With all of the tech mumbo jumbo there's something that you can't get past, Apple runs OSX (great)and Intel/AMD runs Windows XP (sucks).
I come from the Wintel world, have 3 Wintel machines, the fastest being a 1.8gig, 2 of which I'm running WXP Pro on.
I absolutely love my Powermac 933Mhz running OSX compared to any of the Wintel machines, and with 1.24gig's of RAM the Powermac seems even faster than the 1.8gig machine I have.
I also have a FP iMac and I love using it too.
Yes surely it would be nice for Apple to catch up in the speed dept, but it's the Mac OS that is the shining star.
<strong>Bigc: save your trolling efforts for another forum. I was just joking and pointing out that it DOES change something. That's got nothng to do with me not liking Apple or even getting a Dell. But you should probably get a little chill and some sense of humor.
G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also was only joking, it was only a reference to the Dell commercial "Duude, you're gettin' a Dell". My sense of humor was fine, how's yours?
<strong>With all of the tech mumbo jumbo there's something that you can't get past, Apple runs OSX (great)and Intel/AMD runs Windows XP (sucks).</strong><hr></blockquote>
The AIM alliance is dead. Nothing has happened with it for a LONG time. Everyone has gone back to their own corners.
I agree I would like to see something out of Motorola soon (VERY soon) to make me sleep better... BUT...
The design of the intel, 2.4 or 3 GHz, still makes for lots of bubbles and stalls on most processing demands. I still believe that the PowerPC has them beat here regardless of clock speed. Besides I still also contend that SMP in OS X can whip this piss out of a fast, single processor running WInblows. period.
This may be reiterative, but Mach 3.0 can deal with SMP on a fundamental level which supercedes the need for special MP libraries and code specific to applications (which IS the case with most of Windows.)
in the old days when the two OSes were closer cousins w.r.t. OS architecture, number comparisons were a little more valid. Nowadays, there is just too big a difference to leave measure-of-performance/productivity up to the numbers.
Granted our OS is a little immature yet, but this is more a strong point than a weak point. Reason is this: Macs stack up pretty well AS OF RIGHT NOW against the comparable PC, especially in apps that PCs can't even run ( ) like FCP, etc. What happens when we start to see the advantages of a real OS kernel appear with the advent of better compilers and methods of message passing in Cocoa? We will see OS X starting to make leaps and bounds over what is capable with wintels.
No speed bump is gonna save them then!
And other arguments presented w.r.t. productivity gleaned by the production environment of OS X is qualitative ammo as well in this argument. Simply put, I don't care if they have 100 GHz processors, it is still windows and hence still on the end of my 10 foot pole.
Seriously, Motorola will never catch up to Intel or AMD. Never. The best they will do is provide small, incremental upgrades to the G4 which hopefully keep it within 2-4 years of x86 technology. That's the most we can ever hope for.
Apple's fate is tied to a company that just doesn't care. Motorola cannot turn the desktop PPC line into a big moneymaker no matter how bad-ass of a chip they offer Apple...it comes down to Apple's market share, end of story.
Until Apple's market share grows substantially, motorola will not put in the effort to fab competitive PPC chips. And until moto fabs a competitive PPC chip, Apple's market share will not grow.
It's like watching Rome fall to the northern barbarian hordes.
Seriously, Motorola will never catch up to Intel or AMD. Never. The best they will do is provide small, incremental upgrades to the G4 which hopefully keep it within 2-4 years of x86 technology. That's the most we can ever hope for.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What? C'mon, the G4 increases by 133 MHz every 6 months or so. These are massive speed increases! Why in 2 years, we'll be at a blazing 1.533GHz!
I don't think its as bad as it seems. I read a few months back that IBM had developed a new process that speeds up transistors to switch at 200 +GHz. In the article, the IBM manager mentioned that the PowerPC chips that will benifit from the new process go into things such as Apple computers. I don't remember the time frame when the process would be ready but I think it was less than 2 years. Of course, if this new process doesn't fly, then I agree that Motorola will never catch up.
Well, at least in a few months, we'll have a significantly faster OS on top of DDR and a G4 running around 1.4 or 1.6GHz. Should be a far better series of speed increases than the dinky 133MHz ones that we have been suffering through for the last few years.
OSX and its compliment of apps run pretty damn well on the current line of G4s, sure a speed bump would be greatly appreciated but I think Apples main problem is its actual market share, and here I put this down to poor advertising.
Over here we rarely get any sort of Apple advertising, the occasional TV ad when a new product comes out (ie. FP iMac) so the masses rarely get exposed to the world of Mac.
Even PC superstores here may only stock a few Macs and even then the sales assistants know nothing about them so they steer customers straight to the wintel product (possibly bigger profit margins here too) and quoting mega sppeds and other bullshit!
Well, at least in a few months, we'll have a significantly faster OS on top of DDR and a G4 running around 1.4 or 1.6GHz. Should be a far better series of speed increases than the dinky 133MHz ones that we have been suffering through for the last few years.<hr></blockquote>
That is what nearly everybody was pragmatically expecting for MW SF Jan 2002 (except the OS part). Hasn't happened yet though. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
I really hope Apple can pull it out of the bag (ATA133 would be a start). Currently I have money earning interest in my account rather than theirs. I hope that will change by NY.
Comments
RSN!
