"The future of PowerMac is closer than you think".
Unfortunately it might be further away than we might dare to hope: VIA at the Computex 2002 show in Taipei is discussing plans to implement and support a 667 MHz Front Side Bus for use with the upcoming (sometime in 2003) Prescott P4 CPU, which will be manufactured at 90 nanometers and by launch time should be well able to exceed 3 GHz. :eek:
Where does all this leave future PowerMacs by that time? <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I don't think Apple has really slowed down the rate at which it introduces dramatically new hardware and technologies. I tend to think that it is our perception that has changed over the past few years. Why? Because on the other side of the barricade things have started to evolve MUCH more rapidly. Apple used to be able to fight head to head with Intel for the performance crown. But they simply can't beat what has come from the harsh competition between Intel and AMD. As a result of this, the whole PC hardware sector has started to evolve more rapidly (think of the different RAM technologies and mobos that each architechture has succesfully exploited), and Apple found itself falling inexhorably behind.
You can whine or draw your swords to defend Apple til your last breath, but this is a fact: the lack of competition in the Macintosh market is harming the Mac experience as a whole. Can you imagine IBM competing with Moto for the same market-share instead of dividing the cake between the 2 of them?
To conclude, by the time the scenario I described above will take place we'll be stuck with a pitiful hardware platform, maybe a little better than what we have now, but I don't see dramatic performance leaps anytime soon. There is the future of the PowerMac. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> I'd love to be proved wrong though...
It's getting ugly. And it doesn't look like it's going to get any better this year, it may actually get bad enough to start doing irrepairable damage to their market position.
Ok, lets have a look at the facts that we do know:
Apple is selling machines equipped with G4s at cheaper and cheaper prices, and it is in all of apple's machines apart from the iBook and the CRT iMac.
Rebates have been available for ages now and they end near the time of the expo. This is only a several weeks away.
Rumours of the G5 have been circulating since last year, claiming speeds of up to 2Ghz.
The G4 is an old processor and the power line is due for a new generation. We all suspected San Francisco to be it, but we got the LCD iMac that we were all more or less suprised with. We were also suprised with the Xserve....
The motherboard apple uses in its current line is due for a massive overhaul, not just an update, but a competely new design and new technology.
Wouldn't Mac World New York be the best oppertunaty to get the first 64bit chip out on the market? I know there are ones out now, but not in the amount that apple would sell them and what they would be used for. Wouldn't this be one of those times apple would innovate?
Also, isn't it the 25 anniversary of apple this MW?
[quote]I don't think Apple has really slowed down the rate at which it introduces dramatically new hardware and technologies. I tend to think that it is our perception that has changed over the past few years. Why? Because on the other side of the barricade things have started to evolve MUCH more rapidly. Apple used to be able to fight head to head with Intel for the performance crown. But they simply can't beat what has come from the harsh competition between Intel and AMD. As a result of this, the whole PC hardware sector has started to evolve more rapidly (think of the different RAM technologies and mobos that each architechture has succesfully exploited), and Apple found itself falling inexhorably behind.
You can whine or draw your swords to defend Apple til your last breath, but this is a fact: the lack of competition in the Macintosh market is harming the Mac experience as a whole. Can you imagine IBM competing with Moto for the same market-share instead of dividing the cake between the 2 of them?
<hr></blockquote>
I am sorry to say, I fully agree!! The Intel-AMD cat fight, has been the worst thing to ever happen to Apple.
Our only hope for the future of Apple is that they have an active role in the desktop PowerPC design. This means, and the purists will crucify me for saying this, that a powerPC needs to be designed with high MHz in mind and not just with the help of a smalled process. The pipeline needs to get big. Huge! Enormous! Maybe even up to 20 stages! That means better branch prediction. I heard that IBM was designing BPUs that used some fancy AI for pranch prediction and recovery. Also to compensate for the long pipeline like i said before, more execution units. This may make the processor huge. But thats what small processes are for.
Just to add more fuel to the fire, what about this--from THG's Computex coverage:
[quote]Further highlights were the DDR 400 motherboards A7V8X [that's Asus, a Big Player, for those not familiar with the PC mobo biz] with VIA´s KT400 and Serial ATA, and A7N8A with NVIDIA Crush 18G and MCP2. The "G" of the "18G" stands for Graphics. There's also a version without an integrated graphics chip, namely the Crush 18 D (Discrete). A K8 board with AMD 8111 and 8151 was also shown, of course. <hr></blockquote>
I disagree. It is sharply and cruelly exposed compared to a 2.1 gig Athlon Xp. 1 fpu vs 3 fpu. Do the math. (AMD's high end vs Apple's low end. AMD's top end? Priced cheaper. And you get more DDR ram, bigger hard drive and a flaming monitor...)
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Great, you're comparing high end Athlons to low end G4s. How does this contradict what I said? Additionally, what is your basis for price? Are you comparing the price of the chip or the price of the system?
<strong> [quote]
"and the dual CPU strategy is keeping them afloat at the high end."
I don't think so. Any 3D x86 workstation beats the snot out of the dual 1 gig G4. Show me one bench mark where a dual G4 takes a dual Athlon 2.1 Xp multiprocessor or single (for that matter) pro' system? Then there's price. Heh. I know. It's not funny.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, we know that Athlons do well at 3D, which represents probably less that 1% of the professional market. I could easily turn this around and ask you about Photoshop, Video Editing, DVD encoding, etc. However, just to entertain you, let's stick to the much smaller 3D market.
