[osiris]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
I think the problem is that they just don't have the balls to sort things out and make the big decisions.

And why not have even a really basic a road map to avoid this whole **** storm every 6 months? is it too much to ask? is it?

Whoa, now you're asking Apple to exceed expectations when they apparently have a problem even meeting them.

[Link]

The irony is the old dual 1.8 is now worth more than they used to be worth.

Gee thanks apple.

[TiDual]

Originally posted by Link:
The irony is the old dual 1.8 is now worth more than they used to be worth.

Gee thanks apple.

How so? You can now get a dual 1.8 for 500 less, or get a dual 2.0 for what you paid for the rev. A dual 1.8.

That said, I'm very glad I got my dual 2.0 right at the start ... a fantastic machine, and although the new one is cheaper, mine has a better graphics card and I've had 8 months use ... the "waiters" got it wrong this time (unless they didn't need a machine anyway) ... even the 2.5s are months away ... 3GHz won't *ship* til Feb '05 at the earliest now.

[leperkuhn]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Point = Missed.

Whatever.

Just because the 2 machines have the same processor speed does not make sense to compare the two they way you have. The upgrade was from a single 1.6 to a dual 1.8. The dual 1.8 is now a dual 2.0.

Here are the specs on the 2.0

Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus/processor
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

That is the new midrange.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by leperkuhn:
Just because the 2 machines have the same processor speed does not make sense to compare the two they way you have. The upgrade was from a single 1.6 to a dual 1.8. The dual 1.8 is now a dual 2.0.

Here are the specs on the 2.0

Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus/processor
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

That is the new midrange.

Can't agree I'm sorry.

I don't see that you can make the 1.6 increasing to d1.8 statement, as the price is waayyy higher on the new machine than the old. There is no comparable machine to the 1.6 in the new range.

I still stand by my original statement. The new Dual 1.8 is much worse than the 'old' Dual 1.8. Surely this cannot be disputed when you look at the specs...That is all I have said!

[TiDual]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Can't agree I'm sorry.

I don't see that you can make the 1.6 increasing to d1.8 statement, as the price is waayyy higher on the new machine than the old. There is no comparable machine to the 1.6 in the new range.

I still stand by my original statement. The new Dual 1.8 is much worse than the 'old' Dual 1.8. Surely this cannot be disputed when you look at the specs...That is all I have said!

To use your own argument ... I don't see how you can compare the old d1.8 with the new d1.8. The price of the old d1.8 is waayyy higher than the new one. That gap is much greater than the price diff of the old 1.6 and new d1.8

[AppleCello]

Originally posted by 365:
They couldn't do that becuase they might become mainstream and that would be no good for the many Apple eliteists and Steve Jobs' ego.

Apple excel at software but just don't have the financial muscle to be a successful hardware company, they have to rely on too many companies who seem to constantly treat them with contempt.

Rely on too many companies?? Is that an actual reason that you give to state why apple cant be successful in hardware? My friend, Dell is far more reliant on other companies to turn out their products. At least Apple has a real R&D plan compared to Dell's which consists of a few engineers figuring out the most cost effective way to packing existing technologies.

And if Steve's ego was a question, dont you think he would like to beat Gates at the software game? think it through.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
I still stand by my original statement. The new Dual 1.8 is much worse than the 'old' Dual 1.8. Surely this cannot be disputed when you look at the specs...That is all I have said! [/B]

You are using a single computer metric- the processor speed- as the baseline for comparison, ignoring the overall specifications and price point. You might as well say the dual 2.5 G5 is worse than a Powermac 9500 because it has fewer card slots.

[Monstermind]

I don't give a sh_t. Anything has to be better than the sluggish dual-gig noise-hole G4 I was dumb enough to buy last year. I'm down for the dual-1.8 G5 for that reason alone.

[eddiecatflap]

..you have a point there

..i'm stuck on a 17" 800 imac

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by DaveNinja:

My upgrade is from a 350 MHz B&W G3 so it should be a big jump. I still use the G3 for Warcraft 3 (the only games I ever seem to play on the computer are the blizzard ones). Its probably the most 'intensive work' that I do. Maybe i'll do some video editing now I'll have some hard drive space.

