[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by OwlBoy:
hehe, that should be made an official Emoticon.

-Owl

That picture was great!

I downloaded it for use in Presentations at work and such.

Too funny!

[Switched2Mac]

OK.

The IBM Announcement yielded nothing in terms of specific G5 announcements or roadmaps.



And I think that even PowerMacMan has finally come to terms with my prediction that started this whole thread.



So, I think that we can all agree by now that there will not be any new Macs until the WWDC, unfortunately.



Given that, we move on to the bigger question! What new Macs will there be at the WWDC?



I confess that I am guessing here, but I say speedbumps in the 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 flavor. But I firmly believe that you will not see the 3.0 at WWDC.

Which leads me to my Bold Prediction #2:

You will not be able to walk into an Apple Store and buy a Dual 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac before the end of WWDC.

Announcing them at WWDC and then making everyone wait for 2 months while they are still being made does not count. Apple has had an entire 12 months to move up from 2.0 to 3.0 gHz.

And given Steve Jobs promise, you would think that they would be ready for purchase at WWDC time.

And if my second prediction is wrong, well, I'll be fending off all the "told you so!" comments on my new Dual 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac with 23" metallic Cinema Display. But, I'll be too happy to care at that point!

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
And I think that even PowerMacMan has finally come to terms with my prediction that started this whole thread.

*Bzzzzzzzt*

Negative on the coming to terms.

If you would have read my posts, you would have already seen that since my first post in the thread I have said that WWDC would be fine, and that it seems more and more likely.

But I still think you are dead wrong on the no-3GHz prediction. You have no reason to think that Apple will not deliver on Steve's promise of 3GHz in 12 months. Which is why I think you are overly pessimistic.

[Zoom]

I believe there will be a speed bump between now and WWDC, and then I think we'll see the 3GHz models announced at WWDC. Why? I don't think Apple can afford the sales hit. There is a lot of pent-up demand for new G5's, I think. If they wait that long to do something, they'll miss out on too many sales. They need to throw something out there now, even something modest, to relieve the people waiting for the next incremental upgrade.

Then I would bet on a bigger update announced at WWDC: 3GHz top end and probably some enclosure updates (eg, dual optical drive). That's another reason I see a minor update coming - I think they're going to update the case, and to use up the supply of existing cases, they'll probably need a refresh to drive some sales. Just a guess.

So, if all that is true, then I would expect the speed bumped PM's very soon, like in the next 2-3 weeks.

I'd love to see a month-to-month sales graph of PM's. I'll bet it's not flat. I'll bet the sales peak at every incremental release.

[Evan_11]

Man I bet there are a lot of us who could just kill Steve Jobs about now. I'm a firm believer in "buying when you need" which for me is no later than 2 weeks from today. That means I'll be buying the best deal I can find on a dual G5. The deals at all the resellers have dried up (I missed a good one over on Amazon) and I'm only praying that this is the calm before the storm and we'll see a new release in the next week or two.

I'm not too keen on the 23" cinema display rebate. Not only does the screen pale in comparison to the 20" but it's too fat to place on my desk.

[bwana]

G5 iMacs are coming anytime now, emacs to follow and then G5 speed upgradejavascript:smilie('')javascript:smilie(': cool:')

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by Evan_11:
Not only does the screen pale in comparison to the 20" but it's too fat to place on my desk.

Say what?? How can the 23" pale in comparison to the 20"? Have you seen them side by side? The 23" in amazing & beautiful. And I thought that the 23" was brighter and had a better quality LCD than the 20" or 17"?

Switched2Mac, you may be right about nothing coming until WWDC, but that does not make me happy enough. So until then, I am going to be hopeful that Apple is waiting until ATI cards ship this month before they release updated G5's. Happy thoughts, happy thoughts, happy thoughts...

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally posted by Zoom:
I believe there will be a speed bump between now and WWDC, and then I think we'll see the 3GHz models announced at WWDC.

Although it makes sense that Apple wouldn't want the sales hit, when was the last time Apple updated their products within three months of a previous update? Not for many years, if ever. I'd say the chances of a minor speed bump right now followed by a major update at WWDC are almost nil, based on history. It's more likely that there will be an update now and another in late summer/early fall, or a big update at WWDC. But there's no way there will be two updates in the span of three months. No chance at all.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
Although it makes sense that Apple wouldn't want the sales hit, when was the last time Apple updated their products within three months of a previous update? Not for many years, if ever. I'd say the chances of a minor speed bump right now followed by a major update at WWDC are almost nil, based on history. It's more likely that there will be an update now and another in late summer/early fall, or a big update at WWDC. But there's no way there will be two updates in the span of three months. No chance at all.

