MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 08:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hello!

Slow newsday? Of course Intel is going to break 4ghz, IBM is going to break 3 Ghz, Motorola is going to break 2... oh well, maybe not Motorola, that POS that held Apple back.

Why is this even news?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 09:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
to bug

jerks like you.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 09:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Keep going, Intel!

Keep on pushing that creaky old architecture... faster, faster!

Intel knows their backs are against the wall... the G5 scales well, and IBM is poised to overtake them GHz-wise, eventually. I can't help but wonder how the Wintel fanboys will pooh-pooh Macs once that happens.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 09:14pm | report spam | close Reply |
not very likely

"IBM is poised to overtake them GHz-wise"?

What are you smoking?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 09:53pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: not very likely

I *said* "eventually," dumbass!

The 2.0GHz G5 came out in June 2003 and Apple/IBM are shooting for 3GHz before September 2004. That's a maximum of 15 months to increase clock speed by 1GHz.

The 2.0GHz P4 came out on August 27. 2001. The 3.0GHz P4 came out November 14, 2002. Intel hopes to hit 4GHz sometime in 2004. If they were going to do it by spring, they would have said so. Therefore, we can infer that they will take longer than 15 months to increase their clock speed by 1GHz.

If both chips' development continues at relatively the same pace, logic dictates that the G5 will eventually overtake the P4 in terms of clock speed.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Barrier?

When was 4GHz ever a 'barrier'...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
These will take forever..

Really now does Apple has to pay allegiance to any specific processor. According to Jobs porting Panther to Intel is really easy. Take note that other computer brands out there, don't have to deal with this problem since they have models which carries different brand of processor. Allowing the consumers decide for themselves.

So the issue here is not really the processor, but providing consumers some real options.

Furthermore, Apple should not feel threatened if Panther gets into the pc boxes. Its actually a great maketing strategy to promote Apple-- "Panther inside". Since this will only promote awareness to consumers. Wouldn't it be a great to see those "Apples" inside the their pcs reminding them "It actually works better with the mac!".

What can we learn from Quicktime, Firewire, iPod and iTunes-- it is possible.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hmmmm...

As a former computer salesmen I have experienced many times customers stopping and adoring Apple products but would immediately turned off once they learned of the following:
1. Its not running a standard OS (Windoze)
2. Their current apps wont run.
3. The processor is not Intel.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
poor intel...

maybe they will catch up with the G5 someday....then again, probably not.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Its time to expand

The days of "Thinking differently" is gone. With Longhorn well long overdue and Windoze security in question, its about to time to take the the lead. But these pc -user sill not easily and blindly migrate. Apple must initiate the integration first, before it could lead.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 10:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: poor intel

"maybe they will catch up with the G5 someday....then again, probably not."

Beware of Karma. This is the same thing witel zealots say about Apple and G4 not too long ago.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 11:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
Jobs said..

he don't see a compelling need to switch processor families.

If 4 GHz is not compelling enough I'm sure that a portion of the 90% computer users are.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 11:13pm | report spam | close Reply |
the thing is...

While intel pushes speed over actual PERFORMANCE, they are just shooting themselves in the foot. If the G5 running at 1ghz "slower" is keeping up with their best efforts, Its only a matter of time before intel just burns their chips into the ground and AMD takes over the x86 performance market. With AMD's + ratings (ATHLON 3200+ etc etc, where that number only means its as fast as a pentium 3.2ghz, while the ghz is really around 2.9-3.1) Intel really has its work cut out. They are seriously pushing the CISC to its limits, getting a regressing 3-7 percent performance gain per 100 MHZ. At the same time, RISC (IBM) are well within the exponential growth/shrinkage curve and have many years and LOTSof room to grow to push the RISC technology even further. Wake up intel, no one but the uninformed really care about numbers. They want to know that their computer is FAST, not high MHZ rated. People don't really care about your BS any more, and even though its the uninformed (or testosterone driven monkeys) that care more about big meaningless numbers, that keep your company alive, people want more than just flashy c***, and that number of people is dwindling. We Shall see...

-macjedi-

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/20, 11:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
Bad Math

(not a new concept at Intel, btw) ...

