# New PowerMacs at NAB



## alexandr (Apr 5, 2005)

funny this one hasn't been picked up yet, guess it drowned in the Tiger-frenzy around April 1st. anyway - macrumors.com are reporting of rumors of an update to the PowerMac-line at the NAB-conference, which is to be held in Las Vegas 16th-21th of April.

the machines is said to sport new processors, PCI-Express, blu-ray-drives(high-end-model only) and may be able to max out at 32MB(!) RAM..

sounds ok 

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/03/20050330102917.shtml

alex.


----------



## JetwingX (Apr 5, 2005)

you mean 32 GB right? ^^

and i didn't think that blue-ray was ready yet... but if it is then great!


----------



## ziess (Apr 5, 2005)

Wow 32Mb ram!! That puts the new G5s up there with my palmOne Tungsten!


----------



## texanpenguin (Apr 5, 2005)

I'm pretty certain blu-ray isn't even a ratified spec yet.


But I'll take any rumour I can get at the moment.


----------



## ziess (Apr 5, 2005)

Had a writeable DVD format been ratified when Apple introduced SuperDrives?


----------



## adambyte (Apr 5, 2005)

32 MB of Ram? Wow, that's almost as much as my Performa 6400/200!  

Now I can finally edit video... ON MY COMPUTER!

lol. Sorry. It's just too fun.


----------



## alexandr (Apr 5, 2005)

yeah, yeah - keep it coming. i can take it.. 

alex - who by no means is gonna edit his first post.


----------



## Captain Code (Apr 5, 2005)

I don't really believe that at all.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Apr 5, 2005)

We're still in the midst of settling on DVD-R or DVD+R, so it wouldn't surprise me if Apple decided to "take a side" before a standard was settled on concerning Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD (if a standard is ever settled on).


----------



## mindbend (Apr 6, 2005)

As ususal, I think the rumored specs are a bit too ambitious. Here' smy prediction:

Definitely new G5s at NAB
Top out at 2.8 GHZ
Same 8GB RAM max
PCI-Xpress
Support for new higher end 3D cards
No Blu-Ray, instead just higher speed DVD burners (16x)


----------



## alexandr (Apr 6, 2005)

well.. but we _have_ been waiting for the PM's to reach 3.0 for quite some time now, and considering the massive delay compared with the average PM update-cycle i think we are in for something big. but thats thinking/hoping without too much technical insight..

i would very much see the line top out at 3.0(or more), and hopefully the bigger/better models get a slight bump aswell, meaning the 2nd model at 2.8 and the 3rd at 2.5. a whole step(2 to 3) seems a bit too much considering that would indeed signify a massive difference in CPU-speed. too massive if you ask me..

another thing, if the iMacs 2.0 will be released i hope that the "slowest" PM gets a higher clock-speed. yeah, i know the PM sport double processors, but i like the way it is with the high-end iMac as a "weaker" machine than the lowest PM. i would like to avoid cross-over clock-speeds, if you get me.. for marketing strategy aswell, i think that would be wise. keep the PM a .1 or .2(or even .3 or .4) over the iMacs and it is easier to see what you get..

alex.


----------



## Carlo (Apr 6, 2005)

They will definatly release new machines.. They are already starting to dry up the supply of PM's here in sydney. I was going to wait but figured that if I do wait I will end up waiting another 4 months.. 

Hopefully they boost up the standard ram with these machines.. 256mb is a joke. Ram prices have dropped again (im thinking of getting another 1gb for my g5.. cos I can)


----------



## Pengu (Apr 6, 2005)

um. saying PCI-Xpress is VERY misleading. Currently, they have PCI (low "crippled" ones) or PCI-X.

The rumors are about PCI-Express, aka PCI-E.

please do not confuse the issue by writing PCI-Xpress.


----------



## kainjow (Apr 6, 2005)

I was just thinking....my DP 1.8GHz G5 is lightning fast... if they introduced DP 3.0Ghz G5's... those machines would be a minimum of 60% faster then mine.. and they probably have better cache and all that other goodies.. I would be so tempted to buy one.


----------



## Pengu (Apr 6, 2005)

Dont forget that the bottleneck is and always will be I/O. HDDs and Networks are still way slower than CPUs in most cases. I'd prefer things like 10Gb-Ethernet.. SATA2 HDDs, onboard RAID (or even the cabling to use something like an XServe RAID card without cables going everywhere), PCI-Express video cards, DDR2 memory, more HDD spaces (even 3 would be good, for 74G RAPTOR boot, and 2x500Gb Hitachi for 1Tb storage), Bluetooth 2.0 (as in PowerBooks)..