According to MacRumor's Buyers Guide page, PM's were updated 135 days ago (about 4.5 months) and the average time between updates is 171 days (about 5.7 months). And the more recent updates have happened closer to 5 months. I think we're due for a minor update in April and an announcement at WWDC that might take 1-2 months to deliver.

[Link]

Zoom, 137 days since the Powermac 1.8 was replaced with the dual 1.8

[Link]

Originally posted by gururafiki:
Say what?? How can the 23" pale in comparison to the 20"? Have you seen them side by side? The 23" in amazing & beautiful. And I thought that the 23" was brighter and had a better quality LCD than the 20" or 17"?

The 20" is brighter than the 23", AFAIK.

However as I last saw it, the 20" is DEFINATELY smaller. Too fat = The dude's desk is too small and he's too cheap to buy a bigger one.

Probably too cheap to pay $600 for a better screen too

[Evan_11]

Originally posted by Link:
The 20" is brighter than the 23", AFAIK.

However as I last saw it, the 20" is DEFINATELY smaller. Too fat = The dude's desk is too small and he's too cheap to buy a bigger one.

Probably too cheap to pay $600 for a better screen too

I just checked it out again yesterday and realized the bezel is huge. Compare it to the elegant ones on the large Samsung displays and you'll see what I mean. Yes desk space in my case is a premium. I do video production and like to have as much space allocated to decks, harddrives, speakers, tapes etc.

The 20" is also much sharper. Compare the two and you'll find that the 23" is rather grainy.

Oh and your idiocy is astonishing. You're 18 right? or younger?

[Eug Wanker]

Perhaps the Power Macs will be updated sometime in April, when the new video cards are out.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Perhaps the Power Macs will be updated sometime in April, when the new video cards are out.

Which ATI model are we talking about?

Would these be 256meg versions?

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by Evan_11:
The 20" is also much sharper. Compare the two and you'll find that the 23" is rather grainy.

When I last compared them the 23" was lots nicer. I was a Fry's and they had the two monitors side by side. I played some movie prieview on full screen, and it seemed the 23" had sharper color, and was brighter. Maybe the one that you saw had problems? I dunno, I think the 23" is nicer, but thats from my experience.

But back to the powermac, if we don't see an update in april, then I fully expect Apple to have daul 3 Ghz at WWDC, because its been too long without an update.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Which ATI model are we talking about?

Would these be 256meg versions?

R420/423.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
R420/423.

Well, I think they ay wait until the Nvidia NV40 comes out and then choose between the 2...

Could be some time.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Well, I think they ay wait until the Nvidia NV40 comes out and then choose between the 2...

Could be some time.

The previously rumoured date for the NV40 release was April 13. Whether that's true or not I dunno.

Anyways, assuming the cards are coming out within a few weeks or even in say May, then it's obvious that Apple would have already made their choice on NV40 vs. R420/423 months ago.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The previously rumoured date for the NV40 release was April 13. Whether that's true or not I dunno.

Anyways, assuming the cards are coming out within a few weeks or even in say May, then it's obvious that Apple would have already made their choice on NV40 vs. R420/423 months ago.

Not according to the info in Anand's weblog over at Anandtech...

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Not according to the info in Anand's weblog over at Anandtech...

If I understand you correctly then you are reading far too much into those comments methinks. You forget that sometimes cards have come out on the Mac even before they came out on the PC side to the public, so obviously, Apple could not have waited until the public release before making their decision. In other words, Apple knew much beforehand what was available, as would be obvious. Hell, if we already know part of the architecture of NV40 and R420/430 and release of them is in this quarter, then it's guaranteed that companies like Apple (which ships tons of these video cards) would know all the details already, and have known the bulk of the details of the final production models for months.

In fact, if one were to take those comments literally (and I'm not), it would suggest simply that nVidia's NV40 won't be Apple's next top-of-the-line cards, and that Apple had already chosen ATI. But like I said, you can't read too much into those comments.

[Flach]

I'd imagine that it's definitely going to be at the time of the WWDC, I can't imagine it being any sooner than that. It would make sense because that's the same day that the current promotion between the G5 and the 23-inch Apple Display ends.

[Evan_11]

I just decided to finally jump off the fence. It was getting too crowded on there not to mention my butt was hurting.

