January 10, 2006 1:07 PM PST

Jobs: New Intel Macs are 'screamers'

A correction was made to this story. Click here for details.

SAN FRANCISCO--Addressing a packed crowd of the Mac faithful, Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs on Tuesday served up the first Intel-based Macs, introducing a new high-end laptop and a revamped iMac.

The new machines both include Intel's Duo dual-core chip. The iMac will come in the same sizes and sell for the same prices as the current models, but the Intel chips make it two to three times faster, Jobs said. A new laptop computer, called the MacBook Pro, will be available in February, he said.

Click here to Play

Video: Debut of first Intel-based Mac
At Macworld, Apple CEO Steve Jobs unveils an updated, Intel-based iMac.

In addition to the crop of new Macs, Jobs announced a new version of the iLife suite that adds a tool--iWeb--designed to make it easy to create Web sites with video, audio and blogs, and new features meant to simplify the sharing of photos over the Web and the creation of podcasts.

Jobs said Apple would transition to an all-Intel lineup of Macintosh computers by the end of 2006.

"We're a little ahead of schedule," he said, with Intel Chief Executive Officer Paul Otellini joining him onstage dressed in a head-to-toe "bunny suit," the protective suits that workers wear in chipmaking facilities. "These things are screamers."

The release of the new Macs comes just seven months after Jobs shocked the computer world with an announcement that Apple would move to Intel chips, after years of using the PowerPC hardware made by IBM and Motorola.

News.com Poll

When will you buy your first Intel-based Mac?

Immediately, if not sooner
Let's read the reviews first
When my current PC finally dies
Never



View results

Jobs said last June that Apple would have computers ready to ship by June of this year. Beating that mark by almost half a year will help ease a transition some feared would result in several quarters of diminished sales, analysts said.

"The critical thing they delivered on is what people, including analysts, were expecting," said Charlie Wolf, a financial analyst at Needham. "They have begun the Intel transition sooner rather than later."

Still, Jobs took pains to dispel any notion of a current slowdown in Apple sales. In an uncharacteristic announcement, he said the company had a record $5.7 billion in revenue for the quarter that ended in December. Apple's retail stores alone accounted for $1 billion in revenue, he said.

That included sales of 14 million iPods in the holiday quarter, with more than 32 million of the music devices sold over the course of 2005. Those figures, at least as much as the new products, impressed analysts.

special coverage
Apple's new crop
Sink your teeth into all the news from this week's Macworld Expo.

"They could have announced dog food and the stock would have been up five points," Wolf said.

The new iMac line will include a 17-inch, 1.83GHz version, selling for $1,299, and a 20-inch, 2GHz version for $1,699.

Once released in February, the MacBook Pro line of laptops will include a $1,999 model running at 1.67GHz and featuring a 15-inch screen. That version will also come with an 80GB hard drive and a new infrared sensor to use with the Apple Remote control device. A second version will feature a 1.83GHz processor and a 100GB hard drive and cost $2,499.

"The MacBook Pro is the fastest Mac notebook ever, obviously," Jobs said.

Focus on creating media, not selling it
The company was light on the media announcements that have come to define Apple events in recent months. Jobs did say, however, that the iTunes store will begin selling clips from "Saturday Night Live" and that more than 8 million videos have been sold through the iTunes online store since October.

The iTunes Music Store has now sold about 850 million songs and is on track to pass the 1 billion mark in the next few months, selling about 3 million songs a day, he added.

He also introduced a new, $49 FM radio and remote control accessory

CONTINUED: A "giant" new software release…
Page 1 | 2

80 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Hmmm...twice the speed
Guess that settles the performance question between PowerPC G5 versus the Wintel processors.

AMD is the fastest.
Posted by make_or_break (3747 comments )
Reply Link Flag
4x the speed actually.
On their front page the caption under the new laptop reads "4x faster. (Wishes do come true.), 15.4-inch MacBook Pro starting at $1999"

The system is dual core, but 2 cores != 2x speed. I know PowerPC has lost some ground but only a couple years ago they were claiming to be faster.

Were the last couple years THAT bad for PPC?

Nope, sounds like marketing math to me.
Posted by Dachi (797 comments )
Link Flag
Dual Core???
Um, lets see, Dual Core vs Single Core. Ya, might be a bit faster...
Posted by thawk9455 (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Marketing Hyperbole
People,
Please try to understand the difference between "speed attained" and work performed, anyone who has seriously looked at the different cpu architectures that are continuously involved in this argument will tell you that THESE ARE MYTHS. Intels architecture excels at speed. AMDs architecture excels at work and the PowerPC architecture excels at both, while not leading at either.

