New Power Mac G4s Announced

benh57 writes "Apple today announced the new Power Mac G4 towers with new faces, running at dual-867MHz (US$1,699), dual-1GHz ($2,499), and dual-1.25GHz ($3,299). All are running DDR, the two higher end models at 166MHz FSB with Radeon 9000, the low end at 133 w/GF4MX." Check it out at The Apple Store, and keep your eyes peeled for an appearance on the Power Mac G4 site.

Comments

dual processors - all of them

[eshefer]

Thats front page news - apple becomes the first PC maker to go totaly to dual processor in it's pro desktops.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[foobar104]

And the way they did it! Yesterday $1600 (more or less) bought you a single-proc machine. Today, $1600 (more or less) buys you a dual-proc machine at the same or slightly better speed.

I've already spec'd out my dream machine. (Realistically, that is.) It comes in just over $2,000, all-inclusive. For more than twice the oomph I could have gotten yesterday.

The new exteriors are sexy, too.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[DietFluffy]

Even more interesting is the fact that Apple doesn't seem to be relying as heavily on trade shows (ala macworld) to promote new products anymore.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[johnpaul191]

all dual combined with the faster motherboard should make these really fast running 10.2. can't wait to see the benchmark tests. it is also the first Mac since the Beige towers that have two full sized front bays. if you look at the new case modifications, you can see that this is meant to move a TON of air through the case. the whole back panel seems to have speed holes, and there are ports in the front of the case for full air pass through (older G4/G3 case had no venting in the front and most of the back was sealed up except the fan ports). it also has a monster heatsink. apple.com has some VRs posted of the inside and outside of the case. besides the already listed stats, here are some other interesting bits of information. the full breakdown is now up at Apple.com as well.

from macminute.com-

* the ability to have two internal optical drives via a build-to-order option that adds a second DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive ($250)

* support for four internal hard drives (two ATA/66, two ATA/100)
* support for up to 2GB of DDR RAM with four slots (266MHz in the dual-867MHz, 333MHz in the dual-1GHz and dual-1.25GHz)
* dual-867MHz and dual-1GHz feature 1MB of DDR L3 per processor, dual-1.25GHz features 2MB per processor

* processor heatsink is considerably larger than previous models, but lacks a fan

* the return of an audio-in port

* ATI Radeon 9000 Pro replaces NVIDIA's GeForce4 MX in the mid-range and high-end models, but a GeForce4 Ti card is still available for an additional $250 (or $350 on the low-end Power Mac G4)

* video cards feature ADC/DVI connectors; VGA is supported through an included adapter

* dual-1.25GHz system delivers 18.3 gigaflops, versus 15 gigaflops for the previous generation dual-1GHz (20% increase)

Re:dual processors - all of them

[innerlimit]

when they rolled out the dual proc systems last time it was because of a shortage in chips-whith-higher-clocks supply... what's the deal with this?

like lightning-fast-pc's check this one out...

Re:dual processors - all of them

[trash eighty]

same thing, shortage of G4 chips that run at 2GHz+, a real acute shortage at that

Re:dual processors - all of them

[singularity]

Actually Apple came close to doing this a while back and almost got blasted for it.

The original G4/MP machines, http://manuals.info.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/M anuals/specs/desktops/L05546A_EN.pdf , were knocked because it was seen as Motorola and IBM being unable to provide faster G4 chips.

The machines were offered in 400, 450x2, and 500x2 MHz.

I am sitting here with my G4/933, jealous of the new machines. I am really glad they have finally decided that dual optical drives could be important. While I have recently become glad that I go the Superdrive (having to brun 3.2 gigs worth of pictures for friends), I really wish I had the ability to burn CD's faster than 8x. Yes, I could go with a Firewire burner, but that seems like a lot of money when I already have a decent burner. A cheap iternal CD-RW would fit the bill perfectly.

I do not see why each option has a DVD drive, though. I would think that most people that would want dual optical drives would want either DVD-R/CD-RW or DVD/CD-RW as one drive, and CD-RW in the second. How often does one person need two DVD drives?

In the meant time, I suppose I can just wait for Jaguar (10.2) to ship. Apparently it is almost as fast as a harware upgrade on a CD.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[foobar104]

In the meant time, I suppose I can just wait for Jaguar (10.2) to ship. Apparently it is almost as fast as a harware upgrade on a CD.

That's a really good description of the 10.2 experience. Apple could have marketed it that way. I have 6C106 running on several machines, G3s and G4s, but my personal machine is a 500 MHz iBook. OS X 10.2 6C106 makes my machine (get this) more responsive, more capable, more energy-efficient, and cooler!

I mean, I could understand faster and more features; that's what OS upgrades are good for. But something in the new power management subsystem has tripled my battery life (no kidding) and seriously reduces the amount of heat that my iBook generates. I used to get uncomfortable after using my laptop for an hour or 90 minutes because the trackpad and palm-rests were hot to the touch. It was okay, though, because the battery would be almost flat by that time. But now I get three plus hours of battery and the machine is always cool to the touch. I don't know if that comes from hard drive spin-down or from processor cycling, but I love it.

Incidentally, that three-plus hours is doing stuff like surfing and email and MS Word, but it's with the AirPort card on.

Mac OS X 10.2 really is like a hardware upgrade on a CD, at least for us laptop owners.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, I have 6C115 running on my new iBook 600 and its quite a bit faster than 10.1.5 was.

I was worried about the 600Mhz on the G3 but in the end Jaguar is so fast it almost feels as if I'm running OS 9.

Nope, Jag is such a nice upgrade (I ordered mine for $20) I recommend it to all my clients.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Lev13than]

I do not see why each option has a DVD drive, though. I would think that most people that would want dual optical drives would want either DVD-R/CD-RW or DVD/CD-RW as one drive, and CD-RW in the second. How often does one person need two DVD drives?

I could see some people who would find it useful to have both DVD-R and DVD+R or +RW (or whatever the hell all the different versions are) on their machines in order to produce custom disks for special situations.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[daviddennis]

I have a G4/450 dual processor system from that era. I knew it wasn't a big advantage when I bought it, but I was definitely looking forward to it on MacOS X.

And I wasn't disappointed, and I have real-world evidence to back it up.

When Final Cut Pro 3.0 for MacOS X came out, I tried it out in the store on one of their then-new single-processor 867 systems. The 867 seemed a bit sluggish - when I was rendering, the whole world would stop and I couldn't even pull up a web browser window. But I can do this seamlessly on the dual 450, so in my eyes it's a much nicer machine to work with than the 867.

So I don't think you'd regret buying a dual processor system even if it was a small cut in nominal processor speed (933 to 867 for instance).

My main problem with my system is that my ego really wanted the dual 500 as the top of the line, but my rational self couldn't justify paying $1,000 more for it(*).

Anyway, it looks like a repeat with the current range - the dual 1.25ghz system is only about 25% faster in mhz and is 32% more expensive. Might not be so bad if the total performance was 32% better, but it's probably not since it doesn't have a memory subsystem or disks that are 32% faster. I would have certainly gone for the high-end machine if it had been $2,999, but for $3,299 it seems like they're pushing it.

What do you think? Is the .25ghz extra worth $800 more?

D

(*) Of course I could have ordered the 500 bare through the Apple Store online, but I called them and the whole experience was pretty bad because I did not have a credit card capable of handling the full amount, and they're pretty inflexible on payment options (no COD, not even cash).

At any rate, that doesn't apply anymore since you can no longer downgrade machines on the online Apple store, and you can no longer upgrade CPUs on the lesser systems. So you're stuck paying $800 more if you want .25ghz more. Pity.

In the end, this means there's little point to buying an Apple machine online anymore. Might as well be pampered at an Apple Retail Store for the same prices to the penny (including sales tax).

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not see why each option has a DVD drive, though. I would think that most people that would want dual optical drives would want either DVD-R/CD-RW or DVD/CD-RW as one drive, and CD-RW in the second. How often does one person need two DVD drives?

I suspect the option for a second combo drive versus an option for a CD-RW is to keep fewer parts on hand. Most Apple's systems are now combo (DVD-ROM/CD-RW) or SuperDrive (DVD-RW/CD-RW) which allows them to keep the number of parts down. I suspect the remaining CD-ROM and CD-RW systems are stock on hand and will not be on the price list much longer.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[ckd]

In the end, this means there's little point to buying an Apple machine online anymore. Might as well be pampered at an Apple Retail Store for the same prices to the penny (including sales tax).

It might be cheaper--no shipping charges. Also, there's an Apple store in tax-free New Hampshire, if you can get there.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[jcr]

What do you think? Is the .25ghz extra worth $800 more?

Try this: go to an Apple store, and run the apps you use on the dual 1Ghz machine, and the dual 1.25Ghz machine. Then decide.

-jcr

Re:dual processors - all of them

[singularity]

I think you are right about keeping the inventory simple (something Jobs is good at, for the betterment of Apple owners everywhere).

When I was buying my G4/933, Apple was having trouble keeping the Combo (DVD/CD-RW) in inventory. I wanted both a DVD and CD-RW, so I ended up paying the extra few hundred for the Superdrive (the other option was just a CD-RW).

In the end, I am glad I got the DVD burner ability, but at the time the money seemed like a lot.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[FangVT]

Anyway, it looks like a repeat with the current range - the dual 1.25ghz system is only about 25% faster in mhz and is 32% more expensive. Might not be so bad if the total performance was 32% better, but it's probably not since it doesn't have a memory subsystem or disks that are 32% faster. I would have certainly gone for the high-end machine if it had been $2,999, but for $3,299 it seems like they're pushing it.

What do you think? Is the .25ghz extra worth $800 more?

For that $800 you also get a 120GB hard drive instead of 80GB ($100 in build-to-order) and 512MB of ram instead of 256MB ($200 in build-to-order), so technically you're only paying $500 for the .25MHZ per processor.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[phillymjs]

Moving away from major announcements at shows is their stated intention. They don't like how their sales tank for the month or two before a show, when something major is expected to be announced there.

I guess they want to space out product announcements all year long, and to make them as much of a surprise as possible so as not to affect their sales volume so dramatically.

~Philly

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Dolly_Llama]

Im interested in jaguar for that reason, but I have an older Lombard. from what i understand, the speed boost is by better use of hardware acceleration. would it have that same noticable difference on something with 4mb of video ram?

Re:dual processors - all of them

[foobar104]

I also have it running on a bronze keyboard PB G3-- I've forgotten all my code names; it's bronze keyboard, but no firewire-- and it's very peppy. I think it's a 400 MHz, and it has 192 MB of RAM. It's not as fast as a G4 with Quartz Extreme, of course, but it's totally usable. Which is a pleasant surprise for a five-year-old (+/- 1) machine.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Analog Penguin]

It does have DDR RAM. Surely that helps open the speed gap as compared to the old systems?

Re:dual processors - all of them

[daviddennis]

They're not succeeding, then; world+dog (as The Register says) knew that there would be new G4s released today or shortly thereafter thank to the end of the previous Crystal Clear promotion (which promptly was replaced with a new one).

D

Re:dual processors - all of them

[singularity]

This is a frequent misconception of the speed improvements from 10.2. Yes, Quartz Extreme uses AGP accelerated graphics for a faster GUI. However, 10.2 incorporates many other improvements that make the user experience much faster, as well.

You will see a speed-up from 10.2. It would not be as fast as if you had Quartz Extreme capable graphics, but you will still see quite a speed-up.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[JPriest]

Not to mention that 10.2 is quite an improvement, and the machines now use DDR 333 (PC27000) rather than PC133. I am willing to bet on a fairly significant difference.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[daviddennis]

This would look valid - but outside of Apple's price bubble, I can get a 120gb 7200rpm hard drive for $199 and 512mb of DDR RAM for $199.

So it's really just a way to get gullible customers like me to pay extra for the speed bump :-(.

D

Re:dual processors - all of them

[loraksus]

1 mb extra L3 too, and a few other features.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Apple,

I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young little boys. Thanks in advance.

with much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[imperator_mundi]

that sounds great, but what the hell is there in the older OS versions that eats so much power and heats so much (I was barely burned by my powerbook yesterday)? A warm-the-planet daemon on the old kernel?

Re:dual processors - all of them

[Anonymous Coward]

Theres a big difference between then and now. Now Apple has an OS that can actually take advantage of dual procs.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[SlamMan]

You could always get a firewire brdge and box, and toss your cheap cd-rw in it. Should save you a couple bucks over having to buy one already in a firewire box.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[SlamMan]

bronze keyboard+ no firewire makes it a "bronze", I think.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[ajna]

Or "Lombard." The official name was Bronze, tho.

Here's a nice link: http://www.apple-history.com/pg3sbronze.html

Re:dual processors - all of them

[protohiro1]

I hate you apple. These computers are just too cool. I was just about to start building a new desktop...but somehow apple lust has taken over. I feel almost morally obligated to buy a system this good. Sadly, I just don't have the $3k I need to buy the system I want...

Re:dual processors - all of them

[MoneyT]

lease it through apple?

Re:dual processors - all of them

[slashdaughter]

This is the second time they have gone all dual proc. in their pro lines. They did this briefly back in 2000.

Re:dual processors - all of them

[tuxedobob]

Note that the low end is using PC2100 DDR RAM, unless that's a typo. I don't know enough about DDR to know what the advantage to 2700 is, though.

18.3 Gigaflops!

[joebp]

According to this article on Moore's observation, we shouldn't be seeing computers this powerful until roughly Q3 of 2005.

I want one.

No, I want a beo... err

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Tom7]

Well, that article is about a single processor, not dual-processor machine.

(Not to mention the fact that when Apple quotes gigaflop figures they are talking about all-in-registers zero-pipeline-stall vectorized operation, not actually doing anything useful -- like reading from memory.)

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[foobar104]

(Not to mention the fact that when Apple quotes gigaflop figures they are talking about all-in-registers zero-pipeline-stall vectorized operation, not actually doing anything useful -- like reading from memory.)

Um. I'm no expert, but to me that sounds like any cache-resident vector function, like a 5x5 convolve or something. You take a small performance hit when you have to load the next cache line, but if you're lucky your pipeline is deep enough to keep the processor units going while that fetch happens.

I mean, how else are they supposed to quote processor performance if it's not this way? If you want them to talk about performance of the whole system, taking things like memory and busses into account, they're going to have to pick a real-world application to test with. They do that already, using Photoshop as their benchmark the same way the graphics board companies are using Quake as theirs. Apple's test shows the dual 1.2 GHz machine to be about 90% faster (or almost twice as fast) as a single-processor 2.5 GHz P4. And yet Apple still gets hell for using Photoshop as their metric.

Seems like you can never satisfy everybody.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Anonymous Coward]

Um. I'm no expert, but to me that sounds like any cache-resident vector function, like a 5x5 convolve or something. You take a small performance hit when you have to load the next cache line, but if you're lucky your pipeline is deep enough to keep the processor units going while that fetch happens.

Sorry, but I happen to be an expert on these things, and those 18 Gflops are just a theoretical peak of perfectly combined multiply-add operations in the vector unit. As soon as you can't match an add and a multiply your performance would drop in half. More important - that's the THEORETICAL peak. You will never see anything close to it in practice. Apple's own version of FFT performs at 1-2 gflops.

And the vector unit can't even do double precision, which is kind of important in science. For a double precision FFT the performance is LESS THAN HALF that of a current Athlon CPU.

And yet Apple still gets hell for using Photoshop as their metric.

Nobody is blaming Apple for using Photoshop. The problem is that they don't provide any details. In practice, it looks like they are only testing 3 or 4 filters that are heavily Altivec-optimized, so it is not typical for Photoshop performace. When third parties perform benchmarks based on a large set of Photoshop actions, the Apple machines are
much slower than current x86 offerings.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Golias]

More important - that's the THEORETICAL peak. You will never see anything close to it in practice.

Yes, but if you compare it to the theoretical peak of the Pentium or Athlon, then it's still a relatively fair comparison of the chip itself... and 18 Gflops is not too shabby.

Nobody is blaming Apple for using Photoshop. The problem is that they don't provide any details. In practice, it looks like they are only testing 3 or 4 filters that are heavily Altivec-optimized, so it is not typical for Photoshop performace.

I agree with you that it is a little misleading, but Photoshop does serve as a showcase for Alti-vec in general; basically saying "if you write code that takes advantage of Alti-vec, check out the speed boost you can get!" For that reason, it's not a totally worthless metric, but it's still not very applicable to the average user.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[BitGeek]

That digitalvideoediting.com site is even more biased than Apple. For instance, for their video performance benchmarks they use and orphaned unsupported application on the mac side-- one that isn't optimized.

A fair comparison would be to use Final Cut Pro on the Mac side and see how fast it does the comperable work.

IF you really want to compare how fast you can GET STUFF DONE, that is.

Unfortunately, most benchmarks out there are really pre-designed to give the answer the creator wants.

Apple is explicit when they say the 18Gflops is a max performance, not a typical one.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but if you compare it to the theoretical peak of the Pentium or Athlon, then it's still a relatively fair comparison of the chip itself... and 18 Gflops is not too shabby.

First, it's a comparison of the vector engines - not the whole chip. Unfortunately, the vector engine is the ONLY part of the G4 that can compete with P4/Athlon - the rest of the chip is a generation behind.

Having programmed both SSE & Altivec I definitely agree it IS powerful, but not as powerful as you are lead to believe by the flopcount. One reason for this is the fused multiply-add; if you only are doing e.g. additions the flopcount will be cut in half for Altivec, while it stays the same for SSE. SSE can also work with memory operands, it has many more rename registers, and can do out-of-order execution in the vector engine too.
In addition, Intel provides a compiler that can generate SSE & SSE2 code (even gcc 3.1/3.2 will
NOT generate altivec automatically for you).

As much as I like the Mac, in practice the final performance of a 2.4 GHz Xeon is significantly better than a 1 GHz G4 (even for SSE vs. Altivec)

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Anonymous Coward]

The page I linked to concerns the most common benchmark used by Apple - Photoshop. If you don't like that site there are several others:

http://www.barefeats.com/pentium4.html

Even this mac-centric site finds that a much cheaper 1.6 GHz Athlon beats a 1 GHz G4 on photoshop.

Unfortunately, most benchmarks out there are really pre-designed to give the answer the creator wants.

That's true, but both of the sites above provide detailed specifications of the benchmarks they run so the user can judge for himself - Apple doesn't. That tells a lot about the credibility.

Apple is explicit when they say the 18Gflops is a max performance, not a typical one.

Yet, on most machines you will be able to attain 50-60% of the peak performance in practice, but on the G4 you only get 10%.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Anonymous Coward]

they use and orphaned unsupported application on the mac side-- one that isn't optimized.

After Effects is Altivec optimized according to Adobe, and they used version 5.5 on both platforms to make sure everything was fair. Version 5.5 isn't any more orphaned on Mac than it is on a PC.

And, if you want to make the Mac look better, it's not a very good argument to claim that you are stuck with orphaned and unsupported applications from major software vendors like Adobe if you choose Apple for your hardware.

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[Golias]

As much as I like the Mac, in practice the final performance of a 2.4 GHz Xeon is significantly better than a 1 GHz G4 (even for SSE vs. Altivec)

I agree. And it seems that Apple agrees with you too, because they are now selling all their high-end boxen with two chips and an OS that does MP really well. After all, A 2.x GHz (whatever the current latest and greatest is) chip from AMD or Intel might be considerably faster than a 1 GHz G4, but how does it stack up against two of them?

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[loraksus]

I don't want to start a flame war or anything, but the pc they were comparing the new G4 to was a goddamn dell, just a small point I want to raise. Dell machines are not known for speed, or anything besides cheap hardware. . .

Re:18.3 Gigaflops!

[foobar104]

What's your specific complaint? Dell is the biggest manufacturer of PCs, and the machine was equipped with that I believe is the fastest Pentium processor available. How was the test unfair?

All Dual Processors

[blakespot]

This is an excellent move for Apple. Solid UNIX high-end workstations making use of multiple processors, as a robust, pre-emptive multitasking system should. Let's hope Apple finds some what to make the public aware of this singificant spec of their tower machines.

Sadly...my dual G4 800 may be getting grey hair...

blakespot

Re:All Dual Processors

[ellem]

stop weeping. I have a single G4 400! (AGP at least!)

Re:All Dual Processors

[Anonymous Coward]

dual 800? please. my g4 400 has a tone more grey hair than that.

Re:All Dual Processors

[Anonymous Coward]

My dual Athlon MP is only 3 months old and fast!
it cost me just $1000!

Re:All Dual Processors

[pi radians]

I'll trade you, all I have is a G3 300.... and its beige!

I'm so ashamed.

Re:All Dual Processors

[blakespot]

But you can't run OS X on it.

What was the point of that purchase?

blakespot

Re:All Dual Processors

[ellem]

Ha ha!

Re:All Dual Processors

[Etcetera]

Aww yeah.... G3/233DT beige bay-be :)

At least it's got 480 MB of RAM, so things still seem surprisingly zippy.

Damn, I remember when that was next-to-top-of-the-line back ni Dec. '97.... *sigh*...

Re:All Dual Processors

[TQBrady]

I'll take your grey-haired dual 800 off your hands so you can get one of these new ones!!!

Re:All Dual Processors

[MoneyT]

Got you all beat

5400/180 with a G3 upgrade card to 300
and an additional 512 cache.

With 142 MB of memory, it works fairly well for a 6 year old computer

DDR Memory, but not bus.

[zmalone]

Much like the Xserve, it looks like they've managed to hack DDR onto the G4 processor, and its still running on a bus which is not doubled like the Athlons. Running the bus at 166mhz should make up for that a little bit though. Interesting that after all the commentary on the new cases having huge (7lbs) heat sinks, I couldn't find any images of them on the apple site. They must really be that big.

Re:DDR Memory, but not bus.

[azav]

7.1 pounds is bullshit. The aluminum heat sink IS larger but I would measure its weight in ounces not pounds. Stop spreading disinformation.

Re:DDR Memory, but not bus.

[Hes Nikke]

and how do you know it's not a lead heat sink? (were's my ROTFL emoticon?!)

DDR, yes -- but no the CPU

[blakespot]

As an FYI:

These machines do have DDR memory and a DDR system bus but the G4's themselves are running at 133 or 167MHz (depending upon model). The system controller and memory are running full tilt though (266 or 333 depending).

blakespot

Re:DDR, yes -- but no the CPU

[Enrico Pulatzo]

But there are two CPUs, I wonder if the chipset splits the memory accesses between the two...

Re:DDR, yes -- but no the CPU

[Wesley Felter]

The CPUs are on a shared bus, so the 1.3GB/s is shared.

No!!!!

[avalys]

I just bought a new Power Mac G4 (933). Yesterday!!! 12 f*cking hours ago!!!

Noooooooooooo!!!!

Re:No!!!!

[johnpaul191]

well, then you could have gotten the rebate on a monitor? if not.... sorry buddy. sometimes those rumor sites do know.

Re:No!!!!

[avalys]

Well, that's it. I'm going to force those blithering idiots at CompUSA to take it back.

I'm assuming the dual 867 will give me better performance overall (using Photoshop, Office v.X, Illustrator, Quark) than the single 933, correct?

Re:No!!!!

[foobar104]

I'm assuming the dual 867 will give me better performance overall (using Photoshop, Office v.X, Illustrator, Quark) than the single 933, correct?

Only if you're doing more than one thing at the same time. ;-)

The answer is yeah, overall the dual-proc machine should be faster than the single-proc machine, thanks to new multithreading enhancements in the Finder and the faster busses.