I ordered a refurb dual 2.0 from the Apple store for $2399. This might or should I say probably means we'll see an update in two weeks.

How's the refurb G5's typically?

[eddiecatflap]

..EVERYTHING comes to he who waits..

[Leonard]

Originally posted by Evan_11:
I just decided to finally jump off the fence. It was getting too crowded on there not to mention my butt was hurting.

I'm gonna stay on the fence... I've waited for a month, another month or two isn't gonna hurt. Besides, as you say, there's lots of company on the fence.

[Zoom]

I've been waiting for about 2 years! I almost jumped on the G5 when it came out, but money was too tight. I've been incrementally upgrading my G4/400, trying to give it a little more life. Now I'm just ready for a new G5, and I ain't gonna buy till a new one comes out. I've survived this long, I can wait till this summer if necessary... but I don't want to.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by gururafiki:
But back to the powermac, if we don't see an update in april, then I fully expect Apple to have daul 3 Ghz at WWDC, because its been too long without an update.

Agreed.

It has been far too long.

[cmoney]

Oh well, the "Impress for Less" deal that's been mentioned was just announced and it goes until...June 26. Anyone still thinking new PowerMacs at NAB is a possibility? I'd hate to have to wait until WWDC but I'm not buying these current models.

Ok, just looked at the promo and it's for all Macs, so I guess it's less telling than I originally thought.

[power142]

This is what's great about speculation - it's just that Until Apple makes an announcement, we won't know for sure.

I'm waiting for a faster G5 for sure, but I'm also waiting until I've got my taxes in order before buying anything in that price bracket

[The Placid Casual]

I just can't come to terms with the fact that Apple will wait for another 3 months, and then probably have a delivery time of a month or more going by previous announcements... It could be another 4+ months before we get new machines on our desk! The delay would probably be even more with me being in the UK... (MiPod anyone?)

I've decided that I'm going for a G5, but think I may just buy one now, and have 4+ months usage out of it when they are finally upgraded! It would last me for years anyway...

This secrecy is really getting embarrassing... AMD are sticking by their roadmaps and rolling out new chips like the FX53 and other A64's all the time, and have the totally new socket versions coming out in the next month or so, yet are not having their sales harmed.

Apple has gone from the undesirable system of announcing updates at Macworlds every 6 months to what seems to be a totally illogical and random upgrade cycle.

Business can't work like that if you are buying in bulk, and also it puts consumers off as they keep thinking there is something better around the corner.

It is all getting to be a bit of a bad joke.

[Evan_11]

Hey Placid,

Just buy what you need when you need it. I definately needed a new computer by the end of April. I have about a dozen projects coming up over the next few months and there is no way I was going to be editing them on my current iMac G4. Not to mention that it takes time to setup, transfer and load all the software that I have to a new system. Even if Apple releases new PW's next month (or June) there will probably be some wait associated with them. I don't see them releasing them any time sooner. This is of course unless the current promotions are such a hit that they totally deplete their current supply of machines and monitors. Then we might see an earlier release. Judging by the responses here and elsewhere this is not going to be the case.

[ae86_16v]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:


Given that, we move on to the bigger question! What new Macs will there be at the WWDC?



I confess that I am guessing here, but I say speedbumps in the 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 flavor. But I firmly believe that you will not see the 3.0 at WWDC.

Which leads me to my Bold Prediction #2:

You will not be able to walk into an Apple Store and buy a Dual 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac before the end of WWDC.

Announcing them at WWDC and then making everyone wait for 2 months while they are still being made does not count. Apple has had an entire 12 months to move up from 2.0 to 3.0 gHz.

But earlier you said that a 3.0GHz won't be available until Jan 7th, 2005.

Originally posted by 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 think that the Dual 3.0GHz will be announced at WWDC, but will definitely be available before Jan 7th, 2005

[Zoom]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
This secrecy is really getting embarrassing... AMD are sticking by their roadmaps and rolling out new chips like the FX53 and other A64's all the time, and have the totally new socket versions coming out in the next month or so, yet are not having their sales harmed.

Apple has gone from the undesirable system of announcing updates at Macworlds every 6 months to what seems to be a totally illogical and random upgrade cycle.

Business can't work like that if you are buying in bulk, and also it puts consumers off as they keep thinking there is something better around the corner.

It is all getting to be a bit of a bad joke.

