The Power Mac G5 is the world's fastest personal computer and the first with a 64-bit processor -- which means it breaks the 4 gigabyte barrier and can use up to 8 gigabytes of main memory.
8GB?? Sounds like it's a 64-bit processor with a 33-bit address bus. Even the 32-bit P4 can address 64GB.
Of course, I guess this could mean they just have enough slots for 8GB of main system RAM on the current motherboard. Still, it's an odd quote. Then again, maybe I'm just stupid...
That's a 42 bit address bus, which can address around 4.4 terabytes.
-- Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
Re:Article?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Funny
So must you! Nobody actually reads the comments either. You should just post and moderate on random to blend in.
Re:Article?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
That's what the preview button is for.
Re:Article?
by
Warpedcow
·
· Score: 2, Informative
> Still waiting for IBM's Model to come out. Not much yet.
They've been out awhile. You can find IBM's Power4 (which the 970 spun-off from) in their pSeries and iSeries machines, I believe. Certainly the iSeries, I've been working with their 6-way i825 all summer. Its a beast! Of course, it also costs a quarter mil or so...
Well sure, if you want to an AIX box like the p630 Model 6E4 for a list price of $16k, or the IntelliStation POWER 275...
I think the above poster might have been interested in IBM 970 kit, as Big Blue's still shipping POWER3-II's in the blade "space".
Also, a 970 is not a POWER4 - 0.5 MB vs 1.5 MB L2 cache, 0 MB vs 8 MB L3, dual- vs single-core, no Altivec on Power4, 1.8 vs 1.4 GHz max (currently shipping) freq, 0.13 um vs 0.18 um, decreased MTBF on the 970 to make it faster... &c.
Re:Article?
by
clarkcox3
·
· Score: 2, Informative
8GB?? Sounds like it's a 64-bit processor with a 33-bit address bus.
No, it's a motherboard with 8 memory slots. (i.e. the 8GB limit is one of physical size on the motherboard, not a logical one of how much memory the chip can actually address.
Even the 32-bit P4 can address 64GB
No, it can't. 4 GB is the maximum that any 32-bit processor can address
-- There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
"On a 32bit system, there can only be 2^32 addressable bytes (4GB). Intel had kind of cheated and added a couple of extra bits that the operating system can use, allowing a full 64GB, although any one process only has access to 4GB at a time."
8GB is the limit given by RAM modules available today. AFAIK all Macs made for quite some time could also fully utilize bigger RAM modules (if principal addressing didn't change), even if Apple never updated the info. At least in that respect Apple has always been conservative.
--
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
hurray for apple
by
selderrr
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
does anyone know how many pre-orders there were ? According to the usual zealot sources, the G5 is supposed to be the stemcell of apples resurection. Albeit a fabulous machine, I wonder if there will be enough sales momentum to influence marketshare.
Re:hurray for apple
by
CoolQ
·
· Score: 5, Informative
100,000 pre-orders according to Apple PR. Which you would have found if you had read this. --Quentin
Re:hurray for apple
by
danigiri
·
· Score: 2, Informative
No way, but around 100.000 machines were ordered. Not bad for an high-end product line.
Checkout the press release.
dani++
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Hmm.. I sleep much better, thank you;)
Re:hurray for apple
by
phillymjs
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I would tend to believe the numbers, no matter how large.
Many people have been in a holding pattern, using old machines running OS 9 for two reasons:
1) They would need a new machine to really make the most of OS X, and they wanted to wait until the successor to the G4 was available.
2) They didn't want to make the move to OS X until a native QuarkXPress was available for it.
Both of those conditions have now been fulfilled. Apple will not be able to crank out these things fast enough (even moreso than usual) to meet all the pent-up demand.
I bet once the numbers are in, we'll find out that this was Apple's best quarter in a few years, maybe even since the return of Jobs.
~Philly
Re:hurray for apple
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 2, Redundant
I don't see a machine like this being the ressurection of Apple until they produce a consumer version. That leaves the professional Apple users and there are only so many in the world, especially those who *need* a new Mac.
Of course many Mac heads would love a new machine for the sake of it (count me in since my dual CPU G4 runs like a slug) but I wonder how many will justify the expense of it.
I also have my doubts of forking out for a machine which regards '64-bit' in the much same sense as Windows 95 did with '32-bit'. Maybe the hardware is 64-bit but I wonder how long it will take for the operating system let alone anything else to make proper use of it. And if we're talking some months, it seems that waiting is the most prudent thing to do. Hey, it's not like Apple haven't had production problems before now (*cough* G4 cube) so maybe this is smart anyway.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
" you would have found if you had read this."
If I found some obscure page on Apple's site?
Re:hurray for apple
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Except that the native Quark sucks royal ass from everything I've read. So a lot will switch to InDesigned which has a rumored upgrade coming with the new year.
There was a survey at a conference filled with "publishing pros" that said only 17% of them had switched to OSX. I find that hard to believe, but it gets quoted a lot. This may fix that. Honestly I can't understand why anyone would stay with OS9 given its many flaws and weaknesses. But never underestimate the power of inertia. People prefer gradual evolution to change. And OSX is nearly as big a change from OS9 as moving to XP is.
The big issue is that finally Apple has a system with enough data transfer to really be killer on many graphics problems. Expect high end grpahics cards to be out within six months. (Prediction, not knowledge)
Honestly though, if you get a dual G4 then OSX is plenty fast enough. I'm still lusting after the G5's but will probably get a second generation one because my dual 867 still does me so well. One must wonder if this won't aid the switchers who weren't exactly switching in large numbers from XP to OSX. (Well, I did, but that's a different matter - an XP box is still my primary work box with OSX my primary home box. If the development tools were as good as Visual Studio I'd probably switch entirely)
Re:hurray for apple
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I believe the memory manager in Panther is 64-bit aware. The special version of Jaguar (10.2.7) that initially ships with the G5's allows 64-bit applications and thus presumably has some memory issues dealt with. Panther isn't fully 64-bit, but most aspects of the OS don't really need it to be honest. (And neither do most applications)
Re:hurray for apple
by
Rolman
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
It doesn't really matter. I don't even think it's necessary for Apple to try and get a bigger marketshare. Most Apple users I know are really happy with their choices and sometimes it's their only choice, because of the software they run.
I can certainly see all Apple owners salivating for this one, so I believe eventually they'll own one. It's comparatively cheaper to a G4, after all.
Now, for me, I can't have a Mac as my main computer because the kind of software development I do is mostly x86-based (not Windows, mind you), but I am recommending buying Mac for everyone, because I don't like people around me to waste time learning how to use their computers, fix their crashes or remove that damn Blaster thing. Not to say MacOS X is indestructible or anything, but it's a big reliability leap for most Windows users.
At worst, I think they'll keep their marketshare, but I also believe people will have less of an argument not to buy a Mac.
-- - Otaku no naka no otaku, otaking da!!!
Re:hurray for apple
by
Hes+Nikke
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Hey, it's not like Apple haven't had production problems before now (*cough* G4 cube) so maybe this is smart anyway.
if by "production problems" you mean "didn't know when to stop," then yes, apple had problems with the production of the PM G4 Cube.;)
i wish that apple had properly priced that line! if you had a choice of $2000 for a non-expandable though small brick computer, or $1500 for an expandable G4 tower at the same speed, which would you do?
exactly.
-- Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
I think that a fair amount of people will be waiting for the G5 powerbooks to come out before upgrading.
A 64-bit laptop is really something to brag about. Maybe dual processors as well?
Re:hurray for apple
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Xcode is very cool. However my problems with Project Builder relate to their very limited debugging tools and not compile speed.
My big problem is that the type of code I deal with often involves very subtle bugs. To fix the bugs I must go though the code in many many steps. PB doesn't retain your watch variables between calls to the debugger. That means when I restart the code to re-examine a process I have to retype in all my variables or else put printf's in the code. Compare this to Visual Studio which has amazingly simple and easy to use watch panes - four of them in fact. It is easy to "drill down" into structs and classes. And most importantly they retain their variables each time I restart the debugger.
I've asked a few people playing around with Xcode and by and large the changes to the actual debugging UI is only superficially changed. I've sent in lots of feedback to Apple but nothing has been done. This is amazing to me as adding something like Visual Studio's debugging panes would not be very hard. I'd be very, very surprised if it would take more than a week of work. But for reasons known only to them, Apple has not done it. And thus I primarily debug in Visual Studio.
Re:hurray for apple
by
mekkab
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I do some kernel programming in AIX for ibm pSeries machines, which are 64 bit chips. The OS has a 32 bit emulation mode. SO everyone will use that to begin with. Then, certain devices and drivers will require 64bit, and the apps will follow afterwards.
THAT will most likely be driven buy how many people buy the machines and what sort of market demand there is.
And yes, we are talking months, maybe years.
BEsides- you'll see more performance gain from the GHZ rating rather than from the 64-bit-ness, (unless you have a need for LOTS of addressable ram. 64bit is a virtual memory manager's dream.
-- In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
Re:hurray for apple
by
arloguthrie
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You're dead-on correct about the OS X-native Quark XPress. It's also worth mentioning that OS X-native Exchage support has finally reared it's ugly head, making OS X that much easier to deploy. Other than Quark, Exchange support is what was holding up the design department at my office. I hope Apple's homegrown Exchange support includes iCal, since Entourage tends to, you know, suck.
Our preordered G5s should be here soon. Hooray!
-- ----------
Cheese it! It's the FEDS!
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Funny
1. Nobody cares about market share.
2. Nobody cares about market share.
3. Apple has been one of the most consistently profitable computer companies of the past five years.
4. Nobody cares about market share.
That is all.
Re:hurray for apple
by
MouseR
·
· Score: 4, Informative
My big problem is that the type of code I deal with often involves very subtle bugs. To fix the bugs I must go though the code in many many steps. PB doesn't retain your watch variables between calls to the debugger. That means when I restart the code to re-examine a process I have to retype in all my variables or else put printf's in the code. Compare this to Visual Studio which has amazingly simple and easy to use watch panes - four of them in fact. It is easy to "drill down" into structs and classes. And most importantly they retain their variables each time I restart the debugger.
How about NOT having to leave your debugging session when you make simple changes?
Check out XCode's features, notably the Fix And Continue and ZeroLink.
It makes fixing silly things a snappy process, and you don't need to restart your test suite to get back to the same point. Just fix WHILE you debug, recompile the fixed code and resume execution where you left off, foregoing any application re-initialization (such as connecting back to a server).
Not to say MacOS X is indestructible or anything, but it's a big reliability leap for most Windows users.
I've owned a Mac with OS X. My XP box has been more stable than my PM G4 that ran OS X 10.2.6.
I'm sure I'm not alone in this. I switched... then switched back. Now I run what I've been running for a long time, Linux (debian/gentoo flavors) and windows.
.. I also believe people will have less of an argument not to buy a Mac.
They had an argument to begin with? I switched because I wanted the mix of *nix with a nice UI. Let me be brief: it isn't worth the money. Spend a few hundred on a cheap box, put Linux on it with your favorite desktop manager. Use the extra 2 grand to make a nice comfy seat cushion.
Re:hurray for apple
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Because for many kinds of programs that doesn't work for finding buts. i.e. you have to get your program into the same state as it was earlier. For things like tracking down decompression errors, encryption errors, btree errors, and so forth, what you describe is next to useless. I admit that fix and continue is extremely usefull. I've been using it in Visual Studio for years. It's about time it came to Project Builder. But it really isn't helpful for many kinds of debugging.
The issue isn't fixing the bug it is finding the bug. Sometimes subtle logic bugs can take many days of iterating through the code to find.
Re:hurray for apple
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
My point is that Windows 95 made grandiose claims about being 32-bit when it wasn't at all. It was 32-bit icing on a 16-bit DOS layer. Apple is doing much the same. While the hardware might be 64-bit the software most certainly isn't so touting it as such is either stretching the truth or deliberately misleading depending on how charitable you're feeling.
Now I agree that Ghz is nice and I suspect the 32-bit / 64-bit modes are handled much more nicely that in x86 land, but if what you're buying here is not 64-bit. It's a Ferrari with a speed limiter since the issue of 64 vs 32 is not just about memory, since this chip contains a number of advanced modes e.g. better pipelining operations, branch prediction etc. such that software would greatly benefit from recompilation.
I don't know about you, but I feel rather uneasy about the whole prospect. Macs are hardly known for their long shelf life (i.e. builtin obscelesence) so it seems that the best strategy is to wait for a machine which actually delivers on its promises (and throws in some extra Ghz in the meantime) and not some half baked go-between.
Now perhaps I'll succumb eventually, but I've been down this road before and I find it's best to hang off a little until the fact seperates from the FUD and people can see what's what.
I wonder how long it will take for the operating system let alone anything else to make proper use of it.
I don't know for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if the kernel were 64-bit clean/optmiized right now. OTOH, if 32-bit emulation is 100% binary backwards-compatible, don't be surprised if a lot of userland code stays 32-bit forever.
Not having an extra flavor to build cuts way down on maintenance overhead and doesn't introduce reliability-reducing churn. Besides, most userland code doesn't really benefit. Sure, a 64-bit optimized Photoshop could win big, but the only measurable "performance" improvement of the mount command would be on the kernel side. Not worth it.
Re:hurray for apple
by
GigsVT
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I work for a printing company. We still use OS9 in prepress. Quark is one major factor, but also the "enhancements" in Illustrator 10 make it not backward compatible with our trapping software (on IRIX).
We are looking to upgrade our trapping software, but so far all the offerings seem to suck, badly. If anyone knows of a good trapping software, that runs on UNIX/Linux/or even OSX as a last resort, that is up to date, that doesn't require you buy into their "workflow management" software as well, that can be automated, preferably with a shell script or hot folders, let me know.
There was some issues around font management, but I think they are fixed now, with some training in OS X font management. That's been another hurdle, getting the artists to accept the change. I think they are ready for it now though, just need to get that trapping software ready, and Quark going.
-- I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
You probably already know this, but the default options in OS X make everything incredibly slow. If you turn off all the stupid eye candy, it's half usable. My coworker thought I was kidding, until I showed him that just mousing over the animated menus uses 50% of the processor.
-- I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'd say it's the opposite. Apples are generally known for having long useful lives. It's what pissed off many Apple owners when Apple decided to EOL many models when OS X was introduced, even though they could potentially run it.
Entourage doesn't suck! It provides a distinctive Microsoft experience, right down to crashing for no apparent reason when attempting to send mail, or at other seemingly random times. It really makes me forget that I'm not using Outlook anymore.
Re:hurray for apple
by
nelsonal
·
· Score: 2, Informative
At $2500 per box, which might be a little high, that's a quarter billion in revenue on a month and a half of pre-orders. No where near Dell numbers yet, (PC revenues are around $130 billion/yr) but it would probably move the workstation market a few points, which marketing notwithstanding is what these are much closer to in function and price.
-- Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
You've probably already considered this, and as far as I know it hasn't been ported from OS9 to OS X yet, but ArtPro was an excellent trapping solution that replaced a Scitex workflow system at the printing company I used to work for. If they ever get around to porting it to OS X, it may be exactly what you're looking for.
Elsewise, all the other solutions I could offer (Creo, Creo-Scitex, etc) all suffer from the problem you site as unwanted; they all want you to completely change how you do things and buy into their "workflow" as a total solution. It's frustrating, I would imagine.
To add to the frustration, the Quartz display system is PDF-based, which *should* mean that development of trapping systems should be really straightforward, yet no one seems to be doing anything with it. But I offer you a hearty good luck, and my condolances for being in print during this time of changes in platform. Prepress/printing is a pretty thankless job, made more difficult by slow-moving software development, compounded even more by the high turnover in said software development dev positions.
-- /*- Mohammed -*/
Re:hurray for apple
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The initial versions of the G4 were very nice and very compititive. What happened though was the Motorola, for whatever reason, couldn't get the chip to scale well and couldn't deal with bandwidth. Realistically had Motorola been able to fix the bandwidth limitations of the G4 and get it to scale to 2 GHz it would be very competitive with the 970.
Had Motorola not fallen behind so badly then I think that we'd not be complaining so much (nor needing the horrible wait the last year for the 970).
The problem with the 970 / G5 is that it doesn't really have as many integer processing units. So it really isn't that much faster per clock cycle than the G4. (The benchmarks show this) However the bandwidth and vector units are very impressive. Perhaps the G6 will improve integer performance.
Don't tell me that buzzwords and hype are unrelated to performance. I've been using this dual G4 with macosx convinced it was a cray on a desktop, faster than a multiple GHz pentium 4, with twice the memory.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Steveftoth
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
They're not lying at all though.
Listen, 64-bit is not a hardware issue as much as it is a software issue. Yes, the hardware support needs to be there first, but really it about wether or not the software will actually use the 64-bit modes.
It's not like 64-bit is always a win-win situation. Some programs will always run faster when compiled in a 32-bit addressing mode simply because 32-bit can be more efficient when not addressing large amounts of ram. Just like there are programs that can be written entirely withing the 16-bit addressing modes of the x86 that will outperform the 32-bit version. Though I would guess that today that number is rather small.
I hope that the Mac continues to be a hybrid of 32 and 64 bit programs for awhile. It won't be expensive to maintain compatability from the OS perspective, and it will ensure that all of us that don't want to upgrade will be able to run all the software for awhile.
Apple already has the infistructure in place so that people with G5s will be able to run G5 versions and people with G4s will be able to run a G4 version. Their executable format allows for multiple versions of the same program so that the developers can simple recompile for the G5 ahead of time and package it with the G4 version in the same file. (like the old 'fat' binaries of yore with 68k and ppc code in them)
Besides, you can't 'just recompile' and get benefits of 64 computing. It's not that simple. If you don't program with the intent of being x-platform then you can't recompile and have it work. Also, as you hinted, the G5 has a radically different idea about what kind of code it optimal compared to the G4, thus any code targeted for the G4 will perform sub-standard. We'll just have to wait a month or two until all the software catches up to the hardware. The G5 will only seem to get faster and faster as more software is retargeted for it.
The G5 is more then a step up in clock speed, it's a whole new generation of processor, a bigger step from the G3 to G4. But no matter how you look at it, it's a step up. Maybe not as big as you want it to be and this is something that I think a few people are (still) sore about.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
You forgot 3) the G4s were obviously inferior in terms of their bandwidth, with a motherboard that was unable to take full advantage of the DDR RAM. You were paying full price for an architecturally crippled machine, but not so any longer with the G5. This was a big reason I was holding back on a new Mac.
"Use the extra 2 grand to make a nice comfy seat cushion."
Two points: people who install Linux don't *have* an extra two grand, and if they did, it would only be a question of time before mommy came downstairs to clean their basement room, found the money, and subsequently blew it all on crack, anyway. 2000 dollars means a lot less dicks they have to suck!
-- /*- Mohammed -*/
Re:hurray for apple
by
SethJohnson
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Perhaps this is a troll.
Macs are hardly known for their long shelf life
I'll bite. My personal experience and observations culled from working at many Mac-based offices is that Macs have a much longer lifespan that PCs. As an example, I am still using the 450mhz B/W G3 I bought in 1999 for $1800. My Dad is using a 400mhz B/W G3 he bought the same year. Both machines are running OS X.2 just fine. The only thing that had us teetering on upgrading in the past few years was the prospect of digital video editing with real-time rendering. The G5 has pretty much convinced me it's time to upgrade. Four years later and I've got a computer I can still probably sell for a couple of hundred bucks. That lowers my cost of upgrading to a G5. I think a 1999 intel-based PC will probably cost you money to dispose of through a recycler these days.
I'm not beating the "macs are better" drum here. I'm just comparing the lifespan of the mac to pc.
i'd do that too, if it didn't cost more to get it.
-- Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Re:hurray for apple
by
li99sh79
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I don't know about you, but I feel rather uneasy about the whole prospect. Macs are hardly known for their long shelf life (i.e. builtin obscelesence) so it seems that the best strategy is to wait for a machine which actually delivers on its promises (and throws in some extra Ghz in the meantime) and not some half baked go-between.
Actually, back when I was working for my alma mater's academic IT department the life-span of a Mac was 5 years, and they've been pretty good at keeping the old stuff working with the new stuff, recent lawsuits nonwithstanding.
Then again Apple does update their product line on a pretty quick basis. They're like the auto industry in that way. Every year car makers come out with the latest design of their models with all sorts of new whiz-bangs. Hell, Dell and the boys are the same way, only difference is that Apple makes a big show out of their new model years computers, like the auto industry.
Really? Are they part of a throwback campaign to the multi-colored Apple? I thought only Microsoft was turning people colors for their commercials nowadays, and even that was a blue butterfly.
-- R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before?
B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Re:hurray for apple
by
heh2k
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The OS has a 32 bit emulation mode.
it's not emulation, actually, it's just 32bit mode. the ppc spec specifies 32bit and 64bit versions. the 64bit ppc's are 100% user mode binary compat.
sorry for the pedantics. 8)
Re:hurray for apple
by
waynelorentz
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
That 17% number could be right, if every shop is run like the one I'm in.
The majority of the machines are IBM clones. The ones in the art department are Mac. They all need to talk to each other. It took the Wintel-head IT guys forever to figure it out, and it still doesn't work right all the time.
The IT guys are afriad to upgrade the Macs because they think they'll break what little works of the network now. It doesn't matter how much you tell them that OSX simplifies networking, they are afraid of anything outside their comfort zone, which at this time only includes Windows 2000.
Exactly my situation. I finally convinced the wife to let me get a Powerbook, and the next day Apple announced the G5's. I'm tired of the giant Wintel box on my desk, while my wife flits around the house with her Airport-enabled iBook. So I'm waiting for a G5 laptop. Please by Christmas! Please! Please! Please!
Great. I've got a Pentium 133 from 1996(?) as my router at home, and an even older dual pentium pro box at work to serve DNS for my subnet. Right now, I am using a Pentium II from 1998 as my main workstation at work. Runs fine with Gentoo 1.4, KDE 3.1.2, and mozilla firebird nightly builds.
Oh, and for the record, anyone who has run OS X 10.2 on a B/W G3 would know better than saying they run "just fine". Yeah, they run just fine if you login to a text console.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
How many times more does it need to be said? 32 bit apps are supported NATIVELY in PPC970. NO EMULATOR is necessary. Sorry for being a bit harsh, but I am tired of hearing how 32 bit apps will run in emulation, implying that there will be performance hit. And yes, the bridge will be there for years, until Apple and IBM decide that it would no longer necessary.
And the performance gain will also come from the really fat FSB. Now memory is the bottleneck... wonders never cease.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It was actually the processor which couldn't handle DDR ram. The motherboard could handle it just fine.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yes. I want that feature also. In addition to it, when a member function or member variables are added to a class, it should be displayed so on 'class' list on the left side of the PB. However current PB allows it only when the code is compiled. It's somewhat inconvenient.
I disagree, I'm running 10.2 on a old Bondi iMac and aside from the fact hat I don't get the eye candy (big deal) it seems pretty snappy. Hell, it doesn't seem all that much slower than XP running on my 1.2 Gig Duron.
All of those things sound like great uses for old intel-based hardware.
I am completely serious when I say 10.2 runs fine on my 450mhz B/W G3. I'll agree that 10.0 was spinning beach ball hell, but 10.1 got a lot faster and now 10.2.6 is perfectly fine. I use this computer for photoshop, iTunes, Quark (in classic mode), iMovie, and browsing the web in Camino. I'll probably get a G5 so I can do bigger DV projects, but beyond that, my G3 is 'good enough'.
Only Problem I have with apple.... They need to make it so us gamers can get games on the apple then I will drop my "WinWhores Computer" but untill then i have to use a shitty Winwhores..
Damn Damn Damn these G5 look sweet just need more games ARG
-- Sorry was in bad mood when made account:)
Re:hurray for apple
by
Mr.+Show
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Please keep in mind when complaining about PB and XCode that while PB is free, and XCode will at a minimum come free with Panther, Visual Studio.NET can cost you anywhere from $549 to $2,499, depending on the package you choose.
It has also been stated previously that about half of the pre-orders are for Dual 2.0GHz systems.
So... they'll need 50,000+ chips (for that many single-CPU systems) running at 1.6 or 1.8GHz, and 100,000+ chips (for 50,000+ dual-CPU systems) running at 2.0GHz. No wonder the slower ones are shipping first.
Oh, and at the base prices, not counting all those extra-cost build-to-order options, that works out to over $100,000,000 worth of 1.6/1.8GHz pre-orders, and $150,000,000 worth of 2.0GHz dual pre-orders, for a total of $250,000,000 in top-line sales.
The processor? It ran at up to 1.42GHz. The bus ran at 166MHz, damnit!
Re:hurray for apple
by
selderrr
·
· Score: 1, Informative
umpf... as a professional developer, even $2499 is recovered in a few days when you're tracking an extremely nasty bug. Sorry, but providing devtoosl for free does not stack up against the ease of use of MSDevTools. Really. I'm an apple developer and a win32 developer (not.net yet) and as far as devtools go, apple still is a distent second to MSVC. Not only the saveable state, but also spy++ and the customseable C++ object inspector (you can declare a function in your C++ object that will be called by the debugger whe you inspect an object. The String restult of this function in displayed in the debugger) are superior. Not to mentiojn the insane speed difference.
The only reason i'd buy a G5 is to get a decent debugger (speed wise) at last.
Re:hurray for apple
by
hcduvall
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I work for S&S, number 4 or 5 in the world. We still use OS 9.x.
I'd say you underestimate the inertia big companies have. You need to retool a lot of machines, you need a lot of people to reorient themselves, and you need to justify the expense of doing it- especially in a large corporation, where the publishing arm of the multimedia companies are treated like the ugly stepchildren. I work on a G4 because I'm in the production dept.- but none of us have a dual processor.
From my experience in a smaller firm, you're lucky to get a new computer every couple of years. So they'll be a powerpc sitting next to an imac siting next to a G4.
And lastly, publishing is even more inert than other industries. Even the move to desktop publishing is relatively new, we're not a bunch who move quick, even with an imaginary budget that would allow it.
Re:hurray for apple
by
c1pher
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
i've got a 1989 era Mac that can still run a web server, and a original classic Mac (well it's a 128k, from like 85 or 86) that still runs nicely in the kitchen as a glorified recipe book. I've still got a Apple IIc too in a box somewhere, that last i checked worked, which could probably do the same in the kitchen too i suppose.
Re:hurray for apple
by
digitalunity
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Meanwhile, in other news...
Intel sold $3 billion last month.
Apple is still marginal. Great products though.
-- You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
the customseable C++ object inspector (you can declare a function in your C++ object that will be called by the debugger whe you inspect an object. The String restult of this function in displayed in the debugger) are superior.
You can do this in the new developer-preview-only-so-far XCode, actually. You can specify persistent custom "display strings" that are associated with a type, and among the things that these display strings can do is call functions.
The XCode debugger is MUCH improved in general over the old ProjectBuilder one. I'm sure there is still work to go but you may be pleasantly suprised if you check it out. I'm not sure if you can have persistent state between debug sessions or not, though, and that seemed to be your main issue. Note though that in the developer preview, a lot of features aren't fully functional if you're writing java.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Mr.+Show
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
as a professional developer, even $2499 is recovered in a few days when you're tracking an extremely nasty bug.
Then write better code:)
Seriously, though, I am also both a C++ Win32 and Apple developer. I agree that PB is not as good as Visual Studio, but that's not the point. It's like saying that iMovie is not good enough because Final Cut Pro is better. Well, you pay $1000 for Final Cut Pro, so it should be better. Similarly, you pay an arm and a leg for Visual Studio, which gives Microsoft the resources to invest in adding more features and making it a richer development environment. You get what you pay for. That's life. And while there are some things about PB that drive me nuts, for free development tools I think PB and IB are pretty good (IMHO, IB spanks VC++ for UI design -- can't speak for VB or "C#" though), and I'm looking forward to XCode.
I don't even think it's necessary for Apple to try and get a bigger marketshare.
Perhaps, but things I've heard from small developers and software companies suggest that a slightly bigger market could help the Mac platform.
One primary cycle in a healthy "platform ecology" is that a healthy userbase drives the platform desirability for developers. The other half of this cycle is that a rich developer base is a factor drawing users to a platform.
The flip side is a downward spiral where insufficient users or insufficient developers cause platform acceptance to dwindle over time.
While Apple doesn't need to dominate the world, they do want a "healthy" (that word again) steady-state market size that supports vibrant user and developer commmunities.
Side note: I've deliberately used vague terms such as "healthy" and "rich" above to cover many variables that affect these groups. For simplicity, think of these as size of these groups.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Except that the native Quark sucks royal ass from everything I've read.
It's better than the OS 9 version. Granted, that's damning with faint praise...
Anyhow, everyone I know that punted Quark for InDesign has never looked back.
Why don't you go to the XCode link provided above and send an email/phone call to Apple Computer and let them know the reasons why you choose Microsoft Visual Studio over XCode/PB? I think that letting Apple know your reasons would be a great step in the right direction. If it would be the case, let Apple know that you would switch to developing on Apple full-time if the changes you needed implemented got implemented.
Hmmm... I don't think the OS inertia is peculiar to Apple, not that you were suggesting that it is... Look at the pattern of upgrades for Windows OSes, for example... Lots of people are still running 95 and NT 4.0... It even applies to Linux... Lots of people are still running Red Hat 7.x.
For this reason, I find it strange that so many media folks are focused on OS X's adoption rate... Check it in about five years, then we might have something to talk about... Oh well, I guess the media folks need to write about something... big media strikes again! If there isn't any news, they create it!
There must be something seriously wrong with your setup if mousing over an animated menu takes up 50% of your processor. Or maybe you've left out some details.
The problem is that on the OSX platform the only other real C++ IDE is Codewarrior. And yes it is expensive. And yes I did buy it. And no it is no where near as good as Visual Studio. While not as bad as PB, it can still be a frustrating experience to use.
I've sent feedback to Apple many times, as have many others. As I said, I don't know why Apple has not dealt with these issues. Arguably the main reason to use an IDE over a command line tool is ease of the compile/debug cycle. While all these nice features of XCode are very nice, they only deal with speed issues and not basic functionality.
Perhaps the latest versions of XCode have improved the debugging features. To be honest I've not checked up on it the last month. If they have I'll be very happy.
But right now for some tasks you either use Codewarrior, which has its own slew of problems, or develop your basic C++ classes in Visual Studio. The later is really the best option at the moment.
All of the guys in Apple's developer tools group are intensely aware of the fact that Xcode is not finished. In the latest development cycle, the emphasis was on improving build times, and introducing the new (Xcode) UI.
If there are features of Visual Studio or other development environments that you'd like to see in XCode, please send in your suggestions to xcode-feedback@group.apple.com.
-jcr
-- The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Yes I have a 400mhz b/w G3 and it is running 10.2 GREAT. 1 gig of RAM and it runs smooth. Thats why I spent $5000 on a g5, because I know It will still be rockin in 5 years.
Yeah, it really is. I've been trying to move toward open solutions with a minimum of vendor lockin. We've had Creo and ArtPro present their piece, but both seemed intent on selling thier lockin-ware complete workflow solutions.
development of trapping systems should be really straightforward
Straightforward, but difficult I've heard. I've discussed in-rip trapping with the Ghostscript people, and they seem to think it will take a pretty serious effort. Even if they did implement it, I don't think in-rip autotrap by itself would ever be intelligent enough for prepress work. The ability to tweak traps by hand will probably always be necessary.
I'd really love some open source developers to step up to the plate on this one. Ghostscript and GSView have been invaluable tools for me so far with my prepress work (GSView/epstool supports DCS2 now due to my company's funding of said features). The new version of FullPress is even based on a custom licensed version of Ghostscript. There's an old open source OPI server out there too, I don't know if it's still useful.
We have the open foundation, we just need some people to get together to fill in the missing pieces. As a side benefit, a trap would be useful for non-prepress printing too, as it could be used by inkjet printer drivers.
-- I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
(you can declare a function in your C++ object that will be called by the debugger whe you inspect an object. The String restult of this function in displayed in the debugger)
You mean like the -description method, which has been in Cocoa since day 1?
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
And how many pickup trucks did GM build last month?
Who cares?
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Oh, and for the record, anyone who has run OS X 10.2 on a B/W G3 would know better than saying they run "just fine". Yeah, they run just fine if you login to a text console.
Pfft! You do NOT know of what you speak!
I am *also* running 10.2.6 on a 450MHz B/W G3. I'm here to tell you that OS X DOES run *just fine*. In fact, I habitually use iMovie and a Formac analog-DV converter to archive my VHS tapes.
Now, having 512 MB RAM certainly helps the issue, but since RAM is cheap nowadays, I really don't see what your boggle is.
I would happily take any working 1999-era PCs off of anyone's hands that no longer want it for free. Right now, it seems the high-end Pentium computers and low end PII's are about the area where you can still give them away - anything slower and you'll probably have to pay to get rid of it cause few would want it.
Also, I would note that most 1999-era PCs will also run Windows XP, even if it's a tad slow.
At home, I have a massively upgraded Beige G3 (450MHz G4 upgrade), two 9600's (circa 1996?) and a bondi blue G3 iMac from, I believe, 2001. These Macs are like Volvos. They just keep on going. Though I've had some quirky problems with the Beige. Had to replace the ROM. I'll admit that. It's currently running the latest OS (as of yesterday) just fine.
-- These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Incredible! You've proven... you've proven that all numbers are equal!
Thanks for the tip. Now I can tell people that my Mac can perform 90,000,000,000,000,000 calculations per second, proudly state that my website gets just as many daily visitors as every pr0n site combined, tell the world that I have an IQ of 10,000, and brag that I have a 20-foot penis!
And I can say it all with a clean conscience, because it's all *true* thanks to your new math!
government institution? Sounds like the incompenance one might expect from such a workplace.
Sounds like you guys need to hire some new IT guys, if they are too pussy to do what you need. I bet you could find some at the unemployment office that are actually qualified for your requirements.
I know exactly what you are talking about. underqualified IT "professionals" that don't know how to do research, and don't want to learn. They are less qualified to run the your than burger king cashiers.
-- Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
"Oh, and for the record, anyone who has run OS X 10.2 on a B/W G3 would know better than saying they run "just fine". Yeah, they run just fine if you login to a text console."
Try upgrading the RAM.
10.2 runs "just fine" on a Snow generation iMac with 640 MB of RAM.
I agree that Macs have a long shelf life. I'm running Mac OS X 10.2 server on a PowerMac 7500, upgraded with a 300 MHz G3. The 7500 was releases 8 years ago.
Trapping software:
Depends on what you need: do you need in-workflow fullpage vector/raster trapping, or do you need area based manual trapping?
if you need the former, can't help ya, we're a large format company, with most jobs 6 colour, and no film, all ctp, and we've had bad luck with automatic trapping.
If you need manual trapping, I recommend PCC ArtPro, with Artworks/Nexus RIP. The RIP runs on windows 2k server, and ArtPro works OS9/X, at about $20k/seat.
ez.
The reason for this IMO is that there are fewer Mac gamers than PC gamers. I have a blue G3 Imac that works fine for browsing and email. Yet I update my PC every 2 years or so (the video card more than that) to keep up with the games. In the other hand, I guess I can afford to do that because I can go to Frys and get cheap (yet fast) parts for my PC. I know this is dry kinder for a flame but I don't mean it to be. It's just the reality.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
As one of only 2 PC companies making any money right now I don't understand what you mean.
Oh unless his Steveness is turning himself in to the undead? Wouldn't have to ever stop running Apple then and the reality distortion field can hide the gaunt flesh:P
I swear half the reason I hang out on Slashdot is because of the amusing clueless things people like this guy say.
-- Don't blame me - this.sig had steal me written all over it.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> You mean like the -description method, which has been in Cocoa since day 1?
Well, it changed signature in NeXTSTEP 3.x, with the FoundationKit...
Only kidding. And of course, some day the original poster will discover.gdbinit to store his "persistent state" to look at bug that "can take many days of iterating through the code to find"
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> If there are features of Visual Studio or other development environments that you'd like to see in XCode, please send in your suggestions to xcode-feedback@group.apple.com.
Yes, there is ONE feature I'd like:
DO NOT REWRITE THE DEV TOOLS AT EACH MAJOR RELEASE
ProjectBuilder was OK. It could have been improved upon, but Apple let his engineers write PBX instead.
Great. A two years setback, but PBX could have been fixed.
No. Apple let his egineers write XCode instead.
Another two years setback. Maybe they'll fix XCode instead of letting the engineers rewrite it in 2005.
(And yes, ProjectBuilder, the old one, OPENSTEP 4.x, was already a rewrite to the original ProjectBuilder NeXTstep 3.x, which COULD HAVE BEEN FIXED INSTEAD)
Oh, okay, no problem. I just thought I would say something constructive instead of non-productive. Well, please keep trying to contact Apple about your problems. Maybe you should even state your emails in the way your wrote your response to me.
Thanks for the correction- yes, it isn't "emulation" and that isn't just a nit-pick error. Everyone who's ever run MAME or any other EMU knows that EMUs can be dog-slow.
-- In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
Just glad I grabbed $1000 of AAPL on the recent down swing. I expect it will go up a pretty good amount over the next 6 months or so. G5 numbers will come in, and then Windows iTMS (which I wish they would release sooner if possible).
Please keep in mind when complaining about PB and XCode that while PB is free, and XCode will at a minimum come free with Panther, Visual Studio.NET can cost you anywhere from $549 to $2,499, depending on the package you choose
Exactly...and for OS X, if you need much more powerful debugging tools (and darn-fast compiles) you can always use CodeWarrior. I've been a CodeWarrior fan for years, and I think its debugger is better than VS's!
Yep, we've used the tadpoles for HP/UX and Solaris in the last few years. Still, the readily available 64-bit laptops really don't compare with the general coolness of the titanium PB. Plus the tadpoles weigh a ton. Also, unless you compile and tweak out Gnome, you are usually stuck with CDE for a desktop...Mac OS/X is really cool.
It's that color, but it's a 350MHz slot loader. Do I remember exactly when? Hell, it was over a year ago. It's all a blur to me.:)
-- These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"anyone who has run OS X 10.2 on a B/W G3 would know better than saying they run "just fine". Yeah, they run just fine if you login to a text console."
Well, you *do* need to put in more than 128MB of memory to get usable performance.
With 768MB, the G3/400 is more than just adequate, and replacing the Rage Pro128 card with a Radeon 7000 Mac Edition card makes an even bigger apparent improvement.
Re:hurray for apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If Visual Studio is so great, why are most Windows' software crap?
Cocoa is so elegant a framework that it more than makes up for what's lacking in the IDE (if any).
It's the FRAMEWORK, stupid. Not the IDE that makes the difference.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
jellomizer
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well the neat thing about technology, When you get a faster computer you start working with it without really noticing a major speed change. But then after a week you go back to your old system then you see the difference.
-- If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
el-spectre
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I kinda wondered why they were gonna ship 'em. I figured just tell the mac its new address and let it go!
-- "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
pmz
·
· Score: 1
When you get a faster computer you start working with it without really noticing a major speed change. But then after a week you go back to your old system then you see the difference.
My fastest computer at home is six years old and has a 300MHz CPU--I guess I can dream, though.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
aww, i have five computers and the slowest is 1.6ghz amd. you almost made me wanna donate you some hardware.
almost!
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
martingunnarsson
·
· Score: 1
Totally agree with you. Same thing when you get a faster internet connection. It doesn't seem that much quicker, but when you try a connection of the same speed as your old, it's soo slooow!
-- Martin
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
That might mean that you're upgrading too often.
I upgrade infrequently enough that I get 5-10x the CPU performance after the upgrade (since the bus technology changes, too, this is actual performance increase, not clock ratio), and that has definitely always been noticable.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
aclarke
·
· Score: 1
That's why all they ship you is the ethernet card. Then they send the rest of the computer to the MAC address.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
Night+Goat
·
· Score: 1
That guy in the commercial was bringing it on himself. He should have used the Mac's handles, like he was supposed to! They put those handles there for a reason!
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
hobbit
·
· Score: 1
If you think that's neat, you should try getting addicted to anti-depressants!
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
pmz
·
· Score: 1
If you think that's neat, you should try getting addicted to anti-depressants!
I've seen people who benefit more from the placebo effect of the anti-depressant than the actual medication itself (yeah, they really feel better right away, I'm sure). It's pretty sad.
Anti-depressants are over-prescribed and over-used in the USA. I think the reason people want them so much is that they aren't living up to some manufactured idealism that has no foundation in reality. Should a person feel worthless because they aren't working their asses off making $500,000 per year? I really don't think so. What if they can't join every club in school? No one does that, anyway.
