First, the Crystal Clear Savings promotion on Powermacs and displays runs out at the end of this month so that could indicate a timeframe for new Powermacs to be released.
Second, is that I am actually incouraged that there was no "refreshing" of the Powermacs now. It seems to me that if there was a long lead time to the really new machines everyone is hoping for with G5s or at least Apollo G4s, faster memory and bus speed, etc then Apple would have at least upped the Mhz of the current lineup. The fact they did nothing seems to indicated they have a major upgrade in store, and relatively soon. They may have not had enough chips to announce now, and/or they did not want to distract from the new iMac.
Seems to me if you can't appreciate what the whole make experience means, then you should just migrate to Windoze. I haven't seen it mentioned much here, but Apple has really made a major shift in the way it operates. Before we appreciated the synergy and ease of use of Macs because Apple made both the hardware and the OS...now it is also making some great software that only works on Macs. Yes, before they had Appleworks and Framemaker, etc, but these do nothing all that different then windows apps. Now if they would just make an iBrowser, most consumer users would have the apps they use most of the time coming from Apple!
Well if this is the best Apple can offer i too think its time to sell up all my powermacs and setup some dual Athlon machines running Avid DV xpress.
The line between a nicer OS on slow machines compared to a less than ideal OS on MUCH faster machines must be drawn here.
Athlons running Pro Tools run 3x more proccessing plugins in realtime compared to the fastest Mac's, Athlon machines render nearly 3x faster video in Avid DV Xpress.
Yeah the major shift here is Apple seems far to concerned with wasting resources developing free consumer software to apease miss and mr imac user.
Really the big news here was iPhoto and iMac's....woopdy ferkin doo.
The user experience is a valid point, but it seems no longer worth the sacrafice.
Im the last one to say this but Apple has lost it. I witnessed countless mac fans sell up in favor of AMD systems after Mac World NY failed to deliver. MWSF has also failed to deliver. After a little time with XP, i have to say it has come a long way and i dare say, is a pleasure to use.
Apple didn't even touch the powermacs. This means they are due for an update, soon.
[quote]
You don't need that 'extra speed' doesn't mean others don't need that too.
If you go to my other topics in the general discussion section you will understand why I am so mad and frustrated.
<hr></blockquote>
Clearly, just because I don't need the speed I don't think that others don't need it. I'm just weary of people who carp on and on about how slow Powermacs are, when they don't even need the power.
I wasn't trying to say that you don't need it, I was really curious, about what you did that needed so much power. Now that you told me I have a better understanding of what Powermacs are slow at. Thanks.
The gap is only important to power users. The power users are only a portion of Apple's sales. This show they went after the procumer with iMac and iBooks.
As one of the anylisists on TechTV said
" the mehz war is over. No one cares about what faster than what, now they look at what the computer can do for them". Enter the iMac which can do everything that was showcased today. That's what poeple will be looking at and will help Apple. The mhz doesn't matter as much to Joe Consumer as it once did.
As for us power users, you think Apple re made the iMac, slapped in a G4 and made it a baby tower for less then a tower just to speed bump the towers a couple of notches?
I'm tired of it also. No they don't need the speed really. However, if you're a customer in the store and all your PC buddys lead you to believe the only thing that matters is speed ( if you are Joe consumer ) that's what you're going to buy. If they do that enough Apple's market share will have to read with a magnifying glass. I'm sorry to say but, we live in the age of speed and Apple has let too many years slip by without properly addressing this " we will close the Mghz gap ".
Well?
Apple has to show that to the average consumer they are a viable alternative to what everybody else has. You can't do that with design alone. As long as you hand the PC side that argument in their favor they will use it to their marketing advantage.
Ok, then it comes down to the wow factor. The faster then I will need ugly boring box over there, or the sweet fast enough iMac does does everything or the new towers ( applies once new towers are released )
Even if Apple was at 1.6ghz+ we'd still face as many obsticals, that willnever change. If we had a 3ghz tower it would be "but i can't run blah blah on the mac".
If Apple had a 3 GHz Powermac they would be selling a hell of a lot more than they do now!
That doesn't even make sense. C'mon, if Apple had the upper hand in speed, then gamers would be interested, more professionals would be interested, even geeks would be thinking about Macs. The performance gap hurts Apple, seriously.
