or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Moved: New PowerMac specs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Moved: New PowerMac specs - Page 7

post #241 of 301
Maybe they're raising prices because they're going to offer dual processor models instead of single processor ones. maybe it's because they're adding a standard Superdrive and an extra 256 MB of RAM to the baseline, who knows? Don't jump to conclusions about Apple raising prices when you know nothing about what's coming.
- Apple certified service tech
- Mac user since 1985
- All around Mac dork
Reply
- Apple certified service tech
- Mac user since 1985
- All around Mac dork
Reply
post #242 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>
Ya, but doesn't moore's law also say that processor speed would double every 18 months? I could be wrong, I don't really know much about the law, I just heard that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yup, that's one way to look at it (see my original post for an edit to that effect). If we do look at it in this particular way (and ignore all the other bits and pieces) then we are right on track with Moore's Law at 1.25GHz.

I do believe that the original Moore's Law was simply an observance that the # of transistors on a chip was doubling every 18 months (correct me if I'm wrong).

I find it amusing that the generally accepted Moore's Law we have today is neither a) by Moore nor b) a law (it's just an observation)...

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: JustAGuy ]</p>
post #243 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by JustAGuy:
<strong>

Yup, that's one way to look at it (see my original post for an edit to that effect). If we do look at it in this particular way (and ignore all the other bits and pieces) then we are right on track with Moore's Law at 1.25GHz.

I do believe that the original Moore's Law was simply an observance that the # of transistors on a chip was doubling every 18 months (correct me if I'm wrong).

I find it amusing that the generally accepted Moore's Law we have today is neither a) by Moore nor b) a law (it's just an observation)...

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: JustAGuy ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ya, I don't really know if it is processor or transistors...
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
||||||||||||||||||||Bioflavonoid|||||||||||||||||||| bob.scifihifi.com
"The only problem with Microsoft is that they have no taste." -Steve Jobs
My tribute to Apple: http://bob.scifihifi.com/graphics...
Reply
||||||||||||||||||||Bioflavonoid|||||||||||||||||||| bob.scifihifi.com
"The only problem with Microsoft is that they have no taste." -Steve Jobs
My tribute to Apple: http://bob.scifihifi.com/graphics...
Reply
post #244 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Bioflavonoid:
<strong>
Ya, but doesn't moore's law also say that processor speed would double every 18 months? I could be wrong, I don't really know much about the law, I just heard that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Moore's Law is something like "2x transistors every 18 months."

If it took 7 months to get from 1 GHz to 1.25

If you start from 1 GHz and add 25% compounded every 7 months, after 21 months you'd almost be at 2x the clock speed.
I can change my sig again!
Reply
I can change my sig again!
Reply
post #245 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>Thanks about the Yikes info.

So what do you think they will name the new case?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Maybe the G4 Dual 867 Holy Mary Mother of God?

Depending of course on mobo inventory...

MSKR
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
post #246 of 301
I would call it reloaded.
||||||||||||||||||||Bioflavonoid|||||||||||||||||||| bob.scifihifi.com
"The only problem with Microsoft is that they have no taste." -Steve Jobs
My tribute to Apple: http://bob.scifihifi.com/graphics...
Reply
||||||||||||||||||||Bioflavonoid|||||||||||||||||||| bob.scifihifi.com
"The only problem with Microsoft is that they have no taste." -Steve Jobs
My tribute to Apple: http://bob.scifihifi.com/graphics...
Reply
post #247 of 301
Moore's law says that transitors will grow exponentially at a base of 10 (10x) every year, I believe. We're no where near that with the G4.
post #248 of 301
I don't think Moore considered Moto when he made up his law
post #249 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by iMud:
<strong>I don't think Moore considered Moto when he made up his law </strong><hr></blockquote>

Moto is the exception that proves the rule.
post #250 of 301
Seriously... think about it. iMacs still only 800 mhz? And we would expect PowerMacs to get to what? 1.4 ghz? <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
post #251 of 301
Some of my observations on this:

1) I am buying this new PowerMac and I will like it. For me these specs are fine, if there's FireWire 2. I have an iBook 500 and B&W G3 300.

