Apple Previewing New Power Mac?

dunric writes "CNET.com reports that Apple Computer may be previewing a new Power Mac, complete with dual G5 processors and a more advanced memory configuration." The "previewing" isn't intentional, though -- the report is based on service and repair documents distributed last month and reported on AppleInsider.com. AppleInsider has taken down at least one image from their report, but have added an artist's rendering.

previewing

[name773 (696972)]

why wouldn't apple want the previewing?
to me, it seems like good advertising... for free, and you know how companies like free adverts

Re:previewing

[iotaborg (167569)]

Simple, because it would mean everyone will know that Apple is going to refresh the PowerMac lines real soon. Then people will tend to want to wait for the next model rather than buy the current, which isn't really what Apple wants.

Re:previewing

[NoData (9132)]

Also, companies like to time new releases with liquidation of current stock. They know few people are gonna buy the old model once they hear about the new one coming out (as you point out), but the real bitch is that it leaves them with a surplus of old stock they can't move and then have to eat a loss discounting it. This is why sometimes new products are ready to go months before a company wants to officially announce them. When you have tiny margin and a small market share like Apple, this is a big problem. (Apple also has kinda crappy inventory control, which exacerbates this problem. They routinely come up in short-supply after a new product launch, or overstocked near the end of a product cycle).

Re:previewing

[Have Blue (616)]

This is also why rumor sites tend to keep careful track of promotions and discounts from Apple, believing they are efforts to clear out inventories of older models in preparation for a new product launch.

inventory control?

[johnpaul191 (240105)]

generally Apple get's very good points from analysts when they see how small Apple's inventory is... hrm i can't think of the term but generally Apple does not have more than a few weeks of products in limbo. they have an issue with iPod minis and that's the hard drive manufacturer. while it isn't great to have demand outpace supply, it's better than having mountians of devices nobody will buy. some companies live by that motto..... Minui Coopers, Harley Davidsons and Triumph motorcycles for example. they take it to an extreme (somepared to Apple), but they know every vehicle they make will be sold right off. that's a nice place to be.
the delay on the new powermacs has def been processors. it's possible there are other components, but Apple and IBM admitted there were issues at the IBM chipmaking plant that caused problems for supplies getting to Apple. it was the chip that is in the current Xserves and rumored to have been in the G5 tower revision. now the speculation is that the G5 tower may hop right up to the next chip revision alltogether.

Re:previewing

[jwthompson2 (749521)]

Spoils keynotes...

Big heatsink

[Fiz Ocelot (642698)]

There seems to be either a huge heatsink or some kind of cover over it in this image Here [wankie.net] looks cool.

Re:Big heatsink

[SuperBanana (662181)]

There seems to be either a huge heatsink or some kind of cover over it in this image

It doesn't have fins, so it's not a heatsink. Apple's long-stated goal with the thermal design of the G5 was to compartmentalize heat sources; the extension of the box(which appears to be one piece of formed metal) seems purely to help compartmentalize the CPU area more. Wouldn't it be interesting if this was done because the heatsinks are taller? Taller but thinner heatsinks would let you put(ahem) more CPUs into that space. I honestly can't say I think they bumped processor speeds; wasn't IBM at a brick wall in that regard with the G5? Seems like we'd be more likely to see a quad box, although for 90% of even high end users, 4 processors wouldn't be terribly useful.

What is also interesting is that the motherboard has shrunk by a few inches, hence the longer connecting cable in one set of photos; it's a few inches back from the front of the case instead of nearly abutting it.

Re:Big heatsink

[mebob (57853)]

it does have fins. The current G5's are just like this. There is just a seperate cover for each.

Re:Big heatsink

[peragrin (659227)]

No IBm wasn't at a brick wall, they just had probelms in the actual manufactoring processes. They were losing a large amount of chips due to defects. Those have been worked out a for a couple of months now.

Re:Big heatsink

[Genady (27988)]

That's no heat sink. It's a spacestation.

G5 Espresso Machine

[thedogcow (694111)]

Check this link out from Appleinsider [appleinsider.com] under the user name "windowsblowsass". I thought that was humorous.

