The MW that would make you switch to PC....Fantasy/Horror Time

in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Steve takes stage. Begins talk of OSX:

Steve: Well, OSX is progressing nicely.

Audience: uh-huh.

Steve: But, the thing we really need to do now is convince software DEVELOPERS to support us more, so we can increase our market share.

Audience: OK, uh-huh.

Steve: It all comes down to one word: Developers (audience begins to see where he is going and gasps: "OMFG")

Steve: Join me! "Developers, Developers, Developers.....Developers Developers, Developers......GOD, I LOVE THIS COMPANY...STAND UP FOR ME!!!!! STAND THE **** UP!!!!!! (begins to sweat profusely and starts pulling out clumps of hair)

Products: Apple says there have been some yield problems with MOT and the new line-up will be:

PM 400, 450, 500

--smaller hard drives due to the fact "that damn CD-RW thing that we missed the boat on is taking over....people just don't need internal storage anymore. Since Steve is now also pissed at nvidia for revealing the manuafacturer of his black turtleneck he would wear for the show, they go with "FINAST" brand video cards.


Steve: "Well, the iMac just isn't selling all that well anymore. So rather than invest 10's of millions in R&D were just going to cut it. It it did its job, **** it.

ibook: Steve:

"Wow. Who would have guessed that people found it so small and portable they would actually lose it? Well, to fix that we have some great news. All ibooks now ship with a lead weight inside, weighing in 7.9 lbs w/o battery. We also took some design cues from Dell (well, us, now that we think about it) to make it less likely to be stolen.


Steve: All production is now being donated to Afghanistan. Demand for IMovie over there is HUGE.


Steve: People just don't seem convinced that this a revolutionary product. So, we need a price change! (audience cheers!). To make it seem REALLY revolutionary, we need to RAISE the price to $799. (people begin throwing things)

Steve: Well, I forgot folks. We have severed all ties with Adobe because they pollute this little stream near know how I feel about the environment and all. We also are going to be using our $4B in cash reserves to buy 2 and a half B1 Bombers. We are going to put them on display at the campus. Let MS **** with us now! (some people like this and start to clap)

Steve: And that is about all folks.

Yep, that would do it for me. And you?

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>


  • Reply 1 of 75
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I think that's pretty much what would do it for me too.
  • Reply 2 of 75
    macaddictmacaddict Posts: 1,055member
    Anything less then a good value will make me switch on my next purchase. I am so close to building a PC.

    Unless Apple releases a PowerMac with 2 full size drive bays, a processor that can push over 100 fps in QIII, and something other than a budget nVidia graphics card for under $1500 I'm jumping ship.
  • Reply 3 of 75
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by MacAddict:

    <strong>Anything less then a good value will make me switch on my next purchase. I am so close to building a PC.


    That's how I felt earlier this year. That's the reason why I got an iBook in June, that was really the only value in Apple's lineup.
  • Reply 4 of 75
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    I would NEVER jump ship just because of hardware shortcomings (none of which, by the way, hamper my ability to do my job).

    Yes, it does get frustrating with Apple's slow update cycles and reliance on less-than-stellar video cards in the iMac and so forth.

    But it's ALWAYS been about more than the hardware for me. I don't care if the Mac stalled at 867 for the next four years...I'm not about to forsake the Mac OS for Windows.

    Just not gonna happen. I started on a Mac, learned on a Mac, own a Mac, make my living with a Mac, etc.

    The industry I'm in is STILL (despite the bullcrap you may be hearing) predominantly Mac-based as well.

    As long as OS X is made more powerful and stable and cooler (and more of the software I use on a daily basis runs natively on X), I can forgive the occasional lapses in hardware.
  • Reply 5 of 75
    [quote]Originally posted by MacAddict:

    <strong>Anything less then a good value will make me switch on my next purchase. I am so close to building a PC.

    Unless Apple releases a PowerMac with 2 full size drive bays, a processor that can push over 100 fps in QIII, and something other than a budget nVidia graphics card for under $1500 I'm jumping ship.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    I hope you can swim!
  • Reply 6 of 75
    I'd be gone before you could say, "Wait till MWNY"
  • Reply 7 of 75
    roffroff Posts: 58member
    I don't plan to purchase any new computer for at least a year yet. My G4 sawtooth 350 works for all I need it for. By that time we'll see what's out.

    My problem will be 'Do I go portable or desktop then'.
  • Reply 8 of 75
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    Jumping ship because your mac can't push 100 FPS in Q3?

    I'm sorry for you man, I really am. Better get a PC right now, don't wait, in your case, it's a waste of time.

    Some people actually work with their computers too.

    G-News (tztztztz)
  • Reply 9 of 75
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by G-News:

    <strong>Jumping ship because your mac can't push 100 FPS in Q3?

    I'm sorry for you man, I really am. Better get a PC right now, don't wait, in your case, it's a waste of time.

    Some people actually work with their computers too.