Dude, you're gonna flip. A dual 1.8 is at least 20 times as fast as what you have now.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the new low end. They fixed the main flaw (slower RAM), so now it's a decent machine. Most people will never need more than 4 RAM slots -- 256 MB + 2GB is plenty for 99.9%, even professional users. As to PCI-X, I've never really used PCI cards, so the PCI-X slots in my dual 2GHz will likely never get used.

[Turias]

Originally posted by eddiecatflap:
..you have a point there

..i'm stuck on a 17" 800 imac

Not the "my computer is worse than your computer" contest, again!

BTW, yours is twice as fast as mine.

[365]

Originally posted by AppleCello:
Rely on too many companies?? Is that an actual reason that you give to state why apple cant be successful in hardware? My friend, Dell is far more reliant on other companies to turn out their products. At least Apple has a real R&D plan compared to Dell's which consists of a few engineers figuring out the most cost effective way to packing existing technologies.

The thing is 'my friend', Dell doesn't have to think about R&D because it has 90%+ of the industry sharing the burden, Dell also has over 30% market share and when you have that amount of buying power people sit up when you shout. Who do you think Mr ATI or Mr NVidia is more keen to please, Steve Jobs or Michael Dell? This goes some way to explaining why Apple spec'd equipment such as graphics cards are always a generation behind, they're well down the pecking order when it comes to supplier loyalty.

And if Steve's ego was a question, dont you think he would like to beat Gates at the software game? think it through.

He'd love to but having charisma isn't the same has having a great business mind. If he had a great business mind he wouldn't be happy to accept 2% market share with an OS that is a lifetime ahead of the competition. Steve Jobs is nothing more than a master at preaching to the converted.

[DeathMan]

Originally posted by 365:
He'd love to but having charisma isn't the same has having a great business mind. If he had a great business mind he wouldn't be happy to accept 2% market share with an OS that is a lifetime ahead of the competition. Steve Jobs is nothing more than a master at preaching to the converted.

This is true.

However, more than preaching to the converted, he is a visionary. Read some of the stories at Folklore.org. Steve was continually reminding them that they weren't just working on a computer. They were working on art. They were working on something that would let people do more, create more. Steve likes to make a buck like everyone else, but I think that his desire to see the Mac stay as pure as uncompromised as possible will keep Apple in the small marketshare numbers, but high in the "We have the best end to end content creation and delivery solutions (thanks, Schiller).

Steve doesn't want Apple to be Dell. Dell is Walmart.

[davidahn]

You're all correct, so stop arguing. Those who really want a high-powered, expandable machine for as little money as possible, steer clear of the new dual 1.8; IT'S NOT FOR YOU. Those who want as much computer for as little money as possible, feel free to jump on the new dual 1.8 since it's WAY better than the old single 1.6. Unless of course you can get the old dual 1.8 for the same price, in which case both groups should get the clearance dual 1.8's.

Everyone happy? Of course not.

David

[Targon]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
No PCI-X,
4 Gig RAM max,
256MB RAM as standard,
Reduced HD capacity from 160Gig to 80Gig.

It is basically a 1.6 Ghz G5 with another processor.

What a joke.

bah you're a Joke just like PCI-X is a joke. we can't even run out PCI audio cards anymore cos these machines wont accept 5v signaled cards. The genius Power Mac hardware designer decided to key the PCI slots so we can't use any of our SCSI cards either.

Oh an there are no PCI-X audio cards or narrow SCSI cards !!!

NOW THAT'S A JOKE !!!

VERY Disturbing !!!!!

[Leonard]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
I think the problem is that they just don't have the balls to sort things out and make the big decisions.

And why not have even a really basic a road map to avoid this whole **** storm every 6 months? is it too much to ask? is it?

Didn't they do that last summer when they promised the 3.0Ghz G5. Now all the analysts are saying they shouldn't have done that. In technology, you can present a roadmap, but unless it's vaague, it's gonna change from month to month because of the unexpected.

I get a kick out of all you whiners. What a crowd. Oh, it hasn't got PCI-Express. All the new graphics cards are going to be PCI-Express. Whine, whine. Get real. There are billion of PCs out there with AGP. ATI and Nvidia will be producing AGP cards for the next 3 years. If they don't they'll lose out on the AGP upgrade market. Which will be a big loss. Even the current Radeon X800 comes in AGP 8x and PCI-Express. Take a pill and buy a PowerMac now if you're in the market.