Re:G5 Espresso Machine

[JamieF (16832)]

Here's a link that spares you the need to scoll past a bunch of ridiculous speculation:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&t hreadid=42736#post627583 [appleinsider.com]

Also, in the process of looking at the source to figure out how to make the above URL, I found these comments in the HTML starting at line 45:

"DO NOT CHANGE THIS AGAIN
THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY FOR MEMBERS TO RETURN TO THE CONTENT"
(some HTML code removed here)
"DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE
GO FUCK YOURSELF - The Management"

Nice. It's always good to see design arguments that have escalated into profane insults embedded in one's publicly visible HTML source. The least they could do would be to use the scripting language's comment syntax so those little love notes wouldn't be visible to anybody looking at the source code...

Missing picture

[polyp2000 (444682)]

This may be the picture you are looking for...
New G5 Picture [blackapology.com]

nick ...

Re:Missing picture

[bogie (31020)]

Wow. Just mindblowing. A VERY bold move by Apple.

Isn't this predictable

[agent dero (680753)]

With WWDC coming up, isn't it somewhat obvious that apple is preparing a new PowerMac? Most likely a new revision of most of there stuff.

I mean, they are coming out with 10.4 at the WWDC, why not new hardware to run it on?

Correction...

[WiseWeasel (92224)]

They're PREVIEWING MacOS 10.4 Tiger, not releasing it, supposedly. Also, their G5s are seriously due for an update, after almost a year (if you don't count the change to the 1.8 GHz model). This would have happened sooner if IBM could produce the 90 nm chips faster, but c'est la vie...

Anything is better...

[erockett (784008)]

I'll take any Mac that runs at 1GHz or more (...not saying that 2 or 3GHz wouldn't be nice...). The family computer is shared by 4 people and runs at 800MHz. I want to get my own computer, so I can fill it up with my junk instead of everyone else's.

Hey

[Ikn (712788)]

Go to Wired [wired.com] and check out their Cult of Mac blog, and I think get have some pics/more info on this.

What I found most interesting

[foidulus (743482)]

Is that the rumor is that the next "generation" of the G5 will be all duals. This definitely puts a kink in my plans to buy a dual 1.8, esp. since Apple tends to keep the same prices but bumps up the specs when they make new releases(and doesn't sell the old stuff anymore), and since I am a student, it seems the best deal is to buy off apple themselves(through the $99 student developer program you can get 1 hardware purchase at about 20% off, more than pays for itself even against the normal student discount)

Flashback

[douthat (568842)]

June 23, 2003

visit http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc03/ and fast forward to 1:51:50

"We're at 2GHz today. IBM and Apple are today announcing that within 12 months that we'll be at 3GHz. 3GHz processor clock. That's up 50% within 12 months. And so, believe me, this architecture has legs."

Some people dispute what Jobs meant when he said that. At best, it could mean new 3GHz G5 PowerMacs by late June. Or at worst, it could mean that IBM will release a 3GHz G5 Processor by August 2004, since the G5 PowerMac was slated to ship in August of 2003.

Apple Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Who the hell can say that Apple is not THE SHIT?

- Cocoa
- Quartz
- Stylish industrial design.
- Best tech support in the business. They treat you WELL!

I go to the library with my puny little iBook and chicks come talk to me. OVER a freaking computer!!!

You can run all kinds of free software thru Fink.
You can run Windows thru Virtual PC (Dog slow, but it works).

They include X11, Developer tools, all kinds of pretty things....

WHAT MORE CAN YOU WANT?????

Can't wait until they put Gianpaolo to good use and get rid of HFS+, though. Case preservation can kiss my ass.

I'm 28, been using computers since 5. Apple is THE SHIT!!!
I had forgot about the fun in computing until I got my first Apple in 2001.

There are a lot of old dogs, who have been through a lot of shit, and they all say that, for example, a Powerbook is what computers should have been all along.
Damn right.

BTW... screw Political Correctness. You all post shit on slashdot like you were waiting a table. You CAN make a valid point and still say the word FUCK. It's OK.

I like this quote by Lenny Bruce (don't know who the hell he is, but anyhow):

'Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government.'

Take care! Oh, and get a Mac. You'll see what I'm talking about.

P.S. - It rules when a HOT chick you just hooked up with complains about the breathing led on your sleeping Mac.