I think the popularity of anti-depressants is actually an indicator that people, in general, have collectively decided that being human isn't good enough. The people who have genuine crippling depression are relatively rare, so why is it that so many people I know can get a prescription so easily? The fact that doctors are so easy is disappointing, especially given that anti-depressants screw around with a person's brain in ways that even psychiatrists can't define.
Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!
by
hobbit
·
· Score: 1
I agree entirely. In my analogy, if you don't notice the difference in speed when you upgrade your hardware, you didn't need to upgrade it. You upgraded it because you perceive it as an advantage that other people have, which you desire.
Then, when you try to stop taking anti-depressants, your brain feels like it keeps swapping to disk all the time...
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
1) One button mouse
2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job
3) Quicktime should be open source
4) Ogg Vorbis? Hel-LO!!!
5) I can't run 12-year old software on it
6) They should give it away for free
7) No x86 (though this is actually a plus
--
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I can't decide if the parent is a troll or trying to be funny.
2) I can't afford one because I'd rather spend 3000$ of my own time fixing Windows than the extra 1000$ it costs to buy a Mac.
Time is money, and this is where people get the equation wrong.
Actually, if you build it yourself, a very decent x86 box can be had for $600. Then again, you can get one from Dell or IBM or Compaq that is not horrible for that price with a monitor. The last machine I built cost me less than $500. The one I am building this week was around $200. New hardware.
As for Windows problems, I have none. You see there is this littel OS called Linux. Prhaps you have heard of it?
It would be pretty tough to build a $3000 - $5000 x86 desktop these days, and if you did, it would probably have at minimum twice the Ghz of the G5 per proc.
Re:ObWhines
by
TheRaven64
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
1) One button mouse
The one button doesn't bother me, but the lack of wheel does. On the other hand, I now have a logitech (USB) keyboard on my PC which has Apple symbols on the keycaps so presumably works on the Mac. It has a scrollwheel to the left of the keys, which I prefer using since it can be used by any finger easily, which reduces finger strain from stroking the mouse.
2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job
Yeah, that was a shame. I'd been trying to avoid having a real job, but then when I saw Apple's prices I finally bit the bullet. Now a fully paid up member of the establishment.
3) Quicktime should be open source
I don't care if Quicktime is open source, free software, or dictated to a trained monkey by God himself and compiled in secret. It should, however, support full screen video playback without upgrading to Pro for $30.
It would be pretty tough to build a $3000 - $5000 x86 desktop these days
Unless you go for a dual CPU PC with a 18-19" high contrast/high luminescence flat screen with digital input.
Building an average PC was always boring, so I've built Alphas and seriously optimized, high-performance multi-CPU PCs as a challenge. Sure it cost me a lot of money (although I've sold most of my hardware), but damn it was great getting your Alpha running 64-bit Linux for the first time already in the 1990s...
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Funny
It has a scrollwheel to the left of the keys, which I prefer using since it can be used by any finger easily, which reduces finger strain from stroking the mouse.
All I can say is you're a very sick sick SICK man!
Yeah, what the hell was apple smoking with a one button mouse? It makes all sorts of input slower, clumasier, or impossible. Having 2 mouse buttons is nearly essential for any FPS, preferably more than that for various keybinds. It's much faster to click a mouse button than type a key because of little things called stroke length and seek time which are both practically zero on the mouse. 2-button scrollwheel mice should be standard on every computer, i'm sick of those dinky useless 1-button puck mice on all the macs at my school. (actually, several of them have real mice, but they're not even configured to support the 2nd button or the scrollwheel because OS9 doesn't even support that by default (lol).
yes we all know that EVERYONE who doesnt use a mac uses winders, & they all worship bill gates as the second coming.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
1) One button mouse
I've plugged in the good old, got-it-with-my-crap-ass-Dell MS USB optical mouse, and low and behold - two buttons and a scroll button mouse that works fine.
Feels kinda blasphemous tho.. MS mouse plugged into an iBook.... *shurgs* oh well, it works.
The one button mouse is probably the most valid in the list by a long stretch and not just as a whine. I have to wonder if there is anyone stuck in front of a Mac all day long who hasn't forked out for a decent mouse - one with two buttons or preferably three with a wheel.
There can be few users, novice or otherwise who can't cope with more buttons these days. Perhaps that wasn't true once, but persisting with the one button design means new users get a crappy mouse and a crappier 'experience' neither of which is what Apple wants.
Linux is nice, but c'mon, if my neighbours can fuck up their Windows computers, fucking up Linux/BSD would be a piece of cake unless they were all sent to 'Whats a symlink, is it like a shortcut?' school.
So, lets compare out-of-the-box GUI'd commercial OSes. I wish I could include BeOS and Warp in the list, but alas, MS slayed them.
The hardware shipped with G5s kick the stuffing out of any 600$ box, thankyouverymuch. Thats apples to oranges (shit, the gfx card in a G5 is half of you 600$ box alone.. and theres a DVD recorder in there.. )
So try again? Build me a PC box with the level of componants in an Apple rig.. which Alien Ware does. A rough check says their systems go from 1500-2500..
Its good that you can get what you need for 600 bucks, but your resulting rig would be a far cry from the capabilities of a G5. I'm not saying that you can't build a cheaper PC rig that can do the same things as a G5, but at least be fair if you're going to honestly try and crunch my glibly provided numbers in my orig post.
And I'm a FreeBSD developer.. a real *nix guy who builds his own PCs. Unless you can prove that you can appreciate what the Apple experience provides, theres no sense in pointing out that you can get what *you* like for cheaper.
-- "Old man yells at systemd"
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is bullshit. It assumes that you can do paid work at a certain high value for any moment that you wouldn't be fixing your machine. Of all the reasons to buy a Mac (and there are several good ones), this is one of the worst, yet the most often repeated.
run a twelve-year-old on your computer, you dirty baster
dirty baster? you sicko!
--
---
Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Informative
http://www.apple.com/powermac/ "NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra."
$110 is not half of $600.
Re:ObWhines
by
Slack3r78
·
· Score: 5, Informative
You know, I'm an x86 fan, and I build all my own machines simply because I enjoy it, but I have to disagree with you on the price thing. Out of curiousity due to your post, I put this together to see how a similarly spec'd PC would compare as far as pricing goes. Now compare it to Apple's offering.
I realize it's an Opteron, which is technically a server processor, but it's the only currently available chip which I would say is comparable to the G5. And yeah, there's a 9600 Pro when the mobo doesn't have an AGP slot, but that's to keep the price comparison fair. So now the premium of the apple is only ~25% instead of 1000%.
I should also note that things like an operating system and peripherals were left out of my comparison system, since that cost is going to vary due to desire/needs in the x86 world.
So basically you get a bare 1.8GHz dual Opteron for about $600 cheaper than a 2.0GHz dual G5. While, like I said, I'm an x86 fan and I like building my own systems, I could definitely rationalize a G5 purchase, and I don't exactly fall into their target demographic anyway. I really think Apple's got their act together with the G5 line. While to those of us used to building full systems of commodity hardware for a few hundred dollars, it sounds high, but in all reality, the pricing on the new systems is rather fair.
The point stands as soon as non-functining Windows gets in the way of productivity (which at least *some* people benifit from directly via commisions/bonuses/profitsharing), and or job performance. Secondly, its still true because most people dont fix their own computer - they ask knowledgable friends to do it. Friends who probably make a living in some way from computers. Friends that have a difficult time asking friends for payment for their services. Finally, if it isn't true, then why wouldn't people *always* buy the worst-performing solution if the time fixing it isn't actually worth anything to them?
The point was glib, but the reasoning does stand in numerous unquantifiable ways. If the time != $$, then it sure as hell == something else important to people, because I see people spending more for a better working solution every day of the week.
I don't care if Quicktime is open source, free software, or dictated to a trained monkey by God himself and compiled in secret. It should, however, support full screen video playback without upgrading to Pro for $30.
You need mplayer. It's free and at least on Linux/x86 plays quicktime fullscreen. Have not tried OS X version.
Life is more than money, time was never money
Time was never cash, life is still more than girls.
Life is more than hundred dollar bills and roto-tom fills,
Life is more than fame and rock and roll and thrills.
All the riches of the kings end up in will
We've got information in the information age
But do we know what life is outside of our convenient Lexus cages?
It's one thing building your own machine if you enjoy it (as some of you weirdoes do) but frankly it's not worth my time. I'd much rather spend my time in work earning money and spending my time outside of work with my family rather than piddling about with Windows OR Linux on cheap hardware.
Moreso, to save Money I could run Linux which would provide me with 50% of what I consider to be a good computing experience - the smashing UNIXy bits. The rest - consistent UI, stable, bug-free apps, sound card support I don't want to work for - I'd have to get elsewhere. The remainder (buggy apps, poor UI, poor documentation) you (and Adobe) can keep.
So, I guess if you work the graveyard shift in a 24 hour supermarket, live with your Mom and think that a well-running x86 box is one with the side off, then I guess building your own computer is worth the time you spend on it.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Having 2 mouse buttons is nearly essential for any FPS
LOL. The truth comes out at last.
i'm sick of those dinky useless 1-button puck mice on all the macs at my school.
Translation: this post was written by a teenager with a game fixation. Ignore it.
1) No one on/. (or with RSI) should care how many buttons the mouse has as any real computer user would use the keyboard. Why use a right mouse click when a key command (or shell command) can do it faster. I only use the mouse when I can't tab to what I want (point and click). Besides, one mouse button is easy for newbies who's minds are two small for such things. Also, my 12 inch PB looks much nicer with only one button. PC laptops always look like crap with to me but that's just my opinion.
2) That's becouse you spend too much time posting on/. (wait, I'm posting too. Doh!)
3) Why does this matter, MPG (what QT uses) is open, what else do you need? Find a nice and Free (beer) media player and your set. That's what x is for right?
4) Try using http://www.google.com. It's a really nice site that helps you find things on the net (try "Ogg Vorbis Macintosh", I got a free app on the first link)
5) I can.
6) Your funny.
7) I aggree this is a plus. Down with CISC! (Yes I know all about how intel is RISC inside (bla bla bla))
I don't care if Quicktime is open source, free software, or dictated to a trained monkey by God himself and compiled in secret. It should, however, support full screen video playback without upgrading to Pro for $30.
Dunno if this makes up for it but it is just the PLAYER app that can't handle full-screen without a cash injection. These are freeware apps that will do fullscreen. Plus I'm guessing you can use MPlayer OSX and VLC anyway. http://www.lostminds.com/content/truplaya .shtml http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo /mac/181 83
In the line of keeping the comparison fair, I think you should also mention, that your selected motherboard does not only lack the AGP slot as you admitted, it also neither supports DDR400, nor Firewire 800 and 400 as the G5's do, I believe. Let alone that it's "only" 1.8 GHz Opteron vs 2 GHz PPC970. Performance-wise, this is probably irrelevant, regarding the marketing and the price it is not. From my experiences prices for new processors increase sharply the higher the frequencies.
I couldn't check the case you selected, however I would expect Apple's case to look much better:-) Besides, it's metal not plastic. For some people, this doesn't mean much, too me however, it does. Although I am a computer science student and am mostly able to deal with the more nasty subtleties of a Windows box, I just don't want to. I'm not a system administrator and don't want to be one. I want a system which gets the job done as nicely and with as little fuss as possible. Usually, this rules out Windows as well as Linux. OS X together with a more recent Mac is an excellent coalition of Unix and an elegant UI.
If you don't like using the one-button mouse, it's not all that difficult to merely unhook the standard one and plug in any USB mouse with as many buttons as you want. I use a Logitech Optical Cordless mouse on my iBook on a regular basis with no problem whatsoever. Mac OS X supports multiple-button mice out of the box. If you're still using OS9, you have a few more problems than having only one mouse button.
-- Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
$110? You're way low! The card is $200 at Circuit City. My distributor cost is $155!!! If you can get it for $110, I'll order a couple dozen at least!
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Unless you go for a dual CPU PC with a 18-19" high contrast/high luminescence flat screen with digital input.
Just incase anyone missed it, he was trying to say "unless you build it to the same specs as a 3000-5000 mac, which most x86 boxes really aren't".. I think.
"2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job"
Right. Because you MUST be lame if you don't have a good job. I mean...who cares that you might be a college student putting the money towards your education.....or the fact that the economy is in the gutter and you'd be lucky to get a crappy retail job at this point.....or that not every good job pays a lot, and not every well-paying job is good.
I hope you meant all of that in jest, because that was a pretty ignorant comment to make.
For me, my #8 and your #7 are the big ones (though #9 would cure #8 most likely). #2 is the only other one that matters to me. I actually have a good job, but I also have a family and simply can't justify spending that much on a computer at one time regardless of architecture. This is where x86 really shines for me; I can upgrade a piece at a time, and thus conceal the true cost from my wife. Even then, though, it works out to only about $400 a year or so. Yes, I read the discussion about the fairness of the price for what you get above, but as I said I just can't justify spending that much on any architecture.
Also, I know it's popular to disparage x86, but, well, it works, and the vast majority of software is available for it. Having the superior architecture doesn't mean much when you can't run your software.
Anyway, I'm sure someone will mark this as flamebait because of my disparaging remark regarding the Mac UI. Sorry, I know Apple's UI is supposed to be the end-all/be-all of UI design, but I have always found it confusing and cumbersome.
-- Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
You hit on several points that I didn't simply because I didn't want to include 6 paragraphs of disclaimers along with it.:) The case I selected was simply selected because it was already in my cart from another project - laziness prevailed. And yes, it's not as nice as an Apple case. One could be found, but it'd run well over $100.
It wasn't meant to be a strictly Apple-to-apples (bad pun, I appologize;)) comparison, but rather to point out the fact that an x86 system of comparable spec isn't as cheap as my parent poster was making it out to be. The UI and OS issue were something I didn't want to touch with that post, hence why I left an operating system completely off the Opteron. Hope that clears things up some.
Your link to apple didn't work on my computer. Looks like you are sending session information in the link. Any way you can send a new one (that is not based on a session)?
--
Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You don't 'build' your own computers, you assemble them. Give the engineers at Intel, AMD, IBM, Motorola, etc. some credit.
Sorry about that. There doesn't seem to be a way to link to it directly, but here's what it was:
Dual G5 2.0Ghz
RAM upgraded to 1GB from the stock 512MB
Price: $3,249.00
Hope that clears things up for you.
Re:ObWhines
by
multiplexo
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And where's your operating system? Unless you have a brother who works for Microsoft you can plan on dropping anywhere from $160 to $300 for a version of Windows XP. Or, if you're running Linux/BSD you can plan on spending more time configuring the box than you would if you purchased a Macintosh with OS X. Also your machine is going to be one noisy son of a bitch with that Opteron in it. I run a 2Ghz Athlon XP and the damned thing sounds like a vacuum cleaner, even with a Thermaltake fan set on the low speed. And the case and power supply you selected, one word: pieceashit. If you bought a decent case and power supply (Lian Li and a PC Power and Cooling Silencer power supply) you'd be out another $200 or so, thus narrowing your price differential even further. This whole "I can build an x86 box for less money than you can buy a Macintosh" game is for idiots. It's like saying "I can turbo charge a Honda Civic so it will go faster than a Porsche Boxster and save lots of bux". Yes, Sparky, you can, but it's still not as good as a Porsche Boxster. It might be as fast on a straight track, but it still sux compared to the real thing.
-- cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
your math is wrong. The apple is 3,000, yours is 2,660. That is a $340 difference, just about enough for a copy of windows. If you want software equivalent to all the iApps, you better be ready to shell out a few hundred more.
Pretty fair comparison all in all, but pre-software the price difference is about $300 not $600. After you add the software to make them equivalent the race is essentially a dead heat, depending on your software needs.
blah blah blah,,, only hardware costs considered, blah blah, reboot, blah ease of use, blah, etc....
But a reasonable comparison, modulo one math error.
Whoa, slow down there. If you had read through my whole post, you'd have seen that I very specifically didn't include an operating system for a number of reasons. You'd also see that the G5 including OS X was something I chalked up in the G5's favor.
I don't think noise would be as much of a problem as you make it out to be. AMD's x86-64 chips are reportedly running MUCH cooler than the current generation of CPUs, so such extreme cooling measures won't be needed. Either way, that Opteron isn't a system you could actually build anyway - ie: the Radeon 9600 and no AGP port. This list was just meant to show how commodity x86 hardware compares in price to an Apple G5, and to clear up the misnomer that a Mac is uberbucks more expensive than a comparable PC.
So in short, you basically agreed with most of what I had already said. Please read more carefully next time.
Actually, it wasn't, I just should've posted specs instead of a link. I had upgraded the RAM in the G5 to 1GB from the stock 512MB. That bumped the total price to $3,249.00. Sorry for the confusion.
One-button mice are used by Apple for two reasons:
1) To enforce good GUI development.
2) Ease of use. It's easier to mash a single button with three or four fingers than have to mentally process which finger is over which button and press the correct finger based on what you want to do.
-- You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Construction workers don't 'build' houses, they assemble them. Give the engineers at US Steel, etc. some credit.
Unless it is free or cheap, I don't see the point in upgrading. I am still using Photoshop 5 LE (came with the camera), AutoCAD 13 (circa 1994), Corel WordPerfect Suite 8. To replace all of these with the latest version could easily cost $4000 total. Even if you cheap out in getting the latest neutered versions (Acad LT, PhotoShop Elements), that's $1000 easy total.
I really don't see the point in upgrading, unless you either want to have an infringing copy or you like to waste money. I have yet to see an adequate replacement for AutoCAD on Linux, or see a currently maintained CAD program for Mac, so they don't apply.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The OS X version is pretty good, but VLC is generally a lot nicer. I find I only have to use MPlayerOSX for the occasional old, weird MPG file (weird in encoding, not content - well maybe both).
Between Quicktime with the DiVX AVI importer (part of the DiVX 5 component) and VLC, you can play damn near anything quite nicely.
Actually, you will not be able to find a case as nice as the G5, or even the G4. The new G5 case runs at 35 dB, is almost completely screwless (including the hard drives!), has handles, and looks SWEET. PC cases are getting better, but Apple wins on industrial design, hands down. (with the caveat that there's only 2 drive bays, which sucks)
Right, becuase it's so much money to "fork out" for a decent mouse.
If you're the kind of person to whom a specific mouse is that important, you're probably the kind of person who would shell out the extra money for the mouse of your choosing anyway. I am, and I did.
"So try again? Build me a PC box with the level of componants in an Apple rig.. which Alien Ware does. A rough check says their systems go from 1500-2500.."
Beyond spelling... First: Alienware's machines are crap. Second: Should you want the "level of components" in an Alienware system, go build it for 1/3 the price. Third: What the hell is a "level of components"? Fourth: Should you be talking about quality of parts, don't tell me about Apple's quality. My iBook went back to the factory SIX times during the half year that I owned it!
I'm talking about the school computers. I would never waste money on a fucking Mac. My home built PC beats the shit out of any similarly priced prebuilt computer, even before I overclocked it.
I call BS. There is nothing difficult or complicated about a multibutton mouse interface, except for someone with a negative IQ who hasn't used a computer for more than 1 hour in their life. It invariably speeds up command & control without any complications or negative side effects. Muddling through doing everything with a single mouse button is like trying to type with only one finger and leads to LESS EFFICIENT interfaces.
Actually, some of the less computer literate people might be best off with a Linux/*BSD box pre-configured for them with all the software they need, because they'd be less likely to mess it up than a Windows box. You know, the type of people who don't even want to install software themselves, who don't particularly care what they use (when visiting, my ex-girlfriend was just as comfortable using my FreeBSD PC as my MacOS X laptop).
On the other hand, the somewhat more demanding non-expert users might be better off with MacOS X, but most of the people I know who are of this status are dependent on specific software packages only available for Windows...
Re:ObWhines
by
wolrahnaes
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I was doing a similar price comparo, so I started with the Dual 2GHz G5, put in 1GB of RAM, 500GB of HD, the Radeon 9800, and removed the modem.
Summary
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
2x250GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
Mac OS X - U.S. English
Subtotal $4,045.00
I then configured an all-out G5 Fighter using prices from pricewatch.
This is what I came up with, part by part
Case: Lian Li PC-6070 ($153) This all-aluminum case has great looks as well as front panel USB2.0 ports. It is as similar to the G5's case as I could find.
Processors: 2x AMD Opteron 246 ($799 each) 2GHz, 64 bit...as close to equal as possible
Mobo: Rioworks HDAMB ($415) Being the only dual Opteron board with AGP, this was a given. It also included onboard Gigabit LAN, SATA, USB2.0, 1394, and 5.1 surround.
RAM: 2x Samsung DDR400 512MB ($85 each) Even though the Opterons only use DDR333, this was supposed to be as even as possible, and for $10 extra, why not up to DDR400 for future-proofing
Video Card: ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB ($318) Should be the exact same card
Optical Drive: Pioneer DVR-A06 ($166) The SuperDrive is AFAIK this same drive or an earlier revision
Hard Drives: 2x Western Digital WD2500JD ($308 each) Should be the same
PSU: Sparkle Power 460 ($81) 460w PSU with the EPS12V connectors needed by the motherboard
Mouse: Logitech MX500 ($32) The mouse is tough to make even, with no 1 button mice for PCs, so I chose one of the best mice (mouses?) available today.
Keyboard: Logitech Elite ($8) This is a nice keyboard, far better than Apple's keyboard.
OS: SuSE Linux Enterprise Server AMD64 ($448) Since you have to buy MacOS with the Apple, I included the only fully tested distribution quality OS for AMD64. This would likely be left off and most people would just recompile what they have for 64 bit use.
In total, with shipping, here are the costs for the AMD system: With SuSE: $4064.13 W/out OS : $3616.13
Bringing back the G5, that was $4045. The AMD64 system basically has the same parts, but comes up $428.87
Basically, if you value the time that it would take to assemble the above system and install/configure the OS (basically doing a Linux From Scratch to compile everything for AMD64) at more than the difference, the G5 is likely a better choice. Either one has all the software compatibility you could want. The G5 will run all of your old MacOS (or PPC Linux) apps, and the AMD64 system will run any old x86 app.
My opinion is that the pricing is even enough to negate that from the consideration.
Kudos to Apple.
-- I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Obviously the only reason you chose Opteron was to get the price as high as G5's, because performance it certainly wasn't. It barely beats the Athlon, and is totally toasted by the P4.
Not that I'm surprised though. It's the modus operandi of comparions trying to prove that Macs really aren't that expensive to show the specs for a completely pointless PC so as to get the price really high and keep performance down.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
As someone who runs both MacOS X and various Unix variants, I can honestly say that I can install and configure FreeBSD on a PC faster than MacOS X can get through the basic installation...
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
having more than one mouse button also streamlines normal desktop navigation
Uh... on what operating system? On Mac OS X, a second mouse button is utterly superfluous for normal desktop navigation.
and school-related use.
Negative. School kids learn a single mouse button much more readily than two mouse buttons. It's called "point and click," not "point and manipulate in any number of ways depending on which finger you twitch in which direction."
There's a place and a time for the computer equivalent of HOTAS. The basic mouse that comes in the box with the computer isn't it. If you want an N-button mouse, N > 1, buy one.
I don't think the point is that one cannot use a two button mouse, i think the post was meant to portray that Apple made a bad decision trying to push the one button mouse, and i would have to agree. I've met very few mac users who actually prefer the one button mouse, and those that do i'm a bit suspicious of(raging mac obsessed steve jobs worshipers tend to rationalize bad decisions by apple and end up convincing themselves that they are a good thing). So yes, i can(and have) buy a two button mouse with a scroll wheel(how can one possibly argue that the scroll wheel is a bad idea?). Or, Apple could own up to its bad decision, come out with a two button mouse(presumably with some crazy innovative addition and/or cool looking design) and make its users happy:)
The above is a false choice. The real choice users face isn't between "learn two buttons" and "learn one button", it's between "learn two buttons" and "learn how to press one button while optionally pressing some obscure meta-key at the same time".
In other words, by leaving out the easiest way to obtain different click-semantics, Apple forces everyone to learn how to get the same functionality a much harder way.
People didn't evolve multiple fingers for nothing, ya know.
--
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
I care, because my Qt-based program that works great under Linux and Windows has to be hacked up and redesigned to work properly using only one mouse button under OS/X. Even telling all of my users to buy multi-button-mice isn't enough yet, since Apple's drag-and-drop functionality is broken -- you can only drag and drop with the primary mouse button.
If Apple thinks it's acceptable to revert to brain-dead three-letter-extensions for file typing "because that's how Windows does it", then surely they can take off their ideological blinders long enough to include multi-button-mice as well.
--
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
WTF are you talking about? The spell check program is system wide, in the Mail app, in the Address book, etc. etc. etc. By the way, nice use of commas there ya' dumb bastard.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Any USB keyboard will work with a Mac. I have a Microsoft Natural keyboard. The "Windows" key translates to the pretzel (aka "Apple", aka "that weird four-cornered clover type thingy") key. Don't know what the menu key translates to. Alt translates to option.
Why can't you just do a control click? That's what Apple does for you when you click the right mouse button. If this does not work, then prohaps you should complain to Qt.
I suggest you go read some books on ergonomics and physiology. Pay particular attention to the parts about muscle coordination.
Better yet, do this experiment. Mash your fist on a keyboard. Now type the alphabet. Which one took more physical coordination? Which one was faster?
-- You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Apple's drag-and-drop functionality is broken -- you can only drag and drop with the primary mouse button.
There's a reason why Apple publishes UI guidelines. One of those reasons is to avoid the nightmare of having to explain to a user why there's a difference between a left-drag and a right-drag.
If your code depends on doing drags with different buttons, then you need to seriously re-think your UI. Maybe that crap will fly on linux, where people are willing to put up with all kinds of X-windows cruft, but mac users will throw it back in your face, and rightfully so!
I can upgrade a piece at a time, and thus conceal the true cost from my wife.
Until she reads about it on slashdot:)
Not likely, that's one of the advantages of using a true multi-user OS. Additionally, she considers not ever having to think about how to make the computer do the things she wants to be one of the advantages of being married to a geek.
I think my secret is safe...
-- Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
I can do a control click with no problem. But try explaining to my grandmother what a "control key" is, and why you need to hold down that key while clicking... no fun.
--
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
There's a reason why Apple publishes UI guidelines. One of those reasons is to avoid the nightmare of having to explain to a user why there's a difference between a left-drag and a right-drag.
My program is used to control audio consoles for live theater sound systems. In that scenario, the difference between a UI where it takes a quarter-second to change a control and one that where it takes 2 seconds is the difference between success and failure. My users need to be able to do things very quickly, and assigning different actions to different mouse buttons is one way to make that possible.
If your code depends on doing drags with different buttons, then you need to seriously re-think your UI. Maybe that crap will fly on linux, where people are willing to put up with all kinds of X-windows cruft, but mac users will throw it back in your face, and rightfully so!
If I were to dumb down my GUI and make it slower to use, my users would not be able to use it anymore. The UI guidelines are just that -- guidelines. They don't apply to every scenario, and this is one that they don't apply to.
--
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
As someone who runs both MacOS X and various Unix variants, I can honestly say that I can install and configure FreeBSD on a PC faster than MacOS X can get through the basic installation...
Using an iPod I can install a two gigabyte image, including Classic, MS Office and all our other standard applications, on a G4 400 in five minutes. The necessary command line utilities are part of the standard 10.2 install, but Mike Bombich's NetRestore Cocoa/AppleScript front end makes it fast and easy. Likewise his Carbon Copy Cloner makes creating compressed images a breeze.
Just yesterday I had to make six clones of a Slackware box. The fastest way to do it was to take them all off the network, put them on a hub, boot each from a floppy, manually fdisk, mk2fs and build a rudimentary root directory structure, then rsync the original box to them. It was downright comical and took two of us hours. Even accounting for Murphy's law it wouldn't have taken more than half an hour with Macs. Simply boot a target machine off the build machine in Firewire target disk mode, Clone it with Carbon Copy Cloner, hook both of those up to two more target machines etc. until done. Each clone is a one or two click affair.
Granted, things would have been a bit easier had we been allowed to use RedHat and do kickstart builds then rsync, but nothing approaching the ease OS X affords. G4U would have been easy but it was way too slow.
-- It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man
The main difference between Windows problems and Linux problems problems is how you go about fixing them. With Windows problems, I have to either, call tech support or go to their website, find the answer in their database somewhere and then just do what it says. Easy, but boring. In Linux, I have to google for a solution, or better yet man for it. Then I'll have to go in and probably edit some script or make some symlink. Difficult, but educational.
I don't use Windows because I don't have any fun playing around with it. I use Linux because it's fun to play around with it. Some people don't find that fun, and some people would rather have stuff just work. To each his own, but I certainly like it better knowing why it works, so that it's technology, not magic.
-- "Did you know you can do calculus without a calculator?"
Now try controling a game with only your fists. your analogy is total bullshit. The one-button mouse is a waste of independently working fingers that could, with a little training, be used to increase input bandwidth without confusing anybody who knows his face from his ass. Theres nothing un-ergonomical or slow or complicated about using the fingers in one hand to do more than one mashing motion. Are you come kind of psychotic mac fanatic who feels the need to rationalize every decision apple makes?
Oh please people, assembling a PC is so easy a 13 year old and do it. Don't call it "building".
Building a sun room for your house, that's building. Spending your weekend on working on your 1964 Mustang, that's building. Assembling a PC is just playing Lego.
which reduces finger strain from stroking the mouse
If you're *ahem* stroking the mouse *ahem* enough to cause finger strain, maybe you ought to cut down on the porn. Or at least switch hands once and a while.
-Ted
-- -=-=-
Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Interesting. Your app sounds like a situation where hitting the wrong button would be Very Bad Indeed.
All the more reason to keep it simple.
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It beats the shit out of a dual 2GHz G5? I don't think so.
You seem to think that all users are power users. Let me guess: all your friends are geeks? I think Apple's HCI experts have a better idea than you do of whether people with a positive IQ, who have used a computer for considerably longer than an hour, still get confused using multiple mouse buttons.
And as b-baggins (no relation) said, the number one reason is to enforce good GUI development. Mac developers know that power users will have two-button (or more) mice, so they can put the power functionality in context menus etc.; but they'll try to make the majority cases easy to access using only one button. If you don't see that as good GUI design, that's because you don't know what good GUI design is.
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
You're wrong. It's not that there is never any need to right-drag (see Apple's own Interface Builder for a good example of this), it's that you don't want to confuse the majority of users by giving them something out-of-the-box which is really only necessary for power users (who can plug in a multi-button mouse or use the modifier keys).
I do think that Apple should themselves make available a really nice (read: matching) two- or three-button mouse, though.
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Re:ObWhines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Nice troll... Are you perhaps a bit annoyed that momerath2003 made a better joke than the one that you were going to tell about Barbie, and made it sooner than you? Thought so.
I wish I could include BeOS and Warp in the list, but alas, MS slayed them.
Don't be too quick to discount BeOS. I recently installed BeOS MAX 2.1 (an R5 personal edition based distro) on my desktop. It detected my dual monitor setup perfectly (something that required considerable config file hacking in X) and enabled 2D acceleration. Mozilla 1.4 installed and ran fine. In fact installing software on BeOS is more or less just a case of copying the folder to a sensible place, just like on MacOS. It has a *NIX style shell, but I didn't find myself actually needing to use it for anything. After using it for a little while, going back to Windows / Gnome was painful. I would really like to use BeOS on my desktop, but it needs a few things fixed first:
A decent, ideally rootless, X server
A better, and ideally free, Jabber client. Actually, this is not a major problem, since if I decide to switch I'd be happy to write my own.
3D acceleration support.
Java support.
At least the first three of these are going to be fixed in YellowTab Zeta, which should be released Real Soon Now(tm), since it's been in beta for over 6 months.
It was meant to be a joke, because, well, it's all the standard/. arguments against Apple. It's odd (though understandable) how many have taken it as a troll. It's less odd (though quite sad) how many took all this seriously.
Ah well. The longer I live, the more I realize that we ignoble hairless apes haven't really left Olduvai, have we?
--
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Another interesting point to remember: Apple's memory is famously expensive. A lot of buyers will only buy the minimum memory from Apple, and buy the rest from a 3rd party supplier.
Just incase anyone missed it, he was trying to say "unless you build it to the same specs as a 3000-5000 mac, which most x86 boxes really aren't".. I think.
Try again. The $5000 Mac does *not* come with a monitor. What I was saying is that even if you tried to spend $5000 on a PC, I really don't think you could. Such an attempt would probably include a motherboard with dual 4hz P4's, much of the same hardware except a more hefty video card, and still be cheaper.
I work in a hospital where a majority of users (nurses, admin staff) get confused when they're told to right-click with their mouse.
I for one would welcome a one-button mouse.
New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until november
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
My friend was trying to order one of the duel 2.0 GHz G5 machines and got a quote of november at the earliest for s ship date. So much for G5 production.
it's about freaking time!
by
192939495969798999
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I'm sorry, but they have been advertising this thing a little heavy considering they weren't even shipping them. I've visited the apple store here at least twice, seen the ad, and then looked in the store for the box. It is really disappointing to see the ad up as if the computer is right there, and it's not. I surely hope for their sake that there are no major bugs, recalls, etc! Could this be the box that changes the tide? interesting to think about.
What happend to Autumn? Dec 21 is the first day of Winter...at least it has been for all of my life, and I tend to pay close attention to that day since it's my birthday.
--
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Re:it's about freaking time!
by
Zixia
·
· Score: 1
For the record, Summer ends with the Solstice around Sept. 20/21.
That's the Autumnal Equinox, but is indeed when Summer ends. The Summer Solstice occurs on the 21st June.
Re:it's about freaking time!
by
NaugaHunter
·
· Score: 1
Umm... it's from the Autumnal Equinox on August 21st to the Winter Solstice on December 21st. Northern Hemisphere, obviously.
To recap (Northern; had Solstice confused with Equinox):
Summer: June 21st to September 21st (Autumnal Equinox)
Fall: September 21st to December 21st (Winter Solstice)
Winter: December 21st to March 21st (Vernal Equinox)
Spring: March 21st to June 21st (Summer Solstice)
(Allowing for Leap Years and other fluctuations, of course.)
So for Apple to deliver in August, they have easily made 'late summer'.
-- R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before?
B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Once again, Apple releases a product whose packaging is almost as desireable as the contents inside! Now if only they would update the Powerbook 15" line.
-- "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I wonder how long it will be until we see G5 boxes on eBay.
If anything like the other Apples on fleaBay, they will bid them up so high that you'd be much better off buying new.
Re:That box!
by
Darth+Maul
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The box for the iPod is a work of art; the clamshell design is wonderful. I'm just amazed at Apple's attention to detail with something so seemingly trivial as product packaging.
P.S. - rumour has it that new 17 and 15 inch powerbooks are coming out soon. Head on over to thinksecret.com.
-- ---
witty signature
Re:That box!
by
doc_traig
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
"Steal me now!"
-- So long, michael. Don't let the door hit you...
Don't worry, they will. I'm planning on getting a PowerBook in the next couple of months, and as soon as I do they will instantly release a 1.2GHz G5 based version...
We've been seeing G5s on eBay for a while now. From the same people that sell you a 17" pwerbook and a 23" TFT for $1000. I doubt that it would actually turn up after you'd handed the money over though...
What does packaging have got to do with anything? Does "packaging" encode your OGGs or AVIs any faster? No? Does it get you higher score on Seti? No it doesn't? Does it compile Linux kernel any faster, no it doesn't.
This really touches on the difference between apple and most wintel retailers. It's all about Quality. Quality is a basic aspect of the way we understand reality which underlies both the classicist and romanticist systems of thought. By refering to a list of easily measurable benchmarks, you are nailing your colors to the flag of classicist thinking and opposing the romanticist side of the product. Thinking that this is OK is how horrible products are created. Some people spend their whole lives laboring under this kind of thinking; you don't have to if you think about Quality. (Full disclosure: I'm reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance right now).
I'm talking about selling the boxes on eBay, not the actual computers.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
God, how much more does that box cost than a plain cardboard one? I would rather have a $10 discount than a pretty box that is going into storage or the dumpster anyway.
Guess the wont be selling any of these then... ooooo shiny
--
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Bzzzzt. Sorry, buddy.
Quality is a measurable quantity. With computers it means performance. I could live with your idea of quality if it meant that you want to have a silent and good looking (which is a waste of time in my opinion) terminal for accessing the brutal number-crunching beast of 10 PCs in your basement, but no. You want to have "performance" that looks good.
Well, let me tell you something buddy. Ever heard of "fast, inexpensive and quality"? You can't have two out of three. That applies perfectly to this situation.
Great post! It's all starting to make sense... Apple is following Pirsig's lead. Being "insanely great" reminds me (literally and figuratively) too much of Phaedrus. I see the light, and it's blindingly bright...
Yes, and it seems the more you drink, the shinier things get.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Bzzt yourself. The G5 box has no ratsnest of cables inside. It's easy to work on. It's got great airflow. It's got convenient handles. On top of all that, it looks good.
Also, the OS never crashes, the user-interface is both easy to work with and nice to look at, and a lot of people think the programming tools for it are the best in the world.
All with price and performance comparable to the best Intel machines. You were saying?
Bzzzt. Sorry, Buddy.
Quality is NOT measurable. By your way of thinking, a quality computer is the newest fastest processor, and when it's released the quality of all that came before it is diminished. That's not how it works. There's quality machines, and there's crap machines, and performance has nothing to do with it.
I would venture to say that the 'classicist' thinker who trotted out the numbers mentioned above is, at some level, a Quality oriented thinker, albeit a rather twisted one. Case in point: Does scoring higher on Seti have any measurable real-world value? Does being able to compile a Linux kernel faster have any meaning compared to the fact that the kernel *needs* to be compiled in the first place? A Linux Zealot perceives Quality using different esthetic values then the rest of us. To most people, Apple's packaging is beautiful. To a Linux zealot, the specs are beautiful. Both the box and the specs are meaningless in the classicist sense. Had the original poster asked "Does 'packaging' feed my children? Does it make me more money?" etc. then he would have been a classicist thinker. But he's as hopelessly romantic as those of us who 'ooh' and 'aah' at Apple's packaging.
How can you be so sure about that one? The G5 currently is running 8 fans I believe in that tower. What makes you think that they will be able to drop this processor into a PowerBook and keep it cool?
-- No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
Wait till the CDs warp because a UPS truck was parked too long in the sun baking the black box.
Re:That box!
by
dasmegabyte
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Excellent Pirsig mental diarrhea. For those of you who don't think reading is strictly for masochists, here's an attempt at simplifying this post:
True Quality is not about simply delivering a nice product. It is a process which does not stop throughout the products' design and manufacture. As soon as you begin to cut corners, you begin to whittle away at this.
"We don't need the nice box," you say. That's cool, and probably true. You don't really need rounded edges or a shiny back, either. And you don't need the Chicago font, or a glowbing blue backlight, or a hold button. Fact is, 99% of the unit is in the short run inconsequential to the production of a digital music player.
But in the long run, it's these inconsequential elements that make the difference between a truly great machine and a half assed one. Really fine details smooth over the parts that may not work so great. There is a lot more leeway given, hence the Apple fanatic's uncanny ability to look over some of the stupid shit Apple does. After all, quality is a combination of all the factors of a product...here's something that looks well made, sounds well made, feels well made and comes with well made accessories in a well made box. At what point does the box start mattering? Well, it's the first thing you see at the check-out when you're about to shell out a bunch of cash for the thing, or it's the first thing you see when it comes in the mail. It's very reassuring.
Besides, the box is at most 5% of the cost of the final product. If you don't include it, you either reduce the price of the product by 5% or increase your margin by a similar amount. If additional sales as a result of the cool box are more than that 5%, and don't come at the expense of people willing to buy the thing if it were ONLY 5% cheaper, it's worthwhile to keep it. And I guarantee you that's not the case with the iPod.
I think in that case the HOLY *(#% THAT'S FAST reaction outweighs the ooooo shiny instinct.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The G5 box has no ratsnest of cables inside.
What do you care what's on inside - or on the outside, for that matter?
Performance. Raw floating point crushing performance is the only thing that counts. Period. Anything else is just someone's desperate justification for buying over-expensive hardware and software.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
mod parent up
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Magic?
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I care because I might want to install something new in the machine, and I hate futzing around with cables. Plus, the airflow is better without them, so the machine runs cooler and thus more reliably. Reliability doesn't count? Usability doesn't count? Only if you're running a rendering farm or something.