As for the Radeon 9800XT taking up the PCI slot next to the AGP slot. All new graphics cards are doing this and what I heard from a web news site editor is that the 9800XT's fan on the PC side gets loud when it revs up. Maybe Apple did something to quieten the Radeon 9800XT Mac version down like add a bigger heat sink. Let's wait and see before we complain. Besides, how many people that use a Radeon 9800XT will need 3 PCI-X slots. Gamers and graphics people won't. Maybe someone who gets a dual 2.0 with the Radeon 9800XT can take a picture of it so we can see if there are improvements on it for cooling and noise.

And what the heck is wrong with the Dual 1.8 low-end machine. Hell the old low-end was a single and only 1.6. The low-end got a decent upgrade. And it has PCI so those with alot of PCI cards can transfer them from their G4's to their G5's.

[Leonard]

Originally posted by Targon:
bah you're a Joke just like PCI-X is a joke. we can't even run out PCI audio cards anymore cos these machines wont accept 5v signaled cards. The genius Power Mac hardware designer decided to key the PCI slots so we can't use any of our SCSI cards either.

Oh an there are no PCI-X audio cards or narrow SCSI cards !!!

NOW THAT'S A JOKE !!!

VERY Disturbing !!!!!

But M-audio will apparently provide you with a G5 compatible PCI card when you trade in your old card... http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/18/maudio/

[no1allowed]

Originally posted by Arkham_c:
Dude, you're gonna flip. A dual 1.8 is at least 20 times as fast as what you have now.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the new low end. They fixed the main flaw (slower RAM), so now it's a decent machine. Most people will never need more than 4 RAM slots -- 256 MB + 2GB is plenty for 99.9%, even professional users. As to PCI-X, I've never really used PCI cards, so the PCI-X slots in my dual 2GHz will likely never get used.

Actually I put in an extra 5 port USB 2 PCI card ($18) in mine so I wouldn't have to use a hub. I did some tests and the NEC chipset on the PCI card is 23% faster for USB 2 than the on-board USB 2 ports on the G5. I'll probably get another one or even a combo card because of all the printers, scanners, pocket drives, PDAs, and flash thumb drives I seem to have acquired.

[booboo]

On the other hand . . .

Although I don't like the idea of buying lesser PCI technology, I probably won't need PCI-X . . .
. . . it's a small extra outlay to have 2 of 256MB sticks supplied BTO (128's are an insult) and if I get another 1GB elsewhere (much cheaper) 4 slots (initially with 1.5GB) should be OK for a good while . . .

Plus

� If the slow fireWire of the first gen G5 is fixed and

� if the analogue audio out noise and cpu issues are resolved

then this machine doesn't seem too bad for �1250 ex VAT . . .



P.S. Can anyone tell me which is the quietest graphics card option?

[Leonard]

Originally posted by booboo:
P.S. Can anyone tell me which is the quietest graphics card option?

I doubt anyone has a new PowerMac G5 with the new Radeon 9600XT or Radeon 9800XT yet. It's only been a couple of days since the announcement. Give it a week and someone will be able to answer this.

[samneric]

Originally posted by Leonard:
I doubt anyone has a new PowerMac G5 with the new Radeon 9600XT or Radeon 9800XT yet. It's only been a couple of days since the announcement. Give it a week and someone will be able to answer this.

I'm pretty sure the 9600XT has no fan, my roomate got one for his PC a few months back.

I actually ordered a dual 1.8 wednes.
No faster machines announced till at least january.... and my dual 800 is 3 years old almost.

If I had known the updates would be so mild I mighta custom ordered the 1.8 a fews months ago.... but I like the doubled ram in the 9600... and I'm gunna end up paying a bit less (sure i'll give ram expansion...but i think 2 GB will hold me for awhile...already got my crucial ram.... and I cant remember the last time i needed a pci slot...1999?...if they had a fast headless xMac).

My dual G4 is so noisy I had to put it in another room via a 10' Dr.Bott cable.... heh... maybe now I can have my computer on my desk again.

[JBracy]

Originally posted by freakboy2:
i think the thing that sucks the worst for me is that it comes with 256 megs of ram.. so you're basically forced to fork over 300? bucks to apple to get it up to 512, so you can fill it up to get to 1.5 gigs. So figure on adding 300$ to the purchase cost right off the bat.

Man what site are you looking at? The Apple Store will upgrade it to 512MB for $75 leaving 2 slots free for future upgrades.