Steve Jobs is doing what he does best, selling ice to Eskimos.
Posted by EmbSysPro (57 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Speed Attained
Let's have a look again at the architecture issue:

The whole point of a dual-core processor is the ability to
multitask. Given, Intel is speed-drunk and AMD is more or a
number-cruncher (hence more gamer-used), but at this point,
the dual-core technology promises a better POWER than before,
specifically because the work is now split, and not sequential.
Just look at the Xbox360 for an example of a multi-core
processor working better than the previous.

However I write this with a grain of salt: The Intel duo-core has
not yet been proven as far as its ability. The theory is sound,
the power is there, but all this is lab-tested, or other controlled-
state. We shall wait and see, but my predicition is that Pixar, ILM
and other Mac-based, power-hungry and demanding industry.
Posted by Mephisto_Puck (1 comment )
Link Flag
Should I feel burned?
Charles, I hope you're right about the speed thing being marketing
hyperbole. I just bought a G5 iMac ten days ago, and now Apple
says the new G5 is "twice as fast and twice as amazing." Should I
feel burned?
Posted by Robert Scheide (2 comments )
Link Flag
$1299 for an Intel Apple machine???
$1299 for an Intel Apple machine??? I'll stick to my Windows XP-AMD 3800+ for $720. Why are the prices so high? Just to discourage anyone who doesn't own one from ever buying one? I don't get it. Does Apple make $500 per computer?
Posted by lingsun (482 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Does that $720 price include...
- System/Display integration
- A built-in webcam
- A built-in mic
- Built in stereo speakers
- Integrated remote system
- Built in wireless (Bluetooth 2.0 and 802.11g)
- Mac OS 10.4
Posted by djemerson (64 comments )
Link Flag
Hahaha...
Show me a $720 Dual Core Yonah that has no viruses, then you can
get back to me.
Posted by zigziggityzoo (15 comments )
Link Flag
Let's Make the Machines Equal
As others have mentioned, let's make these similar in just a few key areas:

- 17" High Quality LCD - $300
- Web Camera, closest in quality is a Logitech QuickCam® for Notebooks Pro - $99
- Windows XP Pro (really you need Longhorn which may ship this year or next) - $200
- Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 plus Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 - $149
- You'll Need MS Office for Outlook 2003 which is the closest to Apple's Mail, Contacts, and Calendar, the Outlook Express isn't in the same class.
- You'll need to add Nero for DVD burning - $79

The above items are now over $800 in additions to your Windows based system.

Add on the speakers, microphone, and a host of missing hardware and software and you'll spend another $300+.

So when we sit down at the compare table, a new iMac will cost $1299. Your system to be similar for software and hardware will cost close to $200 -- and you'll have to spend another $200 for the Windows Vista update in 10-12 months to catch up to where the Mac is now. Apple will be ahead further with Mac OS 10.5.
Posted by brian.bezanson (6 comments )
Link Flag
is that price for a...
LAPTOP or a desktop?

u kno.. laptops are much more expensive than dektops

besides, your getting apples incredible innovation - such as the optical in and out and the magnetic power cord (truly genius)
Posted by assman (1101 comments )
Link Flag
The three Apple S's
That's the premium you pay for 'Stability, Security and Style'. It's
like anything in life, you get what you pay for. But they do also
offer great value - Apple is offering consumers this machine with a
flat screen built in, built in iSight camera, as well as the brilliant
iLife software. With new dual core processing for the same price as
the outgoing model - it is a great deal! If you want cheap as chips,
wait for the new Mac Mini, which is really the only comparable
thing to your PC!
Posted by sath71 (7 comments )
Link Flag
apple vs. pc
1)apples have such great design why oh why does Steve Jobs make a mac version and a PC version that can run business pc software. So us business people can have a cool looking PC!

2) i-games idea downloadable games for your game consoles way lower ditribution costs and packaging. It is a no brainer Put BOB(likes robert) kondrk on it!
Posted by GAVINDEWEY (3 comments )
Link Flag
Once more....
.... irrelevance from Bill. No, he doesn't get it, nor will he.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
Eating My Words!
An Intel based Mac that has a Linux based OS. Looks like it is time for a big plate of Humble Pie! To all you Mac-aholics I take back all the bad things I said.

And M$ does it again, snatches defeat from the jaws of victory!
Posted by Mister C (423 comments )
Reply Link Flag
ummmm
Apart from the fact that OS X is NOT Linux based - yours was a good post..

*rolls eyes*
Posted by TyTyson (154 comments )
Link Flag
ExpressCard?
Apple's ahead of the curve with ExpressCard, but is this sane? With USB they gave up their proprietary ADB, but here they're giving up an established standard for a new one that (they hope) will catch on soon.