Yes, it is possible to write some serious code and still pull ass.
Wasn't Feynman the biggest nerd ever, and still able to pull ass?
Feminists hated the bitch, and he was fucking with quantum physics.
How can you not admire a dude like that, who goes to Brasil to learn how to play the bongos :)

Some idiot writes 10 lines of PERL and thinks it's OK to have no game. Pathetic.

What's the point of being able to mess (as in write/modify -- not compile) a kernel if you can't walk up to a HOT girl and say:

"Hi! I'm XYZ. You have a beatiful smile. Can I buy you a drink/Hold this for you/Open the fucking door/Give you flowers/whatever the fuck?"

Women are humans. Humans.

Sorry about the offtopicness but half of the blogs I read, from people who write better code than me, are depressing because those dudes can't get laid.

"When I go to a conference, I relate to those people, but how do I talk to girls?"

Geek guides for dating.... WHAT THE HELL!!!!!!

There is NO guide for dating.

Be the fucking man. Be assertive. Be strong. Just fucking do it.
Insecure? Go test your fucking limits: skydive, pump iron, pick a fight... do something fucking manly... and you get women.

That's it. I'm sick of this post. Take care.

Re:Apple Rules

[Jeff DeMaagd (2015)]

Are you geek version of Grandpa Simpson?

Here's what's significant...

[sfgoth (102423)]

The significance here is that the new motherboard is smaller.

Because Apple doesn't have to create motherboards that fit some standard size and fastener layout, they're free to adjust their designs as parts change, which makes them free to adjust the external design of the machine as the motherboard shrinks.

They also have a strong desire to be able to reuse a motherboard design across multiple products.

In other words, the smaller that G5 motherboard gets, the closer we are to seeing it in a consumer iMac, or even a PowerBook.

Innovation doesn't just grow on trees, and Apple's proprietary designs give them the flexibility needed to produce unique computers.

By contrast, there have been around, what, five? standard PC motherboard sizes since the 386. Commodity parts are great for end user prices, but commodity means "same", and it shows in the final product.

Re:Here's what's significant...

[dasmegabyte (267018)]

Apple's whole thrust into the consumer market is based on their iMac and eMac computers not looking like computers. Which is amazingly effective...people are willing to spend more money for slower hardware because it's easy to use and looks fucking awesome.

Why should you care? Hey, if you want an ugly ass machine, be my guest. I'm not going to waste time convincing you that the soft white corrugated look of the Apple 23" cinema display is the reason why I'd buy one...that's the last of maybe 15 reasons, of which viewing angle, refresh rate and warranty quality being at the top. But think: with all else being equal, wouldn't you choose the interesting case over the bland one?

Don't knock our enthusiasm for new design pictures

[Tibor the Hun (143056)]

Apple's design goes beyond aesthetics. For example, the new keyboard's don't have a "scroll lock" or "num lock" keyes. The reason for this is not just so that they can eliminate a few keys, but because they're not needed.
If I have a full size number keypad, why would I want to switch it off and on? (and for those 12 of you that actually use the diagonal arrows instead of arrows, I don't really care to hear the explanation)
And WTF is "scroll lock" again?

Re:Don't knock our enthusiasm for new design pictu

[Barlo_Mung_42 (411228)]

"Apple's design goes beyond aesthetics"

Yep. I still own one of the old iMacs. It makes a fine mp3 player in the living room.
I am reminded of the famous Apple design aesthetic each time I try to use that round mouse.

Re:Scroll lock is used in Excell

[The Infamous Grimace (525297)]

Which isn't too bad to lose that key because there currently are only about thirty commercial games for Apple machines.

You sure 'bout that? [apple.com]

(tig)

Re:Go APPLE !!

[ericdano (113424)]

I know I shouldn't feed the Trolls but....

Honestly, the life of an Apple product is a lot longer than a typical windows PC. I still use my Powermac 9500 (running 10.3.4) but I have retired my 600Mhz Pentium III.

And how many people do you see driving old BMWs compared to Toyotas? Which looks better?

Re:Go APPLE !!

[IamTheRealMike (537420)]

That's pretty anecdotal. I know a few people still using 500/600mhz PCs just fine, it's not like they *need* to upgrade. I'm sure your Powermac 9500 is just fine, but that doesn't mean PCs (even "typical windows" ones) have a short shelf life.

Like many things, you can get as much out of it as you are willing to.

Re:Go APPLE !!