2) Dartmouth is getting rid of lots of its Macs. While I'll buy this new Mac and like it, this new machine looks bad compared to PCs. Especially when the person doing the looking is stupid and doesn't know what "ease of use" "MacOS X" or "Dual Processors" are. Either they need to tell people through the Switch ads about the megahertz myth, or they need to convey that Macs are more than Mhz. They're easier, more productive, and friendly. Again, Dartmouth is dropping Macs for staff, and DeLorme dropped Street Atlas. Some key pieces are starting to move against Apple, like Motorola sucking, developers dropping Apple, and the Switch ads SUCKING. Apple needs better marketing. They need to tell average people what we already know. Dell users are used to being beat up when using a computer. They would LOVE the MacOS, especially OS X. They just don't know it, yet....Microsoft may have been right with their pre-MWNY FUD. Paging Apple Marketing...

I am not flaming against Apple. Don't flame me. I am just trying to show everyone here how ordinary people will and do see Apple.

3) Also, Apple is not going out of business I just thought that would be important to add... Since they have been through worse times. Somehow they always pull through, and although Steve Jobs seems to be completely oblivious and/or arrogant sometimes I feel good having an iCEO at Apple. PCs are faster at some mthings sure, but all that accomplishes: They can crash Windows even faster!
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #252 of 301
Sigh...

"Moore's (1st) Law" is that a microprocessor's transistor count doubles every 18 to 24 months. This is an observation based on manufacturing technology advancing every 18 to 24 months or so, typically a reduction of 30% (or 50% in acreage), in gate, transistor, line length, etc.

Unfortunately, "Moore's (2nd) Law" is always ignored but is going to rear its ugly head pretty soon. This observation is that the cost of implementing the next CMOS manufacturing technology will exceed the amount of revenue the prospective chips it manufactures. That is, it so expensive to build to plant that you can't recover the costs. For the 0.10, 0.07 and 0.05 CMOS technology, it looks like only Intel, maybe IBM, and a couple of East Asian conglomerates will be able to afford the R&D. Motorola will be hitting this wall soon, or probably hit it 2 years ago when they trailed the pack in getting to 0.18u.

Moore said nothing about clock rates. Many of you are falling into the MHz = performance game. It gets very tiring. MHz is half of the performance equation. IPC (or CPI), how many instructions per cycle, is the other half. The two together makes:

G4 IPC ~= 1.3 x P3 IPC ~= 1.7 * P4 IPC ~= 1.1 x Athlon IPC (or something thereabouts)

or

1 GHz G4 ~= 1.3 GHz P3 ~= 1.7 GHz P4 ~= 1.2 GHz Athlon (or something thereabouts)

In other words, Apple needs about 1.5 GHz G4 to be competitive. They would have it if Motorola would produce a 0.13 micron G4. Intel, AMD and IBM have been shipping 0.13 parts for a long while now...

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: THT ]</p>
post #253 of 301
Smart people: do two 1Ghz processors mean the speed of a 2Ghz processor? BRussel mentioned that without proper threading apps couldn't take advantage of Dual processors. I thought that was one of the wonders of OS X? It takes care of this problem right? I just want to know if ordinary apps like Office X, IE, games, iApps, would see two 1Ghz processors perform as well as one 2Ghz processor. Thanks. Programmer?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #254 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Animaniac:
<strong>Moore's law says that transitors will grow exponentially at a base of 10 (10x) every year, I believe. We're no where near that with the G4.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually no. I took the effort and went to the source of all knowledge (google) and found that "Moore's Law" was the observation of "doubling of transistor density on a manufactured die every year." However, the progress has since slowed to about 2x every 18 months so the law was updated by Moore.