None of the big 3 (US) cell phone carriers offers data cards in this format. Will they? Given their active neglect of Mac users, until Dell (or maybe HP) owners start demanding ExpressCard it isn't gonna happen.
Posted by joelwest (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
just like...
usb and firewire.... right?
Posted by (96 comments )
Link Flag
Yep
Apple pioneered USB. The iMac had it and everyone was saying
"But there aren't any peripherals for it!" Sure enough, in a few
months there were.

Apple had WiFi on Macs a year befor the next manufacturer
(Dell) did.

They pioneered Firewire. (Well, okay, so that hasn't bee as
successful.)

The list goes on and on and on. Nobody drives new hardware/
software adoption like Apple does. Their impact on the industry
is way out of proportion with their market share. And that will
likely continue (except in music where they eat everyone's
lunch.)

The only think Bill Gates has over Apple is his's a better
philanthropist than Steve Jobs by a long shot.
Posted by ewelch (767 comments )
Link Flag
Any Multi-Core Programs?
Dual care chips, in any box, PC or Apple, still have one thing limiting their proformance. The programs. Dual core processros only combine two processor cores into one chip. YOu still have to have both an OS and programs that actually take advantage of both processors.

While the majority of modern operation system (except XP Home) support two processors, and therefore dual core chips, Last I checked, unless you were running server applications or high end (much higher than the adverage user will ever run) aapplications, the vast majority of software out there does not take advantage of anything beyond the first processor.

While eventually multi-core processos look like they will become standard, right how, how many people have programs that actually use that second core?

In a year, when a hot new game come out that requires a multiple processor system, they may grow in popularity with programers, but untill then, the adverage user is not going to see much differance between a single and a dual core chip of the same clock speed. FOr now, they are great for marketing to people who don't know what they are listening to and a reason to add several hundered dollars to the price of a computer.

For the time being, because the idea of a multi-processor in the adverage computer is still new, who actually makes software to put that second core to use? So this "screaming mechine" will only be slightly facter than a single core mechine of the same clock speed to the adverage user. Marketing math is at it again.
Posted by startiger (50 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Both cores will be used
Apple's been running and writing code for dual-processors for
years now. In fact, given the processor-intensive high-end apps
(Final Cut Pro, iDVD, Aperture, Motion, etc.), I'm sure many of
Apple's apps are built from the ground up to run on to cores.

Of course, that's assuming the OSX kernel doesn't handle the
threading to begin with.
Posted by mgreere (332 comments )
Link Flag
MultiCore OS
Bob,

What you said may be true of Windoze programs.. MacOSX has as a
core technology Symetrical Multiprocessing. PowerMacs have been
dual-processor for 4 or 5 years. Many programs worked with
multiprocessing before OSX, but all programs work that way with X.
Sorry you windoze users have been left so far behind!
Posted by bill Kline (2 comments )
Link Flag
Multi-Core Programs
My boss bought a dual-core computer for Christmas. I told him his games would suck because they are not made for dual-core. He came back after the break and said his computer SCREAMS when running games or anything else. Apparently there is some tweak you can do for non-dual-core programs so they still run like lightning.
Posted by BaldSpot (7 comments )
Link Flag
You obviously don't know Apple software
There are quite a few programs that are multi-processor aware
in OS X. Even Unreal Tournament 2004 unloads the audio to a
second processor to speed up the rest fo the program.
Photoshop is somewhat multi-processor aware. After Effects
from Adobe is especially multi-processor aware. It actually can
use all four cores in the new Quad Mac G5. Reports are it churns
out the fastest numbers any personal computer has even spit
out.

There are quite a few other Mac apps that are multi-processor
aware. Quite a few aren't. So your point is partially correct. But
hardly as correct as you think.
Posted by ewelch (767 comments )
Link Flag
obviously you have no idea what you're talking about
even in windows (which is a threaded OS) at all times you have a multitude, shall I say a plethora, or processes running, in addition to whatever applications you are running at any given moment. On a dual core system the OS intelligently distributes the workload amongst the available resources (processors in this case). kind of like a balancing act. Of course it will never be perfectly balanced at any given moment but the second processor doesn't just sit idle as you put it.
Posted by mortis9 (370 comments )
Link Flag
Don't worry, many are coming...
There are some programs out there now that will make use of it. The most important aspect of a dual core system is that two programs can each have full CPU power at once.

Where you will see the multi-core development is from the game industry. Each of the new game consoles provide multiple cores in order to increase overall system performance. The game market is forcing app developers to start thinking on a multi-core method for their programs.

