Speed Kills
Just got the latest Macworld (STILL getting these free from a Mac purchase last year?!) and I thought the Andy Ihnatko column was really bang-on. And no, I never thought I would utter words to that effect, ever. 
I thought the message was accurate, especially with all the reading I've done here (and several other message boards) of all the hopped up G5s being ordered by 15 year old MP3 swappers and porn downloaders (not that there's anything wrong with these things
). That Dual 2GHz G5 isn't going to help you download a song, email a friend, chat, bang out a paper, or go scanning for skanks much quicker than you are now. It's just too easy to get caught up in the numbers game.
And yes, I know, there are people out there that need more speed... I'm talking about the other 90% of people here.
Anyway, I felt like a typing speed test today, so I banged out about half of the column (I didn't feel like relaying his story about the waitress and his PowerBook - uh, you're not that funny, Andy). Here it is:
I especially like the line "...even though I know intellectually that the speed advantage of Apple?s fastest Mac, compared with its slowest, is obliterated during that fraction of a second when I think I hear the FedEx truck coming and glance out the window." I read something similar to this a while ago (from him, maybe) about all the speed benefits of his dual processor G4 going out the window when he decided to go grab a Coke out of the fridge. Makes you think differently about those few seconds, anyways.
I thought the message was accurate, especially with all the reading I've done here (and several other message boards) of all the hopped up G5s being ordered by 15 year old MP3 swappers and porn downloaders (not that there's anything wrong with these things
). That Dual 2GHz G5 isn't going to help you download a song, email a friend, chat, bang out a paper, or go scanning for skanks much quicker than you are now. It's just too easy to get caught up in the numbers game.And yes, I know, there are people out there that need more speed... I'm talking about the other 90% of people here.
Anyway, I felt like a typing speed test today, so I banged out about half of the column (I didn't feel like relaying his story about the waitress and his PowerBook - uh, you're not that funny, Andy). Here it is:
Quote:
When It Comes To Macs, Power Is More Important Than Speed
Speed Kills
<snipped out 6 mildly humorous paragraphs>
For years, I?ve been whining (privately and publicly) about the need for a nice compact PowerBook. But you know what? Apple came out with a great tiny PowerBook a whole year ago? except the company sneakily called it the iBook.
I arranged to swap my PowerBook for a pal?s iBook for a couple of weeks. I left ten perfectly good G4 processors sulking in my office and relied exclusively on the Little Velocity Engine That Wasn?t for all my computing needs. And, well, gorblimey, I could barely tell the difference.
Mind you, I?m not suggesting that a $999 iBook was the equal of a PowerBook that costs nearly twice as much money and has at least half again as much processing power. But the CDs got ripped, the files found, the words got written, and the moneys I skimmed from the company pension fund got channeled to the Bank of Cameroon just as securely. The Holy Trinity of Mac productivity ? for me, and for most users, it?s a Web browser, an e-mail program, and Microsoft Office ? was content and at peace.
It?s easy to be seduced by speed. I?m a big, dumb male: when I see a spec sheet, my eyes reflexively flick to the rightmost column, where the fastest processors are stabled, even though I know intellectually that the speed advantage of Apple?s fastest Mac, compared with its slowest, is obliterated during that fraction of a second when I think I hear the FedEx truck coming and glance out the window.
I shouldn?t think in terms of speed; I should think in terms of power. An iBook can be more powerful than a single G4 tower that isn?t free to roam. An inexpensive G4 tower can be more powerful than the top-of-the-line model, if you use the extra money to buy AirPort cards and a Base Station for the whole office. Speed is a number. Power is the ability to get things done.
Which brings up another point: there?s plenty of speculation that Apple will switch to Intel processors. The subject comes up during the Q&A after nearly every user-group talk I give. And it?s silly.
Such a move would be counterproductive. Now I know, better than before, that the Megahertz Myth isn?t about the inappropriate use of one user-friendly number to compare the speeds of two different processor families. The myth is that such numbers are all that important in the first place.