Besides, floating point performance basically matches Intel's at the same price, so it's not over-expensive either.
Leather seats don't make a car go any faster. A sunroof doesn't improve the fuel economy. A walnut-trimmed interior doesn't help the tires grip the road better. But when you put them all together, they're all signs of a quality automotive experience.
Taking the analogy one step further -- there are people in the world content to drive around in Chevys, and there are people in the world who drive around in Jaguars. Both accomplish the same essential tasks. But one does it with style.
There are people content to compute with Wintel boxes, and there are people in the world who use Apples. Both accomplish the same essential tasks. But one does it with style.
My M3 looks better than your fugly Mustang. It also is built better. The tolerances are greater, more money was spent designing every little detail so that every time I use the turn signal, or shift gears, or even get in the damn thing, I enjoy it. Oh yeah, and it will smoke the Mustang any day of the week, too. Some people are willing to pay for quality.
The rest of you can suffer with your POS american cars and beige box PC's that cost you $5 less but don't provide you half the power, usability or elegance of the Mac.
Here's a thought. Most PC lusers don't know the first thing about Macs, they've never used one, they don't even know that there's a version of Office for the Mac for god's sake. OTOH, every Mac user out there has used a PC. Ever wonder why nobody CHOOSES to switch to a PC? They only switch because they're forced to do so.. and those numbers are made up by the PC users who are intelligent enough to try out a Mac, and end up swiching themselves. But of course the numbers aren't great because of the aforementioend ignorance of the Mac.
Oh, and I am willing to pay $10 extra for my computer to be shipped in a nice box. Not because I want the nice box, but because it's the hallmark of a company that designs everything thoughtfully. If I went with a computer maker who cheaped out on the box, it would also be a computer maker that cheaped out on components and got everything made for the lowest possible cost. And honestly, we ALL make too much money to not spend the extra few bucks to get something decent. (This is not to say that if you're in the market to buy a $600 PC that you can afford a $3000 mac, but if you're looking at a $2600 PC, you owe it to yourself to pay a few extra bucks to get a quality product instead).
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No, "Ooohhh, shiny!" is one of the rewards Apple's customers receive in exchange for their money.
I for one bought a 12" PowerBook because I needed a light, full-featured, unix machine, and a replacement for my aging windows box. It fills both roles nicely. The fact that it's goddamn sexy was far from my mind when I bought it, but became very apparent to me after using it for a just a day.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What does packaging have got to do with anything?
As a customer, the well-designed packaging indicates to me that this company wants my business, is not trying to insult my intellegence, is not trying to shove other products down my throat, and pays attention to details.
Would you understand the importance more at the other extreme? Would you like to do business with a company that packages it's computers in, say, old burlap sacks that may or may not contain moldy fruit?
Does "packaging" encode your OGGs or AVIs any faster? No?
Does the packaging make it any slower? No. Oh darn, iTunes can only encode my music 8x faster than it can read it from the CD! Oh how I wish it would go faster, so I could troll Slashdot with takes of my computer's incredible performance!
Does it get you higher score on Seti? No it doesn't? Does it compile Linux kernel any faster, no it doesn't.
Why the fuck should I care about a SETI score? Why the fuck should I care how fast it compiles a kernel? I've got better things to do with my time than search for alien messages and compile things that I have no reason to compile.
It's not about how much time the computer takes to do things, it's how much of my time it takes for me to do things. It's not like I'm sitting there waiting for iTunes to rip a CD. It doesn't matter if it takes five minutes or ten minutes, either way I'm spending that time reading my email or working on my thesis while it happily does it's work in the background. When it ejects the CD, I pop in another and keep working. I don't care how long it takes as long as it gets done in a reasonable amount of time without much effort or attention on my part.
Fucking PC-moron. Get a life instead of bitching about what kind of computer other people like to use.
Taking the analogy one step further -- there are people in the world content to drive around in Chevys, and there are people in the world who drive around in Jaguars. Both accomplish the same essential tasks. But one does it with style.
More correctly, there are people in the world content to drive around in Chevys, and there are people in the world who drive around in Jaguars. Both accomplish the same essential tasks. But one does it sensibly, and the other has a small penis.
-- Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Wow, I didn't know you Chevy drivers were so poorly hung.
Re:That box!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
"Trifles make perfection...but perfection is no trifle." -Michaelangelo
Because for the 8 fans, you are looking at the version running at 1.6-2.0GHz. The 1.2GHz model, aimed at blades (which are basically laptops without a screen and a battery), uses a cool 19W, 3W less that the G4s currently used in laptops.
Oh, and don't forget that the 8 fans are not the kind of high speed delta fans used by overclockers. They are slow rotation and relatively quiet, since using lots of slow fans produces the same airflow (or even better, since it's less bottlenecked) but less noise than one fast loud fan. Oh, and if you look at the case design then you will see that they are not all for cooling the CPU, some are for the drives etc.
So does this mean that in another 3 weeks they will be announcing their new G6 processor developments?
Nah. But now that we know IBM is making the chip, that there IS a G5, we can all start speculating on WHEN the G6 will come out, if it will be 128-bit IBM/AMD joint venture, and if the beleaguered company can survive until then without the education market.
--
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
considering how long we've been stuck on this damn i386 chipset (32bit processor), i very much doubt we'll see any such 128 cpu anytime soon.
Apple's Market Share
by
wwhsgrad2002
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
The only thing that prevents Apple from grabbing a serious share of the market are their prices.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
tinkertank
·
· Score: 1
and their lack of machine stability
-- ___Abuse of power comes as no surprise___
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
DavidinAla
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And the only thing that prevents BMW from grabbing a serious share of the market are THEIR prices. While there are certainly exceptions to the norm, you TEND to get what you pay for.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
SirSlud
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
No, its that consumers still don't 'value' OSes at their true value. Just because Ladas were cheaper than Hondas didn't mean Ladas outsold. Why? Cause people knew Ladas sucked shit, and Hondas didn't.
If Microsoft advertising ever stops drowning everybody out and they stop forcing computer distributors to *only* offer their OS, then people still start to gain a little more visibility. It really wasn't all that long ago that people knew Amiga, Commadore, Apple, IBM existed.. and we'll see such a day again. When the average consumer understands that the OS market does offer a few choices, and that actually choosing a better OS is a money-saving decision, Apple will do better.
I know of at least two people recently who bought a whole new computer cause they fucked up their Windows installation and figured it'd be easier to buy a new machine. This is an excellant example of how little choice consumers feel they have in the OS world. Who the hell buys something, watches it break from every day use, and goes out to buy the exact same thing? Obviously, somebody who feels that there isn't much else to buy.
Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM, and nobody ever felt alone suffering through Windows problems. When more of your friends have Apple, you'll be more likely to see the value of spending more on a computer (and subsequently buying computers/OS upgrades less often).. being a consumer is about being educated to make strong decisions. Ask anybody why they bought Windows today, and 95% of the time, the person will answer along the lines of "What else is there" or "Because of work/school/friend/game/application, I didn't have any other choice". 4% will say something along the lines of "Well, its the most popular OS, so how bad can it be?".. your usual leader-worshippers.. the same folks who equate financial success with product superiority (tho engineers know better.) The last 1% actually like Windows, but they also happen to be the 1% of the population that exhibits a distinct interest in sadomasochism.
And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do.. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.
-- "Old man yells at systemd"
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Fred+IV
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
I know of at least two people recently who bought a whole new computer cause they fucked up their Windows installation and figured it'd be easier to buy a new machine. This is an excellant example of how little choice consumers feel they have in the OS world. Who the hell buys something, watches it break from every day use, and goes out to buy the exact same thing? Obviously, somebody who feels that there isn't much else to buy.
I'm sorry, but anyone who buys a new computer because they screwed up the configuraton of the old is either fucking retarded or has more money than sense. In either case, I don't think these are good examples of typical consumers.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Arker
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do.. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.
$1,000? How do you figure that? E-macs (not to be confused with emacs, although it is included) start at $699 last I checked.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Why not? These people know shit-all about computers (definately the majority of computer purchasers) and have stable, mid-level white collar jobs (probably the majority of comptuer purchasers.)
And while maybe most people wouldn't just up-and-buy a new computer, remember that their computers were 3 years old. Many people think that this is a reasonable 'life span' for a computer, thanks to MSes 2 year upgrade cycle. People feel its easier to throw out a Windows installation than fix it. Unless you hang with computer saavy people (I suspect this is true of most/.ers), you'll find scores of people who believe this to be true, which says a lot about how convenient it is to keep Windows tuned and in decent working order.
-- "Old man yells at systemd"
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Redundant?
Go back to smoking that Apple mod crack. I should know better than to post in one of these unless I follow the party line.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
please qualify your troll. Our powermacs are stable as can be. Sounds like you are an amd fanboi.
Well, I guess if they're too stupid to reinstall an OS, they're also stupid enough to buy a new PC when the OS needs an upgrade or when Microsoft releases a new OS.
I'm not knocking Apple, I love my iBook, I'm just not as cynical about the typical user as you are. Maybe I need to spend some time in tech support or something.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Ask anybody why they bought Windows today..."
in my experience most will say "whats windows?" its not so much that everyone worships Microsoft, but more like they dont even recognize the OS as being anything but a hard-wired component of every pc.
as a matter of fact, many people think "windows" is a software package that includes word, excel, access and powerpoint.
the os has always been transparent to them, if the machine locks up & the pointer stops moving their first reaction is to buy a new mouse, ok?
im sure the same could be said for many mac owners.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
People actually BUY windows? I thought everyone used it cause it was free... like music.
And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do.. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.
That's the best part... once you stop using windows for a while, you won't have *feign* ignorance because you really won't know shit about whatever current thing is fucking everything up, or want to. and your brain will start to purge all the painful stuff, leaving room to store useful knowledge. and then you can smile smugly and say, "Yeah, bob, i dunno. I haven't used windows for a year now, so i haven't the faintest idea what's wrong with your laptop."
There's nothing wrong with elitism when you're right.
Have you actually had to use one of those bargain-basement computer systems? They're torturously slow, plagued with instability problems, and in general are something I'd rather not have to deal with on a regular basis.
-- Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Or, maybe the fact that Apple doesn't license their computer for others to manufacture. PC's came from IBM, remember? Now we have more cometition, such as gateway, dell etc. If apple did the same, they would probably hold more than 1/2 of the market, easily. Also, they do sell computers with alternate OSs, just that nobody's buying them. If a user can screw up Windows XP, how do you expect them to even install linux?
If Microsoft advertising ever stops drowning everybody out and they stop forcing computer distributors to *only* offer their OS, then people still start to gain a little more visibility.
People need to at least get this little nugget right. Microsoft cuts people like Dell a deal where instead of paying like $80 per OEM copy of Windows, they can instead pay $30 per copy if they agree to pay that for each computer they ship. This is different than the old deal where there was no price cut involved, just bullying - that got MS in court and they had to cut it out.
Now what's happening is that MS is cutting people like Dell a deal in order to save the hassle of checking to see if every PC sold has Windows. In theory this might make it easier to sell Linux since to sell five PC's with Windows under the old deal it costs $400 in OS licensing, but to sell four with Windows and one with a free Linux it costs $150 in licensing fees. In practice however, Dell still basically views that $30 OS hit on the license they don't actually sell as a loss, so they throw up barriers to keeping people from being able to get Linux. You won't be able to remove Windows from a PC through their website, but you can call them up and make it happen if you're persistent enough.
Anyone from Dell who tells you they can't put Linux on your PC "because Microsoft won't let them" is either lying to you or uninformed.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sure, but BMW's are only 2-3x the Honda competition. G5's are around 10x the price of a really good PC (including monitor).
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Umm who the hell do you buy your computers from, some guy off the back of his pickup truck?
I've bought nine laptops in the past year, and every single one of them came with WindowsXP CD's, two dells, a toshiba, an HP, and several Sony's. The Sony re-install CD doesn't look like a standard windows CD, its silver and says sony OS install on it, but its the same damn thing. The crapware sony installs is on their 2nd set of CDs.
Now only 3 of the computers came with CD-ROM drives, but that's a different story altogether.
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
stephentyrone
·
· Score: 1
I bought my last laptop from Compaq (when it was still separate from HP) and the one before that from HP.
They all came with an "installation CD" that just copied an image from one of the pre-installed Windows hard-drive partitions to the main partition and rebooted the machine.
And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do.. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.
Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM...until micro-channel came out.:)
The last 1% actually like Windows, but they also happen to be the 1% of the population that exhibits a distinct interest in sadomasochism.
Hey! I'm sado-masochist and I highly resent that remark! I use BeOS!
-B
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I think that.NET will be a boon to apple. I'm currently developing a component suite for.NET and when it becomes available for the G5, I may just jump ship from Wintel. I'll need to keep my old boxes for compatibility testing (theory often does not match reality), but I'd love to be able to Develop on something other than Windows.
Of course there is a Linux version coming out, too (Mono), but due to intellectual property rights, it won't be as compatable as Apple's version, from what I gather...
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Maybe they run Windows because they might actually use their computers in a business environment. Maybe they don't want to pay an extra grand for a pretty box from the most autocratic company around (who of course has brainwashed all of you into thinking that it is your choice). Maybe they understand security enough not to be bothered by some script kiddie's worm. Maybe they laugh . ..
Have you actually had to use one of those bargain-basement computer systems? They're torturously slow, plagued with instability problems, and in general are something I'd rather not have to deal with on a regular basis.
I've used them, yes, one of my coworkers got one a few months ago. It's working great. Stable as a rock, and reasonably fast. In short, you're trolling and/or you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
My father has a Dell Dimension 4100. When he needed to reinstall Windows ME, he not only had to get it from this special partition, but he had to call Dell to get instructions on how to access it.
And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do.. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.
Now, thats the REAL problem with our line of work! Nobody will pay you one cent for you solving their problems with their computers, but if you were a carpenter they would pay you to put up a roof in your spare time.
I guess this is mainly because of geeks with poor social skills, using their tech knowledge to trade with social acceptence.
I know it's not all about the money, but still, don't you feel just a little bit buttf*cked when spending an entire evening fixing your neighbours computer only reciving a soda and perhaps a meal, all the while knowing that he/she will fuck it up in a week, and you could have been paid good old cool cash if you were a mechanic/carpenter fixing his/her car/roof?!?
-H
Re:Apple's Market Share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
but if you were a carpenter they would pay you to put up a roof in your spare time
That's the difference between building and repairing. Yeah anyone would expect to pay someone for building something, but just about no one expects to do things like pay a friend who: * is a mechanic and fixed that odd noise your car makes * is an electrician and fixed that weird blinking problem with the lights * is a computer guy and fixed that windows error
For it to be a good analogy to the IT world there would be many car manufacturers but they'd all get their steering wheels, gearshifts, engine and power train from one one company. One car manufacture would choose to make the entire thing all themselves, and a large dispersed team of engineers would be building their own steering wheels, gearshifts, engine and power train in their spare time 'cos they didn't like the "standard" one.
It just doesn't fit:P
-- Don't blame me - this.sig had steal me written all over it.
I figured this was probably true, but the post above was too easy an opportunity for a vi joke (not that it was funny...I'm just that lame).
...if you're that much of a masochist feel free.
I indulge daily. In fact, I even run Emacs in VIPER mode, and have "set editing-mode vi" set for my bash command line! Having learned only one set of commands, I can be very productive in each environment (it makes using Windows a pain in the rear, though--fortunately, Windows doesn't matter).
I thought it was actually kind of funny... not a real but guster but I cracked a smile when I read it.
Isn't vi available on windows? I'm pretty sure it is... of course. Here you go, pick your poison.
Of course you can also install emacs on windows, and run it in viper mode, in case you ever come to your senses you could then just change modes instead of having to download another editor.;)
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Have you actually had to use one of those bargain-basement computer systems?
Yes. I used an eMac all year at college.
They're torturously slow,
Well, the POV-Ray rendering speeds and the time to compile X11 from fink were pretty slow, but for most other stuff it was plenty fast.
plagued with instability problems,
Yeah, it panicked maybe 3 times all year, but it turned out this was Norton's POS antivirus software which Harvard recommended... I uninstalled that and it hasn't crashed since. My uptimes were usually a couple weeks, generally broken up by tired nights when I got pissed at the (admittedly loud) fan and the obnoxious "breathing" power LED.
and in general are something I'd rather not have to deal with on a regular basis.
Hmm. Different strokes, I guess.
PS: if you, like some Harvard admins, take a first-generation iMac, retrofit it with OSX 10.1, add a poorly-setup netboot image, and add a bunch of third-party hacks in the name of "security" (despite having isolated users and a netboot image that refreshes every reboot), then yes, it is pretty much unbearable.
-- I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
Well, actually, I was referring to bargain-basement PCs (Wintel machines). I happily use my Mac everyday and have no problem with it. My comment was directed toward such computers as Emachines, ultra-low-priced Dells, etc. I'm much more content with the performance of the lower-priced Apples, which tend to be a better value in my book.
-- Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
Re:I want one!
by
jellomizer
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips. And many flaws from long term use will be helped fixed (like the PowerBook paint peeling). Also you can hopefully get some more real benchmarks and not from people who are guessing. As well as seeing how people like them after a year. Lilke most things with computers never try to get version x.00 Try to get the next version up. That way they can fix many of the issues, that have not been expected.
-- If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
currently available configurations
by
kaan
·
· Score: 5, Informative
1.6GHz PowerPC G5 800MHz frontside bus 512K L2 cache 256MB DDR333 128-bit SDRAM Expandable to 4GB SDRAM 80GB Serial ATA SuperDrive Three PCI Slots NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory 56K internal modem
$2,399.00
1.8GHz PowerPC G5 900MHz frontside bus 512K L2 cache 512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM Expandable to 8GB SDRAM 160GB Serial ATA SuperDrive Three PCI-X Slots NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory 56K internal modem
Re:currently available configurations
by
pdxmac
·
· Score: 1
Interesting that they list the inclusion of a modem but no ethernet. I'm sure they come with gigabit ethernet, but clearly that's not as exciting as that nifty 56K internal modem.
Re:currently available configurations
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dell Store
$1,199.00
3.2GHz P4 533MHz frontside bus 512K L2 cache 512MB DDR333 128-bit SDRAM 120GB ATA/133 NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 128MB DDR video memory
Re:currently available configurations
by
thung226
·
· Score: 1
Man, this thing should really f***ing fly when you use that 56K modem (?)
--
-n-
Re:currently available configurations
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Oh yay! A 100 dollar video card in a computer over 2 grand.
Re:currently available configurations
by
jandrese
·
· Score: 1
Interestingly enough, Ethernet is now considered so standard that it isn't even worth mentioning in the features list anymore. Those modems are still somewhat optional though. Yes, it comes with Gigabit ethernet, as well as Firewire 400/800, USB2 (High speed), and of course optical digital audio. Naturally it has 802.11g, DVD burning, and all of the other standard Apple features as well.
--
I read the internet for the articles.
Re:currently available configurations
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I agree Apple does put shit video card in their computers. They are always the cheapie version, but at the same time Apple's aren't really gaming platforms so I don't think it matters that much.
Oh sure there are some games available for Macs, but really Apple's target audience remains education and graphics designers who don't need the extra 3D graphics horsepower. For them its the cpu that really matters.
Re:currently available configurations
by
addaon
·
· Score: 1
Okay, let's try this again. Get the 800MHz bus, so the Dell has some chance, however small, of competing with the G5. Add Gigabit ethernet, the modem (well, you're better off subtracting it from the Mac, but let's be fair), a decent keyboard, XP Professional (still not nearly as good as OSX, but at least usable), Microsoft Works (I won't say that Appleworks is as good as Word, but many people I know use it regularly), Microsoft Digital Media Edition Plus! Pack (it's shit, but it represents iPhoto, iMovie, and the other great OS X software free)... and you get $2748 (no monitor), compared to $2399 for the fast single-processor mac...
i'm still broke from the last apple i bought.. and now they have to make another one.. i can only donate sperm once a week.. that's a lot of clown punching for a cheese grater..
Rumors for powerbook?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
anyone has any info?
Re:Rumors for powerbook?
by
XplosiveX
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Digit Magazine has rumors of the G5 powerbook showing up in February 2004. Source
In What Quantity?
by
TPIRman
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The story is pretty useless until we get an idea of the quantity of shipping G5s we're talking about here. I'm betting it's just a trickle. When the PowerBook G4s first came out, the backorder queue remained quite long for weeks after Apple claimed the 'Books were "shipping," because the actual number of units being shipped was relatively small. I hope there's a flood of G5s making their way from Apple's factory in Taiwan, but from previous experience, I bet that isn't the case.
Read this:
Over 100,000 Ordered Since June 23 Introduction
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT= 104&STORY=/www/story/08-18-2003/0002002429&EDA TE=
Re:In What Quantity?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Apple doesn't own anything in Taiwan. They outsource to that place... it's kinda more like a cooperative venture with another company. The G5's will ship from Elk Grove, California. Trust me. (:
I ordered a 1.8ghz custom configured model within 24-36 hours of the official announcement. I just checked my order status and it is still listed as "on or before August 29th." This was upgraded about 3-4 weeks ago from September 3rd.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
Trigun
·
· Score: 1
Somehow I doubt that they will downgrade their platform, especially with Big Blue ready to churn out the PPC 970 chips like crazy. Apple hardware is going to become commodity stuff, just like wintel crap.
beware the differences between the 1.6 & the 1
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Okay, I just noticed this today (forgive me for being slow), but there are 2 potentially-important differences between the 1.6GHz machine and the 1.8GHz machine:
1) The 1.6 only uses DDR333 memory, not DDR400 (I dunno if it can make use of DDR400 if you replace the DDR333 it comes with). The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!). I'm wondering if the mobo can handle some Mushkin 2-2-2 PC3200 RAM if I got it? 2) The 1.6 can 'only' use up to 4GB of memory, vs 8GB for the 1.8 and 2.0 machines.
FYI if either of these things bugs you, be warned. Shop smart, shop...S-Mart!
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
alien666
·
· Score: 1
"Troll" is giving the parent post too much credit. Doesn't even have a good hook. "Retarded" would be much more appropriate moderation. Please add "retarded" to the moderation options!
Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Soon we will have 64-bit laptops.
Now, some people may feel that 64 bits is not needed; that 32 bits is fine. However, certain hi-end rendering applications are already feeling the confines of a 32-bit application; since gaming uses rendering technology, games will also be feeling the limits of 32-bits in the foreseeable future.
Another application of 64 bits: Certain cryptographic algorithms (Whirlpool hash, Tiger hash, and the Hasty Pudding Cipher) are designed for 64-bit systems; these systems perform poorly on 32-bit systems.
The G5 is the first 64-bit computer-dummy-desktop available; in particular, high-quality laptops need to be produced in large numbers, and must be computer-dummy friendly. Hence, this will be the first time a high quality (small, light; tadpoles are neither small nor light) 64-bit laptop will be available.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
raverbuzzy
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
MyHair
·
· Score: 1
Well hooray for all the "computer-dummie-desktop" people who need "certain hi-end rendering applications" and better performance on their Whirlpool, Tiger and Hasty Pudding Cryptographic hases/ciphers. (European translation: replace "hooray" with "bully".)
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"computer-dummy friendly"
These people are not going to be doing " hi-end rendering applications" or "cryptographic algorithms" on their G5 laptops. Get real.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
um, opteron, AMD's 64 bit chip has been out for about 6 months now, mind you boards were pretty tough to find that first couple months...
its all pointless as neither side has a 64bit OS just yet
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
torpor
·
· Score: 1
I can't wait until we can have portable 64-bit processors around, personally.
I know tons of good uses for an extra 32-bits worth of information for each of my existing 32-bit data structures... or at least one really really good one.
-- ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets.
--
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Soon we will have 64-bit laptops.
.. will this mean my Internet will go faster?
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
I did address them in my orignal posting; in particular, the tadpoles weigh more than seven pounds. The portable macs are in the 5-7 pound range; the one powerbook that weighs as much as a tadpole has a 17" screen.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
However, certain hi-end rendering applications are already feeling the confines of a 32-bit application; since gaming uses rendering technology, games will also be feeling the limits of 32-bits in the foreseeable future.
This is easily, far and away, the stupidest thing I've ever read on Slashdot, ever.
Certain cryptographic algorithms (Whirlpool hash, Tiger hash, and the Hasty Pudding Cipher) are designed for 64-bit systems; these systems perform poorly on 32-bit systems.
Wrong. These algorithms use 64-bit words. It doesn't matter whether the computer is a 64-bit one or a 32-bit one or a 16-bit one as long as it can do calculations with 64-bit words in a single instruction.
In fact, these algorithms could run twice as fast on a Power Mac G4, because it can do two 64-bit operations at once using its 128-bit registers.
Also: you're ignoring the fact that Apple specifically said in a public statement months ago that the G5 would not be coming to the PowerBook line any time soon.
In other words, STFU please thanks.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is easily, far and away, the stupidest thing I've ever read on Slashdot, ever.
Speak for yourself; people who say things like this in on-line debates have weak arguments (and usually emotional problems)
These algorithms use 64-bit words.
Which requires a 64-bit system to effectively use. Various SMID solutions (MMX, AltiVec/whatever-IBM-calles-it) are specialized, suffer from poor compiler support, and require assembley programming to be well used.
Apple specifically said in a public statement months ago that the G5 would not be coming to the PowerBook line any time soon.
Well, Apple does need to continue selling their current inventory of G4 powerboooks; they are trying to avoid the Obsourne effect.
STFU please thanks
In other words, your arguments are weak and you need to resort to personal insults to make your point.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Which requires a 64-bit system to effectively use.
Nope. Are you unclear on the definition of "64-bit system?" A 64-bit system uses 64-bit memory addressing. Period. That's the beginning and the end of the discussion.
The PowerPC G4, a 32-bit processor, has 64-bit double-precision floating point registers. It can do 64-bit arithmetic in a single clock cycle. It is not a 64-bit processor.
Various SMID solutions (MMX, AltiVec/whatever-IBM-calles-it) are specialized, suffer from poor compiler support, and require assembley programming to be well used.
None of these things is true. AltiVec is not specialized; it's quite general purpose. Any arithmetic operation that can be done on an integer of any size can be done on a 128-bit-wide vector of integers. Libraries like BLAS extend this functionality to ALL general-purpose mathematical operations, including vector dot and cross products and higher-order matrix arithmetic.
GCC has complete support for the AltiVec instruction set. You can also access it through FORTRAN if you prefer, but it works very well from plain old C.
And I've never even SEEN an example of assembler programming using AltiVec. It's all done in C and FORTRAN.
Well, Apple does need to continue selling their current inventory of G4 powerboooks; they are trying to avoid the Obsourne effect.
Or, far more likely, they're telling you the truth. The G5 is not coming to the PowerBook any time soon.
In other words, your arguments are weak and you need to resort to personal insults to make your point.
Whatever, dude. I'm right and you're wrong, and you're a fucking moron. Whining about my choice of words isn't gonna change that.
STFU now please thanks.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
pmz
·
· Score: 1
Now (64bit sparc laptop)
While I'm sure the UltraSPARC-based laptops are nice, they are constrained to 650MHz CPUs, which makes them very useful for Solaris shops but not terribly useful as regular personal computers (for the price).
Also, I can't understand why they come with a fingerpad instead of one of those mouse-sticks (I just find the touch-pads very very clumsy).
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Now, some people may feel that 64 bits is not needed; that 32 bits is fine. However, certain hi-end rendering applications are already feeling the confines of a 32-bit application; since gaming uses rendering technology, games will also be feeling the limits of 32-bits in the foreseeable future.
I thought I read that 64 bits will let game developers do things more precisely, letting them create more and more photo realistic worlds. My thought is great just what we need, instead of spending more time enjoying ourselves in the real world we can become more enslaved in a digital one that looks just like it. Flame me if you want, I don't fucking care.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A 64-bit system uses 64-bit memory addressing. Period
No, a 64-bit system has 64-bit integers. A 32-bit system has 32-bit integers.
Any arithmetic operation that can be done on an integer of any size can be done on a 128-bit-wide vector of integers.
Nope. One example: Load a 64-bit vector from memory, indexed addressed (because we need to perform a table lookup). Not two 128-bit vectors; a single 64-bit vector.
GCC has complete support for the AltiVec instruction set
And does GCC know when to use AltiVec operations and when to use ordinary 32-bit integer operations, and when to switch over, without needing special compiler directives in the C source?
I didn't think so.
And I've never even SEEN an example of assembler programming using AltiVec
You haven't looked hard enough.
The G5 is not coming to the PowerBook any time soon.
Depends on you definition of soon. It will be out within two years; I seriously doubt there will be an x86 64-bit laptop in the same time frame.
I'm right and you're wrong, and you're a fucking moron. Whining about my choice of words isn't gonna change that.
You are acting in a very aggressive, hateful, and in an extremely unpleasant manner. People who act like this online have psychological problems which are better addressed by seeing a therapist instead of acting rudely online.
In other words, you need psychological help. Seriously: For you own good, see a therapist. The fact you need to resort to cuss words in our debate means that there is something seriously wrong with you.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No, a 64-bit system has 64-bit integers. A 32-bit system has 32-bit integers.
You're confused. Pointer, not integer. The size of "int" is implementation-specific and has nothing to do with the underlying hardware architecture. On an SGI Origin, for example, you can compile your program to use either 32- or 64-bit ints. Does that mean it's a 64-bit system when running a 64-bit-int program and a 32-bit system when running a 32-bit-int program? Of course not.
The size of the int (or short, or long, or long long) is irrelevant. The size of the pointer defines the "bitness" of a system.
Load a 64-bit vector from memory, indexed addressed (because we need to perform a table lookup).
That's not a vector operation, you twit! Vector operations are ATOMIC. You perform a vector operation on the ENTIRE vector AT ONCE. You load a vector of shorts (for example) and increment them all with a single instruction, or you load two vectors and multiply them, or whatever. They're atomic operations. By definition, the individual elements in a vector are not addressable!
See? This has more to do with your IGNORANCE than it does with anything else.
And does GCC know when to use AltiVec operations and when to use ordinary 32-bit integer operations, and when to switch over, without needing special compiler directives in the C source?
Um... what? Look, moron, here's some C source showing you how AltiVec works:
vector signed long vec_2sComp (vector signed long x) {
vector signed long one = (vector signed long) (1);
x = vec_nor (x, x);
x = vec_add (x, one);
return x; }
That function takes the 2's compliment of a vector of signed longs. Get it? GCC knows when to use AltiVec operations because you TELL IT TO. That's what vector computing is about. Moron.
It will be out within two years
Put that number back in your ass where you got it.
You are acting in a very aggressive, hateful, and in an extremely unpleasant manner.
Fuck you, idiot.
People who act like this online have psychological problems which are better addressed by seeing a therapist instead of acting rudely online.
Maybe, maybe not. So? Does it make you feel better about yourself to imply that the people who criticize you are somehow defective?
Two can play your little game, Sigmund.
Seriously: For you own good, see a therapist.
Bored now.
The fact you need to resort to cuss words in our debate means that there is something seriously wrong with you.
Fuck shit piss ass boobies cunt doodie.
Still doesn't change the fact that you are WRONG about EVERYTHING you have said here. (1. graphics processing [which doesn't even HAPPEN in the CPU for the most part] benefits from 64-bit memory addressing; 2. cryptographic algorithms benefit from 64-bit memory addressing; 3. 64-bit computing means 64-bit integers; 4. altivec is flawed because you can't bitwise address the elements in a vector register; 5. altivec requires assembly language implementation; 5. GCC doesn't understand altivec; 6. there will be a G5 powerbook in two years.)
You're a moron. Please STFU now. Like now. Kay? Thanks.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The size of "int" is implementation-specific and has nothing to do with the underlying hardware architecture.
Have you ever programmed in assembly language? It doesn't sound like it. Yes, gcc has a "long long", but it is dog-slow unless the underlying chip can handle it.
The size of the pointer defines the "bitness" of a system.
Oh really? Then how do you explain that the 8-bit Commodore 64s have 16-bit addresses? And that there has never been a mainstream processor with a bigger integer (vector units aside) than pointer?
Here is a clue: Take a basic CS course which exaplins how the bus architecture works.
[Context: A 64-bit laptop will come out within two years]
Put that number back in your ass where you got it.
I will gladly do so: In August of 2005, if there is no 64-bit Apple portable available. A two-year timeline for a given end-user desktop to be available in laptop form is more than generous.
[You are wrong about other things, but I have better things than to deal with your ignorance right now]
you twit! [...] your IGNORANCE [...] Moron. [...] Fuck you, idiot. [...]
Sigh...
If you work and like like this to anyone at work, you will very quickly get fired. I remember working for an ISP and seeing people fired who acted like you online.
If you act like this at school, you will have disciplinary action performed against you.
This kind of behavior is unacceptable in modern society; it can result in you losing you job, getting expelled from school, and getting hurt in physical fights.
You need to learn some manners.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
instead of spending more time enjoying ourselves in the real world we can become more enslaved in a digital one that looks just like it
I agree with your general sentiment.
The appeal of video games is that people can pretend to be people they are not; instead of being a homely computer geek, they can pretend to be a valient warrior or a dashing maiden.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Have you ever programmed in assembly language?
Sure, but not for a long time.
Yes, gcc has a "long long", but it is dog-slow unless the underlying chip can handle it.
Right. But that has nothing to do with "64-bitness".
Then how do you explain that the 8-bit Commodore 64s have 16-bit addresses?
Dude, I'm not going to even bother googling to see if you're making that up. God, could you have thought of a less relevant example?
And that there has never been a mainstream processor with a bigger integer (vector units aside) than pointer?
No idea. Does it matter? Again, you're confusing compiler/runtime implementation decisions (sizeof(int)) with hardware features (sizeof(void*)). Silly rabbit.
Here is a clue: Take a basic CS course which exaplins how the bus architecture works.
Here's a clue: the last time I was in a CS course, Reagan was still in the White House. Grow up.
[Context: A 64-bit laptop will come out within two years]
Context: whether it will or it won't, you're absolutely pulling shit out of your butt here.
[You are wrong about other things, but I have better things than to deal with your ignorance right now]
Good one. Let's have another.
If you work and like like this to anyone at work, you will very quickly get fired.
True. If I talked like that to my children or my wife or my mother, I'd be in a world of hurt, too. You are not, last time I checked, my child, wife, mother, or coworker. You are a fucking idiot on a fucking message board. Deal with it.
If you act like this at school, you will have disciplinary action performed against you.
Actually, no. Well, let me revise that statement. Not at any real school. There are probably some bullshit schools out there that try to punish people for using words from some verboten list, but this is not the standard by which we should draw comparisons.
This kind of behavior is unacceptable in modern society
Wrong, twathead. It's perfectly acceptable in many contexts. Like this one, fuckwit.
it can result in you losing you job, getting expelled from school, and getting hurt in physical fights
None of which is even remotely relevant here. Cocksucker.
You need to learn some manners.
You, on the other hand, need to learn not to open your fucking mouth when you don't know what you're talking about, since you're so morally offended ("Well, I never!") by the thought of being flamed.
STFU. Now. Dammit.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If I talked like that to my children or my wife or my mother, I'd be in a world of hurt, too.
Exactly.
There are probably some bullshit schools out there that try to punish people for using words from some verboten list
U.C. Berkeley has a policy against using "fighting language"; your potty mouth would get you expelled there. Most people do not consider Berkeley "some bullshit school".
It's perfectly acceptable in many contexts. Like this one, fuckwit.
No, it is not. Let me give you a clue: My original post has been moderated up to 5; indicating that the community here approved of my original post. Not one of your rude posts has been moderated up; if you had something meaningful to say in reply to me, you would have been moderated up. You were not.
I am anonymous because I want to make sure people like you have no information you can attack me with. I wish people like you were not in the world; it would allow me to post to Slashdot with my real name.
Anynonymity only works in places where people like you are banned.
You, on the other hand, need to learn not to open your fucking mouth when you don't know what you're talking about, since you're so morally offended ("Well, I never!") by the thought of being flamed.
Are you familiar with Robert A. Heinlein? One of the things he said is that the decay of society is the erosions of manners and decency. You have no manners. You have no decency.
You could have replied by documenting and pointing out errors in a civil manner. Instead, you, out of the blue, start acting like a teo year old with a potty mouth.
Is this OK? No. You would have been moderated down if more moderators bothered to read posts rated at zero.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
U.C. Berkeley has a policy against using "fighting language"
Figures.
your potty mouth would get you expelled there
At which point they would get sued, and the out-of-court settlement would be sufficient to buy a person four years at a REAL university.
Most people do not consider Berkeley "some bullshit school".
Quite the contrary. Berkeley is the dictionary definition of "some bullshit school."
My original post has been moderated up to 5
Dude, this is SLASHDOT. It's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying NOTHING.
But don't let that stop you. Take your +5 and hang it on the wall. You momma will be so proud.
indicating that the community here approved of my original post
What community? A group of people who have never seen each other cannot be accurately described as a community.
Not one of your rude posts has been moderated up
Nor should they have been. This ain't a popularity contest, boy.
if you had something meaningful to say in reply to me, you would have been moderated up
Your faith in the moderation system is laughable. I'm laughing at it right now. It's funny.
Anynonymity only works in places where people like you are banned.
I'm pretty sure that wasn't even a sentence, Berkeley boy.
Are you familiar with Robert A. Heinlein?
Oh, great. Not only are you a fuckwit, a liberal, and a college boy, you're also a sci-fi nerd. Fanfuckingtastic. Can it get any better than this?
One of the things he said is that the decay of society is the erosions of manners and decency.
He also said that women should be submissive to men. Pull the other one.
You have no manners. You have no decency.
Whatever you say, college boy. You know best, after all. (Despite, of course, being WRONG about EVERYTHING you have said thus far.)
You could have replied by documenting and pointing out errors in a civil manner.
What for? Where's the fun in that?
Instead, you, out of the blue, start acting like a teo year old with a potty mouth.
What's a teo year old?
Is this OK? No.
By whose standards? Yours? I think it's pretty clear that nobody gives two shits what you think.
You would have been moderated down if more moderators bothered to read posts rated at zero.
Again with the funny. Man, you're better than a barrel of monkeys, ain'tcha?
Your humor value not withstanding, please STFU now, bitch. Thanks so much.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Am I the only one that finds these rediculously long and heated bitch-sessions between ACs to be incredibly funny?
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Am I the only one who finds people who can't spell "ridiculous" funny?
Asshat.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dude, I'm not going to even bother googling to see if you're making that up. God, could you have thought of a less relevant example?
Ah, the classic "I've just been proven to be full of shit" response.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I find it funny too; I just like putting people like this in their place.
Reading Slashdot comments at level 0 is like watching WWF. Great amusment. Means nothing.
Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I just want to say that I really enjoyed my bitch and shout session with you. Perhaps, one day, we will have a beer together and laugh about this (of course, I don't drink, but still...).
It was like the best of WWF and scream therapy combined. Very enjoyable, and the only meaninful entertainment Slashdot has. I hope the lurkers and you enjoyed it as much as I did.
Take care.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 1
you say tehy were dodgey....most people say tehy were fine...including NASA.
--
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
NetCurl
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them
A quick look where? These OS topics quickly desolve into unsubstantiated ramblings, so please post links not opinions...
--
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
StarmanDeluxe
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The PPC Processors work very well. Considering the tons of time and money that must have been poured into the research of the G5, there is (approximately) a 0% chance of Macs switching to x86.
This was a semi-viable (though far-fetched) rumor before the G5s debuted; now it's just standard FUD.
Geeks changing to Apple
by
QEDog
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I have a lot of geek friends that have been switching to Apples since OSX came out. They are very good computers, but it is weird to see the geeks and the hip stereotypes converging like this. Has anyone else observed this biblical effect?
Gen 3:1Now the Apple was more subtil than any beast of the field which the God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every computer of the garden?
Gen 3:6And when the linux geek saw that the G5 good for Unix, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one hip, took of the Apple thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto the other geeks; and they did eat.
Gen 3:7And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they weren't using Open Source; and they compiled aprons something using gpp.
Gen 3:13 And the LinusGod said unto the geek, What is this that thou hast done? And the linux geek said, The Apples are so sexy, they beguiled me, and I did eat.
-- "There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
Oh, yeah. No doubt. The mostly Linux shop I work at has been buying up G4 laptops like crazy for a while now. Everyone from IT to programmers are getting them. I think we've even got some XServes in the racks now as well.
Re:Geeks changing to Apple
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Gen 3:1Now the Apple was more subtil than any beast of the field which the God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every computer of the garden?
It's subtle, you German fagot.