[MacDork (560499)]

That's pretty anecdotal.

Fine, then compare resale value. 333 Mhz iMac [macresq.com] vs. 350 Mhz PII Compaq [off-leasecomputers.com].

That's $330 vs. $59 for machines that are about the same age. Given, the Compaq doesn't have a monitor or modem like the iMac. Those two things can hardly make up for that much price difference though. It's simple. A four year old PC is crap. A four year old Mac is still useful. Remember that the next time you bemoan how expensive Macs are ;-)

Re:Go APPLE !!

[talonracer (260073)]

I have. I had an old Camry and an old 320i. The Camry was dependable, durable, and went forever. The beemer was nasty. Looked great, people went "ooh, BMW...", but it broke down far too often.

The worst was when two hotties watched me walk up to my car, I heard one say "ooh, he drives a BMW.." - I started it up, and it belched a MASSIVE cloud of exhaust that nearly filled the block. Fortunately I used the smokescreen to escape and evaid their laughter...

So yes, this analogy is appropriate. Give me the Toyota.

Re:apple is overated

[mgs1000 (583340)]

Unfortunately, you didn't seem to get a keyboard that has caps lock or shift keys.

Re:apple is overated

[Anonymous Coward]

That's funny, because I have a 2.8 GHz machine with 1 GB of DDR and a nice, big 120 ultra scsi that I paid 1.2K for the parts on, and run Windows XP on, and my 1.8 G5 (which I paid 2.5K for) blows it away on every program they have in common: Photoshop, Celestia, SETI@Home, Word (yes, Word on a Mac blows away Word on a Windows computer - me thinks Microsoft should look into going PowerPC), iTunes, VNC, any kind of number crunching. Meanwhile, OS X is twice as stable (i.e., crashes half as often); and that 2.8 GHz P4 is a replacement for a 2.6 GHz P4 processor that only lasted a year, as did the mother board; can't say that there's any proof yet that the 8 month old G5 is more reliable hardware, but my 2001 iBook is still running strong, and still gets 2h/battery charge (with WiFi running, processor on full speed, and screen up to full brightness). I'm guessing that you're comparing a tricked out p4 that actually cost a lot more than half a grand if you count all the real expenses (like the video card - a video card comparable to the 1.6 GHz G5's would be $150; add 512 MB of memory, a gigabit ethernet card, and a DVD-R and you're already over half a grand. Toss in Firewire 800 (oh, yeah, there isn't any interface at that speed on a wintel, is there?), dual FW 400 and Dual USB2, another 3 USBs and 5.1 audio . . . then keep in mind that the 1.6 GHz PowerPC is using a very different architecture and so can't be compared to a P4 by clock speed ... and I'd say you're talking out your ass, blizzy83. (Is that your Mom's date of birth, 1983?)

Partwise comparison... here's what you pay for

[wirelessbuzzers (552513)]

I'd like to see some benchmarks on performance there...

Here's what you're paying for on the mac:

mobo ... $54
The Mac mobo supports pci-x, serial ata and up to 1ghz fsb. It can also take up to 8 gigs of DDR-400 RAM if you want/need it. Also, what about the gigabit ethernet, optical spdif audio, bluetooth, etc?

Entry level gamers video card ... $70
The Mac video card, a GeForce FX 5200, supports two monitors and is rather faster than that entry level card. Still, it's not that much more expensive.

cpu ... $138
The G5 is probably not as fast, but it has a faster fsb and a comparable vector processing unit. I don't know about you, but in most of the stuff I do, the fsb and vector unit are more important than raw crunching here (not to mention the video card). For compilation, the Athlon would probably win.

Ram ...$87
Same as you get through Apple, but they mark it up.

hard drive ... $59
Apple is using larger drives (yours is only 40gb) and they're SATA rather than IDE... should give you a faster transfer rate there.

DVD-CDRW thingie ... $72
Yep, can't beat you there, I have one of those and it's quite a nice drive. Apple is using an older Pioneer drive, which is also unfortunately more expensive.

Case ... $40
The G5 case has you beat pretty soundly. It's higher quality if heavier material. It's extremely quiet (to people with a normal hearing range, it's a bit leaky in the 19k area). It's trivial to install drives: open the case door, slide the drive in, fold in the connectors (no cables to mess with). Similarly with RAM. There aren't as many drive bays, though, but Apple is supposedly going to address this in the next revision.