I've said this over a year ago, and those who scoffed at my prediction are seeing it come true now. :)
Posted by zaznet (1138 comments )
Link Flag
Like evertyhing but the name
MacBook is hard to say. I know Apple wants to distance itself from
PowerPC by dropping "Power" from its brands but MacBook Pro?!
How about iBook Pro? There could be iBooks and iBook Pro models.

Just my $0.02. All in all, I'm impressed. Saving my pennies.
Posted by discern (75 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Not hard to say.
The name "MacBook" isn't hard to say, but I do think the "iBook" would sound better and and could benefit from other marketing such as from the iPod.
Posted by zaznet (1138 comments )
Link Flag
Writer
Whoever wrote this should have finished middle school before attempting to prove any points. I found 20 typos and numerous grammar mistakes in this article. If you need someone to write grammatically correct and typo-free articles for you, come to me.
Posted by ROFLance (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Screamers
Someone should tell His Steveness that a "Screamer" roughly
translates as "flambouyant homosexual" in UK.
Posted by mcthingy2 (64 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Boring....
Extremely happy the elitist Mac fans have something else to brag about, but these Mactels are boring. Maybe I'll get excited in a few months, but for now it's nothing new and spectacular. Still slower than AMDs at twice the cost.
Posted by tahbasco (30 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Slower at twice the cost?
Can you back that claim up?
Posted by swortis (4 comments )
Link Flag
What A Load!
Sorry to be so crude, but the performance claims for these machines is, ah, suspect to me. Did anyone notice those graphs? They were very pretty, woodgrained thingies, but totally devoid of meaning!

Lets try to be realistic about things here. Even though I'm sure both the new iMac and the Mac Book Pro (clunk) are better than their PPC-based predecessors, especially the laptop, the performance increases clearly have as much to do with the supporting technology as with the CPUs, if not more. PCIx over AGP - no contest. Slower video processor vs a faster one - 'no duh' there. Serial ATA over Parallel ATA - another big improvement. And (at least with the MBPro) FSB speeds that can't even be compared to the earlier model. All of that could have been incorporated into any Mac laptop, including a G4 based one, at any point, going back for the last 2 years.

Now, out of curiosity, I went to the site of the company (Freescale) that makes the G4. How many people realize that they too have a dual core CPU, with the same general clockspeeds as CoreDuo, and FSB support that is just as fast as this new Intel CPU too? Check it: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG7249" target="_newWindow">http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=0162468rH3bTdG7249</a>

If the old G4 is any indication, they'll be pretty power efficient too.

So what? So why make a lateral move in performance and power efficiency, especially when - if moving to x86 is a good idea for some other reason - AMD is available? The new FX-60 is dual core, probably the most efficient desktop CPU ever, and a REAL "screamer" to boot. I'll be putting my money on AMD to surpass Intel even in the mobile space soon. As for PPC ... I don't claim to be an expert, but I do know that PA Semiconductor is reportedly bringing to market a mobile class, 64bit dual core CPU that promises to be very impressive, IBM has a 4+ghz Power6 in the pipeline for '06-07 that has Altivec on it (no one but Apple would compel them to add that, so I guess that lays to rest the idea IBM didn't care about them), and Cell is the most forward thinking CPU design I've ever seen or heard of.

All in all, this move to Intel seems supremely pointless to me. Question for Apple/Jobs: If second best is a worthy enough goal now, why bother with the charade? Just sell the company to Intel and be done with it.
Posted by bcsaxman (69 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I agree
There's something about the Intel move that Teh Steve is not telling us. Was he pissed with IBM the way he was with Moto before that? If so, how long will it be before we have to move house yet again? Until his buddy leaves, maybe?
Posted by Xiaxua (20 comments )
Link Flag
Does that $720 price include (cont.)...
You keep forgetting that Winbows is still sftw from the Teletubbies and has no guarantee that it will work with your stuff or hardware.
Posted by JonB. (59 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I was screaming when I found out that my 2-weeks old iMac is now obsolete.
I am a loyal Mac user/owner who bought a brand new iMac as a
New Year's gift to myself two weeks ago. I went to several Mac
stores before buying my new iMac online with a 1.5 GB/500 HD
for $2,100+.

I kept asking sale people in the MAC stores if they will have a
new version of the iMac and they kept telling me that it is the
Mac Mini and the iBook that will be the first ones to change to
the new Intel Dual Core. So I bought the iMac thinking that I
have at least a year--since the version I bought just came out a
few months ago.

Anyway, it's not even two weeks and I have an obsolete unit. I
went to check the price for a 2.0 GB/500 HD iMac and it's
actually cheaper than what I have!

