[Switched2Mac]

I predict that Apple will not release any new products until the WWDC.

That is June 28th, 2004 folks.

My predictions have yet to be wrong.

[eddiecatflap]

..grate !

..gives me plenty of time to save up !!

[djohnson]

I say flip a coin... No one here knows, or if they do they wont tell! I say the longer the better, I still need another $500 to get a mid range iMac G5!

[Lateralus]

If Apple would drop the prices on the current lineup, I think WWDC would be okay for a Rev2 release. AMD and Intel have pretty much stalled on the clock speed front, so Apple isn't falling further and further behind as each day passes as they were with the G4. And if Apple could release those promised 3GHz PowerPCs at WWDC, well, it would be a worthwhile update.

[Switched2Mac]

Does anyone really think Apple can get 3.0 gHz G5's by the end of the year?

Never going to happen.

Look how long it is taking just for a minor speed bump.

Jobs will probably cheat and announce them Dec 31st and they will actually ship Jun 2005 or something like that.

Mark my words.

You will NOT be able to go online or to an Apple store and buy a 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 on 12/31/2004.

[Lateralus]

Why is that? IBM has been consistently ahead of schedule on G5 development. I would be surprised if Apple didn't ship 3GHz G5s by early fall.

[Peder Rice]

Though, the XServe is now delayed. Makes you think.

I suspect that we'll see 3.0GHz G5s at WWDC, only because once the 90nm G5s are pouring out of IBM, nothing will hold Apple from releasing a 3.0GHz PowerMac, as long as they crank up the fan speed in the G5.

I do think, however, that the iMac G5 will easily be the product announcement that Apple's banking on. All those iPod users may just be waiting for G5 e/iMacs.

[Lateralus]

Yeah, it'd sure make sense for Apple to relegate the 970 to the iMac and the eMac, and save the 90nm 970fx for the Power Mac line. I'd sure love to see them take that large of a step in wiping Motorola from their supply chain.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:

Look how long it is taking just for a minor speed bump.

Though announced at WWDC in June, PMs did not ship until late August. Late February makes 6 months. If they roll out speed bumps by late March it will be 7 months. This is NOT an odd update schedule for Apple. Especially for a Rev A. ... they tend to milk those a little longer than other Revs (because the "gee-whiz" newness factor is stronger). Subsequent updates usually come a little quicker.

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:

Mark my words.

You will NOT be able to go online or to an Apple store and buy a 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 on 12/31/2004.

Consider them "marked". IBM already openly announced a month ago that their next-generation .90mn G5 (running at up to 2.5 Ghz) has gone into mass production. zdnet Story Why we've not yet had a PM announcement is anyone's guess (problems w/chip or integration ? Maybe just market timing? Who knows ?)

[Krusty]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Yeah, it'd sure make sense for Apple to relegate the 970 to the iMac and the eMac, and save the 90nm 970fx for the Power Mac line. I'd sure love to see them take that large of a stride in wiping Motorola from their supply chain.

Actually, that's make less sense. The 90nm 970fx has DRASTICALLY reduced heat and power consumption over the 130nm. It make more sense to put an underclocked 90nm G5 into the iMac/eMac which don't have nearly the cooling capacity of the the 9-fan, cheese-grater front, PM.

[Switched2Mac]

Agreed.

The 970FX should be looked at in terms of the iMac only for now. PowerMac has the least heat concerns of the rest of the Apple line (iMac, eMac and HeatBook).

But again.

MARK MY WORDS!!!!!

You will not be able to go online or to a local Apple Store and actually buy a shipping or in-stock PowerMac G5 3.0 gHz computer.

Won't happen. Best of Luck. Keep dreaming.

Mind you, I hope I am wrong. But I highly doubt it.

The switch from Motorola to IBM is causing delays, no doubt. You are changing your most important vendor for another and relationships, processes, procedures, etc must all be created. This takes lots of time for something this large.

The next "bump" will most likely be 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 gHz G5's. And they will come at the WWDC in late June. Given Apple's history, it would be uncharacteristic of them to meet the 3.0 gHz "shipping" by Dec 31st, 2004.

