Apple says goodbye to single processor PowerPC Power Macs

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 37
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by AquaMac

    Dissapointing news. The offered expandability at a lower cost.



    Trying to force folks into dual Powermacs just to have expansion and a "real" video card. Paperpushers at Apple are at it again trying to figure how they can screw up more. Only way I see them correcting this is to intro a new machine thats based on 1 cpu and has expansion slots and video options. Wont do that though cause it takes sales from the Powermac. Apple sometimes just doesnt get it. PowerPC for One, not selling a single fastest CPU machine for another. Clowns & Committee's.
  • Reply 22 of 37
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    Trying to force folks into dual Powermacs just to have expansion and a "real" video card. Paperpushers at Apple are at it again trying to figure how they can screw up more. Only way I see them correcting this is to intro a new machine thats based on 1 cpu and has expansion slots and video options. Wont do that though cause it takes sales from the Powermac. Apple sometimes just doesnt get it. PowerPC for One, not selling a single fastest CPU machine for another. Clowns & Committee's.



    Ummm, so you're brilliant concept on the only way they could fix this is to re-release the same machine? And they won't do it mainly because someone will look at the product map and go "Hey, for the exact same price, they could get an iMac, so why should we have this product?"



    Yes, you gotta love apple. Want your own video card? Prices start at $2000. The $1500 machine was only there so Apple could say "We've got towers starting at $1500!". Nothing else. It was a bastard step-child. They even crippled the FSB for some stupid reason. What's funny is that the only anyone can think of to not release a cheaper tower is fears of loss of the higher-end sales. Yet Apple is doing that to themselves by having overpriced equipment that's barely any better then last years models.



    BTW, Apple could sell low-end towers with one or two slots, plus AGP or PCI-Express, firewire 400 only, with the same box as they have now, then move the high-end into a better box, one that gives the user multiple (more than 2) optical bays, 4 or more internal hard drive slots, extra PCI slot, make them all PCI-X (just because they've jumped on that sword and now they're stuck, because no one else does PCI-X), dual processor, PCI-Express, Firewire 800, etc, etc, etc.
  • Reply 23 of 37
    bborofkabborofka Posts: 230member
    This stinks. Our newspaper needs to update its lab, and they already have pretty nice 20" CRT monitors, so there's no reason to get an AIO Mac. The low-end G5 tower was really the only option for us... the Mac mini is not at all expandable and it's slow, but a low-end tower now starts at $1799 which is probably more than we can afford right now (it was $1350 for the low-end before).



    We can't wait 2 years for Intel Power Macs. Will Apple sell to pros on a budget before then, or just watch their unit sales drop each quarter?
  • Reply 24 of 37
    naknak Posts: 101member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bborofka

    This stinks. Our newspaper needs to update its lab, and they already have pretty nice 20" CRT monitors, so there's no reason to get an AIO Mac. The low-end G5 tower was really the only option for us... the Mac mini is not at all expandable and it's slow, but a low-end tower now starts at $1799 which is probably more than we can afford right now (it was $1350 for the low-end before).



    We can't wait 2 years for Intel Power Macs. Will Apple sell to pros on a budget before then, or just watch their unit sales drop each quarter?




    Probably watch their sales drop. You could, however, invest in the mid-range iMacs (I think they're $1399 right now with a discount, so $50 more than the towers) and sell the monitors. Depends on your layout/screen-estate needs.
  • Reply 25 of 37
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    BTW, Apple could sell low-end towers with one or two slots, plus AGP or PCI-Express, firewire 400 only, with the same box as they have now, then move the high-end into a better box, one that gives the user multiple (more than 2) optical bays, 4 or more internal hard drive slots, extra PCI slot, make them all PCI-X (just because they've jumped on that sword and now they're stuck, because no one else does PCI-X), dual processor, PCI-Express, Firewire 800, etc, etc, etc.



    That was one sentence!



    But anyway, I think we will probably see much more expandable towers emerge when the Mactels come out. They'll have a lot more internal space to work with since they won't need three wind tunnels and a liquid cooling system to keep the tower from exploding like they do now.
  • Reply 26 of 37
    Quote:

    Originally posted by CosmoNut

    That was one sentence!



    But anyway, I think we will probably see much more expandable towers emerge when the Mactels come out. They'll have a lot more internal space to work with since they won't need three wind tunnels and a liquid cooling system to keep the tower from exploding like they do now.




    Oh so this is qhy apple switched to Aluminium casings instead of plastic to withstand the explosion
  • Reply 27 of 37
    hasapihasapi Posts: 290member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    [B]I wonder what would happen if the Clowns at Apple sold a single cpu version with their fastest CPU. A single 2.7? Lot of Folks dont need a 2nd cpu hanging around doing nothing for the most part. Lot of folks just want options and a single fast cpu not a single slow cpu./B]



    Couldnt agree more, but now most software if not the os must support multiple cpu's, so your getting use of the 2nd core/cpu on even the most basic of apps. Thats the idea anyway?
  • Reply 28 of 37
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hasapi

    Couldnt agree more, but now most software if not the os must support multiple cpu's, so your getting use of the 2nd core/cpu on even the most basic of apps. Thats the idea anyway?



