In fact there is no big difference in performance in all this systems (except iBook, but is for mobility so...) from a day to day use (QuarkXpress, Photoshop, Fireworks, Ultradev, Illustrator, Internet, games). In fact the Quicksilver is really annoying because of it's BIG FAN NOISES and is not that fast. (the dual 533 is like a cube compared to it and it's fast too).
I hope Apple will come with a (minimum for high-end) Dual 1.4 G4 with a new motherboard (DDR, Rapid I/O, HyperTransport, Gigawire, ATA 133). I think that the motherboard in itself will release the true power of the G4.
Personally, I think the whole clock speed thing is a whole load of bull - and I'm not talking about the mhz myth either. A 2.2 ghz is faster than any mac you can buy, but who cares? I've got an 867mhz machine and it feels fast for pretty much everything. Out of all those people saying "unless apple brings out a 1.2/1.6/2.0 ghz machine, I'm switching to wintel" how many will actually use that performance? really only those who are doing stuff like 3d rendering. Internet, wordprocessing, dtp, excel etc- even the g3 in the bottom iMac can handle these without blinking. Even photoshop is less affected by mhz and more by things like altivec- thats how jobs beats schiller at every expo bake off. Real world performance, todays machines are ok. Yes they're expensive compared to wintels, but you pay to use a mac- its always been that way, and for the forseeable future, it will be. I'd much rather see useful stuff in my computers to justify the extra cost- nice screens (like the Tibook), good conectivity (like standard airport), good optical drive choice, quiet running etc etc. The people who would get benefits out of 1.6 Ghz G5s are those who use stuff like Maya - and how many people like that are there round here? a minority, I'll wager. Ok, so Mhz is important, especiallly from a marketing point of view, and for certain areas of computing, but wouldn't you rather see an optimised version of osx that felt as fast as os9? The way most people round here treat megahertz is in a 'my dicks bigger than yours' type way- they feel inferior to wintels. But for how many of you are the latest powermacs REALLY too slow? and the next ones?
[quote]Even photoshop is less affected by mhz and more by things like altivec- thats how jobs beats schiller at every expo bake off. Real world performance, todays machines are ok. Yes they're expensive compared to wintels, but you pay to use a mac- its always been that way, and for the forseeable future, it will be. I'd much rather see useful stuff in my computers to justify the extra cost- nice screens (like the Tibook), good conectivity (like standard airport), good optical drive choice, quiet running etc etc. The people who would get benefits out of 1.6 Ghz G5s are those who use stuff like Maya - and how many people like that are there round here? a minority, I'll wager. Ok, so Mhz is important, especiallly from a marketing point of view, and for certain areas of computing, but wouldn't you rather see an optimised version of osx that felt as fast as os9? The way most people round here treat megahertz is in a 'my dicks bigger than yours' type way- they feel inferior to wintels.<hr></blockquote>
Your ignorance is astounding. PS has a few altivec enabled filter and functions which Jobs uses for each bakeoff. For much real world PS is highly dependant on HD speed and throughput, memory throughput and processor speed. So what you have to do with a PM is load it up with from [from a third party], add a SCSI card and some SCSI drives [again from a third party] and hope for the best.
People working in video, graphics [DTP] and 3D need the MHZ. Each new generation of software does more better fancy things, requiring more processing power, and Apple hasn't been able to keep up with software, much less give the owner some breathing room for the next generation of software.
[quote]Apple should always think about the core of the powermac business.<hr></blockquote>
People who need fast computers are the core of the PM business.
Comments
It can hold 3 HD's, 4PCI's, and 2 FW. It has 3 slots for RAM. The only problem is the lack of additional 5.25 bays.
In this day and age, every computer worth a nickel has two optical drives, including some laptops! I hope Apple fixes this.
SdC
Cube 450 / 60 Gb / 640 RAM / Rage 128 / DVD
Cube 500 / 40 Gb / 1Gb RAM / Radeon / DVD
Dual 533 / 40Gb / 640 RAM / GeForce 2MX / CDRW
Dual 800 / 2x80Gb / 1.5 Gb RAM / GF3 / SuperDrive
iBook 600 / 20Gb / 384 Mb RAM / Combo
In fact there is no big difference in performance in all this systems (except iBook, but is for mobility so...) from a day to day use (QuarkXpress, Photoshop, Fireworks, Ultradev, Illustrator, Internet, games). In fact the Quicksilver is really annoying because of it's BIG FAN NOISES and is not that fast. (the dual 533 is like a cube compared to it and it's fast too).
I hope Apple will come with a (minimum for high-end) Dual 1.4 G4 with a new motherboard (DDR, Rapid I/O, HyperTransport, Gigawire, ATA 133). I think that the motherboard in itself will release the true power of the G4.
and a wet dream will be a G5...
[ 01-05-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
Apple should always think about the core of the powermac business.
SdC
Your ignorance is astounding. PS has a few altivec enabled filter and functions which Jobs uses for each bakeoff. For much real world PS is highly dependant on HD speed and throughput, memory throughput and processor speed. So what you have to do with a PM is load it up with from [from a third party], add a SCSI card and some SCSI drives [again from a third party] and hope for the best.
People working in video, graphics [DTP] and 3D need the MHZ. Each new generation of software does more better fancy things, requiring more processing power, and Apple hasn't been able to keep up with software, much less give the owner some breathing room for the next generation of software.
[quote]Apple should always think about the core of the powermac business.<hr></blockquote>
People who need fast computers are the core of the PM business.