Jeez-louise guys (Macintosh, really): two months ago, 90% of us would've auctioned off our left nut for an 800MHz G4. Now that it's here (AND, in an iMac, no less), suddenly it's not enough?!?
Some of you people...
I swear to God, Apple could unveil a quad G5 at 3.2GHz tomorrow, for $1399, and some of you would STILL bitch and moan.
My own little theory on this is that the more someone bitches about performance, speed, numbers, etc. (and you know who you are), the less likely they are to be actually in the position to do anything with it. It's like bragging rights or something.
Two years ago, every magazine and website and hi-res digital art was STILL being produced: on 300-500MHz G4s, no less. Some of you make it sound like you can't get anything done whatsover with anything less than 2GHz.
Knock it off and be happy with a superior OS and an overall more satisfying computing experience.
If you buy into all that stupid MHz crap, numbers/specs and the whole "G4 vs. Intel" business, you're NEVER going to be happy or satisfied...or get anything done.
I'd be curious to ask some of the "power users" (jeez...) out there: what exactly isn't you CAN'T do (honestly) with an 800MHz-plus G4?
And if you have a legitimate answer that truly affects your career or income-earning potential (heavy duty 3D or animation or whatever), then maybe you should look for other solutions? Maybe a Mac truly isn't right for the bill.
But for mainstream design/publishing/graphics/artwork, what can't a Mac do?
I wasnt bitching i just wasnt sure if those ere good numbers. I cant wait to get my imac. This new iMac nearly doubles the speed of my G4 Cube. I cant wait, its making me insane.
Maybe I'm just more easily placated (or impressed) because here's my scenario:
Currently have:
- 400MHz G3
- 384MB RAM
- 10GB hard drive
- 8MB Rage128 graphics
- DVD drive
- 13.8" viewable CRT @ 800x600
- original small iMac keyboard and "hockey puck" mouse
- built-in speakers (don't sound that great)
Will soon have (within 2 weeks)
- 800MHz G4
- 768MB RAM
- 60GB hard drive
- 32MB nVidia GeForce2 graphics
- SuperDrive drive
- 15" viewable LCD @ 1024x768
- Apple full-size pro keyboard and optical mouse
- Apple Pro Speakers
:eek:
Let's recap. I'll be:
- DOUBLING my clockspeed (not to mention going from a G3 to a G4...OS X has to like that!
- DOUBLING my RAM
- Increase of hard drive space by 6x
- much better video performance
- the end-all/be-all "do everything" optical drive
- larger monitor AND higher resolution...also, no flicker or other CRT-oriented issues
- nice, modern keyboard, mouse and speakers.
I can't WAIT. I'm going to be thrilled, I'm sure!
Basically, I'm getting such a drastically improved and impressive set-up, that I honestly can't quibble about things like bus speed and benchmark scores.
Maybe if I was going from a 733MHz Quicksilver or something to this new iMac, I could. Things like that might actually matter.
Although, probably not, since I'm not that anal and weird about numbers and specs and so forth.
seems right to me...a single 800 should be half the speed of a dual 800 and 1/3 the speed of a dual 1000....and that is without L3 cache.....and it doesn't seem slow....the mouse arrow does jump across the screen every so offen, which is only mildly annoying...does anyone know why this is??
pscates...you will love it...i do! you have an iSub right? iTunes sounds great with the pro speakers and the iSub....without the iSub though the pro speakers are still underpowered and lack bass....but still better than the old iMac speakers....hope you and macintosh and all the others waiting get theirs soon...you all are probably tried of my pictures and would like to see some different setup...g
<strong>pscates...you will love it...i do! you have an iSub right? iTunes sounds great with the pro speakers and the iSub....without the iSub though the pro speakers are still underpowered and lack bass....but still better than the old iMac speakers....hope you and macintosh and all the others waiting get theirs soon...you all are probably tried of my pictures and would like to see some different setup...g</strong><hr></blockquote>
can you try a test for me with the speakers?
I was using the new iMac and when I played something like a rock song I couldn't go above 75 percent volume withpout bad distortion. does the iSub fix that problem? could you try like a heavy song with and without the isub at near max volume and see if it makes a difference or distorts with the iSub?
[quote] Jeez-louise guys (Macintosh, really): two months ago, 90% of us would've auctioned off our left nut for an 800MHz G4. Now that it's here (AND, in an iMac, no less), suddenly it's not enough?!?
Some of you people...
I swear to God, Apple could unveil a quad G5 at 3.2GHz tomorrow, for $1399, and some of you would STILL bitch and moan.
My own little theory on this is that the more someone bitches about performance, speed, numbers, etc. (and you know who you are), the less likely they are to be actually in the position to do anything with it. It's like bragging rights or something.
Two years ago, every magazine and website and hi-res digital art was STILL being produced: on 300-500MHz G4s, no less. Some of you make it sound like you can't get anything done whatsover with anything less than 2GHz.
Knock it off and be happy with a superior OS and an overall more satisfying computing experience.
If you buy into all that stupid MHz crap, numbers/specs and the whole "G4 vs. Intel" business, you're NEVER going to be happy or satisfied...or get anything done.
<hr></blockquote>
Wow, chill out, man!
Some of us would like Macs to have better performance so they compete with Wintels better. At least, that's the reason I care. I use a PMG4 400MHz, and it's fine for my needs, but if that's all Apple sold then they wouldn't be around for long. It's sad but true, MHz DOES matter, not necessarily for performance but for marketing and competition.
So if Apple is going to do well, they've got to get their MHz, and other specs, up. And when Apple does well, they have more money to sink into R&D, which means I'll get a better version of OS X, better iApps, etc. So in the end we all benefit from Apple having higher performance Macs.
5.8 sec and 2297 megaflops with stuff running in background
5.1 sec and 2650.5 megaflops with just Os X and classic environment running....
second time---4.9 sec with 2721.6 megaflops
can i test it without classic running??
hope this helps and sounds about right...g
<hr></blockquote>
If something is Carbon, that means it will run in OS X natively. So yes, you can run the fractal thing without Classic. Give it a try and maybe you will get better results. Just quit classic, and everything else on your computer, and run the Fractal alone.
Nice pics, very cool setup! :cool: :cool: :cool:
My parents are getting a new iMac, and I cannot wait to set it up for them. I'll be getting benchmarks for Quake too, and I'll be sure to post them here. Based on your photos that iMac looks really sweet! I hear that they are way cooler in person than in photos, however...
gelding ol' boy, congrats on getting your new iMac. i read that other ppl's imacs were still sitting in alaska, so i wasnt sure if you had gotten yours yet (and i couldnt get onto this board all weekend).
i appreciate your feedback in layman's terms. i dont speak techno-babble either. its funny how your wife thinks that the white keyboard will get dirty. i thought that too at first. must be a girl thang.
(sure you dont wanna auction your new baby imac on ebay for like...$5,000? just kidding.)
take care, and enjoy the new imac!
p.s can you use a multi-button scroll mouse with OS X? let me know if you try. i heard that it still didnt have drivers for using cool mouse features and im wondering if it is true.
2nd button and scroll wheel of mice are functional out of the box in OS X.
if you would like to customize the buttons a bit more or if you have more you can download the beta of USB Overdrive which can be found at <a href="http://www.versiontracker.com"; target="_blank">www.versiontracker.com</a>
and if you have an MS multibutton mouse drivers specific to those are in beta testing now. but the 2nd button and scroll wheel still work
what's the colour gamut on the monitor like? If you compared the old iMac and the new iMac side by side... do colours line up for the same files? I do web & graphic design stuff and have heard that lcd monitors can be too saturated in the dark greys and stuff... hope this isn't the case because I'm really looking forward to the new iMac
Comments
tonights sunset
Some of you people...
I swear to God, Apple could unveil a quad G5 at 3.2GHz tomorrow, for $1399, and some of you would STILL bitch and moan.