Amen, I'm with you 100% on this. This has frustrated me for ages. What is Apple trying to protect, exactly? They have no competition! It's not like processor announcements will cause Wintel companies to do anything - in fact, it's not like they even could do anything that would affect Apple's market. What's the point of all the secrecy? If people knew where Apple intended to be for the next 12 months, things would just work out - some people would buy now, others would buy later, but everyone would be making an informed decision. The only time this sort of secrecy would be warranted is when some monumental change for the better is coming, so big that no one would buy the current model if they knew what was coming. But those same people are already waiting now, just in case, because they don't know. Here are the possibilities:

- you wait, something bad comes out soon and you're pissed that you waited
- you wait, something good comes out soon and you're happy that you waited
- you don't wait and something bad comes out soon and you're happy that you didn't wait
- you don't wait and something good comes out soon and you're pissed that you didn't wait

Even if you assume an even distribution of people, 50% are pissed off. If you knew what was coming, everyone would be happy.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Zoom:
What is Apple trying to protect, exactly?
...
What's the point of all the secrecy?

I'm not attempting to excuse Apple here, but your post got me wondering if Apple execs themselves actually know when they are going to bring out what?

Why are we so sure they have a 3-year in advance battle plan? Does Apple know what GPU and which optical drive or RAM will be available at what time so it can be put into this and that Mac by then and then? Does IBM tell them months in advance exactly how many xyz GHz 970s they can deliver on a certain day?

Could it be that Apple is just waiting as much as possible until they fix the specs for a certain line to give them maximum flexibility and maybe keep costs down and/or margins up?

Again, this is no lame apology for Apple's silly behavior. I don't like this secrecy any more than the others. It's just that I'm wondering how much Steve really knows how far in advance. Obviously they would like to know everything far in advance, but can they really?

[BrunoBruin]

Originally posted by Simon:
It's just that I'm wondering how much Steve really knows how far in advance. Obviously they would like to know everything far in advance, but can they really?

No, they don't, and they have acknowledged that they don't. One of the biggest factors they CAN'T predict is component costs. This probably doesn't affect the Power Macs as much as it does the consumer lines, where pricing is more sensitive, but it can cause delays in product rollouts. Wasn't there some mention of the LCD iMac being delayed because panel prices didn't fall to where Apple expected them to be?

[Eug Wanker]

Does IBM tell them months in advance exactly how many xyz GHz 970s they can deliver on a certain day?

No, but they can estimate how many xyz GHz 970s they can deliver on a certain day.

It's just that I'm wondering how much Steve really knows how far in advance. Obviously they would like to know everything far in advance, but can they really?

Of course they'd try to plan as much as possible. Do you really think they just build Macs based on the computer part prices that month? Indeed, it'd be impossible to do that unless they were simply an OEM assembler. However, Apple is not. They manufacture machines, including cases, motherboards, screens, mice, etc.

Could it be that Apple is just waiting as much as possible until they fix the specs for a certain line to give them maximum flexibility and maybe keep costs down and/or margins up?

That makes little sense, at least the way I understand your wording. Why must they wait until say April 13th to "fix the specs" of a machine using that logic? They could just as easily do it at the point in time of January 29th or March 1st. If it's to do with parts, it's not to do so much with weekly fluctuations of part prices, but overall availability and overall price trends.

Perhaps the 970FX 2.5 GHz chips are simply unavailable in sufficient volumes, or perhaps the ATI R420 won't simply be available in sufficient volumes until the end of April. Those are overall supply issues. OTOH, in terms of pricing issues, Apple will likely keep DDR2 out of the Power Mac for quite some time, since even if available in sufficient volumes it would be outrageously priced, but the delay is certainly not because say Gigabit Ethernet chips cost 10% more last month, and Apple is not delaying the Power Macs because of DDR2 cost (or supply) issues.

[Simon]

OK, if those examples are all far-fetched, let's turn this around.

Steve runs Apple.

Apple wants to make money.

Why should they be so hush hush about everything if it serves no purpose and they earn less?

Why?

Or does a majority of the people here actually believe Steve's ego problem is worth millions of dollars to Apple's stock holders?

Doesn't really convince me.

Really, what's the motive?

[osxisfun]

Geez. Louise.

Why don't they pre announce:

If the product slips and misses a "pre -announced" date. Apple GETS SUED.

Apple can't PREDICT the FUTURE.

SJ has gone on the record and SAID that the PR "pop" they get by not pre-announcing results is 10s OF MILLIONS of $ in FREE PRESS. THAT's MARKETING DOLLARS THEY DID NOT HAVE TO SPEND INCREASING THEIR PROFIT.