We?re Mac people for God?s sake! We?re supposed to be more sophisticated than that. And while we may not be smart enough to know that the way to convert an Intel user is to put a Mac mouse, not a spec sheet, in his or her hand? well, we ought to be. We certainly act like we are.
Frankly, if I ever wind up in a business where my boss expects me to work so hard that a dual-processor 1GHz desktop can barely keep up with me, I?m more than willing to work in a place where I spend most of my time waiting for the light on a french-fry machine4 to come back on.
When It Comes To Macs, Power Is More Important Than Speed
Speed Kills
<snipped out 6 mildly humorous paragraphs>
For years, I?ve been whining (privately and publicly) about the need for a nice compact PowerBook. But you know what? Apple came out with a great tiny PowerBook a whole year ago? except the company sneakily called it the iBook.
I arranged to swap my PowerBook for a pal?s iBook for a couple of weeks. I left ten perfectly good G4 processors sulking in my office and relied exclusively on the Little Velocity Engine That Wasn?t for all my computing needs. And, well, gorblimey, I could barely tell the difference.
Mind you, I?m not suggesting that a $999 iBook was the equal of a PowerBook that costs nearly twice as much money and has at least half again as much processing power. But the CDs got ripped, the files found, the words got written, and the moneys I skimmed from the company pension fund got channeled to the Bank of Cameroon just as securely. The Holy Trinity of Mac productivity ? for me, and for most users, it?s a Web browser, an e-mail program, and Microsoft Office ? was content and at peace.
It?s easy to be seduced by speed. I?m a big, dumb male: when I see a spec sheet, my eyes reflexively flick to the rightmost column, where the fastest processors are stabled, even though I know intellectually that the speed advantage of Apple?s fastest Mac, compared with its slowest, is obliterated during that fraction of a second when I think I hear the FedEx truck coming and glance out the window.
I shouldn?t think in terms of speed; I should think in terms of power. An iBook can be more powerful than a single G4 tower that isn?t free to roam. An inexpensive G4 tower can be more powerful than the top-of-the-line model, if you use the extra money to buy AirPort cards and a Base Station for the whole office. Speed is a number. Power is the ability to get things done.
Which brings up another point: there?s plenty of speculation that Apple will switch to Intel processors. The subject comes up during the Q&A after nearly every user-group talk I give. And it?s silly.
Such a move would be counterproductive. Now I know, better than before, that the Megahertz Myth isn?t about the inappropriate use of one user-friendly number to compare the speeds of two different processor families. The myth is that such numbers are all that important in the first place.
We?re Mac people for God?s sake! We?re supposed to be more sophisticated than that. And while we may not be smart enough to know that the way to convert an Intel user is to put a Mac mouse, not a spec sheet, in his or her hand? well, we ought to be. We certainly act like we are.
Frankly, if I ever wind up in a business where my boss expects me to work so hard that a dual-processor 1GHz desktop can barely keep up with me, I?m more than willing to work in a place where I spend most of my time waiting for the light on a french-fry machine4 to come back on.
I especially like the line "...even though I know intellectually that the speed advantage of Apple?s fastest Mac, compared with its slowest, is obliterated during that fraction of a second when I think I hear the FedEx truck coming and glance out the window." I read something similar to this a while ago (from him, maybe) about all the speed benefits of his dual processor G4 going out the window when he decided to go grab a Coke out of the fridge. Makes you think differently about those few seconds, anyways.
Comments
Can't be THAT old... it wasn't in any stores as of a few days ago.
Anyways, Inhatko(or however that's spelled) is about the only worthwhile thing left about Macworld.
Anyways, Inhatko(or however that's spelled) is about the only worthwhile thing left about Macworld.
Eh...Ihnatko sucks. He even got demoted from the last page to the middle of the mag. Blech. His columns are blogtastic and pure stream of consciousness rambling.