I don't think that means as much as some people make it out to be. Apple had the fastest machine not 10 years ago and it did shit for their market share. We don't have the luxury of 2 COMPITENT chip makers fighting over speeds for our platform, we will never catch up or keep a steady pace mhz wise. We don't need to, because we all the know the argument. We need fast enough machines with the wow factor and excellent features that run the mac os the way it was meant to be.
Don't get me worng, I'm waiting to buy th fastest thing Apple releases whenver they relase it! But, I think the mhz whine is getting played and old. Lets focus on the positive things our favorite fruit is doing
"We don't have the luxury of 2 COMPITENT chip makers fighting over speeds for our platform"
While this is true, the fact that Motorola's main interest BY A LONG SHOT, is embedded processors. Embedded processors today make less than adequate desktop processors. While Apple can not move to the X86 processor, much of the technology in AMD's chips could be used in a processor designed for OS X. The core for the X86 chips is RISC, meaining uniform instruction size, just like the Power PC.
Apple really needs to get away from Motorola as their supplier. I don't know how, but holy crap, a 1.5 GHz gap is embarrassing. Adobe has optimized their software for, what is it called, SSE, which I guess isn't a efficient as Altivec, but for how long?? Things don't remain static, SSE instruction sets and chip design will progress and any advantage Altivec has will or has become mute.
I don't know, but AMD may not even be interested in Apple's business, but we do know Motorola isn't. Talk about a rock and a hard place.
<strong>If Apple had a 3 GHz Powermac they would be selling a hell of a lot more than they do now!
That doesn't even make sense. C'mon, if Apple had the upper hand in speed, then gamers would be interested, more professionals would be interested, even geeks would be thinking about Macs. The performance gap hurts Apple, seriously.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I really do think that even IF Apple had 3Ghz, that would not convert large numbers of people.
Face it, Windows is SOOOO much of a stronghold, they'd have to completely stop releasing new OS updates and stop making new hardware for 10 years for Apple to catch up, marketshare wise.
I really do think that even IF Apple had 3Ghz, that would not convert large numbers of people.
Face it, Windows is SOOOO much of a stronghold, they'd have to completely stop releasing new OS updates and stop making new hardware for 10 years for Apple to catch up, marketshare wise.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It would convert all the professional users in video graphism and multimedia. Busisness men won't care and nor the gamers (much less number of games : and if you love games you should better buy an X box)
I was working at an store that sold apples whne the first PC's came out, I saw whole departments at ford and chrysler dump their apples and order PC's that no one had even seen at that point. Our parent company sold 6,000 PC's before anyone even knew what they would look like. The market share that is open to Apple is at max, about 20%. And I really wish Leonis would just buy his PC and get on with it. He's been headed that way so long, time to fish or cut bait.
<strong>"We don't have the luxury of 2 COMPITENT chip makers fighting over speeds for our platform"
While this is true, the fact that Motorola's main interest BY A LONG SHOT, is embedded processors. Embedded processors today make less than adequate desktop processors. While Apple can not move to the X86 processor, much of the technology in AMD's chips could be used in a processor designed for OS X. The core for the X86 chips is RISC, meaining uniform instruction size, just like the Power PC.
Apple really needs to get away from Motorola as their supplier. I don't know how, but holy crap, a 1.5 GHz gap is embarrassing. Adobe has optimized their software for, what is it called, SSE, which I guess isn't a efficient as Altivec, but for how long?? Things don't remain static, SSE instruction sets and chip design will progress and any advantage Altivec has will or has become mute.
I don't know, but AMD may not even be interested in Apple's business, but we do know Motorola isn't. Talk about a rock and a hard place.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You hit the nail mostly on the head. Except x86 was, is and always has been a CISC design. One of it's biggest annoyances is it's variable instruction size. And why exactly is it that Apple can't move to x86? It would take a MASSIVE contract to get AMD or Intel to develop a custom chip for the Mac, I think that is extrodinarily unlikely.
You hit the nail mostly on the head. Except x86 was, is and always has been a CISC design. One of it's biggest annoyances is it's variable instruction size. And why exactly is it that Apple can't move to x86? It would take a MASSIVE contract to get AMD or Intel to develop a custom chip for the Mac, I think that is extrodinarily unlikely.
But the question is: "Are we going to see this in our lifetime?"
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just by your fücking pc and be on with it. Do your cross platform upgrade and get off the boards. By the way what is it that you do that 867 G4 can't do. Shit or get off the pot.
Moral is at new low, and Apple needs to preannounce the new G5 as soon as possible. (This is my personal feeling). I've been using Macs since 1991. In that time I owned a Mac Classic and an iMac400dv. I'm NOT a power user, and I too am DISAPPOINTED. As an AVERAGE consumer, I can't say that there is a single product available today that I would buy from Apple. I know first hand what a shity graphics card can do to your gaming experience, and the fact that Apple leaves no choice in that department, is a serious problem with regards to its consumer product(s). (The new/old iMac). Second, I've played around with the G4 towers with osX installed, and even with all the supposed optimization for the altivec engine, the user experience is still sluggish at best. I will not buy a G4 machine period. osX is the future, but sadly even with a 1 GHz G4, I doubt the user experience will be much improved. From what I read this has to do with the bottleneck in the memory subsystems, and something which supposedly will only get solved with the arrival the G5 and it?s new motherboard design. (If the speculation is true). Furthermore, Apple needs to seriously address the perception that people have, by offering dual and even quad processor machine, that together add to, or exceed the MHz speed of comparatively priced Wintel boxes. Mac users, have always been at a disadvantage when it comes to choice of software, and this is something that most macaddicts, such as myself, have come to accept. OsX can maybe change that, but Apple needs to grow its market share, and there?s no way they will do it with INFERIOR hardware. Absolutely no way!
Comments
First, the Crystal Clear Savings promotion on Powermacs and displays runs out at the end of this month so that could indicate a timeframe for new Powermacs to be released.
Second, is that I am actually incouraged that there was no "refreshing" of the Powermacs now. It seems to me that if there was a long lead time to the really new machines everyone is hoping for with G5s or at least Apollo G4s, faster memory and bus speed, etc then Apple would have at least upped the Mhz of the current lineup. The fact they did nothing seems to indicated they have a major upgrade in store, and relatively soon. They may have not had enough chips to announce now, and/or they did not want to distract from the new iMac.
Seems to me if you can't appreciate what the whole make experience means, then you should just migrate to Windoze. I haven't seen it mentioned much here, but Apple has really made a major shift in the way it operates. Before we appreciated the synergy and ease of use of Macs because Apple made both the hardware and the OS...now it is also making some great software that only works on Macs. Yes, before they had Appleworks and Framemaker, etc, but these do nothing all that different then windows apps. Now if they would just make an iBrowser, most consumer users would have the apps they use most of the time coming from Apple!
The line between a nicer OS on slow machines compared to a less than ideal OS on MUCH faster machines must be drawn here.
Athlons running Pro Tools run 3x more proccessing plugins in realtime compared to the fastest Mac's, Athlon machines render nearly 3x faster video in Avid DV Xpress.
A sad day for Apple's power users.
Ketracel
[ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Really the big news here was iPhoto and iMac's....woopdy ferkin doo.
The user experience is a valid point, but it seems no longer worth the sacrafice.
Im the last one to say this but Apple has lost it. I witnessed countless mac fans sell up in favor of AMD systems after Mac World NY failed to deliver. MWSF has also failed to deliver. After a little time with XP, i have to say it has come a long way and i dare say, is a pleasure to use.
[quote]
You don't need that 'extra speed' doesn't mean others don't need that too.
If you go to my other topics in the general discussion section you will understand why I am so mad and frustrated.
<hr></blockquote>
Clearly, just because I don't need the speed I don't think that others don't need it. I'm just weary of people who carp on and on about how slow Powermacs are, when they don't even need the power.
I wasn't trying to say that you don't need it, I was really curious, about what you did that needed so much power. Now that you told me I have a better understanding of what Powermacs are slow at. Thanks.
As one of the anylisists on TechTV said
" the mehz war is over. No one cares about what faster than what, now they look at what the computer can do for them". Enter the iMac which can do everything that was showcased today. That's what poeple will be looking at and will help Apple. The mhz doesn't matter as much to Joe Consumer as it once did.
As for us power users, you think Apple re made the iMac, slapped in a G4 and made it a baby tower for less then a tower just to speed bump the towers a couple of notches?
Relax.
Well?
Apple has to show that to the average consumer they are a viable alternative to what everybody else has. You can't do that with design alone. As long as you hand the PC side that argument in their favor they will use it to their marketing advantage.
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Even if Apple was at 1.6ghz+ we'd still face as many obsticals, that willnever change. If we had a 3ghz tower it would be "but i can't run blah blah on the mac".
Deal with it.