A very quick search produced the following results:
Yes, the newer Athlons and P4s will do a little better. Still, I don't believe I ever claimed the dual G4s were smoking the competition in this area, did I? Instead, I claimed that the dual G4 strategy is keeping Apple afloat. Additionally, I've even provided evidence as such in your market niche of choice.
[quote]<strong>
"No, Apple is not the the performance leader it once was."
No. It certainly isn't. No DDR, ancient bus, same G3 with bells on processor and 'power'Mac prices that have remained static and way over priced when most other PC makers have expandable and powerful towers in most price brackets.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Blah, blah, blah... Nobody outside of forums like this really cares about the specs. Most professionals care about results. If the desired specs provides the desired results, thats great. Otherwise, you're just restating the obvious.
[quote]<strong>
If Steve Jobs wants to liken Apple to Mercedes or BMW, then he better drop in the appropriate 'engine' into a 'power'Mac to keep spouting those kinda analogies.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you're going to use analogies, you should at least understand them. You can put a fast engine in Ford Mustang. At the end of the day, it's still a Ford and not a Mercedes. If 0 to 60 is the only thing that matters to you, then buy the Ford. If the superior feel of the car and it's handling matters to you, then you can move up to the Mercedes. The same is true with Macs. If all things were equal (meaning the operating system), we'd all be buying Athlons and P4s. For most Mac users, they prefer the operating system. I also find it funny how you talk about "speed", but make not mention of workflow. I'd like to hear your argument for speed to a Mac based pre-press workshop. As they show you advanced Applescripts that have no equivalent on the PC side in terms of workflow and automation, you'd be laughed out of the building.
[quote]<strong>
"but Apple isn't exactly going out of business due to performance issues as some people here seem to suggest."
Not anytime soon with $4 billion or so in the bank. Yeah, yeah. It buys them time. Great OS, nice iApps. Right now, Apple make a compelling software startup. Hardware company? Great plastics. Poor out of date specs. If the 'new' imac was beige apple would be in trouble. The spec list would look overpriced for what it is.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
At what point do you actually start to believe crap like this? People like you have been predicting Apple's demise for the past 20 years. At what point will you wake up and realize they're not going out of business and that they do have a significant market niche that will easily sustain the company for years to come? You seem to attribute Apple's existence to gimmicks like plastic cases, etc. Really, you're line of reasoning grows tiresome.
[quote]<strong>
But if they want to convince many of those 95% Wintel owners to switch...'X' and free software and posey plastic swivelling gimmicks aint going to do it alone. It may stem the market share bleed...but for how long? I know most of the people I talk to about the Mac's advantages suddenly 'glaze' over when they look at the clock speed. Real or perceived (and anybody who thinks a 900ish G4 can take a 2.1 XP Athlon needs help...) the current 'power'Macs are an out of date and pricey joke.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, let's talk about the masses. First, I agree with you that iApps, as great as they are, are not enough to win over the masses. In terms of speed, anything more than a 1GHZ PIII is overkill for 90% of the masses. Yes, there are the hard core gamers and the professional 3D modelers that need more, but they are by far the minority. The masses buy computers based on familiarity. If 95% of the masses use PCs at work, then 95% of the masses will likely buy a PC for the home. The same goes for Macs. It's extremely difficult to get people to switch platforms. I've seen plenty of people switch to Macs, but only because they new it was "safe" to do that as they knew I would provide free tech support if needed, etc. or possibly show them where to find a specialty application of some sort, etc. Apple clearly has an uphill battle here. However, Mac OS X is becoming the premiere development platform for many. My brother (a PC developer) recently attended a major Java conference in California as he has in the past few years. This year, he said it was like being at a Mac expo (even though he's never been to one). Many Linux/Unix developer types have been moving over to the Mac because of Mac OS X. This is a very positive sign for the future of the platform.
[quote]<strong>
With Matsu on this.
"No, but they're slowly bleeding market-share through a combination of pricing and performance issues. Don't just look at Steve's tenure, think in terms of the last 18 years. The trend is a very slow but definite decline in market-share. They may be beginning a slow upswing, but without better prices (on better performance) it won't last."
Agreed.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't disagree with this statement, but I fail to see the significance of it. The marketplace was quite different 18 years ago. Apple's bread and butter was the Apple ][ , not the Mac. There were other players that have gone under completely such as Atari, Comadore, TRS-80 (Tandy/Radio Shack), etc. Further, back then, anything IBM did was a guaranteed success and standard in the business world. My point is that times have changed and Apple has maintained a healthy niche over the past 10 years. Further, I see no indication this trend is likely to change in the next 10 years. If anything, there is likely to be increased fallout over MS market monopolization and unfair business practices. In fact, the well known consumer advocate, Ralph Nader is now pushing for a change in the way Government purchases computer equipment in a way that will favor alternative operating systems. In short MS is at the top right now. They have no where to go but to lose marketshare eventually. If not to Apple, then to someone else. Nobody stays the dominant player forever.
[quote]<strong>
PS. Apple will have to do something about it soon given the 'Eighth generation' AMD chip is due to ship this later this year/early next year. On hypertransport. Having been to AMD's website...and seen how compelling, open and positive they are regarding their future processor strategies...I hope Apple have something better than a p*ss poor dual 1.2 G4 on p*ss poor DDR 266 memory.
7500. Soon. That's my bit for future hardware.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm hoping (but not expecting) more than dual 1.2 ghz G4s from Apple this summer as well. Unlike you, I don't think it will make them or break them either way.
"Great, you're comparing high end Athlons to low end G4s."
Er...nope. A single 'high end' Athlon is much, much cheaper than a low end G4. Wanna go high end? How about a dual Athlon XP?
In a competitive market place (!) consumers make choices based on cost and performance.