The source for this? Dr. Gordon Moore, so I think we can trust it

If transistor count had been going up at 10x per year since 1965 (when the law was first observed), and *if* we had 1 transistor in 1965, we'd have 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 transistors on a chip today.

Now, I thought the PIV's 55 million was a lot...
post #255 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by OverToasty:
<strong>Man this is gonna hurt, I just hope this transition phase isn't long.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, I don't think it's as bad as that, but if the rumors are accurate, it means that this isn't what Apple wanted.

Duals across the board last time meant that something got f'd up. I suspect that the same holds true today. I'm suspicious of true DDR and suspect that we'll get 166MHz FSB and Xserve style DDR and have to be content with that. We may get some gimmicks to make these perform faster that the numbers might suggest, though.

But duals across the board means that Apple is making the most of a bad situation. We won't see anything revolutionary out of a press release, we won't see true DDR.

Go back and reread moki's posts over the last month. Apple didn't pull the big system together. They're giving us something less. Tune back in March, or thereabouts.

Don't assume that I'm bitter or feel that you should be. Processor speed is highly overrated. In almost 20 years of doing this stuff, slow CPUs have hardly gotten my attention. But crap software and operating systems will suck your life away. Poor integration, systems locked up such that users can't do what they need, simply bad code. Mac OS X is the jewel here. Focus on it. If you actually do work with your Mac, it'll deliver more than a 2GHz G4 will.

Apple will never lose the user base that realize what the true benefits of a computing experience are.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
post #256 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Aquatik:
<strong>Smart people: do two 1Ghz processors mean the speed of a 2Ghz processor? BRussel mentioned that without proper threading apps couldn't take advantage of Dual processors. I thought that was one of the wonders of OS X? It takes care of this problem right? I just want to know if ordinary apps like Office X, IE, games, iApps, would see two 1Ghz processors perform as well as one 2Ghz processor. Thanks. Programmer? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Short answers: No with a but..., Long Answer: Yes with an if...

In particular: Office X: I wasn't aware this was slow in the first place? IE: ditto, window resizing is the domain of the window manager and 10.2 should fix that; games: definately not. Vast majority are single threaded; iApps: Don't know of any massively multi-threaded iApps.

Keep in mind that, even in the perfect implementation, a multi-threaded app running on a 2x1GHz system will not be 2x as fast as a 1x system. And most apps are not perfect.
post #257 of 301
<strong>Originally posted by Aquatik:
Smart people: do two 1Ghz processors mean the speed of a 2Ghz processor? BRussel mentioned that without proper threading apps couldn't take advantage of Dual processors. I thought that was one of the wonders of OS X? It takes care of this problem right? I just want to know if ordinary apps like Office X, IE, games, iApps, would see two 1Ghz processors perform as well as one 2Ghz processor. Thanks. Programmer? </strong>

If you run a lot of apps concurrently, x MHz dual processors will approximate 2x MHx single processor pretty well. It may even run smoother due to load balancing issues.

If you run one app that is properly threaded, x MHz dual processors = 1.8 * 2x MHz single processor.

If you run one app that is single threaded, then the app can only run on one processor. The 2x MHz processor will run that app 2x as fast the x MHz dual processor.

So if you run a lot of apps concurrently like Office X, IE, iApps, dual processors will do ok compared to single processor with 2x MHz. If you mostly run one app at the time, 2x MHz single processor is usually the way to go.

A dual 450 or dual 500 MHz G4 with 512+ MB of RAM would be very nice machines for typical office automation and web usage. A silent dual G4 Cube would be so nice in my bedroom...
post #258 of 301
<strong>Originally posted by johnsonwax:
I'm suspicious of true DDR and suspect that we'll get 166MHz FSB and Xserve style DDR and have to be content with that. We may get some gimmicks to make these perform faster that the numbers might suggest, though.</strong>

You know, if RAM companies made PC166 SDRAM, a prospective 166 MHz MPX FSB + PC166 SDRAM would perform about the same as (or perhaps even better than) a 266 "MHz" FSB + PC2100 DDR SDRAM. It wouldn't be bad solution. Now, if Apple can ship a 166 MHz bus this soon, I think they are doing well.

