<strong>Seems like we'll have to wait until MWSF to be wowed.
1.5GHz G4s would be impressive, but I doubt Apple can meet such expectations.
I just don't see the G4 scaling 50% in 5 months when it took 18 months to go from 500 to 733 and 1 year to go from 733 to 1GHz.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I always find it odd when people say this...
At any minute Moto could subtly change the process and voila, volume production of 1.5Ghz parts is not only possible, it's easy.
A good friend of mine worked for Bookham Technology as senior process engineer up until Oct 2000. They had been struggling to get decents yeilds on a process, because 1 stage involved dunking each wafer in acid, drying them for a few hours then applying a different process. It took 18 hours per wafer.
To increase efficiency they hired a consultant. He took one look at the process and grabbed a box of wafers, dunked them in a bucket of acid, and left them to dry.
So in a few minutes they increased yeilds by 30 fold simply because a new guy had different experience and knew there was no danger in doing huge batches rather than single wafers. Previous thinking had believed it wouldn't work.
The point is, things change fast in the semi-conductor world, a jump from 1Ghz to 2Ghz might require the tiniest process tweak. It just needs somebody to try it.
At any minute Moto could subtly change the process and voila, volume production of 1.5Ghz parts is not only possible, it's easy.
A good friend of mine worked for Bookham Technology as senior process engineer up until Oct 2000. They had been struggling to get decents yeilds on a process, because 1 stage involved dunking each wafer in acid, drying them for a few hours then applying a different process. It took 18 hours per wafer.
To increase efficiency they hired a consultant. He took one look at the process and grabbed a box of wafers, dunked them in a bucket of acid, and left them to dry.
So in a few minutes they increased yeilds by 30 fold simply because a new guy had different experience and knew there was no danger in doing huge batches rather than single wafers. Previous thinking had believed it wouldn't work.
The point is, things change fast in the semi-conductor world, a jump from 1Ghz to 2Ghz might require the tiniest process tweak. It just needs somebody to try it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but Moto doesn't have anyone with enough expertise or intelligence to figure out stuff like that. They would need to hire a whole army of consultants.
Also, I've heard that Motorola is notorious for keeping their fabs extremely dirty and messy. They are simply not cut out for such a high-tech manufacturing sector.
1.5 would be more aggressive and show Apple is beginning to turn things around...starting to play hardball.
I somehow don't expect 1.5 but a miserly 1.2 dual top config. £2, 500 for that. With Rapid Io or better half a year around the corner...(or just several months away by the time Apple ships?) Just not worth it to me.
1.5 G4? Might get my palms sweaty...but would I buy?
Apple likes to think its hardware is value added...a premium product. But it's bargain basement tech with a ridiculous price.
The ibook laptop is nice. My wife likes it. So do I...apart from the 8 meg Ati Rage which sucks.
Bus, memory and processor? Apple are way behind...but the prices are way in front.
A g4/g5/ibm processor on Hypertransport may make me get the wallet out. I'm still Mac towerless...because of Apple's poor specs over the last couple of years.
What do I expect from New York? It seems like the next gen 'Big Iron' won't be there. (But I'd love the absolute top system to be a G5 and surprise us all.) What I do expect is the SAME radical thinking prevalent in Jaguar, iTools, iApps...and the 'Switch' campaign.
It could be a custom Nvidia video acceleration card to tap directly into the 'Quartz Extreme' engine. Vector acceleration...for progs like Illustrator. License another altivec unit or Apple multimedia specific units to go into an Nvidia custom card to accelerate final cut pro or the Mac version of Maya...or the interface yet further.
So, mhz may not be 'important'...but lets see Apple do 'something' about it. Work closely with Nvidia to integrate a souped up Quadro card with the rest of the Mac system...increase bandwidth...
Nvidia have had enough time now to integrate some of 3Dfx's 'sli'(?) dual card technology into their pending line up. It would be nice to be able to put two Geforce 5s working in tandom on Apple's top or other machine. A dual Geforce 5?
1.33 mhz would be so-so on its own. But if Moto has added a few more fpu bits then...it may make me pay attention. Thru put...would be a nice alternative to mere brute force. But Moto isn't competing in mhz or throughput in my eyes. I'm not technical...but clearly a 1.33 G4 feeble 1 fpu isn't going to compete with an Athlon 1.8 gig with 3 fpus.
