Why would you need a comparison chart between the two? G4..meet G5, your new, shiny, faster brother. Is this really that confusing that you need benchmarks?
Unless you expect the G4 to pull ahead in some areas?
Actually, I disagree. This kind of audio preservation might not be of much interest to the majority of people, but what about us ridiculous and insane record collectors? My girlfriend and I recently combined our respective collections and now have well over 1200 items, including some very rare vinyl and acetate releases. Personally, the idea of porting my vinyl stuff over to a lossless format is pretty appealing, especially when you take into consideration that vinyl *does* wear down slightly with every play.
Keeping large file archives of Britney Spears might seem ridiculous, but when i've got albums that i've paid over $200 for, I don't really want to have to worry about replacing them. Given that the vast majority of our collection consists of underground experimental music, the effort to replace that stuff is even more daunting.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Just to clarify, I do agree on some counts with what you're saying, most notably with the misconceptions that many Linux users have. However, just as I don't assume that those misconceptions exist within all Linux users, i'm not going to assume the same about all Mac users.
You may not have encountered people like the ones that i've mentioned; if so, it's very possible that the people i've spoken to are a very small minority, in which case, no further clarification should be needed. However, I still stand by the fact that they truly do believe the misconceptions i've noted.
I'm not spreading FUD anywhere; merely noting my impressions based on some of the users i've encountered. Why is this so difficult to understand? Based on those people, I was (perhaps mistakenly) operating under the assumption that this kind of thinking was a bit more widespread. If you disagree with my solution to that, then you're certainly welcome to that opinion, but that doesn't necessarily make my reason for describing such a solution entirely invalid.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Which is something I was trying to get across, but maybe didn't explain too well. Nonetheless, you're correct about Darwin.
Anyway, I hadn't seen the Darwin page yet (though I think I looked over it once when OS X first came about). In any case, I stand largely corrected! Kudos to you.
To everyone else who still thinks i'm bashing Apple, though: take heart in the fact that after seeing the G5's, i'll likely be buying one for my audio work and day-to-day use. Better GUI, good speed. It also kills two birds with one stone, as I was considering for a long while to build one box for audio running Win2k and one running FreeBSD for day-to-day use.
Now if only they'd bring Softimage|XSI over to Mac and improve support for high-end graphics cards, I could say byebye to Windows for good!
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Which is in reference to Mac USERS that i've spoken with. This is in no way a reflection of Apple or my perceptions about Apple, FreeBSD, or "other gnu projects".
Am I the only one wondering whether or not we'll see some new displays to go along with this?:)
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Well, i'd like to not be unemployed anymore. *cough*
But, as it relates to the topic at hand, how many people will actually see that specs list? It's certainly not mentioned on their website (unless they just updated since I last hit refresh), nor is there any kind of link provided for users who might want to check out the project in more detail.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info!
This does, however, somewhat touch on the point I was trying to make: give credit where it's due. Up until your comment, I hadn't seen *anything* that would indicate what you've mentioned.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
And if you'll look back, I distinctly mention that they should be applauded for their efforts. I'm not upset that they've done it at all.
I was merely noting the confusion that i've observed in some Mac OS users that I know between the two, and feel that there should be a more specific line drawn for these people to differentiate the two. A public "good job!" seems like a good way to do this, along with a link to the FreeBSD website.
Go to the Mac OS X tab on Apple's website and tell me how quickly it takes you to find anything that mentions and links to any of the currently active BSD projects. Looking at the page as it's currently written, it seems as though it'd be pretty easy to neglect the efforts of those groups.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Look, i'm not bashing Apple and saying that they've *stolen* anything. I'm not debating their contributions, either, because they've made some damned good ones.
However, there is a very large misconception among CERTAIN MAC USERS (not ALL) that Mac OS is FreeBSD and FreeBSD is Mac OS; obviously, we all know this to be false, and we know that Apple doesn't believe it either.
That said, there is a vast difference between giving back to the community, and giving a nod of appreciation that goes beyond a "Based on UNIX" or "Based on FreeBSD" graphic.
I'm personally excited to see what Apple's going to be coming out with, but the reactionary attitude some of their users display is disgusting. Just because i'm mentioning Apple in a context that doesn't include giving a virtual handjob to Steve Jobs doesn't mean i'm bashing them.
Having used FreeBSD for a couple years, though, I just think it'd be a nice gesture to say "thanks". Nothing more, nothing less.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
Did I say it was, or even indicate that? No.
What I said was, Apple is using the FreeBSD name, and subsequent bits of technologies developed by them, to help itself. All i'm indicating is that they should give a public nod of, "Hey, thanks for putting our funding to good use and releasing some great software! It's a big help to us and is a good companion to our existing software!"
It's that simple. Stop reading between the lines for things that aren't there and assuming that i'm bashing Apple or claiming that Mac OS is just FreeBSD with a coat of paint. Saying that is like claiming that because FreeBSD can emulate Linux apps, it's just Linux with a different style of arranging directories.
Re:This will be another solid update
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yeah, it totally rules to essentially try and take credit for work you didn't do.
While I think it's cool that Apple is integrating things from BSD into their software, I think the FreeBSD team should get a HUGE nod of appreciation, publically, for all their hard work over the years. Amongst the Mac people I know, they've developed a bit of a "well, now I know UNIX! h4rdc0r3!" sensibility about Mac OS, but they attribute that strength and flexibility to Apple, while completely ignoring the fact that FreeBSD was and is a very capable, powerful OS developed by dedicated volunteers; not some corporate entity.
Kudos to Apple for successfully doing it, but I say give fair credit where it's due.
Re:thankyousirmayihaveanother?
on
Jaguar is Over
·
· Score: 1
While it's true that FreeBSD 5.1 has been out for awhile now, it's still technically a sort of -STABLE release..otherwise, the 4.x branch would've been killed already. As things currently stand, they may still take things as far as 4.9 or 4.10, last I heard.
Warranty means shit if you go the smart route and build your own goddamn system.
A good PC, a truly good one, never *really* becomes obsolete. Just ask the 75Mhz system behind me and the 500Mhz system to my left.
Pay no attention to the 1.5Ghz sitting in front of me, though.
Re:Where's the Pentium 5?
on
P4 3.2GHz Reviews
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The way I see it, it's smart marketing.
"Pentium", as you've noted, was used for the series of chips following the 486. In computer years, that's a LONG friggin' time ago. Consider how many OEM systems have "Pentium" and "Intel Inside" stickers stamped to the side.
That amounts to some serious brand-name recognition, and Intel damn well knows it. Go ask the average mom-n-pop user with their 3 year old Dell system about AMD, and you'll probably be met with blank stares. Mention Intel or "Pentium", and you'll probably get at least a glimmer of recognition. That same recognition is likely to spur their next upgrade to be an Intel system, as well.
Re:Processor design needs to change.
on
P4 3.2GHz Reviews
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If you're claiming that Mac's have superior GPU's on their graphics cards, then why are they using ATI Radeon 9700's...a company, I might add, that Apple dropped, only to get bit in the ass and return to, once they popped out a fantastic series of cards for PC's?
Look, there's a simple underlying reason that we need/want higher clock rates, fsb's, etc. Games, 3D animation, multi-track audio, and any number of other things *require* some serious processing power. It's that bloody simple. If you want to test that, load up 11 or 12 plugins on a 2 minute sample in Cubase on a 1.5GHz system, then compare that same test on a 2.3GHz system. You *will* notice a difference.
And don't even get started on marketing. ALL of these companies, from Apple to Intel to AMD, push crap at their customers left and right. Regardless of your platform choice, you're eating it up just the same..otherwise, you wouldn't be bringing up specs for the PPC 970 (ps: the current crop of Pentium 4's can be pushed to 1.2GHz FSB..the difference is, they're actually out on the market.) and you wouldn't be arguing the Macs vs. PC thing.
Give up on the "mhz myth" marketing scheme Apple has going and look at the bigger picture. You may not notice a difference while browsing the web, but content creation professionals *definitely* will.
Just kind of amusing to me this early in the morning.
Eh, anyway. I realize that some are a-ok overall, but in general, i've just lost my taste for it. Something once exciting and interesting becomes mundane routine after awhile. All things in moderation, I suppose, but it's how i've come to feel about a lot of the social things I did when I was a teenager.
And, no offense, but a political theory IRC channel just does *not* sound like fun, smart people or otherwise:p
I used to use IRC, AIM, etc. a lot, but then I discovered that most people pretty much suck and chatting is little more than a worthless timesink for bored people.
I'm only somewhat joking.
The net is a resource for information. Mind that i'm not making a specific definition of *how* we receive that information; "people speaking to people directly" is a pretty limited context when you take into account the dozens of other ways that we're able to (and do) gather and process information on the net. You can't simply reduce it to one giant fucking chatroom, because ideally, it's not, nor should it be.
You're sort of getting the point that I was making, but not quite.
What I was saying is, the initial cost of my system combined with upgrades would bring it to the same level of power (if not greater) as a similarly upgraded Mac, but at considerably lower cost than the Apple system would run.
On a related note, my upgrade path is considerably more flexible, even if I were to toss aside my current mobo and CPU. My case is large enough to accomodate an extended-ATX motherboard, so I could just as easily spend a little over a grand to upgrade my system to a dual-proc AMD Athlon MP or AMD Opteron. In the instance of the MP, i'm getting greater expandability than a Mac would provide, and in the instance of the Opteron, flat-out trouncing the Mac, and gaining 64-bit capabilities where applicable. At the end of the day, my combined cost for my initial system, and the subsequent, drastic upgrade, is still cheaper or equivalent, yet i'm getting greater speeds and flexibility as a user (hardware-wise, at least; it's definitely in the eye of the beholder when it comes to software!).
Actually, I don't have a Pentium 4. I've got an AMD Athlon XP.
Second, you're comparing the two as a dick-waving contest and missing a fundamental point I was trying to make: I could toss aside my video card for an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro or Nvidia QuadroFX 5900 Ultra, upgrade the RAM to 2GB, and still smoke the Mac on all counts (and SPEND LESS). Dual-processor means shit if the applications can't utilize them both, and you still have to take into account the operating system currently running.
I have serious doubts that programs like iTunes are taking advantage of that.
The worst graphic card you can buy is irrelevant, btw. Who the hell would want to buy the worst available?
User 1: "Dude, that graphics card is totally lame!"
Now see, the PowerPC architecture, imo, is a step in the right direction..most notably the G5's.
(As for the Pentium comment, my roommate has a Pentium 75MHz sitting behind me..I used to have a 233MHz Pentium MMX)
At this point, i'm torn between sinking cash into a custom-built Windows box for audio work, or one of the G5's. Truthfully, the final choice will come down to simple economics, but i'm definitely keeping an eye on the G5's as a very serious possibility.
We will see what comes along later this year, I suppose:>
Apple also doesn't have the flexibility to pick and choose who their customers are. Not if they want to survive in the long run.
I might be someone who builds their own systems, but i'm also someone who'd toss that aside for a stable system that matches my needs. I've already admitted that I like OS X, at least from a visual standpoint. I've also mentioned that I do multi-track audio and graphic design work. I'm also currently a user of Windows and FreeBSD.
Unless i'm missing something huge here, all of those facts place me *exactly* under Apple's target market. Given their current status in the industry, Apple may not be looking for people like me, but they sure as hell *need* people like me if they hope to bring themselves into a more prominent position.
Graphic designers, 3D animators, electronic musicians, gamers, developers..hell, even scientists...if you don't think Apple wants them to come over to their way of thinking alongside the masses of consumers with too much money to burn, think again. They simply don't have the luxury to pick and choose at this point.
Look, truth is, i'd love an Apple system, but the things i'm pointing out as flaws are things i'd like to see changed before i'd shell out that kind of cash for one. It's not like asking Moses to part the fucking sea, it's asking them to stop dragging their feet and step up to the level that Intel and AMD are playing at. Hell, i'd even love to see the same from Transmeta! More choice simply means a healthier industry. Perhaps if Apple, and it's users, would take these types of criticisms to heart, their users *and* their critics, might see them in a whole new light?
That's somewhat of a trick question, because the answer is "I wouldn't." Nobody would.
However, there is a fundamental difference between an older PC and an older Mac. I built my current 1.5GHz PC roughly 2 years ago. I've since upgraded the RAM to 768MB of PC2100 DDR, added a somewhat newer video card (Voodoo3 to TNT2 Ultra), and picked up a couple new drives to replace my *really* old floppy drive and CD-R. It's my day-to-day workhorse and handles everything from multi-track audio editing to gaming and graphic design.
This was previously a 233MHz Pentium MMX. I scrapped the parts, keeping the video card, monitor, cd drives, and sound card. Everything else was brand new and I spent less than $600 for all of it.
So, what's the theme here?
For not even a quarter of the cost of a new Mac, I put together a whole new machine, and more than 2 years later, it's still fast, efficient, and responsive to virtually everything I throw at it. If I need to upgrade to a faster processor without replacing the mobo, I can. Even if I were to upgrade the CPU, hard drives, video card, sound card, and memory, I still wouldn't come even CLOSE to the price of a G4.
Why is this significant?
Because my PC will still outperform the most current Apple systems. Should I decide to build an entirely new system another year or two from now, that new system will still outperform a new Mac (yes, even the upcoming G5) for considerably lesser cost. I'm still getting high-quality parts, eye-pleasing case and monitor, and all the software I need, but i'm not spending a ridiculous amount of money for a powerful, stable system.
"Obsolete" to me means "no longer able to be productive within the limits of my machine". We've had friends over who've sat down at my girlfriend's 500MHz system and even they have said that they're surprised at how fast and responsive it is under Win2k.
Imo, neither of these systems is even near obsolete. If you can show me a Mac system that's still responsive when running Softimage|XSI, Photoshop, and Mozilla Firebird simultaneously, then I might take the price of an Apple system a little more seriously.
I'm not trying to claim that PCs are the most godlike systems ever, but for someone within my budget (which believe me, isn't much), it's the most flexible when it comes to available applications, processing power, and productivity. Even if I have a larger budget, I'd still likely choose a PC, because I don't feel, at this point, that paying a premium for a Mac is justified for what the system is giving you back. Computers should be a price = power situation, where what you pay out is directly in correlation with what you get. Paying out nearly $4000 for a new system that barely competes with a system that I custom-built 2 years ago just isn't justifiable for my budget, or my work.
I'd pay a shitload for a high-end x86-based system, but that should mean sheer fucking POWER. At the rate that Apple charges for their systems, I could probably build a dual-Xeon system that's still cheaper and smokes the shit out of Apple, my old 1.5Ghz, *and* my girlfriend's 500Mhz.
People like myself have been watching Apple's development cycle for awhile now. I like the Mac OS GUI just fine, but my concerns (and subsequently, the reasons I haven't bought a Mac) lie in processing power and price. A pretty GUI is great and all, but it means shit if it's lagging my productivity down. I'm not going to assume anything about Panther until I see some signs that it's actually going to fix some of the existing bugs and speed up system response.
I'm sure you think it's great that Apple can develop in secrecy, but the end result is what truly counts. Stop looking at everything through rose-colored glasses and make some valid points and we PC users might listen more closely. Instead, all you're doing is bash Windows in a vain attempt to reinforce your beliefs about Apple.
I'm no Microsoft zealot, but I go where my budget and my needs take me. Unfortunately, paying out $4000 for a system that Apple will discontinue a year later isn't really high on my list of priorities.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would you need a comparison chart between the two? G4..meet G5, your new, shiny, faster brother.
Is this really that confusing that you need benchmarks?
Unless you expect the G4 to pull ahead in some areas?
Actually, I disagree. This kind of audio preservation might not be of much interest to the majority of people, but what about us ridiculous and insane record collectors? My girlfriend and I recently combined our respective collections and now have well over 1200 items, including some very rare vinyl and acetate releases. Personally, the idea of porting my vinyl stuff over to a lossless format is pretty appealing, especially when you take into consideration that vinyl *does* wear down slightly with every play.
Keeping large file archives of Britney Spears might seem ridiculous, but when i've got albums that i've paid over $200 for, I don't really want to have to worry about replacing them. Given that the vast majority of our collection consists of underground experimental music, the effort to replace that stuff is even more daunting.
Just to clarify, I do agree on some counts with what you're saying, most notably with the misconceptions that many Linux users have. However, just as I don't assume that those misconceptions exist within all Linux users, i'm not going to assume the same about all Mac users.
You may not have encountered people like the ones that i've mentioned; if so, it's very possible that the people i've spoken to are a very small minority, in which case, no further clarification should be needed. However, I still stand by the fact that they truly do believe the misconceptions i've noted.
I'm not spreading FUD anywhere; merely noting my impressions based on some of the users i've encountered. Why is this so difficult to understand? Based on those people, I was (perhaps mistakenly) operating under the assumption that this kind of thinking was a bit more widespread. If you disagree with my solution to that, then you're certainly welcome to that opinion, but that doesn't necessarily make my reason for describing such a solution entirely invalid.
Which is something I was trying to get across, but maybe didn't explain too well. Nonetheless, you're correct about Darwin.
Anyway, I hadn't seen the Darwin page yet (though I think I looked over it once when OS X first came about). In any case, I stand largely corrected! Kudos to you.
To everyone else who still thinks i'm bashing Apple, though: take heart in the fact that after seeing the G5's, i'll likely be buying one for my audio work and day-to-day use. Better GUI, good speed. It also kills two birds with one stone, as I was considering for a long while to build one box for audio running Win2k and one running FreeBSD for day-to-day use.
Now if only they'd bring Softimage|XSI over to Mac and improve support for high-end graphics cards, I could say byebye to Windows for good!
Why would I capitalize it?
Which is in reference to Mac USERS that i've spoken with. This is in no way a reflection of Apple or my perceptions about Apple, FreeBSD, or "other gnu projects".
Am I the only one wondering whether or not we'll see some new displays to go along with this? :)
Well, i'd like to not be unemployed anymore. *cough*
But, as it relates to the topic at hand, how many people will actually see that specs list? It's certainly not mentioned on their website (unless they just updated since I last hit refresh), nor is there any kind of link provided for users who might want to check out the project in more detail.
Actually, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info!
This does, however, somewhat touch on the point I was trying to make: give credit where it's due. Up until your comment, I hadn't seen *anything* that would indicate what you've mentioned.
And if you'll look back, I distinctly mention that they should be applauded for their efforts. I'm not upset that they've done it at all.
I was merely noting the confusion that i've observed in some Mac OS users that I know between the two, and feel that there should be a more specific line drawn for these people to differentiate the two. A public "good job!" seems like a good way to do this, along with a link to the FreeBSD website.
Go to the Mac OS X tab on Apple's website and tell me how quickly it takes you to find anything that mentions and links to any of the currently active BSD projects. Looking at the page as it's currently written, it seems as though it'd be pretty easy to neglect the efforts of those groups.
Look, i'm not bashing Apple and saying that they've *stolen* anything. I'm not debating their contributions, either, because they've made some damned good ones.
However, there is a very large misconception among CERTAIN MAC USERS (not ALL) that Mac OS is FreeBSD and FreeBSD is Mac OS; obviously, we all know this to be false, and we know that Apple doesn't believe it either.
That said, there is a vast difference between giving back to the community, and giving a nod of appreciation that goes beyond a "Based on UNIX" or "Based on FreeBSD" graphic.
I'm personally excited to see what Apple's going to be coming out with, but the reactionary attitude some of their users display is disgusting. Just because i'm mentioning Apple in a context that doesn't include giving a virtual handjob to Steve Jobs doesn't mean i'm bashing them.
Having used FreeBSD for a couple years, though, I just think it'd be a nice gesture to say "thanks". Nothing more, nothing less.
Did I say it was, or even indicate that? No.
What I said was, Apple is using the FreeBSD name, and subsequent bits of technologies developed by them, to help itself. All i'm indicating is that they should give a public nod of, "Hey, thanks for putting our funding to good use and releasing some great software! It's a big help to us and is a good companion to our existing software!"
It's that simple. Stop reading between the lines for things that aren't there and assuming that i'm bashing Apple or claiming that Mac OS is just FreeBSD with a coat of paint. Saying that is like claiming that because FreeBSD can emulate Linux apps, it's just Linux with a different style of arranging directories.
Yeah, it totally rules to essentially try and take credit for work you didn't do.
While I think it's cool that Apple is integrating things from BSD into their software, I think the FreeBSD team should get a HUGE nod of appreciation, publically, for all their hard work over the years. Amongst the Mac people I know, they've developed a bit of a "well, now I know UNIX! h4rdc0r3!" sensibility about Mac OS, but they attribute that strength and flexibility to Apple, while completely ignoring the fact that FreeBSD was and is a very capable, powerful OS developed by dedicated volunteers; not some corporate entity.
Kudos to Apple for successfully doing it, but I say give fair credit where it's due.
While it's true that FreeBSD 5.1 has been out for awhile now, it's still technically a sort of -STABLE release..otherwise, the 4.x branch would've been killed already. As things currently stand, they may still take things as far as 4.9 or 4.10, last I heard.
Warranty means shit if you go the smart route and build your own goddamn system.
A good PC, a truly good one, never *really* becomes obsolete. Just ask the 75Mhz system behind me and the 500Mhz system to my left.
Pay no attention to the 1.5Ghz sitting in front of me, though.
The way I see it, it's smart marketing.
"Pentium", as you've noted, was used for the series of chips following the 486. In computer years, that's a LONG friggin' time ago. Consider how many OEM systems have "Pentium" and "Intel Inside" stickers stamped to the side.
That amounts to some serious brand-name recognition, and Intel damn well knows it. Go ask the average mom-n-pop user with their 3 year old Dell system about AMD, and you'll probably be met with blank stares. Mention Intel or "Pentium", and you'll probably get at least a glimmer of recognition. That same recognition is likely to spur their next upgrade to be an Intel system, as well.
If you're claiming that Mac's have superior GPU's on their graphics cards, then why are they using ATI Radeon 9700's...a company, I might add, that Apple dropped, only to get bit in the ass and return to, once they popped out a fantastic series of cards for PC's?
Look, there's a simple underlying reason that we need/want higher clock rates, fsb's, etc. Games, 3D animation, multi-track audio, and any number of other things *require* some serious processing power. It's that bloody simple. If you want to test that, load up 11 or 12 plugins on a 2 minute sample in Cubase on a 1.5GHz system, then compare that same test on a 2.3GHz system. You *will* notice a difference.
And don't even get started on marketing. ALL of these companies, from Apple to Intel to AMD, push crap at their customers left and right. Regardless of your platform choice, you're eating it up just the same..otherwise, you wouldn't be bringing up specs for the PPC 970 (ps: the current crop of Pentium 4's can be pushed to 1.2GHz FSB..the difference is, they're actually out on the market.) and you wouldn't be arguing the Macs vs. PC thing.
Give up on the "mhz myth" marketing scheme Apple has going and look at the bigger picture. You may not notice a difference while browsing the web, but content creation professionals *definitely* will.
