The processor argument is a red herring.
So they can magically add processors that haven't been developed in the real world whenever they want?
Let's take a look at history shall we...
Apple switches to Intel in 2006...
- 2006 model = brand new boards and new CPU's from Intel (51xx series)
- 2007 model = same board in the 2006, but new CPU's are available (53xx series allowed Apple to release the 1st Octads)
- 2008 model = new boards (due to different chipset) + new CPU's (54xx series)
- 2009 model = new boards (different socket, chipset, ICH) + new CPU's (35xx and 55xx series for SP and DP systems respectively)
- 2010 = new boards (added the latch mechanism to the DP daughter board as a means of running standard IHS equipped DP CPU's) + new CPU's (36xx and 56xx series, which allowed for Hex and Dodeca systems)
From one model to another since the Intel switch, there's been new CPU families introduced.
So how can you claim that the CPU changes in each new Intel model are a Red Herring?
Seriously.... I'd like to know what you guys are smoking.
If you notice, the newer systems are based on Intel's new Tick-Tock cycle (2009 on), which means a socket is supported for 2 years (new architecture followed by a die shrink, which allows for more cores = more efficient parts). 2006 - 2008 was before this was initiated, and the actual socket was LGA771 (but Intel still managed to release new CPU's on that socket).
This has been clearly stated by Intel, and there's plenty of sources on this. Granted, this has no bearing on the 2006 - 2008 models, but does from 2009 on, which means, that Intel is poised to introduce a new socket with Sandy Bridge Xeons (in fact, there's 3; LGA1155 for the entry level, LGA1355 for the mid-level, and LGA2011 for the high-end).
The Intel Roadmap alone is sufficient proof, but there's articles on this if you're interested (BTW, their source is the publicized Intel Roadmap).
Please note both the sources (links, which are a round-robin of sites linking each other as sources) and this bit from the front page...
MICGadget has not previously published many original rumors, so their reliability is unknown.....
That simple statement (bolded text) is critically important.
Yes, it's what some people want to hear, and it can fit the other rumors' timeframe for a new MP release.
But if you dig deeper, it all adds up to very unreliable sources (and in the case of Apple v. Intel relations, there's more to it than what's linked on MR's page, as it appears Apple screwed Intel over on PCB manufacturing <where the real money is> when they switched to Foxconn - it seems they used the contract dates to their advantage, and didn't re-sign with Intel). Somehow, I doubt Intel looks all that kindly at Apple over that situation (more per unit profit in PCB manufacturing than CPU's). Ye olde raw materials v. finished goods bit in terms of profit per unit.
To give you an idea, Foxconn reduced their bid on assembly due to the lucrative PCB manufacturing (assembly is typically a "looser", so companies need to make up for it in another area). You can research this, as the information is out there (it was even a Front Page article in MR IIRC).
as usual, the people who said no upgrade until q4 or 2012 are continuing to be wrong as more information comes out! This is going to be awesome! New processors as some of us had hoped for.
New procs will be good, and the 2010 MP is looking very old now. AWESOME!!!!
Again, you're not digging into the information (
dig into the sources and pay attention), and latching onto
opinion and calling it proof.
It would truly be in your best interest to learn the difference.
All smoke and mirrors, the idea that there aren;t processors. There are always processors to upgrade to. after a few monhs
The only smoke and mirrors are the sources you keep latching onto.
Check the sources. If you have a brain in your head, you'll see that there are canyons there, not just holes in them.