    G-News (tztztztz)</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Yeah MacAddict, he's right. I didn't think about that before when I posted. You're probably gunna have to wait years to be able to get that.
  • Reply 10 of 75
    I'm seriously thinking what's the use of staying with Macs if their desktop computers suck so much, but unfortunately I hate Windows so much I probably will never jump ship. But I'm getting damn close in wanting to run Mandrake 8.0 on a Athlon XP 1900+.

    Little things about Apple piss me off. Like the fact that they can't give us a case with 2 full drive bays. Like the fact they can't give us a descet amount of ram. Like the fact that they haven't used DDR ram yet. Like the measly speed increases. Like the budget nVidia cards on high-end machines. Get a clue Steve, it's not that difficult.

    MacAddict: RIght now Macs can push over 100 FPS easily in Quake III. If you're talking about a value system doing that, I think it's a little unreasonable to jump ship because an iMac can't hit 100 FPS. If you're that much of a hardcore gamer, then by all means buy a PC. Personally, it takes more than games for me to want to switch.

    I just hope that Apple can take a look around and see what us Mac users want.
  • Reply 11 of 75

    Come off it, the 800 Dual get 100 fps in Quake

    Just think what a Dual 1.6 ghz G5 will do.

    Besides, 80fps, can't tell the difference.
  • Reply 12 of 75
    cdhostagecdhostage Posts: 1,038member
    Arg. I will buy the next revision of the Power mac, be it aG4 or G5. Hopefully it will be a G4 1 GHz. G5 too muc h to hope for this January.
  • Reply 13 of 75
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    Yeah...according to MacWorld, in a November 2001 article (Product review of the Power Mac G4/800 Dual Processor), the 867MHz Power Mac can do 107 FPS in quake, and thats with a stock video card. The dual 800 does 95. Just imagine those things with a GeForce3..mmmm.
  • Reply 14 of 75
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by iDogcow:


    Come off it, the 800 Dual get 100 fps in Quake

    Just think what a Dual 1.6 ghz G5 will do.

    Besides, 80fps, can't tell the difference.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Yes years. If MacAddict wanted to spend a lot of money then yeah he could get something now. But he wants this for $1500. Knowing Apple I think it'll be at least a year or two until you can get that for $1500.
  • Reply 15 of 75
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    For 1500, a mac ought to at least come close. Consider that for 1500 you can buy a PC that will do that and more. Damn, I can do pretty good for 1500 in canadian dollars, so imagine what I could buy with real money. However, that $1500 PC won't really do better than a mac in any area other than Games.

    Now it's time to think a little about PC games, most of the types of games that distinguish a PC from a games platform will run fine on either a mac or budget PC -- sims, diablo, starcraft, baldur's gate, puzzel, real-time strategy... and the like.

    Is the PC really better at games? We're really only talking about FPS games now, that's where you'll notice the difference. Is it worth it to buy a computer just for UT or Quake? When you think about it, those are the only games where a PC is better than both a console and a mac, period. Platformer (2d and 3d), racing sim, 3d fighter, sports... they're all better on a console, despite the spec. Even in three years time when PC's have about 8 times the power of the current consoles, I'm willing to bet that the gaming experience is still qualitatively better on today's consoles.

    Computers -- with their monitors, keyboards, and mice -- are great for FPS's, and sims/RPG's. But macs are equally good at sims/RPGs. So, PC's are really only better at one specific genre of game. This genre, the FPS, has about 3 distinct titles max. Is it good sense, to buy any computer just for three very similar games? It isn't.

    Buy the 'interface' you like/can afford/need. Buy a console for fun. There are arguments in favor of the PC, but games are not really a great one, or at best, when you think about it, they're a stupid one.
  • Reply 16 of 75
    macaddictmacaddict Posts: 1,055member
    I know I can't tell the difference between 80 and a 100 fps in Quake. Hell, I don't even play Quake.

    Quake is just a benchmark for 3D games. The top of the line Macs right now barely eke out 100fps.

    To upgrade my foolish Rage 128, I have to pay $200 for an Ati Radeon 32MB...years old, underperforming, outdated...blah blah blah. I could get a GeForce 3, but the 2X AGP bus that Apple gave us when all of the PC motherboards included 4X slots can't handle the bandwidth. Plus Apple will charge you a huge premium for a GF3.

    I'd love to get a CD burner...but not a $300 external that just wastes another FireWire port...I want an internal one. But since Apple only gave us one full size drive bay in a pro machine, I would have to give up my DVD drive (yes I do use it).

    The only consumer soundcard for the Mac is a $130 Soundblaster...buggy and overpriced. I can't upgrade my CPU because Apple doesn't seem to want any 3rd party manufacturers stealing sales. Mac motherboards will never be upgradable. I have to wait months or years after a PC game is published to get a Mac port of it. We have what, three flight sims out on the Mac? And ones developed back when 266MHz was crazy fast don't count. Ati made some great AIW cards for TiVo capabilities, then never made them for the Mac.

    I like the Mac a lot...but Apple doesn't make their stuff with gamers/multimedia enthusiasts in mind. Eventually a 16MB GPU and a G4 won't make it around anymore and chances are that when it comes time to upgrade there will be better values and performance on the x86 side of the fence. A $600 PC could be a much better gaming machine than a $1600 PowerMac. I hate consoles (trying to play Civ 3 with a gamepad has to be interesting), so right now a cheap PC looks like a great option.

    Anyway, my point is that Apple doesn't make very good gaming stuff and probably never will...they're not that kind of company. What I want out of MWSF will probably never come. I realize that.
  • Reply 17 of 75
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    MacAddict, if you're willing to give up some speed why don't you just get an internal Combo drive?
  • Reply 18 of 75
    Here?s the horror MWSF that would truly drive me away for good:

    The ?Revolutionary? New LCD iMac:

    800 MHz G3

    Same old 8x4x24 CDRW

    Same old PC100 RAM

    16MB nVidia GeForce 2MX

    60 Gig HD

    15? LCD

    $1499 (Fastest; I don?t even want to think about Fast and Faster?)

    The All-New PowerMac G4:

    1.0 GHz G4 / Dual 933 MHz G4

    SuperDrive (whee.)

    PC 133 RAM (still)

    32MB nVidia GeForce 2MX

    80Gig HD / 100 Gig HD (ooh, a 20 Gig boost. Each. Ooh.)

    $2499 / $3499 (the low end machine is too dreary to mention)

    Photoshop for OSX: Shipping in March!! Or April!!

    \t(Actually ships on April 27th , performs so slowly you?d think it was a beta)

    Mini-Lecture About the MHz Myth

    Ensuing Bakeoff

    \tTwelve Photoshop filters that only 3% of the population uses

    \t$3500 G4 wipes the floor with a $1500 P4 1.8 GHz (monitor included, probably)



    \t15? ? same old resolution, $449

    \t17? ? 1280x1024 (same), $799

    \t19? ? same resolution as 17? , $1399

    \t22? ? same resolution, $2399 (?we dropped the price! $100!!)

    Oh, and one more thing:

    \t?We brought back the Cube. Introducing, the SuperCube2K2!!?


    \t800 MHz G4


    \t40 Gig HD

    \tPC 133 RAM

    \t16 MB nVidia GeForce 2MX


    Audience goes nuts.

    I start learning Linux.

  • Reply 19 of 75
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    The expansion options, and price-erformance ratio are some good arguments for the PC side. Then again, for certain markets price-performance is actually better on the mac. Pre-press benefits greatly from the color corrected workflow of the mac; Apple will sell you a very capable video production system at a fraction of what dedicated vid-production systems cost; Even 'professional' audio is arguably more cost effective on a mac.

    It is the iMac which needs to catch-up to the bargain PC. The powermac will always remain a specifically targeted machine, so lets leave it alone for now.

    Integration and simplicity will go so far -- iMac is good at that -- but it needs a little more expansion and A/V power. I think we can forget about a PCI bus. Fine, I'd like one, but fine. Apple could replace the PCI bus entirely with a faster version of firewire (could this be the recently registered Gigawire?). 1394 calls for up to 3.2Gbps (400MB/s) nearly twice the speed of the PCI bus. We might just see such an animal: gigawire suggests at least 1000Mbps so I expect a 1600Mbps (200MB/s) version to appear. 800mbps wouldn't quite justify a gigawire naming scheme. Depending on who supplies the chips it might be 800, 1600, or even 3200 Mbps. The spec does include all three speeds; some manufacturers might not supply them right away but Apple would do well to go directly to at least the 1600 speed. At that speed, many PCI peripherals could be made available on the mac over the Firewire bus. We would see more options if consumer machines had a way to use expansion cards. The options for powermacs are limited because, for the most part, even those that own them are unlikely to invest in consumer grade components. There needs to be a way to supply expansion to the iMac for peripheral makers to be interested enough in the mac. If it were made just a little faster, Firewire could be that method.

    As to the videocard, I think it would be best for Apple to build the new iMac with a cube style AGP port. Most users would leave it alone anyway, but it makes bumping the system spec easier throughout the life of the machine -- they don't have to mess about with the motherboard to supply a graphics update. But also, users could BTO a faster or dual display option to create a viable prosumer model that doesn't have all the seperate design, production, and marketing/inventory drawbacks for Apple, that the cube had.

    Just wait untill January, Apple may very well get it right.
  • Reply 20 of 75
    [quote]Originally posted by Mithral:

    <strong>Here?s the horror MWSF that would truly drive me away for good:


    Audience goes nuts.

    I start learning Linux.


    Loved it! I am pretty convinced we'll be pissed off by sth. very similar to your scenario! Do you have any ideas for the iPod?

    Regards, TWD


    Love the Mac too, though
Sign In or Register to comment.