[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by liquidh2o:
you're assuming that all 200,000 powermacs that are sold in a quarter are available from Day 1 of the quarter.

Can you remember when Apple first came out with the powermac G5 and how limited the initial quantities were?

What makes you think the same situation isn't happening with the next revision?

You don't start ramping up a process and suddenly 300,000 cpu's appear. It takes time, and the time it takes is based on the capability of the plant as well as the % of the yield you're getting from the fab. process.

The yield can vary greatly and usually it improves as the production process is tweaked and improved.

I just don't think you're grasping the bigger/whole concept.

Errr... You originally argued that VT's order was holding things up, and I was saying that VT had very little to do with it. I said it was something else (and yes that something else could be ramping issues). Your original post:

So why the long wait for an update?

Answer: G5 xserves. Virginia Techs order of 1100 xserves is what apple normally sells in one quarter. I'm sure that put them behind in meeting demand right off the bat. And that's not to mention if any other institutions also decided to buy in.

Indeed, after I pointed out that the VT argument makes no sense, you now have changed your argument to something closer to mine.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
Get ready to eat a great big, steaming pile of crow come WWDC, Switched2Mac. You have no idea if there are going to be only "minor speedbumps" or not. You're just making that up because you've created mental blocks that prevent you from ever imagining Apple doing something right. And 3 GHz G5s at WWDC would definitely be Apple doing something right.

So you are then publicly stating this for all to read? You are saying that Apple will have 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMacs at WWDC?

I am not "making it up". I am merely making a prediction.

This prediction, unfortunately, becomes more true every day.

Sorry if some have a hard time believing it. If you disagree, then state your case here for all to read.

The best some can do is hurl insults and make lame comments. Deep down they suspect that I am right and they are taking out their frustration with Apple on me (PowerMacMan comes to mind).

I hope I am proven wrong! Because if I am wrong, I will be sitting in front of my Dual 3.0 G5, drowning my sorrows.

I agree. 3 GHz G5's at WWDC would definitely be Apple doing something right (to quote you). But to have to wait a full year for anything less is a huge mistake on Apple's part.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Stop it troll.

Enough already.

If this is the best you can do, then its time for you to move along.

You made some points early in the thread, which I truly appreciated.

However, as soon as everyone doesn't subscribe to your point of view, you descend into name calling.

Give it a rest.

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
So you are then publicly stating this for all to read? You are saying that Apple will have 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMacs at WWDC?

I am not "making it up". I am merely making a prediction.

This prediction, unfortunately, becomes more true every day.

Sorry if some have a hard time believing it. If you disagree, then state your case here for all to read.

The best some can do is hurl insults and make lame comments. Deep down they suspect that I am right and they are taking out their frustration with Apple on me (PowerMacMan comes to mind).

I hope I am proven wrong! Because if I am wrong, I will be sitting in front of my Dual 3.0 G5, drowning my sorrows.

I agree. 3 GHz G5's at WWDC would definitely be Apple doing something right (to quote you). But to have to wait a full year for anything less is a huge mistake on Apple's part.

The prediction can't be "more true every day." Perhaps "more true every week" since Apple almost always updates on a Tuesday, but as far as we know, the PowerMac is just as likely to get a lame 2.4 GHz speed bump as it is to get huge bump to 3.0 GHz. I did not say that we WILL see a 3.0 GHz PowerMac at WWDC. I don't know how you got that impression, but what I said was that if Apple's going to wait until WWDC, they should come out with a 3.0 GHz PowerMac.

You know what, I bet if Apple released new 3.0 GHz G5s on Tuesday, your reaction would be, "Took them long enough!" But you know what? They announced the PowerMacs only about nine months ago, which is definitely less than a year. But you're so happy with throwing your little tantrums about how Apple continues to not update their PowerMacs that you wouldn't notice if they beat their schedule by three months.

I'd be plenty interested in a discussion that involves predictions, articles, rumors, and other stuff to look at the possibility of a 3 GHz G5 at WWDC as well as other possibilities. Unfortunately, all your posts consist of "I just know Apple is going to fail!" and "I hope someone proves me wrong!" There's not much substance there, just whining. How can anyone possibly argue with you or prove you wrong? I guess we'll just have to see what happens.

[fizzlemynizzle]

Since when is a speed bump to 2.4ghz and going from a 130nm to a 90nm processor "lame"? you guys are such a bunch of old ladies..

[Eug Wanker]

Yeah, a 2.4-2.5 GHz update tomorrow would not be mind-blowing, but would be reasonable and far from lame.

A 2.5 GHz update would put the machines at somewhere in the ballpark speed range of the top dual 3.2 GHz Xeons or dual 2.2 GHz Opterons... for a lot less money. Nothing wrong with that.

If you don't care about PC comparisons, just Mac ones... A 2.5 GHz G5 dual would be 25% faster than the fastest current Mac on the planet. Not too shabby.

[eddiecatflap]

..yeah , go back a few years , the g4 'speed bumps' , 50 mhz every six months !

..now we're maybe talkin' 500 mhz+ in the same period !!!

..maybe even a gigahertz in a year !

WOOHOO!!

[eddiecatflap]

..the ONLY reason i haven't gone out and bought a 1.8dp is that my imac is so darn reliable and nippy enuff

..wish it was more pc like - ie : c-r-a-p , then i'd have an excuse

[Luca Rescigno]

Originally posted by fizzlemynizzle:
Since when is a speed bump to 2.4ghz and going from a 130nm to a 90nm processor "lame"? you guys are such a bunch of old ladies..

It's not lame at all. At least, it wouldn't be, if it came out soon.

A 2.0 GHz to 2.4 GHz over the span of one year would mean only a 20% increase. Compare that to these:

Early 1999: 400 MHz
Early 2000: 500 MHz
Increase: 20%
Early 2001: 733 MHz
Increase: 47%
Early 2002: 1.0 GHz
Increase: 36%
Early 2003: 1.42 GHz
Increase: 42%

[liquidh2o]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Errr... You originally argued that VT's order was holding things up, and I was saying that VT had very little to do with it. I said it was something else (and yes that something else could be ramping issues). Your original post:

So why the long wait for an update?

Answer: G5 xserves. Virginia Techs order of 1100 xserves is what apple normally sells in one quarter. I'm sure that put them behind in meeting demand right off the bat. And that's not to mention if any other institutions also decided to buy in.

Indeed, after I pointed out that the VT argument makes no sense, you now have changed your argument to something closer to mine.

no, i was arguing that the increased demand for G5 xserves(due in part to Vtech) put a strain on what apple could crank out for an incremental update for the Powermac G5's. Which is why there still isn't an update.

Yet, if you went more in depth then you would realize why an order from someone such as VTech that early on in the production cycle can mess with Apples' plans.

