"So... you doubt anyone will switch a the drop of the hat, then you admitted you did just that,"
Check eyesight. (Again, I guess you view making a decision over many years, 'Drop of a hat'.)
"now it's temporary because your back? Ummm... Okay, whatever..."
I didn't say I was 'back' either.
"We've gone to OS X, and now we have Maya."
Correct. A world class 3D program and decent Gl. Big difference. ie Macs weren't taken seriously at 3D.
"Mac's have had Electric Image, Lightwave, Cinema 4D, etc... I wouldn't call Macs best in class for 3D, but I wouldn't call it a joke either."
Look closely. This is about hardware. But seeing as you mention software...(I have Lightwave for the Mac/PC...and have plenty of respect for that...but take that away? Electric Image...and..? Years ago C4D was a hatchling...)
Mac 3D software? Previously? 'Okay'. It's better now. But it's still lacking some big hitters.
The lack of Gl, lack of high end 3D card, fitting an almost £3,000 'workstation' 'power'Mac with a 'Rage' 16/32 meg card for what seemed like years!!!! ....AND...Quickdraw (Okay, I'm reaching really far back for that one...
For many years. 'power'Macs. Joke. Simple words. My view. Your point on the software. Well...okay, we had Lightwave. (A very wobbly version of until relatively recently...go Rage ATi...)
They are 'less of joke' only in comparison to previous Mac 3D workstations.
I guess I'm talking hardware 'joke'...but the x/gl software has got them on track.
"Macs have always been at a premium "
SO that makes it alright to charge almost £3,000 for a Mac workstation that gets hammered by the equivalent PC workstation? For techology I, ahem, lets get this right now, 'perceive' to be out of date, ridiculously over priced as opposed to premiumly priced...?
(...and the initial point of my argument is my 'low end' PC, a 1.6 gig Xp slaps the 'power'Mac dual silly. My 'xp' aint very special any longer (how many Athlon bumps and price cuts have we had since the dual 1 gig G4?) and that's within the space of half a year! Compare that to Moto's much anticipated 'leap' to 1.2 dual G4s? Still, let's see...eh?)
"when it comes to price. Of course, there is also an argument that in many ways, they are configured better (firewire, gigabit ethernet, etc.). Then, when you add in the cost of the digital hub apps that let you do quite a bit right out of the box,"
Compared to a pc half the price that's comparitively crippled? Look again. If you think a few ports here and there makes up for the whopping extra Apple charges...
"you find that Macs aren't really priced that terrible."
Nope. You're seriously behind the curve here. Compare a a SERIOUS 3D PC workstation and a Mac one and ouch. There isn't any competition. In benches, the Mac is comprehensively hammered. (That's why the recent dual 'power'Mac had its price dropped because they didn't: compete. They still don't.)
"Further, when you compare to similar workstations on the PC side, the price seems even better."
Post me a few links willya...
"Generally speaking, the Education market has little if any impact on sales of the high end machines."
Well, PC schools can get a cheap, high performing tower that stuffs both the old imac and the 'e' mac.
"Likewise, you're note about the decline of Powermac sales is moot."
Yeah. Keep cherry picking.
"You've also failed to mention the increase in sales in iBooks and Powerbooks, etc."
No. I didn't. You weren't looking hard enough. The redesigns have given Apple a few home runs. Granted. And I'm pleased for Apple and want them to do well with them (not bad for a guy who has an 'axe to grind', eh? Where did you get that idea...?
However, note the dip in sales with both the ibook and powerbook as Apple took ages to update them and when they did, it wasn't enough. Sales for both have dropped. Sales for them look okay combined. But the ibooks have stopped 'flying' off the shelves so quickly. This is when Apple's 'mean' spec list becomes exposed.
(...and don't tell me you haven't noticed Apple's generous supplements of ram over the years?)
When you get past the 'cool' style intial sales impact...we get back to the crux of Apple's problems. Hardware! The specs...and...the recent ibook wasn't doing enough spec wise and sales had slipped. Gee, guess that's why it got 'bumped.'
The recent bump, for many, is not enough cpu wise. But, according to you, we've got axes to grind when we complain Apple's performance on the spec sheet isn't up to scratch.
"As for the publishing market, I have not seen any data which suggests"
Then how do you know? I've read many news sites, data etc that suggests this 'erosion'. I guess I'll have to make notes from now on and post an avalanche of hyperlinks to keep me mate here happy. (Still, it's more fun to stick to our perceived arguments, right?)
"these significant inroads by the Wintel market. Do you have any source of data for this information to share?"