Holy shit, you're in PDX, too! :p
:p
Just kind of amusing to me this early in the morning.
Eh, anyway. I realize that some are a-ok overall, but in general, i've just lost my taste for it. Something once exciting and interesting becomes mundane routine after awhile. All things in moderation, I suppose, but it's how i've come to feel about a lot of the social things I did when I was a teenager.
And, no offense, but a political theory IRC channel just does *not* sound like fun, smart people or otherwise
Actually, that's not really too accurate to say.
I used to use IRC, AIM, etc. a lot, but then I discovered that most people pretty much suck and chatting is little more than a worthless timesink for bored people.
I'm only somewhat joking.
The net is a resource for information. Mind that i'm not making a specific definition of *how* we receive that information; "people speaking to people directly" is a pretty limited context when you take into account the dozens of other ways that we're able to (and do) gather and process information on the net. You can't simply reduce it to one giant fucking chatroom, because ideally, it's not, nor should it be.
You're sort of getting the point that I was making, but not quite.
What I was saying is, the initial cost of my system combined with upgrades would bring it to the same level of power (if not greater) as a similarly upgraded Mac, but at considerably lower cost than the Apple system would run.
On a related note, my upgrade path is considerably more flexible, even if I were to toss aside my current mobo and CPU. My case is large enough to accomodate an extended-ATX motherboard, so I could just as easily spend a little over a grand to upgrade my system to a dual-proc AMD Athlon MP or AMD Opteron. In the instance of the MP, i'm getting greater expandability than a Mac would provide, and in the instance of the Opteron, flat-out trouncing the Mac, and gaining 64-bit capabilities where applicable. At the end of the day, my combined cost for my initial system, and the subsequent, drastic upgrade, is still cheaper or equivalent, yet i'm getting greater speeds and flexibility as a user (hardware-wise, at least; it's definitely in the eye of the beholder when it comes to software!).
Actually, I don't have a Pentium 4. I've got an AMD Athlon XP.
Second, you're comparing the two as a dick-waving contest and missing a fundamental point I was trying to make: I could toss aside my video card for an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro or Nvidia QuadroFX 5900 Ultra, upgrade the RAM to 2GB, and still smoke the Mac on all counts (and SPEND LESS). Dual-processor means shit if the applications can't utilize them both, and you still have to take into account the operating system currently running.
I have serious doubts that programs like iTunes are taking advantage of that.
The worst graphic card you can buy is irrelevant, btw. Who the hell would want to buy the worst available?
User 1: "Dude, that graphics card is totally lame!"
User 2: "Yeah, I know"
In unison: "Awesome!"
Rrrriiight.
Now see, the PowerPC architecture, imo, is a step in the right direction..most notably the G5's.
:>
(As for the Pentium comment, my roommate has a Pentium 75MHz sitting behind me..I used to have a 233MHz Pentium MMX)
At this point, i'm torn between sinking cash into a custom-built Windows box for audio work, or one of the G5's. Truthfully, the final choice will come down to simple economics, but i'm definitely keeping an eye on the G5's as a very serious possibility.
We will see what comes along later this year, I suppose
Apple also doesn't have the flexibility to pick and choose who their customers are. Not if they want to survive in the long run.
I might be someone who builds their own systems, but i'm also someone who'd toss that aside for a stable system that matches my needs. I've already admitted that I like OS X, at least from a visual standpoint. I've also mentioned that I do multi-track audio and graphic design work. I'm also currently a user of Windows and FreeBSD.
Unless i'm missing something huge here, all of those facts place me *exactly* under Apple's target market. Given their current status in the industry, Apple may not be looking for people like me, but they sure as hell *need* people like me if they hope to bring themselves into a more prominent position.
Graphic designers, 3D animators, electronic musicians, gamers, developers..hell, even scientists...if you don't think Apple wants them to come over to their way of thinking alongside the masses of consumers with too much money to burn, think again. They simply don't have the luxury to pick and choose at this point.
Look, truth is, i'd love an Apple system, but the things i'm pointing out as flaws are things i'd like to see changed before i'd shell out that kind of cash for one. It's not like asking Moses to part the fucking sea, it's asking them to stop dragging their feet and step up to the level that Intel and AMD are playing at. Hell, i'd even love to see the same from Transmeta! More choice simply means a healthier industry. Perhaps if Apple, and it's users, would take these types of criticisms to heart, their users *and* their critics, might see them in a whole new light?
That's somewhat of a trick question, because the answer is "I wouldn't." Nobody would.
However, there is a fundamental difference between an older PC and an older Mac. I built my current 1.5GHz PC roughly 2 years ago. I've since upgraded the RAM to 768MB of PC2100 DDR, added a somewhat newer video card (Voodoo3 to TNT2 Ultra), and picked up a couple new drives to replace my *really* old floppy drive and CD-R. It's my day-to-day workhorse and handles everything from multi-track audio editing to gaming and graphic design.
This was previously a 233MHz Pentium MMX. I scrapped the parts, keeping the video card, monitor, cd drives, and sound card. Everything else was brand new and I spent less than $600 for all of it.
So, what's the theme here?
For not even a quarter of the cost of a new Mac, I put together a whole new machine, and more than 2 years later, it's still fast, efficient, and responsive to virtually everything I throw at it. If I need to upgrade to a faster processor without replacing the mobo, I can. Even if I were to upgrade the CPU, hard drives, video card, sound card, and memory, I still wouldn't come even CLOSE to the price of a G4.
Why is this significant?
Because my PC will still outperform the most current Apple systems. Should I decide to build an entirely new system another year or two from now, that new system will still outperform a new Mac (yes, even the upcoming G5) for considerably lesser cost. I'm still getting high-quality parts, eye-pleasing case and monitor, and all the software I need, but i'm not spending a ridiculous amount of money for a powerful, stable system.
"Obsolete" to me means "no longer able to be productive within the limits of my machine". We've had friends over who've sat down at my girlfriend's 500MHz system and even they have said that they're surprised at how fast and responsive it is under Win2k.
Imo, neither of these systems is even near obsolete. If you can show me a Mac system that's still responsive when running Softimage|XSI, Photoshop, and Mozilla Firebird simultaneously, then I might take the price of an Apple system a little more seriously.
I'm not trying to claim that PCs are the most godlike systems ever, but for someone within my budget (which believe me, isn't much), it's the most flexible when it comes to available applications, processing power, and productivity. Even if I have a larger budget, I'd still likely choose a PC, because I don't feel, at this point, that paying a premium for a Mac is justified for what the system is giving you back. Computers should be a price = power situation, where what you pay out is directly in correlation with what you get. Paying out nearly $4000 for a new system that barely competes with a system that I custom-built 2 years ago just isn't justifiable for my budget, or my work.
I'd pay a shitload for a high-end x86-based system, but that should mean sheer fucking POWER. At the rate that Apple charges for their systems, I could probably build a dual-Xeon system that's still cheaper and smokes the shit out of Apple, my old 1.5Ghz, *and* my girlfriend's 500Mhz.
On the contrary.
People like myself have been watching Apple's development cycle for awhile now. I like the Mac OS GUI just fine, but my concerns (and subsequently, the reasons I haven't bought a Mac) lie in processing power and price. A pretty GUI is great and all, but it means shit if it's lagging my productivity down. I'm not going to assume anything about Panther until I see some signs that it's actually going to fix some of the existing bugs and speed up system response.
I'm sure you think it's great that Apple can develop in secrecy, but the end result is what truly counts. Stop looking at everything through rose-colored glasses and make some valid points and we PC users might listen more closely. Instead, all you're doing is bash Windows in a vain attempt to reinforce your beliefs about Apple.
I'm no Microsoft zealot, but I go where my budget and my needs take me. Unfortunately, paying out $4000 for a system that Apple will discontinue a year later isn't really high on my list of priorities.