I am not talking about the Apple Store Online taking orders on Dec 31st and shipping 3 months later either.

I am talking about me being able to ride over to the local Apple Store in the mall and walk out with a 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 on or before Dec 31st, 2004.

Not going to happen.

I also predict no FireBook G5's by Dec 31st, 2004 either.

I don't mean to be negative. I am a switcher and love Apple. Just trying to be realistic.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Krusty:

Consider them "marked". IBM already openly announced a month ago that their next-generation .90mn G5 (running at up to 2.5 Ghz) has gone into mass production. zdnet Story Why we've not yet had a PM announcement is anyone's guess (problems w/chip or integration ? Maybe just market timing? Who knows ?) [/B]

Surely you jest?

Merely because IBM is shipping them to Apple does not mean that Apple is ready to include them in the PowerMacs and then ship them. And what kinds of quantities are we talking here too? They sell something like 300K+ per quarter. IBM would have to meet that need for the PowerMac's alone. IBM actually sent the first shipment in the first week of January 2004 (or so I read somewhere). 2 months later, we still see no sign of new PowerMacs.



OK. So I have stated my opinion. Now are you going to "mark your words" and state for all to read, that Apple is going to have them in-stock by Dec 31st? I would think that you would.

[Lateralus]

I don't have the energy to nitpick through everything you wrote in both your posts, so in response to both posts and everything you said in them I say the following:

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I don't have the energy to nitpick through everything you wrote in both your posts, so in response to both posts and everything you said in them I say the following:

I second that.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Surely you jest?

Merely because IBM is shipping them to Apple does not mean that Apple is ready to include them in the PowerMacs and then ship them.

True ... if you read my post, I'm saying clearly that Apple, for whatever reason(s) is not yet ready to include them in the PM. Could be a technical problem ... could have something to do with market timing. Who knows ?

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:

OK. So I have stated my opinion. Now are you going to "mark your words" and state for all to read, that Apple is going to have them in-stock by Dec 31st? I would think that you would.

Of course not. I never said that "I guarantee that Apple will have 3.0ghz G5s in stock on 12/31/04" -- merely pointing out that your alarmist declaration that Apple absolutely won't have them by then is based on some pretty flimsy reasoning (i.e." Gee, this first revision sure has taken a while ... therefore, the next one will be late too ... conclusion: no 3.0ghz PMs in 2004".). It's not uncommon for Apple's first revision of anything to have a longer life cycle than subsequent ones (see: DV iMac first rev = 9 months, TiPB first rev = 9 months, AlPB first rev = 9 months). Get the picture ??

[off/lang]

I think the big problem here is that when Apple went with IBM for the processors we expected (rightly or wrongly) that the days of 10 month rev cycles were over, that IBM could give us the processors to enable Apple to have something to update the machine with every 4-6 months--that the slow rev cycles were Apple's ways of handling Motorola's incompetence.

It is coming as a shock that even with IBM giving Apple new chips, timely revisions aren't really happening. Before, it was so easy to blame Motorola, but now...

I personally was fairly sure we'd see new powermacs in the last weeks of January...when it didn't happen I thought early Febuary... when that didn't happen I thought by the end of Febuary... now I'm hoping they will come within the next few weeks.

[Commodus]

I say late March, early April at the latest. It's quite simple:

1. IBM announced 2.5 GHz PowerPC 970 FX chips (90 nm G5s) in February.
2. Apple and IBM are the only real customers.
3. Apple used the original 970 significantly in advance of IBM.

My belief is that Apple has simply been waiting for everything they want. At the least, that would be sufficient quantities of the 2.5 GHz chips (they're probably expecting a rush for the fastest model). They may also need to preload 10.3.3 on the systems. There's also the possibility that they want newer video cards. PCI Express, maybe?

[Evan_11]

I agree. With the announcement of the faster chips it was just that, an announcement. Most likely they just went into mass production. This would put an update around the end of March likely. Since this is not a major update (though its turning into one) immediate delivery is important. Also consider that Apple is going to reveal its 2nd quarter numbers late April. It would make no sense not to boost sales before then. The only way to boost sales is to either cut prices or release new models. With no announcement of the 3ghz chip on the horizon we'll see the updated Powermacs this month, early April at the latest.