Sure. I'll go get them right now...
On the other hand, just why are those 'power'Mac sales shrinking? What shall we pinpoint? Lack of OS X.2? The lightweight Aquashop 7? 'power' users putting off their purchases because they're on their 'cycle'? (OR MAYBE it's those huge prices and LOW specs?)
"Rather than just speculate"
That's what 'FH' is for. (You really go and speak to those guys?)
"Of course migrations happen."
That's why Apple's worldwide marketshare is 3-5%?
Where's your hard data to show this erosion aint happining. (Check Apple's sales figures. Look okay? See an overall trend? No. Okay. Apple aint out of business. Sure. It's not here yet. But they need a few more 'gimmicky' home runs. Because there overall sales the last year or so have shrunk. Y'know, that 'majority' that aren't fickle like me...)
So, 'significant'? Define. Erosion.
"No doubt there will be some that make ignorant decisions based on numbers like MHZ."
What, like me? Like those who are contributing to Apple's otherall shrinking sales?
Apple may have steadied the 'ship'.
But can they see real growth. Much of the software and 'gimmicks' are in place.
But hardball line in the sand? The specs?
Er...well, listen to the wail of the Appleinsider and co post board banshees and draw your own RDF conclusions.
"PowerPC is not likely to bridge a MHZ gap as long as it's competing with a P4 20 stage pipeline, sacrifice anything for MHZ type of architecture."
Then they'd better start thinking different.
Because myself and others don't buy the dual 1 gig g4 is competitive with even single P3 at 3 gig argument.
Change the record, Apple!
"The more intelligent people"
So, I'm not 'more' intelligent (like you...of course...) because I bought a machine for a, let's see, a sixth of the price of the dual mac that clobbers it in any of the tests you fail to provide benchmarks for?
"will judge Macs by how well they perform their job, how much support and aggrevation they require to maintain as compared to PCs, and possibly determine (as you mention) if they are still competitive in performance for what they do."
Is that a 'perceived' competitive performance?
So all the people who decide they can get a dual Athlon XP with twice the mhz and performance for less money are 'ignorant'?
"Minor performance difference will certainly not be enough."
Minor? Well, if you say so... (shakes head...)
"I don't know if that's true across the board."
Well, if you 'don't know', then don't talk about it.
"I recall seeing a comparison between Apple's new iMac and a similar setup from Gateway (flat panel, dvd burner, etc.)."
Where, exactly, do you 'recall'? A link..?
(...and how about other build to order companies? What about smaller firms? Otherpriced Gateways - a PC company much like Apple... - offering overpriced underperforming kit... Hardly a 'fair comparison' if you've got a PC point of view...)
"The iMac was considered the better deal, and it's bundled software was considered to be much better the the "digital hub" alternatives on the PC."
I recall talking about 'power'Macs in particular. The imacs do a much better job. But, check that spec list again. Cos they are behind. They look heaps better though and have all those freebie 'easy to use' apps you mention...
"Yes, at the high end PC arena, you get considerably better bang for the buck,"
Glad you agree on my post. What took you so long to crack?
"Remember, percentage wise, the Mac is already a niche market."
Oh. I see. And how did it get that way? So mac sales are shrinking? How come, overall, despite Steve Jobs most titanic efforts...they are still shrining all be it more slowly? Big on style and short on substance (not, duh, talking software here...) Why are sales still going primarily to PCs than Macs? Perhaps many of those 'ignorant' people have a reason for going PC?
Tell me, why my school, having £12,000 to spend are going PC? Gee, I wonder, but because I'm not intelligent I don't know.
"Likewise, you're assuming this niche market will be as easily swayed as you."
Patronising, eh? Easily swayed...but you aren't. Good for you.
"I think history shows, even in difficult and uncertain times for the platform, that the majority of Mac users are not as easily swayed as you."
In 'uncertain' times for the Mac market, they almost went bankrupt and Powermac sales werre healthier then(!) Powermac sales are now a poor relation to what they were years ago.
Take away the imacs and the already waning ibook and Apple have some underlying problems to solve with their famous 'value added' approach.
The spec aint. VALUE ADDED!
The shrinking 'majority'. I guess if you want links to testify to that you'll have to get off your *** and look it or Apple's sales figures up yourself!
"Gimmicks? I don't know. I don't think gimmicks last as long as the original iMac, do you? The gimmicks get people's attention, but the substance is why people buy."
