I think right now many companies that are (or are partly) involved in the computer industry are working together just for the sake of not working with microsoft. Apple is playing a smart game being open for all the standards, giving back to the OpenSource community, relying on UNIX, etc.
I think by now many people see Apple as a real alternative (given the fact that OSX is developing quite nice compared to Linux). So I guess IBM sees Apple as a nice oppurtunity to stick it up MS/Intels rear end. And rightfully so!
There are 12 months in a year, so the 2nd half of a year starts July 1st. "Sampling" means that samples are available for testing, and public sampling begins about April. Private sampling for Apple may have already begun (some time ago even), and Apple has been working on their chipset designs for a couple of years. While July 1st is certainly optimistic, August-September isn't unreasonable. There is no evidence at all for anything sooner, although a WWDC announcement of a 64-bit version of MacOS X and the introduction of the 64-bit APIs wouldn't surprise me at all. They could even introduce the hardware at that point since people able to wait will likely be waiting already anyhow. Apple did the "pre-order thing" with the original iMac introduction.
Something that most posters here seem to ignore is that often people & companies need a new machine and they need it now. It isn't acceptable to wait some unknown length of time to get a machine that will certainly be better, but which is completely unproven... even to exist! Sales of PowerMacs have already been hit by the waiting for the next PowerMac and by the price/performance deficit, but they are still selling >150K per quarter. Even when the new machines arrive, the 1.25 GHz G4 version may still be available (hopefully at a slashed price) to satisfy MacOS9 users. There is probably a great deal of pent up demand for next-gen machines, however, so when they arrive I expect supplies to be very tight regardless of how fast IBM can produce 970s, and how fast Apple can build the boxes. This will probably continue to sell G4 PowerMacs even after the 970 arrives since there will still be people who need a machine now. A month delay can easily cost a company more than the price of a new PowerMac, so it is financially sensible to buy in that situation even though techno-lust makes the new technology desirable.
This is completely true in most cases. If we needed to get 3 machines right then for new freelancers stating then we would just get whatever is in stock at the time. No waiting for weeks until the new machines come out. Even if I am sure there will be new machines out soon I would still, begrudgingly, order up some presently stocked machines. And when your department has a finite time to use up their budget money, you better believe they will take what they can get! You can't leave it off for the next quarter; you may not have the same money come next quarter!
[quote]and if apple has it's hands on those "private sampling" 970s - why is there such a long time between private sampling and "real" samling?<hr></blockquote>New chip (970), new fab (Fishkill), new process (300mm wafers). Think about some of the numbers involved in a CPU. Do you realize the astounding complexity of a CPU, and the endless numbers of errors possible in design and fabrication.
The POWER4+ (btw has 10 million more transistors than the normal 180nm POWER4) is a 130nm part made on 300mm wafers at Fishkill. They have some experience seeing as the POWER4+ is going in servers for the past few months.
no Altivec in the Power4+, thought it was being fabbed in Burlington. oh well, my bad.
I wonder is AltiVec is big enough a change to warrant a "full scale" testing. I hope that the relative similiarity between the 970 and POWER4 CPUs actually cuts development time significally.
Nope and in fact when IBM release the SPEC scores at the conference they mentioned it wasn't based on real silicon.
Apple has definitely been involved in developing the chips so they would have had development samples and production samples that weren't fit enough for a public release.
<strong>They don't have to tell anyone that. They certainly didn't when they showed off the G4. There might be people who believe that anything shown off at WWDC is imminent, just like there were people who believed that a 970 PowerMac would come hot on the heels of MPF, but there arne't enough of those to kill PM sales.
I have to agree with what was said earlier. If Apple pre-announced 970-based Macs, it will be a disaster, unless they are absolutely prepared for what will happen--and I think James is right when he talks about Apple's new marketing angle for the PB's, as desktop replacements. I hope I wasn't the only one who looked at the 17" PB and thought "Wow...a portable X-Serve!"
I think everyone is missing a very big point here about timing. 970 PMs will be announced by MacWorldNY and this fits in with IBMs Q3 release roadmap.
The point is that we are actually now in Q2 2003 already. I don't recall IBM actually specifically saying they were referring to calendar year 2003 as oppossed to fiscal year 2003. This would mean that a MacWorld NY release of new PMs fits in very comfortably with their roadmap and in fact falls at the end of Q3 so they would have had plenty of time to ramp up production of the 970 at "Fishkill".
