Is there an estimate on when the PowerBook G5 will debut? The new Power
Mac isn't available until sometime in August, so I assume that means an
updated PowerBook won't be available until the end of the year (or later)?

What about a speed bump for PowerBook G4?

I'm looking at purchasing a new PowerBook 17", but I'd like to make an
informed decision. I don't want to buy it and then in two weeks get
burned when a faster one is released.

In article <vff5ibf3mvf8c3[at]corp.supernews.com>,
Michael Rice <marice[at]whiteice.com> wrote:

> Is there an estimate on when the PowerBook G5 will debut? The new Power

One thing at a time. Let's allow them to

1) get the G5 out the door, instead of only announced
2) get the hardware and software bugs out of it
3) figure out how to decrease the heat generation (*9* fans???)

before we expect a laptop.

--
Today, on Paper-view: Pulp Fiction!

Michael Rice wrote:

> I think requesting vendors to provide a product roadmap, with
> approximate dates, is not unreasonable. I don't mind the "nature of
> the beast", but it kills me to buy "top of the line" when waiting
> behind the curtain is an upgraded/better product, just waiting for
> some release date to arrive.
>
> I assume there are economic reasons for vendors not doing this. It
> would also probably take some of the hype out of product releases.

Check out the canonical economic reason for this at Wikipedia:

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_Computer_Corporation

-Greg

--
from the sonic domain of the net TLD, with username gw2.

"...a typical American production, with guns and special effects."
-Tariq Aziz

In article <gtQJa.4973$%3.262141[at]typhoon.sonic.net>, Braxton Burrsaddle
<not[at]here.invalid> wrote:

> Check out the canonical economic reason for this at Wikipedia:

Interesting story (I used to own a Kaypro; it was a great computer
(with a 768KB ram disk, _everything_ could operate in ram, and the
machine was absolutely silent). It seems to me, however, that Jobs
might have shot the G5 in the foot by announcing 3GHz machines by
year's end. I'm not in the market for a G5, but if I were, I could see
myself waiting four months to get a 50% performance increase.

In article <230620032144044828%jd[at]invalid.invalid>,
jemmy ducks <jd[at]invalid.invalid> wrote:

> In article <gtQJa.4973$%3.262141[at]typhoon.sonic.net>, Braxton Burrsaddle
> <not[at]here.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Check out the canonical economic reason for this at Wikipedia:
>
> Interesting story (I used to own a Kaypro; it was a great computer
> (with a 768KB ram disk, _everything_ could operate in ram, and the
> machine was absolutely silent). It seems to me, however, that Jobs
> might have shot the G5 in the foot by announcing 3GHz machines by
> year's end. I'm not in the market for a G5, but if I were, I could see
> myself waiting four months to get a 50% performance increase.

But that's not what he said. Steve announced that the G5 would go to 3
GHz roughly a year from now, not by the end of the year. And he said
nothing about when a Mac would be available at that clock rate. So it's
not four months; figure more like 14 to 16 before you see that 50%
increase.

--
Hank Shiffman http://www.disordered.org
Have Opinion, Will Travel hank[at]disordered.org
Mountain View, California

Michael Rice <MichaelARice[at]knology.net> wrote:

> I think requesting vendors to provide a product roadmap, with
> approximate dates, is not unreasonable. I don't mind the "nature of the
> beast", but it kills me to buy "top of the line" when waiting behind the
> curtain is an upgraded/better product, just waiting for some release
> date to arrive.

> I assume there are economic reasons for vendors not doing this. It
> would also probably take some of the hype out of product releases.

Get used to it. This is typical of the computer industry. If you
don't want to be annoyed at buying the latest and greatest computer
and risk another better model coming down the pike within a few
months, or a cost reduction in the model you just bought, then don't
buy computers.

Yes, it would be reasonable to expect Apple to provide a roadmap,
but don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

Howard S Shubs <howard[at]shubs.net> wrote:

> 3) figure out how to decrease the heat generation (*9* fans???)

You suppose the code name for the thing was Altamont?

nmassello[at]earthlink.net (Neill Massello) wrote in message news:<1fx1i01.b4a97718s9rbqN%nmassello[at]earthlink.net>...
> Howard S Shubs <howard[at]shubs.net> wrote:
>
> > 3) figure out how to decrease the heat generation (*9* fans???)
>
> You suppose the code name for the thing was Altamont?


*GRIN* - Thanks for making me laugh. After nearly 15 years on the
east coast, I really enjoyed the moment to remember some
bay-area-esque geography. I remember bicycling the Altamont pass - it
was amazing going one way and amazingly painful going the other...

Bruce

In article <bd952u$1iq$1[at]cronkite.temple.edu>, <stan[at]temple.edu> wrote:

>Michael Rice <MichaelARice[at]knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I think requesting vendors to provide a product roadmap, with
>> approximate dates, is not unreasonable. I don't mind the "nature of the
>> beast", but it kills me to buy "top of the line" when waiting behind the
>> curtain is an upgraded/better product, just waiting for some release
>> date to arrive.
>
>> I assume there are economic reasons for vendors not doing this. It
>> would also probably take some of the hype out of product releases.
>
>Get used to it. This is typical of the computer industry. If you
>don't want to be annoyed at buying the latest and greatest computer
>and risk another better model coming down the pike within a few
>months, or a cost reduction in the model you just bought, then don't
>buy computers.
>
>Yes, it would be reasonable to expect Apple to provide a roadmap,
>but don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

I'd settle for Apple telling us the truth.

Stan

In article <1fx1i01.b4a97718s9rbqN%nmassello[at]earthlink.net>,
nmassello[at]earthlink.net (Neill Massello) wrote:

> Howard S Shubs <howard[at]shubs.net> wrote:
>
> > 3) figure out how to decrease the heat generation (*9* fans???)
>
> You suppose the code name for the thing was Altamont?

"eh?" I don' geddit.

--
Today, on Paper-view: Pulp Fiction!

In article <230620032144044828%jd[at]invalid.invalid>,
jemmy ducks <jd[at]invalid.invalid> wrote:

> It seems to me, however, that Jobs
> might have shot the G5 in the foot by announcing 3GHz machines by
> year's end.

IIRC, by "some time within the next year", no?

--
Today, on Paper-view: Pulp Fiction!

Stan The Man <macho[at]mac.com> wrote:

> I'd settle for Apple telling us the truth.

Where has Apple lied?