From yet another thread you've posted in about this... (
source).
In simple terms,
Exactly.
The CNET source, which pulled their information off of a couple of Tong's tweets, isn't fact. It could turn out to be total BS, or it may be a couple of new cards (GPU and Thunderbolt) and faster clock or two from the current line of CPU's.
But that wouldn't actually be a truly new machine, as it would use the same CPU socket (LGA1366).
Now is it
theoretically possible that Intel and Apple have penned a deal where Apple will get the newer socket parts (LGA2011) sooner than other vendors?
Yes.
But given the fact that Intel no longer does the board work for Apple (on any system), that's not likely IMO, as it's manufacturing the boards that tends generate greater profits (more lucrative than the CPUs on a per unit basis). So the only way Apple might be able to do this with CPU's alone, is with a MASSIVE quantity order, and there's no evidence to support this is the case (all indications are that the MP market is shrinking, not growing).
Apple's growth is in the consumer products (iDevices, laptops, iMac, and maybe the Mini). XServe is gone, and it was just a MP in a different format (did require a different board layout to fit, but it was based on the same Intel Reference Design and components <CPU family, chipset, ICH> as used for the MP of the same CPU series).
I'm just not convinced from available information that the growth has reached the point in these areas that Intel would entertain such a deal. Getting into further detail, the various iDevices are based on ARM processors which are not designed or manufactured by Intel (designed by PA Semi and made by TSMC). So we're really only talking about the CPU volumes for the laptops, iMac, and Mini (why I don't think the volume is high enough).
So you believe rumors rather than
verifiable facts...
What a sad state of affairs our education system must be.
Show us real facts, and we'll applaud you. Nor would any of us complain, as we're interested in the MP for various reasons.
But a CNET article based on a couple of tweets from someone who over-all doesn't have the best track record, doesn't qualify as fact by any sane person's definition (certainly not Webster's Dictionary).
But ATM, what factual evidence is available, clearly states there aren't any suitable parts based on a new socket. Yet.
True.
But more importantly, even if Apple did sign a deal with Intel for new socket parts for the MP (LGA2011) for delivery dates prior to any other vendor, historically that would only be 1 Quarter (13 weeks), not 6 months or more. Which would place delivery to Foxconn's assembly plant in August.
Then they'd need another 13 weeks (1 Q, aka lead time) to get systems shipping (they need time to verify the assembled systems meet specifications, then manufacture a sufficient quantity to ship - why it typically takes 13 weeks of lead time before products are shipped from the date they can begin manufacturing).
And if you go back and look at Apple's earlier Intel systems, 13 weeks is the longer lead times they had (problems will reduce this, which is why I suspect the 2009 model didn't make it but about 3 weeks ahead of Intel's official release date for the Xeon series used).
Those that do, would be bound by NDA clauses. So revealing information can cost them their jobs (companies tend to take these agreements seriously).
Exactly. We'd be very happy campers (save perhaps the price structuring, but that's a different argument that tends to crop up with each new MP).
Exactly again.
Most of us wouldn't consider another LGA1366 release a new system (not worthy of a new MP Identifier), as the current system could be made into one by swapping out a few parts (i.e. add a Thunderbolt PCIe card, new PCIe GPU card, and maybe a faster clocked CPU from the same family of Xeons).
Precisely, but sadly, this seems to fall on deaf ears (hoping beyond hope that they're going to get what they want, when they want it, so the most unreliable tidbit/nugget of a rumor gets all kinds of undue attention).
I can tweet all kinds of BS I could pull out of my @... err... imagine, but doesn't mean for one instant it would be true (or ever happen in the distant future). But if it were to state "Heard from Foxconn's CEO Mr. Terry Guo himself - NEW MP DUE OUT TOMORROW -", it would have this section of MR up in arms.
But it seems some would jump on it like a drowning person would on a life-preserver, despite it being a total load of crap.
Just faster clocks of existing CPU's isn't worthy of a new MP Identifier.
The closest thing like this that ever happened with the MP, is the 2007, where Intel did release new CPU's that could use the same boards as the 2006's (created the first Octad systems).
Others, such as the 2010's, where a few new parts, and board tweaks. But in both cases, something other than the GPU used and CPU clock frequency changed.
This is what I don't get...
Most of us are trying to use historical evidence and publicly available facts to gain some sense of what, when,... a new system would be available (MP based on a new socket). Not "I saw a rumor..." from a very dubious source, and state it = FACT.
See above (and/or other threads on this particular source of information for that matter).
Not really the best way to go if they intend to make a system faster than the previous model.
For a faster system, definitely (end Q1 2012 or early Q2 2012 would be sufficient time to get new systems out, presuming CPU's arrive to assembly plants at or near the end of December 2011 = tail end of Q4 2011).
Which could prove to be a disaster if they do IMO (i.e. toss in a faster clocked LGA1366 CPU, Thunderbolt PCIe card and faster GPU), as it would reduce the sales of the LGA2011 based models (already spent their new system budget on the mid-season refresh LGA1366 models).
This has bearing, as they need to meet a minimum sales figure to break even, let alone make a profit. If they over-estimate the sales volume (= order too many units from the manufacturer), they would end up with over-stock. So to move it, they'd re-list those systems as refurbished/sell off at a lower price to other sales outlets and take a reduced profit, if not a loss (depends on how many they sold vs. got stuck with letting go at a reduced rate to determine if it's a reduced profit or a loss <aka "in the red"> for that particular MP).