Re:No!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple does run a hardware discount program where you can get a rebate direct from apple on any machine bought within 10 days of a price drop. So if your 933 has been downgraded, you might be able to get some money back on it. Can't find the apple link right now, sorry.

Re:No!!!!

[kennedy]

HA HA! *points and laughs*

so how did you manage to get your head so far up you ass that you didn't know new g4 towers were coming soon?

oh well, sucks to be you!

Re:No!!!!

[avalys]

Oh, and how is that?

Why don't you go visit the store I went to, and then tell me my characterization wasn't accurate.

Re:No!!!!

[jweatherley]

Er, because everyone and his dog knew Apple were going to rev the towers by the time Jaguar was released? I'm happy even if the credit card is feeling fragile - just ordered myself a new 2x1GHz tower. Should be a bit faster than my lame old 4400 with an overclocked G3 upgrade :))

Seriously though give the store hell - they sure knew they were selling you end of the line goods and if they didn't it just prooves they're a bunch of incompetents.

Re:No!!!!

[foo12]

Did you open it? If so, it's 15% restock fee. If not, you're out nothing.

Re:No!!!!

[MoneyT]

You should have known a revision was comming. There was just a macworld. There are always Hardware updates, you should have waited

Re:No!!!!

[Che Guevarra]

2 months ago. I feel you.

this is good

[aztektum]

I do enjoy when Apple puts out new products, it means their old products will become slightly more in my price range. Although I don't know how much longer I can wait for a deal on older TiBooks. I may have to whip out the credit card.

>:D

Re:this is good

[MaxVlast]

It doesn't work on all products. When I can get a 10GB iPod for $200, bam! The 5GB models still seem to be going for about $230 - $250 on eBay.

Dual CPU's

[Anonymous Coward]

This may very well be Apple's answer to the growing performance gap between G4 and Pentium 4 CPU's. Don't expect this to double the computer's CPU performance, but it should still provide a significant increase.

Re:Dual CPU's

[qurob]

Doubles the price of the CPU(s), too!

"Faster than light" processor speed?

[dpbsmith]

This page says "The faster-than-light processor speed gets an additional boost with an advanced cache memory architecture that provides ultrafast, dedicated [blah blah blah...]"

Not that I expect much truth-in-advertising from computer vendors, but isn't that a bit much?

Oh, well...

I wonder if they count spring-loaded folders as one of Jaguar's 150 "amazing" new features... not that I didn't think it WAS pretty amazing in OS 8, but...

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[thatguywhoiam]

The only reason they like to harp on this is that someone at Apple figured out that a single calculation (on the original G4s @ 400Mhz) took less time than it did for the light from your monitor to travel the 12" to your face.

Hence, faster-than-light computing.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[dpbsmith]

Riiiiggghhht... Well, the ENIAC could complete a calculation in less time than it takes a bolus of digested material to fall from an anus to the surface of the water in a water closet, so I guess by that reasoning the ENIAC was faster than s---.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, you were about to tell me what the ENIAC was faster than, but then the signal cut out and I didn't get it. Could you try again?

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[damiam]

And my abacus is fast as fuck.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Comments like this illustrate why geeks write code and not advertising copy.

Also why no one bothers trying to sell to us...

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

and that's pretty fast, if your girlfriend's reports of your performance are a fair metric.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[BitGeek]

I thought "spring loaded folders? who cares?" when I heard about it.

But now that I've been using it, its quite wonderful.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[MaxVlast]

Interesting. I think I might be the only person who finds them an annoyance. When dragging files, I often linger on the folder while asking myself "is this what I really want to do?" When folders are spring-loaded, that can be a real bother sometimes.

Re:"Faster than light" processor speed?

[tuxedobob]

Anyone remember the page on Apple's site a while ago saying your dog could use it for something or other? I forget what exactly it was, but they had a footnote saying they were just kidding about the dog.

Unfortunately

[catwh0re]

Unfortunately the rumours about powerbook upgrades to 1ghz, weren't fruitful... damn

Re:Unfortunately

[z80]

A TiBook @ 1GHz problably isn't a very good idea. The models running at 800MHz is so hot that it's almost not possible to work with them.

Re:Unfortunately

[catwh0re]

Really? I heard reviews that suggested that the 800mhz models were cooler than previous specs such as the old 667, and that "throughout an entire week of use" the fan only came on once, and only for a few minutes.

I'll be figuring this out for myself soon enough.

Board Colors

[zmalone]

I know that Apple uses colored PCBs for various prototype stages (if I remember correctly, one of these machines went on eBay a little while back with red/brown boards). I thought that blue was one of the colors that they used for prototyping (some of the 6100 prototypes I've seen images of have blue boards, and undoubtedly there are newer examples out there). Did they change they're testing process around, or did they just shift colors to have a better visual look in the final revision?

Re:Board Colors

[class_A]

The Xserve motherboard is also blue, don't know of any significance though.

Re:Board Colors

[DavidRavenMoon]

The Xserve motherboard is also blue, don't know of any significance though.

Don't you know anything?!?!? Blue motherboards are faster! ;)

Re:Board Colors

[BitGeek]

Apple doesn't have a factory they own making PCBs.

Apple contracts with others to make thier PCBs. (This is quite an industry, actually, you can take your desing file, email it to people and get a PCB back in a week.)

The colors vary from vendor to vendor, and don't really mean anything... so during prototype they'll have one color depending on which vendor made it (they probably use multiple-- one for overnight turnaround, one when they want to run a dozen and one when they want to run a couple hundred.)

The final PCBs are made by yet another company, probably in asia, which due to local supplier variation will likely produce PCBs with a different color than the US prototyping houses.

It doesn't really mean anything.

Re:Board Colors

[MaxVlast]

I too, once heard that Apple uses color-coded PCBs at different points in the design process. I don't remember where I heard it, so I would really argue with you, but the original poster is not alone in his belief.

Oh yeah!

[Raster Burn]

I never knew that I could be sexually attracted to a computer!

Re:Oh yeah!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the holes, isn't it.

Re:Oh yeah!

[Anonymous Coward]

> I never knew that I could be sexually attracted to a computer!

You're posting on /., and this surprises you?

Re:Oh yeah!

[Lev13than]

What - you got four tiny dicks or something?

What this also means..

[catwh0re]

It's very likely that apple are pumping out dual g4 systems to simply get rid of the remaining g4 chips, (like how you get them in everything now except the iBook). This could on the opposite side be apple introducing speed updates and time for an even longer wait for the G5.

Re:What this also means..

[foobar104]

It's very likely that apple are pumping out dual g4 systems to simply get rid of the remaining g4 chips...

No, I don't think so. I think they're moving entirely to multiple processors in the towers for two reasons. First, they're more clearly distinguishing between the iMac and the tower. Yesterday, a low-end G4 seriously overlapped the top-of-the-line iMac. Today, the line is clearer.

The other thing is that Apple's proud of the degree to which Jaguar is threaded at low levels of the OS. Dual-processor machines really will be faster, even for just basic surfing and email and whatnot, than otherwise equivalent single-processor machines.

Incidentally, was anybody else slightly surprised that Apple didn't just double the whole product line, introducing "small" and "medium" dual-proc machines and a "large" quad-processor system at the $4,000 price point?

Re:What this also means..

[elocutio]

I find it interesting that this move has been made so soon after recent announcements that Apple is considering a move to an x86 architecture.

I felt those claims were groundless, but they gave me a really good laugh. This new product release is much more like the Apple that I have come to expect and love. :)

Re:What this also means..

[dtfarmer]

Oh, they're pumping out those old 1.25GHz G4 chips that won't be available to ship until 6-8 weeks from now - but mark your words, they're gonna get rid of them if it kills them!!!

(but at least you covered your ass - "the g5's are coming soon! or not!")

Re:What this also means..

[bbc22405]

They are doing this because they need to do something, and this is something they can do. Their chips are not so expensive and not so toasty, so putting 2 per box is not too expensive or toasty. They were going to have a top-end motherboard with dual processors anyway, so it's not that much more engineering, manufacturing, and support to put dual lower-speed CPUs on the same board in lesser models.

I'm guessing that it was the arrival (and recent maturity) of OS X that makes the dual procs finally worthwhile to a substantial fraction of the users. I do like the resilience (under load) of a multi-processor Unix box!

Re:What this also means..

[deveco]

No, As the PowerPC uses a shared-but topology; dual is easy compared to quad. This is like the P3. The dual CPU is not much more complicated then a single cpu system, as they can "hear" each others memory requests. I believe that, a quad system would need 2 buses and some kind of coherency system.

Re:What this also means..

[catwh0re]

I think people missed what i was saying, but none the less said it in the replies.

Introducing dual g4's is a nice way to ensure that the computers keep getting faster and stay competitive, which could be a method in which they are buying time for the G5.

Technically speaking, the roadmap for the g4 suggests that it wasn't meant to be such a high speed chip, and rather they are already stepping into parts of the g5's road map in terms of sheer mhz.

The suspicion of getting rid of the "g4" so to speak is the other side of the balance, with reports that remaining stock on g4's is still plentiful, putting a g4(a rather powerful processor) into everything except the ibook, is a really clever way to ensure that the number of G4's that go out the door are increased.

Additionally there is no difference between "being overstocked" and "attempting to reach sales targets for a chipset", either translate into more sales needed before a transition. I'm not saying anything ground breaking here, just providing potential reasons for either direction they may take.

Re:What this also means..

[Anonymous Coward]

Given the size of that heat sink, they might have needed a different form factor for a quad-1.25GHz G4.

Re:What this also means..

[foobar104]

I was going on the assumption that the new heat sink-- which is disproportionately large compared to the one in the dual 1 GHz Quicksilvers-- is there to accommodate four processors. Otherwise, it's overkill.

Re:What this also means..

[Anonymous Coward]

Dual-processor machines really will be faster, even for just basic surfing and email and whatnot, than otherwise equivalent single-processor machines.

The problem Apple is faced with, and the reason they're going with all dual systems in their pro machines, is that their competition is not selling "equivalent" single-processor machines. Simply put, the present-day Pentium4 processor kicks the G4's *ass.

Re:What this also means..

[foobar104]

Simply put, the present-day Pentium4 processor kicks the G4's *ass.

You can state that sort of comparison either accurately or simply, but not both at the same time.

For example, I find that the G4 kick's the Pentium 4's ass, because the Pentium 4 can't run OS X. If it doesn't run OS X, it's not a computer, as far as I'm concerned. So by my criteria, the G4 kicks the Pentium's ass.

If your criteria is how well the processor runs Windows, then obviously the Pentium beats the G4.

If you care about running MSC.Nastran, then the Pentium 4 beats the G4 because there's no version of Nastran for the G4. On the other hand, if you care about running BLAST, then the G4 is 12-15 times faster than the Pentium 4, so in that case G4 wins.

So simply put, it's not possible to "simply put" this sort of thing.

Now, getting back to my point, a dual-processor G4 running at 867 MHz will feel faster-- more responsive and interactive-- than an otherwise identical single-processor machine.

Re:What this also means..

[MoneyT]

Of course the downside to this is that all the PC manufacturers will be shoving dual systems in our faces now

Re:What this also means..

[Anonymous Coward]

If you care about running MSC.Nastran, then the Pentium 4 beats the G4 because there's no version of Nastran for the G4. On the other hand, if you care about running BLAST, then the G4 is 12-15 times faster than the Pentium 4, so in that case G4 wins.

Can you provide us with a reference for that claim?

If you are thinking about the Apple/Genentech version of BLAST, it is just as fast as the non-optimized NCBI version on a P4 at the default wordsize 11, and up to a factor two faster at insane wordsizes like 40 or so. (But your sensitivity will be extremely low, making it unusable for most tasks)

If you compare it to the optimized blast from Washington University, the Apple/Genentech version is still slower.

I'm a big Mac fan, but I'm also a scientist that uses BLAST daily, and unfortunately the Apple marketing claim doesn't hold up very well in practice.

here's your heat sink picture........

