http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207...8U.MFus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3cjE0b2MwBHNlYwM3Mzg-
Now that Duo isnt sounding so great...
Now that Duo isnt sounding so great...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Should have apple waited???
- Thread starter jtalerico
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
jtalerico said:
One has to assume that it would still run way too hot for a laptop so still no decent PBs or MBPs. Also, this is a certain amount of hype. IBM have not been too good at living up to expectations and they do say that it will run with a lower power consumption than SOME of today's chips.
I'll put money on the fact that this means that they still run extremely hot compared to Core Duos and use vast amounts of energy... OK maybe less than a P4 at 5GHz but then it is a server and these things generally live in artctic conditions to keep them cool.
jtalerico said:
When you say tweaked, do you mean into a laptop format? They couldn't do this with the G5 and IBM seemed to show no interest in doing it.. I imagine the sam eholds true of this.
People often refer to IBM concentrating on Games Consoles chips and I think that is a bit misleading. I think IBM do not have a goal to produce laptop chips and as such Apple could not stay with them.
They say the chip should be available next year. And although it does say lower power consumption it doesn't say that it would be suitable for a laptop so it might not be available until mid or late 2007. Apple could end up waiting for this chip then when it came out they find it won't work in a PowerBook (it does say it's a server CPU) so by the end of 2007 there would still be G4s in PowerBooks.
So no, Apple shouldn't have waited as I would hate to be sitting using a G4 in my PowerBook in 2008.
Furthermore, yeah the chip sounds powerful when they compare it against the Intel chips of today. However, remember that Conroe and Merom are due out THIS year. So this Power6 chip will be competing against second or third iterations of Conroe and Merom and it won't look so good when compared to those.
So no, Apple shouldn't have waited as I would hate to be sitting using a G4 in my PowerBook in 2008.
Furthermore, yeah the chip sounds powerful when they compare it against the Intel chips of today. However, remember that Conroe and Merom are due out THIS year. So this Power6 chip will be competing against second or third iterations of Conroe and Merom and it won't look so good when compared to those.
maverick808 said:
Even so. As i said i was not refering to the Laptops. I was pruly refering to Destop or even server units. I honeslty hate that they jumped to the Intel based chip.
I myself have Intel based machines. But have not had one that can out preform my Dual G5. I just thought having a G5/(OSX too!!) in mac's made it unique now it will be like every other Dell or Gateway sitting in everyone's house.
When have Mac's been cheap?! Well now they are due to the Intel chip. You get what you pay for.
I wouldn't really pay much attention to this article, if you're comparing it to the Yonah chip. They're completely different, and most likely, the Power6 chip wouldn't have seen the inside of an iMac or laptop. So... if Apple should have waited, it's not because of this chip.
jtalerico said:
I don't think it's fair to jump to conclusions and say "you get what you pay for" in relation to Apple and Intel. First of all, the new Apple's really aren't all that cheap. The high-end MacBook Pro starts at $2499. Second, I don't think we'll see a drop in quality in the long run. Granted, there might be a few bugs and problems right away due to the shift to Intel, but I think that in a year, if we could look back and see where IBM's chips would've taken Apple at the same time, we'd laugh about it.
just coz i neva got a propa edyakashon.jtalerico said:When did you learn how to read? Maybe you didn't!!
I'm sorry, I missed your comment about it applying to desktops.
max_altitude said:just coz i neva got a propa edyakashon.
I'm sorry, I missed your comment about it applying to desktops.
Thats okay.. I sometimes just go to a tread and post what i feel w/o reading things!
Maybe i am jumping to conculsion.. I just felt that the G5 has been my most reliable and fastest CPU since my Ultra60..
Maybe apple should of went down the Sparc path 20 years ago, or whatever it was!
No worries people I was just bringing in some news, no need to get heated over this. Just trying to bring a different ideas onto the forum. I honeslty will (maybe) buy a macbook but that is DOWN the road once all the bugs come out and Intel straightens things out.. Maybe until the 64bit version comes out...
jtalerico said:
Yes you said these applied to desktops but my question is if they stayed with IBM and waited for this chip then what would have happened to the laptops?
My answer is that no they should not have waited on this server chip for their desktop machines as it would not work in laptops and there is no other IBM chip on the horizon that would. So if they wait on this server chip just to put it in desktops then we end up still having a G4 in the laptops in 2007, 2008 and beyond.
Waiting on this chip would result in the complete death of the laptop line. Is it worth killing their biggest selling line just to wait on a chip that may possibly come out and may possibly provide better performance in than the Intel chips of 2007? I say no.
maverick808 said:
Good point, but why did they just make this leap to Intel? I know laptops are the biggest line but if they want to keep selling their desktops then they should of stuck with IBM. Because I (ME, this is how i feel, i am not trying to push my ideas onto you) feel that now every iMac or PowerIntel(whatever the hell they are going to call them) is going to be like my Intel P4 and nothing better, just running a different flavor of Unix.
jtalerico said:
The average consumer over the last 5 years doesn't even know what CPU is in the machine sitting on there desk. To the average person the change in CPU won't matter one bit.