<strong>But duals across the board means that Apple is making the most of a bad situation. We won't see anything revolutionary out of a press release, we won't see true DDR.</strong>

Nothing spectacular certainly. But Apple should be shipping duals in every desktop machine in any case.

<strong>Processor speed is highly overrated. In almost 20 years of doing this stuff, slow CPUs have hardly gotten my attention. But crap software and operating systems will suck your life away. Poor integration, systems locked up such that users can't do what they need, simply bad code.</strong>

That and the American airline industry are embarrassments to humity! No, the American airline industry is worse.
post #259 of 301
Thanks for clearing that up THT, johnsonwax, and JustAGuy. Nice posts!

So are most developers taking advantage of Duals? I would think NOT. Since most Macs out there don't have them. Too bad Apple can't invent a way for OS X to make up for the lack of good thread programming of developers! Is it hard to take advantage of Duals?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #260 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Blackcat:
<strong>As far as PowerMacs go, all those specs are doable, we just need a G4 that does DDR - the mythical 7470.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Given that MOT was supposed to just be delivering 1.4ghz units to Apple in August (and who knows if they'll make it on time), I'd be pretty surprised if that was accurate at all. Maybe if they announce the machines, but they aren't available for a bit (especially the high end models).
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #261 of 301
actually more things are multi threaded than you think. how well it is implemented i have no idea. but go to the terminal and type top the look at what ever application running and it tells you the number of threads in one of the columns
If you had game like me You would still have your girl.
Reply
If you had game like me You would still have your girl.
Reply
post #262 of 301
Cool! I can't believe I didn't notice that!
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #263 of 301
Well, here's the new deal: <a href="http://www.flymilesmicro.com/product_detail.html?PRODUCT_ID=185328" target="_blank">web page</a> .
post #264 of 301
Some other fine AI poster put this <a href="http://flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12" target="_blank">LINK</a> which is just short of pure and total confirmation
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
not with a bang, but with a wintel machine

-T.S. Eliot
Reply
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
not with a bang, but with a wintel machine

-T.S. Eliot
Reply
post #265 of 301
..talking about us behind our backs?..
heheh.

side note: is appleinsider having server problems and having to constrain Topics to a minimum?

Anyways...I don't believe the flybymicro store, because of it's ineptness.
WILLYWALLOO'S: MostlyMacly: Rumors. Read about the timeline beyond our time.
PENFIFTEENPRODUCTIONS: We like what we do.
Reply
WILLYWALLOO'S: MostlyMacly: Rumors. Read about the timeline beyond our time.
PENFIFTEENPRODUCTIONS: We like what we do.
Reply
post #266 of 301
I dont believe becuase they have no information about the new ones, when the other PM on the page as everything about it on its page. as I said in the other thread (which shoulda been kept open IMHO) why would Apple let them have the information that the rumor sites have, but not the rest of it? You would think they would give them all the info if they wanted them to update the site.
post #267 of 301
Moto and Apple aren't following Moore's law, what you mean is Murphy's law.

G-News
Matyoroy!
Reply
Matyoroy!
Reply
post #268 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by G-News:
<strong>What few understand, is that it's not the machine that makes a good Quaker, it's the skill.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, it sure ain't the dancing!

Thank you. You've been a great audience. Please try the veal.
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.
Reply
post #269 of 301
Agent Cooper: [quote] Enjoy your date with the Dell Dude, Dude. Don't trip over your skirt on the way out....<hr></blockquote>

The point is that should we be content to accept poor performance from an Apple Powermac or should we demanding the best? You may be happy to bend over and kiss Steve's ass whatever he brings out but unless people show their frustration and anger at the situation then nothing will change. Do you think those people who complain about the $100 for .mac should be quiet too???