Why?

the initial fab. process, if anything like Intel or AMD would yield 25%-35% (i read once where intel was only getting an initial yield of 17% at one time, ouch).

That means for every 100 chips, only 25 can be used at that clock speed. So an order for 2200 chips, means IBM would have to crank out
8800 cpu's. And that's just one order.

Now if apple was only expecting to sell 100 xserves right off the bat how do you think that affects the production process?

Now one of two potential problems can arise.

1.) if they're using the same plant to fab. processors for the powermac and the xserve, then all of a sudden you have a delay to catch up with demand for the xserve. Then you have to switch over production to the powermac, and then ramp up, and then meet Apple's zero barrier for a green light to start selling them.

Chances are that that could've happened by now and it's just too close to WWDC to have an incremental update if there still is a plan to go 3.0ghz at WWDC.

or maybe they're just trying to get a yield of 3.0ghz cpu's off the current production process, which would be next to impossible, but still it could be done, it'd just take forever.

2.) They're using the same processors for the xserve and powermac. No change in the fab. process, but the initial yields are low. Had apple only anticipated 100 xserves to be sold then all of a sudden get stuck with an order of 1100, that can be a BIG burden to handle right off the bat. Your theory of it only taking 1 or 2 days to produce that many cpu's has no merit or proof behind it, especially this early on in a production cycle for a new cpu.

My argument hasn't changed. I think you're just looking to argue for arguments sake. so enough with that.

[Eug Wanker]

Sorry, it just doesn't make sense. I suspect the ENTIRE Xserve sales in a quarter is maybe 3% (or less) of that of the G5 Power Mac. The impact of VT's order (and like orders) is small-fry compared to Power Mac sales.

Let's say for the benefit the doubt that Xserve sales increased to 5% of a normal quarter's sales. If CPU supplies from that 5% is enough to prevent Power Mac sales for more than a few days, then there is something seriously wrong with the supply of the CPUs. In other words, there wouldn't be enough of them to go around, regardless if VT had ordered any or not.

You are arguing two different points. One point I agree is possible (although you didn't argue that initially), and one point which doesn't agree with your other point.

That means for every 100 chips, only 25 can be used at that clock speed. So an order for 2200 chips, means IBM would have to crank out 8800 cpu's. And that's just one order.

If one were to assume that last year IBM had 100% yield for PPC 970 (and they most certainly did not have 100% yield), then 8800 CPUs would take just a couple of days. However, given that yield was not 100%, IBM would be making well over 10000 G5 CPUs (including defective ones) every 3 days, just for Apple. And if you halved that efficiency, we're talking a week.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Enough already.

If this is the best you can do, then its time for you to move along.

You made some points early in the thread, which I truly appreciated.

However, as soon as everyone doesn't subscribe to your point of view, you descend into name calling.

Give it a rest.

Oh no, this has nothing to do with anybody having a different viewpoint. Since post 1 I have said that a WWDC release would be fine, and I also agree that it is looking more and more likely.

But the negative tone in all of your recent posts has become G5 bashing. You are the one who is refusing to listen to other people's viewpoints and refusing to listen to facts.

I stated earlier that you should probably leave it up to the people who follow the Mac processor scene to judge. Yet you, a person who did not know that IBM and Apple have been working together constantly since 1991, have taken it upon yourself to make some of the most annoying anti-G5 posts I have seen in quite a while.

I will not simply 'agree to disagree' as long as you continue with these antics. If you want to somehow convince yourself that the G5 is far behind schedule and that Apple and IBM will not deliver on promises, that is fine. But keep it to yourself until you know it as a fact rather than preaching it as fact in your posts with one liners like "92 more days until WWDC and minor speedbumped PowerMacs.". Because like I said, you don't know ****. But I am operating on promises from Apple, IBM's processor road maps, and IBM's reputation as having always more-than-delivered with their PowerPC's for the past decade. You are operating on whatever you can makeup, which conveniently only seems to be things that are negative.

If you cant refrain then don't create speculation threads.

[osxisfun]

Appleinsider is now reporting that we will see a new rev. And that the current promo should not be taken as a sign that there will be no new macs before WWDC...

[Turias]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
Appleinsider is now reporting that we will see a new rev. And that the current promo should not be taken as a sign that there will be no new macs before WWDC...

Here's a link for the lazy

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
Appleinsider is now reporting that we will see a new rev. And that the current promo should not be taken as a sign that there will be no new macs before WWDC...

"If Apple indeed releases a new aluminum-wrapped 23-inch HD Cinema display, it will most definitely be identified by a new model number, sources said, and hence will not apply to the current promotion. Additionally, sources noted the possibility that 2nd generation Power Mac G5 models may sport updated, and possibly ECC RAM, which would disqualify them from the extended RAM promotion."

I'd be very surprised if the new Power Macs ship with stock ECC RAM. I'd be surprised too if they used DDR2.

I do agree though that the Cinema Display promo doesn't mean much in terms of G5 updates. If anything, they'd mean more with regards to display updates.

[liquidh2o]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Sorry, it just doesn't make sense. I suspect the ENTIRE Xserve sales in a quarter is maybe 3% (or less) of that of the G5 Power Mac. The impact of VT's order (and like orders) is small-fry compared to Power Mac sales.

Let's say for the benefit the doubt that Xserve sales increased to 5% of a normal quarter's sales. If CPU supplies from that 5% is enough to prevent Power Mac sales for more than a few days, then there is something seriously wrong with the supply of the CPUs. In other words, there wouldn't be enough of them to go around, regardless if VT had ordered any or not.

You are arguing two different points. One point I agree is possible (although you didn't argue that initially), and one point which doesn't agree with your other point.

If one were to assume that last year IBM had 100% yield for PPC 970 (and they most certainly did not have 100% yield), then 8800 CPUs would take just a couple of days. However, given that yield was not 100%, IBM would be making well over 10000 G5 CPUs (including defective ones) every 3 days, just for Apple. And if you halved that efficiency, we're talking a week.

Can you show me #'s on how many processors/wafers IBM kicks out for apple in a day? And can you show me how long it takes to start up a production process again after it's already been halted, or how long it takes to switch from fabbing one chip to another? It'd be useful information.

And also... Apple does not initially produce a new revision of computers based on expectations for the quarter. Apple produces X # of computers for initial release and gauges future demand based on pre-orders and how the initial batch sells.

It wouldn't be hard to think that before they initially announced the G5 xserve that there were expectations on how many they'd sell and they had an initial # in mind. If it was anything compared to previous xserve sales, then the VTech order alone would've met their quota for the whole quarter.

So ask yourself what if the production of initial cpu's for the xserve had already been completed? What does apple do then? I think that brings us to the present.

