the graphic card of the new i mac is better

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 116
    Seems to me that if Apple is going to offer an iMac model aimed at video editors who need the superdrive, then they should offer an iMac aimed at gamers. Slip a Geforce 3 chipset in it, price it at around $1600, and it's golden.



    I bet that more consumers are interested in a fast video card than a superdrive. Few people actually are interested in burning DVDs. It's just like with the DVD-rom drives that Apple forced on everyone. Jobs says, "look, it's got a DVD drive! You can watch movies on your iMac!!!", consumer says, "but I want to burn CDs on my iMac", Jobs says, "yeah, the iMac has two firewire ports! Isn't it amazing!", consumer says, "dude, I'm gettin' a Dell!".



    Personally, I'd rather be able to buy the fastest iMac without the superdrive for less money. If Apple offered the ability to upgrade the video card, I sure as hell would. It just doesn't make any sense, that Apple constrains themselves by making their consumer models without any choices. Not being upgradeable, that's one thing, but not even being able to choose, that's even worse.
  • Reply 102 of 116
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 103 of 116
    [quote]

    thank you, that's the info I have been asking for.

    <hr></blockquote>



    Hmmm... well I know its not the first time I've posted it. I thought it was in here, but did you read the thread I refered to in the OSX forum?



    [quote]

    low resolutions are no different. there is no driver. performance is poor at all resolutions. a bit better at 640 x 480 I guess.

    6 MB isn't enough for this? then wouldn't 8 MBs fill up quickly with a DVD?

    <hr></blockquote>



    The graphics chip is not aware of more than one frame at a time, so the source is irrelevant. It could be a still frame, a CD-ROM, a DVD, or an endless live video stream. It sounds like they didn't provide any hardware support, which isn't all that surprising because the early YUV support was weird. Some hardware (maybe not ATI's) used a chroma colour to "show through" where you wanted the movie to appear. Sometimes you'd get the movie showing through in places you didn't expect because somebody happened to use that colour...! ATI was an overlay though, I think, but they only support one at a time.



    [quote]

    that could be but I don't understand why a specific "hack" could not be made for the older machines without affecting new machines? why can't the two be completely seperate and then it would be up to developers to support those machines like it is now in OS 9?

    <hr></blockquote>



    I've been trying to think of an analogy for this, and don't have a good one. Here's a not-so-good one: imagine that we're talking about trains. The worldwide standard is two have two rails, and everybody builds trains that run on two rails. Now somebody sells you a train that requires three rails to operate. If you want to use this you have to lay all sorts of extra track, which is expensive, and you have really weird things happen at junctions, causing havoc with the normal trains. The operating system is your infrastructure, and if you have to change it for a specific driver then it affects all drivers and all applications... and probably not for the better.
  • Reply 104 of 116
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]The graphics chip is not aware of more than one frame at a time, so the source is irrelevant. It could be a still frame, a CD-ROM, a DVD, or an endless live video stream. It sounds like they didn't provide any hardware support, which isn't all that surprising because the early YUV support was weird. Some hardware (maybe not ATI's) used a chroma colour to "show through" where you wanted the movie to appear. Sometimes you'd get the movie showing through in places you didn't expect because somebody happened to use that colour...! ATI was an overlay though, I think, but they only support one at a time.<hr></blockquote>



    the chroma key is still used. it's a green. if you make the desktop in OS X that color and open up the dvd player it'll play on the desktop.



    not sure if this occurs on nVidia chips



    [quote]I've been trying to think of an analogy for this, and don't have a good one. Here's a not-so-good one: imagine that we're talking about trains. The worldwide standard is two have two rails, and everybody builds trains that run on two rails. Now somebody sells you a train that requires three rails to operate. If you want to use this you have to lay all sorts of extra track, which is expensive, and you have really weird things happen at junctions, causing havoc with the normal trains. The operating system is your infrastructure, and if you have to change it for a specific driver then it affects all drivers and all applications... and probably not for the better.<hr></blockquote>



    simple. do what people do with O gauge and change the powered drivers from the middle rail to the outer rail thus making the train adapt to the 2 rail rails.
  • Reply 105 of 116
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>simple. do what people do with O gauge and change the powered drivers from the middle rail to the outer rail thus making the train adapt to the 2 rail rails. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yep, that works great except for the million or so poor sods who already have the original trains. Oh well, if they need to run on the new tracks they can buy a new and much improved train.
  • Reply 106 of 116
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,457member
    Well the Rage2/Pro owners may get their wish -- <a href="http://www.thinksecret/"; target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret/</A>; seems to think that ATI has agreed to do OSX drivers for these chipsets. I wouldn't count on very good OpenGL functionality, mind you, but at least it'll be as good as the hardware is capable of.
  • Reply 107 of 116
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Programmer:

    <strong>



    Yep, that works great except for the million or so poor sods who already have the original trains. Oh well, if they need to run on the new tracks they can buy a new and much improved train.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    no reason both the middle and 3rd rail can't both be powered. the train will either use one or the other



    then you can put in a catenary system and then have 3 engines on one track without even needing to implement blocking or something like DCC control
  • Reply 108 of 116
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,457member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>

    no reason both the middle and 3rd rail can't both be powered. the train will either use one or the other



    then you can put in a catenary system and then have 3 engines on one track without even needing to implement blocking or something like DCC control</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Heh, I think I picked the wrong analogy.
  • Reply 109 of 116
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Programmer:

    <strong>





    Heh, I think I picked the wrong analogy. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    nah.. it got the point across. good analogy based on my interests



    so if true is OpenGL going to be hacked and screwed up and hold developers back now? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Reply 110 of 116
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    nah.. it got the point across. good analogy based on my interests



    so if true is OpenGL going to be hacked and screwed up and hold developers back now? :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>





    Well I'm hoping that ATI will do the best they can without requiring any changes to OpenGL or the applications. This may mean lame performance, and lots of missing features... which translates to most applications not working right and doing it slowly when they do work. Programs that don't use advanced techniques or the particular things unsupported on those chips ought to work acceptably, but many (most?) won't. I can't really speak to the possibilities for QuickTime acceleration... it'll probably be erratic (i.e. some resolutions won't be accelerated, and only one movie at a time). What other things work (and how well) depends on what else in Quartz is using hardware acceleration.



    Certainly these chips will never be "first class" citizens... they simply aren't capable of it. Don't expect too much (if ATI even delivers).
  • Reply 111 of 116
    Looks like you guys are discussing a moot issue. ATI is reportedly going to write OS X drivers for these older graphics chips:



    <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com/features/atimacosx.html"; target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com/features/atimacosx.html</a>;



    See, some of you got your panties in a bunch for nothing. Was it worth it?



    Good thing people bitched, though, 'cause I'm sure that's why we're getting these drivers. Apple probably payed ATI off or something so they wouldn't lose face in this "GPU support debacle".



    I personally think anyone who bought one of those G3s that's unsupported with the belief that they would run OS X was being a bit naive. Did any of you REALLY think they would be fine for OS X? REALLY? Between the crap video cards and the dog-slow CPUs, I wouldn't even bother installing OS X on some old 266 Mhz G3 Mac. Only one I'd install OS X on is a B&W tower, and I'd upgrade the video card to a PCI Radeon. Problem solved.



    I'm sure that MOST Bondi blue iMac buyers are not the sort who are going to update to OS X. The typical Mac user runs the same OS that their computer came with for the lifetime of the computer, without even bothering to give it a point update. OS X would be so intimidating for the average Mac user that they would never even get past the installation steps. Seriously, we're talking about the early adopters of the candy-coated iMac, mostly teen-age girls who thought it looked "cute" and had to have one. They don't give a rat's ass about OS X.
  • Reply 112 of 116
    This has gone rediculously off topic. There are multiple threads in OSX about Rage Pro drivers.
  • Reply 113 of 116
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Looks like you guys are discussing a moot issue. ATI is reportedly going to write OS X drivers for these older graphics chips:



    <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com/features/atimacosx.html"; target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com/features/atimacosx.html</a>;



    See, some of you got your panties in a bunch for nothing. Was it worth it?

    .</strong><hr></blockquote>



    nice of you to actually read... we have only been dicussing that article for a few days now
  • Reply 114 of 116
    [quote]You don't have to fling an insult simply because you have not proven your point well.<hr></blockquote>



    I'm sorry, but didn't anyone else laugh their asses off when they read this statement from applenut?!



    ROTFL!!

  • Reply 115 of 116
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Calvin:

    <strong>



    I'm sorry, but didn't anyone else laugh their asses off when they read this statement from applenut?!



    ROTFL!!

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    funny coming from a new member who likely knows nothing.
  • Reply 116 of 116
    Well, I have been reading the boards longer than I've been registered... long enough to know what you're all about man...



    Anyway, it wasn't meant as a real insult or anything - I just thought is was funny that the guy who's the quickest here to toss an insult someone's way made a comment like that.



    Not trying to start a flame war over it - actually I get a kick out of your "whatever. you're full of shit" posts...



    [ 02-02-2002: Message edited by: Calvin ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.