My point was simple. We have the best OS in the world. OS 10.2 is truely awesome yet we are stil crippled by poor performing Powermacs ( when compared to the best that PC's have to offer). Can you seriously be satisfied that we are stuck at 1.25GHz chips? Dual is great for a few apps and helps the OS along otherwise it does not compensate for chips with half the grunt of a P4.

As others have said those complaining and demanding more are the ones who care most about Apple. When Apple finally shift from Motorola to IBM and the Power4 then we will see the true potential of the best OS in the world at work. Until then I wont be satisfied. As to buying a PC it is a decision that reflects my attitude. of course I will have a Mac also but will forego the expense of a top end 1.25GHz Mac and pick up a cheap dual 1GHz QS instead and wait for the real power to come.

Personally I think that the Superdrive should be an ( affordable) option for those that want it and lower the price for those that don't
"Beyond the rumour sites. Way beyond"

2002 Apple Computer, Inc
Reply
"Beyond the rumour sites. Way beyond"

2002 Apple Computer, Inc
Reply
post #270 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by anakin1992:
<strong>in addition, you could even optimize compiler to increase performance as well. but apple are not doing any of them, at least from what is happening.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Apple has been working on optimising their compilers. That's where a large part of the performance jump in Jaguar comes from.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #271 of 301
[quote] those complaining and demanding more are the ones who care most about Apple. <hr></blockquote>

True.

[quote]Moto and Apple aren't following Moore's law, what you mean is Murphy's law. <hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #272 of 301
wax smells funny.

The powermacs are only hours away. Let's hope.

It's bedtime, and this is my last post here for the night. Goodnight. You too wax.

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: willywalloo ]

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: willywalloo ]</p>
WILLYWALLOO'S: MostlyMacly: Rumors. Read about the timeline beyond our time.
PENFIFTEENPRODUCTIONS: We like what we do.
Reply
WILLYWALLOO'S: MostlyMacly: Rumors. Read about the timeline beyond our time.
PENFIFTEENPRODUCTIONS: We like what we do.
Reply
post #273 of 301
1.25 GHz? What is that?
Is that 9.5 x 133 MHz = 1263 MHz
Or is it 7.5 x 166 MHz = 1245 MHz

Someone care to speculate?
post #274 of 301
Just picked up from the MacRumors boards, the new macs are already for sale:

<a href="http://flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12" target="_blank">http://flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12</a>

Looks like MacMinute called it.

I guess this thread can be locked now and we can continue discussing this in Current Hardware.
post #275 of 301
Gee, if my car went from 200KW to 250KW and the price was about the same i'd be stoked.

THIS IF TRUE, IS NOT JUST A 250MHz increase at the top, its 2 X 250MHz. Bandwidth may be an issue although i'm sure most professionals will find this MORE than adequate as an upgrade to their dual gig. Equates to something like a 500MHz upgrade per processor if you take the bandwidth pump and proc speedup, DO THE MATH.

And you won't see a "fully implemented DDR" in these models as that would require a REDO on the G4. Won't happen.

&lt;grumbles something about whining fools who WONT even be in the market for a PowerMac even if it was a mythical G5&gt;



Have a NICE day.

I believe in Dragons,
Good Men & Other
Fantasy Creatures.
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
post #276 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Moonraker:
"Beyond the rumour sites. Way beyond"<hr></blockquote>

BTW Moonraker, I think you mean "Beyond the rumor sites. Way beyond." which has the American spelling of rumor, not the British. Just thought I'd be a brat about it since you're quoting
post #277 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Henriok:
<strong>1.25 GHz? What is that?
Is that 9.5 x 133 MHz = 1263 MHz
Or is it 7.5 x 166 MHz = 1245 MHz

Someone care to speculate?</strong><hr></blockquote>

1.25GHz = 166.66MHz X 7.5
1GHz = 166.66MHz X 6 or 133.33 X 7.5 (Yikes!)
867MHz = 133.33 X 6.5 (Yikes!)
14" iBook
700MHz G3
640MB RAM

Kecksy's Korner
Reply
14" iBook
700MHz G3
640MB RAM

Kecksy's Korner
Reply
post #278 of 301
Kecksy beat me to it...

but I suppose we'll all see for certain in just a few hours!

