Well I for one was not fed up with todays keynote. Even if the Powermacs where updated its not like I can afford them. Their time will come when Mot gets its ass in gear (still waiting after 2 years). I love the new iMac. Its still expensive but god damn is it cool (unfortunately a lot like the cube.) At least I can afford to get some sort of power from a mac.
But yes I will admit the skies are begining to get very gloomy.
I've already responded to a couple of these threads, but having just justified an new 500 g3 mhz iBook to use for Vid editing over your typical 1.5 ghz PC crap, I think your problem is , you haven't used PC's. I use them on a daily basis and wouldn't recommend one for a paper wieght. Dude, you're a PC guy, not a mac guy, live with it. There has never been a time when Apple made the fastest PCs on earth, learn to live with it. It's always gonna be true. When apple was faster that PC's people started complaining they were so much slower than Cray workstations. There's always gonna be whiners. Apple has always made computers that were easy to use. Sometimes they've been faster than the competition, sometimes they haven't. But if you wanted raw speed and power, you never would have looked to apple in the first place. So now that you like the way apple does things, don't try and convert them to the first out of the block with screaming new technology game, they may not be first out of the block, but they're often the first to get it right.
Actually, there was a time when Apple did have the fastest PCs on the earth but that was back in the 90's. Also I use a PC at work every day and get to play around with my friend's. I still like a Mac better but, I know what we are up against and the competition is growing I'm sorry to say. Give Microsoft ( enough bannas ) enough time and they will get enough of it right. That's scary but, it can only happen if Apple lets it. I know I sound a bit like junkyard dawg and some of the other nay sayers but, this is getting serious. You know it is because I've been branded one of the " Apple Cheerleaders ". Time for Apple to really shine but I've yet to see any concrete signs of that happening. Before you start yes, I think the new imac is really great but, it's not enough.
Moderator, spooky wasn't the one ranting... Will everyone just chill. Are we as Mac users getting so defensive now that any criticism of our favorite computer maker puts our shorts in a bunch? While I think spooky is being a bit pessimistic he brings up some good points. Blown Away! Not... The new iMac is very shweet, I like it and will replace my current iMac with the new one. However, Apple doesn't(yet...) offer a machine that will get me to give up my PC game "box".
Macs are very expensive outside of the US, a harsh reality. I don't think G5's are a reality for another year. The G4 with a major speed bump and upgraded mobo architecture would be just fine and dandy at the next MacWorld Show.
i 'll say that the performance of the new I mac are sufficient , in the other way i think the performance of the powermac line are too poor and this machines are too expansive.
The new I mac is a good product, the powermac line is too old.
we all expect that the next generation will soon arrive. Perhaps in february (there is promotion until the junuary 31). During this time i seriously doubt that Apple is going to sell many powermacs .. .
Apple is trying to go after the 95%. That 95% is made up of mostly consumer customer, not pro power hungery users. Apple has everything under control, they're just pacing themselves. Everybody has grown to expect everything can and should be given to them all at once. Once this whole transtion phase for Apple is complete, we'll look at them in a new light. It's pretty aparent to me we are going to get some pretty fast power macs here shortly and I can't wait until the portables make the jump. But we'll be in this same boat 2-3 years down the road, just as always.
[quote] someone please tell me they can be sued for misrepresentation <hr></blockquote>
No it cannot hold water in a court of law... Honestly do you REALLY think that a prase such as "Beyond the rumor sites" can hold some one or a company liable for a product announcement??? LMAO
[quote] I can buy a 2GHZ P4 with full tower, slots, full drive bays, DVD-r, CDRW, GeForce 3 et all plus a 15 inch LCD running XP Home for 1100 gbpounds <hr></blockquote>
Go... LEAVE.... If you can get a PC to do what you want it to and be happy... be happy elsewhere.
[quote] I bet Alias wavefront are really happy about MWSF <hr></blockquote>
They should be refining their code for Maya more than they should be concerned about hardware rumors... I'd much rather have a highly optimized Maya on a 800DP than a crappy Maya on a 1.6GHz G4/5.
Anywhooo... Go away... I thought MWSF was a big hit... You are the weakest link, good-bye
<strong>Apple is working hard and innovating. The new PM line will soon be here, stop crying,</strong><hr></blockquote>
Prove it.
133 system bus? Could have bumped that a long time ago. They didn't. Not only are they not "innovating" they are not even keeping up with The Smiths down the street.
<strong>I've already responded to a couple of these threads, but having just justified an new 500 g3 mhz iBook to use for Vid editing over your typical 1.5 ghz PC crap, I think your problem is , you haven't used PC's. I use them on a daily basis and wouldn't recommend one for a paper wieght. Dude, you're a PC guy, not a mac guy, live with it. There has never been a time when Apple made the fastest PCs on earth, learn to live with it. It's always gonna be true. When apple was faster that PC's people started complaining they were so much slower than Cray workstations. There's always gonna be whiners. Apple has always made computers that were easy to use. Sometimes they've been faster than the competition, sometimes they haven't. But if you wanted raw speed and power, you never would have looked to apple in the first place. So now that you like the way apple does things, don't try and convert them to the first out of the block with screaming new technology game, they may not be first out of the block, but they're often the first to get it right.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I started out using an atari 800 then BBC micros before coming upon the macintosh. There was a time when for creatives macs were unique and untouchable. From videoworks (directors precursor) to a little thing called photoshop, from an outraggeous idea called Hypercard to AV on machines, from 256 colours (hell, who would ever need that - get real right?), from internal SCSI drives to built in networking, from Video to the IIfx. All at a time when Pcs had little bacl screens with text on them and to make pictures you had to use ASCII text. I loved them. They did everything I could want with ease, fun and power.I remember the first 3D package I ever used (on a mac plus). It took 4 days to boolean two cylinders together but the PC guys were in awe. Running Infinidi, Electric Image et al was a breeze.
Now I work with both Macs and PCs (windows 95/98/NT). When we got our G4s the shockwaves reverberated around the organisation for a year - so rare are macintoshes. The chances are that our art, design multimedia department will never get any more.
Honestly now, knowing what 2000 gb pounds will buy you in pc terms can anyone justify the expense of a G4 tower? or even the new imac? We have 15 Nts at 400 Mhz with the same ATI rage pro Gc as our G4 400 AGPs yet using Photoshop, 3D and premiere on a daily basis these PCs blow our G4s out of the water. How come?
Over the past few years I have been asked by many friends and colleagues to advise on buying a computer and I always extol the Mac as the ideal choice. Yet they go and buy a PC. I've just fitted a new graphics card into a friend's PC. He wanted a Mac, I advised a Mac. But his 14 yr old son (for whom the machine really is for) wanted a PC (1000 gb pounds - oops that's a powermac out of the question) why? becuase it had a CDRW, DVD-R, 17" monitor, 40GB HD, Geforce 2 ad nauseum. His 14 yr old son knew he wanted to keep playing games fast and would want the latest graphics card when it came. (oops there goes the imac). Besides, in his own words "so, ok the mac is the coolest machine out there but who wants a poxy 700Mhz?"
From my own point of view I am fed up waiting for rendering, large PS files to open, struggling to run two big apps at the same time, jerky video playback, lack of storage bays, emulated software . . .
I love apple and some of the responses to my initial post seems to underline the fact that these days to dare criticise apple is to sin on a grand scale. Apple needs to know that it is teetering on the brink. Cute things come and go.
I make no apologies for wanting a 3GHz G5/G6/Ganything. The mac is seen only as a low powered toy. Not a real computer. Enough of the BS. This is not the way to increase market share in the long term.
Does anyone know what alias wavefront think about apple's new kit? I'm sure they're really happy having spent all that R&D.
For those of you who are pissed off and upset, all you have to do is mentally downgrade your perception of yourself from "pro power user" to "easily pleased consumer" (like me).
I for one am glad to see that so many Mac users feel the same way as me. I am a longtime Wintel user, and have been considering picking up a Mac just to have something different. I would not replace my PC with one, but I would like one nonetheless. But I can't seem to justify why I should pay Apple's prices for hardware that, while slick and classy, just flat out has less computing power.
Some on this thread have spoken about marketshare. It's obvious that Apple is only interested in retaining its current 5% US (3% Worldwide), rather than converting existing PC users. Why? The hardware is just too damned expensive. Moreover, they're shipping the exact same stuff they were shipping this time last year! What did the G4 gain last year, like 200Mhz or so? Gimme a break. That's not Apple's fault, but what is their fault is sticking with Motorola. Face it, the PowerPC line is going nowhere fast. Motorola is in no hurry to produce new or faster chips, and yet Apple expects to remain competitive with Intel and AMD by using them. Those companies do nothing but create microprocessors, primarily for home computers. If Apple switched to AMD, they could quit having to worry about when their chip maker's going to get their ass in gear and release a new product. So, can someone explain to me why an x86/Itanium/Hammer based Mac is not better in every way?
pcman....my iMac DV 400MHz is fast and does everything i ask of it....this new iMac G4 800MHz is gonna be a monster for me....i don't need anything more and really don't think i would notice the difference between this and a PC running a 1.8 GHz chip...do average computer users need 2 GHz chips?? would average users notice the difference??? just look forward to using the SuperDrive!! and playing with that wicked, mobile monitor...wheeee g
seems to me specs aren't everything...but i could be wrong...it has happened before...
<strong>pcman....my iMac DV 400MHz is fast and does everything i ask of it....this new iMac G4 800MHz is gonna be a monster for me....i don't need anything more and really don't think i would notice the difference between this and a PC running a 1.8 GHz chip...do average computer users need 2 GHz chips?? would average users notice the difference??? just look forward to using the SuperDrive!! and playing with that wicked, mobile monitor...wheeee g
seems to me specs aren't everything...but i could be wrong...it has happened before...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Specs aren't everything true, but with what Apple charges, they should be better. The Superdrive is awesome, that's innovation, along with Firewire, and Gigabit Ethernet in the PowerMac. But putting the same components in a different box is not innovation(although it IS cool). I have a 600Mhz PIII that serves my needs well. Could I tell the difference between it and a 2Ghz or even a 1Ghz machine? You bet I could. It's not a question of need. I could get my with my Dad's PII266 if I had to. But that would suck
Another subject I would like feedback from Mac users on is Apple's crappy warranty. I mean, it used to be that they at least gave premium support for that extra money you paid, but today you get a paltry 90 days tech support? That is pathetic, especially with machines targeted for new users. And the 1 year hardware warranty isn't much better. My buddy has already sent his iBook in twice, so it's not like the machines are bulletproof. Is that a sore spot for you guys?
Specs AREN'T always everything. And like thegelding says, it goes beyond the hard numbers that, let's face it, many people truly don't notice or even appreciate.
I'll take ease-of-use, integration, the iApps, OS X, etc. over MHz and chip bragging rights ANY day.
If I'm pushing pixels around or doing layered Illustrator maps and infographics with a 400MHz iMac and a 466MHz G4 at work (and have NO complaints whatsoever), then I'm only going to be blown away by a 800MHz G4 iMac.
I guess it sucks to be a "power user", whatever the hell that is...
Photos were being edited, magazines being produced, pixels being pushed, etc. on 233MHz beige G3s. And before that, PowerMac 9500s and before that, Quadra 850s, etc.
Yes, it would be totally cool if Apple had Macs in the 1.6-1.2GHz range. I would be thrilled. But they wouldn't allow me to do anything I'm not doing right now, so it's not like I'm missing out on something.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just one of those users who appreciates the other stuff, rather than sheer, all-out speed and numbers. I've never been into that angle of it, so I guess I'm not a good one to comment on it all. I'd rather use a 400MHz G3 and OS X than a 2.2GHz P4 with Windows. To me, it's always been about the OS more than the hardware.
When the new iMac ships, people througout the world over the next few months people will think it's Christmas all over again!!!
iMac II took 2 years to develop with the current technology - four years after the original model which was stuck in G3 all that time. The G5 chip is just taking a little longer - but imagine what the world will be like when it arrives?!
Be patient <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
the new iMac is everything i was hoping for and i ordered it as soon as the apple store was updated...as for apple's tech support...don't remember ever needing it...maybe back when i first got my Quadra 605 in 1992...but i can't image that apples tech support is any worse than dells or gateways...the stories of their support from co-workers is amazingly bad...g
Comments
Your beef is with organizational politics and uninformed computer IS "professionals" (ie, networking geeks), not with Apple.
But yes I will admit the skies are begining to get very gloomy.
[ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: Falcon ]</p>
Macs are very expensive outside of the US, a harsh reality. I don't think G5's are a reality for another year. The G4 with a major speed bump and upgraded mobo architecture would be just fine and dandy at the next MacWorld Show.
The new I mac is a good product, the powermac line is too old.
we all expect that the next generation will soon arrive. Perhaps in february (there is promotion until the junuary 31). During this time i seriously doubt that Apple is going to sell many powermacs .. .
No it cannot hold water in a court of law... Honestly do you REALLY think that a prase such as "Beyond the rumor sites" can hold some one or a company liable for a product announcement??? LMAO
[quote] I can buy a 2GHZ P4 with full tower, slots, full drive bays, DVD-r, CDRW, GeForce 3 et all plus a 15 inch LCD running XP Home for 1100 gbpounds <hr></blockquote>
Go... LEAVE.... If you can get a PC to do what you want it to and be happy... be happy elsewhere.
[quote] I bet Alias wavefront are really happy about MWSF <hr></blockquote>
They should be refining their code for Maya more than they should be concerned about hardware rumors... I'd much rather have a highly optimized Maya on a 800DP than a crappy Maya on a 1.6GHz G4/5.
Anywhooo... Go away... I thought MWSF was a big hit... You are the weakest link, good-bye
Mac Guru
<strong>Apple is working hard and innovating. The new PM line will soon be here, stop crying,</strong><hr></blockquote>
Prove it.
133 system bus? Could have bumped that a long time ago. They didn't. Not only are they not "innovating" they are not even keeping up with The Smiths down the street.
<strong>I've already responded to a couple of these threads, but having just justified an new 500 g3 mhz iBook to use for Vid editing over your typical 1.5 ghz PC crap, I think your problem is , you haven't used PC's. I use them on a daily basis and wouldn't recommend one for a paper wieght. Dude, you're a PC guy, not a mac guy, live with it. There has never been a time when Apple made the fastest PCs on earth, learn to live with it. It's always gonna be true. When apple was faster that PC's people started complaining they were so much slower than Cray workstations. There's always gonna be whiners. Apple has always made computers that were easy to use. Sometimes they've been faster than the competition, sometimes they haven't. But if you wanted raw speed and power, you never would have looked to apple in the first place. So now that you like the way apple does things, don't try and convert them to the first out of the block with screaming new technology game, they may not be first out of the block, but they're often the first to get it right.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I started out using an atari 800 then BBC micros before coming upon the macintosh. There was a time when for creatives macs were unique and untouchable. From videoworks (directors precursor) to a little thing called photoshop, from an outraggeous idea called Hypercard to AV on machines, from 256 colours (hell, who would ever need that - get real right?), from internal SCSI drives to built in networking, from Video to the IIfx. All at a time when Pcs had little bacl screens with text on them and to make pictures you had to use ASCII text. I loved them. They did everything I could want with ease, fun and power.I remember the first 3D package I ever used (on a mac plus). It took 4 days to boolean two cylinders together but the PC guys were in awe. Running Infinidi, Electric Image et al was a breeze.
Now I work with both Macs and PCs (windows 95/98/NT). When we got our G4s the shockwaves reverberated around the organisation for a year - so rare are macintoshes. The chances are that our art, design multimedia department will never get any more.
Honestly now, knowing what 2000 gb pounds will buy you in pc terms can anyone justify the expense of a G4 tower? or even the new imac? We have 15 Nts at 400 Mhz with the same ATI rage pro Gc as our G4 400 AGPs yet using Photoshop, 3D and premiere on a daily basis these PCs blow our G4s out of the water. How come?
Over the past few years I have been asked by many friends and colleagues to advise on buying a computer and I always extol the Mac as the ideal choice. Yet they go and buy a PC. I've just fitted a new graphics card into a friend's PC. He wanted a Mac, I advised a Mac. But his 14 yr old son (for whom the machine really is for) wanted a PC (1000 gb pounds - oops that's a powermac out of the question) why? becuase it had a CDRW, DVD-R, 17" monitor, 40GB HD, Geforce 2 ad nauseum. His 14 yr old son knew he wanted to keep playing games fast and would want the latest graphics card when it came. (oops there goes the imac). Besides, in his own words "so, ok the mac is the coolest machine out there but who wants a poxy 700Mhz?"
From my own point of view I am fed up waiting for rendering, large PS files to open, struggling to run two big apps at the same time, jerky video playback, lack of storage bays, emulated software . . .
I love apple and some of the responses to my initial post seems to underline the fact that these days to dare criticise apple is to sin on a grand scale. Apple needs to know that it is teetering on the brink. Cute things come and go.
I make no apologies for wanting a 3GHz G5/G6/Ganything. The mac is seen only as a low powered toy. Not a real computer. Enough of the BS. This is not the way to increase market share in the long term.
Does anyone know what alias wavefront think about apple's new kit? I'm sure they're really happy having spent all that R&D.
I'm looking for the best way to kill myself.
Nope...got exactly what i was hoping for and the new iMac is "Being Assembled" as we speak..
Life is easier.
Some on this thread have spoken about marketshare. It's obvious that Apple is only interested in retaining its current 5% US (3% Worldwide), rather than converting existing PC users. Why? The hardware is just too damned expensive. Moreover, they're shipping the exact same stuff they were shipping this time last year! What did the G4 gain last year, like 200Mhz or so? Gimme a break. That's not Apple's fault, but what is their fault is sticking with Motorola. Face it, the PowerPC line is going nowhere fast. Motorola is in no hurry to produce new or faster chips, and yet Apple expects to remain competitive with Intel and AMD by using them. Those companies do nothing but create microprocessors, primarily for home computers. If Apple switched to AMD, they could quit having to worry about when their chip maker's going to get their ass in gear and release a new product. So, can someone explain to me why an x86/Itanium/Hammer based Mac is not better in every way?
seems to me specs aren't everything...but i could be wrong...it has happened before...
<strong>pcman....my iMac DV 400MHz is fast and does everything i ask of it....this new iMac G4 800MHz is gonna be a monster for me....i don't need anything more and really don't think i would notice the difference between this and a PC running a 1.8 GHz chip...do average computer users need 2 GHz chips?? would average users notice the difference??? just look forward to using the SuperDrive!! and playing with that wicked, mobile monitor...wheeee g
seems to me specs aren't everything...but i could be wrong...it has happened before...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Specs aren't everything true, but with what Apple charges, they should be better. The Superdrive is awesome, that's innovation, along with Firewire, and Gigabit Ethernet in the PowerMac. But putting the same components in a different box is not innovation(although it IS cool). I have a 600Mhz PIII that serves my needs well. Could I tell the difference between it and a 2Ghz or even a 1Ghz machine? You bet I could. It's not a question of need. I could get my with my Dad's PII266 if I had to. But that would suck
Another subject I would like feedback from Mac users on is Apple's crappy warranty. I mean, it used to be that they at least gave premium support for that extra money you paid, but today you get a paltry 90 days tech support? That is pathetic, especially with machines targeted for new users. And the 1 year hardware warranty isn't much better. My buddy has already sent his iBook in twice, so it's not like the machines are bulletproof. Is that a sore spot for you guys?
I'll take ease-of-use, integration, the iApps, OS X, etc. over MHz and chip bragging rights ANY day.
If I'm pushing pixels around or doing layered Illustrator maps and infographics with a 400MHz iMac and a 466MHz G4 at work (and have NO complaints whatsoever), then I'm only going to be blown away by a 800MHz G4 iMac.
I guess it sucks to be a "power user", whatever the hell that is...
Photos were being edited, magazines being produced, pixels being pushed, etc. on 233MHz beige G3s. And before that, PowerMac 9500s and before that, Quadra 850s, etc.
Yes, it would be totally cool if Apple had Macs in the 1.6-1.2GHz range. I would be thrilled. But they wouldn't allow me to do anything I'm not doing right now, so it's not like I'm missing out on something.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just one of those users who appreciates the other stuff, rather than sheer, all-out speed and numbers. I've never been into that angle of it, so I guess I'm not a good one to comment on it all. I'd rather use a 400MHz G3 and OS X than a 2.2GHz P4 with Windows. To me, it's always been about the OS more than the hardware.
iMac II took 2 years to develop with the current technology - four years after the original model which was stuck in G3 all that time. The G5 chip is just taking a little longer - but imagine what the world will be like when it arrives?!
Be patient <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
the new iMac is everything i was hoping for and i ordered it as soon as the apple store was updated...as for apple's tech support...don't remember ever needing it...maybe back when i first got my Quadra 605 in 1992...but i can't image that apples tech support is any worse than dells or gateways...the stories of their support from co-workers is amazingly bad...g