That doesn't even make sense. C'mon, if Apple had the upper hand in speed, then gamers would be interested, more professionals would be interested, even geeks would be thinking about Macs. The performance gap hurts Apple, seriously.
Don't get me worng, I'm waiting to buy th fastest thing Apple releases whenver they relase it! But, I think the mhz whine is getting played and old. Lets focus on the positive things our favorite fruit is doing
While this is true, the fact that Motorola's main interest BY A LONG SHOT, is embedded processors. Embedded processors today make less than adequate desktop processors. While Apple can not move to the X86 processor, much of the technology in AMD's chips could be used in a processor designed for OS X. The core for the X86 chips is RISC, meaining uniform instruction size, just like the Power PC.
Apple really needs to get away from Motorola as their supplier. I don't know how, but holy crap, a 1.5 GHz gap is embarrassing. Adobe has optimized their software for, what is it called, SSE, which I guess isn't a efficient as Altivec, but for how long?? Things don't remain static, SSE instruction sets and chip design will progress and any advantage Altivec has will or has become mute.
I don't know, but AMD may not even be interested in Apple's business, but we do know Motorola isn't. Talk about a rock and a hard place.
<strong>If Apple had a 3 GHz Powermac they would be selling a hell of a lot more than they do now!
That doesn't even make sense. C'mon, if Apple had the upper hand in speed, then gamers would be interested, more professionals would be interested, even geeks would be thinking about Macs. The performance gap hurts Apple, seriously.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I really do think that even IF Apple had 3Ghz, that would not convert large numbers of people.
Face it, Windows is SOOOO much of a stronghold, they'd have to completely stop releasing new OS updates and stop making new hardware for 10 years for Apple to catch up, marketshare wise.
<strong>
I really do think that even IF Apple had 3Ghz, that would not convert large numbers of people.
Face it, Windows is SOOOO much of a stronghold, they'd have to completely stop releasing new OS updates and stop making new hardware for 10 years for Apple to catch up, marketshare wise.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It would convert all the professional users in video graphism and multimedia. Busisness men won't care and nor the gamers (much less number of games : and if you love games you should better buy an X box)
<strong>"We don't have the luxury of 2 COMPITENT chip makers fighting over speeds for our platform"
While this is true, the fact that Motorola's main interest BY A LONG SHOT, is embedded processors. Embedded processors today make less than adequate desktop processors. While Apple can not move to the X86 processor, much of the technology in AMD's chips could be used in a processor designed for OS X. The core for the X86 chips is RISC, meaining uniform instruction size, just like the Power PC.
Apple really needs to get away from Motorola as their supplier. I don't know how, but holy crap, a 1.5 GHz gap is embarrassing. Adobe has optimized their software for, what is it called, SSE, which I guess isn't a efficient as Altivec, but for how long?? Things don't remain static, SSE instruction sets and chip design will progress and any advantage Altivec has will or has become mute.
I don't know, but AMD may not even be interested in Apple's business, but we do know Motorola isn't. Talk about a rock and a hard place.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You hit the nail mostly on the head. Except x86 was, is and always has been a CISC design. One of it's biggest annoyances is it's variable instruction size. And why exactly is it that Apple can't move to x86? It would take a MASSIVE contract to get AMD or Intel to develop a custom chip for the Mac, I think that is extrodinarily unlikely.
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: PCMan ]</p>
<strong>
You hit the nail mostly on the head. Except x86 was, is and always has been a CISC design. One of it's biggest annoyances is it's variable instruction size. And why exactly is it that Apple can't move to x86? It would take a MASSIVE contract to get AMD or Intel to develop a custom chip for the Mac, I think that is extrodinarily unlikely.
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: PCMan ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
PCMan you are a negativity spreader! The G4 beats the pants off of any app in say a month when the new BEASTS are released. Suck it.
<strong>
The G4 beats the pants off of any app in say a month when the new BEASTS are released. Suck it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But the question is: "Are we going to see this in our lifetime?"
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
<strong>
But the question is: "Are we going to see this in our lifetime?"
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Leonis ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just by your fücking pc and be on with it. Do your cross platform upgrade and get off the boards. By the way what is it that you do that 867 G4 can't do. Shit or get off the pot.
[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: spicoli ]</p>
[QB]
By the way what is it that you do that 867 G4 can't do. Shit or get off the pot.[QB]<hr></blockquote>
Actually a Mac can do. Just can't do fast