I certainly do know the type of and speed of the RAM, bus, CPU, GPU in all my machines yet I simply do not care what CPU is in my Apple computer. I have no special attachment to the PowerPC processor, the Yonah or any other processor.
This came up in another thread. If Dell change from using Intels to using AMDs then does that mean that the Dell isn't really Dell anymore? The Xbox 360 uses a PowerPC whereas the first Xbox used an x86 chip. Does that mean the new Xbox isn't really an Xbox?
Of course it doesn't because a Dell, Xbox or Apple computer are not defined simply by the CPU, or any single specific component, they use. You might as well claim that if Apple started using Seagate drives instead of Western Digital ones in their iMacs then they wouldn't really be iMacs or Apple machines anymore.
no way to put this chip in a notebook, an imac, a mac mini, a home media system or even a Powermac (just see how big the heatsink is for a 2.7 GHz).
the really fast 4-5GHz Chips are probably available 2008 or so.
apple needed something for the notebooks now. that's the reason for the switch.
so no, apple shouldn't have waited.
even if this chip can possibly be made good and fast for desktops in 2008 it's simply too late. apple can't let the whole product line wait for a chip that might be good for their desktops (powermacs that is). desktops are 10% of their sales or so. the rest is imacs, notebooks and mini's.
the really fast 4-5GHz Chips are probably available 2008 or so.
apple needed something for the notebooks now. that's the reason for the switch.
so no, apple shouldn't have waited.
even if this chip can possibly be made good and fast for desktops in 2008 it's simply too late. apple can't let the whole product line wait for a chip that might be good for their desktops (powermacs that is). desktops are 10% of their sales or so. the rest is imacs, notebooks and mini's.
maverick808 said:
LOL okay, you are taking it a bit far. I am just saying it is what set it apart from everything else.
Apple (use to be) PPC
Dell Intel
Gateway Intel/AMD
Tigersdirect Intel/AMD
Sun Sparc
The only two that were different or are different is the Apple and the Sun... Just my case.. Nothing more or less not saying it makes or breaks the brand.
jtalerico said:
I don't agree that the average consumer thinks that it's the PowerPC that sets Apple machines apart. The average consumer will think that the overall integrated and tight design of the hardware and the features of the OS X software are what set Apple apart.
When someone walks into an Apple store and looks at an Apple laptop they don't go "yeah yeah I don't care what it looks like. You say it's thin and sleek? Yeah well that doesn't matter to me. Neither does size or weight. And don't even bother to tell me what operating system it runs. Windows, Linux, hell even OS/2... it just doesn't matter to me I'll take whatever is on it. Now tell me, what third-party company have Apple got to manufacture the CPU because that's all I care about".
maverick808 said:
Alright.. Calm down. Take a breath. I am not talking about the avg user. For gods sake it seems like neither of us are. I am not looking at it as the common user. But again. It is okay, just someone elses thoughts (Mine).
RIP. PPC
LOL.. Just news and my thoughts.. Nothing more.
jtalerico said:Alright.. Calm down. Take a breath. I am not talking about the avg user. For gods sake it seems like neither of us are. I am not looking at it as the common user. But again. It is okay, just someone elses thoughts (Mine).
RIP. PPC
LOL.. Just news and my thoughts.. Nothing more.
Yes, and I'm glad you pointed out the article because it is interesting to know. I guess I just don't feel the same because I never became attached to the PowerPC architecture in any way and in recent years didn't feel it had a massive advantage over x86 chips.
jtalerico said:
I like that your laptop is a Dell... for those of us that can only have one machine and for it to preferably be a laptop, the move to intel was a great one. Whatever you think, Apple are an alround computer manufacturer and for them to not provide a decent laptop would be tantamount to corporate suicide.
jacobj said:
Honesly I am very new to macs.. I have had mine for about a year now. But I am no stranger to Hardware and OS's. I have seen all worlds... A lot of flavors of OS's and I have to say that right now my favorite OS is OS X (Close second is FreeBSD). I have been in the x86 world and once i moved to Mac's (PPC) i feel in love. Maybe it is because I am not that big into laptops. Or maybe it is because that I am new to Apple and have not been waiting for the greatest and latest thing. Sorry if I pissed some people off!!
Also, why do you like that my laptop is a Dell?
oops... read that wrong. Apologies.
I think he likes it's a Dell because he thinks you don't care about the Mac laptop line since you are happy with your Dell.
I think he likes it's a Dell because he thinks you don't care about the Mac laptop line since you are happy with your Dell.