Apple should have a trade-in program for the hundreds of
thousands like me who bought iMacs in the last, say, two
months or so.

Anybody else out there with the same experience?
Posted by Godi GUtierrez (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You couldn't have missed all the hype...
.... about the MacWorld show. And by now you should have
known that Apple always announces new products at shows like
this. And no one tells the sales people what the corporation is
going to do, unless the sales people are locked into not telling
the public. So, your surprise shouldn't have been that much of a
surprise.

And the Intel iMac actually is $100 more than what you paid.
And right now, I think that I'd tend to appreciate the proven G5
performance, without Rosetta, slowing down my apps. In all
probability, the G5 may be as fast as the Intel Mac on non-
universal binary software. And if not as fast, it won't be all that
much slower.

Go for the swap, if it's important. Relax and go with the G5 iMac
if you want proven Mac performance.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag
Try Applecare
Try calling Applecare. In the past they've had a 30 day replacement policy for product update situations like yours. If its any consolation, I bought my iMac about 6 weeks before the Intel switch announcement. Avoid buying Apple hardware in the weeks before any event where Steve Jobs will present a keynote speech. Remember - even if you keep it, that is an awesome machine that will serve you well.
Posted by (1 comment )
Link Flag
iMac G5 is NOT obsolete...
Until ALL major programs are converted to UNIVERSAL BINARY apps for PowerPC AND Intel Core Duo Macs, you will be fine for quite awhile.

Depends on what you are working with presently...

Also, being on the bleeding edge vs. the cutting edge has it's benefits &#38; detriments...

Try AppleCare or your nearest Apple Retail Store to see if they will exchange it...

I purchased the iMac G5 with built in video camera &#38; Front Row for the Holidays too &#38; I was predicting the Macintel Portables only for the MacWorld keynote...

I'm still happy.
Posted by Llib Setag (951 comments )
Link Flag
Gotta love Apple marketing spin
It seems like only yesterday that Apple was hyping "the world's first supercomputer on a chip", and claiming that the PowerPC processor could run circles around x86 processors. Now Apple's entire marketing message is basically "The Mac finally has the world's fastest processor inside". Gotta love 'em.
Posted by VTAlum (30 comments )
Reply Link Flag
TYPICAL MACSCREWED
I learned the same thing a few years back when I actually made
the tragic mistake of buying Mac's popular fruit desktops,
blackberry, blueberry, snow, etc. Only to be crushed to learned a
month later that the new edition iMacs with a multitude of
improvements arrived and was selling for the same proce I paid
not six weeks before and that my machine was now effectively
being sold for like $1,000.00 less. This is a real Machievelian
strategy Mac has been doing for years now. Strategically
DUMPING old units on the cusp of the new arrivals to maximaize
profits before the unveiling. I learned my lesson the hard way,
and almost gave up my lifelong loyalty to Macs because I felt
shortchanged, duped and treated like a fool. If they had any
integrity beyond the modern day obssession with profit over
customer loyalty and support, they would have done the decent
thing and lowered the prices on units they well knew would be
old news after the New year's bells finished ringing. Now, I have
learned to wait until after the annual Mac show, when Mr. Jobs
(who received a piece of my mind via the Classic mode of
comunication: a hard copy letter) unviels his new tricks of the
trade to make people buy buy buy. They refused to refund my
money. I think you have like thirty days from date of purchase
depending on where you bought your machine to return it.
Otherwise, live and learn. I am on the verge of buying their new
MACBOOK PRO, but I just KNOW the Firewire 800 they took out
of the configuration and the DVD burning speeds will soon be
sold, my guess is by summer or fall latest, so I might just sit on
my good hard earned cash until this happens. Fool me once,
etc. etc.
Posted by getwiththeprogram (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Who Cares
Jobs is fighting for his measely 4% of the market...as he has been for the last 30 years. This just proves he is a 30 year loser.
Posted by iZune (58 comments )
Reply Link Flag
30 year loser?
30 years in business doesn't add up to a loss. In fact, they are doing fine. iPod is the de facto number one MP3 player on the market, and Macs have been the choice for artists, architects, and musicians for years.
Posted by mattumanu (599 comments )
Link Flag
Apples accomplishments after 30 years...
With the move to Intel processors and Bootcamp Apple has finally realized its goal of catching up Microsoft and copying its product (think New Coke)...
Posted by 757addict (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Apples accomplishments after 30 years...
With the move to Intel processors and Bootcamp Apple has finally realized its goal of catching up Microsoft and copying its product (think New Coke)...
Posted by 757addict (15 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.