    Guess they had to do this crap because PPC is so slow Vs the Intels/AMD. 2 vs 1 with lots of spin added.
  • Reply 29 of 37
    hasapihasapi Posts: 290member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    Guess they had to do this crap because PPC is so slow Vs the Intels/AMD. 2 vs 1 with lots of spin added.



    No all CPU manufacturers are resigned to a multi core future on just about every type.



    IMO the PMac is faster than dual processor Xeon/Opteron's for the most creative of software, and generally at a more affordable cost.



    That said, the roadmap for continued development does not look good for PPC, which is why Apple has adopted Intel.
  • Reply 30 of 37
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hasapi

    No all CPU manufacturers are resigned to a multi core future on just about every type.



    IMO the PMac is faster than dual processor Xeon/Opteron's for the most creative of software, and generally at a more affordable cost.



    That said, the roadmap for continued development does not look good for PPC, which is why Apple has adopted Intel.




    The fact that multicore is the future for Intel and AMD mean (ironicly) that the Dual processor G5 may have a longer useful lifespan than you think. It will force more developers to multithread their applications to produce performance boosts, so future upgrades of software are more and more likely to run faster on dual processor computers, I realise many are already (esp. Apple ones)
  • Reply 31 of 37
    ilgazilgaz Posts: 9member
    As a G5 1600 user (purchased in 2003) , single processor I think I made a real stupid thing not to buy the 1800*2 option.



    I didn't know OS X and its apps used dual processors that good.



    Oh, "new" Intel zealots, P4 arch can't do SMP (real dual cpu, NOT HT!), Xeon can do it and it hates end user (non server) machines.

  • Reply 32 of 37
    hardheadhardhead Posts: 644member
    Ilgaz, welcome on board.



    If you don't wait too long, you should be able sell it on the used Mac market at not too much of a loss. Better to eat it now than later...
  • Reply 33 of 37
    ilgazilgaz Posts: 9member
    No I just made it 1.5 gb ram and its from 2003 G5 1600 SP.



    I said I should buy g5 1800*2 instead of it that time. Being win32 convert, I didn't know SMP actually works as intended. Its also part that I was a intel customer and I got my mind fixed as "dual processor is for server only" (remember the date, 2003)



    Lets hope Intel decision won't make this excellent SMP home computer platform like wintel.
  • Reply 34 of 37
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    (12 gun salute)





    goodbye, single powermac. i had some good times with the 1.6 ghz single absolutely kicking ass with reason 2.5 software synthesis.



    now that the iMac pretty much covers all that, so be it.



    with the intel announcement as well, the single 1.8ghz is well destined for the bargain bin.



    wow. computer stuff is really getting obsolete so fucking fast nowadays. goddamnit.
  • Reply 35 of 37
    naknak Posts: 101member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sunilraman

    computer stuff is really getting obsolete so fucking fast nowadays. goddamnit.



    "Computers are obsolete as soon as they get off the production line."
  • Reply 36 of 37
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sunilraman

    (12 gun salute)





    goodbye, single powermac. i had some good times with the 1.6 ghz single absolutely kicking ass with reason 2.5 software synthesis.



    now that the iMac pretty much covers all that, so be it.



    with the intel announcement as well, the single 1.8ghz is well destined for the bargain bin.



    wow. computer stuff is really getting obsolete so fucking fast nowadays. goddamnit.




    Fast? Since when is computer stuff fast these days? I feel like it has slowed down in the last 3-4 years, at least in the windows world and partly in the MacWorld. Windows XP is Old News, the processors don't seem to get much faster, just very slowly and Harddrives are still kind of small where is the terabyte people said would be here by 2007? Since Longhorn aparently needs at least 500GB to run smoothly.

    Really the only ones who are driving the industry forward are Apple see Spotlight, fast user switching etc. and I guess Intel have very similar feelings which is why they are so happy about the Apple deal.



    Sos got into a bit of a diffrent topic here
  • Reply 37 of 37
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bborofka

    This stinks. Our newspaper needs to update its lab, and they already have pretty nice 20" CRT monitors, so there's no reason to get an AIO Mac. The low-end G5 tower was really the only option for us... the Mac mini is not at all expandable and it's slow, but a low-end tower now starts at $1799 which is probably more than we can afford right now (it was $1350 for the low-end before).



    We can't wait 2 years for Intel Power Macs. Will Apple sell to pros on a budget before then, or just watch their unit sales drop each quarter?




    2nd party distributors still have the single 1.8's in stock. www.macmall.com has them for 1495.00 USD.
Sign In or Register to comment.