Nvidia have their Nforce chipsets...maybe Apple could do one for the Mac with Moto input? IBM input? An Nforce to increase multimedia throuput?
It's often been said that Apple have a 20-30% markup on thier hardware. Well...and they use old industry standard components! This and common motherboard designs was supposed to make Macs much cheaper!
Add extra hardware elements. Make Macs special multimedia computers...in the way the old Amiga was. Premium component? Maybe an Nvidia 'extra' part that can work in tandem with their own 'card' or a modular bit that enhances it further?
I find it alarming on these boards if you criticise Apple's specs you get labelled a troll. So be it. But the truth is Apple must try harder with their specs. How can any company offer out of date industry standard specs (eg bus, memory...) as their best, 'premium' spec machine...with a Geforce 4 Titanium merely as an order option than as standard on their top machine?
All just ideas. I do criticise current hardware...but like cowabunga...it's only because I want Steve Jobs to walk out on stage and preach the x86 smachdown. G5 with gravy...Quad Quadro sli with 8 Altivec 512 bit units smacking Pentium 4 botty...
Only a week or so to go. I'll feel better than...twitch...
[QB]1.5 G4 with DDR. It's catch up.<hr></blockquote>
Lemon Bon Bon ( Sucker?) You are so wrong. The combines effects of Jaguar, DDR and a 1.5G4 would knock the socks of any x86 processor. Unless of course you don't understand the megahertz myth.
I think you're right about specs. If £450 PCs have ATA133 then it's dirt cheap and Macs should have it too, regardless of its usefulness in current systems. This stuff sells stuff to people who like big numbers.
DDR obviously needs to wait for a G4 that supports it, but from the speed of a dual 1Ghz on a choked bus, I feel confident that dual 1.2 on a modern FSB will bring very impressive performance gains.
As for G5, I can't say I want one until it exists. Until then I don't know what G5 means...
I am go go with Lemon on this one.., and tyhis is far from trolling.
I really don't mind the premium. Really.
But in a 2.5k-3k machine I don't want to see:
GF4 MX boards in a 2.5k-3k machine. A Ti or Radeon 8500 should be standard.
Lack of a decent audio chipset. 5.1 should be standard.
I could go on....
It pains me to think that even the current DP 1GHZ G4 could accomplish so much more if it used DDR ( all around, not a'la xServe ) and had the Bus that the CPU's could not saturate.
Lemon Bon Bon ( Sucker?) You are so wrong. The combines effects of Jaguar, DDR and a 1.5G4 would knock the socks of any x86 processor. Unless of course you don't understand the megahertz myth.
No one has any idea about the performance of the G5. For all we know it could be like the P3 and P4. Weaker at introduction but more powerful as it scales.
And the megaheurtz myth does not apply when you're comparing a 1.5 to 3.0ghz processor. The MM was a marketing ploy for when cpu clocks were close. the MM is a myth.
Curious, of all the people bitching I pose 2 questions-
Do you currently have the top dual gig?
Are you prepared to spend $3k+ and monitor if needed etc in 2 weeks?
I usually see that the most people who bitch and moan about Apple slow speeds and poor quality machines with crappy specs either are running machines 5 yers old and therefore can't comment because they don't use Apple's current machines which are plenty fast for a lot of shit, or aren't in the market to buy shit. Whether Apple releases a G7 at 5ghz next week, most of the whiners wouldn't be buying because they aren't in the market to do so.
But until Apple can upgrade their pro line to a level where the pc using system administrators (they're normally the ones making the choice between macs and pcs) are wowed by the performance and price then they will continue to be a niche market that is slowly shrinking.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is a very true statement. Unfortunately, most people on these boards don't believe this fact.
"I usually see that the most people who bitch and moan about Apple slow speeds and poor quality machines with crappy specs either are running machines 5 yers old and therefore can't comment because they don't use Apple's current machines which are plenty fast for a lot of shit, or aren't in the market to buy shit. Whether Apple releases a G7 at 5ghz next week, most of the whiners wouldn't be buying because they aren't in the market to do so."
(Shakes head.)
Got an iBook. Well, it's my wife's. Despite 384 megs of ram...it don't handle 300 dpi Photoshop files at all well without being 'out of memory'...