"How does this contradict what I said?"
(He's on Apple's pay roll folks...)
"Additionally, what is your basis for price? Are you comparing the price of the chip or the price of the system?"
I'll say it slowly, so you can understand, P-C W-O-R-L-D.
2.1 XP Athlon, 512 meg DDR, Geforce 4, 17 inch monitor, 80 gig hard drive...etc
£1, 200 inc Vat. Apple's 800mhz G4 is priced higher than that without including VAT. No monitor. No level 3 cache Ancient bus, ancient memory yadda a yadda...smaller ram and hard drive...
"Dah, well I don't know TC...it looks like Apple's keeping themselves a float here..."
...and there's more...
"and the dual CPU strategy is keeping them afloat at the high end."
Bismillah, NO!
"Yes, we know that Athlons do well at 3D, which represents probably less that 1% of the professional market. I could easily turn this around and ask you about Photoshop, Video Editing, DVD encoding, etc. However, just to entertain ((still smiling...)) you, let's stick to the much smaller 3D market."
Okay. I'll give you points for trying. But where are those 'high end' dual Athlon scores? Unless the benches you mentioned on the 'not the top end x86 processors' were dual processors?
You're not comparing competitive spec. Put a 2.1 XP Athlon (which I found with a 'quick search' via a walk into my local 'Where in the World' store) and put it against its nearest tower price match. Gee, it's not my fault x86 can price their 'top end' lower than Apple's 'low end'. That makes the comparison more valid to me. Disagree all you want.
And just how is any company going to grow market share by offering lower specs bigger price than a competing companys hi-end lower price?
But you'll have more chance of convincing Apple you need a PR job with them than convincing me that Apple are competitive.
"Yes, the newer Athlons and P4s will do a little better."
A 2.1 Xp does a little better than a 800mhz G4?
You weren't comparing the most recent. And yeah. For less than half the price? That's not bad IS IT?
"Still, I don't believe I ever claimed the dual G4s were smoking the competition in this area, did I?"
Not unless you want to be laughed at
"Instead, I claimed that the dual G4 strategy is keeping Apple afloat."
Sure. Like a ship that's letting in water. (Right now, 'power'Mac line is Apple's Titanic...along came an x86 iceberg and oops...) See Matsu's posts again. Read slowly. It may help.
"Additionally, I've even provided evidence as such in your market niche of choice."
Not just 'my choice.' It's also performance in general. And you didn't show benches of the latest. A machine costing over twice as much as the 'PC World' spec. A 'whole' system. Yep. As sold in...er...shops...
((What was the resolution of that Cinbench score on the Mac? Try as I might, I couldn't find. Macworld usually do the 600ish by 400ish thing. That would make a difference...))
"Blah, blah, blah..."
You're not really Steve Jobs are you? I sense a bid of irritation at your insubordinate Lemon...
"Nobody outside of forums like this really cares about the specs."
Well, that's 'confirmed'. This guy IS Steve Jobs. Nobody cares about specs, price or competition. If we don't care about ancient Rage cards being used...then hell, we can charge as much as we like. That's why Apple lost p*ssed away their 'in the teens' market share? Why 'power'Macs are setting sales records? Are selling more upon more each sucessive quarter. Perhaps we can forgive Apple UK's Mark Rogers 'apologetic' tone in this week's Macuser. He doesn't seem the dual 1 gig can cut it and he's not saying they are compelling upgrades. Heck, even Macuser have noticed that Macs are running on antiquainted tech'. Maybe that's saying something.
Well, maybe a professional like me cares about paying thousands for year old plus technology?
Point is. You can get a decent PC Tower for about a grand that will convincingly out perform Apple's 'low end'. Apple can't hack a decent tower for less than £1,500. That's ridiculous.
"Most professionals care about results."
"restating the obvious."
Yep.
'Mustang?' Shakes head. Okay. You don't get it.
I wouldn't insult the 'power'Mac by saying 'Focus' but it more like a 'Puma'. It's dying to be a sports car but fails miserably.
How about a BMW chass' with 1.4 Focus engine..?
"At what point do you actually start to believe crap like this?"
At the same 'point' you believe 'crap' like Apple are selling competitive towers.
At the point we say: take away apple's over priced plastic imac from the sales figures...and the sales and apple's true condition become 'clearly' exposed. Apple can't sell a decent tower for less than £1,500.
"People like you have been predicting Apple's demise for the past 20 years."
No I haven't.
"At what point will you wake up and realize they're not going out of business"
If they keep selling out of date specs on the towers. They'll lose the pro market they need to surive. You may highlight 'cycles' but the 'power'Mac is a lame duck on its menopause.
It needs that 7500 quick.
"Really, you're line of reasoning grows tiresome."
What? Like Apple apologetics doesn't? Okay, you think a £2, 500 system is competitive with a machine that costs £1,200. Clearly. There's no arguing with you. Or for £800 more we can make the XP 'more competitive' with Apple's dual 1 gig...by making it a dual 2.1 gig Xp.
"Okay, let's talk about the masses. First, I agree with you that iApps, as great as they are, are not enough to win over the masses. In terms of speed, anything more than a 1GHZ PIII is overkill for 90% of the masses."
No it isn't. Faster games. Faster apps. Faster everything. You're a /performance/mhz luddite.
"It's extremely difficult to get people to switch platforms."
So difficult that Apple trimmed themselves down to 3% market share. Really easy to get people to change platform.
'Blah, blah, blah'.
Hey. We're talking hardware here. So I've snipped the 'X' is 'premiere' stuff. We know that already.
"I fail to see the significance of it."
