Slashdot Mirror
Next-Gen Apples To Include 1394b, USB 2.0
seletz writes: "According to this article on The Register, Apple will ship its next-generation PowerMacs with USB 2.0 and double FireWire.
USB 2.0 boosts data transfer up to 480Mbps, FireWire 1394b goes up to 3.2Gbps." It may seem a minor point, but the more and faster connections are built in, the less frequently the upgrade gremlins have to strike. 3.2Gbps!
The layoffs were in the sales force. With the Apple Stores and the online store, FtF sales are not as essential.
There are several reasons we pay a little extra, quality of hardware, tight integration between hardware and software, and it is not Windows. If you are into the creative arts, Apple is the first choice. The Mac has always been geared to the Artist, publisher, teacher, and scientist. These people will tend to buy from those who care about their concerns.
I don't mind paying extra for quality. I know people that are still using the original Mac II. One uses his for fonts, another for HyperCard.
One lady bought a new Compaq, but went back to her 6200, citing the difficulty of using Windows for making class projects. It didn't have HyperCard.
BTW the 6200 line is probably the worst Apples made.
photosMy Photostream
Flame will get you no where...
Despite the fact that you are comparing Apples to Oranges (no pun intended), your case is weak and flaccid.
Windows 2000 is a business OS; built on NT. Mac OS 9.x and before were more consumer operating systems. You should compare Windows 9x with Mac OS 9.x, and Win 2000/XP to Mac OS X.
On those levels, both have advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I favor the Mac OS, but I can't condemn someone for using Windows.
As far as your comment about Macs crashing all the time - that is due to Mac OS 9.x not having protective memory, something corrected in OS X. I have had OS X since its initial release. Since that time, it has not crashed. My Win 2K box has crashed three times - in a year. Does that mean that the Mac is more stable? Probably not, but it does further diminish your argument.
I am Slad.
I remember seeing a Compaq DeskPro with USB on the logic board in early or mid 1997. The first Apple machine to have this feature was the first iMac, which showed up in August/September of 1998.
In both cases, I would say support through the OS and the availability of USB peripherals was weak for at least another year after their initial release.
As for the "daring" Apple, I would argue that they have the advantage of a less fragmented target market than most Intel-based manufacturers. Aside from coming to USB late, Apple had been working with others on FireWire since the 1980s. This, it seems, was simply their strategy to move away from SCSI, one of the largest sources of customer dissatisfaction since the arrival of the first scanners and SyQuest drives.
Motorola said the G5 (8500) is in first silicon. This doesn't sound like 1.5 years off. Sounds like .5 years off.
saru mo ki kara ochiru
I'm sure most Mac fans would love to have gigahertz G5s with DDR and FireWire 2. But there really is not a clamor of interest in USB 2, and I don't see a reason to include it.
USB 2's entire purpose is to compete with Apple's own 1394 standard. USB2 is slower, uses more CPU resources, and has done surpisingly poorly in the marketplace. FireWire devices outnumber USB2 by huge proportions.
Apple knows that iMac (which had no legacy ports) is the event that got USB 1.x rolling. That was a good move, since Apple needed to get with standards. But in FireWire, Apple has set the standard. Adding USB2 would have little benefit and a lot of risk for Apple.
True, but I really remember the G4 being on silicon for a pretty long time. Same holds for the 700+MHz G4. Motorola has been having a really really hard time getting yields up...
there's a difference between having a wafer that can crunch 1GHz G5's, and the wafer actually crunching out usable processors...
By god I hope that this time, they don't take 1 year to get the percentage of decent processors per wafer to more than 2%... Apple really really needs this if they want to market their new SuperDuperPowerOS...
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
At the same time, you can also play around with MacOS X, which is honestly the one OS which has made me ditch Linux entirely. I get the same robust server applications (Samba, Apache, MySQL and PHP, namely), a much better integrated GUI than any window manager has managed (pun intended) to build, and access to thousands of useful day-to-day applications.
Really, as a part-time Linux geek (and platform agnostic -- which means I like Macs because they're better **grin**), MacOS X is the best OS since sliced bread, and if you want a Linuxy laptop, get an iBook just for the chance to try it out!
In all other regards, an iBook is going to be comparable to a PC laptop when running Linux, but for standard configuration differences. Linux-PPC runs lightning quick on it, though.
Author's note: I'm experienced with running Linux on an original iBook, but I'm assuming device support for the latest models. Let the buyer beware and check the documentation.
--Nik
Also, IBM makes PowerPC chips too, and uses them for things other than Macs, like in the Game Cube. Same with Moto... they use PPC chips in a lot of embedded applications.
-- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol