The "Waiting for Revision B" Theory
"I'm going to wait for the rev b when all the bugs get worked out". It's something you'll read every day if you frequent any Mac hardware forums. I even read a post yesterday from a guy who waits for revision D models. I think it's a fascinating mindset from a time long past. Is it still logical today, or are things not what they used to be?
When I purchased my first PowerMac, a Blue and White G3, I was burned by a few revision A issues. The ATA controller used in the revision A was unable to support more than one ATA drive, and an attempt would result in corrupted drives. In addition, it took ATI six months to get their Rage 128 Pro drivers worked out; during that time I had to run my monitor at 1024x768 to keep the computer from crashing. When revision B came, the driver issues had been resolved and the ATA controller was replaced with one that worked properly. I got my new graphics card drivers obviously; but I never was able to run more than one ATA drive, despite the three internal hard drive bays.
Now, what the "Revision B" model has been of years past was one identical to Revision A, only with processor, memory, or hard drive increases, as well as any hardware glitches rectified. But for a few years now, I don't think Apple has had many updates that were merely a processor, RAM, or hard drive increase. It's been more often than not that they've changed internal components considerably. This would lead me to believe that a 'Revision B' model would be just as prone to unknown glitches as a Revision A. The days of mere Mhz, GB, and MB bumps seem long gone. Now everytime Apple updates their hardware, they seem to introduce or change hardware features, introduce new chipsets or cooling systems, and with it new glitches and hiccups.
Furthermore, these "revision B" waiters have no idea what kind of major components Apple may or may not change in the 'safe' version they are waiting for. For example, the "Revision B" MacBook Pro could vary well introduce Intel's Merom chip in the Fall, which would be Revision A all over again! You could end up waiting forever! And of course, an important thing to consider is that any issue one may run into with new hardware is entirely covered under warranty, so all you're out is time. Much less time than the 6-12 months you spend computerless, waiting for mythical "Revision B".
Most importantly is Apple's move to Intel. With it, Apple is no longer building and designing their own Motherboards. Any major hardware issues that exist will be ones that effect every PC manufacturer who uses Intel processors, chipsets, and motherboards. With that in mind, I'm sure Intel does some incredibly rigorous testing before they sell millions upon millions of chips and boards to countless PC manufacturers. And Apple's going to update and exchange internal components even more often; now, when they order Intel parts they'll receive whatever the flavor of the quarter is.
So in this era of Apple, I would say revision B, C, or D of a hardware configuration may not be any safer a purchase than revision A was originally. If one continues to wait, they may find that every Apple update is a Revision A. What are everyone's thoughts on this long-standing ritual of many Mac consumers? I appreciate your input.
When I purchased my first PowerMac, a Blue and White G3, I was burned by a few revision A issues. The ATA controller used in the revision A was unable to support more than one ATA drive, and an attempt would result in corrupted drives. In addition, it took ATI six months to get their Rage 128 Pro drivers worked out; during that time I had to run my monitor at 1024x768 to keep the computer from crashing. When revision B came, the driver issues had been resolved and the ATA controller was replaced with one that worked properly. I got my new graphics card drivers obviously; but I never was able to run more than one ATA drive, despite the three internal hard drive bays.
Now, what the "Revision B" model has been of years past was one identical to Revision A, only with processor, memory, or hard drive increases, as well as any hardware glitches rectified. But for a few years now, I don't think Apple has had many updates that were merely a processor, RAM, or hard drive increase. It's been more often than not that they've changed internal components considerably. This would lead me to believe that a 'Revision B' model would be just as prone to unknown glitches as a Revision A. The days of mere Mhz, GB, and MB bumps seem long gone. Now everytime Apple updates their hardware, they seem to introduce or change hardware features, introduce new chipsets or cooling systems, and with it new glitches and hiccups.
Furthermore, these "revision B" waiters have no idea what kind of major components Apple may or may not change in the 'safe' version they are waiting for. For example, the "Revision B" MacBook Pro could vary well introduce Intel's Merom chip in the Fall, which would be Revision A all over again! You could end up waiting forever! And of course, an important thing to consider is that any issue one may run into with new hardware is entirely covered under warranty, so all you're out is time. Much less time than the 6-12 months you spend computerless, waiting for mythical "Revision B".
Most importantly is Apple's move to Intel. With it, Apple is no longer building and designing their own Motherboards. Any major hardware issues that exist will be ones that effect every PC manufacturer who uses Intel processors, chipsets, and motherboards. With that in mind, I'm sure Intel does some incredibly rigorous testing before they sell millions upon millions of chips and boards to countless PC manufacturers. And Apple's going to update and exchange internal components even more often; now, when they order Intel parts they'll receive whatever the flavor of the quarter is.