[cambro]

I certainly hope updates are forthcoming for virtually the entire line.

I'm typing this on a Ghz TiBook purchased SIXTEEN MONTHS ago. You can STILL by Ghz Powerbooks.

That is just sad. Pathetically sad.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by cambro:
I certainly hope updates are forthcoming for virtually the entire line.

I'm typing this on a Ghz TiBook purchased SIXTEEN MONTHS ago. You can STILL by Ghz Powerbooks.

That is just sad. Pathetically sad.

That is the point that I am trying to make. The iBook line has virtually caught up to the PowerBook line (in terms of processor).

Believe me. I hope that I am wrong. I am all set to purchase my next Mac. But the upgrades are slow in coming.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
That is the point that I am trying to make. The iBook line has virtually caught up to the PowerBook line (in terms of processor).

Believe me. I hope that I am wrong. I am all set to purchase my next Mac. But the upgrades are slow in coming.

How the hell can you say that? The G5 has only been in one product line and for only one revision. And it has only been 6 months since the G5s actually started shipping in full quantity. 6-7 months between revisions is normal and Apple has always revised their machines based around a 6-7 month time frame, and it never had anything to do with supply problems. It was simply Apple's choice.

You should probably wait until the next G5 revision is actually late before you start making unsubstantiated statements. But if you want to persist and continue holding a position that is the opposite of the one that everybody else on the board who follows the Mac processor scene holds, then go ahead.

[ReggieX]

Hooray, another bloody thread.

[soul searching]

At first I thought that we would get a revision in January/February but that has come and gone. Now I doubt we’ll see anything before WWDC. It would be a bit silly to introduce new hardware, say in March, and then again three months later in June/July when the 3Ghz machines are going to be announced (for sure ).

[Commodus]

Did no one listen to Steve Jobs at WWDC or Apple Expo Paris?

Read this very slowly: he said "next summer."

That doesn't mean that Jobs has to stand in front of everyone listing the specs for 3 GHz G5s at the WWDC keynote. It simply means that the company intends to ship that level of performance in the summer time frame, which is as late as the end of September. Releasing new G5s on, say, March 23rd still lets Apple meet its target.

[I Me Mine]

Originally posted by Commodus:
Did no one listen to Steve Jobs at WWDC or Apple Expo Paris?

Read this very slowly: he said "next summer."

At WWDC he said "within 12 months" - no mention of summer.

I believe at the Paris thing "Summer" was mentioned.

[Switched2Mac]

As in summer 2004?

I thought he said something more like "...before the year is out..."

Can anyone confirm this?

[Link]

What good are new macs if the OS has become such a bug filled turd that even XP is begining to look good?

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
As in summer 2004?

I thought he said something more like "...before the year is out..."

Can anyone confirm this?

He said 12 months. I have that WWDC on my HDD.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Link:
What good are new macs if the OS has become such a bug filled turd that even XP is begining to look good?

...What?

Shut up Link.

[masugu]

A Turd?

Man, that's harsh. I use XP all day long. It's OK, but OS X just feels nicer.

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by Link:
What good are new macs if the OS has become such a bug filled turd that even XP is begining to look good?

[Switched2Mac]

So, technically, 12 months from Jan 7th, 2004?

I amend my prediction then:

You will not be able to walk into an Apple Store and purchase an in-stock PowerMac G5 3.0 gHz computer on Jan 7th, 2005.

And naturally, my other prediction stands:

No new Macs until the WWDC in late June.

I really hope that I am wrong, because I have the money just waiting to purchase. But sadly, Apple is all too predictable.

Next bump will most likely put the top system at 2.4 gHz. Sheesh, so a 0.4 gHz jump in (oct 2003 -> jun 2004) 8 or 9 months. Wow ...... NOT.

The next PowerMacs will be Dual 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 as I see it.

The top will become the bottom and use the new G5 dies. The single CPU models sold so poorly that I feel that Apple will drop them completely from the PowerMac lineup. The new G5's supposedly use 1/3 the power and therefore generate roughly 1/3 the heat. So the fans won't have to come on near as much or as loud. A welcome improvement.

