market after seeing the past update cycles for that program.
*(As long has my iMac will print to my 42" wide HP printer (I think it is a Design Jet 500) while in autocad.)
I find myself actually thinking about early off getting an intel Mac, if this report/investigation is true. The seeming last glory of the PPC on the Apple Mac in the 4 cpu has been quite appealing, although right now I do not need it, I just want it.
But, a laptop is more in line with what would be useful for my purposes.
If a PowerBook does come out with the dual core Yonah, and the iBook waits, one may think that when the Meron chip comes out, that would go in to the PowerBook, and the Yonah in to the iBook, given that all works well. Or, that if a single core Yonah goes in to the iBook and Mac Mini at some not too far off point, then when the Meron comes out, both the PowerBook and the iBook may have an update.
What I think is my common sense tells me to wait for a second wave of intel Macs, the early adopter in me wishes to jump.
I still like the PPC, and so what seems to me to be sensible will be to look at the prices on PPC notebooks, come January.
Ever since I was little, I reffered to my mac as a G3 or G something, and now its going to be all taken away and replaced by PM-3625 this and m-8365 that.
Ever since I was little, I reffered to my mac as a G3 or G something, and now its going to be all taken away and replaced by PM-3625 this and m-8365 that.
Yes, I am a sentimentalist, and so it will be difficult. I first deeply admired the Apple IIGS when it came out, before the Mac, and saw the fulfillment of my recognition in 1971 that computers would be much easier to use in ten years or thereabout than they were with the command line.
I came to be able to afford a Mac when the 7300 and 8600 were in their day, with 604 cpu, and so after that came the G3>>. But the PPC, or a Motorola chip was always used. I wanted a Mac IIFX 'Blackbird' in its time, pre PPC, but it was the most expensive Mac ever made.
Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.
Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.
The only Intel chip used in NeXT hardware, ie, hardware manufactured by NeXT Computer, Inc, was the i860 RISC chip in the NeXTDimension graphics board. A NeXTcube with a NeXTDimension board could also be considered an axisymmetric multiprocessor machine because the board ran an optimized Mach kernel dedicated to accelerating Postscript.
All NeXT computers rans variations of the Motorola 68030 and 68040. There may have been an after market 68060, but I think I'm confusing that with the Nitro board (66 MHz 68040?). Long time ago.
After NeXT abandoned hardware, it ran on a small subset of generic Intel hardware, then HP-PA RISC workstations, then SPARCstations, and finally, Apple PowerPC. Next year, it'll come back to Intel.
Comments
Originally posted by nagromme
Even Apple may not yet know the final transition schedule, so we shouldn't be surprised at shifting rumors.
Well, what I wonder is (assuming this true again) whether Apple might have snookered everyone with " Transition will be complete by the end of 2007."
Quote:
And the term "consumer Mac" could mean different things. Some would say that means ONLY the iBook and Mac Mini. Others would say it means everything except the Xserve.
I suppose that I could agree with that if someone is at the top, looking down.
Originally posted by ascii
Oh well, in that case it won't hurt to put a sign next to the computer says "Warning: there are no games for this computer." It's the truth, and since it won't effect sales, why not be truthful?
At least one game in the current iMac's software bundle should be ready:
Nanosaur II
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
This doesn't make business sense. Why would Apple introduce new models in January, AFTER the holidays and before the end of the first quarter to prop up the stock price. January is not a peak selling season, like back-to-school, or Christmas, or tax time, or hell, even Mother's Day.
Doesn't fit... I'll believe it when I see it.
This is actually quite normal (releasing new models early January). It's a way to try and get sales up after peak periods.
As an aside though what better time to release your first computers on a completely new platform than when sales are slow? Do you really want to release it in a high volume time then find out you messed up? It doesn't happen much but it can happen.
i have officially decided to wait.
my next purchase will be a 15 (possibly 13inch widescreen if there is one) PB with intel inside.
i'm saving, i'm saving big cuz this machine will be decked out.
For my part, I'll be wary of the first rev of all the Macintel machines. There are bound to be plenty of small snafus, given that this is the first major release for Apple on the next hardware.
I'm hungry for a new PB, but will probably buy a second-hard 15" to get me by until Merom settles in.
I gess apple will anounce new macintel in january, along with "more than a thousand recompiled apps"...
Apple need to push intel mac on the market in order to hurry up the "slow" developers...
So they will come in january, I'm pretty sure of it!
Originally posted by belzebuth
how do you know that no apps or game are ready for intel?
I gess apple will anounce new macintel in january, along with "more than a thousand recompiled apps"...
Apple need to push intel mac on the market in order to hurry up the "slow" developers...
So they will come in january, I'm pretty sure of it!
You said it: the key are the developers.
All Mactels in 2006 or not later than January 2007.
That will make developers rerlease native Mactel code ASAP.