RSN!
I come from the Wintel world, have 3 Wintel machines, the fastest being a 1.8gig, 2 of which I'm running WXP Pro on.
I absolutely love my Powermac 933Mhz running OSX compared to any of the Wintel machines, and with 1.24gig's of RAM the Powermac seems even faster than the 1.8gig machine I have.
I also have a FP iMac and I love using it too.
Yes surely it would be nice for Apple to catch up in the speed dept, but it's the Mac OS that is the shining star.
<strong>Bigc: save your trolling efforts for another forum. I was just joking and pointing out that it DOES change something. That's got nothng to do with me not liking Apple or even getting a Dell. But you should probably get a little chill and some sense of humor.
G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also was only joking, it was only a reference to the Dell commercial "Duude, you're gettin' a Dell". My sense of humor was fine, how's yours?
Sorry about that.
G-News
should pretend that Intel has a 10GHz chip out right now, instead of just trying to beat what they've really got now.
Let's hope the gap closes. A good way to do this, is if they shoot for the stars.
<strong>With all of the tech mumbo jumbo there's something that you can't get past, Apple runs OSX (great)and Intel/AMD runs Windows XP (sucks).</strong><hr></blockquote>
...or linux
I agree I would like to see something out of Motorola soon (VERY soon) to make me sleep better... BUT...
The design of the intel, 2.4 or 3 GHz, still makes for lots of bubbles and stalls on most processing demands. I still believe that the PowerPC has them beat here regardless of clock speed. Besides I still also contend that SMP in OS X can whip this piss out of a fast, single processor running WInblows. period.
This may be reiterative, but Mach 3.0 can deal with SMP on a fundamental level which supercedes the need for special MP libraries and code specific to applications (which IS the case with most of Windows.)
in the old days when the two OSes were closer cousins w.r.t. OS architecture, number comparisons were a little more valid. Nowadays, there is just too big a difference to leave measure-of-performance/productivity up to the numbers.
Granted our OS is a little immature yet, but this is more a strong point than a weak point. Reason is this: Macs stack up pretty well AS OF RIGHT NOW against the comparable PC, especially in apps that PCs can't even run (
No speed bump is gonna save them then!
And other arguments presented w.r.t. productivity gleaned by the production environment of OS X is qualitative ammo as well in this argument. Simply put, I don't care if they have 100 GHz processors, it is still windows and hence still on the end of my 10 foot pole.
<strong>Misunderstandings then, we don't get that ad here, thus I didn't know it.
Sorry about that.
G-News</strong><hr></blockquote>
No problem, but I should have looked to see you were in Confoederatio Helvetica, I wouldn't have said it then.
Seriously, Motorola will never catch up to Intel or AMD. Never. The best they will do is provide small, incremental upgrades to the G4 which hopefully keep it within 2-4 years of x86 technology. That's the most we can ever hope for.
Apple's fate is tied to a company that just doesn't care. Motorola cannot turn the desktop PPC line into a big moneymaker no matter how bad-ass of a chip they offer Apple...it comes down to Apple's market share, end of story.
Until Apple's market share grows substantially, motorola will not put in the effort to fab competitive PPC chips. And until moto fabs a competitive PPC chip, Apple's market share will not grow.
It's like watching Rome fall to the northern barbarian hordes.
<strong>Game over, man!
Seriously, Motorola will never catch up to Intel or AMD. Never. The best they will do is provide small, incremental upgrades to the G4 which hopefully keep it within 2-4 years of x86 technology. That's the most we can ever hope for.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What? C'mon, the G4 increases by 133 MHz every 6 months or so. These are massive speed increases! Why in 2 years, we'll be at a blazing 1.533GHz!
I don't think its as bad as it seems. I read a few months back that IBM had developed a new process that speeds up transistors to switch at 200 +GHz. In the article, the IBM manager mentioned that the PowerPC chips that will benifit from the new process go into things such as Apple computers. I don't remember the time frame when the process would be ready but I think it was less than 2 years. Of course, if this new process doesn't fly, then I agree that Motorola will never catch up.
Well, at least in a few months, we'll have a significantly faster OS on top of DDR and a G4 running around 1.4 or 1.6GHz. Should be a far better series of speed increases than the dinky 133MHz ones that we have been suffering through for the last few years.
Over here we rarely get any sort of Apple advertising, the occasional TV ad when a new product comes out (ie. FP iMac) so the masses rarely get exposed to the world of Mac.
Even PC superstores here may only stock a few Macs and even then the sales assistants know nothing about them so they steer customers straight to the wintel product (possibly bigger profit margins here too) and quoting mega sppeds and other bullshit!
So c'mon Apple, get your advertising finger out!
*sorry, maybe wrong forum for his rant!*
Well, at least in a few months, we'll have a significantly faster OS on top of DDR and a G4 running around 1.4 or 1.6GHz. Should be a far better series of speed increases than the dinky 133MHz ones that we have been suffering through for the last few years.<hr></blockquote>
That is what nearly everybody was pragmatically expecting for MW SF Jan 2002 (except the OS part). Hasn't happened yet though. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
I really hope Apple can pull it out of the bag (ATA133 would be a start). Currently I have money earning interest in my account rather than theirs. I hope that will change by NY.
[ 05-10-2002: Message edited by: DaveLee ]</p>