"Apple has maintained a healthy niche over the past 10 years."
So healthy, in fact that 'tower' sales are shrinking, their combined lap top sales look okay (and these ARE superb designs...) and the iPod is already falling away...and the iMac? It's holding apple 'afloat'. They'd better hope demand for it doesn't 'drop off'.
So healthy that they can't afford too many 'cubes.'
A machine that exposed Apple's 'ultimate' market philosophy for what it is. Style. Cheap tech/tack and premium price.
"Further"
Snip.
"I'm hoping (but not expecting) more than dual 1.2 ghz G4s from Apple this summer as well."
Good for you.
"Unlike you, I don't think it will make them or break them either way."
I didn't say dual 1.2 'towers' will 'break' them.
"Steve"
Jobs?
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Ahhhhhhh shaddddawwwwwp to the rest o' ya. Me an' stevie boy are having a fate.
Yeeesh. Can't some of you take protracted whining? Haven't you ever heard the beautiful sound of parrots singing?
PPS. Junk mail came through as I type this.
'Medion' laptop. 2 gig lap top. 32 meg Ati Radeon mobility. Combo-drive. 256 megs. Firewire et al. 14.1 inch display. £1,200. Apple's ibook doesn't compete. And the Medion is far from ugly.
I thought hijacking every FH thread to gripe about Apple's price/performance was being discouraged...
Anywho both the dreamers and whiners have the same basic disorder....hardware design as a form of wish fulfillment. Whether it is "Apple just has to cut prices" or "Apple just has to release some revolutionary G5 uberbox", the expectation is that Steve can snap his fingers and this will happen. This is like some screwed up 12 step situation. Steve is not God and the True Believers and the Athiests both need to get over it.
"You know between the Lemon, the Dog and myself, this is some of the best Apple frustration release therapy I've had in a long time."
Speaking for myself, the G5 thing is getting almost sexual...
Lemon Bon Bon </strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm... I thought the Athlon thing was sexual to you.
Anyway, it seems as though a rational discussion is wasted on you. First you talk about performance issues, I address then, then you change the focus to price, etc. It's not very likely that Apple will ever be price competitive with the cheapest PCs across the board. Apple is not just a hardware vendor of generic components.
I don't think I've ever made any grand statements about Apple or the G4 line that I cannot back up. When I suggest that things aren't as bad as you make them out to be, you accuse me of being on Apple's payroll. Very sad. I can only image how insecure you must be. It must be difficult for you to have switched to the PC, yet long for the Mac. Fortunately, I don't have to choose, I have both PCs and Macs.
Anyway, gone on with the Doom and Gloom (Macs are doomed) if you wish. Whether you believe it or not, Apple serves it's markets well. You mention declines of marketshare without discussing any analysis on it. For example, if the "business" market grows faster than the "publishing" market, you jump to conclusions such as people are abandoning their Macs. You've also never discussed product life cycles, the average age of PCs vs. Macs in use, etc. All of these issues are relevant when discussing marketshare, at least in terms of a user base. Of course, you don't seem interested in details such as this, do you?
What I don't understand is the motivation behind your madness. You harbor such a negative attitude. If you are so unhappy with Apple and the products they offer, why don't you just move on with your life and be done with it? You've switched to the PC platform, and appear to be unhappy with it (why else would you be hanging out here?). If life is so good with your Athlon, they why bother coming back here and dreaming about new Mac hardware? Really, there's nothing worse than a "wannabe". Mr. Lemon Bon Bon is a "wannabe" Mac user. How very sad.
"Hmmm... I thought the Athlon thing was sexual to you."
You need to shrink if I ever gave you that impression!
"You harbor such a negative attitude. "
That's missing the point of many of my posts.
Bar the actual spec/price ratio (which HAS got worse over the years...) I don't have a 'negative' Apple attitude. I swear to god they're a software company...
Asides from the out of date specs...they're gggrrrrrrrrrreat!
X= yep.
Software= yep.
Style= yep.
Ease of use= yep.
Design= yep.
Specs= nope.
Price= nope.
"You've switched to the PC platform, and appear to be unhappy with it (why else would you be hanging out here?).
So I can beat up misguided Apple apologists such as your 'good' self of course
Or, doh! Could it be Mac latency?
"If life is so good with your Athlon, they why bother coming back here and dreaming about new Mac hardware?"
Did I say it was 'good'? A choice of being screwed by the x86 or PPC? Call me 'cheap' but the Athlon was a cheaper and faster 'lay'.
"Really, there's nothing worse than a "wannabe". Mr. Lemon Bon Bon is a "wannabe" Mac user. How very sad."
Y'know. Lemon Bon Bon IS a Mac guy at heart. That doesn't make the 'power'Macs competitive!
Details? Do you really(!) want me to post PC prices and specs? (Nah.) I gave you the AMD spec I saw with my own eyes in good ol' English pounds. x86 beats PPC down on price and performance.
You have yet to counter that argument. And that's what the other 95% seem to go on. Until Apple fix that, your blustering is null and void. Apple want marketshare? They're gonna have to perform better on specs.
It's the line in the sand they've got to cross. If they don't. Consumers won't. Not enough to get them to 'double' their market share.
Okay. You buy your 1.2 dual out of date thing. I'll buy the 7500 when it turns up early next year. For what it's worth, I think the 7500 will reduce the debt. But I've got a sneaky feeling that it won't be enough for Apple.
LBB, Matsu, Dog, stop hijacking FH threads. Take your "frustration therapy" where it's topical. If that has to be at AI, keep it in one thread in General Discussion. Leave FH to discussion of Future (Apple) Hardware.
Comments
Unfortunately it might be further away than we might dare to hope: VIA at the Computex 2002 show in Taipei is discussing plans to implement and support a 667 MHz Front Side Bus for use with the upcoming (sometime in 2003) Prescott P4 CPU, which will be manufactured at 90 nanometers and by launch time should be well able to exceed 3 GHz. :eek:
Where does all this leave future PowerMacs by that time? <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I don't think Apple has really slowed down the rate at which it introduces dramatically new hardware and technologies. I tend to think that it is our perception that has changed over the past few years. Why? Because on the other side of the barricade things have started to evolve MUCH more rapidly. Apple used to be able to fight head to head with Intel for the performance crown. But they simply can't beat what has come from the harsh competition between Intel and AMD. As a result of this, the whole PC hardware sector has started to evolve more rapidly (think of the different RAM technologies and mobos that each architechture has succesfully exploited), and Apple found itself falling inexhorably behind.
You can whine or draw your swords to defend Apple til your last breath, but this is a fact: the lack of competition in the Macintosh market is harming the Mac experience as a whole. Can you imagine IBM competing with Moto for the same market-share instead of dividing the cake between the 2 of them?
To conclude, by the time the scenario I described above will take place we'll be stuck with a pitiful hardware platform, maybe a little better than what we have now, but I don't see dramatic performance leaps anytime soon. There is the future of the PowerMac. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> I'd love to be proved wrong though...
ZoSo
Apple is selling machines equipped with G4s at cheaper and cheaper prices, and it is in all of apple's machines apart from the iBook and the CRT iMac.
Rebates have been available for ages now and they end near the time of the expo. This is only a several weeks away.
Rumours of the G5 have been circulating since last year, claiming speeds of up to 2Ghz.
The G4 is an old processor and the power line is due for a new generation. We all suspected San Francisco to be it, but we got the LCD iMac that we were all more or less suprised with. We were also suprised with the Xserve....
The motherboard apple uses in its current line is due for a massive overhaul, not just an update, but a competely new design and new technology.
Wouldn't Mac World New York be the best oppertunaty to get the first 64bit chip out on the market? I know there are ones out now, but not in the amount that apple would sell them and what they would be used for. Wouldn't this be one of those times apple would innovate?
Also, isn't it the 25 anniversary of apple this MW?
You can whine or draw your swords to defend Apple til your last breath, but this is a fact: the lack of competition in the Macintosh market is harming the Mac experience as a whole. Can you imagine IBM competing with Moto for the same market-share instead of dividing the cake between the 2 of them?
<hr></blockquote>
I am sorry to say, I fully agree!! The Intel-AMD cat fight, has been the worst thing to ever happen to Apple.
[quote]Further highlights were the DDR 400 motherboards A7V8X [that's Asus, a Big Player, for those not familiar with the PC mobo biz] with VIA´s KT400 and Serial ATA, and A7N8A with NVIDIA Crush 18G and MCP2. The "G" of the "18G" stands for Graphics. There's also a version without an integrated graphics chip, namely the Crush 18 D (Discrete). A K8 board with AMD 8111 and 8151 was also shown, of course. <hr></blockquote>
ZoSo
<strong>"The G4 is capable at the low end"
I disagree. It is sharply and cruelly exposed compared to a 2.1 gig Athlon Xp. 1 fpu vs 3 fpu. Do the math. (AMD's high end vs Apple's low end. AMD's top end? Priced cheaper. And you get more DDR ram, bigger hard drive and a flaming monitor...)
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Great, you're comparing high end Athlons to low end G4s. How does this contradict what I said? Additionally, what is your basis for price? Are you comparing the price of the chip or the price of the system?
<strong> [quote]
"and the dual CPU strategy is keeping them afloat at the high end."
I don't think so. Any 3D x86 workstation beats the snot out of the dual 1 gig G4. Show me one bench mark where a dual G4 takes a dual Athlon 2.1 Xp multiprocessor or single (for that matter) pro' system? Then there's price. Heh. I know. It's not funny.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, we know that Athlons do well at 3D, which represents probably less that 1% of the professional market. I could easily turn this around and ask you about Photoshop, Video Editing, DVD encoding, etc. However, just to entertain you, let's stick to the much smaller 3D market.
A very quick search produced the following results:
Cinebench (from Cinema 4D)
<a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011009/athlonxp-10.html#cinema4d"; target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011009/athlonxp-10.html#cinema4d</a>;
Athlon XP 1800+ Score: 21.31
P4 2000 Score: 19.16
<a href="http://www.macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/all/master_list_9.html"; target="_blank">http://www.macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/all/master_list_9.html</a>;
Dual G4 1GHZ Score: 21.77 (higher is better)
Yes, the newer Athlons and P4s will do a little better. Still, I don't believe I ever claimed the dual G4s were smoking the competition in this area, did I? Instead, I claimed that the dual G4 strategy is keeping Apple afloat. Additionally, I've even provided evidence as such in your market niche of choice.
[quote]<strong>
"No, Apple is not the the performance leader it once was."
No. It certainly isn't. No DDR, ancient bus, same G3 with bells on processor and 'power'Mac prices that have remained static and way over priced when most other PC makers have expandable and powerful towers in most price brackets.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Blah, blah, blah... Nobody outside of forums like this really cares about the specs. Most professionals care about results. If the desired specs provides the desired results, thats great. Otherwise, you're just restating the obvious.
