why should future macs bother with standards?
I'm kinda wondering why apple bothers with hardware standards at all. The argument I hear is that it allows them to make cheaper parts and thus lower the overall cost of their gear (yeah right <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> ). However, they seemt o be cutting the cost of their machines by cutting corners elsewhere such as removing the on button from the keyboard etc. Also, items such as PCI or AGP graphics cards are always more expensive than the PC versions - the manufacturers just change the firmware to prevent us from getting the cheaper PC versions. Nor have we seen any growth in 3rd parties rushing to develop PCI, AGP etc stuff for macintosh - we're still stuck with ATI and Nvidia. For the first time that I can recall there seem to be a greater number of USB scanners for PCs in the stores. After apple's firmware update 4.1.7 RAM nightmare many mac users end up playing safe and buying so called Apple certified ram at PC100, PC133 etc rather than the cheaper PC stuff from pc vendors - hell isn't it all meant to be PC100, PC133?
Finally, apple themselves bring out ADC!!!
!!
so why bother with standards? wasn't apple's market share much higher when they bucked the trends and used proprietry standards such as NUBUS, SCSI(ok I know its not proprietry but it sure as hel wasn't standard in the market), their own RAM, VRAM etc?
Finally, apple themselves bring out ADC!!!
!!so why bother with standards? wasn't apple's market share much higher when they bucked the trends and used proprietry standards such as NUBUS, SCSI(ok I know its not proprietry but it sure as hel wasn't standard in the market), their own RAM, VRAM etc?
Comments
<strong>I'm kinda wondering why apple bothers with hardware standards at all. The argument I hear is that it allows them to make cheaper parts and thus lower the overall cost of their gear (yeah right <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> ). However, they seemt o be cutting the cost of their machines by cutting corners elsewhere such as removing the on button from the keyboard etc. Also, items such as PCI or AGP graphics cards are always more expensive than the PC versions - the manufacturers just change the firmware to prevent us from getting the cheaper PC versions. Nor have we seen any growth in 3rd parties rushing to develop PCI, AGP etc stuff for macintosh - we're still stuck with ATI and Nvidia. For the first time that I can recall there seem to be a greater number of USB scanners for PCs in the stores. After apple's firmware update 4.1.7 RAM nightmare many mac users end up playing safe and buying so called Apple certified ram at PC100, PC133 etc rather than the cheaper PC stuff from pc vendors - hell isn't it all meant to be PC100, PC133?
Finally, apple themselves bring out ADC!!!
so why bother with standards? wasn't apple's market share much higher when they bucked the trends and used proprietry standards such as NUBUS, SCSI(ok I know its not proprietry but it sure as hel wasn't standard in the market), their own RAM, VRAM etc?</strong><hr></blockquote>
The NuBus was not proprietary. It is an open standard developed by MIT for use in AI workstations.
That said, the comparison of Apple prices is usually to the gamut of prices available on Wintel. Price out an AlienWare computer. You might be surprised. However, when people think about Wintel prices, they only remember the cheap Wintel and the expensive Mac.
Apple component prices are driven by two things:
1. Perception. Perception may or may not be reality.
2. Quality. The Mac community simply does not tolerate the slipshod. When we buy something, we expect it to work.
This is why SCSI is considered to be expensive. There is nothing about SCSI that dictates that it receive garner more than a nominal premium over alternatives. However, SCSI received wide acceptance on the Mac where the cheap and slipshod have no market. SCSI became associated with speed and quality. So today, when Wintel buyers want quality hard disks, they are likely to buy SCSI because SCSI manufacturers still build quality stuff. However, there is nothing inherent in the technology that prevents them from doing so and selling it at lower prices.
...stealing is bad, though somtimes when you get to disable a dell, piss off your school's system admin and make ur mac better...you just can't help it <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 11-10-2002: Message edited by: ast3r3x ]</p>
The makers of that RAM cut corners which is a practice Intel dislikes as well, but they cut corners and tried in a typical intel PC and it still worked, so the manufacturer didn't care. it just happens that apple tightened the tolerances to be closer to the actual PC 100 spec, and some of the cheap ram that cuts corners ddin't work anymore. There was plenty of cheap RAM available that would work, but if you buy from the lowest seller on pricewatch, you're always going to get burned.
I always buy from OWC, because they only sell ram that is up to spec.
Also, i the ram had a lifetime warranty, you should get a free replacement if the firmware update prevented it from working.
removing the power key from the keyboard was to fall in line with the usb specification, and has no percievable lowered cost attached to it. In fact, the cost of redesigning the keyboard and retooling the factories would add cost, not reduce it.