And i still wish i had the white paper on the initial distribution of G5 powermacs' amongst the apple retail stores. I can guarantee you it didn't top 5000.

so yes, 1100 can have a signifigant impact early on in a production cycle/new revision.

[Eug Wanker]

If it was anything compared to previous xserve sales, then the VTech order alone would've met their quota for the whole quarter.

The VT order was not at all unexpected. They've likely known since the beginning (ie. mid-2003) that VT would be getting the Xserves. (Way back in October, when asked about the lack of ECC - which is a big no-no in a big cluster - Dr. V said that they'd be moving to ECC systems in the future. Little did we know that it would be G5 Xserves so soon.)

And also... Apple does not initially produce a new revision of computers based on expectations for the quarter.

Sorry, but that doesn't make much sense either. I hope you're not trying to tell me that Apple doesn't try to predict potential sales of new products.

And i still wish i had the white paper on the initial distribution of G5 powermacs' amongst the apple retail stores. I can guarantee you it didn't top 5000.

And that matters because...? Remember, they dual G5 Power Macs weren't ubiquitous in Apple stores for several months after the announcement. They only became ubiquitous when the G5 Power Macs were shipping in volume.

So ask yourself what if the production of initial cpu's for the xserve had already been completed? What does apple do then? I think that brings us to the present.

Of course a chunk of the initial CPUs for the initial Xserves were already available to Apple. And if IBM couldn't only keep up with ongoing Xserve sales, then regardless if more VT-like institutions ordered or not, there's no way they could introduce the Power Mac G5 update, because the volume required is higher by a factor of something like 30X or more. Even a doubling of Xserve sales would have only a minor impact in terms of Power Mac sales, at the point when Apple has decided that IBM can keep up with volume Power Mac G5 production.

[liquidh2o]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The VT order was not at all unexpected. They've likely known since the beginning (ie. mid-2003) that VT would be getting the Xserves. (Way back in October, when asked about the lack of ECC - which is a big no-no in a big cluster - Dr. V said that they'd be moving to ECC systems in the future. Little did we know that it would be G5 Xserves so soon.)

I don't think apple realized VTech would be so willing to cough up more $$$ to switch over to the xserves so soon. I'm sure they thought VTech would switch sometime down the road, but VTech was very adament about getting the xserves once they were announced

Sorry, but that doesn't make much sense either. I hope you're not trying to tell me that Apple doesn't try to predict potential sales of new products.

the brains up at apple pre-determine a safe # of initial units to sell/have available for the announcement(if they can meet that deadline).

They then see how they sell and take initial pre-orders. They start to funnel down the pre-orders as well as start on re-stocking resellers(including apple retail), based on estimates of how they think they're going to sell, week over week.

Apple is a very cautious company in respect to selling computers. They don't have the luxury of producing excess computers and then just selling them off at a hefty loss when it comes time for a new revision. This is mostly due to the fact that they don't sell a large enough quantity of computers to be able to recoup any sales they make at a loss. This is also part of the reason why you see a "premium" price on apple products.

And that matters because...? Remember, they dual G5 Power Macs weren't ubiquitous in Apple stores for several months after the announcement. They only became ubiquitous when the G5 Power Macs were shipping in volume.

I think you just answered your own question on how hard it can be to initially start producing cpu's in quantity, and the 5000 # was to reflect that same sentiment.

Of course a chunk of the initial CPUs for the initial Xserves were already available to Apple. And if IBM couldn't only keep up with ongoing Xserve sales, then regardless if more VT-like institutions ordered or not, there's no way they could introduce the Power Mac G5 update, because the volume required is higher by a factor of something like 30X or more. Even a doubling of Xserve sales would have only a minor impact in terms of Power Mac sales, at the point when Apple has decided that IBM can keep up with volume Power Mac G5 production.

Again, you're thinking quarter to quarter. And again, initial production of cpu's is nowhere near that as to when they're actually able to be produced in volume.

Repeat after me: Apple/IBM does not produce 200,000 computers/cpu's initially. Apple/IBM tries to produce enough computer/cpu's based on their own initial thoughts. They do not start pumping out in volume until they can estimate how sales may turn out week over week based on initial sales and on the # of pre-orders. They do this so they're not left w/ excess inventory, they do this to save money.

[Eug Wanker]

Again, you're thinking quarter to quarter. And again, initial production of cpu's is nowhere near that as to when they're actually able to be produced in volume.

Repeat after me: Apple/IBM does not produce 200,000 computers/cpu's initially. Apple/IBM tries to produce enough computer/cpu's based on their own initial thoughts. They do not start pumping out in volume until they can estimate how sales may turn out week over week based on initial sales and on the # of pre-orders. They do this so they're not left w/ excess inventory, they do this to save money.

I guess I should point out that Fred Anderson has already said that Apple expects to sell 200000+ Power Macs per quarter in 2004.

The new Power Macs in essence are not really new products. The chip is yes, but the machine is basically the same technology as before.

Thus, if the dual G5 2.5 is released, it must ship in volume, and thus Apple needs significant volume production of 970FX chips. No, Apple does not need 300000 CPU off the bat, but does need way more than 2200 processors.

[liquidh2o]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
I guess I should point out that Fred Anderson has already said that Apple expects to sell 200000+ Power Macs per quarter in 2004.

The new Power Macs in essence are not really new products. The chip is yes, but the machine is basically the same technology as before.

Thus, if the dual G5 2.5 is released, it must ship in volume, and thus Apple needs significant volume production of 970FX chips. No, Apple does not need 300000 CPU off the bat, but does need way more than 2200 processors.

you proved my point yet again. And this goes right back to the 5000 number.

Yes, apple needs to ramp up production of 970FX chips, just like they needed to ramp up production of the original PPC970 processor when the powermac G5's came out. But when did actual volume production begin? Exactly. It took months.

It'll be just like every other revision, there's a small quantity available right off the bat, but more will eventually come down the pipeline.

Might also want to keep in mind that the bus speed of the new powermacs will change (for anything different than the original lineup) on the motherboard.

A smaller die may also mean a smaller cpu, in which case a smaller socket on the motherboard.

Apple also takes a hit on replacing PSUs on the powermac. Usually when they replace the PSU, they replace the whole case because of how the PSU fits into it. I would guess within some of the upcoming revisions that they address this issue to either re-locate the PSU or make it more accessible.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Oh no, this has nothing to do with anybody having a different viewpoint. Since post 1 I have said that a WWDC release would be fine, and I also agree that it is looking more and more likely.

Yes, it does. My viewpoint differs from yours and that is what this has been about since you started the derogatory comments.

You have made this personal.

Relax. Disagree. Debate. Discuss.

This is a public forum, is it not?