So in this era of Apple, I would say revision B, C, or D of a hardware configuration may not be any safer a purchase than revision A was originally. If one continues to wait, they may find that every Apple update is a Revision A. What are everyone's thoughts on this long-standing ritual of many Mac consumers? I appreciate your input.
Comments
I agree with the move to Intel Apple no longer has to worry so much about the chipsets. Intel's going to have errata but nothing that's a show stopper likely.
Also waiting for Rev B assumes that Apple is going to maintain the same 6-12 revision cycle as they had with PPC. I doubt that, I think we see faster revisions in fact in 9 months I expect Apple to move the iMac to Merom (drop in replacement of Yonah) and the MBP.
There's no time to be holding off purchases anymore.
Heck, sometimes there are silent revisions where they switch things like that when there are significant problems with the hardware.
Merom chip in the Fall, which would be Revision A all over again! You could end up waiting forever! And of course, an important thing to consider is that any issue one may run into with new hardware is entirely covered under warranty, so all you're out is time. Much less time than the 6-12 months you spend computerless, waiting for mythical "Revision B".
Unfortunately the attitude you're talking about comes from the change in general attitude towards quality of companies. Many of them don't do good testing anymore. The attitude is more towards making thins fast, cheap, and ok in terms of quality. You may find it acceptable, but I don't.
If revision A sucks, revision B sucks, and revision C sucks, I will go on using my "outdated" machine until something that I like comes out.
Warranty is no replacement for lack of QC.
Most importantly is Apple's move to Intel. With it, Apple is no longer building and designing their own Motherboards. Any major hardware issues that exist will be ones that effect every PC manufacturer who uses Intel processors, chipsets, and motherboards.
Yes and no. Intel produces chips, guidelines on how to incorporate chips into circuit boards, reference boards, and even production boards for a few companies (although not many these days). The actual design of the board (particular data path layout, particular component usage, choice of other peripheral chips) is upto the 3rd party company.
Remember the capacitor leakage problem which hit just about all of the PCB manufacturers from south asia?? Apple was affected since they outsourced PCB design and production to south asia, both of my PNY video cards where affected because they're made in taiwan.
Intel motherboards were not affected because they use US made capacitors, Japanese made notebooks (Fujitsu, some Sonys...) were not affected because they used NEC japanese capacitors... If you didn't use Taiwanese made capacitors back, you were not affected.
So the fact that Apple uses a few chips from Intel doesn't mean that it will have or have not all of the problems that other Intel based systems will have.
With that in mind, I'm sure Intel does some incredibly rigorous testing before they sell millions upon millions of chips and boards to countless PC manufacturers. And Apple's going to update and exchange internal components even more often; now, when they order Intel parts they'll receive whatever the flavor of the quarter is.
So in this era of Apple, I would say revision B, C, or D of a hardware configuration may not be any safer a purchase than revision A was originally. If one continues to wait, they may find that every Apple update is a Revision A. What are everyone's thoughts on this long-standing ritual of many Mac consumers? I appreciate your input. [/B][/QUOTE]
I'll wait thank you.
- PowerMac 350 "sawtooth"
- PowerMac 400
- PowerMac 800 "mirrored drive doors"
- Titanium Powerbook (400 MHz)
- Flat Panel iMac (800 MHz)
- MacBookPro
I've NEVER had a problem with any "Rev A" product I purchased. All these systems are still in use today. I just replaced my 5 year old Titanium Powerbook for a MacBookPro, now my wife is going to be using the TiBook.
The PowerMac 350 has an aftermarket processor upgrade and is now running 800 MHz and is still my primary machine.
No one can tell me that Mac's are not an excellent value. The quality is great. Obviously, you will find some people that have problems, but such is life. Overall, I'd say that the "Rev A" quality of Apple products is top-notch!
Nothing better than a Mac.
Purty crapp.
Apart from that it was cool.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
A little side question: Have any other computer manufacturers to this day come up with a case as simple as the G4 and G5 cases? IOW, the easy-open side panel? It seems most I've seen still require a few screws to be removed, some weird latch undone, the whole box to be slid off the chassis, and then you're done.
I guess you haven't been around much.
Although I'm not a fan of Dell at all, their Optiplex line of desktop is as easy to take apart as a Mac. Certainly no weird latches or screws.
Originally posted by skatman
I guess you haven't been around much.
Not when it comes to my knowledge of Win PCs!