----------



## Qion (Apr 6, 2005)

This article also stated that the PB would recieve a screen resolution update..... I don't personally see this happening, as the PB screen is already technically high-definition.


----------



## fryke (Apr 7, 2005)

It's also a "Page 2" rumour at MacRumors. (Just to answer the original poster's question about why this wasn't covered here.) 

The PB screen was rumoured before. More than rumoured even: There was a reference to a higher-res screen in some Apple manual of the 17" PowerBook. And with this being the "year of HD" for Apple, it would make some sense. It would also make sense to make such an announcement at NAB, I guess.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 7, 2005)

the screens res on the pbooks is terrible IMO. the 12" only goes up to 1024x768! which, in terms of pro apps, is useless. its a jumped up portfolio at the moment.  sony have a laptop with a 10" screen (2" smaller than the 12" pB) with a screen res similar to that of the 15" pb.  thats progress.  the HD model should be the 15". the 17" pB is only just borderline portable - the physical size of the unit is actually quite bulky - it wont fit in a briefcase, for example, or any normal sized bag for that matter


----------



## Go3iverson (Apr 7, 2005)

I have the PowerBook 1.67GHz 17" model (which I love...it makes the 15" I used to have feel like a toy!) and the manual does include specs for a higher resolution display.  

I don't have much trouble commuting with my 17" at all.  Between my WWDC bag and my Zero briefcase, its well protected and very mobile.  Yeah, its a little bigger than the 15", but I hardly even notice it now, after a little bit of use.  Besides, you can't beat the 17" screen in this form factor!

As for PowerMacs.  Obviously a dual 2.5 is still faster than most of us could use.  I don't blame people for waiting, they're expensive machines and if your cash can get you a bit more for your money (like more RAM, newer GPU, extra speed, etc), unless your in dire need, I'd wait too!  (and am)


----------



## fryke (Apr 7, 2005)

There are different needs and other aspects Apple has to take into consideration when choosing resolutions for their PowerBooks. I'm no fan of the 12" model's XGA resolution, either. I personally wish they'd finally make it a widescreen model at least. A tad smaller still and maybe 1152*768. (11 or 12 inch widescreen display.)

And considering higher resolutions: I can clearly see why Apple doesn't choose 'em. The system (even Tiger) is still basically set up for 72 dpi. And until there's at least a 150 or 300 dpi screen available at prices that make sense for 'normal' notebook customers AND Apple has a totally scalable UI for Mac OS X, it doesn't make sense to make the PowerBooks adopt higher res screens. UI elements would simply be too small for the majority of people - and it's the majority of people that defines market chances after all. Graphics artists still make up a great part of Apple's PowerBook customers. And they have to cater for them.

(I know that Tiger implements technology for scaling UI, but there's simply no such setting in system preferences. If you even _had_ a 150 or higher dpi screen, you simply _couldn't_ tell the OS that. So all its UI elements would simply be very, very small. I know it's theoretically possible that Apple would go high-res with displays and the OS. And I wish they would rather sooner than later. But right now, such screens ain't available - certainly not at the right prices - and the OS isn't prepared for it.)


----------



## Captain Code (Apr 7, 2005)

Even  if there were 150 dpi screens there wouldn't be any reason for you to tell the OS that.  It would be able to tell from the screen automatically and rescale the UI elements to match it.


----------



## drunkmac (Apr 7, 2005)

It's a load of crap. Companies are still flying back and forth between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray


----------



## fryke (Apr 7, 2005)

Captain Code: "would" is the important word here.


----------



## mindbend (Apr 7, 2005)

My biggest complaint on the pbooks is the brightness. Much better than my lowly ibook, which is flat out dark in comparison, but still not as bright as it could be. Other than that, the 17" is a stellar machine. First laptop I've used where I can do serious work and could even consider replacing a desktop with (which I won't, cuz I"m grabbing a dual 3 GHZ G5 whenever they arrive).

For anyone who cares, after several weeks now of using the 17" along side my venerable dual 1GHZ box, I'd say the new 17" pbook is slightly faster overall, which is pretty impressive.


----------



## Captain Code (Apr 7, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Captain Code: "would" is the important word here.