Your thoughts?

[Commodus]

PowerMacMan:

That may be what he said at WWDC, but everyone seems to ignore what was said at Apple Expo Paris - it was stated as "end of summer."

And again, people seem to forget that IBM announced that 2.5 GHz 970FX. Who else but Apple would be likely to use that speed first?

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Your thoughts?

:

If you're 'predicting' that there will not be another release until WWDC, and you're also predicting that that release of G5s will top out at 2.4GHz, then you're saying that Apple/IBM will fall 600MHz short on their 12 month/3GHz promise. I highly doubt it.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Commodus:
PowerMacMan:

That may be what he said at WWDC, but everyone seems to ignore what was said at Apple Expo Paris - it was stated as "end of summer."

And again, people seem to forget that IBM announced that 2.5 GHz 970FX. Who else but Apple would be likely to use that speed first?

I wont hold Apple to a 3GHz release date that is exactly 12 months from the date of the 2003 WWDC, most people wont, that would be ludicrous. I will give Apple wiggle room. Just remember, IBM has a very good track record of exceeding their own product roadmaps, they already did it with the 2GHz G5. They hadn't planned to have anything faster than 1.8GHz available until the fall. Plus, I doubt Steve would have made that comment unless he were pretty sure of IBM's capabilities.

Nevertheless, we shall see.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
But if you want to persist and continue holding a position that is the opposite of the one that everybody else on the board who follows the Mac processor scene holds, then go ahead.

Odd statement.

The same logic could be applied to the usual OSX versus WinXP debate.

Being a Mac user (5%) is the essence of holding a position that is opposite that of everyone else (95%). That is part of the lure of Apple/Mac/OSX, in my opinion. Think different. Remember? Suddenly this is a bad thing in a Mac forum?

If you look at the poll, while hardly statistically complete, it would appear that my position is shared by more users than you give credit for. And sad to say, more will share it after March 27th comes and goes (memory sale end date) and there are no new Macs.

And, if I am wrong, I will post a forum message stating that I was wrong and refrain from further predictions. If I am wrong. And I will have a brand new Mac to comfort me, so it won't hurt all that bad.

Oh! And I loved the little jab "...everybody else on the board who follows the Mac processor scene..." Implying that as a switcher, I must be too "new" to the scene to know what I am talking about.

I am open to hear other opinions or predictions.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
:

If you're 'predicting' that there will not be another release until WWDC, and you're also predicting that that release of G5s will top out at 2.4GHz, then you're saying that Apple/IBM will fall 600MHz short on their 12 month/3GHz promise. I highly doubt it.

I am saying that the next release of PowerMac G5's will top out at 2.4 gHz when they are released in late June 2004.

And given that, Apple/IBM will never be able to get 3.0 gHz G5's to the Apple Store near you by the Steve Job's promised deadline.

I highly expect it, given the past history.

Factor in that IBM/Apple relationship is new. And there will be many delays (technical, political within each company, misunderstandings, etc.) that must be ironed out quickly in order to maintain the promised delivery goals.

I hope that you prove me wrong. I really do.

[soul searching]

The '12 month' statement was made at WWDC 2003 and the 'end of summer' statement at the Paris Expo 2003. This means that Jobs believes that at some point this (2004) summer Apple will be (at least) announcing a 3.0 Ghz machine. It might not ship until this fall but it'll come this year.

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
...

Factor in that IBM/Apple relationship is new. And there will be many delays (technical, political within each company, misunderstandings, etc.) that must be ironed out quickly in order to maintain the promised delivery goals.

IBM provided the G3 for Apple. Their relationship is not 'new'.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Factor in that IBM/Apple relationship is new. And there will be many delays (technical, political within each company, misunderstandings, etc.) that must be ironed out quickly in order to maintain the promised delivery goals.

You do realize that IBM and Apple invented the PowerPC, right? And that they have been working together for well over a decade now.

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Oh! And I loved the little jab "...everybody else on the board who follows the Mac processor scene..." Implying that as a switcher, I must be too "new" to the scene to know what I am talking about.