If it's taken them a YEAR to go from 3.0GHz to 3.2GHz, I think we can safely assume that this 4GHz stuff is pure marketing BS. Of course, perhaps they have a chip breakthrough that will help, but my guess is that on Dec 31st, 2004, the fastest Pentium money can buy will be 3.5GHz, possibly 3.6GHz. Maybe.

Hmmm ... now that I mention it, did you notice that Intel did not say "4GHz *Pentium*" in their little press release?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 12:05am | report spam | close Reply |
numbers do matter

No matter how many times you tell people that the Mhz or Ghz rating of a chip doesn't really indicate relative performance, they are still impressed, if not infatuated, by Mhz ratings. The same applies for Mac users. You must be deluding yourself if you don't think Mac users care about Mhz ratings (remember the incessant whining for the past few years about how slow Motorola was with increasing clock speeds).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 12:06am | report spam | close Reply |
Believe it when I see it

I no longer trust the claims you guys are making about the G5 is set to totally surpass Intel, etc etc. Much as I'd like that to happen -- and I know that Macs are finally holding their own, for the first time in a while -- I remember the nonsense when the original PPCs came out, about how Intel was reaching the end of life on their aging architecture, etc. I even remember a column in one of the major Mac mags claiming within a couple of years, performance on the Mac would be so phenomenal that VPC would be faster than running on a real Wintel machine.

I still use my Mac and have no plans to switch; price/performance isn't the only thing, and now Macs are competitive there. BUt let's not kid ourselves.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 03:30am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Hmmmm...

> As a former computer salesmen I have experienced many > times customers stopping and adoring Apple products
> but would immediately turned off once they learned of > the following:
> 1. Its not running a standard OS (Windoze)
> 2. Their current apps wont run.
> 3. The processor is not Intel.

Bullshit.

1. Mac OS X is a standard operating system.
2. Of course they won't, just like my apps won't run on Windows. Though most have Mac versions available and vice versa.
3. This is where you educate them about other brands such as AMD.

More likely they were turned off when they saw the price tag.

Must have been some pretty clued up consumers you had in your store if they are worrying about whether or not the CPU is made by Intel, and the knowing what an operating system is and that there are other ones besides Windows. Were they concerned at all about the virus infestation problem that is Windows and Office?

More likely they asked questions like "Can I send e-mail?", "Can I get on the Internet?, "Can I type documents and print photos?".

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 04:01am | report spam | close Reply |
re: re: Hmmmm

Although I love Mac ( I actually own 2) realistically speaking Apple/ Mac OS X is only used by less than 5% of the consumers globally more specifically in my country. It is used less and less in work, school, at home, and now even in multimedia, advertising, and publication companies.

Actually, perhaps out of media hype the first thing they'ed ask is it XP already? Next does it uses intel (Although I know some may not event know what's a processor is!). And yep, you are right the last thing they do ask is the pice-- the finisher.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 04:30am | report spam | close Reply |
Ha ha

"Intel knows their backs are against the wall."

Right... and what world are you living in?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 04:33am | report spam | close Reply |
Nutcases

"If it's taken them a YEAR to go from 3.0GHz to 3.2GHz,"

Yeah, if you forget about hyperthreading and all the FSB bumps. How long did it take for Motorola to go past the 1ghz barrier? How about 2? Zealots.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 04:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Bad Math

"If it's taken them a YEAR to go from 3.0GHz to 3.2GHz, I think we can safely assume that this 4GHz stuff is pure marketing BS"
Hmm, they will use a 90 nanometer manufacturing process which makes it easy to crank up MHz. And I don't know if the projected "3 GHz within a year" for the G5 will happen with or without a 90 nanometer process.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 09:00am | report spam | close Reply |
well...

"As a former computer salesmen I have experienced many times customers stopping and adoring Apple products but would immediately turned off once they learned of the following:
1. Its not running a standard OS (Windoze)
2. Their current apps wont run.
3. The processor is not Intel."

I can see why you are a 'former' salesman... It's your job to help explain that those issues can be overcome. Here's some responses you could have used instead of just giving up (no wonder Apple can't stand their independent resellers.)

