[MacDEF]

NOTE: this thread is for people actually interested in using Macs. If you want to thread-crap by bashing Apple or Macs, go somewhere else. (Sorry, but past experience says that once you post something about Macs, some idiot has to jump in and make some stupid comment to crap on the thread.)


OK...

Someone at Apple (who is probably out of work by now

) evidently jumped the gun today and posted the specs for the new PowerMac G5s that are to be announced next week -- the specs were actually listed on the Apple Store for an hour or so:


- PowerPC G5/970 processors: 1.6GHz, 1.8GHz, or Dual 2GHz
- Up to 1GHz processor bus
- Up to 8GB of DDR SDRAM
- Fast Serial ATA hard drives
- AGP 8X Pro graphics slot (cards from both NVIDIA and ATI)
- Three PCI or three PCI-X expansion slots
- Three USB 2.0 ports
- Three FireWire 800 ports (compatible with FireWire 400)
- Bluetooth & AirPort Extreme ready
- Optical and analog in and out


More info on the PPC 970/G5 (slightly dated, but good background):
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/ppc970/ppc970-0.html

Quote:

I'm finally convinced that Apple's days of wandering in the wilderness with Motorola are over, and that personal computer users will be able to see the Mac as a real option again in terms of desktop, and not just portable, performance._

The 970 is big for Apple; it looks like Macs will finally get a processor that is once again competitive with the Intel and AMD chips out there (Photoshop tests notwithstanding

).

 

[Lando]

Interesting. I'd like to hear a lot more details about the overall architecture, particularly the memory bus and how it will be coupled to the cpu. If Apple really is going to use 400mhz dual-channel ddr, they may be out of luck very soon. AMD and Intel both have plans for 800mhz ddr2 in the near future, and dual channel support looks like a no-brainer for both of them. (What's the rumored street date for the G5?) Unfortunate for Apple, that would be. Still, it looks like IBM has done a lot of things right designing this chip, and that very fast fsb will come in handy when the time to move to pci express comes. I can't wait to see how this chip stacks up against the Opteron/Athlon64.

Sorry to post here, since I'm not interested in using a Mac, but I am interested in microprocessor design. Does that count?

P.S.: x86 machines have been winning Photoshop benchmarks for quite a long time now.

 

[thsu02]

This is very exciting... my friend just emailed me the same image cut from the website directly.
These chips sound very promising, and isn't it so ironic that IBM may be helping Apple progress adequately in chip development.

I must say that it is odd that Apple "leaked" out this info on the website. With so much attention that is given to shrouding Apple products in mystery, it would be very hard for me to believe that someone "accidently" posted this on their own website. As much as I enjoy watching Steve Jobs' Keynotes and "surprise" announcements, Apple certainly has generated much attention just from their grand procedure of secrecy.

Probably just some publicity stunt....




but then again, here I am at 2:30 am writing about it.

 

[chadbang]

Nice. I'm almost ready to creep away from my 233mhz G3 powerbook... naw....




Quote:

Optical and analog in and out

Now that's good news! I was pissed when Apple dropped analogue in jacks on their powermacs. What the hell?

 

[imported_maverick_12]

Too little, too late, too expensive.
About sums it up.
If they had gone x86-64, they had a chance, but now? Nope, never.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Maverick -- quit spouting ignorance. People have been predicting Apple's demise for 15 years. Every new product they come out with is called "too little, too late, too expensive" yet every new product sells, as this one will. Compared with most other brand computer makers, they're doing just fine -- fluctuating between #1 and #5 for unit sales, and in a better financial position than pretty much anyone else, with over 4 billion dollars cash for R&D and investments.

MacDEF specifically asked people not to thread crap, yet here you are.

 

[Dweebgal]

them specs look interestig.

not a mac owner here, but macs sure do look perdy

my only problem with them is the cost, too damn expensive for this poor student.