If Apple release a G7 at 5Ghz. Yup. I'll be in the market to buy. Hell, I'd sell my Grandmother for down payment if she weren't already gone.
Am I in the market for an out of date machine? Nope.
If Apple could do a 1.5 G4 at say £1,200 inc Vat. I'd think about that. But £2,400? Even for a dual processor...that's alot of money. Especially with a generational leap around the corner ie some kind of G5 on Rio.
I really don't mind the premium. I didn't when I bought my last tower. Back then? Apple were competitive. Now? They're...well...it aint even funny. (Says through choked disbelief...y'know...at facing the 'reality' of where Apple's specs currently are...)
Zaz...it's nice to know somebody understands what some of us 'whiners' (hello Big 'C...'!) are getting at.
For this to be 'Apple's Year' I'm expecting Apple get aggressive with CPU and specs. Doesn't have to be high mhz. But I'd like to see some innovation. Extra FPU, souped up Nvidia/Apple custom job. Y'know...something that will make a Mac special over a PC. Something that justifies the price (as opposed to last years specs...) They have done well with almost everything else.
They charge premium prices. Can we have premium hardware specs to go?
over this thread, a few people have posted again and again, and most of it is the most bitter posting I've ever seen. bitter, bitter, bitter. i figure instead of posting in a rumor area for "future hardware", there should be a "bitter nagging" area, too.
great "bitter nagging threads":
-the processors are way too slow
-quartz extreme will be the death of all macs <Spring 2002
...except that Apple's (admittedly small) marketshare grew last quarter.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There is no way to accurately measure marketshare. I am sick and tired of hearing about marketshare numbers (from both sides).
Sure you can look at the number of Macs sold last quarter, and if Apple sold more computers than it did the quarter before that, great, but what does that mean?
How can you obtain the accurate number of PCs sold? You have so many companies from Dell to House Branded PCs (which may account for nearly 60% of new PCs sold). There is no way to track this. The little local PC shop does not report the number of PC's they sold to anyone (except maybe for their accountant). The Mac marketshare could have grown or could have shrunken. Nobody can really say for sure.
One thing for sure is that Apple desperately needs to LOWER the price of their computers to attract new customers (and to keep their old customers in many cases).
For example, if an educator is faced with a fixed budget (always the case), and that budget will buy them 5 Macs or 12 PCs for the school, which will they buy? Same holds true for system administrators. It is really common sense.
Generally, people believe that BMW sedans are better than Ford sedans. Why don't more people buy BMW sedans even though they know that they are better? The cost prevents people from buying them. Doesn't?
Speaking of BMW... I also tired of hearing the comparisons between Macs to BMWs or Bose audio equipment. They are flawed ways of thinking.
Do BMW sedans use a special type of gas?
Do Bose audio equipment use a special type of electricity?
If they did, would they still be in business? I am not so sure if the quality of their products would justify the use of a special gas or electricity. Do you?
Unfortunately, our Mac's use a special type of gas/electricity called the Mac OS. That is why the comparison is not vaild.
I firmly believe that unless Apple can convince new customers that their products are not only better (something they will never do unless they point out why Windows is crap and how the Mac OS is better) but are also competively priced, their marketshare will shrink over time.
Comments
<strong>Seems like we'll have to wait until MWSF to be wowed.
1.5GHz G4s would be impressive, but I doubt Apple can meet such expectations.
I just don't see the G4 scaling 50% in 5 months when it took 18 months to go from 500 to 733 and 1 year to go from 733 to 1GHz.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I always find it odd when people say this...
At any minute Moto could subtly change the process and voila, volume production of 1.5Ghz parts is not only possible, it's easy.
A good friend of mine worked for Bookham Technology as senior process engineer up until Oct 2000. They had been struggling to get decents yeilds on a process, because 1 stage involved dunking each wafer in acid, drying them for a few hours then applying a different process. It took 18 hours per wafer.
To increase efficiency they hired a consultant. He took one look at the process and grabbed a box of wafers, dunked them in a bucket of acid, and left them to dry.
So in a few minutes they increased yeilds by 30 fold simply because a new guy had different experience and knew there was no danger in doing huge batches rather than single wafers. Previous thinking had believed it wouldn't work.
The point is, things change fast in the semi-conductor world, a jump from 1Ghz to 2Ghz might require the tiniest process tweak. It just needs somebody to try it.
<strong>
I always find it odd when people say this...
At any minute Moto could subtly change the process and voila, volume production of 1.5Ghz parts is not only possible, it's easy.
A good friend of mine worked for Bookham Technology as senior process engineer up until Oct 2000. They had been struggling to get decents yeilds on a process, because 1 stage involved dunking each wafer in acid, drying them for a few hours then applying a different process. It took 18 hours per wafer.
To increase efficiency they hired a consultant. He took one look at the process and grabbed a box of wafers, dunked them in a bucket of acid, and left them to dry.
So in a few minutes they increased yeilds by 30 fold simply because a new guy had different experience and knew there was no danger in doing huge batches rather than single wafers. Previous thinking had believed it wouldn't work.
The point is, things change fast in the semi-conductor world, a jump from 1Ghz to 2Ghz might require the tiniest process tweak. It just needs somebody to try it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but Moto doesn't have anyone with enough expertise or intelligence to figure out stuff like that. They would need to hire a whole army of consultants.
Also, I've heard that Motorola is notorious for keeping their fabs extremely dirty and messy. They are simply not cut out for such a high-tech manufacturing sector.
They suck worse than a friggin' leaf blower.
AMD + Apple OR Bust.
1.5 would be more aggressive and show Apple is beginning to turn things around...starting to play hardball.
I somehow don't expect 1.5 but a miserly 1.2 dual top config. £2, 500 for that. With Rapid Io or better half a year around the corner...(or just several months away by the time Apple ships?) Just not worth it to me.
1.5 G4? Might get my palms sweaty...but would I buy?
Apple likes to think its hardware is value added...a premium product. But it's bargain basement tech with a ridiculous price.
The ibook laptop is nice. My wife likes it. So do I...apart from the 8 meg Ati Rage which sucks.
Bus, memory and processor? Apple are way behind...but the prices are way in front.
A g4/g5/ibm processor on Hypertransport may make me get the wallet out. I'm still Mac towerless...because of Apple's poor specs over the last couple of years.
What do I expect from New York? It seems like the next gen 'Big Iron' won't be there. (But I'd love the absolute top system to be a G5 and surprise us all.) What I do expect is the SAME radical thinking prevalent in Jaguar, iTools, iApps...and the 'Switch' campaign.
It could be a custom Nvidia video acceleration card to tap directly into the 'Quartz Extreme' engine. Vector acceleration...for progs like Illustrator. License another altivec unit or Apple multimedia specific units to go into an Nvidia custom card to accelerate final cut pro or the Mac version of Maya...or the interface yet further.
So, mhz may not be 'important'...but lets see Apple do 'something' about it. Work closely with Nvidia to integrate a souped up Quadro card with the rest of the Mac system...increase bandwidth...
Nvidia have had enough time now to integrate some of 3Dfx's 'sli'(?) dual card technology into their pending line up. It would be nice to be able to put two Geforce 5s working in tandom on Apple's top or other machine. A dual Geforce 5?
1.33 mhz would be so-so on its own. But if Moto has added a few more fpu bits then...it may make me pay attention. Thru put...would be a nice alternative to mere brute force. But Moto isn't competing in mhz or throughput in my eyes. I'm not technical...but clearly a 1.33 G4 feeble 1 fpu isn't going to compete with an Athlon 1.8 gig with 3 fpus.
Nvidia have their Nforce chipsets...maybe Apple could do one for the Mac with Moto input? IBM input? An Nforce to increase multimedia throuput?
It's often been said that Apple have a 20-30% markup on thier hardware. Well...and they use old industry standard components! This and common motherboard designs was supposed to make Macs much cheaper!
Add extra hardware elements. Make Macs special multimedia computers...in the way the old Amiga was. Premium component? Maybe an Nvidia 'extra' part that can work in tandem with their own 'card' or a modular bit that enhances it further?
I find it alarming on these boards if you criticise Apple's specs you get labelled a troll. So be it. But the truth is Apple must try harder with their specs. How can any company offer out of date industry standard specs (eg bus, memory...) as their best, 'premium' spec machine...with a Geforce 4 Titanium merely as an order option than as standard on their top machine?
All just ideas. I do criticise current hardware...but like cowabunga...it's only because I want Steve Jobs to walk out on stage and preach the x86 smachdown. G5 with gravy...Quad Quadro sli with 8 Altivec 512 bit units smacking Pentium 4 botty...
Only a week or so to go.
Lemon Bon Bon
:eek:
[QB]1.5 G4 with DDR. It's catch up.<hr></blockquote>
Lemon Bon Bon ( Sucker?) You are so wrong. The combines effects of Jaguar, DDR and a 1.5G4 would knock the socks of any x86 processor. Unless of course you don't understand the megahertz myth.
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: Addison ]</p>
I think you're right about specs. If £450 PCs have ATA133 then it's dirt cheap and Macs should have it too, regardless of its usefulness in current systems. This stuff sells stuff to people who like big numbers.
DDR obviously needs to wait for a G4 that supports it, but from the speed of a dual 1Ghz on a choked bus, I feel confident that dual 1.2 on a modern FSB will bring very impressive performance gains.
As for G5, I can't say I want one until it exists. Until then I don't know what G5 means...
Ouch.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>It can't be any worse than last year's MWNY. That was brutal.</strong><hr></blockquote>
"From today, we're switching to x86. You will be able to order MacXP immediately for $299, and under everybody's seat is a Xbox!"
I really don't mind the premium. Really.
But in a 2.5k-3k machine I don't want to see:
GF4 MX boards in a 2.5k-3k machine. A Ti or Radeon 8500 should be standard.
Lack of a decent audio chipset. 5.1 should be standard.
I could go on....
It pains me to think that even the current DP 1GHZ G4 could accomplish so much more if it used DDR ( all around, not a'la xServe ) and had the Bus that the CPU's could not saturate.
<strong>
Lemon Bon Bon ( Sucker?) You are so wrong. The combines effects of Jaguar, DDR and a 1.5G4 would knock the socks of any x86 processor. Unless of course you don't understand the megahertz myth.
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: Addison ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
No one has any idea about the performance of the G5. For all we know it could be like the P3 and P4. Weaker at introduction but more powerful as it scales.
And the megaheurtz myth does not apply when you're comparing a 1.5 to 3.0ghz processor. The MM was a marketing ploy for when cpu clocks were close. the MM is a myth.
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: cowofwar ]</p>
Do you currently have the top dual gig?
Are you prepared to spend $3k+ and monitor if needed etc in 2 weeks?
I usually see that the most people who bitch and moan about Apple slow speeds and poor quality machines with crappy specs either are running machines 5 yers old and therefore can't comment because they don't use Apple's current machines which are plenty fast for a lot of shit, or aren't in the market to buy shit. Whether Apple releases a G7 at 5ghz next week, most of the whiners wouldn't be buying because they aren't in the market to do so.
<strong>
But until Apple can upgrade their pro line to a level where the pc using system administrators (they're normally the ones making the choice between macs and pcs) are wowed by the performance and price then they will continue to be a niche market that is slowly shrinking.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is a very true statement. Unfortunately, most people on these boards don't believe this fact.
<strong>
This is a very true statement. Unfortunately, most people on these boards don't believe this fact.</strong><hr></blockquote>
...except that Apple's (admittedly small) marketshare grew last quarter.
<strong>
OMG THE NEW G4 IS 32% FASTER WHEN USING THE LENSFLARE FILTER IN PHOTOSHOP OMG OMG OMG.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you have stairs in your house?
(Shakes head.)
Got an iBook. Well, it's my wife's. Despite 384 megs of ram...it don't handle 300 dpi Photoshop files at all well without being 'out of memory'...
If Apple release a G7 at 5Ghz. Yup. I'll be in the market to buy. Hell, I'd sell my Grandmother for down payment if she weren't already gone.
Am I in the market for an out of date machine? Nope.
If Apple could do a 1.5 G4 at say £1,200 inc Vat. I'd think about that. But £2,400? Even for a dual processor...that's alot of money. Especially with a generational leap around the corner ie some kind of G5 on Rio.
I really don't mind the premium. I didn't when I bought my last tower. Back then? Apple were competitive. Now? They're...well...it aint even funny. (Says through choked disbelief...y'know...at facing the 'reality' of where Apple's specs currently are...)
