WWDC 2003 - Mac Heaven

[gekko]

10:00 Pacific Time, keynote begins. Apple will be unveiling Panther (OS X 10.3) to the world! A few screens leaked on 6/21, I won't post them because it's almost pointless now. Apple also recently uploaded G5 specs to the Apple Store. Accident? Not likely with Apple. WWDC isn't a big Mac show, people wouldn't watch the keynote or hype it. I mean, Panther is great and all, but won't create a ton of hype. But then again, Dual 2.0ghz G5, 1ghz FSB, PCI-X, USB 2, FireWire 800, Optical Audio in/out, Bluetooth and AirPort Extreme? HOT DAMN! :D

Keep an eye out here for the stream: http://stream.apple.akadns.net/

MacCentral traditionally updates live throughout the keynote: http://maccentral.macworld.com/

So far Apple has uploaded something about the new iDisk for Panther. http://www.mac.com/1/pantherpreview.html

The wait is on :D :D :D :D

[Jonbo298]

Just a question, but what is PCI-X? I have a rough idea as to what it is, but unsure. (Not a big Mac person, yet). But those specs are pretty damn nice.

[Stonecutter]

Sooner or later they're going to run out of endanged preator cats to name thier OS's after..........


dun......dun.......DUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNN

[gekko]

PCI-X isn't a Mac thing. Apple tends to jump on new hardware long before the PC world. But it makes its rounds. Biggest example is USB, basically it was non-existant until Apple standardized it, and companies started making products to work with it, and pretty soon the PC world is all over it. But it's not a Mac-only technology. By controlling the hardware market Apple is able to standardize things, and make every new computer ship with that hardware. Because of that, companies are willing to take advantage of it, because every person who buys a new computer will have it. It also allows Apple to make software that all Mac users can take advantage of. iMovie came out when they standardized FireWire, iTunes with CD-RWs, iDVD with the DVD-RW/CD-RW. It works nicely.

Anyway, standard PCI ports have a 32-bit bus running at 33mhz. PCI-X is a 64-bit bus running at 133mhz. But I don't know of much that actually uses the slots as of right now. But they don't need to really, it helps make your Mac last much longer. Over 2 years ago I bought this G4 of mine, it came with a DVD-RW/CD-RW (1st in the world, w00t!) and Gigabit ethernet. When I bought this, I could add a 4 port gigabit ethernet hub with gigabit ethernet cables for $999.99. 2 years later, gigabit ethernet is only slightly more expensive than 10/100, and my DVD-RW/CD-RW is far from out of date. That's why I love Apple. They push ahead, supporting new hardware long before the PC world. Wow, Dell has wireless networks, only years after I've been using AirPort, suckers! ;)

G5s will have Serial ATA, FireWire 800, USB 2.0, AirPort Extreme, Bluetooth, and PCI-X to push it long into the future.

Attaching the leaked G5 specs.

[Jonbo298]

:drool: 8GB of DDR SDRAM. I'd like to see a G5 with top of the line everything in it running. Will they show it running at the conference? If so, I'm gonna have to watch the stream then.

[gekko]

Steve Jobs usually sits down at a computer, but I don't know if it's ever been top of the line. It would make sense, however, I know the monitor he uses tends to be the 17", but maybe that's just so it's a 4:3 on the big screen. But he usually does demos, and then goes back to his presentation, and so on.

[Bond]

Yes

[Jonbo298]

*Runs off to get $4000 worth of pop cans*
Only 80,000 cans to go!:D

[gekko]

Actually, the high end G4 model is only $2999. Dual 2ghz, 512MB RAM. Now if you want 8GB RAM and all 500GB of HD space, you'll need some more pop cans ;)

[Jonbo298]

Actually, the high end G4 model is only $2999. Dual 2ghz, 512MB RAM. Now if you want 8GB RAM and all 500GB of HD space, you'll need some more pop cans ;)

Isn't the $4000 model the one with the 8GB of RAM and 500 GB HD? Or what does the $4000 have that the $3000 one doesnt?

[gekko]

There is no $3999 model. You have to edit one of the current models to up the price.

$2999 gives you:

Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

[Jonbo298]

I was slightly off. I guess they are comparing (in the pic Bond uploaded) the new Mac to a Dell.
*Now only needs 60,000 pop cans:D*

[gekko]

Ok, time for the big wrap up. Stream is up, but getting pounded, as is everything else at Apple. Might want to wait a couple hours, it will start over at about 4 PM CST.

Panther - http://www.apple.com/macosx/panther/
In the meantime, they showed off Panther and all the new features. Ships before the end of the year for $129. No surprise to anyone. There are a ton of new things added to Panther that won't make much sense unless you actually see them demonstrated in the keynote. The best OS just got better :D

Safari - http://www.apple.com/safari/
The final version of Safari is out. No huge differences, but it is out of the beta phase. Over 5 million downloads to date.

iChat AV - http://www.apple.com/ichat/
The public beta of iChat AV is out. Adds support for webcams, and audio chatting (I think).

iSight - http://www.apple.com/isight/
Apple released a webcam. Not just a webcam, the best webcam the world has ever seen. 640x480, 30fps. Steve Jobs did a fullscreen video chat with a guy in Paris. It's just sick. Of course, it's not cheap either. $149, so don't get it unless you're really going to use it. But like everything else, as time goes on, it will get cheaper. Though, I must say, if you see what it can do, $149 makes sense.

PowerMac G5 - http://www.apple.com/powermac/
Yes, the world's fastest personal computer :D Motorola is really the reason the G4 chip barely gained any speed as the years went on, so Apple pleased all Mac fans by giving it to IBM, and damn they did a good job. 2.0 ghz G5 chip (3.0ghz within 12 months), with speeds comparable to 3.0 ghz Intel chips (will get to that later). Of course, it still supports dual processors ;) Apple finally updated the FSB, which was a big problem earlier. they basically had DDR RAM but a bus too slow to take advantage of it. Didn't make much sense. But they have a 1ghz FSB, surpassing the current 800mhz FSB used on PCs. Also has support for up to 8GB of RAM, AGP 8X, PCI and PCI X, FireWire 400 and 800, USB 2.0, Bluetooth, AirPort Extreme, Optical and Analog audio In and Out, 4X SuperDrives, and a new aluminum case. Has 9 fans, and it still very quiet, quieter than the current G4s. Shipping this August. Of course, you weird PC fans probably wonder how powerful it is, after all, that's been the major downfall of Macs, right?

The G5 was tested with both single and dual processors against a 3ghz P4 and Single/Dual 3.06ghz Xeon. They tested them on both floating-point and interger calculations. The G5 lost in single processor interger calculations to both processors, but won in the other 3 tests.

System throughput
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/specchart06232003.jpg

Single processor speed
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/speccharto0206232003.jpg

The tests were done by VeriTest, using SPEC CPU2000 industry standards. They also used Unix for both, making the tests even more accurate. Here are the published results, but it's just technical mumbo-jumbo going more in-depth into how the test was performed. http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf

And of course, there were other tests.

http://a1152.g.akamai.net/7/1152/51/81d407160b1a1d/www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/photoshop06232003.jpg

http://a1120.g.akamai.net/7/1120/51/b42b40c202d5cb/www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/logic06232003.jpg

http://a832.g.akamai.net/7/832/51/fd43a8bcad83f6/www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/blast06232003.jpg

http://a1936.g.akamai.net/7/1936/51/af37216ecfbdb9/www.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/hmmer06232003.jpg

[bobcat]

I'll look at the benchmarks later, but those specs are like :eek:

Dual 2Ghz? What type of market r they going for?

[One Winged Angel]

I was thinking about buying a mac... I might consider this.

8 GB SDRAM?!?

*orgasms

[bobcat]

I was thinking about buying a mac... I might consider this.

8 GB SDRAM?!?

*orgasms

Same

[Bond]

If you start off with the top of the line G5 and you would like to upgrade to 8MB of RAM it's only....

$3,750.

:shakehead

[gekko]

That's because of the RAM they use: 400MHz, 128-bit DDR SDRAM. Most places sell RAM much cheaper than Apple, but I don't know about this stuff.

Either way, HDs are incredibly slow (150 MB/s I believe), the G5s can transfer to the RAM at 6.4 GB/s. Translation, you can copy an entire DVD to your memory in less than a second. Having more RAM allows programs to store more in the memory, making things go much faster, where usually it would have to start writing to the HD. Imagine editing 5 GB of raw DV, keeping it all in the RAM would be a dream come true. But the average consumer doesn't need nearly that much.