Lots of PCs out there do not follow the USB specification properly. USB zip drives have power adapters because of this. iomega said they would not need to include a power adapter with their usb zip drives, thus making them much cheaper, but a lot of PCs don't follow the usb specification with regards to power output and have less than they are supposed to, so it wouldn't work on all computers. Because of that, they designed the zip drives to all use power adapters.
A pc laptop I was using would not recognize two usb drives attached at the same time. If you had a usb floppy drive and then attached a usb cd burner or zip drive, the second drives wouldn't work because the laptop used an incomplete and below-spec usb implementation.
<strong>However, they seemt o be cutting the cost of their machines by cutting corners elsewhere such as removing the on button from the keyboard etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That was not to lower cost - it was a USB issue.
[quote]<strong>For the first time that I can recall there seem to be a greater number of USB scanners for PCs in the stores.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A lot of USB scanners work on Macs.
[quote]<strong>After apple's firmware update 4.1.7 RAM nightmare many mac users end up playing safe and buying so called Apple certified ram at PC100, PC133 etc rather than the cheaper PC stuff from pc vendors - hell isn't it all meant to be PC100, PC133?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is the problem. The RAM that doesn't work in a Mac doesn't follow the specs correctly.
[quote]<strong>Finally, apple themselves bring out ADC!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>
ADC is an open standard combining DVI, USB and power - it's developed by IBM, not Apple AFAIK.
<strong>
However, they seemt o be cutting the cost of their machines by cutting corners elsewhere such as removing the on button from the keyboard etc. </strong> <hr></blockquote> Meh, it is a power thing, that they had to give power to the keyboard even after the computer was off, I believe [quote]<strong> Also, items such as PCI or AGP graphics cards are always more expensive than the PC versions - the manufacturers just change the firmware to prevent us from getting the cheaper PC versions. Nor have we seen any growth in 3rd parties rushing to develop PCI, AGP etc stuff for macintosh - we're still stuck with ATI and Nvidia. </strong><hr></blockquote> Uhm, what about the Matrox realtime card, or those sound cards? or those expansion cards for USB 2 or ATA 133? Seems you are just talking about graphics cards.
[quote]<strong> For the first time that I can recall there seem to be a greater number of USB scanners for PCs in the stores. </strong><hr></blockquote> It only matters about the software, if they are all USB, they just need a way of talking to the computer.
[quote]<strong>After apple's firmware update 4.1.7 RAM nightmare many mac users end up playing safe and buying so called Apple certified ram at PC100, PC133 etc rather than the cheaper PC stuff from pc vendors - hell isn't it all meant to be PC100, PC133?</strong><hr></blockquote> Some of them are not made up to the right specs [quote]<strong>
Finally, apple themselves bring out ADC!!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
ADC is a good idea, and you can still use a VGA or a DVI (or even one of the old old Apple monitors (like me) ) with the new computers.
EDIT:::: <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
[ 11-10-2002: Message edited by: Nebagakid ]</p>
Back to the topic. Apple's marketshare is small, we may like it or not. It is an expensive pleasure for such companies as NVidia to develop and make, say, graphic cards for a bus used in 5% of computers. Just an example (imagine Apple using its proprietary system bus). Moreover, the fact that Apple sells computers with graphic cards from a leader in this field is a selling point in itself. For those who care it really matters; and it doen't hurt those who don't. You may say, why not make graphic cards at Apple? Because of R&D costs, some costs to convince customers that the cards are good, some costs to explain why the crappy cards are not really good and so on.
This is the case with all peripherals and internals. A far better way is to establish a new industry standard, as with USB and Firewire.
Apple is smarter than it seems.
I've also tried several USB cdrws from the likes of Ricoh and sony and found that not only does the mac (Jagwire) not see it but neither does toast. Umax astra level scanners don't accrding to Umax have jagwire drivers - yet there are drivers for everything from Win95 to XP for the same item.
It seems that the vendors are charging more for so caled "mac versions" of their products by constantly reiterating the mac's small market share.
Is it for example, impossible to have a PCI Geforce Titanium that is both mac and pc out of the box? and how come we can't have the Quadro or the fireGL? The wildcat II also won't work in a PowerMac. How is this? I take it it adheres to the PCI spec so how come it won't talk to a mac?
I'm also curious as to why no-one out there has set up in business developing mac drivers / software for such items.