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
But the negative tone in all of your recent posts has become G5 bashing. You are the one who is refusing to listen to other people's viewpoints and refusing to listen to facts.

Negative tone? So that is not allowed here either? Wow. I bet you could find lots of severely negative threads, as compared to this one, in the Macnn forums.

I do not consider this a negative thread. And criticism can be constructive.

G5 bashing? Rather odd, considering that I will be buying the top G5 model the moment it is released.

And because I don't agree with your opinion, does not mean that I don't listen to other peoples opinions. I respect your opinion. In fact, I look forward to reading it in this thread everyday. But lately you seem only to be able to resort to bashing and name calling.

Read the thread again and refresh the poll. An increasing number of people are agreeing with me, at least in part. But, even by my own admission, that does not make my opinion right either. And no one has to agree with me! That is the wonderful thing about public debate in forums. You meet and discuss things with people that may NEVER agree with you. But you learn new things that way.

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I stated earlier that you should probably leave it up to the people who follow the Mac processor scene to judge.

Yes, I got your little insult the first time. Again, you fallback to this tactic again and again. It is not necessary and is getting rather old.

I am a Mac User just like you. Yet, you seem to think that just because I am a Switcher, that you somehow have "special" Mac privilege that I could not possibly ever have.

I thought Switchers would be welcomed into the group rather than be treated as second-class Mac users.

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Yet you, a person who did not know that IBM and Apple have been working together constantly since 1991, have taken it upon yourself to make some of the most annoying anti-G5 posts I have seen in quite a while.

I never said that IBM didn't make the G3. I merely stated that business relationships do not go on forever and must be reforged, and this takes time. Do you really think that the G3 development and production team stayed all ramped up working hand-in-hand with Apple to make the G5 the whole time that Motorola made the G4 for Apple? You don't think that engineers and managers and production staff moved on, left the company, got downsized, got outsourced, got promoted or changed positions? My whole point was that the names, the faces and the processes changed during that time period. When IBM finished the G5 and began the production cycle, I am sure there were issues and bumps in the production process that slowed the cycle. I believe that we are seeing that right now.

Annoying? Again, because I differ in opinion with you, I am annoying? Once you leave college and join the business world, you will be forced to work with others whose opinions differ dramatically from yours. It is part and parcel of functioning in the business world.

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
I will not simply 'agree to disagree' as long as you continue with these antics. If you want to somehow convince yourself that the G5 is far behind schedule and that Apple and IBM will not deliver on promises, that is fine. But keep it to yourself until you know it as a fact rather than preaching it as fact in your posts with one liners like "92 more days until WWDC and minor speedbumped PowerMacs.". Because like I said, you don't know ****. But I am operating on promises from Apple, IBM's processor road maps, and IBM's reputation as having always more-than-delivered with their PowerPC's for the past decade. You are operating on whatever you can makeup, which conveniently only seems to be things that are negative.

Excellent. Join back in the discussion. But argue your point without resorting to insults and foul language.

As far as me not knowing "****", you must be kidding! I am LAUGHING at that comment. Truly laughing.

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
If you cant refrain then don't create speculation threads.

Really? So speculation threads are not allowed here?

I don't remember seeing that in the FAQ. I would imagine that the moderator of this forum would have already called a "Speculation Thread Foul", fined me $20 and sent me to the penalty box already. But he has not.

In fact, forums are generally where people go to have discussions. This is one of the more popular and top read threads in this forum at the moment. Ever wonder why?

And why are you so afraid of speculation? Here is something that is NOT speculation for you:

There are no new PowerMacs. Fact. All your roadmaps and G3 pontificating cannot escape that undeniable fact.

And the question is .... why? Why are there no new PowerMacs. Lots of good discussion in this thread as to why this is. Some say the VT cluster, some give other reasons. I postulated that the demand to fill Xserver G5 orders took CPU's away from consumer machines. This alone may have killed the interim speedbump and left Apple thinking about WWDC and the big 3.0 G5.

Some say that Apple is holding back for the big 3.0 G5 delivery at WWDC. Perhaps. Recent events seem to indicate this. But I have said from the beginning that merely announcing a product and delivery are two different things. I doubt you will be able to buy a Dual 3.0 G5 on the same date as WWDC.

When I look back through this thread, I see lots of people posting their opinions. Not everyone agrees with me, of course. But that is what the forums are all about. How boring would it be if everyone in the forum agreed with each other?

Now, in fairness, I will grant you this. The "92 days until...." was not necessary, in hindsight. Going forward I will refrain from such postings.

I am merely frustrated by the fact that I want my Dual 3.0 G5 and I want it now.

I am sure many others feel that way too.

PowerMacMan, perhaps you would be willing to share these with me:

1. The Steve Jobs quote concerning the 3 ghz G5 (the Apple Promise, as you call it)
2. The IBM Processor Roadmaps.

URL's would be great, if possible. I will begin looking for these now, but it seems you have these readily available. So perhaps you could save me the time.

They would go a long way towards persuading me to change my opinion.

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
Yes, it does. My viewpoint differs from yours and that is what this has been about since you started the derogatory comments.

You have made this personal.

Relax. Disagree. Debate. Discuss.

This is a public forum, is it not?

I have not yet gotten derogatory.

Negative tone? So that is not allowed here either? Wow. I bet you could find lots of severely negative threads, as compared to this one, in the Macnn forums.

I do not consider this a negative thread. And criticism can be constructive.

G5 bashing? Rather odd, considering that I will be buying the top G5 model the moment it is released.

And because I don't agree with your opinion, does not mean that I don't listen to other peoples opinions. I respect your opinion. In fact, I look forward to reading it in this thread everyday. But lately you seem only to be able to resort to bashing and name calling.

Read the thread again and refresh the poll. An increasing number of people are agreeing with me, at least in part. But, even by my own admission, that does not make my opinion right either. And no one has to agree with me! That is the wonderful thing about public debate in forums. You meet and discuss things with people that may NEVER agree with you. But you learn new things that way.

Negative tone... Perhaps the wrong word to describe your posts. Allow me to come up with a different description: Unusually pessimistic. Emphasis on 'unusually'. The level of pessimism in your posts alone makes me question your reasons for creating this thread.

If you want a G5, act like it. The G5 has been a godsend for us, whether or not machines with the chip in it are being updated as often as we would like. The fact is that the G5 has made Apple's hardware viable again, not only in the eyes of Macs users but even the eyes of even the most die hard PC users.

People like you ruin it for everyone by only pointing out the negatives. Okay, so we haven't seen an update yet, so what? The fact of the matter is that the G5 is still at the top of it's class nearly 7 months after release, and that it is still worth every penny.