1. "Yes, Apple computers don't run Windows. I'd love to show you just how easy the Mac is to use. (You could mention that the Mac doesn't crash, doesn't lock up, and is easy and intuitive to use. You'd want to find out just what the customer wants to do with their machine... are they a pro or home user? Do they want to work with photo's, video, or music? etc;)

2. "You'll find that most versions of your favorite software are available for Mac. Programs such as Microsoft Office and Quicken will import your Windows files and work just fine. The Mac has programs such as iPhoto, iMovie, and iDVD that will allow you to create things you never thought you could.

3. "You're right, we don't use Intel chips. Our processors are made by IBM and Motorola and offer more than enough speed for most users. Depending on what you are doing with your machine, the amount of memory (RAM) and harddrive space can be just as important. Also, Apple is the only company that designs their software and hardware to work together perfectly. You don't have to worry about whether your video card came with the right drivers, whether your modem will work, etc;. The processor is the same way.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 10:10am | report spam | close Reply |
yes, but

I want to run the SAME programs I run now, not these [looks at apple screen, makes a dissatisfied face]

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 11:02am | report spam | close Reply |
yadda yadda yadda

this mac vs. wintel discussion is getting a bit annoying. both have platforms have their strengths and weaknesses, the market doesn't play as it's supposed to if consumers were actually intelligent, independently thinking beings (BTW, that's one more reason why I don't buy into all th BS we're told about free markets and privatization etc.).

just my 2 cents

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 12:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Believe it when I see

Good attitude. While we were proclaiming that Intel's CISC is dead and PPC RISC would surpass them, Intel kept their chip alive by grafting RISC onto it. And to that user above who mentioned this CISC vs. RISC thing. That argument is no longer relative. We are not in 1995 anymore.
Second. Intel my be having trouble getting to the 4 GHz barrier, but they will never let the PPC pass them GHz wise. If they have to gut their processors to make it run at 5GHz and perform like a P3, they will.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 01:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
I'm on a pc...

Yeah, yeah, I'm a mac zealot, or mac adict, whatever, I don't even care that I type these terms right or not, I don't know why I'm writing to you guys from thisold pc. running 98....oh, yeah, I love my mac, love your pc, the 4ghz will not make a difference to us the geeks... so why bother posting... wait, why am I posting....

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 02:53pm | report spam | close Reply |
CISC, RISC tsk tsk

Apple should dump RISC and forget about CISC and look into FLASC or vector type processors. And even if they did go with Intel, the hardware would still be proprietary and non-upgradeable and the majority of Windows PC users would still be left in the dark cause they wouldn't be able to run OS X on their existing hardware.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 03:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
True on the CISC vs. RISC

Well said on the CISC vs. RISC argument being about 10 yrs old. Both x86 and PowerPC architectures get closer revision by revision - Intel bolting RISC-like implementations onto the x86 platform and the PowerPC getting lots of add-ons (like Altivec vector units) that get away from the original RISC philosophies. Just ask any RISC purist, and they'll tell you that the PowerPC is definitely not RISC - more what you might call "post-RISC"

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 03:23pm | report spam | close Reply |
GHz Gains

It's important to remember that, due to process improvements, a chip supplier like IBM or Intel can ship faster chips without significant redesign. The 4 GHz goal by Intel and the 3 Ghz G5 goal by IBM are largely based on moving to a 90 nm process for their chips, allowing them to run at faster clock speeds.

Intel has state-of-the-art manufacturing and probably will continue to lead in the Ghz Marketing Scam(tm). Seems like IBM has taken the middle-road and looks to provide higher clock speeds than typical for the PowerPC but without the "damn performance, Jim, gimme the clock speed!" approach.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/21, 04:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Re: Hmmmm...

Bullshit.

1. Mac OS X is a standard operating system.
2. Of course they won't, just like my apps won't run on Windows. Though most have Mac versions available and vice versa.
3. This is where you educate them about other brands such as AMD.

More likely they were turned off when they saw the price tag.

This is a reply to number 3.

I just built my mother a PC (she can't afford a Mac)... and we must have had six or seven conversations about the processor. I'd say "It's going to have an AMD processor in it." And she would say, "So, is that a Pentium? I think I want an Intel Pentium."