Re:apple is overated

[mrchaotica (681592)]

and for what I do (computer science student).

That's a bit of a stretch.

Hey, Windows doesn't even come with a C compiler! My iBook at least shipped with a Developer Tools CD (even if it wasn't installed by default). Also, Developer Tools is FREE. How much does Visual Studio cost again? (Actually, I can get it through MSDN-AA free, but most people probably can't)

The only stretch is whether it's better than a Linux computer, which has the advantage of coming with GCC and Emacs by default, and being the turn-in platform for my homework (we can write it on whatever we want, but it has to compile on RedHat9/x86). However, my Mac's user interface is enough better than Linux's to compensate.

I disagree. Mac OS 7 was superior to Win 3.1 in many ways even System 6 was on par with Windows 3.1 but MS dominated the marketplace anyway.

Okay, I have to admit that back then I didn't use OS 7 enough, or understand enough about computers, to know whether it was better or not. However, by that time they had already lost because they wouldn't allow clones, and IBM did. The fact that all the clones could run Windows (and MS-DOS, for that matter) was what allowed MS to get their monopoly in the first place.

Re:Only apple...

[torpor (458)]

Not saying it isn't fast, but why all the fuss over pictures?

The design of Apple computers is one of the things, small and insignificant though it is, that differentiates Apple from its competition.

Like it or not, people do have an affinity for aesthetic design. Compare your average Dell to a G5, and you'll see the difference.

There are some that assume that any 'major change in industrial design' which Apple introduces to its product line will signify a shift in direction for the company. When the tiBooks came out, for example, it was clear that Apple was 'rejuvenating its purpose as a computer designer/manufacturer' ... to many Apple fans, this is a simple way of gauging Apples' intentions for the future... if they make major exterior design changes, it usually indicates a change in architecture.

Strange, perhaps, but I believe this has something to do with marketing, not technology. Many computer geeks forget that marketing is the only thing that truly counts in computers these days ...

Re:Only apple...

[fermion (181285)]

Not only differentiates, but sets the standards that will be copied. Unfortunately, those copying tend to have no sense of aesthetics.

A good example is the HP I have sitting next to my mac. When the mac is asleep, a small 1 inch circle of dim light slowly and pleasently pulsates. OTOH, the HP has a huge 3 or 4 inch square of bright blue light that blinks to indicate the machine is asleep. The mac pulsing can be ignored. The HP demands the attention of all in the room. Is this some inferiority complex on the part of HP. I mean it is like a child who screams just to get attention.

The pulsing is a good idea. Unfortunately, the designers at HP just haven't a clue of what the idea is.

Re:Only apple...

[Mononoke (88668)]

Only for an apple product would the fans care more about how pretty it looked, rather than how fast it ran. Not saying it isn't fast, but why all the fuss over pictures?

The pics are of the internal designs, many of which directly affect the operation of the computer.

Re:Only apple...

[qqqqarl (678615)]

me too.

i'll never understand why people drive jaguars. my 70's chevy impala station wagon was way faster.

K.

Re:Only apple...

[drinkypoo (153816)]

Apple hardware is supposed to be where form meets function, the state of the art in personal computers. At several times this has been true and these machines may very well represent that principle from a technical standpoint. Early and recently in Macintosh's lifetime it has been the pinnacle of home computing in many ways. Right now, whatever you think of their politics or their price tags, you have to appreciate their technology. And, at the same time, they havr tended to have some of the most functional and attractive cases in the personal computer market.

So, naturally the Macintosh today attracts both people who want a good-looking computer, and those who want a technogically superior (not in every way, obviously, but it has some serious advantages over "the competition". This hasn't really been true for Apple since the days of the Macintosh II family - when it was young, that is. Arguably they reached that point with the dual G4, and equally arguably with the existence of some of the nice shiny hammer-core processors available now they don't have it at this moment, either, but this is my personal perception :P

Re:Only apple...

[mrchaotica (681592)]

Some of Apple's cool technology:

• Quartz 3d, display PDF
• UNIX with a cohesive, integrated interface
• G5 processor (yes, I know IBM made it, but Apple is the only company using it in a desktop)
• PCI-X, Firewire, etc.