[quote]<strong>
If Steve Jobs wants to liken Apple to Mercedes or BMW, then he better drop in the appropriate 'engine' into a 'power'Mac to keep spouting those kinda analogies.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If you're going to use analogies, you should at least understand them. You can put a fast engine in Ford Mustang. At the end of the day, it's still a Ford and not a Mercedes. If 0 to 60 is the only thing that matters to you, then buy the Ford. If the superior feel of the car and it's handling matters to you, then you can move up to the Mercedes. The same is true with Macs. If all things were equal (meaning the operating system), we'd all be buying Athlons and P4s. For most Mac users, they prefer the operating system. I also find it funny how you talk about "speed", but make not mention of workflow. I'd like to hear your argument for speed to a Mac based pre-press workshop. As they show you advanced Applescripts that have no equivalent on the PC side in terms of workflow and automation, you'd be laughed out of the building.
[quote]<strong>
"but Apple isn't exactly going out of business due to performance issues as some people here seem to suggest."
Not anytime soon with $4 billion or so in the bank. Yeah, yeah. It buys them time. Great OS, nice iApps. Right now, Apple make a compelling software startup. Hardware company? Great plastics. Poor out of date specs. If the 'new' imac was beige apple would be in trouble. The spec list would look overpriced for what it is.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
At what point do you actually start to believe crap like this? People like you have been predicting Apple's demise for the past 20 years. At what point will you wake up and realize they're not going out of business and that they do have a significant market niche that will easily sustain the company for years to come? You seem to attribute Apple's existence to gimmicks like plastic cases, etc. Really, you're line of reasoning grows tiresome.
[quote]<strong>
But if they want to convince many of those 95% Wintel owners to switch...'X' and free software and posey plastic swivelling gimmicks aint going to do it alone. It may stem the market share bleed...but for how long? I know most of the people I talk to about the Mac's advantages suddenly 'glaze' over when they look at the clock speed. Real or perceived (and anybody who thinks a 900ish G4 can take a 2.1 XP Athlon needs help...) the current 'power'Macs are an out of date and pricey joke.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, let's talk about the masses. First, I agree with you that iApps, as great as they are, are not enough to win over the masses. In terms of speed, anything more than a 1GHZ PIII is overkill for 90% of the masses. Yes, there are the hard core gamers and the professional 3D modelers that need more, but they are by far the minority. The masses buy computers based on familiarity. If 95% of the masses use PCs at work, then 95% of the masses will likely buy a PC for the home. The same goes for Macs. It's extremely difficult to get people to switch platforms. I've seen plenty of people switch to Macs, but only because they new it was "safe" to do that as they knew I would provide free tech support if needed, etc. or possibly show them where to find a specialty application of some sort, etc. Apple clearly has an uphill battle here. However, Mac OS X is becoming the premiere development platform for many. My brother (a PC developer) recently attended a major Java conference in California as he has in the past few years. This year, he said it was like being at a Mac expo (even though he's never been to one). Many Linux/Unix developer types have been moving over to the Mac because of Mac OS X. This is a very positive sign for the future of the platform.
[quote]<strong>
With Matsu on this.
"No, but they're slowly bleeding market-share through a combination of pricing and performance issues. Don't just look at Steve's tenure, think in terms of the last 18 years. The trend is a very slow but definite decline in market-share. They may be beginning a slow upswing, but without better prices (on better performance) it won't last."
Agreed.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't disagree with this statement, but I fail to see the significance of it. The marketplace was quite different 18 years ago. Apple's bread and butter was the Apple ][ , not the Mac. There were other players that have gone under completely such as Atari, Comadore, TRS-80 (Tandy/Radio Shack), etc. Further, back then, anything IBM did was a guaranteed success and standard in the business world. My point is that times have changed and Apple has maintained a healthy niche over the past 10 years. Further, I see no indication this trend is likely to change in the next 10 years. If anything, there is likely to be increased fallout over MS market monopolization and unfair business practices. In fact, the well known consumer advocate, Ralph Nader is now pushing for a change in the way Government purchases computer equipment in a way that will favor alternative operating systems. In short MS is at the top right now. They have no where to go but to lose marketshare eventually. If not to Apple, then to someone else. Nobody stays the dominant player forever.
[quote]<strong>
PS. Apple will have to do something about it soon given the 'Eighth generation' AMD chip is due to ship this later this year/early next year. On hypertransport. Having been to AMD's website...and seen how compelling, open and positive they are regarding their future processor strategies...I hope Apple have something better than a p*ss poor dual 1.2 G4 on p*ss poor DDR 266 memory.
7500. Soon. That's my bit for future hardware.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm hoping (but not expecting) more than dual 1.2 ghz G4s from Apple this summer as well. Unlike you, I don't think it will make them or break them either way.
Steve
Er...nope. A single 'high end' Athlon is much, much cheaper than a low end G4. Wanna go high end? How about a dual Athlon XP?
In a competitive market place (!) consumers make choices based on cost and performance.
"How does this contradict what I said?"
"Additionally, what is your basis for price? Are you comparing the price of the chip or the price of the system?"
I'll say it slowly, so you can understand, P-C W-O-R-L-D.
2.1 XP Athlon, 512 meg DDR, Geforce 4, 17 inch monitor, 80 gig hard drive...etc
£1, 200 inc Vat. Apple's 800mhz G4 is priced higher than that without including VAT. No monitor. No level 3 cache
"Dah, well I don't know TC...it looks like Apple's keeping themselves a float here..."
...and there's more...
"and the dual CPU strategy is keeping them afloat at the high end."
Bismillah, NO!
"Yes, we know that Athlons do well at 3D, which represents probably less that 1% of the professional market. I could easily turn this around and ask you about Photoshop, Video Editing, DVD encoding, etc. However, just to entertain ((still smiling...)) you, let's stick to the much smaller 3D market."