It's all about branding, it's embedded in us (or at least most of us). My mother is the furthest thing from a knowedgeable computer person. All she does is surf and email, but she knows all about that "Pentium" word.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/23, 12:43am | report spam | close Reply |
Branding is everything...

And at the moment Wintel industry has made a terrible dent in Apple's image way back in the late 90's. We mac user's know and still believe it is a great product, but the rest of the 90% computer users gloably , including developers and investors have developed that negative in image of Apple. Apple must find a way to promote and win customers not only to the already Mac-users (We know were great already) but more on rest of the consumers. Apple must make that bridge that first step. OS X leads in every aspect (primarily because its unix and has GUI and has killer apps) and yet 90% of the users coulkd not appreciate it. Now is the time while longhorn is delayed and Windows security in questio, and while Linux is still in its developing stage. PC users are hungry for a new direction. ALready Windows XP has speech technology, handwriting recognition, Moviemaker. What will Apple do if MS developes a new OS based on UNIX.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/23, 12:50am | report spam | close Reply |
Well 1 thing is for sure.

90% of the consumers who patiently waited will definitely worhip M$ once MS developes a new OS based on UNIX, and will laugh at Apple for being so clammish. An opportunity lost.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/23, 06:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
These clearly shows...

That the processor war will continue on and on. Whichever processor Apple side will eventually find themselves in an endless roller coster ride (although Intel will continue to remain stable at the top for a very long while).

In this war Appe must recognize the fact not only the performance and speed but more importantly the market share the brand of processor occupies.

APple should wisely not involve in these war but strategically devise ways how to deliver what the customer wants and use both of these processor to its Apple's own advantages.

Again there are computer brands out there that has opted to have various models carrying different brand of processors.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/23, 07:32pm | report spam | close Reply |
reThese clearly shows...

Good plan. At least whiechever processor wins, only a model is affected and Apple still remains unfazed. Apple should itself concentrate on developing the rest of the box.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/23, 07:38pm | report spam | close Reply |
Again...

Jobs says: "he don't see a compelling need to switch processor families."

Jobs need not to switch but simply provide an alternative model (that carries Intel) to free Apple from the processor war!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/24, 11:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
So wat is Apple waitng 4?

If Panther can easily be ported to Intel, and Intel is interested, then what is stopping them?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/28, 02:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
tech job recovery...

*Only* about 270k tech jobs projected to be lost; sounds like a big "recovery" all right. I guess who cares about those 270,000 people who will probably lose there jobs.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/20	Apple to start enforcing sandboxing...
05/20	Hands on: Fling Joystick for iPad and...
05/18	Apple allegedly interested in Russian...
05/18	New lawsuit accuses Apple of botching...
05/18	iTunes Festival 2012 to run 30 days...

Show All

05/20	Hands on: Fling Joystick for iPad and...
05/18	New lawsuit accuses Apple of botching...
05/18	RIM, Motorola submit compromise nano...
05/18	Nokia could burn through its cash reserves...
05/18	Samsung said to have 9 million Galaxy...

Show All

05/20	Hands on: Fling Joystick for iPad and...
05/18	iTunes Festival 2012 to run 30 days...
05/17	Apple briefly censors word 'jailbreak...
05/17	Time Warner, Viacom drop dispute over...
05/16	Flipboard 1.9 brings Audio category...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Tech: Intel sets 4GHz goal; tech job recovery...

updated 08:20 pm EST, Thu November 20, 2003

Intel aims for 4GHz

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Hello!

to bug

Keep going, Intel!

not very likely

re: not very likely

Barrier?

These will take forever..

Hmmmm...

poor intel...

Its time to expand

re: poor intel

Jobs said..

the thing is...

Bad Math

numbers do matter

Believe it when I see it

Re: Hmmmm...

re: re: Hmmmm

Ha ha

Nutcases

Re: Bad Math

well...

yes, but

yadda yadda yadda

Re: Believe it when I see

I'm on a pc...

CISC, RISC tsk tsk

True on the CISC vs. RISC

GHz Gains

Re: Re: Hmmmm...

Branding is everything...

Well 1 thing is for sure.

These clearly shows...

reThese clearly shows...

Again...

So wat is Apple waitng 4?

tech job recovery...

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace