<strong>Specs AREN'T always everything. And like thegelding says, it goes beyond the hard numbers that, let's face it, many people truly don't notice or even appreciate.
I'll take ease-of-use, integration, the iApps, OS X, etc. over MHz and chip bragging rights ANY day.
If I'm pushing pixels around or doing layered Illustrator maps and infographics with a 400MHz iMac and a 466MHz G4 at work (and have NO complaints whatsoever), then I'm only going to be blown away by a 800MHz G4 iMac.
I guess it sucks to be a "power user", whatever the hell that is...
Photos were being edited, magazines being produced, pixels being pushed, etc. on 233MHz beige G3s. And before that, PowerMac 9500s and before that, Quadra 850s, etc.
Yes, it would be totally cool if Apple had Macs in the 1.6-1.2GHz range. I would be thrilled. But they wouldn't allow me to do anything I'm not doing right now, so it's not like I'm missing out on something.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just one of those users who appreciates the other stuff, rather than sheer, all-out speed and numbers. I've never been into that angle of it, so I guess I'm not a good one to comment on it all. I'd rather use a 400MHz G3 and OS X than a 2.2GHz P4 with Windows. To me, it's always been about the OS more than the hardware.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wonder if you've ever used Windows 2000 or XP. The truth is, Mac user's just now got a stable OS in the form of OS X and Windows users did the same with 2k / XP. Previous incarnations of BOTH platforms were shaky. A preference for one is fine, but I'm sick of Mac elitists bragging about their OS, and trying to lump me into some mindless collective since I use Windows. And yes, I've used OS X. I like it. It's UNIX, with a better interface. But it's not the best thing since sliced bread.
<strong>Spooky is kind of right, though over pessimistic. The problem with the new iMac from the UK perspective is that while Apple just may get away with its pricing in the US, here in the UK it goes overboard with VAT (sales tax) -- the SuperDrive model costs £1599 inc. vat. -- equaling about $2300. Wow baby! One for Harrods then, can't see it going well at Micro Anvika. And to think that for this money you're getting a consumer machine with a crippled g4 and no expandability...
Actually, having written this I can see why Spooky is depressed.... Spooky, maybe it's time to consider an Athlon box... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I am American and living in England and they rip people off here but its more to do with the VAT at 18% plus extra overhead on price. Bottom line is that what it costs in USD is the states costs this much in GBP which is 50% higher on everything. I'd say to my British friends here is that it would pay for the cost of a plane ticket to NY and buy one there and fly back with it. a free holiday and then some.
<strong>I wonder if you've ever used Windows 2000 or XP. The truth is, Mac user's just now got a stable OS in the form of OS X and Windows users did the same with 2k / XP. Previous incarnations of BOTH platforms were shaky. A preference for one is fine, but I'm sick of Mac elitists bragging about their OS, and trying to lump me into some mindless collective since I use Windows. And yes, I've used OS X. I like it. It's UNIX, with a better interface. But it's not the best thing since sliced bread.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And that's exactly what I stated, PCMan: a preference. A personal preference and opinion.
It's not about you. Or about lumping you in with anything. It's about ME and what I prefer, so I posted it.
I'm a big believer in "use whatever floats your boat". Why should I care? I don't run either company.
And no, I haven't used Windows 2000 or XP. Why should I? I use what I know and what I'm comfortable with, what I've got nine years invested in, software bought for, what my job requires, etc. Windows simply doesn't fit into any of those requirements.
