Slashdot Mirror
Apple's Dev. Tools Hint @ Dual-core G5 & Quad Mac
Eug writes "Apple just released a new version of its CHUD tools, which provides clues about dual-core G5s and quad core Macs (dual dual-core).
The clues include a reference to the 970MP, which is dual-core G5 with increased L2 cache. Also, there is now support for 4 CPUs, whereas previous versions of these Mac OS X tools only supported 2.
This likely means we'll see dual-core Macs by WWDC, and possibly quad Macs based off these dual-core chips by then too."
I am convinced thay have missed the boat until now. They need to make a PC crusher at the top of their line, something that is so much faster than any PC for creative work that no one would dare say any PC is faster.
They got a lot of attention and doubting when they introed "The World's Fastest Personal Computer" when they came out with the G5. What they need to do is actually make that come true beyond anyone's doubt, and then keep up with it. To hell with what it costs - if they sold those IIfx's for 10K back in 1993 they can do the same thing today but even better for far less money.
This time, make that boast true, and shove it straight down the naysayers throats.
For one thing, some people are egotistical enough to want the latest and greatest thing. It may not be the smartest thing in the world, but it's very human. The longer you have the latest and greatest thing, the more ego satisfaction it brings you. So the optimal strategy is to buy the system when it first comes out and to hope that when you have the budget for it, something even greater will come out to replace it.
I have what was the lastest and greatest thing a year and a half ago: The PowerMac G5 2.0ghz dual processor system. It's been through a revision or two since then, but nothing earth-shattering.
You would be right about wanting to buy the system you need today, but if you already have a system that's working well, such as my 2.0ghz dual processor G5 I bought a year and a half ago, things are different. Do I want to get the 2.5ghz revision, or do I want to wait until it gets to 3.0ghz? This is particularly interesting since I do work that would enormously benefit from a quad-processor system.
So in this respect, rumors are valuable since they help us see ahead, even if through an Apple-created fog. Apple hates them because they want me to buy my 2.5ghz system today. At the same time, I had decided at the time the system was introduced that the small performance improvement probably wasn't worth it. So I'm stuck, but rumor sites give me something to look forward to.
Hope that helps.
D
CHUD tools are most useful for testing products, but they happen to have some utility for those of us who want to tweak our computers at home. The latest release indicates that the developers have modularized the product and made it more adaptable when chips change.
What's likely happened is that Apple will get hot under the collar about the way these tools can inadvertantly indicate possible future plans. They used to release WWDC sessions on Quicktime CD's for free (back in 98 or 99). They used to not make developers sign their life away in non-disclosure agreements. They used to allow more access to developer docs, tools, and seeds to the dedicated hobbyist. Now these are all restricted because of leaks that have come from eager fans searching resource forks, out of context remarks, and misunderstood uses as "evidence of Apple's future plans".
If no quad processors are actually in the production pipeline, this rumor will be forgotten. If there is something that has been revealed by the Chud tools, it's more likely that Chud tools will be even more restricted and difficult to get hold of. Slowing down development as developers fear for their jobs for accidentally including a reference to a product they may know nothing about (e.g. Asteroid, a cpu number, a code name, etc.)
It's not like these strings tell you any useful information. Since Apple has a lengthy design, testing and production pipeline all it really says is we might have some new tech in a couple of years if it seems like a good marketing move. There's no pricing, case design, release dates, or anything marketing related in these leaks. In fact, since Apple is strongly dependent on a suprising and innovative marketing aura these leaks and speculations probably worsen that marketability.
One other example: the rumors sites have seen some "evidence" in seed releases that Apple will be making a push to release OS X on x86 chips. That may be the case, but more than likely they're confusing efforts to make a Window's user's transition to a Mac easier as "evidence" that Apple is moving to x86. All that happens is that OS X users will be disappointed that future releases don't run on the x86 line as their speculative "evidence" promised.
Get over the obsession with the rumors; you're only setting youreself up for disappointment.
Even though Apple Computer's stock is pretty high in regards to the P/E ratio (ever since the iPod got the investors' interest), I still think it might be a good buy for the future.
I agree. You won't make any money off of dividends, but my own belief (and Wall Street's consensus, for what that is worth) is that AAPL is a good buy. I'm hoping that when Apple holds their next earnings call that we will find out that the Mac mini has sold absolute gangbusters, and that it will allow the market's focus upon the success of the iPod to be somewhat psychologically replaced by the success of the mini.
Unfortunately, I didn't get in on either stock on the ground floor, and even though they went up pretty high now I think they both might still be great buys for the future.
Apple, yes. Google, not so sure. Apple is consistently coming out with products that make money, and their recent stock split have brought their stock back to more reasonable levels. Google is still trading at around $180/share, and that to my mind is far too high a price to pay given their current revenues. They're profitable, I just don't know about $180/share profitable.
Difficult to see, the future is. *shrug* For whatever reason my inner Warren Buffet says "buy AAPL, wait on GOOG".
Why do bored housewives care about what was on Paris Hilton's handheld ? Why is Michael Jackson's trial big news ? Who are Brad and Jen and why do so many people care?? How many people read US Weekly?!?
God help us, I don't know why, but reading tech rumor sites is the geek equivalent, what's so hard to understand? It beats doing actual work... I don't care what happens to hollywood celebs, and politics is just painful to watch, so reading up on my favorite tech is great entertainment. Probably a lot of the folks reading these sites are checking CNet and /. and google news as well. I know I am.
But by any standard, Apple is one of the more interesting tech companies out there, definitely one of the more unique ones, so it really shouldn't be hard for you to see why it's so popular as a rumor subject. Almost nobody is really checking rumor sites to make purchasing decisions. It's just our form of US Weekly.
is not it time for the Slashdot Apple desktop icon to be updated to reflect the current desktop line? i.e. G5.
Is that really the thing /. needs to work on the most?? I'm sure there are more important features of the site that could use some attention... but most important of all, what should the icon be? A G5 PowerMac? A Mac mini? A G5 iMac? An Xserve? I guess it should be a G5 PowerMac, but a Mac mini or G5 iMac might be the more common machine...