It seems like we're not really getting much for our industry standards.
BTW the question was prompted by a visit to PCWorld. I went with a guy who wanted to buy a PowerMac dual 867. he's a computer novice and we'd talked a lot about what computers might suit him. once in the store he asks the sales guy about the mac. Firstly the mac edition of the Radeon with TV out was some 35 gbpounds more expensive than the pc one (of which there were several from many companies). Then the scanner he wanted didn't come with X drivers - in fact none of the scanners in his price range came with X drivers. I couldn't really give him a concrete answer on the extra ram he wanted cos frankly even I don't understand why one Pc133 stick can be different from another.
In the end he bought an HP
no idea why graphix and PC stuff doesn't work...there shouldn't be a mac version, it should be the same HW so there shouldn't be a mac and PC version...it is probably the same HW they most likely just bundle different drivers adn so they can keep the PC version cost down they hype the price on the mac version to make up for the not as profitable time spend making that driver
<strong>...good thing OSX doesnt' freeze</strong><hr></blockquote>
yeah right... <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
at least no more than three, four, five times a week tops.
<strong>PC video cards usually do not work in Macs because the firmware is not written for Macs's Open Firmware, it is written for a PC's bios. A card would have to have both codes in order to be cross platform, and that would mean larger flash RAM or ROM. This would also increase cost for testing and then support. It is a matter of economics, and for most companies the benefits just aren't there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
so once again, exactly what benefits do we as mac users get from industry standards such as PCI?
<strong>
yeah right... <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
at least no more than three, four, five times a week tops.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well. Last time my OS X freezed was...
umm.
Well.
Hmm!
Maybe three months ago or so?
<strong>
so once again, exactly what benefits do we as mac users get from industry standards such as PCI?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, if we weren't using AGP and PCI, we probably wouldn't have any video cards at all, or the ones that did exist would be even more expensive than the ones which are available now. I would have to say that it is an advantage.
As an aside, OS X has never crashed on my computer, and it's been on here since October 2001. There were a couple times when it has acted strange which caused me to decide to reboot it, but it's never completely locked up or kernel panicked on me.
Of course, it is a laptop, so it's not on constantly. It's usually on for about 4-6 hours per day.
<strong>
Well. Last time my OS X freezed was...
umm.
Well.
Hmm!
Maybe three months ago or so?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Last time it froze up on me was last night. Happened a couple of times. Once again, the culprit was my digital camera. Jaguar doesn't like it, although OS 9 plays with it just fine.
(tig)
Other standards on the Mac help out as well. Where would we be if we couldn't buy ATA Hard drives? What about PCI cards? There are MANY PCI card makers that write Mac drivers for their cards and support Macs. But if these makers had to design cards that used something other than the PCI standard, then it would cost them much more to support the Mac platform, and many probably wouldn't do it.
Then there's USB and Firewire, two standards that give Mac users a wide range of options for peripherals. If Apple still used ADB in lieu of USB, we would have a selection of peripherals orders of magnitude smaller than we currently do.
Also...imagine if Apple only supported the ADC connector and not VGA. We would all be forced to buy Apple displays. Sure Apple displays are high quality, but you can get a better deal elsewhere.
I could go on and on....it's pretty obvious that Apple benefits by using standards on their hardware.
<strong>
...stealing is bad, though somtimes when you get to disable a dell, piss off your school's system admin and make ur mac better...you just can't help it <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's kids like you who sent me to SysAdmins Anonymous!
Barto
If Apple used non-standard parts, they wouldn't be able to charge the premium, or Macs would be more expensive, and before you know it 1996 all over again.
Also, the biggest cost in periferals is hardware. Now, if HP (for example) had to support some weird proprietory standard for printer connections, there is the possibility they would make more money if they simple didn't support Macs.
Also, it may just be the case that standards are better than anything Apple comes up with. Apple is the innovator, they made SCSI, USB, FireWire, etc etc widespread in the market. If Apple reverted back to it's old self, there is no clear leader anymore. Computing is plunged into chaos!
The free market chooses what standards stand or fall. Apple chooses the best (read: not anti-competitive) standards from the free market, and makes more popular. Or throws there own standards into the free market (firewire), and if it works, they stay.
ADC Should die a horrible death btw. Let's have a power supply in the PM G5 with 6x DC out ports.
Elbaroni: You have no idea how good inside it makes me to see someone spell arse the right way on the 'net.
Barto
[ 11-11-2002: Message edited by: Barto ]</p>