My own little theory on this is that the more someone bitches about performance, speed, numbers, etc. (and you know who you are), the less likely they are to be actually in the position to do anything with it. It's like bragging rights or something.
Two years ago, every magazine and website and hi-res digital art was STILL being produced: on 300-500MHz G4s, no less. Some of you make it sound like you can't get anything done whatsover with anything less than 2GHz.
Knock it off and be happy with a superior OS and an overall more satisfying computing experience.
If you buy into all that stupid MHz crap, numbers/specs and the whole "G4 vs. Intel" business, you're NEVER going to be happy or satisfied...or get anything done.
I'd be curious to ask some of the "power users" (jeez...) out there: what exactly isn't you CAN'T do (honestly) with an 800MHz-plus G4?
And if you have a legitimate answer that truly affects your career or income-earning potential (heavy duty 3D or animation or whatever), then maybe you should look for other solutions? Maybe a Mac truly isn't right for the bill.
But for mainstream design/publishing/graphics/artwork, what can't a Mac do?
I'm genuinely curious...
<strong>I cant wait, its making me insane.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, we can tell
<strong>
Yeah, we can tell
You think I have gotten to radical with my message? You aint seen nothin yet!
<strong>
You think I have gotten to radical with my message? You aint seen nothin yet!
Oh God, I can't wait. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>
Oh God, I can't wait. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
It was a joke. <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
<strong>
It was a joke. <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I know. I'm not that stupid.
<strong>Macintosh, what are you comparing those to? Did you think the G4 800 iMac was gonna beat the dual 1ghz Powermac?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Macintosh is correct. those numbers aren't that impressive. My Powerbook G4/667 comes close to those.
Perhaps the faster bus really does have an affect (133 vs 100)
<strong>
Macintosh is correct. those numbers aren't that impressive. My Powerbook G4/667 comes close to those.
Perhaps the faster bus really does have an affect (133 vs 100)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sadly I think Applenut is right, the #'s are not great. Still, its faster than what I have on my desk right now.
Currently have:
- 400MHz G3
- 384MB RAM
- 10GB hard drive
- 8MB Rage128 graphics
- DVD drive
- 13.8" viewable CRT @ 800x600
- original small iMac keyboard and "hockey puck" mouse
- built-in speakers (don't sound that great)
Will soon have (within 2 weeks)
- 800MHz G4
- 768MB RAM
- 60GB hard drive
- 32MB nVidia GeForce2 graphics
- SuperDrive drive
- 15" viewable LCD @ 1024x768
- Apple full-size pro keyboard and optical mouse
- Apple Pro Speakers
:eek:
Let's recap. I'll be:
- DOUBLING my clockspeed (not to mention going from a G3 to a G4...OS X has to like that!
- DOUBLING my RAM
- Increase of hard drive space by 6x
- much better video performance
- the end-all/be-all "do everything" optical drive
- larger monitor AND higher resolution...also, no flicker or other CRT-oriented issues
- nice, modern keyboard, mouse and speakers.
I can't WAIT. I'm going to be thrilled, I'm sure!
Basically, I'm getting such a drastically improved and impressive set-up, that I honestly can't quibble about things like bus speed and benchmark scores.
Maybe if I was going from a 733MHz Quicksilver or something to this new iMac, I could. Things like that might actually matter.
Although, probably not, since I'm not that anal and weird about numbers and specs and so forth.
[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: pscates ]</p>
new iMac---4.8 sec with 2777.6 megaflops....so almost exactly half of a dual 800....
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jeromba
On a Dual 800 with 10.1.2 i've got 5443.3 MegaFlops in 2.4 sec
------------------------------------------------------------------------
seems right to me...a single 800 should be half the speed of a dual 800 and 1/3 the speed of a dual 1000....and that is without L3 cache.....and it doesn't seem slow....the mouse arrow does jump across the screen every so offen, which is only mildly annoying...does anyone know why this is??