pscates beat me to it.....i don't care what system you use...you mentioned in an different thread of getting an apple to play with and i thought that would be great...but always have been (and hope always to be) supportive of the thought process of..."use what you like"....i am happy that you like XP...i am happy that you like your chips and machines.....you call us elitists, yet it seems that non-apple people can't stand the fact that we don't use their system and take it as an insult...i told you that i use a pc at work and i like it...i just like my apple better and will continue to buy apples for my home and family use...no hard feelings, but i get confused by people who sign in on an apple user site with the username of PCMAN and then argue the virtue of pcs over macs.....i just don't get it....i never go to pc boards....what would be the point....oh well...you seem like a nice and smart person and i wish you no ill will, just a bit confused as to why you come here and bash the systems we like and use.....g
as you can see from this board, we are quite able to bash apple ourselves without pc people doing it...we know the strenghts and weakness of our system...we like design and the intangiables over MHz and specs....my current iMac fits my needs beautifully and the new iMac that i ordered will exceeded my needs beautifully...i'm a lucky guy...g
pscates beat me to it.....i don't care what system you use...you mentioned in an different thread of getting an apple to play with and i thought that would be great...but always have been (and hope always to be) supportive of the thought process of..."use what you like"....i am happy that you like XP...i am happy that you like your chips and machines.....you call us elitists, yet it seems that non-apple people can't stand the fact that we don't use their system and take it as an insult...i told you that i use a pc at work and i like it...i just like my apple better and will continue to buy apples for my home and family use...no hard feelings, but i get confused by people who sign in on an apple user site with the username of PCMAN and then argue the virtue of pcs over macs.....i just don't get it....i never go to pc boards....what would be the point....oh well...you seem like a nice and smart person and i wish you no ill will, just a bit confused as to why you come here and bash the systems we like and use.....g
as you can see from this board, we are quite able to bash apple ourselves without pc people doing it...we know the strenghts and weakness of our system...we like design and the intangiables over MHz and specs....my current iMac fits my needs beautifully and the new iMac that i ordered will exceeded my needs beautifully...i'm a lucky guy...g
Well, both of you are much nicer than the guy I'm going back and forth with in another thread. It was not my intention to come here and ridicule Mac users. I joined because, as I said, I'm considering a Mac. I just need people to help convince me I should pay $1800 or whatever for that new iMac. It's hard, coming over from the PC side, because that's a lot of money to us wintel guys.
I want Apple to do well, and keep providing good competition. But to do that, I seriously think they need to reevaluate their partnership with Motorola. Those guys just can't deliver, or worse, choose not to. Apple deserves better. The only other thing I've never understood about Apple is why they don't try to increase market share by pricing their boxes more aggressively. I have no doubt that when the G5 finally does come out, that it will rock. But I shudder to think what Apple's going to charge for it! Something tells me it will be out of the reach of mere mortals like me, something I'm also not used to in the PC world. In short, I'm here to solicit opinions about the Mac, so I can make a better decision.
cool...hope you find lots of answers and help here...we all wish apples were cheaper too, but we understand why they cost more than pc's...apple make computers and os and software that all works together from start to finish....they have to pay for R&D and other things that companies like dell and compac don't have too....now the new imac, thou not cheap, actually competes quite well price wise to pc if you aren't caught up on Mhz (iBooks rock pricewise)....make a dell with lcd and superdrive and the price is about the same....and it looks like apple will keep the old iMac around for a cheap (799 and 999) computer....if i bought a dell i doubt it would be their bottom of the line computer....i don't know....apple is never going to kill pcs in market share...selling at the same price as pcs would probably not gain much market share and instead would kill apple....pc side is pretty cut throat...apple has been around since the first computers were made and is still here...on the pc side, packard bell used to be one of the biggest pc makers and is dead, compac is dying and gateway and dell may well not be around in 5 years....anyways, best of luck in your computer search...enjoy whatever you get...g
ps..as i said, we would like apples to be cheaper, but would rather pay a bit more and have the company stay around for the next 25 years like they have been around for the last 25 years.....
<strong>Why DDR? its not that much faster, why not just jump to rambus? thats what i call fast.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fast yes, but the bus is only half as wide. Not to mention the fact that Rambus is the least liked company in the PC industry, with all their whining. I refuse to own any computer with RDRAM.
Well, both of you are much nicer than the guy I'm going back and forth with in another thread. It was not my intention to come here and ridicule Mac users. I joined because, as I said, I'm considering a Mac. I just need people to help convince me I should pay $1800 or whatever for that new iMac. It's hard, coming over from the PC side, because that's a lot of money to us wintel guys.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm the first to admit that Win PCs are cheaper than Macs in general, but come on -- $1800 is NOT a lot for a Wintel person if you're looking at a machine with 15" LCD and Superdrive (or DVDR-CDRW combo drive if Dell calls it that).
If you're comparing it to some $1300 LCD + CDRW machine on the Wintel side, fine -- buy one of the cheaper iMacs.
So many people keep asking the question "how much power do average users really need?" evry time the relatively appalling performance of the current powermac line is mentioned.
If performance is not important to apple's new prospective clientele then how come mr & mrs average when in a pc store stroll past the 1Ghz pentiums and proceed towards the 1.7, 1.8 Ghz Pcs? Do they think they are getting better value for money?
Here in the uk, a lot of "ordinary people" want computers that are expandable - not becuase they would ever consider expanding them but becuase they perceive it as some kind of future proofing on their massive investment.
I often go into PC world around here just to listen to the sales staff when customers look at macs. Their sales staff always push them away from the imacs on the grounds that :
"they're not upgradeable"
"they're much slower than PCs"
and
"you can't get any software for them"
I still do not see how apple is going to increase market share.
A blazing G5 with all the trimmings is what apple desperately needs to get itself back into the game. As more and more studios move over to wintel there is less incentive for developer's to focus on the mac. I emailed Macromedia asking them when OS X versions of dreamweaver, director and flash would be available. Their reply was:
"With regard to your email of Date: 08 January 2002 unfortunally at the
moment is not proyected to release new version of our program in that
operating system.
If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us again.
Overall, I thought the Keynote went well and I still think that Apple is the way to go. But I am discussing this non ceasing path of upgrades and updates and et al...are we really just getting stiffed?
waaaaaay toooo expensive! that's what i would like to say, just like so many others. the major problem is not only that it is expensive for what you get, though you can argue about that, the problem is that it is too much money in the first place.
a lot of buyers are looking for sub $1000-computers and none of the new iMacs are. Apple is loosing this entire segment of the market.
people have said that 800 mhz G4 is more than what people need - well, a car that drives more than 120 km/h is more than most people actually need (except in Germany). This similarity is WRONG, because people actually want faster processors. There is NO reason at all for why it should take 1 min to convert a song to mp3 when it can be made in 0.1 seconds - look at the iPod, one advantage is the speedy transfer, even though you won't do it very often. How fast is 800 mhz G4 compared to P4 1.6 Ghz - equal? faster? probably a bit slower. My 550mhz G4 powerbook is not faster than a 900 mhz P3 so how come a 800 mhz G4 is faster than a P4 1.6 Ghz?
Apple is missing a large market segment, Apple is loosing customers because of high prices and low performance. If Apple had a 10-15% market share, we would see 200% more games and other software.
also, when the average person goes to a shop to buy a PC - how long time does it take to convince him to buy a PC instead of a Mac?
which one is faster
Pc 1.6 Ghz, Mac 800 mhz
-wait, you know there are things like pipelines....
where do you get most software
PC!
-wait, 99% of the software that you don't find for mac is rubbish anyway...
where do you get most games?
PC!
-wait, 99% of the games you don't find ...
which one can be upgraded
Pc!
-wait, you will never ever upgrade your computer....
Which one is cheaper
PC!
-wait, you need to look at it from a different angle...
To make somebody buy a Mac requires a lot more work and a lot more arguments, thus it costs more time (and time = money) to sell a mac than a pc. what do you think happens?