Re:Geeks changing to Apple
by
thefinite
·
· Score: 1
The KJV of the Bible spells it "subtil". He was just adapting that translation, you cowardly heathen.
yes, waiting is a good plan. that way I can save up the money and won't have to buy it on credit. plus in a year they'll probably be 3 ghz rather than 2
Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips.
It's not just a good idea, it's Moore's Law.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
neiffer
·
· Score: 1
The best you have is retarded? Nice one.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
jared_hanson
·
· Score: 1
I can't beleive that posts that get unfairly moderated in the Apple section. I mean, come on, this guy is not trolling. Speculation about Apple switching to x86 has been going on for a while, and in plenty of well respected sites.
Anyway, just had to stand up for the parent poster and point out a percieved wrong. Go ahead and mod me troll. I can handle it.
-- -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Um, hardware? MacOS-X (there's more to an OS than just its "core" components)? A gaggle of software titles?
Perhaps a quick jaunt to http://www.apple.com would be in line. Doing research before posting has never been popular on Slashdot but it's never too late to begin good habits.
What is up with slashdot?
by
Dr+Reducto
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Half the posts here are trolls who say Macs are slow,gay, etc.
Personally, I wish I had the money to get a G5 for college. My friend picked an Alienware over a G5, but I have a feeling he will regret it.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
My friend picked an Alienware over a G5, but I have a feeling he will regret it.
Not if he plans to game with it.
The way I see it, Macs are wonderful computers but for very specific things. PCs, on the other hand, make much better "Jack of all Trades" sorts of computers where you can game, work, dual boot, customize, et cetera, ad nauseum. If you do something that caters to the Mac crowd, they're wonderful. If you're doing something else... well, I'd still advocate PCs over Macs any day.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 1
hey paid for an PC that he could build for 500 bucks?
that makes no sense. and I bet he is one who bitches about how apples suck and are over priced.
--
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
error502
·
· Score: 1
He'll regret it because he actually bought an Alienware computer, not because he didn't buy a G5.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Btw: apples suck and are over priced
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
thryllkill
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
"hey paid for an PC that he could build for 500 bucks?"
have you ever looked at an alienware PC? The video card alone might run you $500.
Alienware PCs are gameing systems pure and simple. MACs, no matter how cool, fast, 64 bit, sexy, are not gameing systems. I am not talking theory here (they should be able to play games well) I am talking reality. And reality is that a lot, probably most, games are not released for the mac, and if they are it is a half-assed port sometimes years after the PC original came out. If this guy bought an alienware PC it means 3 things. 1.He wants to play games 2.He has more money than I do -and- 3.he is too lazy to build the same thing on his own with individual parts.
Now with his Alienware pC, when inspiration hits him he will be able to make that awesome Neverwinter Nights module he'd been thinking about for days. No matter how cool his Mac is he won't be able to do that...
--
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
the+idoru
·
· Score: 1
if he's a gamer, he probably won't regret the decision. one thing i miss about living on campus were the obscenely low pings that i would have while deathmatching. unfortunately, the mac is a limited platform when it comes to available games. that's slowly changing, though, and i'm crossing my fingers that these uber-fast G5s will help to turn that around even more. there is nothing more that i would like to do than to ditch my Winbox gaming rig in favor of an Apple. i absolutely love my Apple laptop.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 0
he bought it for a 500 dollar Graphics card that will be 50 bucks in 6 months.
yeah.
--
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
kelzer
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Now with his Alienware pC, when inspiration hits him he will be able to make that awesome Neverwinter Nights module he'd been thinking about for days. No matter how cool his Mac is he won't be able to do that...
Which is why, like the original poster said, he'll probably regret it - after he flunks out of college from spending all his time gaming.
If he had the PowerMac, he could flunk out of college after spending all his time ripping DVDs : )
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
dasmegabyte
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Well, it's very easy. A lot of the slashdot readers put a lot of time, money and knowledge into inferior, yet popular platforms. These are people who stayed up late nights trying to get a kernel to compile or getting a system to run stable after hacking some nuance of the bios which resulted in a 3% speed increase to memory operations.
And now Apple comes around a makes a machine that's fast, nice looking, and doesn't require all of this extra knowledge and work to use.
Of course they're annoyed. Of course they're threatened. If Apple's stuff is any good, then they've been wasting their time.
So they spread FUD about broken applications, inconsequential complaints about how a $600 bargain PC is cheaper than a $3000 high end work station, or slander about how Apples are effeminate. It's all bullshit meant to make them feel better about a perceived waste. People do it all the time...just listen to the arguments people make about the benefits of sinking $10,000 into a $15,000 honda, rather than buy a $25,000 BMW.
It's childish in a way. Isn't there more to computing than JUST running an OS as fast as possible? If you do your computer stuff in Linux and like it, fine. I use Windows 2000, Gentoo and OSX 10.2 and none of them is better than any of the others for EVERYTHING. Granted, I spend more time tweaking the Gentoo box than either of the other two, but once I'm done I can just ignore it, and let it chug away serving web pages, databases, etc to its hearts content. Admining the 2k box is generally to keep it from falling apart in DLL hell...and admining the Apple machine is usually accepting that "you can't do that" on an apple;).
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
madcoder47
·
· Score: 1
Would you believe that some crazy individuals out there use computers not primarily for gaming? They actually like to get work done (a prepostorous concept!), without their operating system getting in their way (those rogues!).
Some of us developers also like to code more important applications than Neverwinter Nights Modules, in which case, hey look!, a mac is a terrific choice, not only for it's power and speed, but also for productivity applications, it's teriffic cocoa (obj-c/java) APIs, and included IDE!
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
dasmegabyte
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
My wife games exclusively on the Mac (because she had been gunshy about using my PC ever since she found my usenet porn dump folder). She plays The Sims, Sim City 4, Warcraft 3 and Everquest. You might have heard of these games, they're pretty good sellers on the PC too, and they're lots of fun.
No, she doesn't have the choice of games I have on my PC, and I'm sure she really regrets being unable to play Postal 2 or Soldier of Fortune considering how much she loves needless gore. Yeah, they came out an average of 6 months later than the PC version. But she doesn't care. I dunno why, but apparently since she's still hung up on The Sims: Hot Date, she's not been too worried about waiting for Neverwinter Nights.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
ColMustard
·
· Score: 1
On the bright side, at this rate VirtualPC will be able to run Windows (and thus games) as fast as today's PCs in no time.
Life is good.
-- Moof.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Thumpnugget
·
· Score: 1
Now with his Alienware pC, when inspiration hits him he will be able to make that awesome Neverwinter Nights module he'd been thinking about for days. No matter how cool his Mac is he won't be able to do that...
I've never heard of the Neverwinter Nights module. Is that a new ACPM/software-suspend subsystem? What configuration option to I choose to compile it into my kernel?
:-P
--
Free yourself. Everything else will follow.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
bigman8
·
· Score: 1
Some companies are pretty good about releasing for Mac and PC at the same time.
Blizzard, for example. They release a hybrid CD (remember those? They used to be everywhere!) for every game they publish. That's why WarCraft III is available for any Mac users now - and has been since release.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A $25000 BMW? What kind of crap Bimmer are you driving?
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
thryllkill
·
· Score: 1
okay macoder47, very funny, I like your use of sarcasm. The point I was trying to get across is that Alienware PCs are specialized PCs primarily for people who want to play the newest, hardest hitting PC games, at the top graphical levels. I thought that was something one could assume from my post if they didn't already know what an Alienware system was.
But like you pointed out, some people like to do other things with their computers. For developers of mac stuff, hey, a mac is a great deal. I would never reccomend an Alienware PC for a mac developer.
--
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Half the posts here are trolls who say Macs are slow,gay, etc.
How is it that computers can have a sexual orientation??
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Actually, Macs are gay, at least mine are. Why just last week I had to toss water on my two Macs because they were "going at it!" The iBook was up behind the G4 humpin' away like a horny Pit Bull. I'm not going to say anything about the little leather chaps I found in the iPod case.
You all have been warned.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
raresilk
·
· Score: 1
Our home/SOHO network has almost exactly what you have: homebrew server on Gentoo, a homebrew Windows 2000 box, and a Mac G4 on OSX 10.2. When we dumped my girlfriend's old PowerMac and got the G4 running on 0S 10.2, it made a believer out of me. There are definitely advantages to each platform at the present time, although the main advantage for Win2K ("Mac version of Game X or Software Y won't be available for years, if ever") seems to be diminishing. Apple is also playing that game back, with a vengance - they are buying up music and audio software companies left and right, and discontinuing their PC versions. (Emagic, maker of Logic Audio, being the most famous.)
I kid you not, when I buy my next computer, it will be one of those shiny titanium notebooks. The OS is getting so robust that "you can't do that on an Apple" is getting obsolete. Try drilling down into the BSD core, getting fink and compiling open source stuff if you don't believe me. My girlfriend is all jumping around going "I told you so, I told you so" -- but I'm not the one who changed. Apple has been doing it right for several years, in my view - they're just doing it faster now. Kewl!
Time may come that the only reason I still need a non-Mac computer is to play Neverwinter Nights.:-P
-- No, no, no. This is not a sig.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
toddestan
·
· Score: 1
$25,000 will get you a pretty nicely equipped BMW Mini Cooper. The base model runs about $17,000 too. Yeah, unbelievably cheap for a BMW, I know. Not that I would want one...
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
metalligoth
·
· Score: 1
Now with his Alienware pC, when inspiration hits him he will be able to make that awesome Neverwinter Nights module he'd been thinking about for days. No matter how cool his Mac is he won't be able to do that...
You are so right. By comparing Macs to Alienware people are simply stating that there are few PC's that are truly comparable to the Mac out there.
Oh, and if you want a gaming system and don't think there's enough games for the Mac, go get a PS2. I hear there are a lot of games for that platform.
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Btw Neverwinter Nights is coming out for the mac. I have no idea what is up with slashdot.
Time may come that the only reason I still need a non-Mac computer is to play Neverwinter Nights.:-P
I have terrible news that will have your girlfriend doing a fresh round of i-told-you-so. from the bioware home page--"The Mac version of Neverwinter Nights is now in stores."
Re:What is up with slashdot?
by
Rakarra
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, since the G4s and below are so mindnumbingly slow, the game is too. I'm actually looking forward to a new Mac hardware release for the first time in a long time because the G5s sound so good.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
alien666
·
· Score: 1
Linux-based?! Ha, I didn't even see that.
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A hackneyed business model that guarantees a clique following but broad-based and long-term failure.
I still can't figure out the allure of Mac's. Are these boxes significantly faster than the latest Windows XP Pro, P4 or AMD box? I wonder where one could find a sort of speed vs. price blow by blow breakdown? I'm not talking a Windows Fan Boy vs. Mac Fan Boy flame fest - just one that is as unbiased as possible!
OK. I own PCs and Macs and use both. I've use Macs since System 5, and PCs since DOS. The PC is mainly for working from home when I'm not building actual hardware at work. The Mac is where I do creative things and day to day stuff like email and web browsing.
The Mac is just nicer to use. That's really all there is to it, and yes that's subjective I guess, although even the hardcore Windows fanatics I know admit the GUI is a mess. As for price differences, there really isn't that much of a gap if you compare equivalently equiped machines of comparable quality.
The quality factor is important. I built my own PC, for example, and would never bother with some $500 gray box. There really is no bargain basement Mac, but I don't think I'd want one anyway.
As an aside, I find it weird that there is so much quibbling over a couple bucks in the personal computer world. I know a guy at work who bought a $60,000 car and a $5000 plasma television, and then spent three weeks online to save $100 on a PC (he paid $500 instead of $600). I consider my time to be money, and the time saved using my Mac pays for any price gap easily within a month.
It's very hard not to be biased about whatever you use. But I'll try.
I switched to Mac from Linux because it works. Add Fink to it, and it acts just like a Linux box. I have a PowerBook, and it's by far my favorite laptop (of many laptops I've owned).
What does "it works" mean? It almost never crashes. It almost never needs drivers. It runs MS Office. It's a Unix workstation: bash shell, X, KDE, Gnome, etc. It goes to sleep when the lid closes and comes back within 1 second when the lid opens (I rarely turn it "off"). iPhoto, iTunes, iPod, iMovie are excellent, simple, and easy (not power programs, but excellent for the basics). And most important, it's pretty (titanium or aluminum case).
I still use Debian/Dell on my servers. But for a laptop, OS X is incredibly useful.
It's not about speed anymore. About the PIII, I quit caring about speed. Everything after that is *fast*. My Powerbook 800 is probably about as fast as a PIII 800. For programming, documents, etc., speed isn't the issue anymore. The issue is usability. Personally, I really like KDE. I still use it on my Mac once in a while. I also like OS X. It just works.
The best thing about them is OSX. Most of the advantages of Linux, along with a GUI that beats the crap out of Windows.
They are a little slower for the money than a typical Windows clone, on most benchmarks - much faster on a handful. In practical terms you aren't likely to notice the difference.
Naturally the hardware integration, drivers, and so forth are superb, being a single-source supplier.
-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
The problem is that it's hard to be unbiased when the natural order of things in the industry is to be biased towards what already exists. There are, as far as I am aware, exactly zero applications fully optimized for the G5 currently. To get a fair application benchmark, you would have to have that number be nonzero.
Frankly, benchmarks are only modestly interesting at this point. The Apple benchmarks, which tried to minimize compiler differences and application optimizations, gave some indication of the chip's potential---which is truly incredible, IMHO---but the real-world benchmarks won't be useful or interesting until the chip is more mainstream and in the hands of a lot more developers.:-)
Come back in a year and ask for a speed vs. price breakdown. At that point, someone might be able to compare the state of the platform wars in a reasonably fair and unbiased way. Until then, you can take your pick between processor benchmarks that tell only part of the story (G5 really fast) or app benchmarks that tell only another part (P4 really fast), with the truth lying somewhere in-between....
Funny you should mention this cause I know exactly what you mean.
I attended a dinner meeting last spring in a nearby town and I brought my old Lombard (G3/400) PowerBook running OS X. After we were done eating, I pulled it out and woke it up, ready to start the serious part of our meeting.
A guy I was sitting with was slack-jawed, "Man that thing boots up fast!"
I told him that it didn't boot up and that I merely woke it from its sleep state. I didn't think anything more about it until my drive home.
It ocurred to me that I NEVER shut my PowerBook down... never.
I was raised, and I believe that many other Americans (certainly not all) were raised with a certain sense of responsibility as a consumer in a Free Market system.
The responsibility of the consumer is - to attempt to purchase the cheapest alternative, in order to "vote with your dollars" - to "reward" the vendor who does not gouge.
It's the people who are paying $60k for a car, $5k for a plasma screen, who are irresponsible consumers. They're the idiots who are driving prices for these things through the roof. If people wouldn't pay $5k for a plasma screen, you'd be able to go out to Best Buy and pick one up for $500. But since people seem to be willing to pay this much, that's about the bottom end of the price range - for a TV that will last for about 2 years before it starts dropping lots of pixels. Absolute dumb shit consumers drive up prices by not shopping smart.
Obviously, your friend cares about the computer market, but doesn't give a shit about cars or consumer electronics.
-- These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Plasma TVs don't cost $5000 because of dumbshit consumers who like to overpay and not shop around. They cost $5000 because they are a new technology, that is expensive to make, and currently has few buyers. If you even had a basic sense of economics and the laws of supply and demand, you'd realize that in a free market plasma TVs cost $5000 because they have to. And just because a few people do not shop around doesn't mean nobody does.
In a few years plasma TVs may cost $500 as technology advances, productions numbers go up, lowering the cost per unit. Right now I doubt any TV maker could produce plasma TVs for any where near $500 and turn a profit. Because if such a maker existed, they would quickly take advantage of the fact that they can make them cheaper than their competition and undercut them. The only reason this would not happen is if there was some Plasma TV Cartel around, which as far as I can tell does not exist.
Take a look at standard CRT televisions. Right now, I can go get a color TV for under $100. In 1960, a color TV cost something like $3000 in 1960 dollars. Was the high price tag back then because of stupid dumbshit consumers that didn't shop around and companies gouging them because of it? And if our 1960's consumers shopped around they too could of had $100 color TVs too (or more like $20 color TVs in 1960 dollars)? No way! In 1960 color TVs were complicated expensive things, using large circuit boards of discreet components and vacuum tubes. They cost $3000 because they had too, it took 30+ years and major advances in technology before the $100 TV was possible.
And lastly, shopping smart does not equal buying the lowest cost. It may work for homogenous goods like 2% milk or eggs - but when it comes to things like computers it just isn't smart. There is always someone out there that will cut all corners possible to get the cheapest unit out the door. And you end up with things like the Yugo and Packard Bell computers. If you like to buy cheap shit like that, go ahead. But I'm too poor to waste money like that.
It ocurred to me that I NEVER shut my PowerBook down... never.
Is that a Mac user type thing or what?
I think it is... Most PC laptop users I know try the sleep function on their laptops, only to find that it crashes half the time, and/or it takes ten seconds to load up. Mac laptop users easily grow very accustomed to the sleep feature working like a charm. I'm glad to be part of the latter.
Although it does depend on the OS. Windows XP seems to come up very quickly out of sleep, but then there's an annoying pause where it just does nothing for a few seconds, before finally showing the welcome screen.
I'm not sure how Windows 2000 is, but of course the Win9x series isn't stable enough to even bother with.
With Linux, I could get it to sleep but I couldn't get the display to come back on once it woke up again (Thinkpad R32). I spent a lot of time trying to get power management working properly with Linux.
Due to this and other small niggles, I ended up selling my Thinkpad and was dissatisfied with the hardware and OS combinations available. It's good that there's choice, and that I can make use of those choices, but nothing really worked well enough for me.
Re:Crash Different
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I would have modded u funny, but I am an anonymous coward!
Re:Crash Different
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Same is on windows? Funny, I don't see a giant apple logo anywhere. And, it's true that you can recover deleted files on PC. I've left windows XP on for weeks w/o reboot. I never turn off my PC. The only time it has crashed in 2 years is by doing wierd reg fixes, and hacking things I shouldn't be in. The best part about XP is it's free! (like music)
Re:Crash Different
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sorry, I don't understand what Crash Different means. My OS X PowerBook uptime just passed 4 days, and that was only because Software Update wanted to reboot after downloading and installing a system update sometime before the weekend. Otherwise uptime would have been at least a couple of weeks between reboots, on a portable! I'm starting to forget what the startup sequence is like...thanks to Unix on a Mac.
Re:Crash Different
by
Nuoji
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
My mother had left her iBook in sleep mode although it had only like 5 minutes of battery left. She didn't try to use it until a couple of days later and by that time the computer had completely shut down itself.
I got her to plug in the cord but then she asked me why it didn't start. I told her to press the start button, but she didn't know which one that was.
When the gray startup screen started showing she turned horrified to me and asked: "What's this? Is there something wrong? I haven't seen it before!"
I had to calm her down and explain that was the startup screen. She had only used the sleep function ever since she bought it two months ago.
That is how stable it is. (OS X 10.2.6 on an iBook 12" 900)
I tell people Macs are easy computers to use for "anyone". I guess the incompetent moron in that video demonstrates that I need to say "anyone but incompetent morons like this one guy I saw on the internet."
I suppose if you try to use a first generation G3 iMac with 64MB of RAM to edit video, your Mac experience would suck too.
I'll be generous and chalk it up to comedic license.
-- Sig Applied For
OS X version 10.2.7?
by
kaan
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
According to the Jaguar upgrade website, the latest available version of OS X is 10.2.5. But according to The Register, "All three systems will ship with Mac OS X 10.2.7, a 32-bit version of the operating system optimised for the new CPU".
Does anybody have any insights into what optimizations might be included? Are there any enhancements or features that aren't present in 10.2.5?
It's probably optimized in the sense of not crashing immediately with a message "unknown CPU type".
Re:OS X version 10.2.7?
by
WHudson
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The latest version os O X is actually 10.2.6. Included in OS 10.2.7 is a new version of gcc optimized for the G5, along with a few other optimizations. Basically it's the sort of thing included in Apple's Dec 2002 gcc updater (available on their (a href="http://developer.apple.com">developer site).
-- And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Re:OS X version 10.2.7?
by
tecnobabble
·
· Score: 1
Actually the most recent version of OS X is 10.2.6, 10.2.5 is just what the machines/OS ship as, you can download the latest point update via Software Update or Apple's website.
From what I've heard, 10.2.7 allows for programs to use the 64 bit processes in memory and some floating point applications, as well as allowing for the use of the added system memory per program.
Re:OS X version 10.2.7?
by
larkost
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The latest version of MacOS X is 10.2.6.
Apple has a long history of shipping a new a.b.x release to support new hardware, and then latter shipping another version for all hardware. In almost all cases there were few changes no directly related to supporting the new hardware.
In this case the rumors are that 10.2.7 will add libraries for handling 64 bit processes. The libraries will be in parallel to the 32 bit version, so simply by changing the library you link against will change the application from a 32 bit to a 64 bit application (in many cases... if you did something fancy.. you might have to change you code).
This is how apple apparently plans on allowing the 10.2.x series to use 64bit applications without a major re-write. Eventually MacOS X will be 64bit only... but I expect that to take a few years (thinking 5 or so).
No 64 bit library re-linking is needed or supported in 10.2.7.
The libraries / frameworks provided by the OS, in particular the vector and math libraries have support for using 64 bit math on PPC970 (G5). This is done internally and transparently for those applications that link against it. The kernel has improvements to allow drivers to be compatible with greater then 4GB physical addresses when doing DMA.
No official talk from Apple yet about 64 bit addressing for processes/applications, just how to do 64 bit general purpose math and optimize for the G5.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
th77
·
· Score: 1
Yes, the 1.6GHz model is significantly less advanced than the others. I read an intial review/reaction article way-back-when in which the author strongly recommended getting at least the 1.8GHz model. Can't remember the source, sorry...
"Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips."
Yeah, Apple is always trying to screw the customer, by selling computers, and then coming out with faster ones!
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
neiffer
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
OSX is Linux based, in case you haven't updated since 7.4.1.
Well, that's one switcher
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I, for one, am going to buy one of these beauties come hell or high water. I plan to save as much money as I possibly can from my newly acquired job over the next year so that around the time Apple revises/updates the G5 I'll actually be able to afford one. For now I'll just hobble along on my refurbished IBM.
BTW, someone asked how many preorders there were. According the the Register article linked earlier, "over 100,000".
And FreeBSD is what?
by
nonameisgood
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If you haven't heard, the kernel on which Mac OS X is based is BSD. Steve Jobs finally has his hardware-abstracted OS (as they have been planning for 10 years). Just tweak the Intel-based BSD kernels and you're there.
However, why change to Intel/AMD, when the PPC is such a fabulous chip.
Apple's thing is to keep the hardware proprietary, so the system doesn't become a nightmare of (marginally incompatible) pieces (as GNU/Linux is fast becoming) most end users are concerned about function, not customizing the hardware - anyway, there will always be a way around hardware restrictions.
Keep X network savvy
-- Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
Re:And FreeBSD is what?
by
Ffakr
·
· Score: 2, Informative
actually, the kernel is Mach. The core of the OS is Darwin. Darwin is based off FreeBSD. Mach is based off... Mach. Freebsd has a different kernel.
Mach has run on x86 though (NeXT ran Mach on x86).
--
I'm not feeling witty so bite me
Re:And FreeBSD is what?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I would hardly call a selection of off the shelf components "proprietary". Apple zealots are just nutcases; sooner they make the switch to cheaper/better Intel/AMD machines the better.
Steve Jobs said that it's the year of the notebook
by
Hackie_Chan
·
· Score: 1
How the hell is Apple going to top the PowerMac G5 with the Notebooks? I hardly think that the current Powerbooks top the G5 in coolness at all. However I do know that they haven't been upgraded in a while. But what can they get, really? It will probably be the typical and standard improved revision like aways: additional 300mhz speedbump and a bigger harddrive -- disappointing!
Year of the notebook, year of the scmotebook... Where are thou?
--
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
Chris_Jefferson
·
· Score: 0, Troll
OK, I got my results by compairing their results to the results I get using icc on a Dual P4 3.2Ghz.
I only ran SPECfp_base2000 (because it was the only test I had around)
I got 16.1 (higher than the mac result at 15.7, from the paper)
Argueably I was unfair for using icc instead of gcc, but icc is so much better, why should I use an inferior compiler? If there is a better compiler for mac then I'd be happy to see the results.
I don't agree that using gcc on both platforms somehow makes things "fairer" as it will clearly have to optimise for the different processors differently, so why not use the best compiler you can?
How can they be shipping, the IBM tour guides say they ain't making the chips yet.
http://www.macnn.com/news/20383
Re:Shipping?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You have to wait for the chips. Apple has a long history of shipping computers without CPUs. I suggest that you tow your house down to Cupertino and bombard Apple with emails using your WebTV workstation.
How can they be shipping, the IBM tour guides say they ain't making the chips yet.
http://www.macnn.com/news/20383
I guess it's expected that the Low ID users are the true slashdot users.
Read the FRIGGING link you just posted:
Infoworld reports that the PowerPC "G5" 970 is not yet in production at IBM's new state-of-the-art $2.5 billion 140,000 square-foot chip-fabrication facility in Fishkill, N.Y: "Our tour guide confided that the PowerPC 970 chip (Apple's G5) is not yet in production in Fishkill, but it takes no time at all to get a new chip into the line."
Just because it's not in production at Fishkill THREE WEEKS AGO doesn't mean: 1) It's in production at Fishkill now. 2) It's not in production at other plants.
It also means that they don't necessarily tell the tour guides everything. I mean, they don't tell them about the secret underground labratory for creating a race of giant mutant cyborg zombie clones!
That's because they ARE mutant cyborg zombie clones. I mean, would you want to know?
60DD4MN, 3Y3 R0X0R!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Firstus McPostus, BEEEEEEEOTCHAE!
Bow down and worship my splendiferous magnificence!
pleeeeeeeease?!!!!
The benchmarks were accurate - it's fast.
by
ciryon
·
· Score: 1
There's an interesting article describing all the details about the benchmarks and how they actually prove that this is something beyond what Intel has to offer.
Ciryon
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
jeremyp
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Not even remotely true. OS X is based on the Mach kernel with a BSD userland. On top of that they put the Aqua windowing system. The only thing it has in common with Linux is that you build it with gcc.
-- All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
alien666
·
· Score: 1
Silly, troll. There was no 7.4... and it's not Linux, fool!
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
so let me get this straight,
you use a super optimized compiler on X86 and compare that to a free compiler with some optimizations for the PPC-970.
yeah...that is fair.
"hey look folks, I can run this code through ICC faster on an intel chip than GCC can run code on a PPC chip"
The first time I read the comment, I never noticed the Linux-based OS statement. Clearly he is clueless on issues surrounding Mac OS X. However, the x86 card does hold some water, even if very little. I think troll and flamebait is a bit harsh. Leave it unmoderated at best.
-- -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How about "Uninformed" then. That would take care of comments that are stupid, moronic, retarded and much, much more.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
RalphBNumbers
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
And those "well respected sites" are trolling too. Having someone with media connections write a poorly thought out article about an idea that has been debunked countless times over the last decade or two doesn't suddenly make the idea valid. It just makes the 'journalist' in question the real world equivalent of a karma whore; posting things everyone has heard and ought to know better than, in order to bring in readers and generate buzz, even if they are hostile.
-- "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
Re:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'm very sorry if enlglish isn't your native language (it isn't mine)... but duel G5? those things are supposed to work together (dual) and not eachothers rivals;)
Duel P4's are quite common, but that might be a Windows problem;)
Is there a super optimized compiler for the PPC-970? If so, I'd be more than happy to see some benchmarks from it.
It is my belief that gcc is really not that good on x86, espically as you get up to the pentium 4, because it is such a complex chip. The PPCs have a simpler architecture (which yes, is a good thing) so I suspect gcc does better there.
Remember: MHz doesn't measure speed.
You can only use it as a measure of relative speed between chips which are otherwise virtually identical (e.g. two P IV's)
-- What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
Thanks for reminding me!
by
Chief+Typist
·
· Score: 2, Funny
I've got about 18 months left on a 2 year lease -- thanks for reminding me!
(Yes, I knew they were coming, but I needed an upgrade for an important project 6 months ago...)
-ch
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
gl4ss
·
· Score: 1
** I can't beleive that posts that get unfairly moderated in the Apple section. I mean, come on, this guy is not trolling. Speculation about Apple switching to x86 has been going on for a while, and in plenty of well respected sites.**
yeah they've been speculating for, um, past 10 years so it really must happen soon!.
-
-- world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
TheFairElf
·
· Score: 1
I really don't see how this gets moderated as Flamebait. Who is he trying to flame here?
2 things keeping market share down
by
zapp
·
· Score: 0, Interesting
As a long time windows/linux user, I can tell you why myself (and probably many others) do not buy Apple computers.
1. Price. I am about to start my 5th year of college. That means I have 4 years of student loans already. I cannot afford $2,000 for the low-end model G5. College kids buy cars for less than that!
2. If you don't like it, you're stuck with it. While this is somewhat true with PCs, it seems more so with Apples. Probably because it's a package deal - I can't tear the machine apart for parts, or (asside from Yellow Dog Linux) put another OS on it.
I had a phase for a while where I wanted a PowerBook sooooo bad, but the price kept me away, and now I'm over it. No switch for me.
If they want more of a market share, they need to accomodate the financial standing of a larger crowd
-- no comment
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
MoneyT
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
In regards to #2. If you don't like it, sell it. Macs have very high resale value.
-- T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Hes+Nikke
·
· Score: 2, Informative
well the educational price, is only $1800, but who says that you need a powermac for school? unless your doing high end science, i'd say that an iBook at $949 is probably what you want (based on the limited information you gave me);)
-- Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
jasonbw
·
· Score: 2
1. Price. I am about to start my 5th year of college. That means I have 4 years of student loans already. I cannot afford $2,000 for the low-end model G5. College kids buy cars for less than that!
then use your student discount. $1620 if you can live without a superdrive. Hell, you can get a ghz g4 for about $1100 if you shop around.
2. If you don't like it, you're stuck with it. theres always eBay, if you can't stand it. Macs have always seemed to hold their value pretty well.
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Well, he may study outside USA and get a proper education... Like my CS education. 6 years on average, barely anyone finishes it in less than 5.
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Proper education? Like drinking beer and partying for the first two years like here in Denmark?
You really are a sucker if you can't finnish your CS in 4 years.
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Well, we are all suckers here then... 4.5 years is the fastest I ever heard of.
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
why not include the cost of the G5 in the student loan request? It's not like people haven't used that as a way to get a low interest loan for stuff (cars, computers, stereos, etc.). In reality, Apple's hardware is priced about the same as stuff from IBM, HP, or Dell.
You can get a PC notebook for about half as much and it could still do the things that the mac could do.
Oh really? Can a PC notebook run WebObjects, FrontBase (a non-flatfile database, unlike amateurish crap like MySQL), and Rendezvous file sharing? How about a nice cloning option like 'ditto' for rapid deployment via IEEE1394? Can't do those things? Didn't think so.
Now I will right click with my 20 dollar 4 button USB mouse to post my response to your babyshit excuse for commentary. Cheers, bitch!
-- /*- Mohammed -*/
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
curtlewis
·
· Score: 1
Everytime I build a new PC I wind up not only salvaging parts from older PCs (floppy drives, CD drives primarily) and I spend about $1800 making the box. And I have to put it all together.
Yes, I price around and I'm not building ultra cheap, ultra low performance boxes. I do not build the highest end possible, since that's not where the price/performance sweet spot is. But I do shoot for good performance.
I don't get where people say PCs are cheaper when in my experience Macs and PCs are priced similarly. The only PCs that are cheaper than macs are the 700 Mhz Celeron, 64mb, 4mb video card type systems for $500. Those boxes are obsolete before you take them out of the box!
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
PCBman!
·
· Score: 1
Just curious, what exactly are you building up to that you spent so much? My last build probably didn't top $1000 and that's including the rather large sum I spent on the case and video card.
-- So, when's lunch?
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
bedouin
·
· Score: 1
If you get the educational pricing, then scrap both the Superdrive and Internal Modem the price is only $1,593. That's very reasonable (what I paid for my Quicksilver 2002 over a year ago).
Re:2 things keeping market share down
by
Dominic_Mazzoni
·
· Score: 1
well the educational price, is only $1800, but who says that you need a powermac for school? unless your doing high end science, i'd say that an iBook at $949 is probably what you want (based on the limited information you gave me);)
You can get the G5 for even less than that (about $1649 I think) if you replace the Superdrive with a Combo drive. (Educational price only.)
Personally, I look forward to our new Apple Overloards...
In other news, Department of Homeland Security (DoH'S)! is reporting that the Taliban have already begun smuggling G5's into Afganistan for use against colition forces.
While waiting a couple of months for flaws to be found is always a good idea for new, expensive items (c.f. new model cars), simply waiting a year for faster chips isn't. If they have new models in a year, won't you have to wait again for the early users to find the flaws? And once they work them out, won't there be newer, faster models coming?
While I agree with not buying the first release (especially since Panther isn't out yet - might as well get it pre-installed), a year is definitely excessive. Based on previous Apple models, 4-5 months is more than enough time to see how they hold up, and for software incompatibilities to be fixed or at least noted so you aren't caught unawares.
-- R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before?
B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
m1chael
·
· Score: 0
since there is no such thing as an instance of time, there can not be the fastest pc ever, unless of cause it uses the entire universe for its calculations causing the universe to go into heat arrest and die.
-- I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
1.) No you don't. In some cases, you pay less (Apple bought-out apps like Shake). Unless of course your primary basis of comparison is the bargain games bin. Last I checked, Office, Photoshop, Painter, etc were all the same or about the same price.
2.) Yep, but then, so is pretty much anything but Intel/AMD.
3.) It's called advertising. Check a little company called Intel for more examples.
4.) Yeah...though choice isn't always needed. It's nice, but I'd rather have two options that definitely work than 10 that sorta work.
5.) True, to an extent. But then, without repurchasing software you can't escape from Windows either.
6.) Plus the rest of us that use multiple platforms based on particular strengths. There are more than enough Windows users that are entirely clueless too. At least the "arrogant, arty Apple types" can get themselves on the Web;)
7.) riiight
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
m00by
·
· Score: 2, Informative
you crack monkey. there IS NO DUAL Pentium 4 system, anywhere. dual 3.2Ghz Xeons, yes, but Pentium 4's no! tell us about a plausible lie, please, not a complete fabrication!!!! have a nice day:)
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
momus_radar
·
· Score: 1
The next generation of Apple computers will run Intel or AMD 64 bit processors with the Linux-based OSX.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
" typical for any OEM. they plop in cheap memory to make profits better."
With the P4-3.2GHz at Dell you can get Corsair XMS PC3200 at 2-2-5 instead of generic cas2.5 PC3200.
beware the differences between the 1.6 & 1.8
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
The question isn't really will better memory _work_ - of course it'll work, but will it be used at the better timings? That I do not know.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 2, Informative
GCC is made for the x86 chip pal. it was ported to PPC and alpha. it is optimized for x86 and if you had not noticed, GCC is always tested against ICC when new releases are out.
GCC verses GCC on different chips is as fair as you can get.
I think it says something about your benchmarks though that GCC is that close to ICC. and half optimized compiler for the PPC is with in.4 of a super optimized compiler on x86.
> MHz doesn't measure speed. You can only use it as a measure of relative speed between chips which are otherwise virtually identical.
When people ask me, I simply say it's like car motors : if you got a motor running at 3000 rpm and another at 2000 rpm, which one will make your car go faster? They usually ask me "how many cylinders". I then answer "it's the same thing for CPUs... you can't compare without all the facts. GHz is useless by itself."
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
the_2nd_coming
·
· Score: 1
well that makes it so much better.
and I bet you pay extra for it. so what is the benefit?
--
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
To quote someone above:
(only people who don't know better) "equate financial success with product superiority (tho engineers know better)"
Of course nobody's tested it, the machines haven't been available before. Why do you say it doesn't work? Why wouldn't it? If it doesn't work, complain to Microsoft, and see what they have to say.
-- $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$]; $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I don't really know why... but its a rumor and I am pretty sure that it won't work because connectix haven't work with apple before it has been sold to micro$oft.
Just wait and see...
Everyone screws with benchmarks so don't start that crap. Wanna whine about the price? Then buy a cheap x86 box and run Linux or Windows. Just because you do fine with something like that doesn't mean the G5 isn't a fantastic piece of equipment and well worth the price. Wanna complain that it's propietary hardware and the limited software selection? Have you looked at your precious Linux recently? It may be open but most the software flat out sucks. The hardware may be abundant but that doesn't make it good.
None of those things make the G5 bad. It may not be ideal for everyone but then again neither is a PC and Linux. You damn bigots...
-- Of course we torture people, we need the information
--Gen. Pinochet
Re:Whining?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No it makes the G5 completely impractical. And as ususal there is always a small part of the population that is driven entirely by looks and a need to "belong" rather than by their brains.
So is the G5 "bad"? No. It's just useless and annoying for most people. Live with it, we have to live with Apples infuriating lies on TV and in print.
What's annoying about the G5? And come to think of it, what's useless or impractical about it?
I don't get it. So many posters state they hate/dislike/can't buy/won't buy/ apple products.
And then some people wonder why they're modded down? If you can't/won't use an apple or are offended by the G5, fine. I won't use a Linux desktop and get plenty of use out of my Unix desktop (OS X).
You interested in that? No? Thought so.
That's right, all my life, I wanted to "belong" and I need a Mac for that. There, now go out and smell the roses while "we" go on belonging.
-- I think, therefore I am...I think.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
>OKAY...I'll admit it. OSX is the best. How dare I question. Enjoy your 5% market share.
How come Linux/BSD/Unix is so fuscking great if it doesn't even have 1% market share on the desktop?
You, sir, are an idiot.
I rest my case, pass go and collect 200$.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 1
I thought Pentiums couldn't SMP. Did you perhaps mean an Athalon or a Xeon?
Also realize that the numbers quoted by Apple last month were for a beta version of their compiler. They and IBM have been updating a custom version of gcc that presumably will be released with Panther (if not before). So initially the comparison is a bit unfair.
The other issue is that most programs on x86 aren't compiled with icc. I'd suspect most are compiled with VS. And under Linux almost all compile with gcc.
Heh, I'm already saving pennies for NEXT YEAR
by
numbski
·
· Score: 1, Funny
I just got a 17" iMac last october, and I'm saving money up for a year from this september/october.
I want a dual 3Ghz G5 and HD Studio display. You see, I don't believe those penis enlargment ads that show up in my e-mail. I know for a fact my fallus is directly linked to the power of my computer.
<embed type="Maniacal Laughter">
--
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
Re:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe
by
Rosyna
·
· Score: 2, Informative
AFAIK and can guess, this is the last legal date they can give you before it becomes... lame (I don't know the name for it) in either all or some states. This way if the quote a date like next week and you get it a week later you won't be all pissed. But if you get quoted November (or in my case October) and you get it in late August you're just super happy because it was 1-2 months early.
I'm no mac owner, but what would you reccomend? Should apple play the MHz game too? It would be pretty easy for them to say "equivalent to a Pentium 4 2.7 GHz" or something to that effect. Maybe it's not true, but we know marketing departments aren't confined by limits such as "truth" and "honesty."
No, I'd rather them slowly take marketshare while saying "This is a 2GHz chip, we think it will still impress you when set side-by-side to a 3GHz x86."
Not his point
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
His point was that it is the first one a "computer dummy" might buy.
Re:Not his point
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Or, more to the point, making a light notebook is not cheap; one needs to produce a light notebook in large quantities to recoup the R&D costs of designing a light notebook.
The only way this is possible is if the notebook in question has a large market; most computer users are "computer dummies" and will only buy a computer they can use.
And, yes, a "computer dummy" can use cryptography, simply by going to https://their-bank.com/manageaccount/, and they can use hi-end rendering, by playing a high-end video game.
Re:Steve Jobs said that it's the year of the noteb
by
torpor
·
· Score: 1
Yeah... I type this on my aging yet solid rev. a pbook g4 which I got *right away* because I loved the Apple laptop design, and boy was I happy with the direction it went with the 17"... but I'm still waiting for the next Big Thing to burp its way out of Stevies reality bubble and onto the Market...
In terms of 'coolness' factor, I think the G5 release was pretty good - timely. Apple needed to make a processor stand, and... well... they did this pretty smoothly.
If they put a laptop out that has two cpu's (dual 1gz G4 would be fine) and 2 gigs of RAM, a 17" with design revisions, I'll sell a body part to upgrade. But... maybe not this year.
-- ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets.
--
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
I'm not concerned about PCI-X. What PCI-X cards would one even use? Why would anyone buy into PCI-X when PCI Express is coming next year?
flamebait?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Why does the comment "I want one, but I have no money:(" get modded down to -1, Flamebait?...
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Jeremy+Erwin
·
· Score: 1
Anybody know if the 1.6 is actually limited to 4 GB, or it's just limited because it lacks enough slots to get up to 8GB with currently available DIMMs?
Damn you!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If I wanted to extravagantly waste $2000+ I would buy a used Kia Rio, paint little flowers all over it, and run it into a tree.
Now I'm going to have to get a/. account just to put you on my Friends list. That was funny.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
... and yet, since software is compiled, it doesn't matter what compiler you use, it's fair.
The real world consists of compiled software.
So it's the speed of compiled output that matters.
If the compiler isn't optimized fully for the G5, whine at Apple, not us.
I doubt you'll be able to make use of 2-2-2 memory's extra speed without firmware hacking. AFAIK, firmware hacking is done in some version of FORTRAN. Some Japanese people have been rather clever with Apple's firmware, changing bus speeds and other strange things by writing even stranger things into registers. Time will tell.
I'd personally get the 1.8 as it seems slightly more futureproof.
-- Jag pratar lite svenska.
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
> I doubt you'll be able to make use of 2-2-2 memory's extra speed without firmware hacking.
What the hell is Apple thinking? *shaking head*
> I'd personally get the 1.8 as it seems slightly more futureproof.
Yeah, definitely. At least the memory you get with it could be taken into a new machine down the road. I am planning on going with the low-end machine (now 1.8) to wait it out until the PCI Express machines come out (next year, hopefully). The 1.6 is priced more like I wanted than the 1.8, but that DDR333 is just not gonna cut it for moving RAM from machine to machine.
Still sucks that Apple can't make use of the best RAM available.:(
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's called "Forth." And you change the system bus speed by doing this:
dev/ setenv clock-frequencyhex_value_of_Hz
My old beige G3's "/clock-frequency" value is 03F940AB, or 66,666,667 Hz, a 66MHz bus.
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
bnenning
·
· Score: 1
The 1.6 is priced more like I wanted than the 1.8, but that DDR333 is just not gonna cut it for moving RAM from machine to machine.
Wouldn't the 1.6 be able to accept DDR400, just not use it at full speed?
-- How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
Yes, but since one has to pay for the DDR333 in the first place (when buying the 1.6), it becomes fairly useless. Who's going to buy DDR333 when everyone has switched over to DDR400 (both Apple & PCs)?
Apple should either make it possible to get decent RAM (charge extra - they're good at that), or make it possible to buy a tested machine with no RAM installed.
Same thing with keyboard & mouse. I've _no_ intention of using those crappy Apple mice or keyboards - they're gonna be replaced as soon as I get my G5. Why should I be forced to pay for them? Yuck. I _guess_ it's good to have a backup for emergencies, but still...I'd rather just use my existing USB stuff from my PC as backups.
I doubt you'll be able to make use of 2-2-2 memory's extra speed without firmware hacking.
The memory speed never had to be set in open firmware. I seem to remember to have read once in a knowledge base article that the system automatically uses the best possible timings that all chips support, but I can't find it anymore unfortunately.
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
shawnce
·
· Score: 1
From Apple's developer hardware docs (available on their developer site, no login required)...
70 RAM Expansion Preliminary Apple Computer, Inc. July 2, 2003 For all microprocessor speeds and for both DDR400 (PC3200) and DDR333 (PC2700) SDRAM DIMMs, the Power Mac G5 supports CAS latencies of 2, 2.5, 3, 4, and 5.
C H A P T E R 4 Expansion DIMM Specifications The RAM expansion slots accept 184-pin DDR SDRAM DIMMs that are 2.5 volt, unbuffered, 8-byte, nonparity, and DDR400-compliant (PC3200) or DDR333-compliant (PC2700). Important DDR266 (PC2100) or slower DIMMs do not work in the Power Mac G5 computer. Important DIMMs with any of the following features are not supported in the Power Mac G5 computer: registers or buffers, PLLs, ECC, parity, or EDO RAM.
Re:lower-latency RAM in G5s
by
krilli
·
· Score: 1
Cool.
Must remember to stop guessing at facts.
-- Jag pratar lite svenska.
Compare it to say, an Opteron...
by
Kjella
·
· Score: 1
Dual 64bit proc: Hmm... no 2GHz. 1,8GHz: about $900*2 (including VAT and all shit here) Mobo: $300 "The rest": Dunno, but I'm guessing several hundred $.
Total: Way past 2 grand anyway.
It's the frigging latest and greatest... of course it comes at a premium, and if you can do with less, you pay a lot less. I don't think the G5 is overpriced for what it delivers, far less so than some other Macs I've seen...
Kjella
-- Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> Also Jaguar has been a abysmal failure. Jobs chose > to alienate his user base by making almost 90% > of the software obsolete with this new release.
False, at least from a technical standpoint (I don't care about sales numbers, I care about getting work done). I write xplat Win/MacOS software, and this is not the case. 10.0.4 sucked, but 10.2.n has been a breath of fresh air.
If even.5 of Apple's "It'll just run faster" claims are true, my back-ordered dual CPU G5 will be worth it.
(gotta run, Timbuktu tells me that the.NET compiler hung my Windows box trying to clean a build again...)
3) Misleading marketing saying it's the "fastest PC".
Unlike Intel's entirely accurate and honest marketing. The Pentium 4 really does make the internet cooler.
Yawn.
(BTW: by any meaningful metric, the Power Mac G5 2x2GHz really IS the faster personal computer currently available, given that the 2x2GHz is technically available, in that units have shipped.)
I don't care what people say, Apple consistently revolutionizes the computer-packaging box industry. I will be proud to live inside of that beautiful piece of cardboard when the strains of financing the actual computer force me onto the street.
About time, now we can finally get an independent comparison review of the G5 vs Athlon and Intel offerings. Question is, how long will it take someone who isn't going to prejudice the tests to tell us how fast it really is?
how long will it take someone who isn't going to prejudice the tests to tell us how fast it really is?
More to the point, how long until people start to notice that CPU speed really doesn't matter much anymore. Anything (P3/4, Athlon, G4/5) running at over about 1GHz is overpowered for the vast majority of people. For the few people who actually need faster chips, it's usually the performance running a single specific application that matters. If you use Photoshop, and Photoshop runs fastest on a G5 then it wouldn't matter if an Athlon64 were 5 times faster in `objective' tests, if it ran Photoshop slower. The same is true of scientific computing, which frequently makes use of vector extensions, and so may run faster on AltiVec on a G5 than 3DNow! or SSE.
For the desktop, the level of integration of the OS and applications here is far more important than raw speed, and OS X wins hands down here. I'm excited by the new G5s, not because I'm actully going to get one, but because it should mean a lot of high end G4s will start appearing on eBay.
CPU Speed? When did I say anything about CPU speed? Of course you have to test the whole bloody system, I/O has always been the stumbling block for speed. A good SCSI 160 drive with a 3.9 ms access speed and a decent amount of RAM will be far more effective for speed than an upgraded processor.
The point I was trying to make is that Apples test results were so biased as to be fundamentally flawed. Slashdot had an article about it a little while ago, with hundreds of comments exposing different flaws with their tests. Heck the test companies results didn't even agree with their results for the Dell server when Dell had them do the test if memory serves. Frankly, any test done in which there is colusion, much less cooperation between the test company and the company whose product is being tested is inherintly corrupt.
A test must be done by an independent research team with off the shelf hardware and repeatable results. Software should not be optimized in any manner, since the overwhelming majority of people who use software won't optimize it. Your right in one regard though, certain platforms while always do certain tasks better than others. This is why benchmark tests must test a number of software packages across multiple platforms. If, after all, you run photoshop for a living and could care less about Quake, than the fact that a certain platform does best at Photoshop, the fact that it performs worse in most other tests becomes incidental.
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
SMacTech
·
· Score: 1
And just who the hell makes the processors everyone else puts in their rigs? I bet Dell makes the Intel chip too, eh?
Apple actually worked with IBM to engineer the G5. F'in faggots who have nothing better to say than Apple is slow and gay will find out just how gay they really are. How many of you ACTUALLY have used one ?
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
And you are the CEO of what fortune 500 company ?
Re:The answer to the "Gay computer Posts"
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
but aple is teh ghey !!!1!
Re:Sorry
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No.
Re:Not the fastest anymore
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
nuh-uh...
STEVE says they're faster...so, ummm, they ARE faster
ummm, i think, but those guys in shiny metal suits are calling to me...ooohhh 3 GHz
Reality distortion field weekening...can't breath...HELP...Steve...anyone!!!
In other Apple shipping news...
by
HTH+NE1
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
...DVD Studio Pro 2 also starts shipping today. Requirements include a 733 MHz or faster PowerPC processor (G4 minimum) and AGP graphics card, just shy of Shake 3's minumum 800 MHz G4.
Question is, if you're editing video, do you want a G4 or a G5, when the former has twice as many internal drive bays than the latter? Or is someone putting out Firewire enclosures that can fully utilize >128 GiB drives?
-- Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
after you get it, you'll only use your G5 to post all day on slashdot. Though I suppose it'll give you a new host of apple/64bit/OS X on BSD flamefests to join...
Kjella
-- Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:FUD
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Truth: market share matters even less than megahertz.
Truth: Apple has posted a profit lo eighteen of these past twenty quarters.
Truth: Linux companies are dropping like flies.
Truth: Linux blows.
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
MoneyT
·
· Score: 1
Apple designs the actual product, and the software to run on it. It's very simple actualy. Apple has a product they want. They want it to do X Y and Z. They look arround to see who has something close to what they are looking for, then they work with that company (using their own developers and developers from that company) to design a system which fits their needs. Then, Apple hands production over to that company.
-- T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
It's Not That Complicated
by
Nintendork
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
95% of the users out there don't think about what OS versions are coming up or how soon the next CPU will be released. The only technical thing they look at is the clockspeed and the size of the hard drive because those are the numbers that get larger over time. Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives? Why do you think software driven modems became a success? Why do you think people assume LCDs have a better display?
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
The current state of the economy and the marketing of a product are the biggest hurdles that the latest shiny product faces.
-Lucas
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
funkhauser
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
You need to stop eating aluminum-colored apples, man. It's impairing your judgment.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
phoebusQ
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
G5 Tower inexpensive? God, if only...
I think that a lot of the generalizations you make here refer to the common PC user. I use both PCs and Macs, and I can tell you that most mac users I have talked to are actually a bit more educated regarding their computer choices than your typical PC fan.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Nintendork
·
· Score: 1
I was actually using the success of the iMac as an example of what drives sales. As to your opinion that the average Mac user is a bit more knowledgeable than the average Windows user...I agree, but I don't think the difference is that big.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
phillymjs
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives? Why do you think software driven modems became a success?
Because hardware companies are cheap.
Why do you think people assume LCDs have a better display?
I didn't know people assumed LCDs have a better display. The reason most people I know buy LCDs is to get a larger physical screen size without having to sacrifice desk surface area for a hulking CRT.
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
Erm, no. We're talking about the professional market here. They knew the G5 was coming for the last year, just not exactly when. And I can tell you that every one of my clients, professionals one and all, were waiting for exactly what I said: the next generation of Macs beyond the G4, and OS X-native QuarkXPress. If you had read the articles in the Mac press since 10.2 was released, you'ld know that that was by far the predominant stance.
I was waiting to replace my primary home machine as well, nursing along a 6 year-old Power Mac-- finally last year I couldn't wait any longer and picked up a used G4 that had the horsepower to run OS X, because I needed to get familiar with it so I could effectively support it when the time comes. In January, the G4 goes bye-bye and I get a dual G5, which is what I was waiting for all along. I just hope Apple manages to catch up with demand by then.
~Philly
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Ah well, as an iMac buyer, I'll tell you what drove my sale.
1. It had enough oomph to run OSX - I could tinker with Unix, while using it as a productivity tool.
2. iMovie, iDVD bundled
3. Microsotf Office available
4. And yes a cute design - space was at a premium in my office.
As far as I recall "named after fruit that matches the color" didn't figure in my reasoning. Mind you, I'm not sure it actually parses as English.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I have a Rev B bondi iMac that I use as my router. I just installed Debian, plugged in a USB ethernet adapter, set up some iptables rules, and I've hardly touched it since.
And why not? iMacs are every bit as much "real" computers as any ugly beige PC is. Their PowerPC CPUs are just us powerful as any other PowerPC CPU of the same speed (in fact, I believe that Cicso uses PowerPCs in some of their routers); their IDE hard drives are the same as any PC IDE hard drive; their ethernet and USB controllers are just as fast as any comparable PC part.
The appearance of a computer has nothing to do with it's usefulness or its capabilities, so I don't see why someone would not want to buy an attractive computer. Why would you want to have some ugly beige box sitting on your desk when you can have one that is just as useful and not offensive to the eye?
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
shaitand
·
· Score: 1
"I didn't know people assumed LCDs have a better display. The reason most people I know buy LCDs is to get a larger physical screen size without having to sacrifice desk surface area for a hulking CRT."
Let me rephrase for him. Why do you think most people assume the display on an lcd is at least as good? Actually though, we sell alot of lcd's most do think their not only as good, but better, when in fact the truth is the opposite. CRT's blow lcd's away in terms of graphics quality and performance. The only arena an lcd wins in is space.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
tomocoo
·
· Score: 1
Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives?
Quieter, uses less power
Why do you think software driven modems became a success? I read about Intel's move with software modems a week ago this is by memory: modem standards were different between countries (could not use a modem made for france in germany, etc. etc.) Intel made a modem that had flash memory on it that could be changed for different countries. Other manufacturers adopted the idea and Intel got out (Intel is largest in flash memory busines??). This created the lack of winmodem drivers for non-windows OS's.
Why do you think people assume LCDs have a better display?
Because they are easier on the eyes and colors are very good and the form factor is much nicer.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
kurosawdust
·
· Score: 3, Funny
There exists a corollary joke to this one, involving titanium apples and a burned crotch, but it is trivial and left as an exercise for the reader.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
larkost
·
· Score: 4, Informative
LCD's win in a number of areas:
Power Consumption
Space
No Flicker (really important if you stare at a monitor all day)
Possible digital connection (never have to adjust geometry)
Weight/Portability
Better pixel-to-pixel contrast (on digitals)
And if you get the right screens (mostly LeCei or Apple), they have beautiful color correction, at a par with the best CRT's.
This is vs. CTR's advantages:
Higher luminocity
Average color space is better (with exceptions above)
lower cost
higher refresh rate (important only in games)
So, I think your "CRT's blow lcd's away" comment is unwarranted.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Tower
·
· Score: 1
>The only arena an lcd wins in is space.
I'd also mention that working on an equivalent LCD is less stressful on the eyes over the course of a few hours or a day. I can be working on a brand new FD Trinitron tube at any several refresh rates, but I end up with less eye strain working on a (color and quickness inferior) LCD, and I know others who feel the same way. When reading/. or working on code, the afterglow in LCDs is not an issue the way it can be in FPS games and the colors are "close enough" since I'm not doing layout/publishing/graphic design.
Not to mention that my 18.1" LCD is way smaller and lighter than my 21" CRT, or course.
--
"It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Nintendork
·
· Score: 1
What's with the modding down and the defensive responses??? My post wasn't a dig at Apple, it was a response to the parent post. The one that made rediculous claims about soaring sales due to a new CPU model and a native Quark Xpress.
1) They would need a new machine to really make the most of OS X, and they wanted to wait until the successor to the G4 was available.
2) They didn't want to make the move to OS X until a native QuarkXPress was available for it.
I respond with an argument as to what affects sales and I get all these responses as if I were making crude remarks about Apple!
CRT's blow lcd's away in terms of graphics quality and performance.
I beg to differ. After using LCDs for a very short while, all CRT's are intolerably blurry to me.
I could see giving up an LCD for a plasma-discharge display or something else with a greater brightness and contrast ratio, that still had discrete pixels, but for my money CRT's are not worth considering anymore.
-jcr
-- The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I respond with an argument as to what affects sales and I get all these responses as if I were making crude remarks about Apple!
That's because you're trying to refute cold, hard facts, dummy! The market the G5 is aimed at doesn't buy Power Macs because they look cool. If you did any Googling before talking out of your ass, you'd see that Apple's tower sales have been low for the last year because people were expecting the G5 to be released a year ago-- but all we got were the underwhelming mirrored drive door G4s that were clearly "placeholder" systems. Mark my words, there is definitely pent-up demand for the G5.
Make your e-mail visible. I want to make a note of it so I can serve you a nice helping of crow when Apple releases their quarterly results for 3Q and 4Q.
~Philly
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Jon+Abbott
·
· Score: 1
You need to stop eating aluminum-colored apples, man. It's impairing your judgment.
Oddly enough, there is a band out there called Silver Apples...
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
mkldev
·
· Score: 1
Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives? Quieter, uses less power
Cooler. Ever try to stick eleven large 10,000 RPM drives in a tower?:-)
(And in other news, a blackout has swept the northeast. Investigators have traced the cause back to the sudden drain when a slashdot reader turned on his computer. More details as they become available....)
-- 120 character sigs suck. Make it 250.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Funny
I propose the following auto-moderation for spelling:
-1 "rediculous"
+1 "ridiculous"
-1 "teh"
0 "the"
0 "color", "humor", etc.
+1 "colour", "humour", etc.
Just a thought.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Senjaz
·
· Score: 1
LCDs are still sensitive to the position of the viewer which can cause problems if you are in an environment where colour is really important. There is still a market for highend CRTs.
-- Don't blame me - this.sig had steal me written all over it.
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I would also add that CRT's are probably the best option for 3D stereographics, not widely used I know but in molecular modeling its essential.
Chris
Re:It's Not That Complicated
by
funkhauser
·
· Score: 1
So who wants to start a Silver Apples cover band called Aluminum Apples? I call lead singer!
In other news, and possibly as a response to Apple shipping the G5, AMD skyrockets on the financial market; apparently traders know something Steve Jobs doesn't. More than 10% in a day, wheeew; looks like 1999.
Re:AMD responses
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What do traders know? If I listed to them telling me what I should buy vs. what I actually bought I would be so in the hole.
Re:AMD responses
by
Gogo+Dodo
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The jump is due to the analyst report, not Apple shipping G5s. You need to read the article you sited.
Re:AMD responses
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Maybe he wanted make a statement on G5's performance relative to Opteron/Athlon 64...
Idiot. The word "shipping" comes from (you guessed it) "ships", which were invented well before the eighties. Several years before: they were invented in the late sixties by Gene Roddenberry.
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Dude, that is SO true! In fact, Apple has been dying since 1985, if not earlier. It's been a long, slow, miserable death with nothing to show for it.
Forget all of the things Apple has brought to computing. Forget the Music Store. Forget the G5s. Forget OS X. Forget the XServe. Forget their pro apps. Forget that they're making money while everyone else but Dell is losing money.
Apple is "dead" as a competitor to Microsoft and the PC companies. The war for market share dominance ended a decade ago.
However, Apple can survive as a niche company. If it can keep coming up with innovative products (imusic, ipod, ect.), it could achieve Job's dream of it being a "digital lifestyle" hub.
Apple's margins are already much higher than other computer makers because its products are unique.
Re:Apple IS dying
by
Cyberllama
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I'm sorry, but my karma is already plenty healthy, so I have to come right out and be honest, even though I'm certained to be modded down as flamebait:
Apple as a platform isn't just dying, it's already dead. Apple as a company is not. Apple occupies a comfortable niche in the computer market because of its dedicated following and strong video processing capabillities. As long as this remains true, apple will continue to profit and continue to stick around.
However, as a platform, it is long dead. Remember back when Apple dominated the pc market? They were the first company and had the upper-hand. All they had to do was cling to their market share like Microsoft does now. But they didn't fight dirty enough and now they lack the leverage they need to ever reclaim it, no matter how super-special their latest offering might be (and btw, I'm sorry, but for my money, I still I get way more value out of intel or amd's latest offering than Apple's).
Apple no longer even dominates the educational market like it used to. No *serious* gamer uses one, and don't get me started on the desktop market.
Apple isn't dying; it's already dead. A band of dedicated followers and their continued innovation in other fields (think ipod/itunes) will continue to keep apple alive as a company, but I strongly doubt it will ever be taken seriously as a computing platform again.
Bring on the flames. ..
Re:Apple IS dying
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yes!! That ought to be their ad campaign slogan.
"APPLE. Going out of business since 1984"
Kinda reminds me of a skit from Almost Live (Anybody from the Pacific Northwest?)
"Everything is on sale. We are going out of business. This time we really, really mean it. We are dead, kaput,... "
Re:Apple IS dying
by
mcwop
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Because the platform is not popular or high in market share does not mean it is dead. That seems like some faulty logic to me. And, BTW I tried to get value out of an Intel machine it failed miserably. In fact my Compaq machine only operated slightly better than a dead computer. My Macs have done fantastic.
People throw around Apple's market share number of 3%. Why? Becuase three is a small number. But 3% of what? If we talk world population that would be about 145 million people. I will admit that 3% of the world population does not have an Apple. In reality Apple's world market share in people is around 26 million. That is not chump change.
Anyhow, thanks for opening my eyes. I never realized it, but all this time I wasn't taking my Mac seriously as a computing platform.
--
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish."
-NOFX
Could you people please quit bitching about the one-button mouse? I bought a G4 three months ago, and guess what? The 2-button-and-scroll USB mouse that I bought to go with it was only $25.
Hey, when you buy a new PC, have they started giving you optical mice yet? I sure do love those little rubber balls! Sheesh.
-- Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
OK, i just posted elsewhere to the same effect, but it seems it is required once again. People aren't bitching because $25 dollars is too much, or because they thing ONLY one button mice are supported. People are bitching because it makes very little sense for a company to provide with systems and/or sell separately an input device that only a small number of people actually like. I'm talking out of my butt here in terms of actual statistics, but i would hazard a guess that most people do in fact go out and buy a new mouse instead of using the one button mouse. So, how logical is it from the standpoint of a company to say "Hey, lets ship all our computers with a component that is widely reviled, and will most likely be replaced at some small cost and inconvenience by the user and put on on the living room table as a conversation piece!" I figure that's why people are bitching. It's why i'm bitching anyways.
Why would you hazard a guess that obviously contradicts Apple's own research? Only one (of about ten) Mac users that I know has a multi-button mouse. I'm a power user and I still use modifier keys and a one-button mouse (it encourages me to think about non-power users when I'm developing user interfaces).
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Why would you presume that Apple's own research is more valid than the research and experiences of the other 90% of computer users who use a two button mouse? Either way, we may see an end to this debate if the rumors are true and apple comes out with a new mouse. Either it will be one button, two button or something really weird and possibly innovative:) Personally, i could probably live without two buttons, but the scroll wheel? Gotta have it...there's no way anyone could argue that they can navigate the web faster without a scroll wheel...
On what basis do you claim to know about the experiences of 90% of computer users? Have you conducted ten times the research that Apple has?
You are purely projecting your own wishes onto the entire computing population. "I find a scroll wheel indispensable, so everyone does".
FWIW, I use the scroll wheel all the time under Windows, but when I use my Mac, I use the keyboard instead, without really noticing.
I'd like to think that Apple's new mouse would break the mould... possibly no buttons, but primed to recognise stroked gestures?
-- "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
jared_hanson
·
· Score: 1
OK, you make a valid point that journalists should not always be taken at word. My only point was that I don't believe this guy should be moderated as troll and flamebait for saying that he thinks x86 architecture is in the future. He does have a point, no matter how invalid you may believe it is.
A quote from an article pertaining to Apple's recent share holder meeting:
At the company's shareholder meeting in April, however, Jobs asserted that Apple has "no plans" for a switch to Intel. When a shareholder argued that a move could be beneficial to the company, Jobs replied, "That is an opinion."
This is amongst discussion about internal projects at Apple that involve porting Darwin to x86.
First, let me state that I am an avid supporter of Apple, I love their stuff. However, I am less than enthused by most of the rabid Apple followers. It's a religion so feverishly followed that any speculation is considered fallacy. If it doesn't come from the mouth of the highest power, Steve Jobs, it should be ignored.
People speculate in their comments posted to slashdot all the time. Under normal circumstances, they get moderated up as Insightful or Interesting. Speculation on Apple promptly gets moderated down as Troll by the people who save points waiting for Apple stories so they can squash the thoughts of false prophets.
Anyway, see my amendment to my comment. I don't think the poster is all that intelligent with regard to his knowledge of Apple. But, the comment does not deserve troll or flamebait. Leave it unmoderated if you don't like it. Or give it an Overrated if you feel so strongly.
-- -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Insightful?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I said this same thing last week and got modded troll.
10.2 was the first release of the OSX line that could be called a true production 1.0 release. Everything before that was a mere beta. Poor disk IO, poor net IO, clumbsey UI components like the terrible next left over file browser.
Finally OSX can stand on it's own two feet.
I guess it's your fan boy line about licking steve jobs' feet and the combo diss at MS that makes all the difference:(
Funny... People have been saying that since the beginning of the nineties... Yet Apple revolutionize again and again, and show better prosper than ever. This year we got the Music Store, the Power Mac G5, the 17" Powerbook, the new iPods... Apple and Dell are the only companies in the same industry that show profits right now.
Is Apple dead?
Not by a long shot...
--
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
I bought a generic Firewire enclosure and 160GiB drive at CompUSA about a year and a half ago, and it has worked great with every OS X machine I've plugged it into (an iBook 600 and PowerMac 1.2). I've done direct DV recording to it using a Formac Studio and done basic to intermediate level video editing using both iMovie and FCE and have never had a single problem with the drive.
Apple has no competition (G5 discussion)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
(user opinion)
Apple has no competition.
The usual hoo-ha about market share is noise, not signal.
Pay attention to 'installed user base' instead of 'market share' and you will get a much more usable idea of what Apple, as a business, is really up to.
The 'PC market' equals a huge gradient of cash; Apple successfully siphons 3 to 5% of that cash.
'Low market share percentage' might mean something, if Apple was actually in competition with other computer manufacturers.
Apple 'competes' with other computer manufacturers in the same way that Mercedes and BMW 'competes' with Ford and Nissan.
The Apple installed user base continues to grow, 'even' while 'market share' is a small percentage of total systems sold. Apple products succeed because they are NOT 'like' the so-called 'competition'.
Apple (read: Steve Jobs) strategy of gaining 'mind-share' though quality, style, and ease of use is made ridiculously easy, by the self-sabotaging business 'plans' of PC manufacturers. Apple continues to ask a slightly higher price for much better goods, while PC makers fight among themselves to hold parity in a saturated market. Making a profit by cutting costs may seem reasonable, but cutting quality and customer support equals financial suicide, in the long run.
Apple has no competition. Apple products represent a separate universe of hardware, software, and attitude. Yes, that separate universe intersects the PC universe, but remains separate. Or 'different', if you will.
Apple products represent a 'step up', not just in price, but in overall quality and usability, and most importantly, in user self-esteem. I am not ashamed to be seen driving a Mercedes, and I am not ashamed to own and use Apple products. Ask a Ford owner if he would drive a Mercedes if he could.
Stop in at your local workman's pub, where auto mechanics eat lunch. Each of those guys, who work for a living, can build a car from the ground up. There is no faulting their knowledge or experience; they know automotive technology from the level of metalurgy, to embedded computers. They are the best on-the-scene critics of the products which they service. They can tune (overclock) for speed or economy. They each have opinions concerning functionality vs economy.
Ask a cluster of experienced auto mechanics (machine hackers) to name 'the best car to buy' and then hang around for the ensuing discussion. You will find it enlightening. Then come back here to/. and read the remarks 'about' the 'Apple vs PC'/marketshare/price/cost issues.
Apple has no competition, but someone _could_ steal a bit of Apple market share, by analyzing how Apple 'does it' and simply emulating that behaviour.
-A.C.
Re:Apple has no competition (G5 discussion)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> Apple 'competes' with other computer manufacturers in > the same way that Mercedes and BMW 'competes' with > Ford and Nissan.
Except that BMWs and Fords use the same petrol. Not so with OSes and software.
Re:Apple has no competition (G5 discussion)
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 1
I thought all computers used 60 Hz A/C electricity. At least in the US/Canada. So yes, all OSes (outside of mainframes) do use the same petrol.
Now if you were talking about other kinds of parts, then you might have a part. But trying to just drop in a Ford engine into say a Nissan car is no trivial matter. Probably harder than recompiling a Linux program to run on OSX or running a Windows program in VPC.
Re:Apple has no competition (G5 discussion)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Hard to imagine that in a two-sentence post you still managed to miss half of it:
> Not so with OSes and software.
When you get Joe Consumer excited about running a compiler he'll be using Linux, not Apple.
And Joe Consumer isn't excited about running a compiler.
Must -- not -- respond -- to -- trolling -- anonymous -- coward -- must -- not -- respond....
Can someone explain to me why I should buy A Mac when I can get a faster PC for less?
Why would anyone pay $2000+ for a Paul Reed Smith guitar when they could get a Fender Squire for $200? Why do people pay millions for Stradivarius violins?
A Mac is like a fine musical instrument. It usually isn't "just a tool." Attention to detail, fit and finish figure into the value.
A Mac is like a fine musical instrument.
The G5 really is all that.
by
GPS+Pilot
·
· Score: 2, Informative
-- That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Re:The G5 really is all that.
by
nutshell42
·
· Score: 1
Quoted from that page:
You may have heard different. You may have heard that Apple fudged the numbers, cheated on the benchmarks, that the Pentium is faster after all, and that Steve Jobs lied to us. I?m here to tell you it?s an ugly urban legend, repeated by an all-too-predictable ?geek chorus? of fools and liars, in a blind panic over the fact that Apple ships faster boxes than Alienware, repeated by those who have an agenda against Apple and an investment in slow, legacy x86 processors.
[Macedition Information Minister]
I tell you there are no processors faster than the G5; the execs of Intel and AMD commit suicide outside of apple shop. They build cpus only to destroy them because they are dog-shit. Long live Apple. Long live Steve Jobs
[/Macedition Information Minister]
Sorry but pages like that make/. look impartial on the Windows/Linux issue
-- Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Also, if you order the machine with upgraded RAM, or with say, Mac OSX Spanish, or with an iPod, or anything at all, you cannot return it. You can only exchange it. You can return only the barebones stock systems.
Actually, this weekend I was playing Strategic Conquest, which is at least 13 years old, on OS 10.2.6 in Classic mode. I actually downloaded it to run on my SE/30, but while I was sitting at the iBook I decided to see if it worked, and ended up spending hours battling the computer over iconic cities on polygonal islands.
My card just got charged!
by
wezelboy
·
· Score: 1
And I ordered a 2.0 GHz Dual!
Too bad I'll be at Burning Man when it arrives...:-(
Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Exitthree
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Macs are hardly known for their long shelf life (i.e. builtin obscelesence) so it seems that the best strategy is to wait for a machine which actually delivers on its promises (and throws in some extra Ghz in the meantime) and not some half baked go-between.
Macs are definitely know for long shelf life. In fact, it's one of the Macs strongest arguments. I personally know someone still using a 9 year old Mac as her production machine, simply because there was no real necessity to upgrade. She hopes to be moving to a G5 now, but 9 years is almost unheard of in the computing world. In fact, this lifespan is one of Apple's problems. The move to OS X has been slow because people are happy with their current computers and don't want to adopt a new OS yet while their computer has life left.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 1, Informative
What I mean is that after 4 or so years Apple basically dump support for a model. As soon as you buy a Mac, the clock is already ticking on how long you can expect the operating system and new software to work on it. Look at people who own a G3 towers, and ask if their days are numbered now.
The same is not true at all in PC land because even if you have a machine which is genuinely so obsolete that it couldn't run XP for example, you could still swap parts out of it until it could. A case in point would be a Gateway 450 that I own - I replaced the motherboard, stuck in a faster Athlon and more memory and it's as good as new, all with off the shelf parts. I even have an older machine (now retired) which was 12 years old, starting first as a 486sx 25Mhz (before the first Gulf war no less), then upgrading to a DX266, then a DX4100, and then a P133. Even up to the end it still served a purpose, running Mandrake Linux as a firewall.
Try that with a Mac sometime. If you're lucky some third party will offer some accelerator board but for the price of those you might as well go out and buy a new Mac. Still, I suppose when all's said and done you might be able to install Linux on it, but forget running OS X.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Exitthree
·
· Score: 1
The computer I'm speaking of, the PowerMac 7100, was released in 1994. It wasn't until 1999 that OS X Server shipped, which was the first OS the machine couldn't run, but that was a server OS. That's 5 years. Consider, also, that OS 9 was updated several times before it removed 7100 support (it runs up to 9.1), some time in 2000-2001. That's 6-7 years.
Now consider the original G3, released in 1997, a full 3 years before the OS X beta was released. OS X beta does run on G3s, as does the 10.0 release, 10.1 and 10.2. Only 10.3 removes support for the original G3, which, when it ships will be more than 6 years after the introduction of the computer. That's 6 years.
Now, for consumer machines like the iMac, it is true that support ends faster, however, it's a consumer machine and consumers tend to dump their machines and replace them. An original iMac still got 4 years out of its useful life, which isn't shabby at all.
Most of your argument about recent lifespan of Apple computers has to do with the release of OS X, a huge change in how Macs operated. There were bound to be some ripples and snares in the whole process, as could be suspected in such a dramatic change. However, now that the messy work has been finished, I expect Macs' useful lives to continue to be as long as in the past.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Cheech+Wizard
·
· Score: 1
You bet. I finally bought a New mac last fall after using my old 8500 for almost 7 years. Now the 8500 is essentially one of my 2 media servers - so it's still in use.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
toddestan
·
· Score: 1
Well when you look at the money you fork out for an Apple, it's not surprising that people tend to hang onto them for such a long time.
In the PC world, I can get a pretty nice setup for ~$500 or so. And I can replace that setup for ~$500 later on with something better, or I'll be upgrading it. So it's no surprise some people get a new PC every 2-3 years or fork out some money for some substantial upgrades.
But if you look at the top end PCs, like $2500 or more, they are so ridiculously overpowered (250GB+ drives, 1GB+ of ram, 3.2Ghz+ processors, tons of toys like DVD writers) that if I was to buy one I would easily expect atleast 5+ years of use out of it without major upgrades or replacing it. That's where I see the Apple G5 right now.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Pass the Mac Crack. Macs don't have any more inherent longevity than PCs. (Wanna see my Pentium-133 that runs Windows 2000 without complaining? Or any number of 1997 PII machines running XP?)
It just seems that way because Apple's CPU development has been so retarded in the last few years. Thus fully depreciated G4-450s and the like are getting huge resale values. As soon as the G5 hits volume, tho, those days are over - a G3 will be about as sexy as your 7100.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
GlassHeart
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The same is not true at all in PC land because even if you have a machine which is genuinely so obsolete that it couldn't run XP for example, you could still swap parts out of it until it could. A case in point would be a Gateway 450 that I own - I replaced the motherboard, stuck in a faster Athlon and more memory and it's as good as new
Of course it's good as new. It is new.
New motherboard, new CPU, which presumably meant new RAM. You might be reusing your old video
card (wonder if you can find XP drivers?), hard
disk (even more disproportionately slow compared
to your new CPU), and LAN card. Note, however,
that an 80 GB hard disk costs under $100, and
along with the cards you might have saved $150
or $200.
I agree that a Mac cannot be upgraded as a PC
can be. However, thanks to a vibrant used
Mac market, you can sell it to offset the costs
of a new one. Check on eBay, and you'll find an
Indigo iMac (350 MHz G3, 64 MB RAM, 7 GB hard
disk, running OS 9) going for $300+ with dozens
of bids.
So the question is, can you really save much
more than $300 worth of parts from a 2 year
old PC?
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Now, for consumer machines like the iMac, it is true that support ends faster"
FYI: Panther (10.3) will support all iMacs. Because the Bondi iMac was the first to use the NewWorld architecture, and Panther will require NewWorld, it will actually be the *oldest* Mac to run Panther.
(But I'm sure there will be plenty of hacks come September, or whenever 10.3 comes out, to make it run on OldWorld machines.:-) )
WM
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 1
No it isn't new. The motherboard, cpu and memory certainly are, but the rest of it - keyboard, mouse, PSU, case, monitor, gfx card, harddrive, modem - are not. In other words, I have taken off the shelf parts (costing around $350) swapped them for the old ones and completely rejuvenated my machine. It's not some wacky daughter board that sits in the CPU socket of my old board and twiddles the voltage and clock speeds the new CPU to work, it is a brand new PC indistinguishable from any other and has no compromises on its performance. Hell, I expect I could even slap an 64-bit Athlon board in there at some stage.
The same is not at all true for the Mac. You can forget off the shelf for starters. If you're lucky you'll find some third party who'll sell you some solution for your particular model, but you'll most likely be hobbled by the original motherboard architecture (e.g. some kludge to fit a G4 into a G3 socket), memory limitations, bus speed etc. or expect to do major surgery to do it. And all for 150-200% markup on the price that generic parts would have cost. Certainly if you buy Compaq or HP you might find yourself in the same boat with regards to custom cases that don't accept generic parts, but that's entirely avoidable in the PC world, not so in the Mac world.
I haven't seen anything in the replies to suggest otherwise - Macs have built in obselescence and it's quite obvious they do. The death knell is already ringing for G3 people and I expect my G4 will hear it in two or three years from now. Now I appreciate Macs for other reasons and would advocate their style, design and OS X over PCs any day, but not on this point.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
tomocoo
·
· Score: 1
No it isn't new. The motherboard, cpu and memory certainly are, but the rest of it - keyboard, mouse, PSU, case, monitor, gfx card, harddrive, modem - are not. In other words, I have taken off the shelf parts (costing around $350) swapped them for the old ones and completely rejuvenated my machine. It's not some wacky daughter board that sits in the CPU socket of my old board and twiddles the voltage and clock speeds the new CPU to work, it is a brand new PC indistinguishable from any other and has no compromises on its performance. Hell, I expect I could even slap an 64-bit Athlon board in there at some stage.
You saved yourself about $250 but it definetly isn't the same machine as it was before; it's the same case. If you had really saved your old machine (p2 450 I believe right) you could still have used it.. mine runs XP without a hitch and would easily run linux with the stock amount for a number of purposes.. mp3 jukebox.. firewall.. etc etc.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
li99sh79
·
· Score: 1
The same is not at all true for the Mac. You can forget off the shelf for starters. If you're lucky you'll find some third party who'll sell you some solution for your particular model, but you'll most likely be hobbled by the original motherboard architecture (e.g. some kludge to fit a G4 into a G3 socket), memory limitations, bus speed etc. or expect to do major surgery to do it.
Kludge? Wha? G3 and G4 chips both use ZIF sockets, just pop the old chip out and drop the new chip in. iMacs might be different, as are powerbooks, but laptops are never designed to be easily upgradeable, and the iMac --the first model anyway-- is essentially a laptop with a CRT. G5's might break the trend, but for the line of machines that Apple's designated as upgradeable (the PowerMac line) they can have every component down to the motherboard replaced by the end user, and in a case more elegant than most Wintel boxes. Even the beige towers are pretty well designed, though nowhere nearly as cool as the case design they introduced with the B&W towers.
Anyway, the breakneck pace of obsolescence is not unique to the Mac community, i mean how often do Intel and AMD introduce new chips?
-sam
-- I was just here, where did I go?
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
GlassHeart
·
· Score: 1
No it isn't new. The motherboard, cpu and memory certainly are, but the rest of it - keyboard, mouse, PSU, case, monitor, gfx card, harddrive, modem - are not.
First, let's take the monitor and hard drive
out of the equation. You can just as easily
re-use an old monitor and an old hard drive on
a PowerMac. Once
you do that, the value of your re-use is much
lower. The keyboard and mouse probably combine
for $50, the PSU and case for another $50, and
the modem perhaps $20 if your new motherboard
doesn't already come with one. If a 2-year old
(or older) graphics card is sufficient for your
needs, I expect that a viable replacement would
be worth $40, tops.
IOW, you saved about $160. I see it as a far
more significant contribution to the environment
(and I'm not being sarcastic) than to your
bottom line.
The same is not at all true for the Mac. You can forget off the shelf for starters.
The first thing I did when I got my
PowerMac G4 was to add some PC 133 RAM, put
in an old hard drive, and hook up two old
monitors. So it's probably more accurate to
say "the same is not all true for the
Mac". In fact, the most expensive items are
reusable.