[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
<strong>
Sadly I think Applenut is right, the #'s are not great. Still, its faster than what I have on my desk right now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
maybe I'm just overestimating the increase I thought it would see being 133 Mhz faster. who knows but I think my Powerbook gets around 2.4
<strong>pscates...you will love it...i do! you have an iSub right? iTunes sounds great with the pro speakers and the iSub....without the iSub though the pro speakers are still underpowered and lack bass....but still better than the old iMac speakers....hope you and macintosh and all the others waiting get theirs soon...you all are probably tried of my pictures and would like to see some different setup...g</strong><hr></blockquote>
can you try a test for me with the speakers?
I was using the new iMac and when I played something like a rock song I couldn't go above 75 percent volume withpout bad distortion. does the iSub fix that problem? could you try like a heavy song with and without the isub at near max volume and see if it makes a difference or distorts with the iSub?
Some of you people...
I swear to God, Apple could unveil a quad G5 at 3.2GHz tomorrow, for $1399, and some of you would STILL bitch and moan.
My own little theory on this is that the more someone bitches about performance, speed, numbers, etc. (and you know who you are), the less likely they are to be actually in the position to do anything with it. It's like bragging rights or something.
Two years ago, every magazine and website and hi-res digital art was STILL being produced: on 300-500MHz G4s, no less. Some of you make it sound like you can't get anything done whatsover with anything less than 2GHz.
Knock it off and be happy with a superior OS and an overall more satisfying computing experience.
If you buy into all that stupid MHz crap, numbers/specs and the whole "G4 vs. Intel" business, you're NEVER going to be happy or satisfied...or get anything done.
<hr></blockquote>
Wow, chill out, man!
Some of us would like Macs to have better performance so they compete with Wintels better. At least, that's the reason I care. I use a PMG4 400MHz, and it's fine for my needs, but if that's all Apple sold then they wouldn't be around for long. It's sad but true, MHz DOES matter, not necessarily for performance but for marketing and competition.
So if Apple is going to do well, they've got to get their MHz, and other specs, up. And when Apple does well, they have more money to sink into R&D, which means I'll get a better version of OS X, better iApps, etc. So in the end we all benefit from Apple having higher performance Macs.
anything for you wyntir.....
5.8 sec and 2297 megaflops with stuff running in background
5.1 sec and 2650.5 megaflops with just Os X and classic environment running....
second time---4.9 sec with 2721.6 megaflops
can i test it without classic running??
hope this helps and sounds about right...g
<hr></blockquote>
If something is Carbon, that means it will run in OS X natively. So yes, you can run the fractal thing without Classic. Give it a try and maybe you will get better results. Just quit classic, and everything else on your computer, and run the Fractal alone.
Nice pics, very cool setup! :cool: :cool: :cool:
My parents are getting a new iMac, and I cannot wait to set it up for them. I'll be getting benchmarks for Quake too, and I'll be sure to post them here. Based on your photos that iMac looks really sweet! I hear that they are way cooler in person than in photos, however...
i appreciate your feedback in layman's terms. i dont speak techno-babble either. its funny how your wife thinks that the white keyboard will get dirty. i thought that too at first. must be a girl thang.
(sure you dont wanna auction your new baby imac on ebay for like...$5,000? just kidding.)
take care, and enjoy the new imac!
p.s can you use a multi-button scroll mouse with OS X? let me know if you try. i heard that it still didnt have drivers for using cool mouse features and im wondering if it is true.
if you would like to customize the buttons a bit more or if you have more you can download the beta of USB Overdrive which can be found at <a href="http://www.versiontracker.com"; target="_blank">www.versiontracker.com</a>
and if you have an MS multibutton mouse drivers specific to those are in beta testing now. but the 2nd button and scroll wheel still work
what's the colour gamut on the monitor like? If you compared the old iMac and the new iMac side by side... do colours line up for the same files? I do web & graphic design stuff and have heard that lcd monitors can be too saturated in the dark greys and stuff... hope this isn't the case because I'm really looking forward to the new iMac