[johnpaul191]

they do sorta show it in the VR of the innards.....

http://www.apple.com/hardware/gallery/pmg4_august2 002_480.html

yes it is huge, and notice the holes in front of case venting through to the back plate that is all speed holes. i wonder if it is these dual processors that are that hot, or if Apple is just planning for the future speed bumps? also, look in the open case... there is a fan right about in the middle of the case blowing right across (or sucking air over) the heatsinks. they moved the hard drives out of the air path and use an Xserve-like (or the actual Xserve) low profile power supply strapped up to the inside top of the case. interesting layout changes inside.

Re:here's your heat sink picture........

[bill_mcgonigle]

i wonder if it is these dual processors that are that hot, or if Apple is just planning for the future speed bumps?

I assume they're to accomodate these.

Re:here's your heat sink picture........

[Pope]

I wonder if it is these dual processors that are that hot

Well, a single 1GHz G4 chip max out at 30W, so multiply that by 2 and add a bit, just for the processors! Yep, they're quite a bit hotter than the PPC750 (aka G4) series.

Pretty sweet, but the other big news

[jht]

The other shoe that dropped today was that they've now gone full-tilt with the eMac, adding a Superdrive and running it at 800 MHz for the same price ($1499) as the 15" Combo drive iMac.

Meaning that unless you really like the cool look of the iMac, you can save a couple of hundred dollars by getting an eMac instead, without giving anything else up (I believe they're based on the same motherboard spec) besides the cool screen. And the eMac has a pretty decent screen.

I've been leaning towards getting an iMac in the fall to replace my wife's old iMac DV 450 (we could use the DVD burner to make movies of the baby), but assuming no other drastic changes I'd be inclined to go with the eMac now instead. And Apple is steadily returning the CRT to it's place as the lower-end anchor even though LCD prices are starting to drop again (they also reduced the prices of all the other iMac configs). That's interesting.

Basically, I'm going to be watching the early fall with great interest - once these new configs are well-established there'll probably be some speedbumping of the whole line around October or so. My guess is that the iMac and eMac could hit 1 GHz, the PowerMac towers will start at 1 GHz and go to either 1.4 or maybe as high as 1.6 (Moto is supposedly sampling the 1.6 part now), and the PowerBook will probably get a speedbump to, say, 933 MHz at that point, too. They may not all be at once, but those are the next logical steps, and I'd expect to see them all before years' end (and before Christmas season, in particular).

Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news

[mbbac]

I think the lower power draw of the iMac would more than make up the price differential over the life of the computer. The iMac's monitor would also be easier on your wife's eyes.

Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news

[daviddennis]

I have to admit that I'd still buy an iMac because the LCD screen really makes a huge difference in readability.

That arm is a wonderful ergonomic invention, too - I just wish they could add that to their bigger monitors.

D

Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news

[bnenning]

On the other hand, the eMac has 40% more pixels (1280x960 vs 1024x768), which is very useful under OS X.

Re:Pretty sweet, but the other big news

[daviddennis]

True, so I'd probably wind up splurging on the 17" iMac which has both a LCD screen and extra pixels.

But I will admit that's quite a bit more money.

D

Omissions

[donux]

8xAGP, Firewire 2 and USB 2 are missing. No big deal but interesting. Great to see audio ports built in.

It's all about the software though. 10.1 is superb - 10.2 is alleged to be a big improvement.
Who cares how fast your G4 is clocked? It won't run OS X.

Re:Omissions

[trash eighty]

Who cares how fast your G4 is clocked? It won't run OS X.

really? i'll stick to my G3 iMac then... ;)

Re:Omissions

[foobar104]

It's all about the software though. 10.1 is superb - 10.2 is alleged to be a big improvement.
Who cares how fast your G4 is clocked? It won't run OS X.

Uh... is there some joke in here that I haven't gotten?

Incidentally, 10.2 is a big improvement. I've been running 6C106 (the release was 6C115) for about 10 days now. It's heaven, really peppy even on 400-500 MHz G3 systems.

Re:Omissions

[illerd]

He must be using some wacky keyboard where the G is right next to the P

Re:Omissions

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm assuming you meant P4, not G4 in that last statement? :)

Dont feel bad my G4 733 is excellent.

[Anonymous Coward]

OS X ruleZ!

Zip bay, vents... ?

[Steve Cowan]

While you could probably hack one of those two Optical drive bays for a Zip drive, I am puzzled why Apple would no longer offer Zip as a BTO option.

Hopefully Apple or a third-party mfr will offer an attractive Zip bezel for this case.

Also, those massive cooling vents on the front of the machine kind of have me worried that this thing is going to sound like a wind tunnel... but that is the bitter reality of it: you can't have all the speed and none of the noise.

Otherwise this looks like a damn impressive machine, and a long-overdue overhaul to the G4 line. I'm drooling already. Nice work Apple.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Spencerian]

Why would you NEED a Zip drive as a built-in option when you can burn a CD that holds over 6 times as much?

You can still buy a USB or FireWire Zip drive and connect it externally, but now Apple doesn't dedicate a place in the case that is a waste of space for anything other than a Zip drive.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, those massive cooling vents on the front of the machine kind of have me worried that this thing is going to sound like a wind tunnel...

If anything, the vents make me feel it is less likely these things will howl like the previous Dual GHz model. The extra holes mean better ventilation, better ventilation means the fans don't have to work as hard. Apple has almost certainly heard the complaints about the previous model and done their best to get rid of the most of the noise. I'm going to buy either the 867 or the GHz model, probably today. The one thing that worries me is the good chance for new model bugs, especially given that these are obviously new mobos and there have been vague reports of Xserve problems.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Because a zip disk is more expensive... er... oh right.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[pininfrna]

These 'vents' in the front might actually not provide much added ventilation... because they are speakers. :-)

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the speaker is at the top.

The four "vents" are ports:

Front headphone jack, audio line-in, audio line-out, and Apple speaker mini-jack, for connecting to Apple Pro speakers.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Steve Cowan]

Oh the Zip issue is minor for most people, I'll admit. I have an internal Zip 250 in my existing G4 right now because I use a Roland sampler (the SP-808) which also has a Zip drive, and it makes for a very convenient way to work on samples in the computer and transfer them to the sampler.

The lack of Zip isn't the end of the world for me by any means, I'll just need to get an external Zip so that my workflow won't change.

I suppose in the grand scheme, Zip is going the way of the floppy anyway, at least in Apple's view, and if these machines are the speed demons I expect them to be I can certainly forgive Apple for making my Zip external :)

My favourite thing here is that while they have nudged the top end up about 20% in speed, the bottom and mid-range towers have gotten a massive boost.

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Front headphone jack, audio line-in, audio line-out, and Apple speaker mini-jack, for connecting to Apple Pro speakers

um, no they're not. all those ports are in the back, except for the headphone, which is in the top right corner of the silver drive area.

where the heck do you people get these crazy ideas? i mean, are you looking at the pictures, it sure doesn't seem like it....

Re:Zip bay, vents... ?

[superdan2k]

It's simple really. A blank CD costs roughly 1/15th (or less) what a Zip disk does, stores 6.5 times as much, and is stable and reliable compared to the Zip.

I have a couple Mac with built-in Zip drives. I stopped using Zip disks years ago for the reasons listed above.

A Q about DDR

[DLWormwood]

I'm assuming some of those more skeptical of Apple and more willing to be critical of their hardware decisions are reading this so I'll ask...

As a Mac user, what benefit will DDR bring to PowerPC based systems? My understanding is that the data bus from the CPUs to the bus controller is still SDR; what, then, can take advantage of the increased memory bandwidth? PCI and ATA are much slower than memory. The only subsystem I can see that can hook to the memory at full tilt is the graphics card, but I don't think AGP is at DDR memory speeds yet. Or is it?

Re:A Q about DDR

[MonaXier]

I think 4x AGP benefits from DDR (both ATI and nVidia have been using it for ages). According to Apple, the CPU can access the RAM twice per clock cycle, which (they claim) gives you up to 2.7 GB/s throughput - twice as much as PC-133 RAM. Also, the CPU has 2MB (1MB per unit, I think) DDR L3 cache.
As for why the system bus is still 133 or 167 MHz, I think it may be limitation of G4 processor - all the PDFs on Moto site say 100 or 133 MHz bus, depending on the model. More info at architecture page.

Re:A Q about DDR

[0x69]

Apple's site is really short on hard facts, but DDR main memory can still be very useful with both CPU's stuck on a single SDR bus. IF the system controller (chipset), OS, & drivers are clever enough, DDR can up to (theoretical) double performance when the CPU's, video, network, disks, etc. are collectively making memory the performance bottleneck. Apple's ads suggest that they want to look good in intense multitasking situations like this.

Re:A Q about DDR

[stux]

The memory bus is DDR, the processor bus is SDR.

There are two processors.

This means the memory subsystem can keep BOTH processors completely saturated. (the processor core could use more data... but there is NO way to get more data into the processor faster than SDR (except for L3 cache)

So essentially this is a HUGE improvement for heavy tasks which get a big improvement from bus speeds and processor count...

This is a very good thing. It'd be better to have the processors on a DDR bus... but and extra 33Mhz is definately welcome.

AltiVec is soooo powerful that an altivec algorithm generally runs at the same speed as your memory subsystem... the cpu is actually idling waiting for memory.

Increase the memory speed and you release the latent potential of the altivec unit..

In many ways its more important these days than processor speedbumps.

Re:A Q about DDR

[qnonsense]

The memory bus is DDR, the processor bus is SDR.

There are two processors.

This means the memory subsystem can keep BOTH processors completely saturated.

• 
  I don't thik so... This is the case of the Athlon, but that's for a very strange and unusual reason. Ever wonder why dual Athlon mobos cost so much? It's because the processor bus on the Athlon is point-to-point. That means each processor has its own bus, its own set of traces on the mobo. With a dual Athlon, 333MHz memory makes sense because even though each CPU bus is only 266, there are two independent buses. Each processor can use a full 266MHz of bandwidth at the same time.
  
  The G4 bus (to the best of my knowledge--please provide link proving me wrong) isn't point to poit, just like the P3/P4/Xeon bus isn't point to point. That means all the processors share the SAME 133MHz bus. So, no, two G4 processors can't each use 133MHz of bandwidth to the memory at the same time. G4s, like their shared processor bus cousins the P4 and Xeon, must share their processor bus across the board.
  
  The DDR memory is a good thing to be sure, and the memory subsystem could keep both CPUs saturated, but it can't. In fact, in standard SMP mobos (i.e. non-Athlon/Alpha dual mobos) there is NO way to ever saturate both CPUs.
  
  Hope that helped.
  

Re:A Q about DDR

[farfolen]

According to Apple, the CPU can access the RAM twice per clock cycle, which (they claim) gives you up to 2.7 GB/s throughput - twice as much as PC-133 RAM.

that's not just apple...thats everyone. thats what DDR memory does, allow for access on the rise and fall of every clock cycle.

Re:A Q about DDR

[stux]

The G4 bus (to the best of my knowledge--please provide link proving me wrong) isn't point to poit,

That means all the processors share the SAME 133MHz bus. So, no, two G4 processors can't each use 133MHz of bandwidth to the memory at the same time.


Thanks, I checked up, I think you're right

Which just goes to hammer home how bad the memory speed situation is for a G4 :(

Re:A Q about DDR

[qnonsense]

Also, take a look at dome docs on the AGP controller for the G4...

Re:A Q about DDR

[stux]

I did find something interesting today... Apparently the new controller allows the G4s to support "intervention" in their L3 caches...

basically, they only need to synchronise data if in fact that data is required by the other CPU.

That could provide a large benefit in a dual config.

Also I think the docs said that it didn't use the system bus, not sure though.

Anyway, it was the Technology Overview PDF for the new PowerMacs

Unfortunately, bomniweb has gone and lost the URL

Still out of range, only faster..