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: off/lang ]</p>
post #279 of 301
You might find this leak (if its not pure speculation) very interesting:

<a href="http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12" target="_blank">http://www.flymilesmicro.com/browse_by_brand.html?BRAND_ID=199&CATEGORY_ID=12</a>

Hope it wasnt mentioned somewhere else at AI before

Addendum: Just centimeters above me, sorry for that.

-Oli

[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: oli2000 ]</p>
post #280 of 301
[quote]Originally posted by Moonraker:
<strong>Agent Cooper:

The point is that should we be content to accept poor performance from an Apple Powermac or should we demanding the best? You may be happy to bend over and kiss Steve's ass whatever he brings out but unless people show their frustration and anger at the situation then nothing will change. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not Kissing SJs ass, but I'm tired of people spouting off 'I'm switching to PC" everytime they build up unreasonable expectaions and are let down by the real world.

<strong> [quote]Do you think those people who complain about the $100 for .mac should be quiet too???</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, I have no opinion whatsoever on .Mac, and I'm not sure why its assumed I would.

<strong> [quote]
My point was simple. We have the best OS in the world. OS 10.2 is truely awesome </strong><hr></blockquote>

Looks like you're right about that

<strong> [quote]yet we are stil crippled by poor performing Powermacs ( when compared to the best that PC's have to offer). Can you seriously be satisfied that we are stuck at 1.25GHz chips? Dual is great for a few apps and helps the OS along otherwise it does not compensate for chips with half the grunt of a P4.</strong><hr></blockquote>

What I don't understand is why people even compare the chips! I realize apple does not exist in a vacuum, but to be perfectly honest the current line of PowerMacs still kick ass, and no I don't know that a 1.25 GHZ PM will cripple Jaguar, in fact, from what i've heard Jaguar runs fast one some BEIGE machines. The software is where apple needs to focus, more apps to take advantage of AltiVec would be nice - because that side of the processor has only just begun to be utilized - see DVDSP and FCP3. My point is this - Why do we let Intel draw on our insecurities and an bully us into a Mhz Pissing match? Threatening to leave the Mac platform every time our own internal expectations aren't met seems childish.

<strong> [quote]As others have said those complaining and demanding more are the ones who care most about Apple. When Apple finally shift from Motorola to IBM and the Power4 then we will see the true potential of the best OS in the world at work. Until then I wont be satisfied. As to buying a PC it is a decision that reflects my attitude. of course I will have a Mac also but will forego the expense of a top end 1.25GHz Mac and pick up a cheap dual 1GHz QS instead and wait for the real power to come.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I am always interested in the next generations to come from Mac, and I'm also infavor of a switch to IBM, and after I see what the specs on the new 1.25Ghz macs are, i may decide to buy a Dual 1Gig QS at cut rate prices as well, but I really don't understand why everyone got so upset at the revalation they weren't getting dual 3Ghz g5s... sure It'd be nice but is it reasonable to get so hyped up on purely imagined specs? besides, I've said it before, switching to PC is not an act of protest - its an act of masochism. I've been there, I've dealt with those machines and I can tell you this much - given the choice between a 50 Mhz mac and a 50Ghz PC - I'd still take the Mac. With a PC, its just more clock cycles for for the OS to screw up.

<strong> [quote]Personally I think that the Superdrive should be an ( affordable) option for those that want it and lower the price for those that don't</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hear hear!
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
not with a bang, but with a wintel machine

-T.S. Eliot
Reply
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
this is the way the world ends
not with a bang, but with a wintel machine

-T.S. Eliot
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Moved: New PowerMac specs