Now, if you can resell your old Mac for $450*,
we can add the $350 that you were willing to
spend on a new motherboard, CPU, and RAM,
you have $800 towards a new Mac. Yes, it'll
still cost you more, but it's not the insane
percentage that many here like to quote.
You're also getting a new computer (likely
a bigger and faster hard drive, better video
card, new I/O ports), under warranty, with a
new version of the OS.
I'm not denying that Mac upgrade options
are less abundant than PCs. I'm just arguing
about the degree you appear to think it's at.
* A 400 MHz G4 has 12 bids for $355 on eBay.
A 466 MHz G4 has 7 bids for $595.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
TheSunborn
·
· Score: 1
How do you order an new mac widtout a harddisk?
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 1
Anyone who buys a G4 400 Mhz sans monitor for $355 is insane. And if it's *with* monitor then you can add that into your calculations.
Besides which, the bottom line is I managed to upgrade a six year old PC to a respectable spec for $350. All it cost me was the time to browse Komplett.ie for the spec I wanted and about an hour with a dremel to cut away a proprietary moulding on the back of my Gateway case. Other than that, I got a brand new machine with little effort at all.
I don't deny that *some* Mac upgrade paths exist but they pale totally in comparison with the PC world. Hell, you could buy a new PC in Walmart for the price that an upgrade would cost in Mac land.
As mentioned previously I own a Mac (two if you count a Mac SE I have living in a cupboard), so I'm not denying its other charms but future proofing and cheap upgrade paths are certainly not amongst them.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
DrXym
·
· Score: 1
If it were just a case of replacing a G3 with a G4 then people could just order a new chip and swap them over. Unfortunately it isn't like that at all, with most acceleration solutions consist of a daughter board of some kind.
Either this daughter board sits in the ZIF or replaces your existing processor card. Either way it is constrained by the limitations built into the rest of the motherboard. If the motherboard only operates at a certain clock speed, or has bus constraints, or anything else then so does your upgrade. And all for a premium price, with no guarantees from Apple or anyone else that it will support future versions of the OS.
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
mike77
·
· Score: 1
Check on eBay, and you'll find an Indigo iMac (350 MHz G3, 64 MB RAM, 7 GB hard disk, running OS 9) going for $300+ with dozens of bids.
I'd argue that's due more to the stupidity of people bidding on ebay than actual resale value of a Mac. I like Mac's, but people on ebay will bid $250 on anything that just powers up.
--
--Keeping the flame wars alive, one post at a time
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Gorbag
·
· Score: 1
Consider, also, that OS 9 was updated several times before it removed 7100 support (it runs up to 9.1), some time in 2000-2001.
Don't forget that there is third party software that will let your older 7100 (or 7600, which I have!) run 9.2.2...
In fact, I spent the money and got a 700Mhz G4 upgrade for this old 604e machine. It's happily running OS X, and while the system bus (at 50Mhz) is a bottleneck, it's less of one than some might expect.
-- --
I speak only for myself
Re:Wow, this is totally wrong
by
Gorbag
·
· Score: 1
Seems to me the motherboard IS the machine. If you replace that, you have a new machine, with hand-me-down peripherals, not an old machine you managed to keep alive.
All computers have built-in obsolescence, but that's due to the pace of upgrades in CPUs, memory, etc. not something designed in by the OEMs! I'm still happily running on a 7600 (bought new in 96). Until the new G5 came out, I had no compelling reason to upgrade.
"It's always better to wait"
-- --
I speak only for myself
Are you a crack-smoker or a hypocrite?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Apple has been very clear on what it is calling everything here: the G5(970) IS 64bi. Panther is 32 bit but can handle 64 bit memory addressing. This has come directly from their chief of marketing.
So where's the f'ing " stretching the truth or deliberately misleading depending on how charitable you're feeling"?
G5 Keyboards: Brush Metal??
by
jpalmerino
·
· Score: 1
Has anyone seen the G5 keyboards? What about the mouse? With Apple's current fixation with brushed metal (one I personally like alot), I would expect that the design of the new keyboards and mouse is consistent with the G5 case. Nothing bothers me more than the fact that my grey G4 (MMD) has a white keyboard and mouse. I'd love to purchase a new shiny metallic keyboard and mouse for use with my G4.
Re:G5 Keyboards: Brush Metal??
by
Steve+Cowan
·
· Score: 1
Can't you buy get the clear keyboard and mouse with the black keys and mouse innards instead of white? White was introduced with the flat iMac, but I always thought the more sinister-looking black keyboards looked better with the towers.
Re:G5 Keyboards: Brush Metal??
by
jpalmerino
·
· Score: 1
If you can find one of these black keyboards, post a link. Apple seems to have discontinued them and I haven't found any new "graphite" keyboards on the web.
Besides, I want the brushed metal look...not black.
Re:G5 Keyboards: Brush Metal??
by
Steve+Cowan
·
· Score: 1
Very interesting article I noticed on thinksecret today... I thought of this thread when I saw the article.
First let me say that I take what I read on most of the rumour sites with a grain of salt, but Think Secret has been pretty damn accurate for the past year or so.
Anyway they are suggesting Apple will shortly be replacing their mouse and keyboard with Bluetooth models. Doesn't seem so absurd, and I'll bet if it's true they'll be updated cosmetically too...
try describing a sunset to a blind person...
by
mojoNYC
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
and you'll know what it's like for a mac user to try to explain the 'difference' between mac and pc (or maybe a better metaphor might be 'try explaining sex to a virgin??)
here's a clue, it ain't in the processor speed, it's in the software, stupid...sure pcs have the same kinds of programs, but they don't run nearly as well...the latest examples being the iPod, iTunes and the Apple Music Store--each one was being done on the pc, yet Apple came in and changed the game with its products, with an experience that's totally superior in every way (my girlfriend gave me her old iPod when she got a new one--it sat on my shelf for a couple of weeks, until i finally started to use it, and no shit, it changed my life! i can now carry my entire cd collection in my pocket, and the thing works like a champ)...here's a tip, to any flamers that say 'so what' about any of these examples, i would bet the farm that they've never actually USED any of them!;>
-mojo
Re:try describing a sunset to a blind person...
by
data1
·
· Score: 1
Dude, you are already different from most Slashdotters - You have a girlfriend. Oh, and you have an open mind. Yeah, that too.
Re:try describing a sunset to a blind person...
by
shaitand
·
· Score: 1
I've used macs, actually the only thing I DIDN'T like about them was the software. The hardware (used to be) pretty nice. MacOS gimped power users with a passion, maybe this is improved in OS X I don't know.
I had no trouble navigating or acomplishing any simple task on MacOS, but the more detailed and specific I found my needs to be, the more MacOS failed me. The apps were great, if all you needed to do was find a solution for ftp, there was an easy and intuitive solution on the mac... if you needed to get advanced and customer configure your ftp client for a connection beyond just port and password it failed. It was the same for most every app. I hope this has improved in the last couple years.
A mac now is basically a pc with highly proprietary hardware and an inexpensive RISC processor.
As for the ipod... there are other mp3 players out there with it's capacity. As far as I understand it's locked into a specific app and there is no way you could go to a friends house to plug and go.
I prefer one-button dragging interfaces over right-button menu interfaces. For instance, I usually drag links in Mozilla up to the tab bar to open new tabs.
I find the G5 cardboard box to be stikingly different from Apple's current boxes. It grabs your attention immediately. As for the G5's design...It too is somewhat of a departure, but distinctly Apple in nature.
Now, if only they'd show us the keyboard and mouse. Are they brushed metal? If they are, I want them for my G4
I just got a 2.4 Ghz Emachine with 256MB of RAM, CDRW, and an 80GB hard drive for $450. Your turn Apple.
That's not something I'd admit to in a public forum such as this.
-- "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
Dukael_Mikakis
·
· Score: 1
OpenSource OS kernel: $0
IBM developed (jointly?) processor: $800
Stylish 1-button mouse (no mouse wheel): $1199
Knowing you can run benchmarks under special conditions and configurations faster than Dell customers: priceless
Well, considering that there is a working x86 kernel that is compatible with the basis of the Mac OS X system, Darwin, it appears that we are much closer to hardware abstraction than previously. This is a luxury of the *nix method - many platforms, one system customized to each set of hardware.
Obviously, it is not as easy at I made it sound, but easy isn't what it is about.
Comparing Mac OS 8/9 to Mac OS X, we are in fact now a tweak away.
-- Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
As an aside (but isn't everything here an aside), I'd like to point out that if Bluetooth isn't added at the time of purchase (as a BTO option, which I think means you can't return the machine) it can only be added as a USB dongle.
The Bluetooth capability is added onto the motherboard and will not be available as an aftermarket add-on. If you do chose to get Bluetooth built in also not that there will be an external antenna on the back of the case. Same for AirPort Extreme - you'll have an external antenna coming out of the back of your box.
For the same reason people buy Porsches when they can get a faster car for less.
too damn expensive
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
if i had about 13 thousand american dollars i would find something better than a damn computer to spend it on...
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
8GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 8x1GB
2x250GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
AirPort Extreme Card
Bluetooth Module
56k V.92 internal modem
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Fibre Channel PCI Card
Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
Mac OS X - U.S. English
iPod - 30GB
iSight
Logitech Z-680 THX 5.1 Speakers & Monster 2-meter Cable
AirPort Extreme Base Station (with modem and antenna port).Mac Promotional Bundle
APP for Power Mac (w/ or w/o display) - Enrollment Kit
Dual 2Ghz Opteron 4gb PC2700 SDRAM - 4 x 1gb 2 x 200gb ATA drives Nvidia Quadro4 980 Samsung 240T 24" LCD: $4569 Bluetooth USB module: $30 802.11 PCI Card: $90 DVD+R/+RW/-R/-RW Combo Drive Firewire Card LSI Logic 449290 2 Channel 2GB Fibre Card: $1417 2 x Copper HSSDC2 to SFP FC cables: $200 Black Keyboard Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical Windows XP Professional iPod - 30gb: $499 iSight: $149 SoundBlaster Audigy2 Platinum EX Logitech Z-680 speakers: $399 AirPort Extreme Base Station (with modem and antenna port): $249
$6,621 + add-ons = $14,223.
I still don't have extended warranty added, nor an equivalent software bundle to what comes with the G5, and it is still short 4gb of RAM. But the Boxx M4 only has 4 DIMM slots so getting 2gb DIMMs is harder to get and much more expensive. Howveer, I get to pay at least $1240 more for something that probably won't work together as well.
NOT.
Thanks!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You just proved the two most obvious of statements with that link.
1) Apple ISN'T dying and
2)They're also not beating Microsoft in the market!
bra-vo. *clap* *clap* *clap*
12 year old software runs just fine
by
benwaggoner
·
· Score: 1
Actually, ancient software runs just fine under OS X via Classic. I caught my dad playing a circa 1989 build of Shanghai a few months ago on his G4 Cube, running 10.2.
The only odd thing it did was to switch the computer to 8-bit mode while it was running, and not restore it afterwards.
Just answering AC's question. He asked for it, I gave it.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
well that makes it so much better.
and I bet you pay extra for it. so what is the benefit?
Well, no, you pay extra for the Apple, which is why they should include some name-brand memory rather than cheap stuff. It seems like everything else that comes in their machines are top of the line, so why not memory?
... and for the record, anyone who has run OS X would know better than to say "login to a text console".
Cause, like... there isn't one.
-- The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Re:Text console?
by
Bob[Bob]
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Erm, so what happens when your enter ">console" as your username in the login box?
Re:Text console?
by
Lifewolf
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Cause, like... there isn't one.
sudo/usr/sbin/nvram boot-args="-v"
Then, as root, open/etc/ttys in a text editor. Comment out the line similar to console "/System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app/Cont ents/MacOS/loginwindow ", and uncomment the line similar to console "/usr/libexec/getty std.9600" vt100 on secure
... and for the record, anyone who has run OS X would know better than to say "login to a text console".
Cause, like... there isn't one.
At the login screen, Click Other... then type ">console" as the username then click Login. Welcome to the text console.
I use a six year old Power Computing PowerTower Pro as an OSX webserver. I don't login locally but I do login remotely via SSH, so I usually leave the server running headless, at the login screen.
-- Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
...and for the record, anyone who has run OS X would know better than to say "login to a text console".
Cause, like... there isn't one
Um, like... there is one: Entering ">console" as "username" lands you at a full screen plaintext login prompt.
Re:Still suck
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sheesh, I wish my x86 Linux box had a chance to suck -- but I only have an undergraduate degree in computer engineering so I was never able to get it working.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
God+of+Lemmings
·
· Score: 1
Delusional is more like it.
-- Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
G5 the last in that line?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Re:G5 the last in that line?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It means nothing. 500 of those 600 layoffs were in the Burlington plant, which has nothing to do with production of G5, All of the layoffs were in manufacturing, which has nothing to do with R&D. About a year ago IBM laid off about 1000 people in Burlington. I think there there will be something like 5500 people still employed there, so these layoffs are less than 10% of the workforce. All of this has absolutely zero relevance to Apple or the G5.
Why would Macs be dying?
by
Kjella
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It comes up every time, and the logic is usually the same: Too expensive.
The speed limit in my country is 100km/h max. Can you find a single car on the market that can't reach that? No. So then everybody should be driving around the cheapest of cheap cars then, right? Nope. People pay many times that for a car, though it'll get them there no faster (assuming you're reasonably law-abiding and doesn't speed beyond the capabilities of a low-end car). The Mac whining is about as bad as a person looking at a Ferrari, then bragging about how his compact car will get him from A to B just as fast at a fraction of the cost.
I'm more tempted to buy a Mac now than I've ever been since I moved off C64 to a PC. Perhaps not tempted enough yet (mostly due to applications I know and love), but the scales are definately moving in the right direction.
Kjella
-- Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
about as bad as a person looking at a Ferrari, then bragging about how his compact car will get him from A to B just as fast at a fraction of the cost.
The kicker is when the guy with the compact car uses the saved money to buy an airplane.
--
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Re:Why would Macs be dying?
by
derubergeek
·
· Score: 1
The kicker is when the guy with the compact car uses the saved money to buy an airplane.
And spends three times the amount on fuel, insurance, and maintenance than he would have had he just bought the Ferrari...
-- Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the/. bean counters might report.
Re:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Actually, Apple does this a lot. Within the past 18 months, I've ordered both an iBook and a Powerbook. Both had shipping dates that were about two weeks from the order date, but both shipped within a couple of days. The ship dates that Apple uses are their worst-case estimates (which is why they say "no later than...").
Re:Wild
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's not even a good one. Every claim is so totally ridiculous that there isn't even that half-second moment of doubt that a good troll gives.
Re:Mac Zealots and their mod points
by
zpok
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Well, it's like this: the mod system is here to pull interesting posts up and uninteresting ones down. If I go to the BSD section and post stuff like "Can't be bothered", "really don't care" "Interesting, but not for me", I get modded down.
Why? Nobody gives a shit.
If you go to the mac section to just say "bloody hell, that's expensive", then I say "I don't give a shit".
Not that I'm rich, but the times we've been over the high pricetag versus low maintenance issues...
Incidentally this also goes for "You're a faggot", "I hate mac", "Die Jobs, DIE DIE DIE" and the obligatory "verisign is lying", "macs are still slow", "windows/linux rules",
Everybody is entitled to his opinion, but you'll have a hard time making me care for statements like that.
Thus if I have the opportunity, I'll mod that sh*t down, regardless of how nice the guy/grrl is and will mod something enlightning up (even if it incidentally bashes the Mac. If it's interesting, it's interesting).
-- I think, therefore I am...I think.
Zen and the Art of...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Well, it's nice to see you managed to
form some notion of what "quality" means
in the context of that book. I read the book
and, for the life of me, couldn't figure out
what the HELL he was trying to say. As far
as I can tell, he never defines, describes,
or even hints at the meaning of "quality"
as used in the book. And worse, he
basically says he's not going to define or
describe it because that would destroy the
meaning. At that point, I stopped trying
to understand -- since at best the author
doesn't want me to (and more likely he
doesn't even know himself what he's writing
bout) -- and finished reading
the book for the sake of finishing, which
turns out to have been a total waste of time.
Well that was the point; Quality is in the immediate experience of something; once you start intellectualizing it you've lost it. I'd say Pirsig's best explanation of Quality was by imagining a world devoid of Quality - a totalitarian existence free of beauty.
I really don't think that this line of thought should be dismissed out of hand. We are not robots; Quality is why jokes are funny, why that song sounds good, why people smoke cigarettes, why people will spend a few extra hundred dollars on a computer, millions of things.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
for_usenet
·
· Score: 1
Different motherboards and different arches almost completely. The 1.6 is based on the older arch, with the above limitation (4 GB RAM, PCI slots, etc) whereas the faster models (1.8 and 2x 2.0 GHz) use DDR 400 and PCI-X.
Re:So what does apple do again?
by
slim-t
·
· Score: 1
Oh piss off, I was just paraphrasing the parent comment, I didn't say I agreed with it. I was hoping for replies like the one from Dukael_Mikakis, which was funny.
FWIW, I've been using Macs for over 10 years. Got an LCIII in 93 when I was 15, a StarMax clone in 97, an iMac in 98 (paid for by Mac shareware sales), and a PB G4 in 02. So yes, I've ACTUALLY used one.
Re:Only 2Ghz!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It is true if and only if the ratio G/P > 0.8
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
tantalus
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!)
Actually, Apple is using very nice samsung memory (with a lifetime warranty in the g5s. And if you click on the picture in that link, you'll see that those are samsung chips on a samsung PCB, which is the same RAM corsair, OCZ, and even mushkin has often used to get outstanding overclockable memory. These manufacturers just test the memory (if you're lucky) and cover it up with a heatspreader, which will void your warranty if you remove it to see what's underneath.
Re:Sorry
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Are you sure it is not like a parfait? Parfait has layers too. Coz' l like a parfait.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Re:Sorry
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yeah, like why people pay for Bordeaux 2000 when wine is a box cost only 3 bucks.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
WatertonMan
·
· Score: 1
The only thing it has in common with Linux is that you build it with gcc.
Well that and probably 90% of the software is the same. Other than where some startup files and configuration files are, most of Linux has is in OSX. (Well, you may have to install Fink and X11.app, but those are free)
Now I suspect you or someone else will get into this whole rant about how Linux is the kernel and not all the stuff on top. However for the vast majority of people Linux is the whole OS and software. Only Linux geeks on Slashdot get so picky about terms.
The point being that most of what Linux has OSX has. There are differences. A few packages aren't ported. And some, such as Wine, can't be ported due to x86 dependences. And you are right, the underlying kernel guts are different. But "phenomenologically" the way most people encounter both, OSX and Linux are fairly close.
Go get OWC 550 G4 upgrade
by
douglasq
·
· Score: 1
I have a B&W G3 350 that I upgraded with an Other World Computing 550 G4 ZIF. Go get one if you are not replacing your machine soon. It's worth it. Allows you to do things like iChat AV. If you use Photoshop, you'll really notice the difference. At least until you get a G5.;-)
-- "Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
Re:Go get OWC 550 G4 upgrade
by
megan_of_wutai
·
· Score: 1
You can use iChat AV anyway, not the video part, sure, but I've been chatting away to my friends around the world with my B&W G3 450 for a few weeks now.
Re:Go get OWC 550 G4 upgrade
by
douglasq
·
· Score: 1
No, I understand that. But I get pretty good frame rates with the video chat feature that I don't think I would get with a G3 350. The upgrade definitely gives this box new life and I wanted to let the above poster know it was a worthwhile upgrade.
-- "Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
Use Macs for Visual Arts and...
by
Dracanna
·
· Score: 1
I used PCs for years. Then I went back to school for visual arts and was required to use MACs for all the visual arts classes. After a year of using them almost daily I can honestly say WTF is the big deal about them?
Here is my list:
1) stupid mouse which they STILL haven't improved on
2) OVERPRICED. And the odd thing is the M$oft bashers here love apple.... but Apple is its own monopoly when it comes to hardware. Wasn't Apple that nice company who was suing a company who built Macs from indivdual Mac parts and resold them?
3) I can run Quark xpress just as fast and problem free on my Win XP machine. Same goes for Photoshop 7. And if you opt for a PC you still have money left over to afford the Quark or Photoshop software.
4) Guess what... Macs DO crash. Not just one computer, but *many* in my college have locked up, died, had fatal network errors or some other such nonsense.
5) And on a personal note, the whole Mac religion bugs the hell out of me. My college can't afford to upgrade to the G5 much less buy more Macs so there are enough computers to go around... if I could just unbrainwash them they'd be able to afford enough computers for all the Visual Arts students.
I'm glad there are choices in the computer world, but the G5 just isn't all that and a bag of chips.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
All the big memory houses have multiple product lines of varying abilities (and costs), so saying it's "Samsung" means very little.
My problem with the memory Apple is shipping is the latencies are horrendous, even for PC3200 (DDR400) memory. Very sad, considering the price premium they're charging.
When will the powerooks get G5s
by
Unregistered
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Has anyone heard when the powerbooks will get the G5. I think it may be soon as the powerbook is definatly a major product for apple.
Re:When will the powerooks get G5s
by
bigman8
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Probably when Apple/IBM can cool the G5 down enough for the PowerBooks. It took them a while with the G4. I would rather them do it right than have a PowerBook that melts within two months.
huh, black box? Are you looking at a 80's NeXT machine?
It is a big mofo, definitely not your average desktop machine. Wonder how they'll fit those processors and fans in an iMac.
-- I think, therefore I am...I think.
G5 in a PowerBook
by
dj_anisol
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Does anyone know what kind of timeframe until they put the G5 in a PowerBook? I am looking a getting one with a month or so, but would get not be happy if a month later they came out with the G5 version.
Re:G5 in a PowerBook
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Apple themselves have said "not for a while"-- they've got some serious cooling issues to work out to put the G5 into such a confined space as a thin laptop-- and then there's power management to contend with as well.
A G5 PowerBook would be great, but not if you only get 30 minutes on a full battery, and second-degree thigh burns from the underside.:-)
Rumor has it that a "big update" (but not the G5's) to the PowerBook line is coming tomorrow. However, Mac Addicts have been saying that every Monday for the past couple of months. Hold out as long as you can and then buy it...all technology eventually becomes outdated anyway.
Also, I thought I remembered reading somewhere that the G5's actually run cooler than the G4's. Is this completely wrong?
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
shawnce
·
· Score: 1
No the 1.6 is based on the NEW architecture, it just happens to have less slots and few other cost saving changes.
Define "dead"
by
chia_monkey
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
It still cracks me up when people say "Apple is dead" or "Apple is dying". How can a company that has been turning out profits for quarter after consecutive quarter be "dead"? A company that continues to set standards in the industry be labeled as "dead" is silly to me.
I know this analogy is overused, but is BMW dead? Because they sure don't command 95% of the industry. Poor BMW.
Apple as a niche player? Fine. If you want the best machine for doing your video work or whatnot, you know where to go. You won't find me running to my local Ford dealership for a high performance racing machine that I plan on racing in the circuits. I'll get my "niche" Panoz or Ferrari. Then again, if I feel like "downgrading", I guess I could always get an eMac.
Dead. They're not dead people. They're a company that is alive and well. No they don't own the "market", but just because McDonald's sells more fries than anyone else doesn't make them better either. They are alive and well, still doing R&D, still innovating, still giving shareholders value for their stock.
--
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
It still cracks me up when people say "Apple is dead" or "Apple is dying". How can a company that has been turning out profits for quarter after consecutive quarter be "dead"? A company that continues to set standards in the industry be labeled as "dead" is silly to me.
Its funny, you said the exact same thing I said, only you used nicer, fluffier language and you get modded up, while I get modded way down.
If you read my commment, you'll see I did not claim "apple was dead" I said that the "apple computing platform" was dead. I clearly stated that the company itself was doing just fine (turning a profit even).
I know this analogy is overused, but is BMW dead? Because they sure don't command 95% of the industry. Poor BMW.
Speaking of BMW, the difference is that BMW never dominated the market. They were never a major player, much less the ONLY player. If BMW had fallen from 95% of the market to only 5%, I think people would be saying "BMW is dead" too.
As for BMW analogy, I would argue that BMW, much like apple, occupies a very specific niche market. They do well in THAT market, but in the real world, they simply do cannot compete (nor do they really even try) with others.
Dead. They're not dead people. They're a company that is alive and well. No they don't own the "market", but just because McDonald's sells more fries than anyone else doesn't make them better either. They are alive and well, still doing R&D, still innovating, still giving shareholders value for their stock.
I'm sorry, but you apple zealots are the worst kind of zealots. I knew that would happen when I posted the comment, but like I said, nothing I say at this point can really hurt my karma, so who cares. I'm not gonna sugar-coat everything just becuase some people can't think rationally in response to simple facts/opinions that they find unpleasant.
The problem with your response is that you read my comment, you saw that I wasn't highly praising apple (and thus was immediately labeled 'anti-apple') and immediately fired off a response that, in reality, says much the same thing I said initially: Apple as a company will live on, but as a computing platform, they will forever be resigned to a niche market.
Apple only ever dominated the market when it had no real competition. So yes, while it did once dominate the market, look at the alternatives are the time. When the Apple II came out, the alternatives for home computers were mostly things you had to put together yourself and flick switches on to program. When the Macintosh came out, the alternative were machines that were like the Apple II. Now Apple's computers need to compete against machines with a similar user interface and similar features. To sell an Apple, the buyer needs to be won over that the Apple does these things BETTER than the alternatives (Windows/Linux/Solaris). And people, by and large, are stupid, so Apple doesn't sell to them since they see price as the major factor in a computer purchase, not quality.
Disclaimer: I own lots of Mac and love them. I have a AthlonXp2400 that gathers dust most of the day while I use my Powerbook G4
Re:Define "dead"
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Because the idiots think that marketshare percentage is important, when what is really important is the absolute size of your market share. More people are buying Macs, even though Macs market as a percentage of the overall PC market is declining.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
shawnce
·
· Score: 1
It is not that much different, it has basically the same chip set. It just has fewer memory slots and a lower end PCI bridge in line on the HT bus.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
shawnce
·
· Score: 1
Actually most of the software on Mac OS X at the Unix level are BSD tools not Linux based variants. Very few things that are considered Linux are in Mac OS X by default.
Apple as a platform isn't just dying, it's already dead. Apple as a company is not. Apple occupies a comfortable niche in the computer market because of its dedicated following and strong video processing capabillities. As long as this remains true, apple will continue to profit and continue to stick around.
There is a lot more going on than video. I own several Macs and I never do video. I use them mostly for programming and web development. An old iMac running Jaguar is my web server. I'm into programming shell scripts, perls scripts, PHP and such, and the stuff I write on the Mac can be deployed on any Linux / BSD / you-name-it web server. Since they all run Apache I can do precise staging right on my desktop. I wouldn't try that with a Windows laptop. Macs don't have Cold Fusion, ASP, and Frontpage tools. Thank God.
However, as a platform, it is long dead. Remember back when Apple dominated the pc market? They were the first company and had the upper-hand. All they had to do was cling to their market share like Microsoft does now. But they didn't fight dirty enough and now they lack the leverage they need to ever reclaim it, no matter how super-special their latest offering might be (and btw, I'm sorry, but for my money, I still I get way more value out of intel or amd's latest offering than Apple's).
I wouldn't consider any Wintel machine a better value than a Mac G4 tower - let alone G5. But that's just me. I have used both Mac and Windows extensively, and I just get more done on the Mac. I consistently find better software on the Mac side for anything you'd want to do. I find the Mac UI far easier to deal with on a daily basis. Windows programs are generally inconsistent with one another, which hurts productivity. Windows programs are not as thoughtully designed - with notable exceptions - as Mac programs. The best thing about a Wintel machine is that it can run OSs other than Windows, but Linux isn't anywhere near the usability of even Windows. Don't even get me started on the security issues of Windows. What a hassle. Who has the time to deal with email worms, BIOS settings, IRQ conflicts, DLL hell, the friggin' Registry, the BSOD, and all the junk in the system tray?
My point is, Wintel machines get in the way far too often for my taste. My Macs just work, and I get a good user-experience every hour of every day. Why would I trade that just to join up with the unwashed majority? Again, that's just me. Then again I also have no desire to attend a Jerry Springer taping or a Gallagher show, and both are apprently very popular.
Apple no longer even dominates the educational market like it used to. No *serious* gamer uses one, and don't get me started on the desktop market.
Lacking Dominance is not the same thing as being Dead.
You might want to talk to Peter Cohen about Mac games. He reviews them for MacWorld and can be found in the forums at MacCentral.com. He's a serious gamer. Yes, he owns a PC and plays games on it. And consoles. And Macs. There are some excellent Mac games that aren't on the PC or consoles. I don't play a lot of games on my Mac myself because I'm too busy programming one. It's built on SDL/OpenGL, which as you know makes writing cross-platform games a breeze.
Apple isn't dying; it's already dead. A band of dedicated followers and their continued innovation in other fields (think ipod/itunes) will continue to keep apple alive as a company, but I strongly doubt it will ever be taken seriously as a computing platform again.
It is taken quite seriously by me, in fact more seriously than Intel. I've been involved with computers for over 25 years as a programmer. The first time I saw 8086 assembly code and compared it to 68000 assembly code I became enlightened. The Intel processor architectures were hideous and hackish, while Motorola processors were elegant and clean. If you compare the processor architecture alone, including waste heat, power consumption, and transistor count, i
*MUST* every pro-apple zealot say the same stuff over and over? All of you feel compelled to make the same basic arguments:
1) The luxury car analogy - I admit, this argument sounds good. After all, this recasts the situation in a much more favorable light. However the fact is, Apple was once the ONLY choice. They dominated the entire market and now they are but a tiny niche (shrinking according to polls) in the PC world. "Dead", in this case, is a relative term. They've gone from king of the hill to bottom of the heap. Had Mercedes-Benz done the same thing, people would say Mercedes-benz was dead. . ..
2) "Wintel, Wintel, Wintel!" - This drives me crazy. I hate how you think you can argue Mac Superiority over the PC by marrying WIndows with the intel platform. As though windows were the only option. . . But you know what? If it comes down to it, and I only have a choice of windows or Mac OS, I'd still pick windows; at least that way I could play some games. ..
3) The Better engineering argument - All mac users can't help but wave wildly and point out how much better the macintosh is engineered. Why, its built from the ground up to be better!!
And you know what? They're right. The macintosh is beter designed. The RISC architecture is superior to Intel's. But who cares?
None of that MATTERS. Because no one buys Macs, they don't make enough of the chips to produce them at reasonable cost and thus for the price of a 2 ghz Apple, you can get a MUCH higher clock speed PC which is guarenteed to outperform it -- despite all of it's 'hackish' engineering.
The better machine may have lost, but living in the past isn't gonna change that.
-----------------------
I'm sorry, but I can't help how I feel. I'm not trying to troll anyone. Just glance at my karma if you don't believe me. I just call them how I see them -- and I'm sick of the same old arguments out of the pro-mac camp.
Re:Just the facts, man
by
bnenning
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If it comes down to it, and I only have a choice of windows or Mac OS, I'd still pick windows; at least that way I could play some games. ..
If you're a hardcore gamer, obviously a Mac isn't for you. If you're a user who sometimes plays games, I don't see why not. There are far more Mac games available that I'd like to play than I have time to play them.
Because no one buys Macs, they don't make enough of the chips to produce them at reasonable cost and thus for the price of a 2 ghz Apple, you can get a MUCH higher clock speed PC which is guarenteed to outperform it
No you can't. All available evidence shows that at worst the top-end has parity with the fastest available Xeons. And it's not at all true that Macs must always be slower than PCs. (If it were, Apple would have switched to x86 years ago). A superior architecture can compensate for lesser economies of scale. The first PowerPC Macs were faster than Pentiums of the time. The G3 was much faster than then-current P2s. Motorola screwed up big time with the G4, and Intel did a good job of scaling the P4, which accounts for the performance disparities we saw over the last few years. But that is the exception, not the rule.
-- How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
Re:Just the facts, man
by
steve_bryan
·
· Score: 1
> "Dead", in this case, is a relative term. They've gone from > king of the hill to bottom of the heap.
I suppose it is useless to respond to someone who is so clumsy in his use of language but I'll try to explain why you are being pilloried. "Dead" is not a relative term even if you declare it is. Dead would make some sense if the only way to get useful software for a Mac would be to run Virtual PC and buy PC software. But there are millions of people who have no intention of putting up with the crap of a Microsoft OS (I have an Athlon 2400 box running XP so I'm not speaking without experience) and the often flimsy excuses for software that PC users endure.
The odd fact is that you are further from reality today than you would have been several years ago before OS X managed to become much more robust and capable than any Microsoft OS and Apple's legacy Mac OS 9. If you cared to, you could try to make the case that Mac as a computing platform died with the passing of OS 9 since many know that OS X is actually the second coming of NextSTEP. But I saw no glimmer that you even suspect that.
As for your top of the hill, bottom of the heap you seem to think companies exist to occupy space. No, they are supposed to produce a profit and Apple is one of the few hardware companies that have been producing profits. They aren't even within sight of the bottom of that heap.
But the thing that seems the most mysterious to so many is why people like you revel in making the same prediction (the death of Apple) year after year for about 20 years and wrong every year. Let me give you a litmus test to watch. When Apple's annual WWDC can no longer attract a large number of paying attendants from around the world then you can start making arrangements. Until then the people are laughing rudely because you look so silly joining all those other psychics who still await vindication.
There was nothing clumsy in my usage (which is the proper NOUN form of use) of language in that quote. If you scanned the entire comment, I suppose you might find a grammatical error or two; but hey, nobody's perfect.
The fact that you feel compelled to attack the way my comment was written as opposed to the content of the message itself shows just how weak your arguments are.
Your problem is that you can't seem to seperate Apple the company from the computers they make. My position from the very first comment has been that apple the company is doing JUST FINE. They've had massive successes (well-deserved I might add) with both the i-pod and i-tunes -- and, thanks to a small, but dedicated, group of individuals, they continue to cling on in the PC market. It is not Apple (the company) that is at the bottom of the heap.
But that does not change the fact that the Apple computing platform is used by an ever-shrinking minority of PC users (despite apple's propagandistic commercials trying to convince people to switch). If you do not like my relativistic usage of the term "dead" (BTW, who says dead can't be used relatively?), then you at least have to admit that the platform is in decline (a slow one).
I have no doubt that Apple as a company will live on, nor that do I doubt that they make systems which in many ways are superior to those of the x86 ilk. Nonetheless, the fact remains that slowly but surely they are losing ground in a PC market which they once completely dominated.
P.S. Since it seems clear, given your standardized form-letter type response that you didn't really read my initial comments before responding, I have no reason to expect that I'm not wasting my time by typing this response. But should you happen to glaze over this comment and notice this request, please give it proper consideration: Please read my comment before responding. Thank you.
Re:Just the facts, man
by
steve_bryan
·
· Score: 1
I suspect I missed your original post because it was modded down too low for my threshold. I think I did read all your comments that were not submerged.
Let me try a couple of comparable statements and see your reaction. The Amiga is dead. The AtariST is dead. These were systems much admired by a fraction of the computer owning public. But they are truly dead because there is no more hardware and software being created (by commercial entities) for those platforms. The Newton is dead in a sense but remarkably there are individuals able to continue to create software and drivers that extend its usefulness. For a time it appeared that NeXT would be dead, but with the return of Steve Jobs to Apple its future became assured (well, at least in retrospect).
If all you're saying is that Apple will remain a multibillion dollar company (and not another clone assembler) with millions of customers and industry wide support and choose to characterize that as DEAD because there are even larger companies offering competing products, I guess we have no dispute. But I don't think your definition of "dead" is very useful or one that is shared by ANYONE else.
As long as Apple is designing and creating computers (and other products) for millions of people your pronouncement just sounds ridiculous. Maybe you could find a more accurate brief description for not utterly dominating that does not sound so unconditional as dead?
Well by your defination of Dead, virtually nothing is "dead". No matter how ancient of a system you dredge up, you'll find *somebody* using it *somewhere*. Technology doesn't die like an animal, all at once, but slowly as it breaks down and is replaced by something else.
By dead, I simply mean Apple, in the personal computing arena, can never really dig itself out of the hole its in now. I stand by my original claim: For the cost of an apple system, any apple system, you can always get a PC for less money that will outperform it.
I suppose if you disagree with that statement, then that is the core source of our disagrement. I have seen the G5's benchmarks, and they are impressive, but only when compared to a G4. The doctored benchmarks apple released just don't hold up in real world tests against intel-based systems with much higher clock speeds and lower costs.
I don't know about you, but if I'm gonna buy a luxory car, I expect it to out perform a non-luxory car.
Re:Just the facts, man
by
steve_bryan
·
· Score: 1
Well I wasn't emphatic enough in my examples. All of them are dead: AtariST, Amiga, Newton, and countless others could be thrown in like PenPoint and Symbolics. There aren't new books being written about them, or conferences, or software, or hardware. On the other hand all of those are on the upswing for the Mac.
It seems obvious at this point that you aren't interested in buying a Mac. Your mistake is in assuming this says something about the Macintosh as a platform when all it really indicates is something about you. Do you think I give a shit about some stupid benchmark (whether it says the G5 is faster or not)? My question is whether it runs OS X. If not, you lose. If I want to get a game machine I'll buy a PS2 or Xbox. If I want to spend a lot more (and more headaches, like I said I have an XP) then I'll buy a Windows box. But I thought the topic was computers, not game machines. But when you puff yourself up and make grand pronouncements I will speak up and point out how little content there is in what you say.
For instance you continue to make a big deal about the dominant position Apple had if you go back far enough. But the only machines they made at the time were the Apple II and possibly the Apple III. By the time they introduced the Mac in 1984 they were already a much less significant player. Their choice of the Lisa and then the Mac was intended to advance the state of the art rather than be the largest shipper of beige boxes. They succeeded after about 10 years. The future was won by machines that were designed to imitate the Mac.
I'll predict here for no extra cost that some time this decade Microsoft will again copy Apple and produce a real OS that is unix based with a Windows layer on top. Maybe that will spell an end for Apple's chances to make a useful contribution. I doubt it.
Oh come on now, let's be realistic. There are very few things driving the PC market aside from games. For all word-processing/desktop/internet usages, any pc made in the last 5 years can perform just as well as a new one. So unless a person is buying their first PC, chances are they are buying a new system in order to keep up with the latest games.
I suppose there area few other areas that demand higher end systems (video/graphics work for instance). But Grandma Sue doesn't need to upgrade her 3 year old compaq for a new top-of-the-line system just to send email.
Don't even get me started on consoles. . . Inferior resolutions and incredibly limited multiplayer options, (x-box live is crap) and lack of updates/support only make them suitable for casual gamers.
I'd estimate that a very clear majority of people replacing their old systems are doing so for gaming reasons. If, for some reason, they truly just felt they needed a better system for destkop applications, I doubt many of them are gonna spend 3000 dollars on a g5 or even 1000 on an imac when they could get a fine system for under 500.
As for the advantages offered by OSX? They are minimal. Surely its slightly easier to use and offers slightly fewer headaches than either windows or linux, but neither of those things will be of any concern to a power user. Microsoft (admittedly by copying others) has put together an offering than even good-old Grandma Sue can navigate without too many problems.
Believe or not, I've found the lack of software options (being that not as much software is developed for Macintosh systems) causes me FAR more headaches than sorting through a tangled registry ever did. ..
I really have nothing against Macs, I just don't think they're relevant anymore. ..
Re:Just the facts, man
by
steve_bryan
·
· Score: 1
I'll give you this much: at least you are refreshingly honest about your reasons. PC games were an important factor in why I assembled my Athlon 2400 XP Pro box (it started life as a Duron 700). The other part was to be able to use an HDTV tuner card. My three kids love to game, surf, edit graphics and so forth using both machines which are connected to DSL. In fact so is the PS2 (and an old G2 Power Center Mac clone running linux). I actually enjoy having the XP box because I enjoy a challenge. But it is unquestionably more fragile than my G4 OS X. Also an application I am working on has some unavoidably cross platform aspects to it.
I won't bother boring everyone with reasons why I prefer OS X (except for the obvious and easily understood factor that it just doesn't ever need to be rebooted except for some system updates). The happy fact is that we agree that games are a primary reason to have at least one Windows box.