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh.. they've taken the older G4's off of their website! They are the only model I'm looking at buying from Apple right now, as I already have a nice 20" Trinitron monitor and am in no hurry to reduce my visual real-estate (even though their displays are superior, it is also a money issue - I'm not paying for a new monitor when I already have one that is more than adequate!).

So, where does this leave me? With Apple computers that are still out of my price range, but faster, which does me no good!

Re:Still out of range, only faster..

[Anonymous Coward]

From one AC to another: You do know that you can use your SONY monitor with ANY G4 including the new ones, right? You'll just have to use the included DVI to VGA adapter if you get one of these newest ones.

Re:Still out of range, only faster..

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I want the performance of another one of their desktops, as the G4 is too much.. and their other desktops have built-in monitors.

Re:Still out of range, only faster..

[BitGeek]

Huh? $1700 is out of your price range?

Then just go buy an older G4. I'm certain you can find plenty of used ones on eBay or at the discounters...

Or just wait a few weeks and there will be a mess of them on apple refurbished area (I bet).

Why are they the idiots?

[JudgeFurious]

Get used to the way the world works. I bought a dual 1Gig a couple of months back. Maybe I should try and force them to take it back because I don't want to pay full price for 10.2 huh? Or maybe I can just complain that I'm no longer on the top end and they'll make an exception in my case.

I mean, that's what Apple is there for right? To make you as an indivual feel special.

Or maybe I should remember that I've got a buddy with a dual G4450 who's still getting great performance out of his machine and calm down. Your 9 ain't going to become crap overnight pal.

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[Anonymous Coward]

you have a frind who has a G4 4.45 GHz?? Gimme his address so I can steal it!

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you blithering idiot, he means 450 MHz, which is faster than my single 400 MHz machine from a few years ago. ...and learn to spell, you net moron!

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your and idiot. He bought is yesterday and I'm sure as stupid as they are at CompUsa even they knew that new towers were coming out tomorrow. Not to mention the machine he bought YESTERDAY is close to $1000 cheaper today. BTW your a jackass.

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[MoneyT]

Regardless of how the world works, he can take the machine back to compUSA and get his money back. If he bought from apple, that might be a different story

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[DansnBear]

I bought a duel 1.0 ghz model 5 days ago directly from the Apple Store online. I called them yesterday, and they alowed me to change my order because they haven't shipped it yet. IMO, that was very nice of them, and the sales rep. was extremely helpfull.

Re:Why are they the idiots?

[tuxedobob]

I'm not your buddy.

Why do I have to wait 20 seconds before hitting submit? It's just 4 words!

Totally OT

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you the Raster Burn that used to BBS in St. Louis, MO?

Re:Totally OT

[Raster Burn]

Yep.

Re:Totally OT

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh huh... and look! Four holes on the front! FOUR... have fun ;-)

maybe I'm the only one

[hype7]

to be disappointed by these new machines.

Radeon 9000? It's not as fast as the 8500, which you can no longer get.

The second ATA bus is only 66! Now WTF is going on here? If you put one ATA100 in, you might as well go the whole hog and put two in!

Firewire stays as it was - 800mbits/second, needed if only for mind games with USB2

The case has holes for firewire or usb at the front... but instead, they just leave them as holes.

The case is the same with some plastic hacked on the front.

Money on they won't bother putting different eject buttons for the different drives - hit eject on the keyboard, you eject both

The displays are still as expensive as ever

Bluetooth built in would have been nice

I think that sums up. I'm waiting for the next lot, and hopefully they get rid of those shitty g4s by the time MW Jan comes around.

-- james

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[foobar104]

Dude, did you somehow miss the part where they're selling dual-processor machines for the same price as they sold single-processor machines (modulo a hundred bucks or so) yesterday?

I can't believe the way you just glossed over that to talk about eject buttons on the optical drives! Your priorities are seriously out of whack.

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[benh57]

The case is not at all the same. Look closer. The components are all moved around and the ventilation is completely changed. The hard drives are vertical!

Oh, you're trolling? nevermind. :)

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[pininfrna]

The fact that you refer to the 4 new speakers on the computer as "holes for firewire or usb" pretty much sums up the value of all the comments you just made. :-)

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[Oculus Habent]

Let's see...

• Radeon 9000: The tragedy of a graphics card still too fast for anyone not looking for 150 fps out of Quake III (maybe you're anticipating EQ on Mac...)
• ATA-66?! Oh No! You can barely burst that kind of transfer rate, let alone maintain it. Besides, when was the last time you were copying 40GB from your second 80G drive to your forth 80G drive?
• FireWire 2 - it's nice in the same way having 80 gigs of RAM is nice - bragging rights. Nothing else. Do you see many FireWire 2 compliant products out? Do you see many Apps that say "40GB RAM required, 80GB recommended"? It can wait. Meanwhile, the lack of the North/South bridge allows a FireWire 2 PCI card to get better transfer rates when they come out. The flashiness of FW2 doesn't yet justify the price.
• I'll agree about no up front ports - it would be nice. But the vent holes are an important part of the equation.
• Eject probably won't eject both, just one. Which one? Maybe the selected one. Maybe the first one only. Maybe Apple will write a nifty add-on that lets you select. Maybe it isn't a huge concern for most people.
• This was an upgrade for the box, not the screens. You don't like the $2500 price tag? Buy a CRT - the VGA convertor is included. Sure, they are pretty, but even Apple knows that not everyone is going to spend $1000 on a 17" LCD when they could spend $250 on a 19" CRT.
• Bluetooth built-in would have been OK. Except that maybe 1% of the people will use it in the next year. Despite the attempts to make Bluetooth the short-range communications technology, cables are still pretty popular. It isn't dying, it just isn't pervasive enough to include. And I know how hard it is to have to reach around behind the case and plug something in once.
• Shitty G4s? I was just disagreeing with you until now. Do you have a general dislike of 1-digit numbers, or do you have no appreciation of the way processors work? G4 may not be Power4, but at least it's not Pentium 4.

*sigh*

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

Eject probably won't eject both, just one. Which one? Maybe the selected one. Maybe the first one only. Maybe Apple will write a nifty add-on that lets you select. Maybe it isn't a huge concern for most people.

Or maybe even <gasp!> put an eject button on the drive? Now that would be innovative.

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[EccentricAnomaly]

I'll agree about no up front ports - it would be nice.

There's two USB ports on the keyboard and two on the monitor... why put any on the front of the case??

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[foo12]

The ATA66 is likely intended for the optical drives, neither of which would require an ATA100. From an engineering-meets-realworld-use standpoint, it makes perfect: a few pennies on a single machine mean profiting an extra few hundred grand on the whole.

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

Bluetooth built-in would have been OK. Except that maybe 1% of the people will use it in the next year.

Dude, I'm already using Bluetooth. It's built into my IBM Thinkpad, built into my cell phone, and built into my PDA. I guess I'm in that 1% of the overall population, but from my perspective it's 100%!

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[DavidRavenMoon]

The fact that you refer to the 4 new speakers on the computer as "holes for firewire or usb" pretty much sums up the value of all the comments you just made. :-)

Sorry, but they are not speakers. Those are air vents. It still has one speaker in front, near the top.

If you look at the QuickTime VR movie of the case opening, you can see where the bottom vent holes are, there is a mesh screen inside the case close to them.

Peripherals and audio Two 400Mbps FireWire ports (15W total power)(7) Four USB ports (two on system, two on keyboard) Front headphone jack Built-in speaker Stereo audio line in and line out minijacks Apple speaker minijack for connection to optional Apple Pro Speakers

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

Already there. They are talking about the keyboard "eject" shortcut key, which sends a command to the OS to umount before ejecting.

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[BitGeek]

What a waste that would be. (The drives to have eject buttons, if you ever need them.)

Your computer probably has a floppy drive built in. USe it much?

Haven't missed not having one...

Can you imagine what the iMac G4 would be like if they'd included a floppy drive? Sheesh.

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[hype7]

that was not a troll :P

-- james

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[jcr]

The fact that you refer to the 4 new speakers on the computer as "holes for firewire or usb" pretty much sums up the value of all the comments you just made. :-)

The fact that you don't know how to tell a speaker from a vent hole says something about your own powers of observation..

-jcr

Re:maybe I'm the only one

[The Mainframe]

Why don't we all just agree that none of us has any fucking clue what the four things at the base of the case are, and hope we are enlightened at some later point?

17" iMac price increased $100?

[haaz]

Is it just me, or did the price on the 17" iMac increase by $100?

(OH GAWD NO NOT $100 OH THAT'S BLOODY LARCENY OH THE PAIN OH MY GAWD NOOOOO.... sorry... ;-) I just realized that it is kind of ridiculous to be screaming bloody murder over a $100 price drop when they've cut the prices on their other machines and introduced rocking PMG4s. ;-)

Re:17" iMac price increased $100?

[foobar104]

Is it just me, or did the price on the 17" iMac increase by $100?

I don't think so. I was at the local Apple Store this weekend drooling^W admiring the 17" iMac with Jaguar on it. I remember the price for the system being $1,999, which is the same price as they're listing on the Apple Store web site today.

But they did drop the price on the 15" non-SuperDrive models by $100.

Re:17" iMac price increased $100?

[x136]

Nope. I watched the keynote. It was $1,999 then it's $1,999 now. :)

Re:17" iMac price increased $100?

[garren_bagley]

Re: Is it just me, or did the price on the 17" iMac increase by $100?

It's just you.

Re:17" iMac price increased $100?

[Mononoke]

Is it just me, or did the price on the 17" iMac increase by $100?

It's just you. The other iMacs dropped by $100.

heat sink is HUGE

[paradesign]

that has to be the biggest heat sink ever! i wonder why they dont go with on chip active cooling like the pc people. has anyone hacked a pc heatsink onto a g4?

the blue board is f'n gorgeous, but i NEED my zip drive!!!

Re:heat sink is HUGE

[Jonny 290]

Firewire Zip drive

Mac users like their computers to be furniture, not machines. They like quiet.

(and yes, I am a partial mac user)

Re:heat sink is HUGE

[Pope]

Heat sinks are quieter! ;)

100GBps error...

[Anonymous Coward]

Tues 8/13/02 11:54 EDT
from: http://www.apple.com/powermac/architecture.html

quote:
"
Dual drive interfaces
The Power Mac G4 now includes two ATA hard drive interfaces. All standard systems ship with a 7200rpm hard disk drive on an ATA/100 bus, with theoretical data throughput to and from the hard drive up to 100GBps.
"
Don't we all wish. I think Apple means 100MBps for that ATA100 interface.
100GBps HDs would make RAM seem pretty slow.

Mixed reaction

[Xel]

I was waiting for these for a long time. And im disappointed, frankly.

Basically, the motherboard is a thing of beauty: DDR finally comes to Mac, dual procs, gobs of cache, ATA/100 AND ATA/66, a bitchin memory controller, 4x AGP and 4 PCI slots... This is the culmination of everything Mac users have been lusting over in a mobo.

But what the $&#*@ is up with that case??

It looks like Apple is so stubbornly hanging on to the 4 year old G3 design that theyre just cramming everything in wherever it will fit- some HDs mounted sideways, some flat. PCI slots on TOP? vents everywhere, ungly front bezel that looks like it was cobbled together last minute to accomodate the two optical drives, and a heatsink the size of an air conditioner. The engineers should have stopped and asked themselves if this was a good idea after they started perforating the thing like a cheese grater just to get air flowing through it.

----------------
www.overstim.net

Re:Mixed reaction

[jcr]

But what the $&#*@ is up with that case??

The case is a continuation of an award-winning design, that has proven very popular. It maintains the carry handles (believe me, if you've ever dropped a computer, you appreciate the handles), and the ability to open the case easily.

Speaking as one who had to dismantle and reassemble PC's on a daily basis in my misspent youth, I'd be pretty annoyed if Apple had changed the "put most of the guts on the door" design.