The Power Mac line is the best computers Apple offers. Where most PC companies have different models for consumer and businesses, Apple has their consumer and power user lines, and the Power Mac G5 is supposed to suit everyone from your consumers looking for top-of-the-line, to your businesses editing 200 GB of video and photoshop documents ranging in the hundreds of MBs. Most people never need everything maxed out, but if you have the cash, go for it ;)

[One Winged Angel]

God I want this computer... the price is leanign towards a no though =(

[gekko]

Then wait until you have money for a new computer. Computer's aren't cheap.

[One Winged Angel]

I know that but $4,000? Jesus...

[Shadow Fox]

I know that but $4,000? Jesus...Keep in mind though, that you are spending that much for PC to compete with the $2000 model G5, so it's definately more bang for the buck.

Imagine for a second (if a consumer PC actually could handle more than 4GB DDR), that you put these same specs into a dual Xeon/P4 (though P4's cannot be in dual setups)- you're spending well over $6,000 for the same 8GB RAM, and 120GB HD (no serial ATA), with at maximum 800mhz FSB.

Even if you could match up a system to compare to the new, off-the-damn-chain 64-bit technology, it would cost you nearly 50% more to do so.

And 6GB/sec bandwidth? No bottlenecks? 8X AGP? HyperTransport?

Ladies and Gentlemen, I do believe we have a new contender to run high-end games like Doom 3 and Half-Life 2.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

[Jonbo298]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I do believe we have a new contender to run high-end games like Doom 3 and Half-Life 2.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Now we need the companies to bring them out either at launch of the games or shortly after for the MAC and then we can see what the PC can't do that the MAC can just say, oh yeah, I can do that......

[Mechadragon]

I'm a bit of a newbie at computers and I was wondering: would a dual 2gig processor be equal to a single 4 gig processor?

[Stonecutter]

I'm a bit of a newbie at computers and I was wondering: would a dual 2gig processor be equal to a single 4 gig processor?
In a word.

No.

If you need more, ask.

[Mechadragon]

In a word.

No.

If you need more, ask.
Well, what exactly would it be equal too?

[gekko]

I don't think you can accurately say what it's equal to.

[Xantar]

Well, what exactly would it be equal too?

As I understand it (and I don't understand it very well), it depends what you're doing. The way I learned it was to think of it kind of like this:

If the program is just a linear set of instructions such as first do A, then do B, then do C and you have to complete A in order to do B (perhaps if the result of calculation A was used for calculation B), then having multiple processors doesn't help all that much. If we assume each step takes one cycle, then the entire thing will still take three cycles (keep in mind that I am simplifying grossly here).

However, if the program is multi-threaded and requires the computer to do A and B in no particular order before doing C, having multiple processors helps. One processor would do A. Another would do B at the same time. Then one of them would do C. This program would take three cycles with a single processor but only two cycles with a dual processor.

Now if the program had four steps that all could be completed in any order, a single processor would take four cycles while a dual processor would take two.

Therefore, you can't say that a dual processor is twice as fast as a single processor or is 1.8 times as fast or anything like that. You can give an average, I suppose, but that's not very predictive.

I hope I didn't mangle all that too much. :unsure:

[Mechadragon]

As I understand it (and I don't understand it very well), it depends what you're doing. The way I learned it was to think of it kind of like this:

If the program is just a linear set of instructions such as first do A, then do B, then do C and you have to complete A in order to do B (perhaps if the result of calculation A was used for calculation B), then having multiple processors doesn't help all that much. If we assume each step takes one cycle, then the entire thing will still take three cycles (keep in mind that I am simplifying grossly here).

However, if the program is multi-threaded and requires the computer to do A and B in no particular order before doing C, having multiple processors helps. One processor would do A. Another would do B at the same time. Then one of them would do C. This program would take three cycles with a single processor but only two cycles with a dual processor.

Now if the program had four steps that all could be completed in any order, a single processor would take four cycles while a dual processor would take two.

Therefore, you can't say that a dual processor is twice as fast as a single processor or is 1.8 times as fast or anything like that. You can give an average, I suppose, but that's not very predictive.

I hope I didn't mangle all that too much. :unsure:
Nah you didn't. You explained it very well.