Rather than pointing out that the second revision is short in coming, why don't you show some gratitude for the fact that G5 development is speeding along quite well, certainly better than Athlon64 and Pentium 4 development are. That in and of itself is enough of a reason to give Apple and IBM time... and credit.

And again... I have never totally disagreed with you. As I said above, since post one I have said that a WWDC release would be fine. My disagreement, as I also said, is with the unusual level of pessimism in your posts.

Yes, I got your little insult the first time. Again, you fallback to this tactic again and again. It is not necessary and is getting rather old.

I am a Mac User just like you. Yet, you seem to think that just because I am a Switcher, that you somehow have "special" Mac privilege that I could not possibly ever have.

I thought Switchers would be welcomed into the group rather than be treated as second-class Mac users.

I wouldn't consider it an insult, nor was it a tactic, it was a suggestion.

Switchers are welcomed. I love switchers, I'm a switcher. Many of my friends and coworkers are switchers. Everybody loves a switcher.

Nobody loves a switcher who shows nothing but an unjustified pessemistic outlook on Apple's future at a time that the Mac community and Apple have been waiting for years for.

[Lateralus]

I never said that IBM didn't make the G3. I merely stated that business relationships do not go on forever and must be reforged, and this takes time. Do you really think that the G3 development and production team stayed all ramped up working hand-in-hand with Apple to make the G5 the whole time that Motorola made the G4 for Apple? You don't think that engineers and managers and production staff moved on, left the company, got downsized, got outsourced, got promoted or changed positions? My whole point was that the names, the faces and the processes changed during that time period. When IBM finished the G5 and began the production cycle, I am sure there were issues and bumps in the production process that slowed the cycle. I believe that we are seeing that right now.

This has nothing to do with the G3 development team. It has to do with Apple and IBM having worked hand-in-hand since 1991. From the sound of it, it still doesn't seem like you understand that.

Saying that the slow release of a Rev2 G5 has something to do with a stagnant business relationship between IBM and Apple would be like blaming the slow release of a new Dell Pentium 4 desktop on a stagnant relationship between Dell and Intel. It is simply ludicrous.

Also, I don't think you understand exactly how much the PowerPC 750 series and derivatives, as well as many other PowerPC families/chips from IBM, are used by other companies. Production has never slowed down, it has arguably ramped up in the past few years.

Annoying? Again, because I differ in opinion with you, I am annoying? Once you leave college and join the business world, you will be forced to work with others whose opinions differ dramatically from yours. It is part and parcel of functioning in the business world.

As I said above... this has nothing to do with you disagreeing with me. I run into people who disagree with me all day. You in particular seem to have an agenda.

Excellent. Join back in the discussion. But argue your point without resorting to insults and foul language.

As far as me not knowing "****", you must be kidding! I am LAUGHING at that comment. Truly laughing.

Foul langauge... I knew the moment that I wrote the word **** in my post you were going to be on it like a chicken on an egg. Because people like you don't like curse words. You cant stand words like ****, and ****, and ****... words that have not been tabu in a long time. If the word **** offends you that much, you must have dropped down from heaven or something recently because I can think of very few people who would care about somebody saying ****.

Really? So speculation threads are not allowed here?

I don't remember seeing that in the FAQ. I would imagine that the moderator of this forum would have already called a "Speculation Thread Foul", fined me $20 and sent me to the penalty box already. But he has not.

In fact, forums are generally where people go to have discussions. This is one of the more popular and top read threads in this forum at the moment. Ever wonder why?

Oh, no, no, no, no, no... Everybody loves 'um sum good speculation. But this is not about speculation, it is about pessimism.

And why are you so afraid of speculation? Here is something that is NOT speculation for you:

There are no new PowerMacs. Fact. All your roadmaps and G3 pontificating cannot escape that undeniable fact.

Funny. You say my G3 'pontificating' is irrelevant, but you think that the fact that some IBM PowerPC division boss got fired for banging his secretary or god knows what is? Haha... Gimme a break.

And the question is .... why? Why are there no new PowerMacs. Lots of good discussion in this thread as to why this is. Some say the VT cluster, some give other reasons. I postulated that the demand to fill Xserver G5 orders took CPU's away from consumer machines. This alone may have killed the interim speedbump and left Apple thinking about WWDC and the big 3.0 G5.

Some say that Apple is holding back for the big 3.0 G5 delivery at WWDC. Perhaps. Recent events seem to indicate this. But I have said from the beginning that merely announcing a product and delivery are two different things. I doubt you will be able to buy a Dual 3.0 G5 on the same date as WWDC.

When I look back through this thread, I see lots of people posting their opinions. Not everyone agrees with me, of course. But that is what the forums are all about. How boring would it be if everyone in the forum agreed with each other?

Yes, there are no new G5s out yet. But as I said earlier... so what? You want a G5, that is absolutely fantastic. I'm happy that you and so many other people are able to afford one. But rather than spew pessimism, why don't you just wait patiently like everybody else and trust that right now, your world-ending-important-Rev2-G5-machine is having it's design tweaked and it's processor speed clocked upwards

Now, in fairness, I will grant you this. The "92 days until...." was not necessary, in hindsight. Going forward I will refrain from such postings.

Thank you.

That is the only reason I bothered re-entering the thread.

I am merely frustrated by the fact that I want my Dual 3.0 G5 and I want it now.

I am sure many others feel that way too.

I feel the same way you do! We all do!

I want nothing more than to see Apple pull ahead of Intel and AMD and have machines that are undeniably the fastest available, as it was in the 604ev days. But I'm not gonna sit here and predict doom because the first update to the first machine using a new-generation chip is a week or two late.

Apple is not incompetent. IBM is not incompetent. The G5 has legs. Trust in those facts and don't automatically assume otherwise because you have a wad of cash burning a hole in your pocket.

PowerMacMan, perhaps you would be willing to share these with me:

1. The Steve Jobs quote concerning the 3 ghz G5 (the Apple Promise, as you call it)
2. The IBM Processor Roadmaps.

URL's would be great, if possible. I will begin looking for these now, but it seems you have these readily available. So perhaps you could save me the time.

They would go a long way towards persuading me to change my opinion.

1) He said it during the WWDC Keynote. I have the keynote on my hard drive, but don't expect me to upload it to you because it is nearly 500MBs.

2) I've seen the roadmap, but I don't remember the URL. Eug Wanker is the man to go to for roapmaps, I'm fairly positive he has created a new file organization system for collecting and categorizing things like processor roapmaps. (And I mean that with the highest level of geek respect possible Eug. )

[Switched2Mac]

PowerMacMan,

Foul language doesn't bother me either, in PERSON, face to face.

I spent years in the military with a peacetime tour in Korea and combat in the 1st Gulf War. I have heard more foul language than you will ever hear! So spare me the tough guy act.