-jcr

Re:Mixed reaction

[Golias]

The new case looks to me like minor and needed upgrade from what was already the best case in the home computer industry: Better (and probably quieter) air-flow, room for another optical drive & more internal HD's, and Apple's usual swing-open case design that would make the Dell Dude weep with envy.

What were you hoping for? An iMac-style dome?

Re:Mixed reaction

[PythonOrRuby]

Not to mention moving the optical drives to the middle of the case, which makes them much more accessible for people who keep their PowerMacs on their desk/workspace.

Re:Mixed reaction

[The Mainframe]

I dunno... I don't really have any problem with the case. My question is: Where the #^$%#$ is my G5? I'm sick and tired of this slow-processor bullshit!

Re:Mixed reaction

[Xel]

I'M IT in an office with 90+ Macs. Believe me, i get on my knees and thank Ives every day for the handles, I have to move machines around daily. But you can redesign the case and still give it handles..

Re:Mixed reaction

[Xel]

What I was looking for, in all honesty was a case very similar to the existing one, but large enough to comfortably accomodate everything inside while allowing for airflow and ease of upgrade: anyone whos had to try plugging/unplugging the IDE drives in a G3 or G4 tower knows what Im talking about. A cleaner looking front, two eject buttons, and front-mounted USB/FireWire would have been spiffy too.

yes, there is a fan

[EccentricAnomaly]

* processor heatsink is considerably larger than previous models, but lacks a fan

Well, if you look at apple's site you can see a fan... but it looks like its up by the CD/DVD drives. What's up with that?

Re:yes, there is a fan

[pi radians]

Actually, the only image that will show you a fan is the QTVR. Carefully look and you can see a giant fan right next to the heatsink.

Re:yes, there is a fan

[Anonymous Coward]

it looks like there's two fans... a big one by the heat sink and a small one by the drives.

Re:yes, there is a fan

[Mononoke]

...it looks like its up by the CD/DVD drives. What's up with that?

Burners generate quite a bit of heat, especially under continuous use. Two burners mounted as closely as it looks like Apple will let you begins to approach Pentium heat generation levels.

Re:yes, there is a fan

[dadragon]

Burners generate quite a bit of heat, especially under continuous use. Two burners mounted as closely as it looks like Apple will let you begins to approach Pentium heat generation levels.

Does this mean, that when/if I get one, I can dispose of my furnace? Will I get to use AC in winter? That'd be cool.

Re:yes, there is a fan

[tuxedobob]

Actually, I have a Dual 450 that runs SETI constantly. (Couldn't get Folding@home to work.) I found myself opening the windows at school last winter. In Massachusetts.

Ran to the Apple Store at Lunch

[tsmit]

We have an Apple store across the street from where i work, and i ran over at lunch to check things out. They are getting the low end 867 and 1 gig machines in tomorrow, but won't be getting the 1.25 machines in for 2-3 months. Apparently, the 1.25 chips aren't even available yet, at least thats what the Mac dweebie said.

Re:Ran to the Apple Store at Lunch

[Anonymous Coward]

Your Mom is a dweebie, heh.

another, even bigger fan.

[EccentricAnomaly]

I missed it before... you can see a second even bigger fan in the quicktime VR. Look under the drives, facing the massive heat sinks... Does a G4 really give out this much heat?? I wonder if this is a sign of a Power4 in our future :)

The holes in the front

[pininfrna]

/. keeps down-modding my posts about this bit of info which I think is pretty informative... the holes on the front aren't vents, they are little speakers.

Re:The holes in the front

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably because you are wrong. Besides earlier spy photos of the case which showed there was nothing attached to the holes (people had hoped they were usb or firewire connectors), there's also the fact that the data sheet for the new PowerMacs says Built-in speaker. If the little holes were speakers, it would be plural. This case is all about airflow because of the whining about the whining of the previous case fans.

Re:The holes in the front

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah surround sound hehe

Re:The holes in the front

[usr122122121]

See the big circle above the Optical Drives? That's the speaker.

Those little holes that you're talking about are for air intake.

Re:The holes in the front

[DavidRavenMoon]

/. keeps down-modding my posts about this bit of info which I think is pretty informative... the holes on the front aren't vents, they are little speakers.

Did you just make this up or something?? Nowhere on Apple's page does it say it has more than one speaker. And it does say it has a "Built-in speaker"

They are air vents. It has ONE speaker. Same HK speaker as the Quicksilver, but near the top now. Why in hell would it have 5 speakers anyway? Mono at that!

Re:The holes in the front

[Quad_Junkie]

If those are speakers, what is the speaker at the top doing, please look again :(

And you wonder why they keep moderating you down . . .

Re:The holes in the front

[The Mainframe]

Wait! Wait! I know! Maybe... Nobody has any fucking clue?

the giant fan conspiracy

[johnpaul191]

i saw that too..... i guess someone more knowledgable in the art of DIY computer building would know..... but this is strange to me....

yesterday they had dual 1GHz machines in the quicksilver cases. the quicksilver case has little ventilation. no front vents, small back venting ports. today they have the dual 1GHz and dual 1.25GHz with a massive 7lb heatsink, fan directly blowing across it and it basically is sitting in a windtunnel with those front and rear speedholes. i can only guess this is for the next coming speedbumps? i think this 1GHz chip is actually a revised version of yesterdays 1GHz chip, so it might run a little hotter? also the DDRam and whatnot might be a lil warmer, but i would guess this is planning for the next speedbumps till they fully redesign the case (if they do anytime soon).

Re:the giant fan conspiracy

[delus10n0]

It's a 120mm fan, and looks to be pushing air out of the case, through the heatsink fins.

Also, with newer revisions of chips (smaller dyes/etc.), the chip should actually give off _less_ heat, not more. This is the case most of the time, but not always.

Re:the giant fan conspiracy

[Anonymous Coward]

In January, new power macs will start coming with their own nuclear fusion reactors... this necessitates the huge fan and heatsinks

Re:the giant fan conspiracy

[Alan Partridge]

it's pretty easy - the giant heatsink covers BOTH CPUs, the giant fan runs SLOWER than your average CPU fan (like those fitted to the QS machines)and therefore is larger to give the same throughput at a lower noise level. The heatsink isn't all that much bigger than the one fitted to the dual 450/500/533 machines.

about the video cards...

[ultramk]

what do i have to do to run (2) 1600x1200 CRTs with the built in video? I'm willing to get the Ge4Ti BTO card, but it has 1 ADC and 1 DVI (w/ VGA adapter). Can I get an ADC-VGA adapter to run a second CRT?

(don't like LCD's: too expensive, lousy color gamut, way too expensive)

Anyone have any experience with this sort of setup on a recent G4?

Michael-

Re:about the video cards...

[eweiland]

The newer G4 machines have a VGA and a DVI connector. Each are capable of independent video. Apple sells a DVI-VGA display adapter for $19. (PN - M8754G/A) With it the single card can support two monitors.

Re:about the video cards...

[tomdarch]

I'm concerned about the same thing. All of the available cards from Apple's online store are DVI+ADC out-only cards. I would rather buy a second 19" CRT for us$200 to us$350 than us$1000 for an Apple 17" ADC unit.

Dr. Bott has this "VGA Extractor for ADC" for us$35 plus S&H. I can't find any reviews of how well it works or how good the video quality is. On the other hand, I can't find any complaints.

My additional complaint is that the available video cards don't have standard TV Video out! This is becoming standard on equivalent WinTel video cards. I would rather use my Region 2 DVD drive to watch Spaced on my TV through a reliable MacOS box than my wonky WinTel box.

By the way, you're welcome for my Googling "ADC VGA adapter" ;^)

Re:about the video cards...

[foobar104]

Dr. Bott has this "VGA Extractor for ADC" for us$35 plus S&H.

All the machines announced today come with an ADC-VGA adapter at no charge. If you acquire a DVI-VGA adapter, you can use two independent CRTs with your new machine.

Apple also sells the ADC-VGA adapter separately, but I'm too busy/lazy to look it up for you right now. You can find it at store.apple.com.

Re:about the video cards...

[ultraslide]

Here it is ... ADC to VGA connector !
Now use 2 VGA monitors with your G4!

http://www.networkpromktg.com/adc_to_vga_cable.h tm

yer welcome -

the 'slide
"gotta have more cowbell!"

Re:about the video cards...

[qengho]

All the machines announced today come with an ADC-VGA adapter at no charge.

No, they come with a DVI-to-VGA adapter.

Re:about the video cards...

[singularity]

I went out and purchased a Radeon 7000 PCI card for my G4/933 so that I could run a second monitor.

One important thing to realize is that Quartz Extreme will probably work best with the entire VRAM for it, and not split up for two monitors (it requires 32megs VRAM). Running with a 64 or 128 meg card might allow you to run two monitors with QE, but you might want to check on that.

I picked up the Radeon for about $120.

Of course, if you need all of the PCI slots for something else, you will probably want to run the two monitors off of the original video card.

Just some things to think about.

(And now I have the great option of being able to run four monitors, and have TV-out off the 7000)

Re:about the video cards...

[jimbolaya]

Actually, they come with a ADC and DVI connector, and a DVI-to-VGA adapter.

Re:about the video cards...

[Henriok]

I've bought 4 ADC/VGA-adapters and they work flawlessly with QuickSilver 800, 2x800 and 2x1 GHz. I can recommend these to anyone running two CRT displays. This must be a better solution than going out an buying an aditional Radeon 7000, cause that card wont run Quartz Extreme and costs about 3-4 times more.

Re:about the video cards...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has stated several times that 32mb is recommended but not required.

Re:about the video cards...

[PatJensen]

Tom,

Thanks a bunch for your informative post. I ordered one of those cables with 2 day shipping. I just bought a G4/800 this weekend with a dual headed Radeon 7500. I already have two 17" CRTs so I'm really excited.

-Pat

Re:about the video cards...

[tomdarch]

I did some poking around on the Apple store site, and I could only find DVI to VGA adapters. I think that Apple does not sell an ADC to VGA adapter! As much as I am an Apple fan, I suspect that this will be yet another plug that is doomed to be forgotten (like that damn old-style powerbook SCSI port, to name only one)

Re:about the video cards...

[foobar104]

This page shows you the ADC-DVI adapter, which you then adapt to VGA with this. The ADC-DVI adapter is $39, and the DVI-VGA adapter is $19, or it comes free with some of the new machines. (My new G4 came with one.)

Going the other way (from a non-Apple computer to an ADC Apple monitor) is harder, because you have to put power onto the ADC cable. That takes this adapter, a $149 device that gets power off the wall, takes USB and DVI inputs and sends ADC to the monitor.

I'd really like ADC to become a standard beyond just Apple. My new machine looks like this: mouse plugs into keyboard via USB. Keyboard plugs into monitor via USB. Monitor plugs into computer via ADC. Computer plugs into wall for power. That's it. No other cables at all, since I'm using AirPort. It's great, and makes for a really neat under-desk area.

benchies

[Perdo]

Add 20% to these numbers.

Apple again shines... but only in their traditional strengths.

Re:benchies

[Anonymous Coward]

But how does that take into account bus speed changes, memory bus changes, and ATA speed increases?

7455 or 7470 PPC chips?

[johnpaul191]

hrmmm now there seems to be some confusion is these are running the previous 7455 PPC chip or a new 7470 PPC. i guess the rumors of 1.4GHz were all based on the assumption of the 7470 chip being brought in...... guess we have to wait till somebody molests one.

Re:7455 or 7470 PPC chips?

[noahmckinnon]

I know it's a rumor site but mac os rumors says its 7455. (Please no noogies)

Re:7455 or 7470 PPC chips?

[Anonymous Coward]

So this means that the 7455 won't have the memory management that ppl were hoping for, right? BareFeats did an XServe test and showed that essentially the DDR'd XServe was exactly as fast as the 1ghz G4 Tower (or 1s slower in some cases). If that's the case, I'm not sure the new 'puter is really ready for primetime... Looks like I keep on waiting 'til January.