Besides, I am not sure that OS X is THE easiest OS to use, it is definitly the easiet unix to use, but that's another thing.
my thinking is that in terms of portables, Apple is still very competitive. in terms of desktops, Apple products are looser products, except in terms of design and coolness. that, however, only takes you that far. i would say: add 500 mhz and lower prices with 100 or 200 dollars. then we are talking.
scold me... but as an investor in a mac computer i should be entitled to a worry that software is no longer coming because people don't buy macs anymore. do you think photoshop would take 8 months (i.e from release 10.1 till April) to complete if it had been for windows XP? Do you think civ III ever would be released 1 month later for Windows XP than for Mac? - we should be happy that we even get it! Apple needs to sell more macs to make business good for softwaremakers
nevertheless, i am just happy that i bought a Ti550, though i missed the combodrives by 3 days! and i hope that apple will be around for 4 years more to make it possible for me to buy a new powerbook!
Dividend, you are absolutely right. Apple is claiming that the likes of itunes, imovie, iphoto etc make the mac a more sound bet for ease of use and performance. What happens when all the developers start apeing apple software and it starts appearing free with 2GHz P4s?
I've heard that afx 5.5 is optimised for the new pentium. Is it optimised for altivec? If OSX was so easy to recode for then how come the delays from Adobe and especially Macromedia?
I really fear that the next release of machines will feature just a poxy 1Ghz or 1.2Ghz G4 or something stupid like that. Or hell even if we get a G5 it will probably have a ridiculously low speed motherboard or GeForce 2MX. Great. 128MB Ram? hold me while I faint.
The bottom line is that for the average Jo ie apple's new found following, 1.8Ghz, DDR, DVDR, Radeon, 512MB RAM etc are all basic. I guess the majority of 2Ghz P2s are in people's living rooms and used for just web and games.
Without a flagship powermac apple just makes pretty home appliances. Now is the time to release something more powerful than any other desktop computer (demonstrably in all tasks - not just a few rigged photoshop files) at a price point that is realistic given the competition.
In my view what did it for me this time round was the tag line
"Full speed ahead. Lust factor 10"
Maybe its just me but I really thought we'd see something that would take computing power to a new level.
The new imac innovates in no area in computing terms
so buy a pc....no biggie....still love my 400 MHz iMac and will love my new 800 MHz iMac...either will do everything i need....i don't care about pc specs and many others don't either...want a machine that works, is easy to use and doesn't look like every other crappy box on the market...so please please please buy a pc and hang out at a pc website....sorry, must be tired.....g
I switch from pc to mac since 1995... from a 486 DX4 100 Mhz to a 7100/80 waow...
And you know for what?
To get the work done!
At this period, for publishing it was mac only and i think it's still is. Because of some tools like Colorsync, AppleScript, Quartz (PDF), etc.
You know i do magazine for a living (Quark, big photoshop files of 400Mb, Illustrator) on some PowerMac : Dual 533 , Dual 800, G4 500, G4 450... and seriously you know what...; there is NO difference in speed (apart photoshop) between these system.
For creative people the most consuming time is just to be... creative... and sadly there is no microchip to put in my brain to accelerate the processus.
So... to have the work done i use a mac.
i don't have time to go to a registry or to activate my soft to ms or simply to understand why Diablo 2 don't work today and say that i have i problem with direct X and propose to reinstall all the system... NO WAY... it's hell on earth.
But in a way it's true, the PowerMac line is behing in speed because of Mot for the G4 AND apple with OS X (Aqua).
But there is only one way for Apple to survive and this is is core base : the Power User... in design, publishing, video, music, 3D.
So i'm expecting to have some new tools this year from them.... and if not?
I think i will still use my Dual 800 in 9 and X
with Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, Ultradev, Flash, FileMaker, Office, Painter, iMovie, iDVD, Final Cut, Director, etc, etc.... PLUS all the Unix FREE tools !
And in my spare tme i think i will play with Civilization III, WarCraft III, ShadowBane, Unreal II, Halo, etc...
If you want to use a pc because of your entourage ... well go for it.
If you want to be different well use a Mac.
PS: btw the itanium from Intel STILL is at 800 Mhz and cost a lot !
hi, i find the reply: so go and buy a pc totally missing the point and irrelevant. it is not very constructive netiher!
what we do NOT want is that people choose pc instead of macs - we WANT people to buy macs, if for nothing else for our own plattforms survivalbility. the issue is that many of us buy macs out of loyality, life-style in addition to its easy of use, design and other goodies. but we all recognise that we pay a price for it - slower computers, more money, fewer software and games and more complicated day-to-day computing (internet bankings not working &c)
one may look at complaints - either as a clue for what needs to be done, or to ignore it totally. ignoring it doesn't make life better!
yes, but i can't change what apple puts out...and i really don't want to either...i just get tried of coming to an apple board and hearing people say that apple needs to make computers with the same specs and price as pcs...it is not going to happen, can not happen, and if someone wants the same specs, same insides and same price...then why not just buy the pc and be done with it...sometimes it is apple people complaining, but often it seems like either trolls or just people who want to complain....it gets old after a while....if you like macs, but want them to be better...that's ok--we all want faster, cheaper machines....but a mac can't have the same speed, specs and insides and the same price as a pc...the new iMac is close as is the new iBook...oh well...this auguement probably will never be settled g
Comments
<strong>Specs AREN'T always everything. And like thegelding says, it goes beyond the hard numbers that, let's face it, many people truly don't notice or even appreciate.
I'll take ease-of-use, integration, the iApps, OS X, etc. over MHz and chip bragging rights ANY day.
If I'm pushing pixels around or doing layered Illustrator maps and infographics with a 400MHz iMac and a 466MHz G4 at work (and have NO complaints whatsoever), then I'm only going to be blown away by a 800MHz G4 iMac.
I guess it sucks to be a "power user", whatever the hell that is...
Photos were being edited, magazines being produced, pixels being pushed, etc. on 233MHz beige G3s. And before that, PowerMac 9500s and before that, Quadra 850s, etc.
Yes, it would be totally cool if Apple had Macs in the 1.6-1.2GHz range. I would be thrilled. But they wouldn't allow me to do anything I'm not doing right now, so it's not like I'm missing out on something.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just one of those users who appreciates the other stuff, rather than sheer, all-out speed and numbers. I've never been into that angle of it, so I guess I'm not a good one to comment on it all. I'd rather use a 400MHz G3 and OS X than a 2.2GHz P4 with Windows. To me, it's always been about the OS more than the hardware.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wonder if you've ever used Windows 2000 or XP. The truth is, Mac user's just now got a stable OS in the form of OS X and Windows users did the same with 2k / XP. Previous incarnations of BOTH platforms were shaky. A preference for one is fine, but I'm sick of Mac elitists bragging about their OS, and trying to lump me into some mindless collective since I use Windows. And yes, I've used OS X. I like it. It's UNIX, with a better interface. But it's not the best thing since sliced bread.
<strong>Spooky is kind of right, though over pessimistic. The problem with the new iMac from the UK perspective is that while Apple just may get away with its pricing in the US, here in the UK it goes overboard with VAT (sales tax) -- the SuperDrive model costs £1599 inc. vat. -- equaling about $2300. Wow baby! One for Harrods then, can't see it going well at Micro Anvika. And to think that for this money you're getting a consumer machine with a crippled g4 and no expandability...
Actually, having written this I can see why Spooky is depressed.... Spooky, maybe it's time to consider an Athlon box...
Yeah, I am American and living in England and they rip people off here but its more to do with the VAT at 18% plus extra overhead on price. Bottom line is that what it costs in USD is the states costs this much in GBP which is 50% higher on everything. I'd say to my British friends here is that it would pay for the cost of a plane ticket to NY and buy one there and fly back with it. a free holiday and then some.
i can sympathise.....
<strong>I wonder if you've ever used Windows 2000 or XP. The truth is, Mac user's just now got a stable OS in the form of OS X and Windows users did the same with 2k / XP. Previous incarnations of BOTH platforms were shaky. A preference for one is fine, but I'm sick of Mac elitists bragging about their OS, and trying to lump me into some mindless collective since I use Windows. And yes, I've used OS X. I like it. It's UNIX, with a better interface. But it's not the best thing since sliced bread.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And that's exactly what I stated, PCMan: a preference. A personal preference and opinion.