Macs are not without 'some' substance. The cpu issue is no longer 'perceived'. Well, not by my 'perception'. The 'imac' in a beige case. Dead on arrival. The 'gimmick' saved the company. The company bet on the imac and 'won'. But note how the 'gimmick' faded during those 'six years' when Apple failed to keep the spec list competitive, when they doggedly stuck with an antiquated cpu and graphic chip and 15 inch monitor. Trends that saw the sales fade. Instead of building on the 'old' imac they 'milked' it and lost any momentum for growth. Unfortunately.
This sums Apple over their patchy history. Do something great, sit on it...get overtaken. See classic os. See first Power PCs...see first...
Well, buy a sodding Apple history book.
Take away current 'new' imac sales and Apple look in trouble to me. That's my perception. You can read their sales figures differently if you like.
"The previous iMac was not just competing against a beige box, it was a horribly designed and seriously underpowered beige box called the Performa. The Performa's also had a very confusing set of different models and model numbers, etc."
Yep. That might be part of why they have 3-5% marketshare now.
"That's not really a fair comparison to make."
Yes, it is. I'm saying, take away the 'style' and Apple's hardware is poor. Out of date and out of shape. Disagree if you like.
You pay BMW prices, you expect a damn good engine. Fast. Not the fastest. But the G4 is a Ford engine in a BMW chassis.
"You're comparing all"
Not all. You're saying 'all'.
"gross oversimplification of what has changed since that time."
No it isn't. I'm talking about hardware. I don't recall dropping on Apple's software in the 'recovery' period?
"I know a few Mac shops that would no way shape or form switch to Wintel so long as the Mac was still a viable platform."
Such as? The 'Apple' retails that have gone to the wall in the UK? There's about five 'big' ones left in the UK. Can't speak for Amercia, I guess...
Oh, 'shops'. Well, I can tell you I've spoke to many that said, 'Mac? Stopped using them years ago...' Reasons cited? Value. Specs. Cost.
"This may or may not be true."
Well, unless you collect the data yourself you can't criticise the sources I have read and my own perception of said 'sources'.
"I have not seen these quotes that you're referring to."
...and me yours.
"few links which discuss this."
Do we really have to?
I'm having too much fun clobbering your Steve Jobs inspired RDF.
Go on. Set up a £1,200 pc and a £1,200 mac.
There's your proof. Do the costings of a dual Athlon vs a dual Mac.
Better still, put any SINGLE 'power'Mac against a 'low end' Athlon. You can build a dual Athlon for the price of a low end 'power'Mac. Maybe this would be a 'fairer' test for you?
"Windows can multitask, I don't believe I ever claimed otherwise. However, I believe we were comparing the performance of your 1.6GHZ Athlon to a dual 1 GHZ G4."
Which is dirt cheap and beats the snot out of the Powermac. Better still. Let's compare my 'low end' pc with the 'low end' Powermac?
"As for doing more than one thing at a time, I often do several things at a time. Playing an MP3, burning a CD, while surfing the net is a fairly common example of this. Dual CPUs balance the load very well. The value of multiple CPUs comes into play when running tasks in the background."
It's not a question of whether 'Powermacs' can handle any given task. I and others on these boards harp on about them being overpriced and out of date. Which, in my view, they are.
And. By the way, I love to harp.
"A modest (low end) Athlon xp beats a top of the range Apple."
Show me benches that sez it aint true. I'm not talking '1 gig' Pentium. They still sell those?
"Thats true with some single threaded non vectorized tasks."
Just how many task are 'velocity controlled'?
"This is absolutely not true across the board."
...and given little 'altivec' optimisation, how can a G4 compete?
A dual 1 gig 'power'Mac G4 still gets thumped on Lightwave by a single Athlon Xp. A low end dual Athlon wipes the floor with it.
"Even within the programs you mention, it depends on the action being performed."
What, like those cheap Photoshop filters, the ones 'nobody' uses anymore?
"walk and chew gum (multitask) a bit smoother due to the greater "system" performance."
Like it does on the 'after effects' suite of tests that saw it clearly outclassed and outmatched? (Sure, your perception may see a bit smoother...go ahead and pay three to four times much for the privelage.)
"So. Why did I switch?"
Eh? Do I have to repeat everything for you?
The mac I was using was years old, clearly outmatched by cheap pcs. The macs I wanted to buy were out of date, under specced and overpriced.
Funny, when I bought the 'Power'mac many years ago it was priced at a premium but the 'Power'Macs then weren't outclassed or underspecced (as much as they are now.)
They weren't at least in the same ball park.
Now? Laughable. But then you don't perceive this. So why am I wasting my time typing this crap?