Maybe but I don't know what you mean by that.  As of now the OS gets the supported resolutions from the screen/monitor already so extending this function to include screen dpi would be easy.


----------



## fryke (Apr 7, 2005)

No, as interface elements, right now, are still partly dependant on bitmapped graphics. Sad, but true. And you don't want to look at them scaled up. Eww...


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 9, 2005)

is it possible to have dual native resolutions on an lcd? like 72dpi/150dpi? so the user could choose? if you have relatively good eyesight, a tighter packed screen offering more 'real-estate' would be btter - the icons [and other UI elements] don't get distorted, or change their form, the screen just displays them physically smaller, fitting more into the space - look at the difference between the 2003 alu-cinema displays (100dpi) and their predecessors (72dpi?) my 20" has the same res as my brothers 23" pre-2003 cD. the UI is no different, just higher quality. 

it's the difference between a 42"plasma and a 30" LCD.  the plasma only goes up as far as 864x600, and looks shoddy because the pixels are as big as your fist.


----------



## fryke (Apr 9, 2005)

You can't have 'dual native resolution', unless we're talking effective pixel _doubling_, in which case 4 actual pixels form one virtual one, which would still look fine, I guess. That way, you could have, say, a 2560*1708 pixel monster in a 15" PowerBook, and you could use it in today's mode of 1280*854 without any 'bad' interpolation.

But what we'd _really_ want would be 'freedom', as in: You can scale the whole UI to your liking, or at least to accomodate the actual resolution of any particular screen you'd happen to have lying around, erh: Hooked up to your computer. The system would have to know the ppi/dpi, of course, but could then just define that the menubar - for example - has a thickness of 0.6cm instead of - what is it now - 25 pixels or so.

That'd be the goal, I'd say. But we're definitely not there yet.


----------



## Qion (Apr 10, 2005)

Wouldn't the entire UI graphics system take up considerably more (digital, as in memory) space if it was tailored to fit custom DPI settings?


----------



## Elliotjnewman (Apr 10, 2005)

"No, as interface elements, right now, are still partly dependant on bitmapped graphics. Sad, but true. And you don't want to look at them scaled up. Eww..."


But there could be multiple images, say, apple could design the whole interface at a huge res, and then just have it scaled (using nice resamples) down many times. Like what they do with the dock, that way the bitmap gui could be scalable without any nasty aliasing and pixelation...


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Apr 10, 2005)

Elliotjnewman said:
			
		

> But there could be multiple images, say, apple could design the whole interface at a huge res, and then just have it scaled (using nice resamples) down many times.



They already do that, and have since OS 10.0 -- look in any application package file at the applications' icns file(s), and you'll see that many of them (especially the application icon itself) is simply a bitmapped image at 3 or 4 different resolutions.


----------



## chevy (Apr 10, 2005)

I think this is an excellent idea. But how will web browser react when using very non standard resolution ? What will be scaled and what won't ?

I'm sure it'll come one day, but is it a priority ?


----------



## fryke (Apr 10, 2005)

I'm not so sure it's an "excellent idea" to take very large bitmap graphics (VLBG?) and use them all around the interface, scaling them to the needs. Vector graphics are called for here in my opinion, since bitmaps are slowing down the interface. (You gotta load 'em, scale 'em etc., uses memory like crazy.)


----------



## Qion (Apr 10, 2005)

^^^^thats what I was getting at.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 11, 2005)

isn't macos extremely powerful at scaling bitmaps though? i mean it scales bitmaps like we walk and breathe - without thinking about it.  regardless of any processor intensive stuff happening (rendering complex vectors in illustrator cs for example), look how smooth and effortless expose snapshots and scales every window, regardless of size/complexity.  it's the same with the dock - effortless bitmap scaling - macos is built upon (it seems, i'm no expert in this field) scaling imagery


----------



## ziess (Apr 12, 2005)

Kind of off-topic but there's a nice zoomed in graphic of the tiger GUI on the new tiger site (http://www.apple.com/macosx/overview/aquauserinterface.html). If the GUI could look that smooth....


----------



## martygraw1000 (Apr 13, 2005)

Post deleted by originator.


----------



## Ceroc Addict (Apr 13, 2005)

SJ has recently been quoted (MacMinute) as saying

"Apple is firing on all cylinders and we have some incredible new products in the pipeline for the coming year, *starting* with Mac OS X Tiger later this month." 

Bodes well for the introduction of new PowerMacs, etc..

Kap


----------