[Jablabla]

It would be great if they sold the machines with no ram. Then I could goto ramjet and buy 512 megs for $109.

[yoyoman]

that is what apple should do. Give you a computer with no ram and no hd that you you have the option of choosing what you want. the new hitachi or toshiba hd that is 400 gig sata etc or different ram etc. Maybe even a graphics card you pick and choose.
Who really uses pci-x besides few. I know I don't. Now pci express I know I would use for graphics cards in the future. I think steve will suprise us at the wwdc with something interesting.

[ashiver]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Um, no. I am not comparing the old bottom line to the new bottom line. If you do that, yes there is obviously an increase in spec.

I am comparing the 2 Dual 1.8 models only.

Apple will obviously want people to compare the two and think WOW! The 'dual 1.8' is now cheaper and a great deal... When in reality when comparing the two machines it is not.

256MB on a 'Pro' machine? That is JOKE.

They had no need to drop PCI-X.

The machine is NOT as good.

Where is the problem is saying that? It i lame compared to the 1st generation Dual 1.8.

With a lower end ProwerMac like the new dual 1.8 and the previous 1.6 they are most likely trying to appeal to a home 'pro' user market. people who do lots of photoshop and simple video editing at home that want a step up from an iMac. The dual 1.8 is a great machine, no doubt about it. Just because it is not a machine that would interest you or meet your needs does not make it lame. You probably wouldn't care too much for the eMac or iMac, but they too are great machines and do in fact have their place.

[xCubex]

Edit: Do not make a post like this again xCubex. You have been warned.

[Paul Huang]

Apple is trying to use up the left-over logic board, that's all. When the logic boards are gone, this "new" 1.8 dual will be removed from the line-up.

33 MHz PCI is nearly ONE DECADE OLD. As PCI-X cards become more popular, this box will become not as enticing.

Why knowingly buy something that will make your computer's life shorter? Go for units with PCI-X slots. This is especially true when the price differential is minimal.

UCLA's selling the old 2.0 dual for $1,899. Forget about the 8X DVD-R. Just save the $400 (educational price difference between UCLA and regular edu price) and buy a 12X Sony external drive, then have a good feast with the remaining $180.

[klinux]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Can't agree I'm sorry.

I don't see that you can make the 1.6 increasing to d1.8 statement, as the price is waayyy higher on the new machine than the old. There is no comparable machine to the 1.6 in the new range.

I still stand by my original statement. The new Dual 1.8 is much worse than the 'old' Dual 1.8. Surely this cannot be disputed when you look at the specs...That is all I have said!

I, for one agree, with you in comparing the current with the new dual 1.8 and think it is a step back.

Of course, there are plenty of people on this board who would automatically say whatever new thing Apple come out with is good.

[klinux]

Originally posted by Paul Huang:
UCLA's selling the old 2.0 dual for $1,899.

Caltech is selling it for $2099! Can I pay you to buy one for me?

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by ashiver:
With a lower end ProwerMac like the new dual 1.8 and the previous 1.6 they are most likely trying to appeal to a home 'pro' user market. people who do lots of photoshop and simple video editing at home that want a step up from an iMac. The dual 1.8 is a great machine, no doubt about it. Just because it is not a machine that would interest you or meet your needs does not make it lame. You probably wouldn't care too much for the eMac or iMac, but they too are great machines and do in fact have their place.

Well, I am current Mk1 Dual 1.8 owner.

I agree that the new one is a cool machine. Just not as good as the original 1.8... that was the point.

The amount of people who saw 'dual 1.8' and price reduction before they realised the spec change is stupid...

Apple should NOT be taking steps back and continuing to use 'old' motherboards for over 12 months! They should be improving things over time not decreasing their spec and appeal!

I just don't see any valid reason why they had to reduce the specs so much on the current machine...

'Pro' market appeal with 256MB RAM and 5200fx?

It just seems to be very cynical marketing on Apple's behalf.

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Before we all drown in pessimism here, lets remember one thing; 2.5GHz means that Apple is again offering the fastest 64bit processor on the market. And the Power Mac G5 is still the finest piece of personal computing hardware on the market. I don't think that there is anything to be pessimistic about.

Apple has made a lot of progress with the Power Mac line in the past 18 months. Additionally, AMD and Intel are stalling on the clock speed ramp up as well, Intel more so. Apple is getting some crucial catch up time here. So what if IBM is having the exact same unforseen problems with the move to 90nm that everybody else is? 500MHz is nothing to sneeze at.