('I don't know' sez Stevie.)
"I guess I don't like being screwed by Apple's short sightedness and their legion of 'face suckers'."
Oh presumptious one, I wasn't talking about Apple's most loyal and die-hard fans (of which, despite my 'axe-to-grind', I count myself one.)
I was, again, if you were 'listening' talking about those damned aged specs that Apple clung to for so long.
Remember the alien harvest fields? You know...those Ati Rage 'alien' face suckers that clung doggedly to their victims...the poor ibook, the impoverished 'old' imac, the powerful 'power'Mac line...all victims. Still, I guess was being 'out there'.
In English. Macs have out of date specs (did I say that already?) For years, an example of this was the Rage line of graphic cards.
Things, graphic card wise, are better. But the cpus aren't. The ram isn't. The 'monitor' included in the price isn't. (With the 'Power'mac line.) The 'bus' isn't. The G4's fpu is still feeble.
"Great, so you've sacrificed an admittedly superior working environment"
Yes and no. Pure evangelism. Yes. The mac environment is better. Even the aged OS9. However, on a machine that was too slow? The price to replace it? The outdate specs?
I could do the same job much the same, faster on the PC. Still can. I've watched since the G4 debacle began, and though an Apple fan, I await Apple doing something serious with their 'flagship' line. It's been a while since they were 'Power'Macs.
"for a perceived performance improvement."
Well, I can put together a dual Athlon Xp (and nearly did...) for less than the price of Apple's 'slowest' 'power'Mac.
That's 'perceived'? Glad you think so. (As six fpus kick the crap out of 1 G4 fpu.) I've seen the latest macs and pcs in action. Right. If this kind of 'perception' (read: GULF!) doesn't matter then why is the 'deafening' din of mac users across the boards on this, and others chewing Apple's, Moto's, IBM's *** on the CPU issue? Maybe we all have an 'axe-to-grind'?
"You then group other Mac users (I suppose) into a mass insult by calling them a legin of face suckers."
Your interpretation. See above.
"Nice. The thing is, you come off so bitter about Apple,"
Wrong. Cynical of late. Critical. Jaded at their spec-weary premium pricing tactics. Clinging to death on aged cpus, ram and motherboards.
They, in my opinion have capitulated in there spec downfall. DDR, better graphic cards and motherboards have been around for years. Apple takes ages to get to them. Ask them why. Maybe because they are a monopoly who likes being 'corrupt' in their own little way as MS does in their 'big' way. Apple are a company at the end of the day. They still like easy money.
I like their style while screwing us, though!
And gee, their OS X is pretty good...so...
When they were level? I bought the 'premium' argument. (and held my 'investment' for four years.) But now they are behind as of the last few years...do I buy into the 'well behind and premium' argument?
"that it's hard to take your position objectively."
Likewise. If you like being screwed on price and out of date components. Fine. Your money, I guess.
But to get mine? Apple must try harder. Once fleeced? Twice shy.
"You appear to have an axe to grind with Apple"
Outside of their 'spec' lists your accusation is unfounded and without merit. But I guess we don't know each other that well.
"and seem to use every opportunity to hammer them,"
On specs. Out of date 'hardware'? Yes. (PULLING on the pit boots as I speak...)
"whether your argument is rational or not."
Being charged lots of money for out of date hardware on the 'power'mac line? Brings out the 'irrational'? It does. Check the 'chewing' *** that's going on these boards.
Still, I don't think saying they're 'behind' (alot) in terms of specs is irrational. Anymore than you saying otherwise... (RDF on full...you work for Apple?)
Do I wish Apple made faster Macs? Sure? Will I abandon the platform because they're behind in MHZ? No. I use my Mac for many things because I prefer the OS. Generally speaking, I find the workflow for some tasks to be noticably better on the Mac side. That said, I also have a need to use PCs. Some tasks are better suited for PCs. Likewise, I happily own both. It's not a big deal. Being a dual platform users has helped me keep a better perspective on the Mac vs PC thing as compared to many of the extremists on both sides. My last upgrade was for the PC side. This summer, I'll upgrade my Mac. Why? Because whatever is available in July/August, it will be much better than what I'm using now,
Nobody and not Apple get my money regardless. I don't have 'sucker' taped onto my forehead.
"as to how it compares to my PC for price and performance."
Your choice. For me, Apple will have to do better.
Still, no matter how much Apple lag now, I think most posters on these boards, myself included...hope they'll pull it around.
When they do? I'll be there.
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 05-22-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]
[ 05-22-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>