*Whistles*

[chrisutley]

Sad and remarkable.

Originally posted by cambro:
I certainly hope updates are forthcoming for virtually the entire line.

I'm typing this on a Ghz TiBook purchased SIXTEEN MONTHS ago. You can STILL by Ghz Powerbooks.

That is just sad. Pathetically sad.

[fizzlemynizzle]

hmm.. but today's 1ghz powerbook is about 20% faster, comes in a new shell, offers larger HD capacity, has integrated bluetooth, firewire 800, and a faster graphics chipset.

i thought apple fans didn't get caught up in the "megahertz myth"

[Switched2Mac]

Yes. I know IBM developed the G3 and PowerPPC. I worked there for many years.

But how long ago was that? People do change positions, leave the company, or move on within the company.

Did you seriously think that whole process just sat there dormant waiting for Apple to come back? Of course not.

Those relationships will need to be redeveloped and chances are (especially at IBM), there are all new people in the positions that will be interfacing with Apple during the G5 development process.

[cambro]

Originally posted by fizzlemynizzle:
i thought apple fans didn't get caught up in the "megahertz myth"

We don't when we are comparing completely different processor architectures....

But here we are comparing a 1Ghz G4 to a 1Ghz G4.

The only reason that there was any performance boost at all over the past year and a half was that the L2 cache on the Powerbook got bumped from 256 KB (my Ti) to 512 KB (Al).

Even so, a 20% boost in processing speed by adding cache in 16 months and counting is terrible. Don't get me wrong, I'd trade my TiBook in for an AlBook in a heartbeat. But there is NO WAY that after almost a year and a half my TiBook should be so close in performance to what you can buy new today.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Yes. I know IBM developed the G3 and PowerPPC. I worked there for many years.

But how long ago was that? People don't change positions, leave the company, move on within the company.

Did you seriously think that whole process just sad there dormant waiting for Apple to come back?

Those relationships will need to be redeveloped and chances are (especially at IBM), there are all new people in the positions that will be interfacing with Apple during the G5 development process.

You say that like Apple left IBM...

You're losing me buddy.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I don't have the energy to nitpick through everything you wrote in both your posts, so in response to both posts and everything you said in them I say the following:

What he said...

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
You say that like Apple left IBM...

You're losing me buddy.

Regardless of who left who, my point is that the relationship ended for a period of time. Business relationships are not forged overnight. The players in both companies have no doubt moved up or moved on since then.

This could easily account for some of the delay we see as Apple switches vendors for their G5. This is not uncommon in the business world.

Originally posted by Cambro:
Even so, a 20% boost in processing speed by adding cache in 16 months and counting is terrible. Don't get me wrong, I'd trade my TiBook in for an AlBook in a heartbeat. But there is NO WAY that after almost a year and a half my TiBook should be so close in performance to what you can buy new today.

And Cambro makes an excellent point about the tiny little speed bumps in the PowerBook line over the last 16 months. You cannot easily explain away his statement of fact.

[Lateralus]

No, you're missing what I am saying. IBM and Apple have never stopped working together constantly. G5 development started when Apple was still using the G3 in half of it's product line.

[Switched2Mac]

When did G5 development start? Is this speculation or fact? Can you point to some documented news story that can more or less confirm this?

And I was not talking specifically about development. I was talking about the manufacturing process. Designing something is one thing. Making it enmasse is yet another. Both have their challenges.

We shall see though. I look forward to buying a Dual 3.0 PowerMac this summer! But I doubt they will be available.

And considering your optimistic view, the next PowerBook release should easily include G5's. The new G5's are slightly smaller, use 1/3 the watts and hence 1/3 the heat. And according to the replies in the forum here, Apple is swimming in G5's thanks to IBM. So we should not see another pointless G4 speedbump in the PowerBook line when the new G5's are practically growing on trees, correct?

As Cambro pointed out, Apple can be rather lame when it comes to upgrades within a product line. :

I am glad that I made the switch to Mac. But I sold my iMac recently in anticipation of new Macs in Jan 2004. The reality of Apples slow upgrades hit me hard.....

[Lateralus]

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:

Typical response.