Though, I admit a price drop across the line would have been nice.

Finally someone says it. Intel has not upgraded for a year. The power mac is getting faster than anything else. Remember when intel released the 3.0 gigahertz must be what, 2 years almost and now just a 0.4 ghertz improvement.

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by Cadaver:
Either the new dual 1.8 should have been $1799, or they should release a single 1.8 at $1799. But to not have a sub-two grand tower is not right.

While I think the new machines are nice (dual 2.0's at the midline I think isn't too bad), they're too expensive. While the high-end can remain at $2999, the bottom end costs too much.

One can still hope for the (mythical) headless iMac...

Release a single 1.8? Thats crazy. The dual 1.8 was the most popular in terms of sale. Apple has made huge marketing blunders but seriously eliminate the most popular model.

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
Finally someone says it. Intel has not upgraded for a year. The power mac is getting faster than anything else. Remember when intel released the 3.0 gigahertz must be what, 2 years almost and now just a 0.4 ghertz improvement.

It looks like they finally have the 90n switch sorted though, unlike IBM, and then we will probably see some new chips... Although not the same mhz increases as before.

Everyone seems to have forgotten AMDs 64Fx chips. VERY speedy indeed...

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
Release a single 1.8? Thats crazy. The dual 1.8 was the most popular in terms of sale. Apple has made huge marketing blunders but seriously eliminate the most popular model.

I would have like to see a dual 2 ghz, dual 2.2 ghz and a dual 2.5.

Would have shown improvement rather than stagnation...

[Leonard]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
I would have like to see a dual 2 ghz, dual 2.2 ghz and a dual 2.5.

Would have shown improvement rather than stagnation...

I can't believe I'm gonna agree with you... but I would have to agree. I thought for sure that's what the lineup would be if the top-end was to be a dual 2.5.

[Cadaver]

Originally posted by macaddict0001:
Release a single 1.8? Thats crazy. The dual 1.8 was the most popular in terms of sale. Apple has made huge marketing blunders but seriously eliminate the most popular model.

Something needs to be done to fill the sub-$2000 void.
Maybe then a single 2.0GHz for $1799. I'd buy one for the office at that price.

[macaddict0001]

Originally posted by AppleCello:
Rely on too many companies?? Is that an actual reason that you give to state why apple cant be successful in hardware? My friend, Dell is far more reliant on other companies to turn out their products. At least Apple has a real R&D plan compared to Dell's which consists of a few engineers figuring out the most cost effective way to packing existing technologies.

And if Steve's ego was a question, dont you think he would like to beat Gates at the software game? think it through.

Yeah totally if steves ego was the reason then he would beat bill at it. they were always competing they even went to the same high school(I think). Bill even dropped out.

[Link]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
It looks like they finally have the 90n switch sorted though, unlike IBM, and then we will probably see some new chips... Although not the same mhz increases as before.

Everyone seems to have forgotten AMDs 64Fx chips. VERY speedy indeed...

The annoying part is that AMD is nicer, they update their chips, no big deal... no apple has to do all these ceremonies...

"The new g5 processor.. it's quite a jump for apple."
"NO 3ghz G5s anytime soon! You hear that? Don't even think about g5 powerbooks because we aren't making any now!"
"This magnificent piece of art will be shipping in August for all of those who order TODAY!"

**** like that. At this rate it's no wonder apple has 2% marketshare.. they spend more time blowing hot air than they do selling stuff.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Link:
The annoying part is that AMD is nicer, they update their chips, no big deal... no apple has to do all these ceremonies...

"The new g5 processor.. it's quite a jump for apple."
"NO 3ghz G5s anytime soon! You hear that? Don't even think about g5 powerbooks because we aren't making any now!"
"This magnificent piece of art will be shipping in August for all of those who order TODAY!"

**** like that. At this rate it's no wonder apple has 2% marketshare.. they spend more time blowing hot air than they do selling stuff.

I wonder who is blowing more hot air? You, or Apple? Because I'd be willing to bet that come keynote day, you'll be behind your computer fixed on the stream via QuickTime just like the rest of us. And you'll be on the board afterwards jabbering about what Steve said, did and showed at the keynote just like the rest of us.