However, I have the decency to maintain proper discipline while debating with someone in a public forum.

I also worked for IBM for many years. So I am well aware of internal issues (and politics) that arise during such processes. I am speaking from experience. IBM Micro Electronics used to make clone motherboards for certain suppliers back in the early 90's. Most people never even knew that. So yes, I am aware of the things they do. I have walked the production lines and seen them myself.

So here, let me help you with some facts:

Official IBM PowerPC Website

IBM PowerPC processor roadmap

No mention of anything past 2.0 in the roadmaps! Odd. Roadmaps indicate the companies best estimate of future products based on customer demands and current technology. Certainly you should see some projections going forward past the 2.0 gHz mark.

However, this proves that the Official IBM Roadmap does NOT backup your claims.

Sad fact is, it doesn't claim anything that we don't already know.

Apple Xserver G5 Official Announcement

Seems the Xservers go out the door with only single and dual 2.0 G5's. Not the 2.2 and 2.4 and 2.5 and such that are "supposedly" being churned out by IBM for weeks. Why?

As far as Apple's promises .... I can find no mention of Steve Jobs much praised promise of 3.0 gHZ G5 PowerMacs anywhere on the Apple website. Removed, no doubt.

Thankfully, the press has recorded those words for posterity.

Steve Job's 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 Promise (link1)

Steve Job's 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 Promise (link2)

He said by next summer. That being this approaching summer, of course. He probably should have said that by 2004 year end, they would have a Dual 3.0 G5 available. That sounds much more reasonable. Speed bump at WWDC and then the 3.0 at New Years. That seems more easily achieved.

Still, I don't like to wait. But who does.

And if my frustration is mistaken for pessimism, so be it. I will NEVER be one of the rah-rah Team Mac cheerleader types. Blinders on, ahead full speed. I will always point out problems and issues when I see them, as I see them.

For the record, I do not regret switching for even a moment. The sweet GUI, Microsoft Office, the UNIX command-line and the aesthetic good looks of recent Apple products are simply INCREDIBLE. I have converted a half dozen people over to the Mac since I switched. I especially look forward to the new metal look of the displays, or so someone "speculated" elsewhere in the forums.

But as you indicated, we both want the same thing in the end. I am just more impatient than you are in this regard.

Now some forum members mentioned that Apple likes to announce things on tuesdays. I confess that I have no idea what they are talking about. But March 30th, tuesday, is tomorrow. Let's see what the morning brings. And if it brings nothing, then it is pretty much a wait and see up until WWDC. I doubt Apple would make an announcement at some of those niche events before the WWDC. After all, the WWDC is the big one in the Apple World.

[eddiecatflap]

http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/products/...pc_roadmap.pdf

..yeah , but that says in 2003

..it's 04 now

[Eug Wanker]

No mention of anything past 2.0 in the roadmaps! Odd. Roadmaps indicate the companies best estimate of future products based on customer demands and current technology. Certainly you should see some projections going forward past the 2.0 gHz mark.

However, this proves that the Official IBM Roadmap does NOT backup your claims.

You posted a roadmap that ends last year. Apple is already shipping G5 Xserves using 970FX chips, and those chips aren't even on that roadmap you linked. ie. That roadmap is simply out of date.

The 970FX is referenced in the IBM PowerPC Quick Reference Guide, and they mention "2.0+ GHz" chips, noting that the chip only consumes 24.5 Watts (typical) at 2.0 GHz. For reference, the 1.8 GHz original 970 hits ~51 Watts (typical) at 1.8 GHz.

Furthermore, IBM announced the 2.5 GHz PPC 970FX weeks ago at the ISSCC conference, and listed similar power specs of the 2.5 GHz 970FX part to the previous 1.8 GHz 970 part, suggesting that there may be some headroom above 2.5 GHz even on this current design revision.

BTW, IBM is making some major announcements tomorrow, so we'll see what happens then. Now it's perfectly possible that you're right and we won't see machines until WWDC, but the info provided in your last post does not support that argument.

Seems the Xservers go out the door with only single and dual 2.0 G5's. Not the 2.2 and 2.4 and 2.5 and such that are "supposedly" being churned out by IBM for weeks. Why?

It would be marketing disaster to release a 2.5 GHz Xserve if chip production volumes didn't meet the requirements needed for Power Mac sales. G5 Xserves sell in low volume and therefore they can release them earlier than Power Macs if the chip volumes are relatively low. However, the released speeds can only be as fast as the fastest Power Macs. If Apple released 2.5 GHz G5 Xserves, but IBM couldn't provide enough chips for 2.5 Power Macs, then that would essentially kill Power Mac sales. ie. As of this month, even if there were enough chip volume for Apple to release G5 Xserves (but not Power Macs) at 2.5 GHz, it's in Apple's best financial interest to keep the Xserve at 2.0 GHz, purely for Power Mac marketing reasons.

Something is holding back the Power Macs, and I suspect it may be CPU production volume or system controller stability or something. (However, it's not significantly related to G5 Xserve orders as liquid2ho seems to believe, given the huge Power Mac volume in comparison. Estimated Xserve sales numbers are miniscule in comparison to Power Mac sales numbers.)

[lenox]

I guarantee 8x superdrives in the next revision. My reasoning behind this is simple : the 10.3.3 update supports them as 'apple shipped' products, even though they aren't yet.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by lenox:
I guarantee 8x superdrives in the next revision. My reasoning behind this is simple : the 10.3.3 update supports them as 'apple shipped' products, even though they aren't yet.

BTW, X.3.3 reportedly also supports the Matsushita UJ-825, which is a 4X laptop DVD-R burner.

[lenox]

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:

Switchers are welcomed. I love switchers, I'm a switcher. Many of my friends and coworkers are switchers. Everybody loves a switcher.

Nobody loves a switcher who shows nothing but an unjustified pessemistic outlook on Apple's future at a time that the Mac community and Apple have been waiting for years for.

If the starter of this thread was so confident of their position, despite the "i hope you/they prove me wrong" stuff, what's the use of a poll, and why is it needed to back their opinions up?

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
You posted a roadmap that ends last year. Apple is already shipping G5 Xserves using 970FX chips, and those chips aren't even on that roadmap you linked. ie. That roadmap is simply out of date.

Regardless, that is the roadmap on IBM's Official PowerPC website today.

I have no doubt that it is old, it is obvious from looking at it.

And I did not claim that it backed up my position, only that it did not backup the statements made by PowerMacMan. He was continually referring to this document as proof of his point of view.

I wish they would update it. In fact, the PDF section does not even have one for the 970FX chips yet.

Typical IBM though. Their website is not kept as up-to-date as it should be.

