Return to Standard MP

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
How hypocritical of Apple to make a huge dea of being the first to ship standard MP personal computers in 2000 when they are stuck at a clockspeed and then when they increase a little they forget about that.



if the rumors of only a max of 1Ghz is true and we are stuck with a G4, maybe Apple will go all dual. That would sort of make up for the let down. dual 800, dual 933, dual 1 Ghz.? especially if these machines will be the first tohave OS X default.



Only problem would possibly be whether or not there is a noticeable speed difference in a dual 933 vs a dual 1Ghz. I would think not
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    If I am remembering correctly, 2 years ago or so Apple did this as well, without increasing the price so they said... So the 450 dual cost the same price that the single had.... We shall wait and see I guess.
  • Reply 2 of 44
    Good post Applenut...I agree it is becoming a sick joke. They are almost a whole Ghz behind as of today. I would have to say, in order to "save face" with enthusiast such as ouurselves and to not continue being the laughingstock they are in this regard, anything < 1.5 Ghz would require DP across the board.
  • Reply 3 of 44
    Good time to bring this up, Applenut. It was pretty slick of Apple, to offer dual processors at the same price points as single processors, then as soon as new processors become available, they ditch the dual processor configuration on all but one CPU speed, and charge extra for it. All this back before OS X...so the dualies weren't even used except for a few applications.



    Now that OS X is about to be the default OS, it would be an excellent time for dual processors, standard and at the same price points.



    I recall reading at some rumor site (unfortunately I forget where), where the author stated that he had "insider confirmation" or the like, that the entire Apple desktop lineup was going dual processor, iMacs included! WTF? I doubt it.



    But if Apple did offer dualies standard in all powermacs, at the current price points, then I believe the MHz gap would become irrelevant. Dual processors work both for performance (OS X), and for marketing. People can understand the concept of two processors being fast, even if they don't understand the nuances of dual processor implementation.



    I put the chance of dual processor Powermacs, across the line, at about 10%. At the current price points, 2%. At lower price points, 0.01%.
  • Reply 4 of 44
    I'd like to see some dualies for below $2.5K.



    Something like 900-1000 MHz x2 with DDR.



    But I fear that it will be only in the $3500 range.



    I'm still undecided if I'd buy a current dual 800 if the price dropped to $2.5 K. My gut says no, but the money in my pocket is a burning.



    I suspect my choices <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> after 1/7 will be:



    a brand new single proc DDR Combo box at 900-1100 MHz, or a current model dual 800 SDRAM Superdrive box.



    I've got mixed feelings....I guess I'll just have to wait.



    (Of course, if Apple wants to blow me away :eek: with a DDR dual 1 Ghz box for US$2.5K (because they have a ginormously fast 2x1.33 GHz box at $3.5K), then I'll be firing up a dubois and <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> chilling like Bob Dylan, made in the shade :cool: .



    SdC



    [ 01-05-2002: Message edited by: suckfuldotcom ]</p>
  • Reply 5 of 44
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>I recall reading at some rumor site (unfortunately I forget where), where the author stated that he had "insider confirmation" or the like, that the entire Apple desktop lineup was going dual processor, iMacs included! WTF? I doubt it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Forget the rumor sites; go to the source.



    <a href="http://www.eet.com/story/industry/systems_and_software_news/OEG20020103S0069"; target="_blank">Apple Polishes Dual-processor, LCD-based Desktops</a>
  • Reply 6 of 44
    fluffyfluffy Posts: 361member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>I recall reading at some rumor site (unfortunately I forget where), where the author stated that he had "insider confirmation" or the like, that the entire Apple desktop lineup was going dual processor, iMacs included! WTF? I doubt it.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    That would truly go where no PC has gone before, no?
  • Reply 7 of 44
    glurxglurx Posts: 1,031member
    DP towers wouldn't be all that impressive especially since many users are still using OS9.
  • Reply 8 of 44
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,261member
    But if those new dual PowerMacs booted into OSX by default, it would really make an impact I think.



    I am having trouble believe they would actually do this, but it would be pretty impressive.
  • Reply 9 of 44
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,393member
    Since the G5 has much higher performance than a G4, it would be a big jump in processer power from Apple when then released it. People who would have bought these single G4's would probably be upset. However, if they had bought a dual G4 with DDR, the performace gap would not be as great. So I think this post by Applenut is very possible.



    - Mark
  • Reply 10 of 44
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by glurx:

    <strong>DP towers wouldn't be all that impressive especially since many users are still using OS9.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    But the majority of people shouldn't be using OS 9 much longer as more and more apps are released for OS X.
  • Reply 11 of 44
    [quote]Originally posted by LudwigVan:

    <strong>



    Forget the rumor sites; go to the source.



    <a href="http://www.eet.com/story/industry/systems_and_software_news/OEG20020103S0069"; target="_blank">Apple Polishes Dual-processor, LCD-based Desktops</a></strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't think these guys have a really good grasp of Apple hardware:



    "A week from now I don't think you'll be able to find any more CRT-based iMacs," said Richard Doherty, principal of Envisioneering Group (Seaford, N.Y.). The move also could make Apple the biggest backer of the digital video interface (DVI), a de facto standard for linking desktops and LCD monitors.



    Funny, I thought Apple was using ADC, not DVI connectors.



    "One fast processor is usually better than two slow ones," said Reynolds. "It sounds strange to put dual processors on all of the systems when only 20 percent of users might want them because it's a cost issue and it's such a good upgrade opportunity. It would speed video editing or Photoshop for instance, but I don't see a role across the whole desktop product line."



    Maybe there might be role since OS X is MP aware? THis is a valid criticism of 9, but with X there should be more across the board benefit.
  • Reply 12 of 44
    I don't believe in Dual Processors.



    I have a QS 733 that I bought for around $1650.

    My friend has a DP 800 that he bought for around $3300).

    They both have 640 megs of ram.



    The DP 800 is NOT twice the speed of my 733. I don't have any specific stats but with all of the advantages it has over my 733 (faster bus, faster HD...), I'd say it was about even with say, a single 933. And this is using photoshop with both systems. Both systems have to wait when doing massive filters to massive files,his is probably a bit shorter, bought not $2000 worth.



    just my 2¢ anyway...
  • Reply 13 of 44
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:

    <strong>I don't believe in Dual Processors.



    I have a QS 733 that I bought for around $1650.

    My friend has a DP 800 that he bought for around $3300).

    They both have 640 megs of ram.



    The DP 800 is NOT twice the speed of my 733. I don't have any specific stats but with all of the advantages it has over my 733 (faster bus, faster HD...), I'd say it was about even with say, a single 933. And this is using photoshop with both systems. Both systems have to wait when doing massive filters to massive files,his is probably a bit shorter, bought not $2000 worth.



    just my 2¢ anyway...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    that's nice but you're wrong
  • Reply 14 of 44
    [quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:

    <strong>I don't believe in Dual Processors.



    I have a QS 733 that I bought for around $1650.

    My friend has a DP 800 that he bought for around $3300).

    They both have 640 megs of ram.



    The DP 800 is NOT twice the speed of my 733. I don't have any specific stats but with all of the advantages it has over my 733 (faster bus, faster HD...), I'd say it was about even with say, a single 933. And this is using photoshop with both systems. Both systems have to wait when doing massive filters to massive files,his is probably a bit shorter, bought not $2000 worth.



    just my 2¢ anyway...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    That's sounds like real scientific testing there.....



    SdC
  • Reply 15 of 44
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eupfhoria:

    <strong>I don't believe in Dual Processors.



    I have a QS 733 that I bought for around $1650.

    My friend has a DP 800 that he bought for around $3300).

    They both have 640 megs of ram.



    The DP 800 is NOT twice the speed of my 733. I don't have any specific stats but with all of the advantages it has over my 733 (faster bus, faster HD...), I'd say it was about even with say, a single 933. And this is using photoshop with both systems. Both systems have to wait when doing massive filters to massive files,his is probably a bit shorter, bought not $2000 worth.



    just my 2¢ anyway...</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Try running Cinema 4D XL7, Lightwave 7b, FCP 3, After Effects 5, and even Photoshop 7 beta on the DP machine.... you will have your jaw 'unclosable'



    [ 01-05-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
  • Reply 16 of 44
    I think a switch to MP on most desktop Macs is a great idea. Not only that, I think a quad-processor "best" Powermac would sell like a mother.



    Imagine this lineup:



    $1599 - single G4 933



    $2499 - dual G4 1.2 ghz



    $3499 - quad G4 1.0 ghz



    They'd sell a crapload of those things, though I doubt it would be feasible to put two MORE of the nearly-highest-end G4 chip for only $1000 price increase (assumine the "best" machine would also have more RAM, hard drive, etc.)



    Most of the people who buy the top Powermac do so because they're using Photoshop, FCP, DVD Studio Pro, After Effects, and stuff like that. Many people using apps like these, especially people doing that kind of work for a living, will gladly pay $3499 for that kind of horsepower.



    Of course, in OS9, the $2499 machine would probably be faster, but in 6-12 months, nobody but old ladies and people with expensive digital audio hardware are going to be using OS9.
  • Reply 17 of 44
    [quote]The DP 800 is NOT twice the speed of my 733. I don't have any specific stats but with all of the advantages it has over my 733 (faster bus, faster HD...), <hr></blockquote>



    The 733 and dual 800 have the same bus speed, but the low end 733 does have a slow HD. No idea why Apple insists on outfitting towers with 5400 RPM HDs, that is so 90s.
  • Reply 18 of 44
    tltl Posts: 33member
    [quote]Originally posted by BobtheTomato:

    <strong>



    "A week from now I don't think you'll be able to find any more CRT-based iMacs," said Richard Doherty, principal of Envisioneering Group (Seaford, N.Y.). The move also could make Apple the biggest backer of the digital video interface (DVI), a de facto standard for linking desktops and LCD monitors.



    Funny, I thought Apple was using ADC, not DVI connectors.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>





    ADC is nothing more than DVI with USB and power. If the iMacs went flatscreen, there is no reason to use ADC. Besides, even by using ADC, DVI is being used.
  • Reply 19 of 44
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>



    The 733 and dual 800 have the same bus speed, but the low end 733 does have a slow HD. No idea why Apple insists on outfitting towers with 5400 RPM HDs, that is so 90s.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Uh, no the QS 733 has no lvl 3 cache.



    [edit]I just realized I said bus speed not cache. sorry man...I ment cache...

    chache cache cache

    (hey, that's fun to type

    cache cache cache cache cache....



    weeeeee!

    {/edit]&lt;/lunacy&gt;



    [ 01-05-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</p>
  • Reply 20 of 44
    [quote]Originally posted by glurx:

    DP towers wouldn't be all that impressive especially since many users are still using OS9.

    <hr></blockquote>



    OS 9 users are not the target audience for this hardware release, or any future hardware or software releases. OSX is the future of Apple. There is nothing in hardware, even the G5, that will bring more benefits to the platform than OSX has brought.



    Naysayers and Luddites abound among the Mac "faithfull", and a recent article in The Register slams the UI (Aqua), but the strengths OSX brings to the Mac far, far, outweighs the complaints those users who cling to the past express.



    I understand that professionals, who use Adobe products to make their living, are currently stuck in the Classic mode, but when Adobe does release new products they will be for OSX. The bottom line is if you can't give up OS9 - don't! Just keep using it, as I will keep using Windows '98. I will never upgrade Windows, you don't have to upgrade your beloved OS9.
Sign In or Register to comment.