90nm 3GHz PPC 970FX by Summer
dmdimon sent in linkage to a Forbes story on the upcoming PPC chips and notes "IBM is said to be ready to deliver a new version of its PowerPC processor to Apple by the end of this year in from sizes of 130 nanometers to 90 nanometers...
Apple CEO Steve Jobs has already gone on the record saying that the G5 computer will contain PowerPC chips that run at 3 GHz by the summer of 2004. A mid-step between the current systems, which top out with two chips running at 2 GHz, and systems with chips as fast as 2.6 GHz would be a logical move come January..."
I haven't bought a PB since the G3/333 PB Pizmo Lombardi Wallstreet Whatever edition without Firewire Bronze Keyboard.
But if there were a G5 PB, I am all for it. That would be birthday present to myself. However, I would have to wait until the second generation of that machine b/c I would like to make sure that Apple just isn't unloading G4 parts with a G5 chip.
Glaskowski has a very good track record when it comes to processors. If you look at this objectively, a 1.6GHz or slower G5 would be an easy fit into the current PowerBook chassis. As has been said many times before, the G5 actually does run cooler and consume less power than the G4 at equal clock speeds. If the 90-nm process is employed, then we're ahead of the game.
When the G5 was introduced last June at the WWDC, it didn't go on sale for another month or two. So the idea of introducing the PB G5 at MacWorld, but not selling it for another month or two is not that hard to imagine.
There is no god
sounds like another pissing match.
fagit ^^
I don't know about buying one of those, I heard the clock batteries go bad after a while.
It should be modded funny you fucking stupid bird brain morons.
Did yo mama drop you on the head when you was born?
Personally, I'd hold out on getting a G5 based machine until software (particularly an OS thats not just processor optimizations tacked onto a 32-bit platform) that fully utilizes its 64-bit capabilities shows up. Although, given Apple's current once a year OS release timeline, I wouldn't be suprised if 10.4 came out in both 32 and 64 bit flavors.
Why would anyone want to use slow Apples that have no software and incompatible hardware?
The way forward is to use Windows and Intel, you get lots of software plus fast fast Intel Processors.
HELLO.... Why bother with a platform that has 3% of the market?
Dear fuckwit AC... Ad hominem... stupid generalizations... anecdotal evidence? How about personal experience in a real world setting? I'm not quoting marketing drone propaganda from the brochures, or laboratory benchmarks, or anti Mac FUD. I use these systems every day. For a living. How about "when you can't come up with an argument, contributing nothing to the discussion and posting as AC works just as well."? Blow me.
Someday a real rain is gonna come...