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
BTW, IBM is making some major announcements tomorrow, so we'll see what happens then. Now it's perfectly possible that you're right and we won't see machines until WWDC, but the info provided in your last post does not support that argument.

Again, I only posted that because PowerMacMan continually referred to this document to prove his claims. As everyone can see for themselves, it does not backup his claim. That is why I posted it. No other reason.

I look forward to the IBM announcements.

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:

It would be marketing disaster to release a 2.5 GHz Xserve if chip production volumes didn't meet the requirements needed for Power Mac sales. G5 Xserves sell in low volume and therefore they can release them earlier than Power Macs if the chip volumes are relatively low. However, the released speeds can only be as fast as the fastest Power Macs. If Apple released 2.5 GHz G5 Xserves, but IBM couldn't provide enough chips for 2.5 Power Macs, then that would essentially kill Power Mac sales. ie. As of this month, even if there were enough chip volume for Apple to release G5 Xserves (but not Power Macs) at 2.5 GHz, it's in Apple's best financial interest to keep the Xserve at 2.0 GHz, purely for Power Mac marketing reasons.

Something is holding back the Power Macs, and I suspect it may be CPU production volume or system controller stability or something. (However, it's not significantly related to G5 Xserve orders as liquid2ho seems to believe, given the huge Power Mac volume in comparison. Estimated Xserve sales numbers are miniscule in comparison to Power Mac sales numbers.)

I agree. And it may not even be an IBM issue. The problem could be on Apple's side. And even then it could be non-CPU related. I am sure they are updating other components, so perhaps that could be the cause as well. I would rather these be speedbumped Rev B's than so totally brand new such that they are Rev A's again (and all the associated weird problems that come with it).

But consider that Apple has been making overtures to the corporate IT world now for the last year. Even my company has considered getting Xservers for DNS and WAN monitoring servers. But you could not buy them, so they moved on to Dells. They did not want to wait. This is something Apple must address. Corporate IT likes predictable and dependable product releases.

Roughly, what are the numbers for sales of Xservers and PowerMacs in a quarter, for example? I have no feel for these numbers. Would 300K units per quarter for PowerMacs be about right?

We have focused this thread almost entirely on the G5 CPU. Yet there are lots of other ways Apple could improve the product line:

- faster SuperDrive with plus and minus support (new Pioneers do this now)
- faster bus speed (or at least all models running at top speed)
- larger, faster SATA hard drives
- more and faster memory
- faster graphics card (all ATI, for example)
- slight case modification to allow for second optical drive bay
- quieter fans (this has been a much complained about issue in the forums)

You seem very knowledgeable on the PowerMac product line.

What is your gut feeling on the new PowerMacs? Feature-wise, not delivery date.

I won't hold you to any "predictions"

But I am very interested in your opinion.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by lenox:
I guarantee 8x superdrives in the next revision. My reasoning behind this is simple : the 10.3.3 update supports them as 'apple shipped' products, even though they aren't yet.

That would be very cool.

Now if only the 4X DVD blanks weren't so expensive!

Can you imagine how much the 8X DVD blanks will be?

1X are dirt cheap and CompUSA (< $1 per) but they take so long to burn though.

Imagine the PowerMac 4.0 gHz G5's (due summer 2005?) might use a double-sided 12X SuperDrive.

[Luca Rescigno]

4x DVD-Rs aren't expensive. A friend of mine got a 50-pack spindle for about $45. It's the 8x ones that are very expensive, assuming you can find them. I saw them mentioned on DealMac.com a while ago - a 20-pack cost $60!

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:
I agree. And it may not even be an IBM issue. The problem could be on Apple's side. And even then it could be non-CPU related.

Yeah, that's why I mentioned the system controller. It's (supposedly) designed by Apple, and it's quite a design feat considering it's now at 1 GHz and faster than any other mainstream desktop computer right now. However, if they wanted to release a 2.5 GHz dual Mac, either the system controller has to run at 1.25 GHz (2.5/2) or else it has to run at 833 MHz (2.5/3), because the 970FX supposedly only supports integer multipliers (such as 2X, 3X, etc.) 833 MHz would be a marketing problem, considering it already runs at 1 GHz, and 1.25 GHz may be a technical problem. (There is no info available that suggests the 970FX can run with a 2.5X multiplier, but who knows.)

Roughly, what are the numbers for sales of Xservers and PowerMacs in a quarter, for example? I have no feel for these numbers. Would 300K units per quarter for PowerMacs be about right?

Xserves and Power Macs combined (incl. G4s) is 200000+ per quarter, with people out there in internetland estimate that the Xserves only represently about a few thousand - a couple of percent of that 200000+.

- faster SuperDrive with plus and minus support (new Pioneers do this now)

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple removes + support in firmware. Removing + would simplify matters, and it's not as if + adds much in terms of functionality at this juncture, since + mostly duplicates - functionality.

- faster bus speed (or at least all models running at top speed)

See above.

- larger, faster SATA hard drives

Maybe.

- more and faster memory

Unlikely, as DDR2-400 costs much more and isn't any faster. DDR2-533 is faster, but is outrageously priced.

- faster graphics card (all ATI, for example)

Probably, and that might be another hold up, since new ATI cards aren't really out until April. I doubt the Mac version will be PCI-Express though, but it's always a possibility.

- slight case modification to allow for second optical drive bay

I doubt it. I'd prefer space for 3rd internal SATA hard drive actually.

- quieter fans (this has been a much complained about issue in the forums)

Hope so.

What is your gut feeling on the new PowerMacs? Feature-wise, not delivery date.

Features above of course. Delivery date... I've always been predicting dual 2.5 GHz G5s in spring, with dual 3.0s coming in fall. In fact fact I had been predicting the dual 2.5 update for today, but I guess I'm wrong.

[ae86_16v]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:

Some say that Apple is holding back for the big 3.0 G5 delivery at WWDC. Perhaps. Recent events seem to indicate this. But I have said from the beginning that merely announcing a product and delivery are two different things. I doubt you will be able to buy a Dual 3.0 G5 on the same date as WWDC.

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.

So what is it? No Dual 3.0GHz at WWDC or no new PowerMacs period? It seems like you are contradicting yourself.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by lenox:


If the starter of this thread was so confident of their position, despite the "i hope you/they prove me wrong" stuff, what's the use of a poll, and why is it needed to back their opinions up?

The starter of this thread (me) is very confident of his opinion.

There will be no new PowerMacs until WWDC.

I was simply offering a poll to see where others stand and invite discussion concerning my opinion.

It has certainly spawned some heated yet interesting discussion.

The poll was not used nor intended to backup my opinion.

The purpose of any poll is to determine other people's opinions.

I offered this poll to see where people stand on the possible release date of next revision of the PowerMac line.