 

[Jonny Quest]

I'd love to get a mac to play around with, but as dweebgal says they're too expensive for a poor college student. Optical In/Out would be great to have to use with my MD player.

 

[lan]

Well I built my own mac because I need one but I've never bought one. Hopefully this will make the G4 upgrades much cheaper so I can upgrade.

What's up with only 3 PCI slots? For "pro" users that can be filled with sound, video capture, and scsi cards. I would've had a 4th just in case.

 

[imported_maverick_12]

Russ Arcuri-
What has really kept Apple alive all these years was the hippies, the graphic arts guys and schools. Those are their main 3 markets. Now, the hippies they still have, and they will probably always have them. The graphic arts people are really starting to go win32 because of the pure raw speed a x86, and espically an x86-64 box can provide. Their attempt at servers is a dismal failure, and they are selling fewer and fewer computers each year. The School market, they have almost completly lost, all the schools realized, hey, I can get a cheaper PC twice as fast for half the price, lets do that. The E-Mac, their school iMac is a dismal failure too. By the time g5's come around, 4ghz p4's and 4ghz rated x86-64(probably operating around 2.5ghz) amd athlon64's will be out, and once photochop for x86-64 comes out, its all over.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by maverick_12 Too little, too late, too expensive. About sums it up. If they had gone x86-64, they had a chance, but now? Nope, never.

This is the type of ignorant thread crapping I specifically asked people to avoid. Take it somewhere else.

 

[imported_maverick_12]

Its not ignorant, its realism.
Sorry, I don't have a blind eye towards Apple, go look at their g4 sales, they are way off. Heck, even the g4 cube was a dismal failure, along with many other of their products.

 

[lini]

MacDEF: Thanks for the info. Where did you get it from? Macosrumors?

thsu2: I don't think it's that ironic - IBM also had no problem helping Cyrix (their 6x86 was better than the original Cyrix version) and AMD (flip-chip for the K6(/2)) before... Nowadays, I guess, they are happy to sell their technologies to almost anyone, as long as the payment is good...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[MacDEF]

Maverick, I don't have a "blind" eye towards them, either. You're just ignorant on this topic.

Again, please stop thread-crapping this thread. Read the first two sentences of the thread again.


lini: the info was posted on many news sites yesterday; a few even have screenshots.

THAT BEING SAID...

I read elswhere this morning that Akamai (the content-mirroring company that hosts all of Apple's online content) claims that this was a hack -- they claim that someone hacked into their mirroring system and placed a doctored image there to replace the existing G4 spec image. I guess we'll see next week

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by maverick_12 Its not ignorant, its realism.

It's nothing of the sort. I work on a government contract for the Air Force. There's a decent contingent of Macs here. Not the majority, but nothing to sneeze at either. Unless you feel the Air Force is nothing but a bunch of hippies.

G4 tower sales were good until recently, when rumors of the G5 solidified. Who wants to buy a G4 tower if a G5 is a few months away? As for the cube -- it was a good idea that didn't sell up to projections because the G4 tower had more expandability/upgradeability on the high end and the price of the g3 boxes appealed on the low end.

As I said before -- people have been spouting your nonsense for at least 15 years. I remember reading posts on USENET at least 10 years ago about how the 68040 Macs were too little, too late -- and that Windows/Intel boxes were simply cheaper and better performing, that Apple was all but out of the education market, that artists were moving away from the platform, etc. Funny, here we are in 2003 and the company is still going strong, with excellent financial stability. Where are some of those companies from 10-15 years ago that were going to drive Apple out of business, like Swan?

I never said Apple would become the dominant platform. But to re-hash an old (but perfectly valid) argument -- BMW isn't the dominant car company either, with less than 3% of the world market. When's the last time you heard somebody predicting BMW's demise? 5% of the personal computer market is a hell of a lot of revenue. Heck, 12-15% of the overall mp3 player market (or 30-40% of the high-end mp3 player market) is a lot of revenue too.