Actually my 533 still chugs along quite nicely--I think the deciding factor will be the release of UT2k3 in my case. 8-]

Re:7455 or 7470 PPC chips?

[johnpaul191]

yeah as the day goes on it seems to be the understanding that these chips can not fully take advantage of the DDR power..... hrmmm... makes you wonder if it's moto or Apple... moto talked about the 7470 chip a while ago, but it doesnt seem to be showing up anywhere...... yet?

I'm thinking ...

[DCMonkey]

... big fan, less noise.

The Achilles Heel: Backups

[Mr. Protocol]

The Achilles heel in all this is backup, especially for Mac OS X Server. Every other version of UNIX out there has a built-in backup solution (except, unaccountably, Linux, which has no dump/restore, last I checked). Mac OS X has dump/restore too, but they only understand the UFS file system. Apple rewrote 'fsck' to understand about HFS+ file systems, but not dump/restore.

That leaves Retrospect as the only sensible solution for backup: a third party product. And the regular Retrospect Mac OS X client won't dump a Mac OS X Server system! Instead you have to spend $800 (!!!) for the Server backup software. That software will also dump Windows 2000 and NT workstations, whoop-de-do.

Whatever happened to UNIX as a self-hosting, self-supporting system? Gaaaah. I'm thinking hard about wiping our Mac OS X Server machine and just installing the regular Mac OS X, where at least we can afford the backup software.

Or maybe just dumping Macs entirely and going to FreeBSD on a dual-processor Xeon box. All hail Amanda! At least I could back up a box like that.

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[abreauj]

Every other version of UNIX out there has a built-in backup solution (except, unaccountably, Linux, which has no dump/restore, last I checked).

Every instance of Linux I've ever installed came with the traditional dump/restore, which had no troubles reading Solaris ufsdump images, and generated images that Solaris' ufsrestore had no trboule reading. That includes every version of RedHat since 3.1, a preview release of Caldera before that, and Slackware even earlier, going back to March 1994 when I did my first Linux install.

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[befletch]

A little off topic, but please forgive me.

Lets say you have dump/restore or something available through Mac OS X on your 60GB hard drive. What do you dump *to*? 3 to 6 tapes for a DDS3 DAT backup? A 60GB iPod?

My G4 iMac went corrupt on me. Luckily I could restore my user directory from an iPod backup. But especially after that experience I'd like to do a full backup once in a while to catch all my apps & such, and I can't see anything that looks remotely cost effective for a backup medium, once you start getting larger drives (and presumably filling them).

Any ideas?

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[BitGeek]

A couple.

Drive Restore- its a pretty good program, and while a little buggy, recovered my drive after I let Norton and another product really fsck it up. (NEVER USE NORTON!)

For backup, I started putting my files into encrypted .dmg drives that disk copy can make. Then you can just burn them on DVD regularly, and back them up regularly to an external hard drive (Which is what I do mostly now.)

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[Matty_]

It may not have dump / restore, but it does have tar and gzip, which a lot of us use for backup and restore.

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[Anonymous Coward]

You can use a software called clone X
it saved a copy of the all OS X at a given time which you cannot erase

details below:

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0208/13.clon e. php

regards

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[Mr. Protocol]

This is the thing that really started to get me. Norton Systemworks, which includes Dantz Retrospect Express, comes on a bootable CD...bootable to OS 9. The OS 9 version of Retrospect cannot restore an OS X file system. Surprise!

Yes, there are all sorts of products which will clone a file system to an external drive, if one level of the most recent backup only will do. For me, that won't do...I was a sysadmin for too many years. I want a rack full of tapes.

Failing that, a backup set such as Retrospect provides will have to do. Which means that to back up an iBook I need two external Firewire drives - one to hold a bootable OS X plus Retrospect Express, and one to hold the backup set. Boy howdy, the bottom line just rose a tad!

Re:The Achilles Heel: Backups

[extra88]

tar is not HFS+ aware so you lose your resource forks. Hfspax is an HFS+ aware version of pax, still in beta. Still, there should be something that's ready to go for doing a full system backup and there isn't.

Yup

[ZxCv]

If it helps that much on his 500MHz iBook, then it should make a noticeable difference for your Lombard too. That model iBook does have 8MB vs your 4MB, but neither takes advantage of QE, so I would imagine the speed improvements are fairly similar.

Speed bumb

[Anonymous Coward]

Basically these look like a speed bumbed machine, in a reworked case. Evolutionary not revolutionary. But I expect the case has some design features built with future improvements in mind.

Ahhh what's a typo or two between friends?

[JudgeFurious]

I dropped more than a few in my original post. In fact when I re-read it I thought about the G4 4450 myself. Would like to see that one myself.

Dual G4 4.45Ghz processors...Mmmmmmmm.

Re:Ahhh what's a typo or two between friends?

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Yeah.. you can heat your house and your neiborg's with 1 computer :P

This would be fast... until we get 64bit book-e dualcore G5

x86 gigaflops

[toddhisattva]

Could someone please point me at some gigaflops numbers for x86 chips?

I'm on my fifth Google "pentium gigaflop" and so on, telling it to ignore pages with "G4" and "Apple" because there are so many G4 worship pages, and I can't find squat about x86 floating-point performance.

I'm tempted to wonder aloud if x86 has any floating-point performance to speak of, but that would be trolling ;-)

Re:x86 gigaflops

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the problem is that Apple have redefined the meaning of "gigaflop" to suit their marketing. The classical definition is "double precision floating point operation", not single precision. Personally, I also think it's deceptive to only state the performance for a part of the CPU (vector engine) that isn't used by normal code - it requires handtuned nonstandard vector instructions in your C program.

If you're interested in high-performance computing performance I can recommend either www.specbench.org or www.top500.org. Not particularly interesting for Photoshop users, but I don't consider Photoshop high-performance computing.

The bad news is that the current generation of G4 CPUs suck really big time when it comes to compiled floatint-point code. There isn't a single machine with Motorola-built CPUs on the top500 list.

The good news is that IBM Power CPUs are top-of-the-line performers, so if the new 64bit Power4 desktop derivative makes it into a Mac the
situation will change!

Re:x86 gigaflops

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.idius.net/fpucomparison/

seems to be saying that the P4 1.6GHz turns in a measly 833MFLOPS (although with SSE can get up to 1.9GFLOPS) while the 1.3GHz Athlon chugs along at a respectable 1.8GFLOPS.

I am assuming the the Mac's numbers are coming from the AltaVec unit and not the normal floating point unit.

Re:x86 gigaflops

[Anonymous Coward]

Please note that all those numbers are double precision floating point operations. The G4 CPU can only do 1 double precision flop per 2 clock cycles, so the corresponding figure for a 1.25GHz G4 is 750 Mflops.

Re:x86 gigaflops

[BitGeek]

DOUBLE PRECISION IS IRRELEVANT.

Gigaflops are SINGLE PRECISION.

You don't get to redefine the term and then accuse apple marketing of redefining the term BACK.

Re:x86 gigaflops

[toddhisattva]

Single-precision is fine for AV -- any accumulated error gets erased with the next keyframe ;-) And handtuning vector code is my idea of "fun."

Re:x86 gigaflops

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong, the G4 FPU can do a DP multiply accumulate almost every clock cycle. That's a=c*b+d. So if you have long string of multiply accumulate or polynomial evealuations that you can parallelize (unfortunately latency is 5, while it was 3 fo 7400/7410 CPUs), you get 2 DP Gflops.

And no it's not 2.5 Gflops because there is a limit of at most 4 DP instructions in progress out of a latency of 5, which makes 4/5*2*1.25 or 80% of the performance it would have without this restriction.

It's the Intel chips that can only start a multiply every other clock cycle! G3/603 are the same (actually every clock single for SP, every other for DP) as intel, but 604 and G4 can issue a fused multiply-accumulate almost every cycle.

Oh, and to the ones who claim that the G4 FPU is slow, that's wrong, What's slow is what goes around, it's very fast when your computations stay in the cache, but the short instruction window (16 or so versus 126 for P4) prevents the CPU from looking ahaed and starting memory accesses early. As soon as your working set trashes the cache, the performance of a G4 drops way faster than a P3, hence the abysmal SPEC ratings. When everything is in the cache my 466MHz G4 is about as fast as a 800MHz PIII, when it's not perhaps 1/2 as fast (the exact factor varies quite a lot with the number of divides, which I try to avoid, in the mix).

As a frame of reference...

[shawnce]

About a year ago we had dual 800 MHz systems with 100MHz FSB, PC133 RAM (133 MHz), 2MB of L3 via a 200 MHz bus and single channel ATA/66. Just over one year later we have 1250 MHz systems with 166 MHz FSB, PC2700 RAM (166 MHz double pumped or 333 MHz data rate), 2MB of L3 via a 294 MHz[1] bus double pumped, and dual channel ATA (one ATA/100 and the other ATA/66).

So in a year...
1.56x increase in CPU clock speed (ignoring other CPU enhancements).
2.5x increase in RAM throughput.
1.66x increase in FSB throughput.
2.94x increase in L3 throughput (possibly only 2.5x).
over a doubling in internal disk storage support (not counting SCSI options).

Looking over things on the Intel/AMD side...

AMD had about a year ago 1.53GHz chips (1800+ Athlon XP) today 1.8Ghz (2200+ Athlon XP) (FSB speeds did not changed). Intel had about a year ago 2Ghz P4s with FSB of 266MHz (133Mhz dual pumped) and today 2.53GHz P4s with FSB of 533MHz (133MHz quad pumped, AFAIK).

So in a year...
AMD...
1.18x increase in CPU clock speed.
no change in FSB (from what I see).

Intel...
1.27x increase in CPU clock speed.
2.01x increase in FSB throughput.

AMD/Intel system have been using PC2100 for a while and are now starting to use PC2700 (some are starting to use DDR400 and/or going dual channel to RAM). This is side stepping the issue of RDRAM.

Again just as a frame of reference...

[1] Apple's current specs don't add up fully on this, one states that it stops at 500MHz DDR but the throughput numbers lead me to believe it is running faster then 500MHz DDR for the top end system.

p.s. I am doing the above math with a fever of 102+ so I may have messed up someplace... just don't tell the pink elephant sitting next me.

Re:As a frame of reference...

[Anonymous Coward]

The 800MHz PowerMac was announced in July last year.

As of July last year, the fastest CPU shipping from Intel was 1.7 GHz, and from AMD 1.4 GHz. (If you want to compare with 'announced' x86 CPUs, you should include the 'announced' models this year - like the 3GHz P4).

Sorry to ruin the positive picture, but this means Intel has increased the clock by 48% (and the cache is bigger now too), and AMD increased it by 29%.

The pentium4 got a lot of well-deserved critizism when it first appeared, but apparently the new architecture has paid of in ability to increase the frequency.

Re:As a frame of reference...

[benh57]

About a year ago we had dual 800 MHz systems with 100MHz FSB, PC133 RAM (133 MHz), 2MB of L3 via a 200 MHz bus and single channel ATA/66.

This is incorrect. The quicksilvers have a 133Mhz bus.

Re:As a frame of reference...

[shawnce]

Looks like I may have click on August 2000 spec docs at some point by mistake.

The other values are correct.

Re:As a frame of reference...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just over one year later we have 1250 MHz systems...

Not quite. The 1.25 GHz G4 systems aren't available yet, not for 6-8 more weeks... and only if Apple can meet its forecast. In about the same time frame, Intel is expected to start selling the Pentium4 at 3.0 GHz.

They come with Jaguar...

[flamingnight]

Haven't noticed many people/sites/comments (except for a few of us on Mac OS X-Talk over at the Omni Group's website) talking about this:
The lucky bastards who are ordering the 867mHz or 1gHz models will have 10.2 before the rest of us. And according to macosrumors.com, systems

being shipped out in the past few days have begun arriving to their new owners with OS X 10.2 CDs included -- clearly indicating that Apple has completed development on Jaguar and that build 6C115 is indeed the final version of the new OS.

etc, etc.(That, by the way, was on Monday, August 12, 2002.)
So what's up... are we going to see Shaguar in retail stores sooner than the 24th?
Or am The Rest Of Us(tm) going to have to load up Carracho?
--

Re:They come with Jaguar...

[cappadocius]

I noticed this too. Apple's website still says Jaguar on the 24th, but the fact that Jaguar is preloaded is the only bolded item on the G4 feature list.

The truly sad thing is that you know there's some guy out there who will buy a new G4 just to get Jaguar a week early.

Re:They come with Jaguar...

[Wesley Felter]

Or even more evil: someone could buy a new Power Mac and sell the copy of Jaguar on eBay for big bucks.

Re:They come with Jaguar...

[The Mainframe]

Mmm hmm. He's me.
But I'd never sell it on eBay.

wow

[spectatorion]

The standardization on dual processor machines across the PowerMac line is truly amazing. I have been putting off getting a computer because I haven't really seen any interesting new offerings for a while. I have been watching the PowerMac line from afar, but have been increasingly confused as the flat panel iMac becomes more and more attractive and the differences between the two lines dwindle (the only real distinction as of yesterday seemed to be expandability). The use of dual G4 processors is the first major push I have felt toward going out and buying a computer immediately--especially at their low price. I felt similarly when the TiBook and the flat panel iMac revolutionized their respective product lines, but never have I felt as compelled as I do now to buy an Apple machine. This is a terrific step for Apple and despite the surprising number of nay-sayers, this should make Apple hardware so much more attractive. There is a huge coolness-factor with running dual processors, especially with an OS that is fully multithreaded and SMP-enabled. I can't wait until I can work up the courage to spend the money on one of these babies.

Re:wow

[Anonymous Coward]

>courage to spend the money

Do you just like being a window shopper? If you have the cash, buy now. Or, as a wise man once said "smoke em if ya got 'em"

Mod him back down, guys!

[jcr]

He's wrong. The small holes are vents.

-jcr

Re:Mod him back down, guys!

[pininfrna]

Gentlemen, when you get your hands on one of these you will see that they are in fact speakers. The one at the top is a speaker, yes, and the other 4 are smaller higher range speakers. Just like the 4 cones on the Harmon/Kardon soundsticks. In fact they may be the same cones. As far as Apple's site referring to the built-in speaker, I can't address that, unless they are referring to the whole thing as one speaker. That would make sense... when you buy Harmon Kardon soundsticks, they'd refer to it as 2 speakers and a subwoofer... not 9 speakers.

Re:Mod him back down, guys!

[jcr]

Gentlemen, when you get your hands on one of these you will see that they are in fact speakers.

Wanna bet?

-jcr

Re:Mod him back down, guys!

[pininfrna]

Well unfortunately I can't show you the G4 I saw in person... but I can direct you to look at the open-case photo of it on Apple's site. Note the 4 little speaker wires going up to the "vents". Oh, maybe they're "powered vents" :-)

Re:Mod him back down, guys!

[jcr]

Well unfortunately I can't show you the G4 I saw in person... but I can direct you to look at the open-case photo of it on Apple's site.

I believe that the source of your confusion is that the vent holes have a reflective plate immediately behind them, so you don't just see black if you look inside.

Note the 4 little speaker wires going up to the "vents". Oh, maybe they're "powered vents" :-)

The wires in that photo are the power supply for the two forward drive bays.

-jcr

as for USB 2...

[z-kungfu]

...all the tests I have read have declared Firewire the winner. Explaination, USB 2 relies on your processor for the spead of throughput, Firewire has its own chip...nuff said..

Re:as for USB 2...

[The Mainframe]

Personally, I feel that USB2 is the PC industry's way of trying to avoid firewire, but unfortunately, it [USB2] isn't anywhere near as good.

Woah

[Anonymous Coward]

You honestly get 3 hours out of your iBook with 10.2? In 10.1.x, my iBook 600 (while using AirPort, full-lit screen, full CPU speed) would last no more then 2 hours. I've only used the WWDC Jaguar build, and didn't notice it to be much better.

I must say, if I get 3 hours out of Jaguar, I'll be very happy. Now, time to go pay a visit to my friend who has a copy...

Re:Woah

[foobar104]

I got into the office this morning at 10:00, and I had a full charge on the battery. I used it all day to run OmniWeb, Mail.app, Word, Photoshop, InDesign, and maybe a few other things. I put it to sleep between 12:30 and 1:30, then finally plugged it into the wall at 3:30. I had 23% battery left then, according to the menu item, which probably would have lasted me about half an hour longer.

That's 4:30, +/- 30 minutes. I had the screen at full brightness, using the automatic power management setting in System Prefs (which, I believe, spins down the drive and cycles the processor speed), with my AirPort card off. I haven't timed it with AirPort on, but I'm guessing that might take 60-90 minutes off the battery life. But that's totally a guess.

If you only get 3 hours out of Jaguar, I'll be disappointed.

Re:Too little -- too late

[BitGeek]

Cutting edge for apple == two years ago for the PC world.

Really? Where are the PCs shipping with Firewire 2 that you complained Apple doesn't have?

And who would want USB 2 when Firewire 1 is twice as fast (in real world use)? Ok, I lied, its often ten times as fast.

Oh, and world+dog make Firewire devices, I've never seen nor heard of an external USB 2 device.

Oh, well, I'm having deja vu-- you posted this same list of whines awhile back and I pointed out the same sets of idiocy of it. Why feed the troll?

but I do LOVE the fact that you whine about the lack of firewire two and then claim the PC world had it two years ago. Heh.

Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchmark

[Anonymous Coward]

Did Apple choose their favourite filters?

But how well does it run Quake 3 ;) ?

Finder processes are much faster

[Bobartig]

We're running 10.2 build 6C115 on a 500 Mhz PowerbookG4, and 333 iMac (Grape). The finder's operations are much faster. Opening folders, scrolling through folders with large amounts of files, searching through file system from within apps (like locating a file to open) is all at least twice as fast. The new search feature built into the finder is easily 10x faster than using sherlock for it in 10.1. Instances of the new beachball of death are fewer than ever. Other apps don't really see a speed difference, but for the finder itself, it's like comparing 10.0 to 10.1 again!! So much faster on the iMac, where 10.1 was pokey at everything. That plucky little guy is almost 4 years old, and it feels quick and responsive in OS X. God I love the jag.

a decent critism of the new powermacs at

[iradik]

http://www.macosrumors.com

Re:Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchm

[Anonymous Coward]

But how well does it run Quake 3 ;)

169 fps @1024x768x32bit

http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics.html

Re:Too little -- too late

[sparkleytone]

this is really an old argument. anyone with any inkling of computer knowledge knows that if you want all around power and nothing else, you get a p4 in the desktop world. no g4 or athlon is going to touch it. it also helps that they are much cheaper than the avg apple machine. however, people do not buyapple products strictly for their power. apple provides a combination of power, ease of use, versatility, and stability that no one can really match in the computer market. i bought a mac on the belief that computing was going to be fun again. i was not disappointed. that is a first. i have been continually disappointed with every x86 OS yet. Windows XP was almost gonna make it, back in the Beta2 times, but i believe it got to their heads.so yes, i bought an iBook 600, and bought just about every accessory i could semi-justify, because i just couldnt wait to get home and play. apple makes the best consumer operating system around, which is continually being improved. These improvements come not only in the way of under-the-hood changes, but with user interaction as well. As this improves, time spend doing work in the computer is cut by a factor much larger than any pentium4 or athlon can give you. kudos to the microprocessor manufacturers, its too bad we can't harness it. When it comes to the total package, there is no other choice but Mac OS X for the end-user/programmer/writer/artist/producer/etc. Notice i didnt say anything about servers. Well thats not what im talking about now is it?? :)

They're not even vents

[Anonymous Coward]

Take a close look at the QTVR (the open/close one). See the venting on the floor of the machine? That's where the airflow comes in, not through the 4 small holes (it also comes in through the sides, encouraged by a fan on each side).

Not sure exactly what those scoops are for, but I've heard they're blind (filled with more chrome goodness).

Me, I'm gettin' my Dremel out to make way for front USB and FireWire ports. Looks like there's plenty of room.

Re:Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchm

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweeet then.

I'll resort to the old line then ;)

"But it still has a one button mouse..."

Re:Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchm

[Anonymous Coward]

"But it still has a one button mouse..."

Sell the mouse on ebay for 30-40 dollars, buy a m$ intellimouse and a 6-pack to swill while you play quake... ;)

yeah sure

[Anonymous Coward]

have you EVER bought a new computer (or any elctronic gizmo, for that matter) and not opened it IMMEDIATELY when you got home? I know I haven't.

I'm like a kid on Christmas

Re:yeah sure

[foo12]

Yes, all the time. I've often bought systems for work and let them sit until I could get around to them, sometimes as much as a week. But for a personal system, yeah. I bought an iBook through at an Apple Store and made a friend drive me, just so I could open it in the car :)

Re:Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchm

[piznut]

You don't need to resort to the old mouse line just yet. A 1.67ghz Athlon pulls about 220 fps with the same video card at the same resolution.

Not that a normal human being could really discern the difference..it's more an indicator of raw power.

Re:Haha they are still using photoshop as a benchm

[piznut]

Did I mention that the 220fps Athlon is only using one cpu vs the dual proc g4 benchmark? We're talking less than 1/3 of the price for more than 75% better performance. Thats just sick.

Re:Too little -- too late

[theMAGE]

Oh, and world+dog make Firewire devices, I've never seen nor heard of an external USB 2 device.

So you've never been to a computer store? There are at least external CD-writers from Sony and TDK and external harddrives from Maxtor using USB 2.0

Re:Too little -- too late

[Anonymous Coward]

and the they all will run at the speed of the slowest USB 2 device you plugin to you computer.

a fire wire device has no such bottle necks.

Re:Too little -- too late

[Type-IIa]

Yeah, that's because they changed the printing on the boxes to read "USB 2.0" because the USB 2.0 standard is backwards compatible with USB 1.0 devices. There are no USB devices (drives etc) yet that actually use the new standard past the capacity of the old standard.

thoughts about QE

[Pope]

Sorta wrong, QE is recommended for 32M, but does not require it. Split it between 2 monitors will still allow it to work, but obviously more VRAM is better.

Re:Too little -- too late

[piznut]

Try doing a little research before posting your arguments. I got a USB 2.0 CD writer from IOgear almost 2 months ago that happily writes CDs at 16x whereas it only works at 4x on a USB 1.0 port.

Though the devices may not be plentiful yet, they are out there.

Re:Too little -- too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Good point!

The main thing is that you can do your work on your computer, and it's especially nice if you can do it effectively and it would be even nicer if you actually enjoy working with it.

And I have that with Mac OS X. Yesterday I realized again that I love to work with Mac OS X. Ok, so be it that a P4 is much faster than a Mac. If that means I have to work with Windows, then just forget it.
I also use Linux, which is decently fast (X windows is not fast!), but from a user experience standpoint can't match either Mac OS X or Windows.

Linux as desktop environment is still not competitive. It's a great tinker toy, but it's harder to be productive.
For server environment I wouldn't use anything else.

Re:Too little -- too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but my firewire external CD writer is 40X12X48 - and your ?USB 2.0? is 16X.

No network card???????

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't help but notice that there is no network card listed in the specs, not available in the options prior to purchase. You can add/remove the 56k modem, but no ethernet???????

What the heck???

Re:No network card???????

[Anonymous Coward]

my mistake, it's there. It's just no listed as a major feature, and is asically taken forn granted,

Re:No network card???????

[Anonymous Coward]

You fucking turd smuggler, you're such an idiot. It's built right in there, why don't you get back to your "windows xp" magazine while you're on the crapper and shut the f up?