Also, whether their cases are attractive or not, they are functional. Consider the G5's case, with the fold-down side panel, and the elaborate noise-reduction technology (which could also be listed above).

Re:Only apple...

[sensate_mass (171138)]

Because the pictures show a smaller motherboard, which indicates:

A) that the G5 processors used will almost certainly be of the .9 fab process variety, and

B) that there will be room in the case for an additional 2 hard drives, the lack of which space was a big complaint about the Rev. A models.

Re:Only apple...

[The Infamous Grimace (525297)]

Only for an apple product would the fans care more about how pretty it looked, rather than how fast it ran. Not saying it isn't fast, but why all the fuss over pictures?

Right, because I've noticed a serious lag between when I make a keystroke and when it appears onscreen.
Computers are no longer a luxury, they are a commodity. And once something becomes a commodity, appearance becomes important. Mankind is vain.
Besides, speed is irrelevant. Computational ability is much more important. To use the beaten-to-death car anology, I have a 6-cylinder Explorer, my brother has a 6-cylinder Dodge Cummins diesel. His Dodge runs at almost 1/3 less RPMs, yet has significantly more towing ability.
The speed masters themselves at Intel have begun de-stressing MHz with their Pentium M proc.
What matters is how well the computer does what you need it to do, not how fast and hot the proc runs, unless thats what you need.
Me, I'm typing this on a 6-yr-old powerbook. Do I want the latest and greatest? Hell yes! But in the meantime I'll still get done what I need on this ol' workhorse.

(tig)

Re:Only apple...

[Lars T. (470328)]

Excuse me? Who puts graphics cards with blinkenlights an colorful fans on them into their computers? Mac users?

Re:Only apple...

[Trurl's Machine (651488)]

You forget fans of automobiles, they obviously care how their products look!

In fact, it's rather difficult to find fans of anything that don't care how their products look - with x86 computers being the only odd exception. Fans of automobiles, home cinema, audio systems, motorcycles, biking, hiking, surfing, wine tasting etc. - they all care very much about the look. They wouldn't accept the ugliness of a plain, nondescript beige-box like your average PC (try selling such a nondescript surfing board or mountain bike!). Why x86 computer fans accepted it, it's actually a very interesting question.

Re:Only apple...

[CrowScape (659629)]

Apple is one of the few companies that actually treats computers like a home appliance.

Which is why you can use the G5 as a cheese grater.

Re:Oh boy!

[Durandal64 (658649)]

Yeah, they shrunk the motherboard, reworked the cooling system and added more space for drives inside. From an engineering standpoint, that is a big deal.

Re:comparison Athlon64, G5

[dasmegabyte (267018)]

Congratulations. You have created a detailed Apple-is-Too-Expensive response to an Apple article. Your numbers were nice, and though your prose lacked both quality and originality, I assume you care about either and merely wanted the most cost effective language that could complete the task. As a Slashdot-pronounced "Mac-loving, astroturfering fag" I should attempt to construct the requisite "stupid windows user, nobody cares how cheap your Athlon 64 system was, the Mac is a superior package" response. But my heart's not really into it. So I'll respond thusly:

Good for you. You should be very proud of yourself, creating a nice, fast, usable computer for a very decent price. I personally have been scammed into purchasing four of their computers over the past 10 years for prices that were 10-30% higher than their warranty-free open market PC equivalents. I suppose I should be upset about being a victim of Apple's unfair pricing, but I'm not. I like my Apple gear. It's really good stuff.

Incidentally, if your friend was REALLY doing anything serious with databases, he'd have asked you to scrap the fancy graphics card for a RAID setup with dual CPUs.

Re:comparison Athlon64, G5

[derubergeek (594673)]

1) If you "have" to add a monitor to the Mac then obviously you "have" to add a monitor to the AMD.

2) You forgot to add in your expenses for warranty & support.

3) Your base price is wrong - the G5 is $1800, not $1900.

4) Drop the DVD burner & modem from the G5 & it's $1570 - with an OS, AppleWorks, iLife, et. al. Of course, you can always nuke it & run Darwin or Linux.

So, for an extra $275 you get an engineered, warrantied, professionally manufactured machine that you can easily upgrade to dual CPU in the future. Just my 16#0000_0000_0000_0002# cents worth.