G5s Start Shipping

jocknerd writes "Apple is now shipping its G5. The 1.6ghz and 1.8ghz are shipping while the dual processor 2.0ghz will ship at the end of the month."

Comments

Article?

[Richardsonke1]

You could like to an article, like The Register or Apple PR itself.

Re:Article?

[iamthemoog]

or the actual machines:

http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Re:Article?

[Gothmolly]

You must be new here. This is Slashdot. Nobody reads the articles.

Re:Article?

[El_Ge_Ex]

Still waiting for IBM's Model to come out. Not much yet.

-B

Re:Article?

[God of Lemmings]

That's a 42 bit address bus, which can address around 4.4 terabytes.

Re:Article?

[Anonymous Coward]

So must you! Nobody actually reads the comments either. You should just post and moderate on random to blend in.

Re:Article?

[Warpedcow]

> 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...

Re:Article?

[palp]

From www.apple.com/g5

Theoretically, the 64-bit data paths let the Power PC G5 access up to 4 terabytes of physical memory.

Re:Article?

[clarkcox3]

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

Re:Article?

[supz]

"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."

Source

hurray for apple

[selderrr]

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

[CoolQ]

100,000 pre-orders according to Apple PR. Which you would have found if you had read this.
--Quentin

Re:hurray for apple

[danigiri]

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

[phillymjs]

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

[DrXym]

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

[WatertonMan]

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

[WatertonMan]

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

[mfago]

If the development tools were as good as Visual Studio I'd probably switch entirely

Have you checked out XCode ?

Re:hurray for apple

[Rolman]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[Hes Nikke]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[WatertonMan]

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

[mekkab]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[arloguthrie]

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!

Re:hurray for apple

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[MouseR]

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).

Re:hurray for apple

[WatertonMan]

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

[GigsVT]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[mosch]

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

[nelsonal]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[WatertonMan]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[Steveftoth]

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

[SethJohnson]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[li99sh79]

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.

-sam

Re:hurray for apple

[heh2k]

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

[waynelorentz]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[Mr. Show]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[hcduvall]

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

[c1pher]

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

[Mr. Show]

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.

Re:hurray for apple

[mkldev]

Yeah. It's part of their new lumber milling operation---Northwood, Canterwood, and now in oak veneer.

Re:hurray for apple

[mkldev]

They can't do it just with adoption rate. They have to add the words "beleaguered" and "declining market share" and then it's a story.

I'm good for it

[boomerny]

anybody want to loan me $3000?

Yeah, but they're dangerous!

[pmz]

I wonder how many lawsuits will be filed by people blown through the walls of their house?

Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!

[jellomizer]

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.

Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous!

[el-spectre]

I kinda wondered why they were gonna ship 'em. I figured just tell the mac its new address and let it go!

ObWhines

[tbone1]

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

Re:ObWhines

[rifter]

you mean

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

[TheRaven64]

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.

4) Ogg Vorbis? Hel-LO!!!

Hello

5) I can't run 12-year old software on it

Software lasts more than 18 months? Wow.

6) They should give it away for free

Well, I really can't disagree with this one. Of course they shouldn't give it away for free to everyone, just me.

7) No x86 (though this is actually a plus

More to the point, no x87. Now that is one brain-dead architecture...

Re:ObWhines

[SirSlud]

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.

Re:ObWhines

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.apple.com/powermac/
"NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra."

$110 is not half of $600.

Re:ObWhines

[Slack3r78]

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.

Re:ObWhines

[pelorus]

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

[sm1979]

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.

Re:ObWhines

[grue23]

As for Windows problems, I have none. You see there is this littel OS called Linux. Prhaps you have heard of it?

Ah, so you avoid Windows problems with Linux problems? Sneaky!

Re:ObWhines

[multiplexo]

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.

Re:ObWhines

[robsimmon]

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)

Re:ObWhines

[wolrahnaes]

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.

Re:ObWhines

[commodoresloat]

I can upgrade a piece at a time, and thus conceal the true cost from my wife.

Until she reads about it on slashdot :)

Re:ObWhines

[elemental23]

If his wife reads Slashdot, chances are he wouldn't have to hide his hardware purchases from her.

That box!

[JHromadka]

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.

Re:That box!

[Darth Maul]

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.

Re:That box!

[doc_traig]

"Steal me now!"

Re:That box!

[TheRaven64]

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...

Re:That box!

[cosmo7]

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).

Re:That box!

[whjwhj]

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.

That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

Re:That box!

[dasmegabyte]

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.

hmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

$3000 for a nice new G5
OR
$699 for a SCO-enchanced Linux kernel

THAT is the question;)

The NYT reports...

[MyNameIsFred]

that Apple has over 100,000 pre-orders of the Power Mac G5. See the link.

Re:The NYT reports...

[chef_raekwon]

silly Jobs....macs are for kids!...

i've been waiting a millenia to say that...

Finally....

[nizo]

a good reason to go out and get a job instead of posting here all day.

Re:I want one!