If inventory is too HIGH then new products can be delayed by a QUARTER or more.

If an ATI product in a pre-announced mac slips and misses a "pre -announced" date. ATI GETS SUED by APPLE.

ATI can't PREDICT the FUTURE.

By not preannouncing apple can play with COMPONENT COSTS.

APPLE CAN MAKE GET HIGHER MARGINS BY NOT pre annoucing.

They want to avoid SALES SLUMPS. Don't you remember what fred SAID about announing around MACWORLDS? For geebus sake? Anyone?

DELL CAN PRE-ANNOUNCE since all you are getting in their upgrade is MORE INTEL MHZ.


For petes sake can at least ackowledge that some of the above reasons are SO MUCH more octam's(sp) razor then "Blah blah blah its all steve's EGO!" posts???


As blashempmous as this sounds, most of the world does NOT hang out on mac os rumors board HOLDING up mac purhcases. Most of the world buys a machine when they need it.

Now back to our regularly scheduled show....

[Eug Wanker]

If the product slips and misses a "pre -announced" date. Apple GETS SUED.

Hmmm... I guess that's why every other company can pre-announce and not get sued. Anyways, pre-announcements can just be a guide, and not include specific dates and still be very informative.

SJ has gone on the record and SAID that the PR "pop" they get by not pre-announcing results is 10s OF MILLIONS of $ in FREE PRESS. THAT's MARKETING DOLLARS THEY DID NOT HAVE TO SPEND INCREASING THEIR PROFIT.

Link? I agree with that logic, but I have never seen that quote.

If inventory is too HIGH then new products can be delayed by a QUARTER or more.

Again, link? Apple has gone on record to say that they try to keep inventories as low as possible. That reduces delays for spec upgrades, but increases potential delays when demand outstrips production. Also, in the case of the Power Mac G5, I suspect the design for the updates is going to be nearly identical. (The 2.5 GHz 970FX is a drop-in replacement for the 2.0 GHz 970, and actually uses (much) less power.) Thus it's not as if Power Mac case or parts inventories is going to a major issue overall.

As blashempmous as this sounds, most of the world does NOT hang out on mac os rumors board HOLDING up mac purhcases. Most of the world buys a machine when they need it.

For you and me it's not really a humungous deal most of the time. For companies wanting to buy 50 Xserves, or schools wanting to buy 500 eMacs, it's potentially a huge problem.

[aehaas]

With so many issues in the air it is easy to see why Apple cannot make promises until everything is nailed down solid.

aehaas

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by aehaas:
With so many issues in the air it is easy to see why Apple cannot make promises until everything is nailed down solid.

Roadmaps are not promises. Roadmaps are rough guides, and rough guides are much more useful than no information at all.

[Turias]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
For you and me it's not really a humungous deal most of the time. For companies wanting to buy 50 Xserves, or schools wanting to buy 500 eMacs, it's potentially a huge problem.

I disagree. My old college paid absolutely no attention to rumors of machine upgrades when upgrading their machines. At the same time every year they would buy the most bang for their buck, regardless of the current rumor situation.

[osxisfun]

>Hmmm... I guess that's why every other company can pre-announce and not get sued. >Anyways, pre-announcements can just be a guide, and not include specific dates and >still be very informative.


Apple gets sued by users frequently. Like that whole DVD on OSX thing and the Blue G3 on OSX thing. Am I saying above that the lawsuit would be valid. Nope. But apple people seem to love sue apple and that's only a small part of the whole picture i desribed enough.


>announcements can just be a guide, and not include s

A "guide" that might result in sales slump.

>Link? I agree with that logic, but I have never seen that quote.

Don't have it bu i read it online. I was 79.5% sure i was not drunk at the time.

>Again, link? Apple has gone on record to say that they try to keep inventories as low as possible. That reduces delays for spec upgrades, but increases potential delays when demand outstrips production. Also, in the case of the Power Mac G5, I suspect the design for the updates is going to be nearly identical. (The 2.5 GHz 970FX is a drop-in replacement for the 2.0 GHz 970, and actually uses (much) less power.) Thus it's not as if Power Mac case or parts inventories is going to a major issue overall.

"try" being the keyword. Its all a delicate balancing act and what i am saying is that they are up close at this "act" and make adjustments based on variables we are not privy to.

>For you and me it's not really a humungous deal most of the time. For companies wanting to buy 50 Xserves, or schools wanting to buy 500 eMacs, it's potentially a huge problem.

For schools its a different case since they have period where they "have" to buy. For "some" companies it is. For others its not. they may wait for a week or so if they have a mac but if they have rumors guy in their it depaprtment they can wait only so long before the "bodies" standing around need a new mac.

>Roadmaps are not promises. Roadmaps are rough guides, and rough guides are much more useful than no information at all.

To you and me. Maybe apple has decided, based on more info then you or I have, to think otherwise.




But once again. I am saying the reasons i stated are MUCH more plausible then the incesant "steve's ego / why don't they "just" pre-annouce" responses.

[Turias]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Roadmaps are not promises. Roadmaps are rough guides, and rough guides are much more useful than no information at all.

While roadmaps would be useful to people like you and me, they would not be useful to Apple. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Apple was planning on releasing 2.5 GHz machines in February. But, due to some unforseen circumstances, Apple was not able to do it, and is now continually pushing the date further and further back. How would this have helped their sales? People would have stopped buying computers in February, waiting for that promised update. And then, since Apple wasn't able to deliver, people get pissed, stock prices plummet, and Apple loses money.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Turias:
I disagree. My old college paid absolutely no attention to rumors of machine upgrades when upgrading their machines. At the same time every year they would buy the most bang for their buck, regardless of the current rumor situation.

Who said anything about rumours? We're talking about pre-announcements here. That's a completely different thing.

Companies rely on roadmaps/pre-announcements often to guide (but not dictate) their purchase schedules.

While roadmaps would be useful to people like you and me, they would not be useful to Apple. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Apple was planning on releasing 2.5 GHz machines in February. But, due to some unforseen circumstances, Apple was not able to do it, and is now continually pushing the date further and further back. How would this have helped their sales?

Because some companies who don't have a roadmap from Apple are much less likely to consider Apple products in the first place.

[osxisfun]

>Because some companies who don't have a roadmap from Apple won't consider Apple products at al

Maybe. Maybe not. If a comapny can not see the cost benefits of a G5 Today and OSX today and the unique softare on it today then they may have never really considered apple at all.


BTW.. WHY ARE WE areguing about ROADMAPS?

Didn't steve say there would be a 3Gig by this summer?

[BZ]

I don't think Apple should show its timeline, cause that will add to the "well, I will just wait" list.

I did like the idea that Apple up the anti every few months on a few machines, just to keep things interesting.

Without changing the processor, just include more standard RAM or a better video card or a bigger drive. This could all be done on Apple.com as part of a "promotion" and keep people buying.

Of course, I am just sitting around waiting for the new PowerMac G5. It is painful, but doable.

It is taking everything in me not to just go update my computer (again) to a 1.4Ghz G4 and 9800 Pro card to keep me satisfied.

BZ

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
>Because some companies who don't have a roadmap from Apple won't consider Apple products at al

Maybe. Maybe not. If a comapny can not see the cost benefits of a G5 Today and OSX today and the unique softare on it today then they may have never really considered apple at all.

True, but OTOH, some HAVE considered Apple but the uncertainty of Apple releases has turned them off. I see this posted not infrequently on other boards.

BTW.. WHY ARE WE areguing about ROADMAPS?

Didn't steve say there would be a 3Gig by this summer?

Well, because that's not really a roadmap (although it's better than Jobs' previous complete silence). What I think of by roadmap is something like:

"Power Mac G5 2.5/2.2/2.0 Q2 2004, with 3 GHz in Q4 2004"

[osxisfun]

>What I think of by roadmap is something like:

"Power Mac G5 2.5/2.2/2.0 Q2 2004, and Power Mac G5 3.0/2.7/2.4 Q4 20

This just in IBM fishkill plant closed for 4 months due to excessive pigeon droppings.

Ok the above statement is false but if something like that were to happen apple would be screwed if they announced what you posted. Sales slumps. Cats and dogs living together.

I can see an army of lawyers now saying their client's productvity will drop since they are lacking .3 gigHz.

The horror.

Apple simply does not want to do that it seems. We can live or not live with it....

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
Ok the above statement is false but if something like that were to happen apple would be screwed if they announced what you posted.

Not at all. Company purchasing guys are not that stupid. As I said before, roadmaps are not promises. They are guides and are not by any means guaranteed. They help with planning but they aren't considered contracts.

With your logic all companies that pre-announced would go under if a date slipped.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Roadmaps are not promises. Roadmaps are rough guides, and rough guides are much more useful than no information at all.