Re:Just the facts, man
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
3) Better engineering: It does matter. I'd like to see a Gateway Profile 4 or home built PC take the fall that I watched a 17" iMac take without trouble. Its bottom was at about the level of the middle of my chest (I'm 6' tall), running, with a CD in it playing. It got knocked off the counter, landed top first on the screen's halo, and kept running without any troubles. The only damage done was that the plastic tabs that hold the halo on got sheared in their holes when it hit.
I'm posting as Anonymous because I don't feel like creating an account for my first, and probably only post on slashdot.
Re:Emachines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I just got a machine that wasn't crap from Apple. Your turn Emachines.
I would buy a PRS because it stays in tune and has better tone and sustain and has higher resale value then a Squire.
You are comparing apples (heh) to oranges.
A better analogy would be. You can buy a craftsman cordless drill for like $60. Or you can buy a Milwakee cordless drill for $220. The Milwakee is better balanced and has some really nice well thought out features.
But if all you need to do is drill a couple holes?.... Well then, as I always say:
Right tool for the right job. Something apple seems to overlook. Xservers
I can actually get ancient software (or even only as old as Riven) to run better on my G3 iBook than my 2.4 GHz P4 Dell with XP and Mandrake.
So change name from Apple Computer to ....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Apple Marketing". They're a marketing company, not a computer company. Market from Cuptertino. Build in Taiwan. Program in in India. Perfect modern marketing company.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Tycho
·
· Score: 1
Yeah here are some more things to watch out for with the 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz versions.
1. The 1.6GHz machine only has four DIMM slots as opposed to eight DIMM slots on the 1.8GHz machine.
2. The 1.6GHz machine only has 33MHz PCI slots that do NOT support PCI-X. The 1.8GHz machine has two 100MHz and one 133MHz PCI-X slots. In any case both machines do not accept 5V PCI cards and only accept 3.3V and dual voltage PCI cards. 3.3V keyed PCI cards have a notch in the edge connector at the front of the connector near to the metal bracket. 5V keyed cards have a notch in the connector near the back of the card. Dual voltage cards have notches in both places. 3. There are only two 3.5" drive bays and one 5.25" drive bay. The hard drive bays only have serial ATA connectors available. A parallel ATA hard drive will not work without an adaptor, which may or may not fit in the space available. 4. The Radeon 9600 Pro that ships with the G5 only has 64MB of RAM. If you want to play Doom ]I[ or other games with the highest settings and Antialiasing, upgrade to the Radeon 9800. Otherwise the 9600 should suffice for general office use. Also be aware that according to the developer note for the G5 the Radeon 9800 Pro is crippled with a 128-bit memory bus as opposed to a 256-bit bus on the retail 9800 Pro cards. However I think the developer note may be incorrect in this regard, but I wouldn't put it past Apple to do this.
-- Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
I can't tear the machine apart for parts, or (asside from Yellow Dog Linux) put another OS on it.
Or Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, or NetBSD, or plain old Darwin and roll your own distribution. There's even a very unofficial slackware project available. Or if you *really* like rolling your own, check out Linux from Scratch. If you have a really old Mac you can even run BeOS on it.
Me, I'll stick with OS X, but don't tell me you can't put another OS on your Mac.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
Bizarre. Why do they even bother making a third motherboard - it just increases production costs! That makes 1 mobo for the 1.6, another mobo for the 1.8, and a third for the dual-proc 2.0. Ridiculous.
If they want to save money, they need to buy more stuff in bulk, and standardize more. Have a regular 9600 Pro (128-meg) as the base video, not an NVidia 5200. Have just 2 mobos (single proc and dual proc).
Weird. I'll still buy a G5, but geez, that's just crazyness going on over at Apple.
So, the lesson is: buy the 1.8 at the cheap end, buy the cheapest options available, and upgrade with superior aftermarket stuff (RAM, HDs, videocard, keyboard, mouse).
I just got a 2.4 Ghz Emachine with 256MB of RAM, CDRW, and an 80GB hard drive for $450.
You can pick up a super-charged V8, with auto, air-con, elec windows etc, for under $20,000 these days. But you don't see Merc, BMW, or Porche getting worried and lowering their prices do you?
Specs aren't everything, quality still counts for a lot of people.
DUDE!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The processor supports both modes nativly! Fucking shit man...I can't tell you how many times people have had to mention that fact.
huh. I express my impression of the machine, and I get modded as a troll.
You mods are weak.
-- This space available.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The 1.6 only uses DDR333 memory, not DDR400 (I dunno if it can make use of DDR400 if you replace the DDR333 it comes with).
Of course you can use it, but it'll only function as DDR333. The memory clock is not adjustable. Even if you could, moving from DDR333 -> DDR400 is only about a 3% performance increase, if that.
The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!).
Says who? Not that great in what way? Fuck rumor sites.
I'm wondering if the mobo can handle some Mushkin 2-2-2 PC3200 RAM if I got it?
With no way to adjust the memory timings, you'd be wasting your money. Don't bother spending any more on 'premium' RAM if you can't adjust your settings to make use of it.
Bully for you. But the original, like the Pirsig book he sourced many of his ideas from, is a very terse work. Terse, meaning it says a very lot with a very few words. And unless you knew what he was referring to already, and how he meant it, it was completely beyond you.
Verbosity is neccessary when the knowledge base between two communicating parties is different. I think Plato said that. He probably said it better than I could, but I'm afraid my copy of Phaedrus isn't at hand.
Well, in real life most of the time "winning" means coming out better than your colleagues in a set of criteria. In slashdot, the purpose of a post is to inform, offer an interesting or insightful opinion or to enrage.
I feel that I did all three, so I feel like I win!
I've often thought that posting on slashdot would be a good exercise for a class on either effective argument or effective discourse. For the final exam, students would post on articles with attempts to inform on the details of a post, attack and defend the positions of other posters, as well as to troll and flame. Grades would be based on moderation totals, as well as the number of subsequent posts from other users (hopefully ones not in the class). Slashdot is, after all, one of the most effective open forums on the web. As sad as that is.
-- "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one "
-Albert Einstein
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Because you need a SCSI, fibre channel, or another 1000BT card rignt now?
64-bit PCI has been around for a long time (for example, going back to Apple G3 models), so it's not like its some brand new thing with no installed base.
Re:Note
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The process used to create modern CPUs mainly increases power nearly linear in respect to switching speed (roughly the Hz) and transistor count. So (very roughly) a 3.4Ghz (if one existed) G5 would still be slightly cooler than a P4 3.4Ghz.
However this is largely irrelevant as these are maximum power dissapation figures. I'm not sure how aggresive Apple is with heat management, though I do know that Intel is fairly strict about chipset based power reduction. (Sending HLTs, etc)
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Tycho
·
· Score: 1
They didn't make a three motherboards. Apple only made one PCB and Apple selectively populates components. So the 1.6GHz model has the tracings and the holes for eight DIMM slots, but there are only four plastic and metal slots for DIMMs on the 1.6GHz motherboard. One of the problems with the Mac retail 9800 Pro is that it is based off of the PC retail 9800 Pro so it only has a single digital out, it has VGA and a DVI port as opposed to the Apple OEM card which has two digital out ports which are an ADC port and a DVI port.
-- Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
I think you got modded down cuz you don't know what you're talking about. BLACK??? You're not talking about the picture of the cardboard box there are you? It's silver (well aluminum)...And it's shaped like a tower and about the same dimensions as a typical PC. It'd fit anywhere a tower would.
And actually, I saw one at the USB Compliance Workshow a couple weeks back in Milpitas and thought it looked sweet....Unfortunately I was stationary and didn't have a chance to see it in action. But the Apple guys said the speed difference between the G5s and the G4s would blow you away. Damn I wish I'd had the chance to take a better look:( *Sob*
Re:ObWhines (Quicktime fullscreen)
by
a1291762
·
· Score: 1
I did a search... (search for "quicktime full screen") and found the applescript required to put QuickTime into fullscreen mode is "present movie 1 scale screen". This puts the frontmost window into fullscreen mode and starts playing it.
Re:Emachines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
There's a such thing as getting ripped off too. Emachines work fine, we've got half a dozen in our office and they run every day with no problems. Jeezus, what does the G5 cost, $3000? I get a new machine for 1/6 the price that does any normal office job and with a 2.4Ghz CPU isn't bad for data processing either.
Re:How is this flamebait?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You must be new to slashdot, too.... When you post a comment about how totally brain-dead the moderators are, you should always use the words "cranio-rectal inversion", idiot, dumb&^#, or moron.
Most importantly, however, you should ALWAYS POST ANONYMOUSLY....
dumb&^#.
what's your comparison though?
by
Scudsucker
·
· Score: 1
If you compare a good lcd to a poor crt, of course the lcd's are going to look better. The fact remains that it is still horribly expensive to make large screen lcd's because of the number of pixels that go bad. You don't have that problem with crt's. I'm typing this on an eMac right now and the screen is gorgeous.
Re:what's your comparison though?
by
bursch-X
·
· Score: 1
My god, you've got low standards.
The eMac monitor is abysmally crappy (LG makes them). It's about the worst monitor that ever got out of Apple. If you run it at anything more than 1024x768 you have to live with 75Hz refresh rate, making your eyes bleed after about 2 minutes.
The screen is the one reason why I cannot recommend the eMac to anyone. Everyone I know who bought an eMac ended up feeling they've got screwed because of the monitor, it's so bad.
-- There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
Re:what's your comparison though?
by
jcr
·
· Score: 1
If you compare a good lcd to a poor crt, of course the lcd's are going to look better
Actually, as it happens I'm comparing the best LCDs to the best CRTs. I just can't handle fuzzy anymore.
BTW, I'm glad you like your eMac. Apple does make a point of using CRTs with the best possible color gamut.
-jcr
-- The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Re:what's your comparison though?
by
Scudsucker
·
· Score: 1
The ones I were using were just fine. Was your experience on an older model? Maybe it helps that the I was using is brand new.
Re:what's your comparison though?
by
bursch-X
·
· Score: 1
I was playing with an eMac, when I went to BicCamera in Shinjuku/Tokyo, hoping I could get my hands on a 17" PowerBook early this year. Have there been any changes to eMacs since then? (I don't think so, but I might be wrong).
I don't understand what is fine with any monitor that doesn't give me a refresh rate above 75Hz for usable resolutions. I really get a headache at that low a frequency.
-- There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
Re:what's your comparison though?
by
Scudsucker
·
· Score: 1
It was a school computer so I don't know what the refresh rate was (they deleted the system preferences so you couldn't change the settings). Actually, the first one I sat down at had a very jittery screen - but thats because the AC adaptor for a hub was plugged directly behind it. Maybe the camera place made the same mistake and its getting too much em interference. Dunno.
Just out of curiosity, what are you doing in Japan? One of my friends went to school there for a year and has just gotten back.
How can you tell he's the King?
by
pcwhalen
·
· Score: 1
He hasn't got sh#t all over him.
"native Quark sucks royal ass" -- different than sucking regular ass? Hmmm. Camilla Parker Bowles would know....
I bought the dual 1.42 ghz G4 but the lust factor of the G5 draws me like a $3000 siren song.
Why does it always cost me $3000 to get the one I want? 17 inch Powerbooks, G5s, etc.
Just because a watery tart hurls a scimitar is no basis to choose a leader. Supreme executive power comes from a mandate from the masses....
-- Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
Why do you care about support?
by
2nd+Post!
·
· Score: 1
You upgrade your system piecemeal; why does it matter how long Apple 'supports' the system?
An iMac 266 (G3) from 1998 can still be upgraded with a G4 and can run OS X; 5 years. A beige G3 of similar make can also be upgraded to a G4, and can run OS X; 6+ years.
But if you've got a, say, 12 year old Mac; heck, why not push it out to the oldest that Linux supports? 1987 the Mac II! see? That's nearly 16 years!
A 16 year old machine can have it's processor upgraded and running Linux, no more or less than your PC...
So are people who buy a Merc getting ripped off? It's all about what's important to you. You obviously go for the best bang for the buck, others go for what they feel is better to use.
So, what type memory is being shipped in the G5s? where'd you find the specs? the 'learn more' link on the apple store only stated ddr333 and ddr400, not 2-2-2, 2-2-5, or whatever.
tx.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
My problem with the memory Apple is shipping is the latencies are horrendous, even for PC3200 (DDR400) memory.
And you know this from where? Even if it were true, you're nitpicking beyond all reason. Better RAM latencies might get you 5% more performance in certain situations, at 50% more cost.
Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Bizarre. Why do they even bother making a third motherboard - it just increases production costs!
They don't. You know nothing about how these things are manufactured. They produce one PCB, and put different components as necessary. This is standard practice.
Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?
by
leinhos
·
· Score: 1
OS X is based on the Mach kernel with a BSD userland.
From my experience with MkLinux, Mach is a microkernel that lives between the OS kernel and the hardware. OS X is supposed to have most of the BSD kernel (aka Darwin), with modifications to run on top of the Mach microkernel.
See my reply to the above comment- it was a slip. Your harshness is completely warranted. It is NOT emulation.
HOWEVER- for my current set up, I am not only running in 32 bit compatibility mode (on POWER 4 chips, older brother of the PPC970) but some of my code is POWER2 architecture. Between POWER2 and the PPC/POWER3 world, they dropped some instructions from the chip. THOSE are emulated by the OS (AIX 5.1 in my case). So until someone gets off their ass and buys me a native compiler, I get a perf hit will all the PROGRAM CHECK exceptions!
-- In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
I'm a graphic designer working for a small design firm. We're still mostly working in an OS 9 environment, running QuarkXpress 4.1.
The senior designer/IT geek here had a poll whether we want to upgrade to Quark 6 or go with Adobe InDesign. Most of us are sick of Quark's "idiosyncracies". Quark's noodle code delayed OS X compatibility for 2 years. I like Adobe's standardization between apps, but that's just a way of seeding dependence in customers (a la MS). Will Adobe become the Microsoft of the design field? Probably not, since Adobe's interface actually makes sense and is consistent (with some exceptions). But they've been the plaintiff on the wrong side of court cases a little too often for me to be very enthusiastic.
So it's down to choosing the lesser of two evils.
I guess I'm sort of rare in that I understand something of what printing companies go through - trying to get files supplied by designers clueless to how a layout is put to paper. The thought of trapping some of the pieces I've seen makes me shudder. {smartass}That's why they get the big bucks, right? {/smartass}
-- Sig Applied For
prices from newegg
by
Magius_AR
·
· Score: 0, Troll
mobo - Asus P4P800 Deluxe $137.99
cpu - Intel 2.4CGhz Retail $170.00
ram - 2 x 512 MB Kingston HyperX $262.00
HD - 2 WD Raptors (72 GB Raid 0) $272.00
vid - GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 128 MB vid ram $131.00
dvdburn Sony DW-U10A-10 $189.99
sound Audigy 2 $78.00
case/power/floppy/kb/mouse/modem ~$200 total
Total ~ 1440.98
Compare that to the $1,999.99 apple system.
The x86 solution has the same video card with DOUBLE the vid ram, multi-drives for RAID w/ 10,000 RPM HD solution. A multi-standard dvd burner (I don't know what the SuperDrive does). It has 4 TIMES as much ram, at DDR400 instead of DDR333, and it's dual-channel. It's hyper-threaded. And you have like 500 dollars of difference in cost to upgrade whatever indivudual parts you want...the audigy could upgrade to a damn m-audio audiophile with that kind of cost leeway. The _ONLY_ thing I see that Apple has going for it is the G5, which is supposedly (and believably) a FAR superior chip to anything out there. But last I checked, processor speed wasn't the main bottleneck in machines nowadays.
Bah to you Mac zealots. I can build a faster x86 for cheaper that will actually run 99% of the software out there.
Oh my, why even write this? Why is it so disturbing to you that people decide to purchase a different computer than what you have?
Thank you for your comment, obviously many people don't give a damn about it though. People are buying these things like crazy because they believe it is a good tool for THEM, not you.
Re:Mac Zealots and their mod points
by
brkello
·
· Score: 1
Actually, if you say something like that on any other topic, it isn't interesting, so it doesn't get modded up. That way people who are reading with their filter at 3 won't see those standard opinions. On the other hand, on a mac post, if you say anything slightly negative about macs, you get modded down. Just look at how many more -1s there are when a Mac article is posted. The parent to your post was not redundant, nor was he trolling. I don't even think it was offtopic, more so on topic than many posts that just say how they can't wait to buy a mac, or how good their current mac is...to those I say, "I don't give a shit" (using your words), but they are modded up by the zealots. In any other subject it wouldn't be moderated. He was just pointing out something that was true. At worst, he should have not been modded, I would have said it was insightful. Your post, on the other hand, defended the pro-mac-zealot stance and got modded up...it's rediculous. His point was made with both his own and your post. I like Macs, but the Mac people on here are so annoying it is beginning to make me hate them.
-- Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Re:Mac Zealots and their mod points
by
zpok
·
· Score: 1
You've got more than a point here.
I guess getting called a faggot, loser, idiot, retard,... every few posts kind of puts one on the defensive.
btw I'd not have modded my post up, it's close to redundant.
If someone cuts into an onion with a knife my eyes imediately start to water. I'd imagine the same thing would happen if someone took a knife to my ibook.
So I think I am going to go with the onion on this one.
Parfaits are very tasty though;p
Re:Emachines
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
When the warrenty expired, just say a prayer to the power supply of your eMachine hoping it won't fail one day and bring down your machine. It happened to mine...
I may get another sub-500 machine in the future. But no, it won't have an eMachine logo on it.
Re:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I ordered my dual 2GHz 3 days ago. Estimated shipping time is 7-10 weeks. It all depends on what # in line you are.
Dual G5s in Laptops?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Anyone have a guesstimate when we will see PowerBooks with tandem 970s?
Not in North Michigan Ave.
by
Banzai+Master
·
· Score: 1
I visited the North Michigan Avenue Apple Store yesterday (8/24). There was a gigantic G5 poster facing the street, all employees were wearing G5 tee shirts, there were a ton of visitors inside and out, but there was no G5 in the store. You would think that the high traffic stores should have at least one for the customers to drool over.
You're right that Mach is a microkernel. However, a microkernel does not sit on top of a kernel. What distinguishes a microkernel architecture from a monolithic kernel (which is most OSes) is that it does not have one unified address space and thread state. Instead, it is distributed among several services (such as virtual memory, filesystems, drivers, network stack...) which pass messages to each other.
There is an ongoing debate as to the virtues of microkernel architectures, but stereotypically, microkernels are slower but more stable and secure, and they are harder to create in the first place but easier to extend. Some of this is just stereotype, especially given kernel modules on the one side and improvements in message passing and context switching on the other.
MacOS X, QNX, Mach and the Hurd are microkernels; Linux, *BSD and Windows are monolithic. OS 9 is neither, as the whole system has a unified address space (which makes it fast but unstable).
-- I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
From my experience with MkLinux [mklinux.org], Mach is a microkernel that lives
between the OS kernel and the hardware. OS X is supposed to have most of the BSD kernel (aka Darwin [apple.com]), with modifications to run on top of the Mach microkernel.
OS kernel ----------- microkernel -----------
hardware
Slashdot Mirror
You could like to an article, like The Register or Apple PR itself.
"Men lie."
"Yeah, about sleeping with other women, but never about bioluminescent plankton."
-Dan Brown
does anyone know how many pre-orders there were ? According to the usual zealot sources, the G5 is supposed to be the stemcell of apples resurection. Albeit a fabulous machine, I wonder if there will be enough sales momentum to influence marketshare.
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
anybody want to loan me $3000?
I wonder how many lawsuits will be filed by people blown through the walls of their house?
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
1) One button mouse
2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job
3) Quicktime should be open source
4) Ogg Vorbis? Hel-LO!!!
5) I can't run 12-year old software on it
6) They should give it away for free
7) No x86 (though this is actually a plus
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
My friend was trying to order one of the duel 2.0 GHz G5 machines and got a quote of november at the earliest for s ship date. So much for G5 production.
I'm sorry, but they have been advertising this thing a little heavy considering they weren't even shipping them. I've visited the apple store here at least twice, seen the ad, and then looked in the store for the box. It is really disappointing to see the ad up as if the computer is right there, and it's not. I surely hope for their sake that there are no major bugs, recalls, etc! Could this be the box that changes the tide? interesting to think about.
stuff |
I think that's everyone's tale of woe.
Once again, Apple releases a product whose packaging is almost as desireable as the contents inside! Now if only they would update the Powerbook 15" line.
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
$3000 for a nice new G5
OR
$699 for a SCO-enchanced Linux kernel
THAT is the question;)
that Apple has over 100,000 pre-orders of the Power Mac G5. See the link.
So does this mean that in another 3 weeks they will be announcing their new G6 processor developments?
The only thing that prevents Apple from grabbing a serious share of the market are their prices.
a good reason to go out and get a job instead of posting here all day.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips. And many flaws from long term use will be helped fixed (like the PowerBook paint peeling). Also you can hopefully get some more real benchmarks and not from people who are guessing. As well as seeing how people like them after a year. Lilke most things with computers never try to get version x.00 Try to get the next version up. That way they can fix many of the issues, that have not been expected.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
from the Apple store:
$1,999.00
1.6GHz PowerPC G5
800MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
256MB DDR333 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
$2,399.00
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
900MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
i'm still broke from the last apple i bought.. and now they have to make another one.. i can only donate sperm once a week.. that's a lot of clown punching for a cheese grater..
AK
anyone has any info?
The story is pretty useless until we get an idea of the quantity of shipping G5s we're talking about here. I'm betting it's just a trickle. When the PowerBook G4s first came out, the backorder queue remained quite long for weeks after Apple claimed the 'Books were "shipping," because the actual number of units being shipped was relatively small. I hope there's a flood of G5s making their way from Apple's factory in Taiwan, but from previous experience, I bet that isn't the case.
Somehow I doubt that they will downgrade their platform, especially with Big Blue ready to churn out the PPC 970 chips like crazy. Apple hardware is going to become commodity stuff, just like wintel crap.
Okay, I just noticed this today (forgive me for being slow), but there are 2 potentially-important differences between the 1.6GHz machine and the 1.8GHz machine:
1) The 1.6 only uses DDR333 memory, not DDR400 (I dunno if it can make use of DDR400 if you replace the DDR333 it comes with). The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!). I'm wondering if the mobo can handle some Mushkin 2-2-2 PC3200 RAM if I got it?
2) The 1.6 can 'only' use up to 4GB of memory, vs 8GB for the 1.8 and 2.0 machines.
FYI if either of these things bugs you, be warned. Shop smart, shop...S-Mart!
"Troll" is giving the parent post too much credit. Doesn't even have a good hook. "Retarded" would be much more appropriate moderation. Please add "retarded" to the moderation options!
Soon we will have 64-bit laptops.
Now, some people may feel that 64 bits is not needed; that 32 bits is fine. However, certain hi-end rendering applications are already feeling the confines of a 32-bit application; since gaming uses rendering technology, games will also be feeling the limits of 32-bits in the foreseeable future.
Another application of 64 bits: Certain cryptographic algorithms (Whirlpool hash, Tiger hash, and the Hasty Pudding Cipher) are designed for 64-bit systems; these systems perform poorly on 32-bit systems.
The G5 is the first 64-bit computer-dummy-desktop available; in particular, high-quality laptops need to be produced in large numbers, and must be computer-dummy friendly. Hence, this will be the first time a high quality (small, light; tadpoles are neither small nor light) 64-bit laptop will be available.
you say tehy were dodgey....most people say tehy were fine...including NASA.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them
A quick look where? These OS topics quickly desolve into unsubstantiated ramblings, so please post links not opinions...
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
The PPC Processors work very well. Considering the tons of time and money that must have been poured into the research of the G5, there is (approximately) a 0% chance of Macs switching to x86.
This was a semi-viable (though far-fetched) rumor before the G5s debuted; now it's just standard FUD.
Gen 3:1Now the Apple was more subtil than any beast of the field which the God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every computer of the garden?
Gen 3:6And when the linux geek saw that the G5 good for Unix, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one hip, took of the Apple thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto the other geeks; and they did eat.
Gen 3:7And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they weren't using Open Source; and they compiled aprons something using gpp.
Gen 3:13 And the LinusGod said unto the geek, What is this that thou hast done? And the linux geek said, The Apples are so sexy, they beguiled me, and I did eat.
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
sit at work and post to this... I bet you your boss does the same thing: its how he got there.
"this is the gloaming"
radiohead
yes, waiting is a good plan. that way I can save up the money and won't have to buy it on credit. plus in a year they'll probably be 3 ghz rather than 2
Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips.
It's not just a good idea, it's Moore's Law.
The best you have is retarded? Nice one.
I can't beleive that posts that get unfairly moderated in the Apple section. I mean, come on, this guy is not trolling. Speculation about Apple switching to x86 has been going on for a while, and in plenty of well respected sites.
Anyway, just had to stand up for the parent poster and point out a percieved wrong. Go ahead and mod me troll. I can handle it.
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Um, hardware? MacOS-X (there's more to an OS than just its "core" components)? A gaggle of software titles?
Perhaps a quick jaunt to http://www.apple.com would be in line. Doing research before posting has never been popular on Slashdot but it's never too late to begin good habits.
Half the posts here are trolls who say Macs are slow,gay, etc.
Personally, I wish I had the money to get a G5 for college. My friend picked an Alienware over a G5, but I have a feeling he will regret it.
Linux-based?! Ha, I didn't even see that.
A hackneyed business model that guarantees a clique following but broad-based and long-term failure.
I still can't figure out the allure of Mac's. Are these boxes significantly faster than the latest Windows XP Pro, P4 or AMD box? I wonder where one could find a sort of speed vs. price blow by blow breakdown? I'm not talking a Windows Fan Boy vs. Mac Fan Boy flame fest - just one that is as unbiased as possible!
Unfortunately, Slashdot will probably bring this down, but check out the new Apple Crash Different movie.
According to the Jaguar upgrade website, the latest available version of OS X is 10.2.5. But according to The Register, "All three systems will ship with Mac OS X 10.2.7, a 32-bit version of the operating system optimised for the new CPU".
Does anybody have any insights into what optimizations might be included? Are there any enhancements or features that aren't present in 10.2.5?
Yes, the 1.6GHz model is significantly less advanced than the others. I read an intial review/reaction article way-back-when in which the author strongly recommended getting at least the 1.8GHz model. Can't remember the source, sorry...
Your favorite sig sucks
"Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips."
Yeah, Apple is always trying to screw the customer, by selling computers, and then coming out with faster ones!
OSX is Linux based, in case you haven't updated since 7.4.1.
I, for one, am going to buy one of these beauties come hell or high water. I plan to save as much money as I possibly can from my newly acquired job over the next year so that around the time Apple revises/updates the G5 I'll actually be able to afford one. For now I'll just hobble along on my refurbished IBM.
BTW, someone asked how many preorders there were. According the the Register article linked earlier, "over 100,000".
If you haven't heard, the kernel on which Mac OS X is based is BSD. Steve Jobs finally has his hardware-abstracted OS (as they have been planning for 10 years). Just tweak the Intel-based BSD kernels and you're there.
However, why change to Intel/AMD, when the PPC is such a fabulous chip.
Apple's thing is to keep the hardware proprietary, so the system doesn't become a nightmare of (marginally incompatible) pieces (as GNU/Linux is fast becoming) most end users are concerned about function, not customizing the hardware - anyway, there will always be a way around hardware restrictions.
Keep X network savvy
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
How the hell is Apple going to top the PowerMac G5 with the Notebooks? I hardly think that the current Powerbooks top the G5 in coolness at all. However I do know that they haven't been upgraded in a while. But what can they get, really? It will probably be the typical and standard improved revision like aways: additional 300mhz speedbump and a bigger harddrive -- disappointing!
Year of the notebook, year of the scmotebook... Where are thou?
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
OK, I got my results by compairing their results to the results I get using icc on a Dual P4 3.2Ghz.
I only ran SPECfp_base2000 (because it was the only test I had around)
I got 16.1 (higher than the mac result at 15.7, from the paper)
Argueably I was unfair for using icc instead of gcc, but icc is so much better, why should I use an inferior compiler? If there is a better compiler for mac then I'd be happy to see the results.
I don't agree that using gcc on both platforms somehow makes things "fairer" as it will clearly have to optimise for the different processors differently, so why not use the best compiler you can?
MrJeff
Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
Uh-oh, now it's funny. My bad. Yeah, that works.
There is one other as well: the PCI slots are standard PCI, not PCI-X like the rest.
Then of course the bus is incrementally slower, and so on. Standard stuff really.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
How can they be shipping, the IBM tour guides say they ain't making the chips yet.
http://www.macnn.com/news/20383
Bow down and worship my splendiferous magnificence!
pleeeeeeeease?!!!!
There's an interesting article describing all the details about the benchmarks and how they actually prove that this is something beyond what Intel has to offer.
Ciryon
Not even remotely true.
OS X is based on the Mach kernel with a BSD userland. On top of that they put the Aqua windowing system. The only thing it has in common with Linux is that you build it with gcc.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Silly, troll. There was no 7.4... and it's not Linux, fool!
so let me get this straight,
you use a super optimized compiler on X86 and compare that to a free compiler with some optimizations for the PPC-970.
yeah...that is fair.
"hey look folks, I can run this code through ICC faster on an intel chip than GCC can run code on a PPC chip"
how about some logic courses for ya.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Silly slashbot, Moore's law doesn't apply within Steve Job's reality distortion field.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Check out uControl for a virtual scroll with the touchpad (as well as other tweaks.) Great, free app.
Bark less. Wag more.
To rephrase in /. terms:
1. Get OS from someone
2. Have someone else make a fast chip
3. ???
4. Profit!
Very insightful. Blarg.
The first time I read the comment, I never noticed the Linux-based OS statement. Clearly he is clueless on issues surrounding Mac OS X. However, the x86 card does hold some water, even if very little. I think troll and flamebait is a bit harsh. Leave it unmoderated at best.
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
How about "Uninformed" then. That would take care of comments that are stupid, moronic, retarded and much, much more.
And those "well respected sites" are trolling too.
Having someone with media connections write a poorly thought out article about an idea that has been debunked countless times over the last decade or two doesn't suddenly make the idea valid. It just makes the 'journalist' in question the real world equivalent of a karma whore; posting things everyone has heard and ought to know better than, in order to bring in readers and generate buzz, even if they are hostile.
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
I'm very sorry if enlglish isn't your native language (it isn't mine)... but duel G5? those things are supposed to work together (dual) and not eachothers rivals ;)
;)
Duel P4's are quite common, but that might be a Windows problem
Is there a super optimized compiler for the PPC-970? If so, I'd be more than happy to see some benchmarks from it. It is my belief that gcc is really not that good on x86, espically as you get up to the pentium 4, because it is such a complex chip. The PPCs have a simpler architecture (which yes, is a good thing) so I suspect gcc does better there.
Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
typical for apple?
umm, dude, typical for any OEM. they plop in cheap memory to make profits better.
and yes, you can plop in any memory you like....it is standard memory.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Remember: MHz doesn't measure speed. You can only use it as a measure of relative speed between chips which are otherwise virtually identical (e.g. two P IV's)
What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
I've got about 18 months left on a 2 year lease -- thanks for reminding me!
(Yes, I knew they were coming, but I needed an upgrade for an important project 6 months ago...)
-ch
** I can't beleive that posts that get unfairly moderated in the Apple section. I mean, come on, this guy is not trolling. Speculation about Apple switching to x86 has been going on for a while, and in plenty of well respected sites.**
yeah they've been speculating for, um, past 10 years so it really must happen soon!.
-
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I really don't see how this gets moderated as Flamebait. Who is he trying to flame here?
As a long time windows/linux user, I can tell you why myself (and probably many others) do not buy Apple computers.
1. Price. I am about to start my 5th year of college. That means I have 4 years of student loans already. I cannot afford $2,000 for the low-end model G5. College kids buy cars for less than that!
2. If you don't like it, you're stuck with it. While this is somewhat true with PCs, it seems more so with Apples. Probably because it's a package deal - I can't tear the machine apart for parts, or (asside from Yellow Dog Linux) put another OS on it.
I had a phase for a while where I wanted a PowerBook sooooo bad, but the price kept me away, and now I'm over it. No switch for me.
If they want more of a market share, they need to accomodate the financial standing of a larger crowd
no comment
Personally, I look forward to our new Apple Overloards...
In other news, Department of Homeland Security (DoH'S)! is reporting that the Taliban have already begun smuggling G5's into Afganistan for use against colition forces.
-B
While waiting a couple of months for flaws to be found is always a good idea for new, expensive items (c.f. new model cars), simply waiting a year for faster chips isn't. If they have new models in a year, won't you have to wait again for the early users to find the flaws? And once they work them out, won't there be newer, faster models coming?
While I agree with not buying the first release (especially since Panther isn't out yet - might as well get it pre-installed), a year is definitely excessive. Based on previous Apple models, 4-5 months is more than enough time to see how they hold up, and for software incompatibilities to be fixed or at least noted so you aren't caught unawares.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
since there is no such thing as an instance of time, there can not be the fastest pc ever, unless of cause it uses the entire universe for its calculations causing the universe to go into heat arrest and die.
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
1.) No you don't. In some cases, you pay less (Apple bought-out apps like Shake). Unless of course your primary basis of comparison is the bargain games bin. Last I checked, Office, Photoshop, Painter, etc were all the same or about the same price. 2.) Yep, but then, so is pretty much anything but Intel/AMD. 3.) It's called advertising. Check a little company called Intel for more examples. 4.) Yeah...though choice isn't always needed. It's nice, but I'd rather have two options that definitely work than 10 that sorta work. 5.) True, to an extent. But then, without repurchasing software you can't escape from Windows either. 6.) Plus the rest of us that use multiple platforms based on particular strengths. There are more than enough Windows users that are entirely clueless too. At least the "arrogant, arty Apple types" can get themselves on the Web ;)
7.) riiight
you crack monkey. there IS NO DUAL Pentium 4 system, anywhere. dual 3.2Ghz Xeons, yes, but Pentium 4's no! tell us about a plausible lie, please, not a complete fabrication!!!! have a nice day :)
The next generation of Apple computers will run Intel or AMD 64 bit processors with the Linux-based OSX.
You state it as if it were a fact.
I seriously doubt that claim.
" typical for any OEM. they plop in cheap memory to make profits better."
With the P4-3.2GHz at Dell you can get Corsair XMS PC3200 at 2-2-5 instead of generic cas2.5 PC3200.
The question isn't really will better memory _work_ - of course it'll work, but will it be used at the better timings? That I do not know.
GCC is made for the x86 chip pal. it was ported to PPC and alpha. it is optimized for x86 and if you had not noticed, GCC is always tested against ICC when new releases are out.
.4 of a super optimized compiler on x86.
GCC verses GCC on different chips is as fair as you can get.
I think it says something about your benchmarks though that GCC is that close to ICC. and half optimized compiler for the PPC is with in
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
> MHz doesn't measure speed. You can only use it as a measure of relative speed between chips which are otherwise virtually identical.
When people ask me, I simply say it's like car motors : if you got a motor running at 3000 rpm and another at 2000 rpm, which one will make your car go faster? They usually ask me "how many cylinders". I then answer "it's the same thing for CPUs... you can't compare without all the facts. GHz is useless by itself."
well that makes it so much better.
and I bet you pay extra for it. so what is the benefit?
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
To quote someone above:
(only people who don't know better) "equate financial success with product superiority (tho engineers know better)"
It doesnt work... anyone have tested it???
Everyone screws with benchmarks so don't start that crap. Wanna whine about the price? Then buy a cheap x86 box and run Linux or Windows. Just because you do fine with something like that doesn't mean the G5 isn't a fantastic piece of equipment and well worth the price. Wanna complain that it's propietary hardware and the limited software selection? Have you looked at your precious Linux recently? It may be open but most the software flat out sucks. The hardware may be abundant but that doesn't make it good.
None of those things make the G5 bad. It may not be ideal for everyone but then again neither is a PC and Linux. You damn bigots...
Of course we torture people, we need the information --Gen. Pinochet
>OKAY...I'll admit it. OSX is the best. How dare I question. Enjoy your 5% market share.
How come Linux/BSD/Unix is so fuscking great if it doesn't even have 1% market share on the desktop?
You, sir, are an idiot.
I rest my case, pass go and collect 200$.
Also realize that the numbers quoted by Apple last month were for a beta version of their compiler. They and IBM have been updating a custom version of gcc that presumably will be released with Panther (if not before). So initially the comparison is a bit unfair.
The other issue is that most programs on x86 aren't compiled with icc. I'd suspect most are compiled with VS. And under Linux almost all compile with gcc.
I just got a 17" iMac last october, and I'm saving money up for a year from this september/october.
I want a dual 3Ghz G5 and HD Studio display. You see, I don't believe those penis enlargment ads that show up in my e-mail. I know for a fact my fallus is directly linked to the power of my computer.
<embed type="Maniacal Laughter">
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
AFAIK and can guess, this is the last legal date they can give you before it becomes... lame (I don't know the name for it) in either all or some states. This way if the quote a date like next week and you get it a week later you won't be all pissed. But if you get quoted November (or in my case October) and you get it in late August you're just super happy because it was 1-2 months early.
I'm no mac owner, but what would you reccomend? Should apple play the MHz game too? It would be pretty easy for them to say "equivalent to a Pentium 4 2.7 GHz" or something to that effect. Maybe it's not true, but we know marketing departments aren't confined by limits such as "truth" and "honesty."
No, I'd rather them slowly take marketshare while saying "This is a 2GHz chip, we think it will still impress you when set side-by-side to a 3GHz x86."
His point was that it is the first one a "computer dummy" might buy.
Yeah ... I type this on my aging yet solid rev. a pbook g4 which I got *right away* because I loved the Apple laptop design, and boy was I happy with the direction it went with the 17" ... but I'm still waiting for the next Big Thing to burp its way out of Stevies reality bubble and onto the Market ...
... well ... they did this pretty smoothly.
... maybe not this year.
In terms of 'coolness' factor, I think the G5 release was pretty good - timely. Apple needed to make a processor stand, and
If they put a laptop out that has two cpu's (dual 1gz G4 would be fine) and 2 gigs of RAM, a 17" with design revisions, I'll sell a body part to upgrade. But
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
I'm not concerned about PCI-X. What PCI-X cards would one even use? Why would anyone buy into PCI-X when PCI Express is coming next year?
Why does the comment "I want one, but I have no money :(" get modded down to -1, Flamebait? ...
Anybody know if the 1.6 is actually limited to 4 GB, or it's just limited because it lacks enough slots to get up to 8GB with currently available DIMMs?
If I wanted to extravagantly waste $2000+ I would buy a used Kia Rio, paint little flowers all over it, and run it into a tree.
/. account just to put you on my Friends list. That was funny.
Now I'm going to have to get a
... and yet, since software is compiled, it doesn't matter what compiler you use, it's fair.
The real world consists of compiled software.
So it's the speed of compiled output that matters.
If the compiler isn't optimized fully for the G5, whine at Apple, not us.
I doubt you'll be able to make use of 2-2-2 memory's extra speed without firmware hacking. AFAIK, firmware hacking is done in some version of FORTRAN. Some Japanese people have been rather clever with Apple's firmware, changing bus speeds and other strange things by writing even stranger things into registers. Time will tell.
I'd personally get the 1.8 as it seems slightly more futureproof.
Jag pratar lite svenska.
Dual 64bit proc:
Hmm... no 2GHz. 1,8GHz: about $900*2 (including VAT and all shit here)
Mobo: $300
"The rest": Dunno, but I'm guessing several hundred $.
Total: Way past 2 grand anyway.
It's the frigging latest and greatest... of course it comes at a premium, and if you can do with less, you pay a lot less. I don't think the G5 is overpriced for what it delivers, far less so than some other Macs I've seen...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The name of the processor is Pentium 4 Xeon.
It's still a Pentium 4, numb-nuts.
> Also Jaguar has been a abysmal failure. Jobs chose
.5 of Apple's "It'll just run faster" claims are true, my back-ordered dual CPU G5 will be worth it.
.NET compiler hung my Windows box trying to clean a build again...)
> to alienate his user base by making almost 90%
> of the software obsolete with this new release.
False, at least from a technical standpoint (I don't care about sales numbers, I care about getting work done). I write xplat Win/MacOS software, and this is not the case. 10.0.4 sucked, but 10.2.n has been a breath of fresh air.
If even
(gotta run, Timbuktu tells me that the
You seem to have missed the part about it being a Dual Proc box.
That machine might make VirtualPC tolerable enough to turn the P4 I currently run Windows on into another development server...
do as the topic says
heh, you're a moron (:
Nice troll.
Although you forgot to use the word "beleaguered".
