[B]Yes and that's what has people pissed off. $2500 should get you at a bare min 16 I/O high quality Mic Pres and more than 32 tracks. Digi is horribly overpriced but if you want to learn Protools you have to pay the price. Personally I think that someone composing music is better off with Logic Pro or Digital Performer and a a nice interface. A Fireface 800 and either program would exceed the Digi stuff in almost every area save overall audio editing(which is close but not equal to protools in some ways)
emphasis added.. 32 audio tracks and 256 midi? That's a joke. The iMac G5 can do more than 32 audio tracks easy in fact Logic Express supports 48 channels of audio and 128 midi tracks for $299.
I think we see some fun stuff starting with AES in late October. Logic Pro 7 should be coming and odds are we may see ProBand(which I think are plugins) announced as well. Then if the mythical 64bit DAW actually exists we could see that at Winter NAMM or NAB 2005(I'm really hoping. I didn't really believe the rumors until I found out Tiger is mostly 64bit...now the thought of a 64bit DAW is possible)
Onlooker- Man I know the frustration. We all want to put a boot in Apple's arse to get them moving. The next Powermac refresh needs to happen by Q1 2005 with some "nice" stuff. No AGP..no 5200fx and some "Wow" stuff we hadn't imagined. Waiting ...just feels like an eternity.
Good things come to those who wait for a dual core 64 Quadra :-)
Apple now has a realistic way to launch a new industry standard in Professional Audio applications
IF... they play their cards right.
Not only must the user interface be " EXXTREMELY USER FRIENDLY"
but the instruments and effects plugins should also break new ground
in 64 bit quality.
External interfaces should also work seamlessly to help enable the non technical musician achieve professional results.
That is no Pro Desktop. It has not been in a while.
What I was emphasizing is that there needs to be a Macintosh Pro desktop for their pro applications used by Pro's. If you look again we called it the ProMac, not the PowerMac.
I'll ask you 1 more time... what makes the Powermac not a professional machine besides the graphics cards? you still haven't given a logical answer. I'm getting to the point where I don't even read what you write because all you do is bash on apple. Quit being a troll and say something positive. We all get your point that you are fed up. Bitching to us isn't going to change anything. If you don't like it then do something else. Btw you said all products apple releases besides iPod is outdated instantly... Mac OS X is outdated eh? Has to be the most advanced OS to date IMO.
Their software is lightyears ahead of most out there. Their engineering is so high-tech. Give me a break... start looking at positive things and quit bashing!!!
I don't know why your dragging me back into this thread. I pretty much left after my last statement.
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
hmurchison, I'm not trying to argue with you, or emig647. I'm just a little freaking upset that everything I need is on the other side of the fence as usual, and when these things get updated nothing will change. It will all still be on the other side of the fence.
I'm dragging you back in because you made many statements of how the PowerMac isn't a professional machine without ANY statement to back it up. I asked you numerous times and you avoided me everytime. Do you just love to bash on apple? I don't understand you. It seems with you nothing apple does is right. So obviously you avoided me again with my question... so whatever.
The statements throughout the thread comparing the PowerMacs to Alienware, and BOXX workstations were what I was referring to. They are both very fast, fully configurable, completely expandable, and totally upgradable. With room to spare. The PowerMac is suffering comparatively, and IMO just is not a wise choice as a workstation, because comparatively it isn't.
The statements throughout the thread comparing the PowerMacs to Alienware, and BOXX workstations were what I was referring to. They are both very fast, fully configurable, completely expandable, and totally upgradable. With room to spare. The PowerMac is suffering comparatively, and IMO just is not a wise choice as a workstation, because comparatively it isn't.
The g5 is very fast... compare it to whatever you want... it may not be the fastest on the planet... but its comparable. A few 100 mhz jump isn't going to make a huge difference.
As far as expandable and configurable... forget about it on any mac. Why? Because there isn't a large enough market share to satisfy anyone. This is why you have few choices. This is why you don't have Quadro and FireGL cards. This is why we don't have ECC ram on the PowerMac... (that and there isn't a need for ECC). This you have to get used to... personally I could care less for either of them.
Upgradable... processor wise that will happen sooner or later... just like with the g4. PC's are configurable because they have 10000 companies supporting the architecture. Apple has a small handful. But guess what... there is a HUGE trade off with being configurable... 1) less control by apple... which is a bad thing... cause it leads to 2) Less stability. If apple doesn't know what hardware is going on you get a whole mess of problems. This in my mind is why Mac OS X is the stablest OS out there. Because it is a limited amount of hardware going into the machine that apple knows about inside and out.
If you need those 3 features... than get a PC... but wtf would build an alienware computer... those are the most OVERPRICED computers I have ever seen... yes more than apple. Alienware makes a good 1/2 profit... so if a computer is selling for 3k.... alienware is making 1.5k. Pretty big pig being cut on that one.
Why even compare alienware to apple... apples and oranges (no pun intended). They are not even close to being the same thing. Apple is an innovator... alienware is... a RESELLER! Of course a reseller is going to want configurability. Long story short... apple is doing a great job for being the black sheep. If they stayed in this position for the next 10 years I would be satisfied. Eventually Macs will be faster for a month... then new PC architecture will come out and beat it.
Apple made the mistake once before of selling too many different machines at once... or updating too quickly (which way you ever want to look at it)... it doesn't work. It just kills them. I would like to see 6-8 month update cycles (which I think we will when IBM gets their shit together). But right now... apple is doing good. One last thing I'd like to see is a consumer machine in the 600-800 dollar range without a f'ckin monitor!
As far as I'm concerned... the powermac on my desk will last me 3 times longer than this pc will on my desk... (the pc is brand new... 64bit 3400+). If you think the the PowerMac isn't a professional workstation... then you need to get your head checked. It has more features than most pc's do. I'd like you to find a PC that can hold 16 gigs of ram. Or a pc with a 1.25 ghz FSB. Or a PC with the cleaness of the PM g5. Or a PC that is as quiet and fast. Or a PC that has the stability. Or a pc that has the hardware support (1 year warranty on parts / labor) with the same features. You can't do it...why? cause it doesn't exist!!! Apple has pro's too you know... not just cons... You seem to only find the bad things about the PowerMac. Get it fixed.
Your completely wrong about the Alienware price. They are far less expensive than a BOXX with the same specs, and they offer better options. You can configure a Quadro FX 4000, on an Alienware, not on a BOXX, but BOXX offers a Quadro FX 3000 for more. What is that all about? I don't think you've looked at the current alienware product lineup, and you must be judging them on past products. Their hardware looks better than BOXX for workstations, but BOXX still has a better rendernode.
What most people seem to miss is that ALL computers are simply
a collection of parts in a box.
While the high end Wintel and AMD machines may offer some very attractive features, they are still currently crippled by their operating system and a bottleneck in the system architechture.
It will be interesting to see how things change once these machines
are running on Longhorn.
Even then, the applications to follow will undergo many revisions
in order to achieve stability.
What attracts most people to Apple is that they can get that stability
NOW in nearly any chosen application running in OSX.
If the work you do on your computer is of vital importance,
the stability of your system is equally important.
Last week the director of IT for the Republican National Convention and IT consultant to the Department of Homeland Security
did a radio interview.
He explained that the continued use of Wintel based machines was a matter primarily of meeting equipment and training budgets.
The interviewer then asked what he uses for his personal computer.
Doom fanatics who want the optimal graphics card specifically for Doom III cannot get by without a GeForce 6800. Of course, that is not to say that the X800 models offer really poor performance in Doom III, and naturally their performance with Doom III cannot be applied to other games. The new ATI beta driver clearly boosts the performance of the X800 cards, but they will not be able to break the dominance of the GeForce 6800 cards. ATI fans can only hope for further driver improvements, which will be all the more important when new games based on the Doom III engine are released to the market. With ATI cards that are not part of the X800 series, the new driver brings very little to no improvement.
With mainstream cards, it's a different picture. The game can be played without any problems with the GeForce 5950 and 5700U as well as with the Radeon 9800XT and 9600XT. However, the resolution has to be reduced in order get acceptable frame rates for gameplay. With GeForce FX 5200U, Radeon 9600SE and 9200, smooth gameplay is impossible, even at 800x600 low-quality settings. The only thing that helps in this case is to turn off the graphics effects, which in turn, takes a large chunk out of the game's atmosphere.
For an optimal gaming experience with Doom III, we recommend the following:
Upper price level ($350-max):
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
Upper mainstream ($200-$350):
NVIDIA GeForce 6800
Mainstream ($100-$200):
ATI Radeon 9600XT
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
Entry Level
Currently no cards recommended
So, a 'crap card' Apple has in both PowerMac and iMac G5 systems doesn't have what it takes to run Doom 3.
No surprise their.
I'll take the word of Tom's Hardware over anybody here.
What's more, for little more, Apple could put a 9600 as standard in both iMacs and G5 Towers and restore a little pride. The 9600 of almost any variety boots 5200 ultra into touch being twice as fast.
What's more...the 9800 pro is being offered as standard in PC towers above 1K now.
ie I think Apple should grow some balls and offer the 9800 pro in both their top end PowerMac and top end iMac G5.
You'd get a decent game of Doom on a year old graphics card.
All told, after the dramatic debut of last years 2 gig PowerMac...
...this years PowerMac at 2.5 with crap graphic card?
Disappointing. Momentum lost. Decidedly lukewarm.
Demand exceeding supply?
Yes if your supply is in the hundreds. Wake up IBM. Pose on stage at San Fran about your great tech'? Expect to be savaged when you don't deliver.
The problem with apple in the dark aenemic days of too many models and confusion?
No clarity in the line.
These days...not enough choice.
There is room for a workstation line above the PowerMac which is maxxxxxxed out with ram and a pro' graphics card. 3 models. Just like the 'Pro' line.
There is room for a consumer tower under the 'pro' dual G5 Tower range.
Single G5s running 1.8-2.5.
In the £795-£1295 gap.
There is room for a cheap headless Mac to replace the eMac.
Apple paints themselves into a corner.
Maybe they should set up a different division to sell another range of workstation Mac towers and another for consumer Mac towers or 'headless' cheap. Maybe license HP to do it.
Because, Apple doesn't have a clue.
Lemon Bon Bon
Antares can't come soon enough. After a year? The dual 2.5 is a let down. And IBM can't get it out the door.
Apple has it shortcomings and Im a die hard mac supporter. Apple needs to put in its pro machines, really good top O the line hardware and include a f#@$%! monitor with it, like the PC world does! Damn! when will they get it?? Plus put more RAM into the machines at least a gig to be nice. I bet there profits would go waaay up if they included a monitor with in the price of the towers. Plus the top end GFX card as well. Being charged more money for an extended warranty really sux too. I hate to rant at Apple, but the previous persons drive some good points
It will all still be on the other side of the fence.
The meadow on the other side of the fence happens to be 30 times as large, the grass is greener the flowers are more colourful -must be a happy life there....
What does that make Apple (take 'X' out the equation)?
Eat this:
AMD Athlon 64 3500
nForce 3 Ultra 939 board
Twin 250 gig Serial ATA with 8 meg bugger.
Set to Raid O
2 gig of 400mhz DDr Ram
'Stylish' case.
19 inch LCD (Digital signal and 16ms response, Hmurch'...)
8x dual layer DVD re-writer.
256 megs GT 6800 card (!)
blah, blah, blah.
You get the idea, right?
£1,893.34.
...and it includes some software M$ crap that I could de-bundle the price on.
I'm confident that this system would p****** on Apple's top end PowerMac and it costs two hundred less money. $400 less to you guys.
You're confident eh? I'll put my Rev B 2.0 g5 up against that same machine. Why am I so confident you ask? Cause guess what!! I have a 3400+ with 1mb cache and my g5 smokes it in BOTH cinema and dnetc. I get about 29 million keys a sec with dnetc on my mac (or about 15 million keys a sec on single proc). Guess show many I get with my 3400+ ... about 15-16.5 million (depending if I have it OC'd or not). So you know, the PC is running in dual channel with 1 gig and the mac has the stock 512mb right now.
Have anyone post their stats with dnetc or cinema or any other crossplatform benchmark utility. Gotta remember the dual g5 is ...... a dual. Now if we were talking Opteron systems... I wouldn't hold a candle. Anyways... enough of that...
I wasn't trying to say apple is perfect. They are FAR from it. I've admitted that through this thread and many others. But Onlooker has a reputation of doing nothing but bashing. Look at my past posts... I've bashed the f'ck out of apple... they have got me red hot many times. But you do have to step back and realize they aren't that bad. They are doing a good job with what they have to work with at this point.
I was trying to get Onlooker to realize that all he does is bash and I wanted him to give some compliments. The items he described does not define a "professional machine vs. a consumer machine". The Powermac has plenty of power right now, whether he wants to admit it or not.
But realize I have done my fair share of bashing on apple... but they do great things! I'm happy with them for the most part... I can sit here and list of things they could do to be better like the pc world and I can list of things the pc world can do to be as good as the macworld. Both have their strong points... and one of apple's strong points are stability and power. The dual g5 is a powerful machine. Who cares if they aren't winning the mhz war... AMD isn't winning either... but yet they kick Intel's ass.
Dual core is about to come out from the pc world... we will have to watch and see what happens... power wars will get nasty soon. But right now... my only beef with the Powermac is graphics card. I could use another optical drive but its not a huge deal. External cases can be picked up for cheap now days.
Anyways... try to look both directions... not that apple is this big horrible company... but they do good things too. I'd have to say almost ALL of you wouldn't be here today if it was otherwise.
I'm doubtful that a G5 dual 2 gig with 512 meg can take a raid, 3.5 gig, 2 gig of ram machine.
On Photoshop? 3D?
The keys thing? Scratches head. I know PPC does well on that. Altivec and all. But PS and 3D?
Post some benches for the specced machines and I'll cry uncle.
As for Onlooker. I think he's right to blow his top at Apple's 'odd' stance in not providing 3D cards yet claiming to be a 'pro' customer provider via their PowerMacs.
You bashed Apple for reasons. Did you feel right to do so?
Apple are doing many great things. But they are flawed. They could do better.
It's Onlooker's, Matsu's or Lemon Bon Bon's democratic right to 'bash', whinge or argue for improvement.
Pro graphic cards.
A true workstation range.
A single cpu tower range under the 'dual cpu pro' Macs.
An iMac that costs £1400 with a 9800 pro and 512 megs of ram.
A true 'cheap' headless Mac that replaces of complements the eMac. PC land can do Shuttle. Why can't Apple mini-tower? They should.
Apple don't offer enough choice.
They do skimp sometimes. Eg on ram and gpus on high end PowerMacs or iMacs. Low end. Okay. But mid-to high end? Gpus HAVE got to get better!
Have got to work on the cpu situation. They're 'nearly there'. (Hopefully Antares 970MP will finally deliver the Wintel Killer.)
Still need more productivity software aka office alternative.
People often argue Apple shouldn't or couldn't because Apple doesn't currently offer it.
That's fine.
I'm arguing that Apple could offer things that many smaller companies offer.
26% of Maya sales go to Mac. So why no Pro Card?
A tower starting at £1400? Insane. I'm not expecting one at £399. But...BUT(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), reason prevail...at least offer single cpu models that go from £895-£1295?
There is room for a headless/mini-tower in that range. Not art-museum peices but real solutions that can are attractive aka iMac 3 but not 'up my ar*e' solutions like iMac or Cube. Offer something a little plainer but stylish. Something PC land, something we can relate to.
There is a large ground swell of Mac support for a headless machine cheaper than the ridiculous £1400 price start.
Apple thought there wasn't room for a machine 'tween iMac and PowerMac. ie cube. They were wrong. There wasn't room for an overpriced machine between the iMac and PowerMac.
With Apple...the devil is in the detail. Glaringly simple details.
Like why not offer 512 megs of ram when it's not much more expensive than 256? £44? Nothing. £100 for a better graphics card as opposed to the $16 piece of crap in the iMac 3?
Yeesh, for a little bit more...Apple could offer us so much more...I don't get why the 'BMW' of computers treats us so...
Comments
[B]Yes and that's what has people pissed off. $2500 should get you at a bare min 16 I/O high quality Mic Pres and more than 32 tracks. Digi is horribly overpriced but if you want to learn Protools you have to pay the price. Personally I think that someone composing music is better off with Logic Pro or Digital Performer and a a nice interface. A Fireface 800 and either program would exceed the Digi stuff in almost every area save overall audio editing(which is close but not equal to protools in some ways)
Protool LE only supports 32 Tracks
emphasis added.. 32 audio tracks and 256 midi? That's a joke. The iMac G5 can do more than 32 audio tracks easy in fact Logic Express supports 48 channels of audio and 128 midi tracks for $299.
I think we see some fun stuff starting with AES in late October. Logic Pro 7 should be coming and odds are we may see ProBand(which I think are plugins) announced as well. Then if the mythical 64bit DAW actually exists we could see that at Winter NAMM or NAB 2005(I'm really hoping. I didn't really believe the rumors until I found out Tiger is mostly 64bit...now the thought of a 64bit DAW is possible)
Onlooker- Man I know the frustration. We all want to put a boot in Apple's arse to get them moving. The next Powermac refresh needs to happen by Q1 2005 with some "nice" stuff. No AGP..no 5200fx and some "Wow" stuff we hadn't imagined. Waiting ...just feels like an eternity.
Good things come to those who wait for a dual core 64 Quadra :-)
Apple now has a realistic way to launch a new industry standard in Professional Audio applications
IF... they play their cards right.
Not only must the user interface be " EXXTREMELY USER FRIENDLY"
but the instruments and effects plugins should also break new ground
in 64 bit quality.
External interfaces should also work seamlessly to help enable the non technical musician achieve professional results.
Me Is SO excited!
Originally posted by onlooker
As you mentioned.
That is no Pro Desktop. It has not been in a while.
What I was emphasizing is that there needs to be a Macintosh Pro desktop for their pro applications used by Pro's. If you look again we called it the ProMac, not the PowerMac.
I'll ask you 1 more time... what makes the Powermac not a professional machine besides the graphics cards? you still haven't given a logical answer. I'm getting to the point where I don't even read what you write because all you do is bash on apple. Quit being a troll and say something positive. We all get your point that you are fed up. Bitching to us isn't going to change anything. If you don't like it then do something else. Btw you said all products apple releases besides iPod is outdated instantly... Mac OS X is outdated eh? Has to be the most advanced OS to date IMO.
Their software is lightyears ahead of most out there. Their engineering is so high-tech. Give me a break... start looking at positive things and quit bashing!!!
Originally posted by onlooker
hmurchison, I'm not trying to argue with you, or emig647. I'm just a little freaking upset that everything I need is on the other side of the fence as usual, and when these things get updated nothing will change. It will all still be on the other side of the fence.
Originally posted by onlooker
The statements throughout the thread comparing the PowerMacs to Alienware, and BOXX workstations were what I was referring to. They are both very fast, fully configurable, completely expandable, and totally upgradable. With room to spare. The PowerMac is suffering comparatively, and IMO just is not a wise choice as a workstation, because comparatively it isn't.
The g5 is very fast... compare it to whatever you want... it may not be the fastest on the planet... but its comparable. A few 100 mhz jump isn't going to make a huge difference.
As far as expandable and configurable... forget about it on any mac. Why? Because there isn't a large enough market share to satisfy anyone. This is why you have few choices. This is why you don't have Quadro and FireGL cards. This is why we don't have ECC ram on the PowerMac... (that and there isn't a need for ECC). This you have to get used to... personally I could care less for either of them.
Upgradable... processor wise that will happen sooner or later... just like with the g4. PC's are configurable because they have 10000 companies supporting the architecture. Apple has a small handful. But guess what... there is a HUGE trade off with being configurable... 1) less control by apple... which is a bad thing... cause it leads to 2) Less stability. If apple doesn't know what hardware is going on you get a whole mess of problems. This in my mind is why Mac OS X is the stablest OS out there. Because it is a limited amount of hardware going into the machine that apple knows about inside and out.
If you need those 3 features... than get a PC... but wtf would build an alienware computer... those are the most OVERPRICED computers I have ever seen... yes more than apple. Alienware makes a good 1/2 profit... so if a computer is selling for 3k.... alienware is making 1.5k. Pretty big pig being cut on that one.
Why even compare alienware to apple... apples and oranges (no pun intended). They are not even close to being the same thing. Apple is an innovator... alienware is... a RESELLER! Of course a reseller is going to want configurability. Long story short... apple is doing a great job for being the black sheep. If they stayed in this position for the next 10 years I would be satisfied. Eventually Macs will be faster for a month... then new PC architecture will come out and beat it.
Apple made the mistake once before of selling too many different machines at once... or updating too quickly (which way you ever want to look at it)... it doesn't work. It just kills them. I would like to see 6-8 month update cycles (which I think we will when IBM gets their shit together). But right now... apple is doing good. One last thing I'd like to see is a consumer machine in the 600-800 dollar range without a f'ckin monitor!
As far as I'm concerned... the powermac on my desk will last me 3 times longer than this pc will on my desk... (the pc is brand new... 64bit 3400+). If you think the the PowerMac isn't a professional workstation... then you need to get your head checked. It has more features than most pc's do. I'd like you to find a PC that can hold 16 gigs of ram. Or a pc with a 1.25 ghz FSB. Or a PC with the cleaness of the PM g5. Or a PC that is as quiet and fast. Or a PC that has the stability. Or a pc that has the hardware support (1 year warranty on parts / labor) with the same features. You can't do it...why? cause it doesn't exist!!! Apple has pro's too you know... not just cons... You seem to only find the bad things about the PowerMac. Get it fixed.
a collection of parts in a box.
While the high end Wintel and AMD machines may offer some very attractive features, they are still currently crippled by their operating system and a bottleneck in the system architechture.
It will be interesting to see how things change once these machines
are running on Longhorn.
Even then, the applications to follow will undergo many revisions
in order to achieve stability.
What attracts most people to Apple is that they can get that stability
NOW in nearly any chosen application running in OSX.
If the work you do on your computer is of vital importance,
the stability of your system is equally important.
Last week the director of IT for the Republican National Convention and IT consultant to the Department of Homeland Security
did a radio interview.
He explained that the continued use of Wintel based machines was a matter primarily of meeting equipment and training budgets.
The interviewer then asked what he uses for his personal computer.
He uses a PowerBook
Nuf said.
Doom fanatics who want the optimal graphics card specifically for Doom III cannot get by without a GeForce 6800. Of course, that is not to say that the X800 models offer really poor performance in Doom III, and naturally their performance with Doom III cannot be applied to other games. The new ATI beta driver clearly boosts the performance of the X800 cards, but they will not be able to break the dominance of the GeForce 6800 cards. ATI fans can only hope for further driver improvements, which will be all the more important when new games based on the Doom III engine are released to the market. With ATI cards that are not part of the X800 series, the new driver brings very little to no improvement.
With mainstream cards, it's a different picture. The game can be played without any problems with the GeForce 5950 and 5700U as well as with the Radeon 9800XT and 9600XT. However, the resolution has to be reduced in order get acceptable frame rates for gameplay. With GeForce FX 5200U, Radeon 9600SE and 9200, smooth gameplay is impossible, even at 800x600 low-quality settings. The only thing that helps in this case is to turn off the graphics effects, which in turn, takes a large chunk out of the game's atmosphere.
For an optimal gaming experience with Doom III, we recommend the following:
Upper price level ($350-max):
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
Upper mainstream ($200-$350):
NVIDIA GeForce 6800
Mainstream ($100-$200):
ATI Radeon 9600XT
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
Entry Level
Currently no cards recommended
So, a 'crap card' Apple has in both PowerMac and iMac G5 systems doesn't have what it takes to run Doom 3.
No surprise their.
I'll take the word of Tom's Hardware over anybody here.
What's more, for little more, Apple could put a 9600 as standard in both iMacs and G5 Towers and restore a little pride. The 9600 of almost any variety boots 5200 ultra into touch being twice as fast.
What's more...the 9800 pro is being offered as standard in PC towers above 1K now.
ie I think Apple should grow some balls and offer the 9800 pro in both their top end PowerMac and top end iMac G5.
You'd get a decent game of Doom on a year old graphics card.
Lemon Bon Bon
You're being harsh on Onlooker.
Alienware is a 'bundler' with very nice cases.
What does that make Apple (take 'X' out the equation)?
Eat this:
AMD Athlon 64 3500
nForce 3 Ultra 939 board
Twin 250 gig Serial ATA with 8 meg bugger.
Set to Raid O
2 gig of 400mhz DDr Ram
'Stylish' case.
19 inch LCD (Digital signal and 16ms response, Hmurch'...)
8x dual layer DVD re-writer.
256 megs GT 6800 card (!)
blah, blah, blah.
You get the idea, right?
£1,893.34.
...and it includes some software M$ crap that I could de-bundle the price on.
I'm confident that this system would p****** on Apple's top end PowerMac and it costs two hundred less money. $400 less to you guys.
Evesham also include 3 years warranty and service. Not bad, eh?
I'll be looking at them or Mesh for my next PC tower purchase, having just bought Studio Max 6.
So. Onlooker is right to point out Apple's short comings.
And yes folks, inspite of the fine work they do? They do have their shortcomings. Sorry to break it to you.
No pro cards.
Crap cards in their 'pro' machines.
Using 'industry' standard parts, Apple are still dearer than the opposition.
They don't include LCD in price. Not even a 17 inch entry level one.
You pay extra for Apple 'Care'.
You pay through the a**** for everything.
3 years should be standard.
So should a better graphics card for these purported Unix 'workstation' rivals.
Not having a bundled LCD is easier to take but Apple just pour it on.
No wonder Apple buyers wait years between upgrades. No correlation to price then...is there?
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Oh yeah, the PC included optical mouse and keyboard...
...this years PowerMac at 2.5 with crap graphic card?
Disappointing. Momentum lost. Decidedly lukewarm.
Demand exceeding supply?
Yes if your supply is in the hundreds. Wake up IBM. Pose on stage at San Fran about your great tech'? Expect to be savaged when you don't deliver.
The problem with apple in the dark aenemic days of too many models and confusion?
No clarity in the line.
These days...not enough choice.
There is room for a workstation line above the PowerMac which is maxxxxxxed out with ram and a pro' graphics card. 3 models. Just like the 'Pro' line.
There is room for a consumer tower under the 'pro' dual G5 Tower range.
Single G5s running 1.8-2.5.
In the £795-£1295 gap.
There is room for a cheap headless Mac to replace the eMac.
Apple paints themselves into a corner.
Maybe they should set up a different division to sell another range of workstation Mac towers and another for consumer Mac towers or 'headless' cheap. Maybe license HP to do it.
Because, Apple doesn't have a clue.
Lemon Bon Bon
Antares can't come soon enough. After a year? The dual 2.5 is a let down. And IBM can't get it out the door.
Yeeesh.
Apple has it shortcomings and Im a die hard mac supporter. Apple needs to put in its pro machines, really good top O the line hardware and include a f#@$%! monitor with it, like the PC world does! Damn! when will they get it?? Plus put more RAM into the machines at least a gig to be nice. I bet there profits would go waaay up if they included a monitor with in the price of the towers. Plus the top end GFX card as well. Being charged more money for an extended warranty really sux too. I hate to rant at Apple, but the previous persons drive some good points
Originally posted by onlooker
It will all still be on the other side of the fence.
The meadow on the other side of the fence happens to be 30 times as large, the grass is greener the flowers are more colourful -must be a happy life there....
but that's because it's covered with a lot more fertilizer.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
emig'.
You're being harsh on Onlooker.
Alienware is a 'bundler' with very nice cases.
What does that make Apple (take 'X' out the equation)?
Eat this:
AMD Athlon 64 3500
nForce 3 Ultra 939 board
Twin 250 gig Serial ATA with 8 meg bugger.
Set to Raid O
2 gig of 400mhz DDr Ram
'Stylish' case.
19 inch LCD (Digital signal and 16ms response, Hmurch'...)
8x dual layer DVD re-writer.
256 megs GT 6800 card (!)
blah, blah, blah.
You get the idea, right?
£1,893.34.
...and it includes some software M$ crap that I could de-bundle the price on.
I'm confident that this system would p****** on Apple's top end PowerMac and it costs two hundred less money. $400 less to you guys.
You're confident eh? I'll put my Rev B 2.0 g5 up against that same machine. Why am I so confident you ask? Cause guess what!! I have a 3400+ with 1mb cache and my g5 smokes it in BOTH cinema and dnetc. I get about 29 million keys a sec with dnetc on my mac (or about 15 million keys a sec on single proc). Guess show many I get with my 3400+
Have anyone post their stats with dnetc or cinema or any other crossplatform benchmark utility. Gotta remember the dual g5 is ...... a dual. Now if we were talking Opteron systems... I wouldn't hold a candle. Anyways... enough of that...
I wasn't trying to say apple is perfect. They are FAR from it. I've admitted that through this thread and many others. But Onlooker has a reputation of doing nothing but bashing. Look at my past posts... I've bashed the f'ck out of apple... they have got me red hot many times. But you do have to step back and realize they aren't that bad. They are doing a good job with what they have to work with at this point.
I was trying to get Onlooker to realize that all he does is bash and I wanted him to give some compliments. The items he described does not define a "professional machine vs. a consumer machine". The Powermac has plenty of power right now, whether he wants to admit it or not.
But realize I have done my fair share of bashing on apple... but they do great things! I'm happy with them for the most part... I can sit here and list of things they could do to be better like the pc world and I can list of things the pc world can do to be as good as the macworld. Both have their strong points... and one of apple's strong points are stability and power. The dual g5 is a powerful machine. Who cares if they aren't winning the mhz war... AMD isn't winning either... but yet they kick Intel's ass.
Dual core is about to come out from the pc world... we will have to watch and see what happens... power wars will get nasty soon. But right now... my only beef with the Powermac is graphics card. I could use another optical drive but its not a huge deal. External cases can be picked up for cheap now days.
Anyways... try to look both directions... not that apple is this big horrible company... but they do good things too. I'd have to say almost ALL of you wouldn't be here today if it was otherwise.
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
The grass may look greener on the other side,
but that's because it's covered with a lot more fertilizer.
I'm doubtful that a G5 dual 2 gig with 512 meg can take a raid, 3.5 gig, 2 gig of ram machine.
On Photoshop? 3D?
The keys thing? Scratches head. I know PPC does well on that. Altivec and all. But PS and 3D?
Post some benches for the specced machines and I'll cry uncle.
As for Onlooker. I think he's right to blow his top at Apple's 'odd' stance in not providing 3D cards yet claiming to be a 'pro' customer provider via their PowerMacs.
You bashed Apple for reasons. Did you feel right to do so?
Apple are doing many great things. But they are flawed. They could do better.
It's Onlooker's, Matsu's or Lemon Bon Bon's democratic right to 'bash', whinge or argue for improvement.
Pro graphic cards.
A true workstation range.
A single cpu tower range under the 'dual cpu pro' Macs.
An iMac that costs £1400 with a 9800 pro and 512 megs of ram.
A true 'cheap' headless Mac that replaces of complements the eMac. PC land can do Shuttle. Why can't Apple mini-tower? They should.
Apple don't offer enough choice.
They do skimp sometimes. Eg on ram and gpus on high end PowerMacs or iMacs. Low end. Okay. But mid-to high end? Gpus HAVE got to get better!
Have got to work on the cpu situation. They're 'nearly there'. (Hopefully Antares 970MP will finally deliver the Wintel Killer.)
Still need more productivity software aka office alternative.
People often argue Apple shouldn't or couldn't because Apple doesn't currently offer it.
That's fine.
I'm arguing that Apple could offer things that many smaller companies offer.
26% of Maya sales go to Mac. So why no Pro Card?
A tower starting at £1400? Insane. I'm not expecting one at £399. But...BUT(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), reason prevail...at least offer single cpu models that go from £895-£1295?
There is room for a headless/mini-tower in that range. Not art-museum peices but real solutions that can are attractive aka iMac 3 but not 'up my ar*e' solutions like iMac or Cube. Offer something a little plainer but stylish. Something PC land, something we can relate to.
There is a large ground swell of Mac support for a headless machine cheaper than the ridiculous £1400 price start.
Apple thought there wasn't room for a machine 'tween iMac and PowerMac. ie cube. They were wrong. There wasn't room for an overpriced machine between the iMac and PowerMac.
With Apple...the devil is in the detail. Glaringly simple details.
Like why not offer 512 megs of ram when it's not much more expensive than 256? £44? Nothing. £100 for a better graphics card as opposed to the $16 piece of crap in the iMac 3?
Yeesh, for a little bit more...Apple could offer us so much more...I don't get why the 'BMW' of computers treats us so...
Lemon Bon Bon
Hey, you did say the word 'meadow'.
Don't get me starting...I'm feeling in fine voice...
'Oh what a beautiful...'
Lemon Bon Bon