My prediction, while unfortunate and unpopular, grows more true with each passing week as we get closer and closer to WWDC.

The big "Memory Sale Ends" and "IBM Announcement" that everyone said would prove me wrong have come and gone. No new PowerMacs.

Instead Apple extends sales until 2 days before WWDC! And they even warn the industry of a "dry spell". Does everyone really think that they will announce new PowerMacs next week given that? Or even next month?

Suddenly, everyone gets quiet and the realization sinks in. And now they are thinking "...maybe he is correct..." and "...it sure seems like there won't be any new PowerMacs until WWDC..."

As long as Apple is still making decent and bottom-line sustainable sales, perhaps it makes sense for them to wait until WWDC. Why announce new Macs on some unremarkable day, if you can wait until the BIG-EVENT?

And WWDC annoucement aside, I am still suspecting that Apple will not have the 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 ready in time. And remember, my prediction was based on the ability to purchase one on that day. Announcing it at WWDC but not shipping until 2 months later does NOT count. My prediction was very specific about that.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
4x DVD-Rs aren't expensive. A friend of mine got a 50-pack spindle for about $45. It's the 8x ones that are very expensive, assuming you can find them. I saw them mentioned on DealMac.com a while ago - a 20-pack cost $60!

4X 50-pack for $45.

Awesome!

Where did he get them? I would love to pick a spindle for that price!

You know, I have yet to burn a bad DVD on my Mac. But I have burned probably a dozen or more bad ones on my PC Desktop. Roxio produces some of the most cryptic error messages too. None of which are listed on their knowledgebase.

[ae86_16v]

Originally posted by Switched2Mac:

My prediction, while unfortunate and unpopular, grows more true with each passing week as we get closer and closer to WWDC.

The big "Memory Sale Ends" and "IBM Announcement" that everyone said would prove me wrong have come and gone. No new PowerMacs.

And WWDC annoucement aside, I am still suspecting that Apple will not have the 3.0 gHz PowerMac G5 ready in time. And remember, my prediction was based on the ability to purchase one on that day. Announcing it at WWDC but not shipping until 2 months later does NOT count. My prediction was very specific about that. [/B]

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.

So is it WWDC or Jan 7th, 2005?

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by gururafiki:
And isn't the 30th a tuesday? I'm placeing my bets on the 30th.

[Eug Wanker]

The big "Memory Sale Ends" and "IBM Announcement" that everyone said would prove me wrong have come and gone. No new PowerMacs.

The IBM announcement is tomorrow.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
The IBM announcement is tomorrow.

Oops! My mistake. You are correct.

But check this out! There was some good news today:

Command & Conquer Generals - Gone Gold!

I am drooling with anticipation. This game is awesome and will play very nicely on a Dual 3.0 gHz G5 too.

[eddiecatflap]

..i KNEW there was a reason i needed a g5 !

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by 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.

My original post that started the thread.

Originally posted by ae86_16v:
So is it WWDC or Jan 7th, 2005?

I said no new Macs until WWDC. Regardless of their CPU speed.

People then started saying there would be speedbumps this week and the big 3.0 gHZ G5 at the WWDC.

I restated my original prediction and went a step further saying that, not only won't there be any new PowerMacs until WWDC, but you also will not see the 3.0 gHz G5 PowerMac until New Years 2005.

So, IMHO, the WWDC should yield us 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 in the 970FX G5 flavor along with some other improvements in the overall computer (SuperDrive, better video, etc.) Then sometime around New Years 2005, you should be able to buy a Dual 3.0 G5.

And as I keep saying over and over. My prediction for these dates is that you won't be able to "buy" one on or by that date.

For example, Steve Jobs gets up and announces Dual 3.0 gHz G5 at WWDC and the crowd goes wild. But you walk to the local Apple Store and they have none in stock and the Apple Store estimates August ship dates (which slip and slip and slip, etc.) No, this does not count.

I suspected the WWDC announcement date because Apple has made announcements before when prior to it they were filling up the channel with new product (powerbook announcements perhaps?). That was impressive. They announce an awesome new product and you run right down to the store and there it is. How cool is that? Talk about JIT delivery! You instantly separate the customer from his money and he walks away happy. Capitalism, you gotta love it!

Microsoft announced Longhorn and the entire computer industry is comparing every version of OS X to it in reviews. But again, announcing it and being able to produce the product so the consumer can actually buy it are two different things. You cannot buy Longhorn and its release date keeps getting pushed back and back.

So we wait and see.

I want to play C&C Generals for the Mac on my Dual 3.0 gHz G5. That is my goal. And Aspyr just went Gold with C&C with a ship date of April 16th.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by eddiecatflap:
..i KNEW there was a reason i needed a g5 !

I am hoping that Aspyr goes all the way with the Zero Hour add-on too. This game is so much fun to play, especially online.

Now if they would just convert Total Annihilation (1999 Game of the Year) to OS X, I would be in heaven.

Can you imagine C&C Generals on an Apple 23" cinema display?!?! OMG!

I love RTS games.

[xe0]

imho, we'll see dual 3Ghz PowerMacs at the WWDC. No speedbump before hand.

But for me personally, Im hanging out for a revision of the cinema displays. And a new keyboard in the G5 style. Maybe akin to the powerbook keypad- but more desktop-ish. And a mouse in a similar fasion. Of course crafted with Apple's superb design skills.

An all Alloy workstation....
man that would be sweet

[Switched2Mac]

Hmmm.

Here is something new.

IBM to Reveal New PowerPC Roadmap

About time!

Now let me see if I can find it. I'll post then too.

[Switched2Mac]

Originally posted by xe0:
imho, we'll see dual 3Ghz PowerMacs at the WWDC. No speedbump before hand.

But for me personally, Im hanging out for a revision of the cinema displays. And a new keyboard in the G5 style. Maybe akin to the powerbook keypad- but more desktop-ish. And a mouse in a similar fasion. Of course crafted with Apple's superb design skills.

An all Alloy workstation....
man that would be sweet

I agree.

I would love to have the PowerMac, mouse, keyboard and cinema display all the same metallic alloy looking color. Matched set.

[Switched2Mac]

It would appear that similar discussions are going on in the Macrumors Forums as well.

Macrumors.com News Discussions

Many people over there are saying there won't be any new PowerMacs until WWDC either.

Tomorrow is IBM's PowerPC Event. You never know, maybe Apple will surprise us. I doubt it, but let us wait until this time tomorrow.

[MindFad]

OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG

[Switched2Mac]

CNET Article on IBM Announcement

The IBM Announcement was typical.

No specific details.

No updated roadmap.

So now we wait until the speedbumps at WWDC.

[OwlBoy]

Originally posted by MindFad:
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG

hehe, that should be made an official Emoticon.

-Owl