That's why it's called G5
G5 > P4 by means of the Chewbacca deduction...
how long until
3) Misleading marketing saying it's the "fastest PC".
Unlike Intel's entirely accurate and honest marketing. The Pentium 4 really does make the internet cooler.
Yawn.
(BTW: by any meaningful metric, the Power Mac G5 2x2GHz really IS the faster personal computer currently available, given that the 2x2GHz is technically available, in that units have shipped.)
I don't care what people say, Apple consistently revolutionizes the computer-packaging box industry. I will be proud to live inside of that beautiful piece of cardboard when the strains of financing the actual computer force me onto the street.
-m
#
# Modus Ponens
#
Send me your credit card number and I'll fax the money to you.
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
>got a quote of november at the earliest for s ship date. So much for G5 production
Apple's web site lists "5-7 weeks" which puts at mid-September. Just fyi.
Why was this modded Flamebait?
It was a true statement.
Apple claims their machines are the fastest, but this is a false statement - ie. a lie, which makes Apple liars.
About time, now we can finally get an independent comparison review of the G5 vs Athlon and Intel offerings. Question is, how long will it take someone who isn't going to prejudice the tests to tell us how fast it really is?
And just who the hell makes the processors everyone else puts in their rigs? I bet Dell makes the Intel chip too, eh? Apple actually worked with IBM to engineer the G5. F'in faggots who have nothing better to say than Apple is slow and gay will find out just how gay they really are. How many of you ACTUALLY have used one ?
And you are the CEO of what fortune 500 company ?
but aple is teh ghey !!!1!
No.
nuh-uh...
STEVE says they're faster...so, ummm, they ARE faster
ummm, i think, but those guys in shiny metal suits are calling to me...ooohhh 3 GHz
Reality distortion field weekening...can't breath...HELP...Steve...anyone!!!
...DVD Studio Pro 2 also starts shipping today. Requirements include a 733 MHz or faster PowerPC processor (G4 minimum) and AGP graphics card, just shy of Shake 3's minumum 800 MHz G4.
Question is, if you're editing video, do you want a G4 or a G5, when the former has twice as many internal drive bays than the latter? Or is someone putting out Firewire enclosures that can fully utilize >128 GiB drives?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
after you get it, you'll only use your G5 to post all day on slashdot. Though I suppose it'll give you a new host of apple/64bit/OS X on BSD flamefests to join...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Truth: market share matters even less than megahertz.
Truth: Apple has posted a profit lo eighteen of these past twenty quarters.
Truth: Linux companies are dropping like flies.
Truth: Linux blows.
Apple designs the actual product, and the software to run on it. It's very simple actualy. Apple has a product they want. They want it to do X Y and Z. They look arround to see who has something close to what they are looking for, then they work with that company (using their own developers and developers from that company) to design a system which fits their needs. Then, Apple hands production over to that company.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
The current state of the economy and the marketing of a product are the biggest hurdles that the latest shiny product faces.
-Lucas
In other news, and possibly as a response to Apple shipping the G5, AMD skyrockets on the financial market; apparently traders know something Steve Jobs doesn't. More than 10% in a day, wheeew; looks like 1999.
G5s start shipping? I know this is in error--shipping has been around a LOT longer than the G5s. I think shipping was invented by FedEx in the 80s.
Can you compile a full Linux distribution using ICC? Can you compile Linux using ICC targetted at multiple processor architectures?
Dude, that is SO true! In fact, Apple has been dying since 1985, if not earlier. It's been a long, slow, miserable death with nothing to show for it.
Forget all of the things Apple has brought to computing. Forget the Music Store. Forget the G5s. Forget OS X. Forget the XServe. Forget their pro apps. Forget that they're making money while everyone else but Dell is losing money.
They are done! Toast! Finished!
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Could you people please quit bitching about the one-button mouse? I bought a G4 three months ago, and guess what? The 2-button-and-scroll USB mouse that I bought to go with it was only $25.
Hey, when you buy a new PC, have they started giving you optical mice yet? I sure do love those little rubber balls! Sheesh.
Libertarians somehow believe that private businesses should be stronger than governments but weaker than individuals.
OK, you make a valid point that journalists should not always be taken at word. My only point was that I don't believe this guy should be moderated as troll and flamebait for saying that he thinks x86 architecture is in the future. He does have a point, no matter how invalid you may believe it is.
A quote from an article pertaining to Apple's recent share holder meeting:
At the company's shareholder meeting in April, however, Jobs asserted that Apple has "no plans" for a switch to Intel. When a shareholder argued that a move could be beneficial to the company, Jobs replied, "That is an opinion."
This is amongst discussion about internal projects at Apple that involve porting Darwin to x86.
First, let me state that I am an avid supporter of Apple, I love their stuff. However, I am less than enthused by most of the rabid Apple followers. It's a religion so feverishly followed that any speculation is considered fallacy. If it doesn't come from the mouth of the highest power, Steve Jobs, it should be ignored.
People speculate in their comments posted to slashdot all the time. Under normal circumstances, they get moderated up as Insightful or Interesting. Speculation on Apple promptly gets moderated down as Troll by the people who save points waiting for Apple stories so they can squash the thoughts of false prophets.
Anyway, see my amendment to my comment. I don't think the poster is all that intelligent with regard to his knowledge of Apple. But, the comment does not deserve troll or flamebait. Leave it unmoderated if you don't like it. Or give it an Overrated if you feel so strongly.
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
I said this same thing last week and got modded troll.
:(
10.2 was the first release of the OSX line that could be called a true production 1.0 release. Everything before that was a mere beta. Poor disk IO, poor net IO, clumbsey UI components like the terrible next left over file browser.
Finally OSX can stand on it's own two feet.
I guess it's your fan boy line about licking steve jobs' feet and the combo diss at MS that makes all the difference
What is the power consumption of the G5 processors?
The upcoming P4 3.4GHz is going to consume 103 WATTS.
Intel document confirms Prescott dissipates 103 W
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
Apple as we know it is dead.
Funny... People have been saying that since the beginning of the nineties... Yet Apple revolutionize again and again, and show better prosper than ever. This year we got the Music Store, the Power Mac G5, the 17" Powerbook, the new iPods... Apple and Dell are the only companies in the same industry that show profits right now.
Is Apple dead?
Not by a long shot...
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
Go to Apple.com and click on Hot News Headlines. First link there.
dumbass
I bought a generic Firewire enclosure and 160GiB drive at CompUSA about a year and a half ago, and it has worked great with every OS X machine I've plugged it into (an iBook 600 and PowerMac 1.2). I've done direct DV recording to it using a Formac Studio and done basic to intermediate level video editing using both iMovie and FCE and have never had a single problem with the drive.
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=c&c=msft&k=c1&t=my&s= aapl&a=v&p=s&l=on&z=m&q=l
Uhuh.. apple is a real money maker
Troll
(user opinion)
/. and read the remarks 'about' the 'Apple vs PC'/marketshare/price/cost issues.
Apple has no competition.
The usual hoo-ha about market share is noise, not signal.
Pay attention to 'installed user base' instead of 'market share' and you will get a much more usable idea of what Apple, as a business, is really up to.
The 'PC market' equals a huge gradient of cash; Apple successfully siphons 3 to 5% of that cash.
'Low market share percentage' might mean something, if Apple was actually in competition with other computer manufacturers.
Apple 'competes' with other computer manufacturers in the same way that Mercedes and BMW 'competes' with Ford and Nissan.
The Apple installed user base continues to grow, 'even' while 'market share' is a small percentage of total systems sold. Apple products succeed because they are NOT 'like' the so-called 'competition'.
Apple (read: Steve Jobs) strategy of gaining 'mind-share' though quality, style, and ease of use is made ridiculously easy, by the self-sabotaging business 'plans' of PC manufacturers. Apple continues to ask a slightly higher price for much better goods, while PC makers fight among themselves to hold parity in a saturated market. Making a profit by cutting costs may seem reasonable, but cutting quality and customer support equals financial suicide, in the long run.
Apple has no competition. Apple products represent a separate universe of hardware, software, and attitude. Yes, that separate universe intersects the PC universe, but remains separate. Or 'different', if you will.
Apple products represent a 'step up', not just in price, but in overall quality and usability, and most importantly, in user self-esteem. I am not ashamed to be seen driving a Mercedes, and I am not ashamed to own and use Apple products. Ask a Ford owner if he would drive a Mercedes if he could.
Stop in at your local workman's pub, where auto mechanics eat lunch. Each of those guys, who work for a living, can build a car from the ground up. There is no faulting their knowledge or experience; they know automotive technology from the level of metalurgy, to embedded computers. They are the best on-the-scene critics of the products which they service. They can tune (overclock) for speed or economy. They each have opinions concerning functionality vs economy.
Ask a cluster of experienced auto mechanics (machine hackers) to name 'the best car to buy' and then hang around for the ensuing discussion. You will find it enlightening. Then come back here to
Apple has no competition, but someone _could_ steal
a bit of Apple market share, by analyzing how Apple 'does it' and simply emulating that behaviour.
-A.C.
Can someone explain to me why I should buy A Mac when I can get a faster PC for less?
Why would anyone pay $2000+ for a Paul Reed Smith guitar when they could get a Fender Squire for $200? Why do people pay millions for Stradivarius violins?
A Mac is like a fine musical instrument. It usually isn't "just a tool." Attention to detail, fit and finish figure into the value.
A Mac is like a fine musical instrument.
Read why here.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Also, if you order the machine with upgraded RAM, or with say, Mac OSX Spanish, or with an iPod, or anything at all, you cannot return it. You can only exchange it. You can return only the barebones stock systems.
HTH. HAND.
Apple's return policy.
That post is so bad and ill-informed it's obvious you are just trolling. Good one, though.
Actually, this weekend I was playing Strategic Conquest, which is at least 13 years old, on OS 10.2.6 in Classic mode. I actually downloaded it to run on my SE/30, but while I was sitting at the iBook I decided to see if it worked, and ended up spending hours battling the computer over iconic cities on polygonal islands.
You get what you pay for.
3. Make pretty box!
ignore parent
And I ordered a 2.0 GHz Dual! Too bad I'll be at Burning Man when it arrives... :-(
Macs are definitely know for long shelf life. In fact, it's one of the Macs strongest arguments. I personally know someone still using a 9 year old Mac as her production machine, simply because there was no real necessity to upgrade. She hopes to be moving to a G5 now, but 9 years is almost unheard of in the computing world. In fact, this lifespan is one of Apple's problems. The move to OS X has been slow because people are happy with their current computers and don't want to adopt a new OS yet while their computer has life left.
Apple has been very clear on what it is calling everything here: the G5(970) IS 64bi. Panther is 32 bit but can handle 64 bit memory addressing. This has come directly from their chief of marketing.
So where's the f'ing " stretching the truth or deliberately misleading depending on how charitable you're feeling"?
Has anyone seen the G5 keyboards? What about the mouse? With Apple's current fixation with brushed metal (one I personally like alot), I would expect that the design of the new keyboards and mouse is consistent with the G5 case. Nothing bothers me more than the fact that my grey G4 (MMD) has a white keyboard and mouse. I'd love to purchase a new shiny metallic keyboard and mouse for use with my G4.
here's a clue, it ain't in the processor speed, it's in the software, stupid...sure pcs have the same kinds of programs, but they don't run nearly as well...the latest examples being the iPod, iTunes and the Apple Music Store--each one was being done on the pc, yet Apple came in and changed the game with its products, with an experience that's totally superior in every way (my girlfriend gave me her old iPod when she got a new one--it sat on my shelf for a couple of weeks, until i finally started to use it, and no shit, it changed my life! i can now carry my entire cd collection in my pocket, and the thing works like a champ) ...here's a tip, to any flamers that say 'so what' about any of these examples, i would bet the farm that they've never actually USED any of them!;>
-mojo
I prefer one-button dragging interfaces over right-button menu interfaces. For instance, I usually drag links in Mozilla up to the tab bar to open new tabs.
A Mac is like an onion... It has LAYERS!!!
it was measuring the speed of compiled software....the speed of a compiler!!!
are you that dumb?
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
I find the G5 cardboard box to be stikingly different from Apple's current boxes. It grabs your attention immediately. As for the G5's design...It too is somewhat of a departure, but distinctly Apple in nature. Now, if only they'd show us the keyboard and mouse. Are they brushed metal? If they are, I want them for my G4
That's not something I'd admit to in a public forum such as this.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
OpenSource OS kernel: $0
IBM developed (jointly?) processor: $800
Stylish 1-button mouse (no mouse wheel): $1199
Knowing you can run benchmarks under special conditions and configurations faster than Dell customers: priceless
...are we gonna get all technical?
Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
As an aside (but isn't everything here an aside), I'd like to point out that if Bluetooth isn't added at the time of purchase (as a BTO option, which I think means you can't return the machine) it can only be added as a USB dongle. The Bluetooth capability is added onto the motherboard and will not be available as an aftermarket add-on. If you do chose to get Bluetooth built in also not that there will be an external antenna on the back of the case. Same for AirPort Extreme - you'll have an external antenna coming out of the back of your box.
For the same reason people buy Porsches when they can get a faster car for less.
if i had about 13 thousand american dollars i would find something better than a damn computer to spend it on...
.Mac Promotional Bundle
Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
8GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 8x1GB
2x250GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
AirPort Extreme Card
Bluetooth Module
56k V.92 internal modem
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Fibre Channel PCI Card
Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
Mac OS X - U.S. English
iPod - 30GB
iSight
Logitech Z-680 THX 5.1 Speakers & Monster 2-meter Cable
AirPort Extreme Base Station (with modem and antenna port)
APP for Power Mac (w/ or w/o display) - Enrollment Kit
Subtotal $12,981.90
You just proved the two most obvious of statements with that link.
1) Apple ISN'T dying and
2)They're also not beating Microsoft in the market!
bra-vo. *clap* *clap* *clap*
Actually, ancient software runs just fine under OS X via Classic. I caught my dad playing a circa 1989 build of Shanghai a few months ago on his G4 Cube, running 10.2.
The only odd thing it did was to switch the computer to 8-bit mode while it was running, and not restore it afterwards.
My video compression blog
- Microsoft, #15
- Intel, #28
- Cisco, #38
- Dell, #50
- Hewlett-Packard, #109
- Texas Instruments, #200
- Sun Microsystems, #213
- wait for it...
- OH! There they are, Apple, #381!
Numbers speak it all, my man.well that makes it so much better.
and I bet you pay extra for it. so what is the benefit?
Well, no, you pay extra for the Apple, which is why they should include some name-brand memory rather than cheap stuff. It seems like everything else that comes in their machines are top of the line, so why not memory?
Cause, like... there isn't one.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Sheesh, I wish my x86 Linux box had a chance to suck -- but I only have an undergraduate degree in computer engineering so I was never able to get it working.
Delusional is more like it.
Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
What does this mean for G6 R&D?:8 96&e=14&u=/nm/tech_ibm_dc
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1
It comes up every time, and the logic is usually the same: Too expensive.
The speed limit in my country is 100km/h max. Can you find a single car on the market that can't reach that? No. So then everybody should be driving around the cheapest of cheap cars then, right? Nope. People pay many times that for a car, though it'll get them there no faster (assuming you're reasonably law-abiding and doesn't speed beyond the capabilities of a low-end car). The Mac whining is about as bad as a person looking at a Ferrari, then bragging about how his compact car will get him from A to B just as fast at a fraction of the cost.
I'm more tempted to buy a Mac now than I've ever been since I moved off C64 to a PC. Perhaps not tempted enough yet (mostly due to applications I know and love), but the scales are definately moving in the right direction.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Actually, Apple does this a lot. Within the past 18 months, I've ordered both an iBook and a Powerbook. Both had shipping dates that were about two weeks from the order date, but both shipped within a couple of days. The ship dates that Apple uses are their worst-case estimates (which is why they say "no later than...").
It's not even a good one. Every claim is so totally ridiculous that there isn't even that half-second moment of doubt that a good troll gives.
Well, it's like this: the mod system is here to pull interesting posts up and uninteresting ones down. If I go to the BSD section and post stuff like "Can't be bothered", "really don't care" "Interesting, but not for me", I get modded down.
...
Why? Nobody gives a shit.
If you go to the mac section to just say "bloody hell, that's expensive", then I say "I don't give a shit".
Not that I'm rich, but the times we've been over the high pricetag versus low maintenance issues
Incidentally this also goes for "You're a faggot", "I hate mac", "Die Jobs, DIE DIE DIE" and the obligatory "verisign is lying", "macs are still slow", "windows/linux rules",
Everybody is entitled to his opinion, but you'll have a hard time making me care for statements like that.
Thus if I have the opportunity, I'll mod that sh*t down, regardless of how nice the guy/grrl is and will mod something enlightning up (even if it incidentally bashes the Mac. If it's interesting, it's interesting).
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Well, it's nice to see you managed to form some notion of what "quality" means in the context of that book. I read the book and, for the life of me, couldn't figure out what the HELL he was trying to say. As far as I can tell, he never defines, describes, or even hints at the meaning of "quality" as used in the book. And worse, he basically says he's not going to define or describe it because that would destroy the meaning. At that point, I stopped trying to understand -- since at best the author doesn't want me to (and more likely he doesn't even know himself what he's writing bout) -- and finished reading the book for the sake of finishing, which turns out to have been a total waste of time.
Different motherboards and different arches almost completely. The 1.6 is based on the older arch, with the above limitation (4 GB RAM, PCI slots, etc) whereas the faster models (1.8 and 2x 2.0 GHz) use DDR 400 and PCI-X.
Take a look here.
FWIW, I've been using Macs for over 10 years. Got an LCIII in 93 when I was 15, a StarMax clone in 97, an iMac in 98 (paid for by Mac shareware sales), and a PB G4 in 02. So yes, I've ACTUALLY used one.
It is true if and only if the ratio G/P > 0.8
The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!)
Actually, Apple is using very nice samsung memory (with a lifetime warranty in the g5s. And if you click on the picture in that link, you'll see that those are samsung chips on a samsung PCB, which is the same RAM corsair, OCZ, and even mushkin has often used to get outstanding overclockable memory. These manufacturers just test the memory (if you're lucky) and cover it up with a heatspreader, which will void your warranty if you remove it to see what's underneath.
Are you sure it is not like a parfait? Parfait has layers too. Coz' l like a parfait.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Yeah, like why people pay for Bordeaux 2000 when wine is a box cost only 3 bucks.
Well that and probably 90% of the software is the same. Other than where some startup files and configuration files are, most of Linux has is in OSX. (Well, you may have to install Fink and X11.app, but those are free)
Now I suspect you or someone else will get into this whole rant about how Linux is the kernel and not all the stuff on top. However for the vast majority of people Linux is the whole OS and software. Only Linux geeks on Slashdot get so picky about terms.
The point being that most of what Linux has OSX has. There are differences. A few packages aren't ported. And some, such as Wine, can't be ported due to x86 dependences. And you are right, the underlying kernel guts are different. But "phenomenologically" the way most people encounter both, OSX and Linux are fairly close.
I have a B&W G3 350 that I upgraded with an Other World Computing 550 G4 ZIF. Go get one if you are not replacing your machine soon. It's worth it. Allows you to do things like iChat AV. If you use Photoshop, you'll really notice the difference. At least until you get a G5. ;-)
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
I used PCs for years. Then I went back to school for visual arts and was required to use MACs for all the visual arts classes. After a year of using them almost daily I can honestly say WTF is the big deal about them? Here is my list: 1) stupid mouse which they STILL haven't improved on 2) OVERPRICED. And the odd thing is the M$oft bashers here love apple.... but Apple is its own monopoly when it comes to hardware. Wasn't Apple that nice company who was suing a company who built Macs from indivdual Mac parts and resold them? 3) I can run Quark xpress just as fast and problem free on my Win XP machine. Same goes for Photoshop 7. And if you opt for a PC you still have money left over to afford the Quark or Photoshop software. 4) Guess what... Macs DO crash. Not just one computer, but *many* in my college have locked up, died, had fatal network errors or some other such nonsense. 5) And on a personal note, the whole Mac religion bugs the hell out of me. My college can't afford to upgrade to the G5 much less buy more Macs so there are enough computers to go around... if I could just unbrainwash them they'd be able to afford enough computers for all the Visual Arts students. I'm glad there are choices in the computer world, but the G5 just isn't all that and a bag of chips.
All the big memory houses have multiple product lines of varying abilities (and costs), so saying it's "Samsung" means very little.
My problem with the memory Apple is shipping is the latencies are horrendous, even for PC3200 (DDR400) memory. Very sad, considering the price premium they're charging.
Has anyone heard when the powerbooks will get the G5. I think it may be soon as the powerbook is definatly a major product for apple.
Has anyone seen a G5 yet? Either at an Apple Store or in your mailbox? Just curious. *Will have to visit Towson Apple Store soon*
millennium = singular
millennia = plural
P.S. Also, spell the word right.
And we're all very happy for you.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
huh, black box?
Are you looking at a 80's NeXT machine?
It is a big mofo, definitely not your average desktop machine. Wonder how they'll fit those processors and fans in an iMac.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Does anyone know what kind of timeframe until they put the G5 in a PowerBook? I am looking a getting one with a month or so, but would get not be happy if a month later they came out with the G5 version.
No the 1.6 is based on the NEW architecture, it just happens to have less slots and few other cost saving changes.
Go grok this.
It still cracks me up when people say "Apple is dead" or "Apple is dying". How can a company that has been turning out profits for quarter after consecutive quarter be "dead"? A company that continues to set standards in the industry be labeled as "dead" is silly to me.
I know this analogy is overused, but is BMW dead? Because they sure don't command 95% of the industry. Poor BMW.
Apple as a niche player? Fine. If you want the best machine for doing your video work or whatnot, you know where to go. You won't find me running to my local Ford dealership for a high performance racing machine that I plan on racing in the circuits. I'll get my "niche" Panoz or Ferrari. Then again, if I feel like "downgrading", I guess I could always get an eMac.
Dead. They're not dead people. They're a company that is alive and well. No they don't own the "market", but just because McDonald's sells more fries than anyone else doesn't make them better either. They are alive and well, still doing R&D, still innovating, still giving shareholders value for their stock.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
It is not that much different, it has basically the same chip set. It just has fewer memory slots and a lower end PCI bridge in line on the HT bus.
Go grok this.
Actually most of the software on Mac OS X at the Unix level are BSD tools not Linux based variants. Very few things that are considered Linux are in Mac OS X by default.
If you said BSD you would be more correct.
Apple as a platform isn't just dying, it's already dead. Apple as a company is not. Apple occupies a comfortable niche in the computer market because of its dedicated following and strong video processing capabillities. As long as this remains true, apple will continue to profit and continue to stick around.
There is a lot more going on than video. I own several Macs and I never do video. I use them mostly for programming and web development. An old iMac running Jaguar is my web server. I'm into programming shell scripts, perls scripts, PHP and such, and the stuff I write on the Mac can be deployed on any Linux / BSD / you-name-it web server. Since they all run Apache I can do precise staging right on my desktop. I wouldn't try that with a Windows laptop. Macs don't have Cold Fusion, ASP, and Frontpage tools. Thank God.
However, as a platform, it is long dead. Remember back when Apple dominated the pc market? They were the first company and had the upper-hand. All they had to do was cling to their market share like Microsoft does now. But they didn't fight dirty enough and now they lack the leverage they need to ever reclaim it, no matter how super-special their latest offering might be (and btw, I'm sorry, but for my money, I still I get way more value out of intel or amd's latest offering than Apple's).
I wouldn't consider any Wintel machine a better value than a Mac G4 tower - let alone G5. But that's just me. I have used both Mac and Windows extensively, and I just get more done on the Mac. I consistently find better software on the Mac side for anything you'd want to do. I find the Mac UI far easier to deal with on a daily basis. Windows programs are generally inconsistent with one another, which hurts productivity. Windows programs are not as thoughtully designed - with notable exceptions - as Mac programs. The best thing about a Wintel machine is that it can run OSs other than Windows, but Linux isn't anywhere near the usability of even Windows. Don't even get me started on the security issues of Windows. What a hassle. Who has the time to deal with email worms, BIOS settings, IRQ conflicts, DLL hell, the friggin' Registry, the BSOD, and all the junk in the system tray?
My point is, Wintel machines get in the way far too often for my taste. My Macs just work, and I get a good user-experience every hour of every day. Why would I trade that just to join up with the unwashed majority? Again, that's just me. Then again I also have no desire to attend a Jerry Springer taping or a Gallagher show, and both are apprently very popular.
Apple no longer even dominates the educational market like it used to. No *serious* gamer uses one, and don't get me started on the desktop market.
Lacking Dominance is not the same thing as being Dead.
You might want to talk to Peter Cohen about Mac games. He reviews them for MacWorld and can be found in the forums at MacCentral.com. He's a serious gamer. Yes, he owns a PC and plays games on it. And consoles. And Macs. There are some excellent Mac games that aren't on the PC or consoles. I don't play a lot of games on my Mac myself because I'm too busy programming one. It's built on SDL/OpenGL, which as you know makes writing cross-platform games a breeze.
Apple isn't dying; it's already dead. A band of dedicated followers and their continued innovation in other fields (think ipod/itunes) will continue to keep apple alive as a company, but I strongly doubt it will ever be taken seriously as a computing platform again.
It is taken quite seriously by me, in fact more seriously than Intel. I've been involved with computers for over 25 years as a programmer. The first time I saw 8086 assembly code and compared it to 68000 assembly code I became enlightened. The Intel processor architectures were hideous and hackish, while Motorola processors were elegant and clean. If you compare the processor architecture alone, including waste heat, power consumption, and transistor count, i
-- thinkyhead software and media
I just got a machine that wasn't crap from Apple. Your turn Emachines.
um...
I would buy a PRS because it stays in tune and has better tone and sustain and has higher resale value then a Squire.
You are comparing apples (heh) to oranges.
A better analogy would be. You can buy a craftsman cordless drill for like $60. Or you can buy a Milwakee cordless drill for $220. The Milwakee is better balanced and has some really nice well thought out features.
But if all you need to do is drill a couple holes?.... Well then, as I always say:
Right tool for the right job. Something apple seems to overlook. Xservers
It would have been much funnier if more than 10% of it had been accurate or true.
Although I can certainly relate if he was talking about the Mac OS 8 experience.
Poor fella doesn't know that "Mac" has become too ambiguous.
Mac OS X just plain rocks.
-- thinkyhead software and media
I can actually get ancient software (or even only as old as Riven) to run better on my G3 iBook than my 2.4 GHz P4 Dell with XP and Mandrake.
"Apple Marketing". They're a marketing company,
not a computer company. Market from Cuptertino. Build in Taiwan. Program in in India. Perfect modern marketing company.
Yeah here are some more things to watch out for with the 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz versions.
1. The 1.6GHz machine only has four DIMM slots as opposed to eight DIMM slots on the 1.8GHz machine.
2. The 1.6GHz machine only has 33MHz PCI slots that do NOT support PCI-X. The 1.8GHz machine has two 100MHz and one 133MHz PCI-X slots. In any case both machines do not accept 5V PCI cards and only accept 3.3V and dual voltage PCI cards. 3.3V keyed PCI cards have a notch in the edge connector at the front of the connector near to the metal bracket. 5V keyed cards have a notch in the connector near the back of the card. Dual voltage cards have notches in both places.
3. There are only two 3.5" drive bays and one 5.25" drive bay. The hard drive bays only have serial ATA connectors available. A parallel ATA hard drive will not work without an adaptor, which may or may not fit in the space available.
4. The Radeon 9600 Pro that ships with the G5 only has 64MB of RAM. If you want to play Doom ]I[ or other games with the highest settings and Antialiasing, upgrade to the Radeon 9800. Otherwise the 9600 should suffice for general office use. Also be aware that according to the developer note for the G5 the Radeon 9800 Pro is crippled with a 128-bit memory bus as opposed to a 256-bit bus on the retail 9800 Pro cards. However I think the developer note may be incorrect in this regard, but I wouldn't put it past Apple to do this.
Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
There's some pretty weird people out there. Copy/pasting the same old shit whenever someone uses the word "Mac".
Windows PR guys at least get paid, I wonder what these weirdo's get out of this.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Quicktime does support fullscreen without going pro. You just need to do some applescript.
I think there was a hint on this on macosxhints.com...
Or Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, or NetBSD, or plain old Darwin and roll your own distribution. There's even a very unofficial slackware project available. Or if you *really* like rolling your own, check out Linux from Scratch. If you have a really old Mac you can even run BeOS on it.
Me, I'll stick with OS X, but don't tell me you can't put another OS on your Mac.
Bizarre. Why do they even bother making a third motherboard - it just increases production costs! That makes 1 mobo for the 1.6, another mobo for the 1.8, and a third for the dual-proc 2.0. Ridiculous.
If they want to save money, they need to buy more stuff in bulk, and standardize more. Have a regular 9600 Pro (128-meg) as the base video, not an NVidia 5200. Have just 2 mobos (single proc and dual proc).
Weird. I'll still buy a G5, but geez, that's just crazyness going on over at Apple.
So, the lesson is: buy the 1.8 at the cheap end, buy the cheapest options available, and upgrade with superior aftermarket stuff (RAM, HDs, videocard, keyboard, mouse).
Geez.
You can pick up a super-charged V8, with auto, air-con, elec windows etc, for under $20,000 these days. But you don't see Merc, BMW, or Porche getting worried and lowering their prices do you?
Specs aren't everything, quality still counts for a lot of people.
The processor supports both modes nativly! Fucking shit man...I can't tell you how many times people have had to mention that fact.
huh. I express my impression of the machine, and I get modded as a troll. You mods are weak.
This space available.
The 1.6 only uses DDR333 memory, not DDR400 (I dunno if it can make use of DDR400 if you replace the DDR333 it comes with).
Of course you can use it, but it'll only function as DDR333. The memory clock is not adjustable. Even if you could, moving from DDR333 -> DDR400 is only about a 3% performance increase, if that.
The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!).
Says who? Not that great in what way? Fuck rumor sites.
I'm wondering if the mobo can handle some Mushkin 2-2-2 PC3200 RAM if I got it?
With no way to adjust the memory timings, you'd be wasting your money. Don't bother spending any more on 'premium' RAM if you can't adjust your settings to make use of it.
Dude, what are you talking about?
I understood the parent post. I didn't feel like sloughing through your overly verbose one.
Sorry. He won.
Jag pratar lite svenska.
I haven't received my G5 yet!
.....sigh.....
Of course I didn't buy it yet.
or save up the money.
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
Because you need a SCSI, fibre channel, or another 1000BT card rignt now?
64-bit PCI has been around for a long time (for example, going back to Apple G3 models), so it's not like its some brand new thing with no installed base.
The process used to create modern CPUs mainly increases power nearly linear in respect to switching speed (roughly the Hz) and transistor count. So (very roughly) a 3.4Ghz (if one existed) G5 would still be slightly cooler than a P4 3.4Ghz.
However this is largely irrelevant as these are maximum power dissapation figures. I'm not sure how aggresive Apple is with heat management, though I do know that Intel is fairly strict about chipset based power reduction. (Sending HLTs, etc)
They didn't make a three motherboards. Apple only made one PCB and Apple selectively populates components. So the 1.6GHz model has the tracings and the holes for eight DIMM slots, but there are only four plastic and metal slots for DIMMs on the 1.6GHz motherboard. One of the problems with the Mac retail 9800 Pro is that it is based off of the PC retail 9800 Pro so it only has a single digital out, it has VGA and a DVI port as opposed to the Apple OEM card which has two digital out ports which are an ADC port and a DVI port.
Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
I think you got modded down cuz you don't know what you're talking about. BLACK??? You're not talking about the picture of the cardboard box there are you? It's silver (well aluminum)...And it's shaped like a tower and about the same dimensions as a typical PC. It'd fit anywhere a tower would.
:( *Sob*
And actually, I saw one at the USB Compliance Workshow a couple weeks back in Milpitas and thought it looked sweet....Unfortunately I was stationary and didn't have a chance to see it in action. But the Apple guys said the speed difference between the G5s and the G4s would blow you away. Damn I wish I'd had the chance to take a better look
I did a search... (search for "quicktime full screen") and found the applescript required to put QuickTime into fullscreen mode is "present movie 1 scale screen". This puts the frontmost window into fullscreen mode and starts playing it.
There's a such thing as getting ripped off too. Emachines work fine, we've got half a dozen in our office and they run every day with no problems. Jeezus, what does the G5 cost, $3000? I get a new machine for 1/6 the price that does any normal office job and with a 2.4Ghz CPU isn't bad for data processing either.
Most importantly, however, you should ALWAYS POST ANONYMOUSLY....
dumb&^#.
If you compare a good lcd to a poor crt, of course the lcd's are going to look better. The fact remains that it is still horribly expensive to make large screen lcd's because of the number of pixels that go bad. You don't have that problem with crt's. I'm typing this on an eMac right now and the screen is gorgeous.
He hasn't got sh#t all over him.
"native Quark sucks royal ass" -- different than sucking regular ass? Hmmm. Camilla Parker Bowles would know....
I bought the dual 1.42 ghz G4 but the lust factor of the G5 draws me like a $3000 siren song.
Why does it always cost me $3000 to get the one I want? 17 inch Powerbooks, G5s, etc.
Just because a watery tart hurls a scimitar is no basis to choose a leader. Supreme executive power comes from a mandate from the masses....
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain with all your metadata.
You upgrade your system piecemeal; why does it matter how long Apple 'supports' the system?
An iMac 266 (G3) from 1998 can still be upgraded with a G4 and can run OS X; 5 years.
A beige G3 of similar make can also be upgraded to a G4, and can run OS X; 6+ years.
But if you've got a, say, 12 year old Mac; heck, why not push it out to the oldest that Linux supports? 1987 the Mac II! see? That's nearly 16 years!
A 16 year old machine can have it's processor upgraded and running Linux, no more or less than your PC...
All I mean is, what is your point?
GPL Deconstructed
So are people who buy a Merc getting ripped off? It's all about what's important to you. You obviously go for the best bang for the buck, others go for what they feel is better to use.
oh. hmmm.
I looked at the article and clicked a link, saw a bulky black box. Musta clicked on the wrong thing.
It happens a lot - I've had one too many head injuries, unfortunately. I see things where they ain't and don't see things where they iz.
This space available.
from what I have read.
So, what type memory is being shipped in the G5s? where'd you find the specs? the 'learn more' link on the apple store only stated ddr333 and ddr400, not 2-2-2, 2-2-5, or whatever.
tx.
My problem with the memory Apple is shipping is the latencies are horrendous, even for PC3200 (DDR400) memory.
And you know this from where?
Even if it were true, you're nitpicking beyond all reason. Better RAM latencies might get you 5% more performance in certain situations, at 50% more cost.
Bizarre. Why do they even bother making a third motherboard - it just increases production costs!
They don't. You know nothing about how these things are manufactured. They produce one PCB, and put different components as necessary. This is standard practice.
From my experience with MkLinux, Mach is a microkernel that lives between the OS kernel and the hardware. OS X is supposed to have most of the BSD kernel (aka Darwin), with modifications to run on top of the Mach microkernel.
See my reply to the above comment- it was a slip. Your harshness is completely warranted. It is NOT emulation.
HOWEVER- for my current set up, I am not only running in 32 bit compatibility mode (on POWER 4 chips, older brother of the PPC970) but some of my code is POWER2 architecture. Between POWER2 and the PPC/POWER3 world, they dropped some instructions from the chip. THOSE are emulated by the OS (AIX 5.1 in my case). So until someone gets off their ass and buys me a native compiler, I get a perf hit will all the PROGRAM CHECK exceptions!
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
I'm a graphic designer working for a small design firm. We're still mostly working
in an OS 9 environment, running QuarkXpress 4.1.
The senior designer/IT geek here had a poll whether we want to upgrade to Quark 6
or go with Adobe InDesign. Most of us are sick of Quark's "idiosyncracies".
Quark's noodle code delayed OS X compatibility for 2 years. I like Adobe's
standardization between apps, but that's just a way of seeding dependence in customers (a la MS).
Will Adobe become the Microsoft of the design field? Probably not,
since Adobe's interface actually makes sense and is consistent (with some exceptions).
But they've been the plaintiff on the wrong side of court cases
a little too often for me to be very enthusiastic.
So it's down to choosing the lesser of two evils.
I guess I'm sort of rare in that I understand something of what printing companies
go through - trying to get files supplied by designers clueless to how a layout is put to paper.
The thought of trapping some of the pieces I've seen makes me shudder.
{smartass}That's why they get the big bucks, right? {/smartass}
Sig Applied For
cpu - Intel 2.4CGhz Retail $170.00
ram - 2 x 512 MB Kingston HyperX $262.00
HD - 2 WD Raptors (72 GB Raid 0) $272.00
vid - GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 128 MB vid ram $131.00
dvdburn Sony DW-U10A-10 $189.99
sound Audigy 2 $78.00
case/power/floppy/kb/mouse/modem ~$200 total
Total ~ 1440.98
Compare that to the $1,999.99 apple system.
The x86 solution has the same video card with DOUBLE the vid ram, multi-drives for RAID w/ 10,000 RPM HD solution. A multi-standard dvd burner (I don't know what the SuperDrive does). It has 4 TIMES as much ram, at DDR400 instead of DDR333, and it's dual-channel. It's hyper-threaded. And you have like 500 dollars of difference in cost to upgrade whatever indivudual parts you want...the audigy could upgrade to a damn m-audio audiophile with that kind of cost leeway. The _ONLY_ thing I see that Apple has going for it is the G5, which is supposedly (and believably) a FAR superior chip to anything out there. But last I checked, processor speed wasn't the main bottleneck in machines nowadays. Bah to you Mac zealots. I can build a faster x86 for cheaper that will actually run 99% of the software out there.
Actually, if you say something like that on any other topic, it isn't interesting, so it doesn't get modded up. That way people who are reading with their filter at 3 won't see those standard opinions. On the other hand, on a mac post, if you say anything slightly negative about macs, you get modded down. Just look at how many more -1s there are when a Mac article is posted. The parent to your post was not redundant, nor was he trolling. I don't even think it was offtopic, more so on topic than many posts that just say how they can't wait to buy a mac, or how good their current mac is...to those I say, "I don't give a shit" (using your words), but they are modded up by the zealots. In any other subject it wouldn't be moderated. He was just pointing out something that was true. At worst, he should have not been modded, I would have said it was insightful. Your post, on the other hand, defended the pro-mac-zealot stance and got modded up...it's rediculous. His point was made with both his own and your post. I like Macs, but the Mac people on here are so annoying it is beginning to make me hate them.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
You've got more than a point here.
... every few posts kind of puts one on the defensive.
I guess getting called a faggot, loser, idiot, retard,
btw I'd not have modded my post up, it's close to redundant.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
I was going to agree with you that the new box wasn't that attractive. Then I read your post...
I think you're talking about the box that the G5 ships in. The picture on apple.com is of that, not the actual machine.
If someone cuts into an onion with a knife my eyes imediately start to water. I'd imagine the same thing would happen if someone took a knife to my ibook.
;p
So I think I am going to go with the onion on this one.
Parfaits are very tasty though
When the warrenty expired, just say a prayer to the power supply of your eMachine hoping it won't fail one day and bring down your machine. It happened to mine...
I may get another sub-500 machine in the future. But no, it won't have an eMachine logo on it.
I ordered my dual 2GHz 3 days ago. Estimated shipping time is 7-10 weeks. It all depends on what # in line you are.
Anyone have a guesstimate when we will see PowerBooks with tandem 970s?
I visited the North Michigan Avenue Apple Store yesterday (8/24). There was a gigantic G5 poster facing the street, all employees were wearing G5 tee shirts, there were a ton of visitors inside and out, but there was no G5 in the store. You would think that the high traffic stores should have at least one for the customers to drool over.
You're right that Mach is a microkernel. However, a microkernel does not sit on top of a kernel. What distinguishes a microkernel architecture from a monolithic kernel (which is most OSes) is that it does not have one unified address space and thread state. Instead, it is distributed among several services (such as virtual memory, filesystems, drivers, network stack...) which pass messages to each other.
There is an ongoing debate as to the virtues of microkernel architectures, but stereotypically, microkernels are slower but more stable and secure, and they are harder to create in the first place but easier to extend. Some of this is just stereotype, especially given kernel modules on the one side and improvements in message passing and context switching on the other.
MacOS X, QNX, Mach and the Hurd are microkernels; Linux, *BSD and Windows are monolithic. OS 9 is neither, as the whole system has a unified address space (which makes it fast but unstable).
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
To clarify:
OS kernel
-----------
microkernel
-----------
hardware