Zaz...it's nice to know somebody understands what some of us 'whiners' (hello Big 'C...'!) are getting at.
For this to be 'Apple's Year' I'm expecting Apple get aggressive with CPU and specs. Doesn't have to be high mhz. But I'd like to see some innovation. Extra FPU, souped up Nvidia/Apple custom job. Y'know...something that will make a Mac special over a PC. Something that justifies the price (as opposed to last years specs...) They have done well with almost everything else.
They charge premium prices. Can we have premium hardware specs to go?
Lemon Bon Bon
great "bitter nagging threads":
-the processors are way too slow
-quartz extreme will be the death of all macs <Spring 2002
-mega"hurt"z myth is a myth
-we need DDR now, not tomorrow
-bus speeds are years out of date
-premium price without premium hardware
-not snappy
-one button sucks
-cases are loud and aren't boxy enough
-cases are ugly
-O' extra 5.25" bays, where art thou?
-need my usb and firewire plugs on the front
-DVD read speeds are slooooow
-my mom never hugged me enough as a child
ps. Dorsal come back!
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: pathogen ]</p>
<strong>..face it , Moto suck.
They suck worse than a friggin' leaf blower.
AMD + Apple OR Bust.
You are aware that AMD has currently hit a wall and it's not looking too good for them.
[quote]Originally posted by sp720:
<strong>
Do you have stairs in your house?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am protected.
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: cowofwar ]</p>
Y'mean...'General Discussion'?
"-the processors are way too slow"
Bingo!
"-quartz extreme will be the death of all macs <Spring 2002"
Nope.
"-mega"hurt"z myth is a myth"
No a fews ago. Yes now.
"-we need DDR now, not tomorrow"
We needed it last year.
"-bus speeds are years out of date"
Honey, you don't know how long ahv wait-ed.
"-premium price without premium hardware"
Agreed.
"-not snappy"
I gotta have that 'snap' when I work...how about you?
"-one button sucks"
I'd like to see Apple make a multi button in future for those that can't cope with one.
"-cases are loud and aren't boxy enough"
You can't pin that on me...
"-cases are ugly"
Nice...but they're due for an update...
"-O' extra 5.25" bays, where art thou?"
Blank.
"-need my usb and firewire plugs on the front"
:?
"-DVD read speeds are slooooow"
Hmmm. Er...
"-my mom never hugged me enough as a child"
Got plenty.
"ps. Dorsal come back!"
Ah...he's draining the spuds...no jegs!
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>
...except that Apple's (admittedly small) marketshare grew last quarter.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There is no way to accurately measure marketshare. I am sick and tired of hearing about marketshare numbers (from both sides).
Sure you can look at the number of Macs sold last quarter, and if Apple sold more computers than it did the quarter before that, great, but what does that mean?
How can you obtain the accurate number of PCs sold? You have so many companies from Dell to House Branded PCs (which may account for nearly 60% of new PCs sold). There is no way to track this. The little local PC shop does not report the number of PC's they sold to anyone (except maybe for their accountant). The Mac marketshare could have grown or could have shrunken. Nobody can really say for sure.
One thing for sure is that Apple desperately needs to LOWER the price of their computers to attract new customers (and to keep their old customers in many cases).
For example, if an educator is faced with a fixed budget (always the case), and that budget will buy them 5 Macs or 12 PCs for the school, which will they buy? Same holds true for system administrators. It is really common sense.
Generally, people believe that BMW sedans are better than Ford sedans. Why don't more people buy BMW sedans even though they know that they are better? The cost prevents people from buying them. Doesn't?
Speaking of BMW... I also tired of hearing the comparisons between Macs to BMWs or Bose audio equipment. They are flawed ways of thinking.
Do BMW sedans use a special type of gas?
Do Bose audio equipment use a special type of electricity?
If they did, would they still be in business? I am not so sure if the quality of their products would justify the use of a special gas or electricity. Do you?
Unfortunately, our Mac's use a special type of gas/electricity called the Mac OS. That is why the comparison is not vaild.
I firmly believe that unless Apple can convince new customers that their products are not only better (something they will never do unless they point out why Windows is crap and how the Mac OS is better) but are also competively priced, their marketshare will shrink over time.
Thanks
Dave
[ 07-07-2002: Message edited by: Dave K. ]</p>