You must remember that at the MPF they announced an actual working chip not a concept or a prototype. The reference they make to Q3 in the roadmap is very likely to have been deliberately misleading, yet true, for the benefit of Apple.
With the need to have a new MB designed around the 970 you can bet the decision to use it, or not, would have been made a long time ago. And certainly long before IBM actually announced the existence of the chip.
I doubt announcing a new architecture chip would hurt PMac sales anymore than they are now. Most people won't know the difference and those who do won't run to the first versions until the bugs have been worked out and it is proven that they are backward compatible. If the new processors lowered the price of the G4-based systems, then it might actually spur sales.
I'm wondering what Apple is going to call them.
"I think right now many companies that are (or are partly) involved in the computer industry are working together just for the sake of not working with microsoft."
Yeah. Don't feed the crocodile.
"Apple is playing a smart game being open for all the standards, giving back to the OpenSource community, relying on UNIX, etc."
This means..? Apple can develop a browser for the fraction of the price of M$'s IE. Can take 'Open Office'. Aqua-ize the hell out of it, do the 'Apple Thang' and beat the snot out of M$ Office. Without the extensive development cost of say M$, I'd vouch. Apple must be grinning from ear to ear... I think Apple are well justified in increasing their software development R&D. Just how many M$ packages beat the Apple equivalent? Apple are a great hardware company. But they are an EXCELLENT software company. And it's from that that the hardware springs. Apple are already getting about a quarter in profits from software. I'd like to see their software efforts continue further. With more aquisitions. Maya 4.5 or Softimage 3 would be excellent choices.
"I think by now many people see Apple as a real alternative (given the fact that OSX is developing quite nice compared to Linux)."
"So I guess IBM sees Apple as a nice oppurtunity to stick it up MS/Intels rear end. And rightfully so!"
That's right. Honey, we have lift off!
PM sales are already on the floor (155K per quarter = 2K per day approximately, in a world where NAFTA + EU + JAPAN = &gt;900 Million people, so the penetration is crap, around 0.01% per quarter), so two quarters of even slower sales aren't going to make that much difference.
We need to get back to a situation where we're regularly selling over a half million pro systems per quarter, which based on three year purchasing cycle would be around 0.6% of the population and probably around 1.8% of the working population.
"We need to get back to a situation where we're regularly selling over a half million pro systems per quarter,"
Exactly! Apple should be spitting out 'power'Mac sales of half a million, easy.
I think the 970 will get us easily over the 200 k mark and close to half a million within the first revision.
The current line is just so far behind in terms of specs when you look at the iMac or notebooks, I am surpricsed anyone buys the towers at all.
I don't see how announcing a 970 system could do that much more damage.</strong><hr></blockquote>The towers have two processors. You're surprised that some people will pay more for a faster computer?
Institutional buyers and home, tower users are well aware of rumored 970 or G5 boxes. The G4 has been stuck for so long that it is the next release is anticipated to be a major architectural shift and significant performance jump. The current G4 machines just aren't that much of an upgrade for current G4 tower owners. Thus, if you need more power, you would have the choice of spending thousands now and getting a marginal improvement, or waiting for the announced product and getting a HUGE improvement. If the G4s hadn't stalled for this long, than current upgrades would be more appealing when held up to the rumored 970s.
A 970 announcement would cause many powermac buyers to postpone their purchases in anticipation of a better return on their upgrade dollar. This is always true when considering future product announcements. Its the stalled G4 which makes this next generation of machines such an entisement to wait.
But how many average consumers are actually going to benefit from the 970? I have yet to even own a computer with a G4 processor, but I think that for most, coupled wtih AltiVec, a fast G4 (800MHz-1GHz) does the job beyond nicely, right? OSX hinges on the availability of ample graphics memory and is written for AltiVec, and it runs great with the G4 (it even runs great on my Pismo with only 8MB graphics memory). I am not saying that CPU evolution is uneccessary altogether, but really -- how many average humans can perceive the differences in performance that await in newer processors (albeit those who work with material in 3D compositing/major publishing workflows). A seemingly instantaneous response can only *seem* so instant.
For now at least, the 970 is being fabbed in Burlington. NOT EF. So, that means it's still on 200mm, but at 0.13nm.
[quote]For now at least, the 970 is being fabbed in Burlington.<hr></blockquote>Heard around October that IBM was trying to shut down Burlington and move straff and ops to Fishkill. Guess things are moving a bit slow.
I do think that was the plan, but apparently EF isn't ready for (at least) the 970 yet.