There will be a G5 announced in MWSF. I got this information from a very important person at Apple. He's my friend and I can't risk his job and won't say anything else.
Originally posted by King Cobra
>(Nipsy) Knowing Apple,
Apple IMO only receives the chips, and Motorola should be most responsible for making the chips for Apple.
>if this is true, a G5 may be shipping by November 2003!
This reminds me to back last year with the flamepissed "Upcoming G5, G6, G7" thread, which had information about the G5 going up to 1.6GHz, along with the G6, and the G7. Yet, the G4 Apollo was mentioned to still be supplied by Motorola. So far, we haven't gotten G5s, but we do have a conference this year, to deal out all these issues. From there, more reasonable assumptions should be able to be made, and such sarcasm may not become necessary.
Originally posted by King Cobra
Guys, for those doubting applemacdude, remember what happened with APPLEP58? Almost no one thought he was telling the honest to John truth. And he was. I think certain "newbies" these days with insider information should be trusted until the point they are wrong/right. Then, IF they are wrong, belittle them!
Originally posted by applemacdude
updated ibooks newly desined tibooks a pda codenames n2 (newton 2) atv and thats i konw
erm...yeah...right...oooooookOriginally posted by RBMaraman
These dual processors are the most retarted things I have ever heard of. They are a complete ripoff! Even with the architecture of OSX, the duals don't do anything. You are essentialy paying for another processor that just sits there and does nothing. If dual processors really worked, you would have seen them in windows machines years ago.
Do you have any interesting rumors. Both of your threads, this one and the PDA ones are the most commonly said rumors on all of the message boards. They have been regurgitated so many times that theres nothing left. Come up with something that is actually believable.Originally posted by applemacdude
There will be a G5 announced in MWSF. I got this information from a very important person at Apple. He's my friend and I can't risk his job and won't say anything else.
1. Hasn't read a damn thing ever.Originally posted by RBMaraman
Apple needs the G5 badly!!! These dual processors are the most retarted things I have ever heard of. They are a complete ripoff! Even with the architecture of OSX, the duals don't do anything. You are essentialy paying for another processor that just sits there and does nothing. If dual processors really worked, you would have seen them in windows machines years ago.
I wouldn't waste my money on a dual machine, that's why I'm waiting for the G5 before I buy my next Mac. Even if I have to wait another 2 years.
Originally posted by applemacdude
Hey im just 13. My friend works an apple and i dont to see him that much like once every 2 months. so shut up already
Good to know. I wasn't really commenting on Rush's computing habits, rather on his propensity to misunderstand, misstate, and misrepresent facts, while still having strong opinions on topics. Hell, it keeps him employed, though. I wonder if our uninformed friend (above) has the same luck.Originally posted by solvs
Edit: To the guy above, actually Rush is a huge Mac fan (no pun intended).
chmorley,Originally posted by chmorley
Good to know. I wasn't really commenting on Rush's computing habits, rather on his propensity to misunderstand, misstate, and misrepresent facts, while still having strong opinions on topics. Hell, it keeps him employed, though. I wonder if our uninformed friend (above) has the same luck.
Chris
And what constitutes a "true G5"? 64-bit? HyperTransport? What?Originally posted by e-coli
there's absolutely no evidence that a desktop implemented G5 even exists. heck, they don't even have a manufacturer nailed down as far as we know. I'm betting no true G5 until MWNY (or Boston, or whatever) 2003 at the absolute earliest. But more like MWSF 2004. I hope I'm wrong, but it isn't looking like it from over here.
A 7xxx chip labeled as G5 would be a tragic mistake.