It's not about you. Or about lumping you in with anything. It's about ME and what I prefer, so I posted it.
I'm a big believer in "use whatever floats your boat". Why should I care? I don't run either company.
And no, I haven't used Windows 2000 or XP. Why should I? I use what I know and what I'm comfortable with, what I've got nine years invested in, software bought for, what my job requires, etc. Windows simply doesn't fit into any of those requirements.
But I'm hardly an elitist "Mac snob".
pscates beat me to it.....i don't care what system you use...you mentioned in an different thread of getting an apple to play with and i thought that would be great...but always have been (and hope always to be) supportive of the thought process of..."use what you like"....i am happy that you like XP...i am happy that you like your chips and machines.....you call us elitists, yet it seems that non-apple people can't stand the fact that we don't use their system and take it as an insult...i told you that i use a pc at work and i like it...i just like my apple better and will continue to buy apples for my home and family use...no hard feelings, but i get confused by people who sign in on an apple user site with the username of PCMAN and then argue the virtue of pcs over macs.....i just don't get it....i never go to pc boards....what would be the point....oh well...you seem like a nice and smart person and i wish you no ill will, just a bit confused as to why you come here and bash the systems we like and use.....g
as you can see from this board, we are quite able to bash apple ourselves without pc people doing it...we know the strenghts and weakness of our system...we like design and the intangiables over MHz and specs....my current iMac fits my needs beautifully and the new iMac that i ordered will exceeded my needs beautifully...i'm a lucky guy...g
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
<strong>pcman
pscates beat me to it.....i don't care what system you use...you mentioned in an different thread of getting an apple to play with and i thought that would be great...but always have been (and hope always to be) supportive of the thought process of..."use what you like"....i am happy that you like XP...i am happy that you like your chips and machines.....you call us elitists, yet it seems that non-apple people can't stand the fact that we don't use their system and take it as an insult...i told you that i use a pc at work and i like it...i just like my apple better and will continue to buy apples for my home and family use...no hard feelings, but i get confused by people who sign in on an apple user site with the username of PCMAN and then argue the virtue of pcs over macs.....i just don't get it....i never go to pc boards....what would be the point....oh well...you seem like a nice and smart person and i wish you no ill will, just a bit confused as to why you come here and bash the systems we like and use.....g
as you can see from this board, we are quite able to bash apple ourselves without pc people doing it...we know the strenghts and weakness of our system...we like design and the intangiables over MHz and specs....my current iMac fits my needs beautifully and the new iMac that i ordered will exceeded my needs beautifully...i'm a lucky guy...g
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: thegelding ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, both of you are much nicer than the guy I'm going back and forth with in another thread. It was not my intention to come here and ridicule Mac users. I joined because, as I said, I'm considering a Mac. I just need people to help convince me I should pay $1800 or whatever for that new iMac. It's hard, coming over from the PC side, because that's a lot of money to us wintel guys.
I want Apple to do well, and keep providing good competition. But to do that, I seriously think they need to reevaluate their partnership with Motorola. Those guys just can't deliver, or worse, choose not to. Apple deserves better. The only other thing I've never understood about Apple is why they don't try to increase market share by pricing their boxes more aggressively. I have no doubt that when the G5 finally does come out, that it will rock. But I shudder to think what Apple's going to charge for it! Something tells me it will be out of the reach of mere mortals like me, something I'm also not used to in the PC world. In short, I'm here to solicit opinions about the Mac, so I can make a better decision.
ps..as i said, we would like apples to be cheaper, but would rather pay a bit more and have the company stay around for the next 25 years like they have been around for the last 25 years.....
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
<strong>Why DDR? its not that much faster, why not just jump to rambus? thats what i call fast.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fast yes, but the bus is only half as wide. Not to mention the fact that Rambus is the least liked company in the PC industry, with all their whining. I refuse to own any computer with RDRAM.
<strong>Why DDR? its not that much faster, why not just jump to rambus? thats what i call fast.</strong><hr></blockquote>
latency
<strong>
Well, both of you are much nicer than the guy I'm going back and forth with in another thread. It was not my intention to come here and ridicule Mac users. I joined because, as I said, I'm considering a Mac. I just need people to help convince me I should pay $1800 or whatever for that new iMac. It's hard, coming over from the PC side, because that's a lot of money to us wintel guys.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm the first to admit that Win PCs are cheaper than Macs in general, but come on -- $1800 is NOT a lot for a Wintel person if you're looking at a machine with 15" LCD and Superdrive (or DVDR-CDRW combo drive if Dell calls it that).
If you're comparing it to some $1300 LCD + CDRW machine on the Wintel side, fine -- buy one of the cheaper iMacs.
If performance is not important to apple's new prospective clientele then how come mr & mrs average when in a pc store stroll past the 1Ghz pentiums and proceed towards the 1.7, 1.8 Ghz Pcs? Do they think they are getting better value for money?
Here in the uk, a lot of "ordinary people" want computers that are expandable - not becuase they would ever consider expanding them but becuase they perceive it as some kind of future proofing on their massive investment.
I often go into PC world around here just to listen to the sales staff when customers look at macs. Their sales staff always push them away from the imacs on the grounds that :
"they're not upgradeable"
"they're much slower than PCs"
and
"you can't get any software for them"
I still do not see how apple is going to increase market share.
A blazing G5 with all the trimmings is what apple desperately needs to get itself back into the game. As more and more studios move over to wintel there is less incentive for developer's to focus on the mac. I emailed Macromedia asking them when OS X versions of dreamweaver, director and flash would be available. Their reply was:
"With regard to your email of Date: 08 January 2002 unfortunally at the
moment is not proyected to release new version of our program in that
operating system.
If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us again.
Kind regards"
Killing myself is getting all the more appealing.
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000624"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000624</a>;
Overall, I thought the Keynote went well and I still think that Apple is the way to go. But I am discussing this non ceasing path of upgrades and updates and et al...are we really just getting stiffed?
a lot of buyers are looking for sub $1000-computers and none of the new iMacs are. Apple is loosing this entire segment of the market.
people have said that 800 mhz G4 is more than what people need - well, a car that drives more than 120 km/h is more than most people actually need (except in Germany). This similarity is WRONG, because people actually want faster processors. There is NO reason at all for why it should take 1 min to convert a song to mp3 when it can be made in 0.1 seconds - look at the iPod, one advantage is the speedy transfer, even though you won't do it very often. How fast is 800 mhz G4 compared to P4 1.6 Ghz - equal? faster? probably a bit slower. My 550mhz G4 powerbook is not faster than a 900 mhz P3 so how come a 800 mhz G4 is faster than a P4 1.6 Ghz?
Apple is missing a large market segment, Apple is loosing customers because of high prices and low performance. If Apple had a 10-15% market share, we would see 200% more games and other software.
also, when the average person goes to a shop to buy a PC - how long time does it take to convince him to buy a PC instead of a Mac?
which one is faster
Pc 1.6 Ghz, Mac 800 mhz
-wait, you know there are things like pipelines....
where do you get most software
PC!
-wait, 99% of the software that you don't find for mac is rubbish anyway...
where do you get most games?
PC!
-wait, 99% of the games you don't find ...
which one can be upgraded
Pc!
-wait, you will never ever upgrade your computer....
Which one is cheaper
PC!
-wait, you need to look at it from a different angle...
To make somebody buy a Mac requires a lot more work and a lot more arguments, thus it costs more time (and time = money) to sell a mac than a pc. what do you think happens?
Besides, I am not sure that OS X is THE easiest OS to use, it is definitly the easiet unix to use, but that's another thing.
my thinking is that in terms of portables, Apple is still very competitive. in terms of desktops, Apple products are looser products, except in terms of design and coolness. that, however, only takes you that far. i would say: add 500 mhz and lower prices with 100 or 200 dollars. then we are talking.
scold me... but as an investor in a mac computer i should be entitled to a worry that software is no longer coming because people don't buy macs anymore. do you think photoshop would take 8 months (i.e from release 10.1 till April) to complete if it had been for windows XP? Do you think civ III ever would be released 1 month later for Windows XP than for Mac? - we should be happy that we even get it! Apple needs to sell more macs to make business good for softwaremakers
nevertheless, i am just happy that i bought a Ti550, though i missed the combodrives by 3 days! and i hope that apple will be around for 4 years more to make it possible for me to buy a new powerbook!
Bahhh, iMac, Baahhhh, iPhoto, Bahhhhhh, Windows XP, Bahhhhahh, Patch, Bahhhahh, Updates, Bahhhhahha, UNIX, BAAAAAHHH!!!
I've heard that afx 5.5 is optimised for the new pentium. Is it optimised for altivec? If OSX was so easy to recode for then how come the delays from Adobe and especially Macromedia?
I really fear that the next release of machines will feature just a poxy 1Ghz or 1.2Ghz G4 or something stupid like that. Or hell even if we get a G5 it will probably have a ridiculously low speed motherboard or GeForce 2MX. Great. 128MB Ram? hold me while I faint.
The bottom line is that for the average Jo ie apple's new found following, 1.8Ghz, DDR, DVDR, Radeon, 512MB RAM etc are all basic. I guess the majority of 2Ghz P2s are in people's living rooms and used for just web and games.
Without a flagship powermac apple just makes pretty home appliances. Now is the time to release something more powerful than any other desktop computer (demonstrably in all tasks - not just a few rigged photoshop files) at a price point that is realistic given the competition.
In my view what did it for me this time round was the tag line
"Full speed ahead. Lust factor 10"
Maybe its just me but I really thought we'd see something that would take computing power to a new level.
The new imac innovates in no area in computing terms
I switch from pc to mac since 1995... from a 486 DX4 100 Mhz to a 7100/80 waow...
And you know for what?
To get the work done!
At this period, for publishing it was mac only and i think it's still is. Because of some tools like Colorsync, AppleScript, Quartz (PDF), etc.
You know i do magazine for a living (Quark, big photoshop files of 400Mb, Illustrator) on some PowerMac : Dual 533 , Dual 800, G4 500, G4 450... and seriously you know what...; there is NO difference in speed (apart photoshop) between these system.
For creative people the most consuming time is just to be... creative... and sadly there is no microchip to put in my brain to accelerate the processus.
So... to have the work done i use a mac.
i don't have time to go to a registry or to activate my soft to ms or simply to understand why Diablo 2 don't work today and say that i have i problem with direct X and propose to reinstall all the system... NO WAY... it's hell on earth.
But in a way it's true, the PowerMac line is behing in speed because of Mot for the G4 AND apple with OS X (Aqua).
But there is only one way for Apple to survive and this is is core base : the Power User... in design, publishing, video, music, 3D.
So i'm expecting to have some new tools this year from them.... and if not?
I think i will still use my Dual 800 in 9 and X
with Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, Ultradev, Flash, FileMaker, Office, Painter, iMovie, iDVD, Final Cut, Director, etc, etc.... PLUS all the Unix FREE tools !
And in my spare tme i think i will play with Civilization III, WarCraft III, ShadowBane, Unreal II, Halo, etc...
If you want to use a pc because of your entourage ... well go for it.
If you want to be different well use a Mac.
PS: btw the itanium from Intel STILL is at 800 Mhz and cost a lot !
And waow, i want this little white lamp !
[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
what we do NOT want is that people choose pc instead of macs - we WANT people to buy macs, if for nothing else for our own plattforms survivalbility. the issue is that many of us buy macs out of loyality, life-style in addition to its easy of use, design and other goodies. but we all recognise that we pay a price for it - slower computers, more money, fewer software and games and more complicated day-to-day computing (internet bankings not working &c)
one may look at complaints - either as a clue for what needs to be done, or to ignore it totally. ignoring it doesn't make life better!