[jellomizer]

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.

currently available configurations

[kaan]

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

damnit!

[cannes]

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..

In What Quantity?

[TPIRman]

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.

beware the differences between the 1.6 & the 1

[Tumbleweed]

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!

Soon we will have 64-bit laptops

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[raverbuzzy]

Soon?

Now (64bit sparc laptop)

Re:Not the fastest anymore

[NetCurl]

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...

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?

[StarmanDeluxe]

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

[QEDog]

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.

Re:I want one!

[Feathers McGraw]

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:Apple's Market Share

[DavidinAla]

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.

What is up with slashdot?

[Dr Reducto]

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?

[thryllkill]

"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...

Re:What is up with slashdot?

[kelzer]

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?

[dasmegabyte]

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?

[dasmegabyte]

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.

Which, I might add, came out August 8th.

OS X version 10.2.7?

[kaan]

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?

Re:OS X version 10.2.7?

[WHudson]

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).

Re:OS X version 10.2.7?

[larkost]

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).

Re:I want one!

[Dr Reducto]

"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:Apple's Market Share

[SirSlud]

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.

Re:it's about freaking time!

[NaugaHunter]

doh...apple said they would ship at the end of the summer.

For the record, Summer ends with the Solstice around Sept. 20/21. So they're actually a month early.

And FreeBSD is what?

[nonameisgood]

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

Re:And FreeBSD is what?

[Ffakr]

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).

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?

[jeremyp]

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.

Re:Not the fastest anymore

[the_2nd_coming]

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.

Re:it's about freaking time!

[BigBir3d]

doh...apple said they would ship at the end of the summer.

I don't live in the Northern Hemisphere, you insesitive clod!

Re:Apple's Market Share

[Arker]

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.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines?

[RalphBNumbers]

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.

Thanks for reminding me!

[Chief Typist]

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:I want one!

[NaugaHunter]

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.

Re:Meh.

[HarveyBirdman]

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.

Re:Meh.

[conan_albrecht]

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.

Re:Not the fastest anymore

[m00by]

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:Not the fastest anymore

[the_2nd_coming]

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.

Re:Meh.

[Arker]

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.

Re:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe

[Rosyna]

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.

Re:2 things keeping market share down

[MoneyT]

In regards to #2. If you don't like it, sell it. Macs have very high resale value.

Re:2 things keeping market share down

[Hes Nikke]

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) ;)

What a box!

[lacrymology.com]

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

Not a problem

[3770]

Send me your credit card number and I'll fax the money to you.

Re:2 things keeping market share down

[jasonbw]

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:New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until novembe

[chfriley]

>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.

In other Apple shipping news...

[HTH NE1]

...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?

Title is wrong.

[skinny.net]

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.

Apple IS dying

[Infonaut]

I'm afraid Apple is dying my friends.

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!

Re:Apple IS dying

[antiMStroll]

Now that Apple's core OS is *BSD based, is it dying twice as fast? Netcraft readers want to know.

Re:Apple IS dying

[mcwop]

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.

Re:It's Not That Complicated

[funkhauser]

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.

Heat?

[heli0]

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

Re:Heat?

[MuckSavage]

The 1.8ghz version draws 42 watts.

Re:Wild

[Hackie_Chan]

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...

Re:It's Not That Complicated

[phoebusQ]

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:Sorry

[toddhisattva]

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.

[GPS Pilot]

Read why here.

Re:It's Not That Complicated

[phillymjs]

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:AMD responses

[Gogo Dodo]

The jump is due to the analyst report, not Apple shipping G5s. You need to read the article you sited.

Wow, this is totally wrong

[Exitthree]

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

[GlassHeart]

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?

try describing a sunset to a blind person...

[mojoNYC]

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:Ugly

[jpalmerino]

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

Re:Emachines

[Hawthorne01]

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.

Re:Crash Different

[Nuoji]

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)

Re:It's Not That Complicated

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Numbers

[WTFmonkey]

That's not the point. Couldn't find a 2003 Fortune list, so these are from Forbes. Here are some players you might have heard of:

1. Microsoft, #15
2. Intel, #28
3. Cisco, #38
4. Dell, #50
5. Hewlett-Packard, #109
6. Texas Instruments, #200
7. Sun Microsystems, #213
8. wait for it...
9. OH! There they are, Apple, #381!

Numbers speak it all, my man.

Why would Macs be dying?

[Kjella]

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

Re:Mac Zealots and their mod points

[zpok]

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).

Re:Text console?

[Bob[Bob]]

Erm, so what happens when your enter ">console" as your username in the login box?

Re:It's Not That Complicated

[kurosawdust]

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

[larkost]

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:Text console?

[Lifewolf]

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

Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th

[tantalus]

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:When will the powerooks get G5s

[bigman8]

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.

Re:Emachines

[zpok]

And we're all very happy for you.

Define "dead"

[chia_monkey]

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.

Re:Just the facts, man

[bnenning]

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.

Re:Emachines

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

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.

Huh?

[krilli]

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.