I would also be inclined to keep selling PPC models alongside their Intel counterparts until rev. 2 Intel versions are announced. This should satisfy those people who want the first Intel machines and those that don't. This would also explain why we have just seen an update to various models which may be at the front of the queue for Intel processors. The Intel and PPC versions of each model will have few differences other than the CPU.
At the time of announcement of the first Intel machines I would make it clear that support for PPC machines would last at least 5 years after the last one was made. That should ease some of the fears associated with buying the last PPC models.
- Why was it updated only three months before MWSF then?
- Will the yonah be faster than the G5?
To me it's likely that these new iMacs (and powerbooks) will not replace their PPC counterparts.
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
Why are people so touchy on these boards? 8)
Who the @#$% are you callin' touchy, mother@#$%??!?!?!
Originally posted by cubist
Explains why the current iMacs use the single-core G5 rather than the dual-core tho. Dual-core Yonah, hm. For switchers, if they don't like MacOS X, they can install Windows if they want, so they have a little "safety net".
That would require the intel macs to have a BIOS since vista (which supports EFI) will not ship in january.
BTW, I heard that the HDs in the intel development boxes are not formatted in HFS. Is that true?
Originally posted by french macuser
I am a bit skeptical about the first macintel being an iMac.
- Why was it updated only three months before MWSF then?
- Will the yonah be faster than the G5?
Me too.
The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.
I wouldn't be so worried about the quad purchase melgross either. The photoshop shootout they've just had on macrumors showed it to completely toast even dual core Opterons. I think it'll continue to toast them for some time to come too. Which makes me wonder about Apple saying they'll transition completely by the end of 2007 to Intel. Unless Intel picks up it's legs and starts competing, they'll be in third place behind AMD and IBM all of 2007.
Originally posted by DifferentLee
This is great news! I'm tempted to hold off on any major purchases now.
Don't be disappointed if nothing goes Intel in January. I do think there is a good possibility of at least one line going Intel in January, but if I needed a computer now, I wouldn't torture myself by waiting only to be disappointed.
Also, PowerMac G5's appear to be unaffected. So if you need one of those, there's no reason to wait.
Originally posted by french macuser
BTW, I heard that the HDs in the intel development boxes are not formatted in HFS. Is that true?
That is true. They are formatted in HFS+ Journaled instead.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Me too.
The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.
But, if VPC lets me run AutoCad (yes, I beat this drum in every thread) a lot faster than it does now on my Mac (and possibly gets the mouse cursor correct looking), then I will purchase a new iMac* with intel because I can finally chunk my pc at work. I think this is the market Apple knows about and will get by default when they go with Intel. The several million of us wanting to buy a Mac for work but can't because of that one little program we have to have will probably buy in record numbers once VPC prooves it works. Microsoft with VPC ready to go, would be the answer for Apple in that market, oddly enough. However, I can't make myself believe that VPC would be ready when the new MacIntels are on the market after seeing the past update cycles for that program.
*(As long has my iMac will print to my 42" wide HP printer (I think it is a Design Jet 500) while in autocad.)
But, a laptop is more in line with what would be useful for my purposes.
If a PowerBook does come out with the dual core Yonah, and the iBook waits, one may think that when the Meron chip comes out, that would go in to the PowerBook, and the Yonah in to the iBook, given that all works well. Or, that if a single core Yonah goes in to the iBook and Mac Mini at some not too far off point, then when the Meron comes out, both the PowerBook and the iBook may have an update.
What I think is my common sense tells me to wait for a second wave of intel Macs, the early adopter in me wishes to jump.
I still like the PPC, and so what seems to me to be sensible will be to look at the prices on PPC notebooks, come January.
Originally posted by Glamingo
Ever since I was little, I reffered to my mac as a G3 or G something, and now its going to be all taken away and replaced by PM-3625 this and m-8365 that.
Yes, I am a sentimentalist, and so it will be difficult. I first deeply admired the Apple IIGS when it came out, before the Mac, and saw the fulfillment of my recognition in 1971 that computers would be much easier to use in ten years or thereabout than they were with the command line.
I came to be able to afford a Mac when the 7300 and 8600 were in their day, with 604 cpu, and so after that came the G3>>. But the PPC, or a Motorola chip was always used. I wanted a Mac IIFX 'Blackbird' in its time, pre PPC, but it was the most expensive Mac ever made.
Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.
Originally posted by NordicMan
Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.
The only Intel chip used in NeXT hardware, ie, hardware manufactured by NeXT Computer, Inc, was the i860 RISC chip in the NeXTDimension graphics board. A NeXTcube with a NeXTDimension board could also be considered an axisymmetric multiprocessor machine because the board ran an optimized Mach kernel dedicated to accelerating Postscript.
All NeXT computers rans variations of the Motorola 68030 and 68040. There may have been an after market 68060, but I think I'm confusing that with the Nitro board (66 MHz 68040?). Long time ago.
After NeXT abandoned hardware, it ran on a small subset of generic Intel hardware, then HP-PA RISC workstations, then SPARCstations, and finally, Apple PowerPC. Next year, it'll come back to Intel.