(Go on then, this should be interesting...)
Cinebench (from Cinema 4D)
<a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011009/athlonxp-10.html#cinema4d"; target="_blank">http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011009/athlonxp-10.html#cinema4d</a>;
Athlon XP 1800+ Score: 21.31
P4 2000 Score: 19.16
<a href="http://www.macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/all/master_list_9.html"; target="_blank">http://www.macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/comparison/all/master_list_9.html</a>;
Dual G4 1GHZ Score: 21.77 (higher is better)"
Okay. I'll give you points for trying. But where are those 'high end' dual Athlon scores? Unless the benches you mentioned on the 'not the top end x86 processors' were dual processors?
You're not comparing competitive spec. Put a 2.1 XP Athlon (which I found with a 'quick search' via a walk into my local 'Where in the World' store) and put it against its nearest tower price match. Gee, it's not my fault x86 can price their 'top end' lower than Apple's 'low end'. That makes the comparison more valid to me. Disagree all you want.
And just how is any company going to grow market share by offering lower specs bigger price than a competing companys hi-end lower price?
But you'll have more chance of convincing Apple you need a PR job with them than convincing me that Apple are competitive.
"Yes, the newer Athlons and P4s will do a little better."
A 2.1 Xp does a little better than a 800mhz G4?
You weren't comparing the most recent. And yeah. For less than half the price? That's not bad IS IT?
"Still, I don't believe I ever claimed the dual G4s were smoking the competition in this area, did I?"
Not unless you want to be laughed at
"Instead, I claimed that the dual G4 strategy is keeping Apple afloat."
Sure. Like a ship that's letting in water. (Right now, 'power'Mac line is Apple's Titanic...along came an x86 iceberg and oops...) See Matsu's posts again. Read slowly. It may help.
"Additionally, I've even provided evidence as such in your market niche of choice."
Not just 'my choice.' It's also performance in general. And you didn't show benches of the latest. A machine costing over twice as much as the 'PC World' spec. A 'whole' system. Yep. As sold in...er...shops...
((What was the resolution of that Cinbench score on the Mac? Try as I might, I couldn't find. Macworld usually do the 600ish by 400ish thing. That would make a difference...))
"Blah, blah, blah..."
You're not really Steve Jobs are you? I sense a bid of irritation at your insubordinate Lemon...
"Nobody outside of forums like this really cares about the specs."
Well, that's 'confirmed'. This guy IS Steve Jobs. Nobody cares about specs, price or competition. If we don't care about ancient Rage cards being used...then hell, we can charge as much as we like. That's why Apple lost p*ssed away their 'in the teens' market share? Why 'power'Macs are setting sales records? Are selling more upon more each sucessive quarter. Perhaps we can forgive Apple UK's Mark Rogers 'apologetic' tone in this week's Macuser. He doesn't seem the dual 1 gig can cut it and he's not saying they are compelling upgrades. Heck, even Macuser have noticed that Macs are running on antiquainted tech'. Maybe that's saying something.
Well, maybe a professional like me cares about paying thousands for year old plus technology?
Point is. You can get a decent PC Tower for about a grand that will convincingly out perform Apple's 'low end'. Apple can't hack a decent tower for less than £1,500. That's ridiculous.
"Most professionals care about results."
"restating the obvious."
Yep.
'Mustang?' Shakes head. Okay. You don't get it.
I wouldn't insult the 'power'Mac by saying 'Focus' but it more like a 'Puma'. It's dying to be a sports car but fails miserably.
How about a BMW chass' with 1.4 Focus engine..?
"At what point do you actually start to believe crap like this?"
At the same 'point' you believe 'crap' like Apple are selling competitive towers.
At the point we say: take away apple's over priced plastic imac from the sales figures...and the sales and apple's true condition become 'clearly' exposed. Apple can't sell a decent tower for less than £1,500.
"People like you have been predicting Apple's demise for the past 20 years."
No I haven't.
"At what point will you wake up and realize they're not going out of business"
If they keep selling out of date specs on the towers. They'll lose the pro market they need to surive. You may highlight 'cycles' but the 'power'Mac is a lame duck on its menopause.
It needs that 7500 quick.
"Really, you're line of reasoning grows tiresome."
What? Like Apple apologetics doesn't? Okay, you think a £2, 500 system is competitive with a machine that costs £1,200. Clearly. There's no arguing with you. Or for £800 more we can make the XP 'more competitive' with Apple's dual 1 gig...by making it a dual 2.1 gig Xp.
"Okay, let's talk about the masses. First, I agree with you that iApps, as great as they are, are not enough to win over the masses. In terms of speed, anything more than a 1GHZ PIII is overkill for 90% of the masses."
No it isn't. Faster games. Faster apps. Faster everything. You're a /performance/mhz luddite.
"It's extremely difficult to get people to switch platforms."
So difficult that Apple trimmed themselves down to 3% market share. Really easy to get people to change platform.
'Blah, blah, blah'.
Hey. We're talking hardware here. So I've snipped the 'X' is 'premiere' stuff. We know that already.
"I fail to see the significance of it."
"Apple has maintained a healthy niche over the past 10 years."
So healthy, in fact that 'tower' sales are shrinking, their combined lap top sales look okay (and these ARE superb designs...) and the iPod is already falling away...and the iMac? It's holding apple 'afloat'. They'd better hope demand for it doesn't 'drop off'.
So healthy that they can't afford too many 'cubes.'
A machine that exposed Apple's 'ultimate' market philosophy for what it is. Style. Cheap tech/tack and premium price.
"Further"
Snip.
"I'm hoping (but not expecting) more than dual 1.2 ghz G4s from Apple this summer as well."
Good for you.
"Unlike you, I don't think it will make them or break them either way."
I didn't say dual 1.2 'towers' will 'break' them.
"Steve"
Jobs?
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Ahhhhhhh shaddddawwwwwp to the rest o' ya. Me an' stevie boy are having a fate.
Yeeesh. Can't some of you take protracted whining? Haven't you ever heard the beautiful sound of parrots singing?
PPS. Junk mail came through as I type this.
'Medion' laptop. 2 gig lap top. 32 meg Ati Radeon mobility. Combo-drive. 256 megs. Firewire et al. 14.1 inch display. £1,200. Apple's ibook doesn't compete. And the Medion is far from ugly.
x86 will/(are) chase apple down on design.
Why do you keep bringing up those dual dated 1 gig G4s?
Doncha think I read Apple's benchmarks?
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>"It's extremely difficult to get people to switch platforms."
So difficult that Apple trimmed themselves down to 3% market share. Really easy to get people to change platform.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
You know between the Lemon, the Dog and myself, this is some of the best Apple frustration release therapy I've had in a long time.
Anywho both the dreamers and whiners have the same basic disorder....hardware design as a form of wish fulfillment. Whether it is "Apple just has to cut prices" or "Apple just has to release some revolutionary G5 uberbox", the expectation is that Steve can snap his fingers and this will happen. This is like some screwed up 12 step situation. Steve is not God and the True Believers and the Athiests both need to get over it.
"You know between the Lemon, the Dog and myself, this is some of the best Apple frustration release therapy I've had in a long time."
Speaking for myself, the G5 thing is getting almost sexual...
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>By Matsu:
"You know between the Lemon, the Dog and myself, this is some of the best Apple frustration release therapy I've had in a long time."
Speaking for myself, the G5 thing is getting almost sexual...
Lemon Bon Bon
Hmmm... I thought the Athlon thing was sexual to you.
Anyway, it seems as though a rational discussion is wasted on you. First you talk about performance issues, I address then, then you change the focus to price, etc. It's not very likely that Apple will ever be price competitive with the cheapest PCs across the board. Apple is not just a hardware vendor of generic components.
I don't think I've ever made any grand statements about Apple or the G4 line that I cannot back up. When I suggest that things aren't as bad as you make them out to be, you accuse me of being on Apple's payroll. Very sad. I can only image how insecure you must be. It must be difficult for you to have switched to the PC, yet long for the Mac. Fortunately, I don't have to choose, I have both PCs and Macs.
Anyway, gone on with the Doom and Gloom (Macs are doomed) if you wish. Whether you believe it or not, Apple serves it's markets well. You mention declines of marketshare without discussing any analysis on it. For example, if the "business" market grows faster than the "publishing" market, you jump to conclusions such as people are abandoning their Macs. You've also never discussed product life cycles, the average age of PCs vs. Macs in use, etc. All of these issues are relevant when discussing marketshare, at least in terms of a user base. Of course, you don't seem interested in details such as this, do you?
What I don't understand is the motivation behind your madness. You harbor such a negative attitude. If you are so unhappy with Apple and the products they offer, why don't you just move on with your life and be done with it? You've switched to the PC platform, and appear to be unhappy with it (why else would you be hanging out here?). If life is so good with your Athlon, they why bother coming back here and dreaming about new Mac hardware? Really, there's nothing worse than a "wannabe". Mr. Lemon Bon Bon is a "wannabe" Mac user. How very sad.
Steve
You need to shrink if I ever gave you that impression!
"You harbor such a negative attitude. "
That's missing the point of many of my posts.
Bar the actual spec/price ratio (which HAS got worse over the years...) I don't have a 'negative' Apple attitude. I swear to god they're a software company...
Asides from the out of date specs...they're gggrrrrrrrrrreat!
X= yep.
Software= yep.
Style= yep.
Ease of use= yep.
Design= yep.
Specs= nope.
Price= nope.
"You've switched to the PC platform, and appear to be unhappy with it (why else would you be hanging out here?).
So I can beat up misguided Apple apologists such as your 'good' self of course
Or, doh! Could it be Mac latency?
"If life is so good with your Athlon, they why bother coming back here and dreaming about new Mac hardware?"
Did I say it was 'good'? A choice of being screwed by the x86 or PPC? Call me 'cheap' but the Athlon was a cheaper and faster 'lay'.
"Really, there's nothing worse than a "wannabe". Mr. Lemon Bon Bon is a "wannabe" Mac user. How very sad."
Y'know. Lemon Bon Bon IS a Mac guy at heart. That doesn't make the 'power'Macs competitive!
Details? Do you really(!) want me to post PC prices and specs? (Nah.) I gave you the AMD spec I saw with my own eyes in good ol' English pounds. x86 beats PPC down on price and performance.
You have yet to counter that argument. And that's what the other 95% seem to go on. Until Apple fix that, your blustering is null and void. Apple want marketshare? They're gonna have to perform better on specs.
It's the line in the sand they've got to cross. If they don't. Consumers won't. Not enough to get them to 'double' their market share.
Okay. You buy your 1.2 dual out of date thing. I'll buy the 7500 when it turns up early next year. For what it's worth, I think the 7500 will reduce the debt. But I've got a sneaky feeling that it won't be enough for Apple.
Lemon Bon Bon
This thread is dead.
LBB, Matsu, Dog, stop hijacking FH threads. Take your "frustration therapy" where it's topical. If that has to be at AI, keep it in one thread in General Discussion. Leave FH to discussion of Future (Apple) Hardware.