[Link]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I wonder who is blowing more hot air? You, or Apple? Because I'd be willing to bet that come keynote day, you'll be behind your computer fixed on the stream via QuickTime just like the rest of us. And you'll be on the board afterwards jabbering about what Steve said, did and showed at the keynote just like the rest of us.

Uh huh... uh huh...

you're probably right

[Simon]

Originally posted by Cadaver:
Something needs to be done to fill the sub-$2000 void.

I'm wondering if Apple is cynical enough to chose this PowerMac line-up in order to increase iMac sales. If they introduce a new 1.6GHz G5 iMac for under $2000 this would be exactly the situation...

Of course it would be a ridiculous idea since their margin on the PowerMac is certainly larger than on the iMac. Even Schiller couldn't be that stupid...

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Simon:
Even Schiller couldn't be that stupid...

Oh how I wish we could be sure of this...

[Simon]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Oh how I wish we could be sure of this...

Yeah, we really can't be that sure.

[jcadam]

They should have kept the crippled-motherboard low-end PM a single processor. Make it as cheap as possible. It's as close as we'll get to a headless-iMac.

Not that I would buy it. I only buy dual machines now. My current, and first dual machine is my MDD 867DP. It may slow-down on some tasks (most notably, UnrealTournament 2004 ), but in general use it is the most responsive, kick-a** multitasker of a box I have ever used. My 2GHz Dell at work SUCKS compared to it.

[BurpetheadX]

And why not have even a really basic a road map to avoid this whole **** storm every 6 months? is it too much to ask? is it?

Agreed. One of Apple's main failures in the buisness world is that they have no roadmap. This turns away all other larger investors because they dont know what to expect.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Link:
The annoying part is that AMD is nicer, they update their chips, no big deal... no apple has to do all these ceremonies...

"The new g5 processor.. it's quite a jump for apple."
"NO 3ghz G5s anytime soon! You hear that? Don't even think about g5 powerbooks because we aren't making any now!"
"This magnificent piece of art will be shipping in August for all of those who order TODAY!"

**** like that. At this rate it's no wonder apple has 2% marketshare.. they spend more time blowing hot air than they do selling stuff.

Please do not make a mindless post like that again.

[Cadaver]

At least for edu customers, if you strip down a new DP 1.8 (delete modem and superdrive), you can get it under $1700. Not too shabby. Though I still would like to see a (non-iMac) machine for about $1400 edu price.

[Al G]

Here's what I would like to see (this assumes we are, in fact, stuck for now at 2.5GHz at the top end).

Dual 1.8GHz
512MB RAM
80GB hard drive
Radeon 9600Pro
$1799

Dual 2.1-2.2GHz
1GB RAM
160GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2199

Dual 2.5GHz
1GB RAM
200GB or 250GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2799

I don't think Apple should ship any machine with less than 512MB RAM--that is the minimum amount to run OS X well. Also it should be configured so that it's easy to upgrade to at least 1.5GB without having to pull existing chips.

We could also have a dual 1.6 at the low end if they knocked $100 or so off the price.

You will notice that there's no GeForce 5200 in my configurations. I really don't like that card.

One question I have is about the 130nm CPUs. Is the 130nm fab unable to produce slightly faster chips (2.1 or 2.2GHz) or is IBM simply unwilling to do so?

[The Placid Casual]

Originally posted by Al G:
Here's what I would like to see (this assumes we are, in fact, stuck for now at 2.5GHz at the top end).

Dual 1.8GHz
512MB RAM
80GB hard drive
Radeon 9600Pro
$1799

Dual 2.1-2.2GHz
1GB RAM
160GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2199

Dual 2.5GHz
1GB RAM
200GB or 250GB hard drive
Radeon 9600XT
$2799

I don't think Apple should ship any machine with less than 512MB RAM--that is the minimum amount to run OS X well. Also it should be configured so that it's easy to upgrade to at least 1.5GB without having to pull existing chips.

We could also have a dual 1.6 at the low end if they knocked $100 or so off the price.

You will notice that there's no GeForce 5200 in my configurations. I really don't like that card.

One question I have is about the 130nm CPUs. Is the 130nm fab unable to produce slightly faster chips (2.1 or 2.2GHz) or is IBM simply unwilling to do so?

I like it, and I am sure IBM could produce something at 2.2 ghz...

How about a dual 2.0, dual 2.2, and dual 2.5?