“The widely anticipated update to Apple Computer’s Mac OS X will appear earlier than expected, sources say, which is good news for the company in a tough year.” Read the report at News.com.
Apple’s Jaguar Leaps Ahead of Schedule
2002-07-03 macOS 45 Comments
Mac OS X is quickly evolving into the one of the best operating systems available for a personal computer. It is a night and day difference working with Mac OS X vs. Mac OS 9.x. This can only bode well for Apple as the future of the company rides on this operating system.
Apple’s entire equation would change if they made OS X available on more affordable hardware — either by making the OS available for x86 platforms or by making cheaper PowerPC hardware.
It will be interesting to see how Steve ties together the recent spate of acquisitions, the new OS, and whatever new and better hardware that is coming out this year.
You took the words out of my mouth. I work @ Apple (the reason I try to stay impartial during Macintosh discussions here) and that’s a big gripe internally. The barrier to entry is too high for most folks. That, and for what you get on the low end the money is too much. I get flak ‘cuz I call the G3 iMacs Crapintoshes They should be a few hundred bucks cheaper…
TLFord, I totally agree.
Yes – take the new iMac, remove the LCD and put it in a Cube case shouldn’t that be possbile for $800?
Cheaper Hardware is what Apple needs to get it’s “switchers”, see people look at Mhz so you tell them about the Mhz Myth and they will prob. get it, but when they see the cheapest Mac (I mean one the supports 10.2 fully) the eMac is $1100 they go crazy.
” Mac OS X is quickly evolving into the one of the best operating systems available for a personal computer. It is a night and day difference working with Mac OS X vs. Mac OS 9.x. This can only bode well for Apple as the future of the company rides on this operating system. ”
I use a lot of OS’s and, frankly, I would take OS 9 over W2K based on usability and stability (in my experience). But having moved to OS X, there is now no turning back for me. My workflow is much improved because X multitasks as well as my SGI’s.
But, I don’t think X for X86 is such a great idea, though. Yes, I am concerned about MOT’s apparent inability to light a fire under their chip-smiths AND their inability to understand that PPC is more important than some bogus cell phones. But I think Intel /AMD are milking a dead cow. I do not think X86 has a future.
And who’s got the future? PPC? Hah! Motorola doesn’t give a damned sh*t about their PPC line of CPUs. And that has really hurt Apple.
As for x86. Sure and it does have a future for the next 4-5 years. Then, the 64-bit CPUs will take over mostly. That’s Evolution. Not that the 95% of the computer CPU market will just die out just because you, an Apple-head, said so. Get a grip damn it. Leave the zealotry behind and stop talking nonsense. Think with your head, not with your willie. Duh.
One of the reasons I refuse to buy another Mac (after my 4 in the closet that don’t run anything current) is this. I could afford any of the $1K Macs barely, but the video that might come out of any of the laptops or ieMacs is crippled down to mirror video out only the same as the built in LCD/tube.
My anciant 4yr old P2 laptop was one of the 1st & few to output full 1600.1200 even though the LCD display was xvga. I see no reason why Apple can’t do the same with laptops or ieMacs since the vid controllers are getting better. The crippling down is blatantly obvious when you check out the chipsets they use.
But I don’t want a Tower either, no space, no $ etc. I would like to buy something like the Cube or small form Tower/Bookcase pc but I won’t hold my breadth for that either.
AND as long as Apple runs those losers on TV, well I don’t want to be using the same HW as 1st timers. Why don’t they do some Uber Geek adds that show what a Mac can really do that a PC can’t easily? Why not reintroduce the loaner program?
Agree, drop the LCD/Tube costs, fix the video to go the max & put in a small box with STD VGA connectors PLEEZE.
If they released an X86 version it wouldn’t be such a bad year for them. It would likely be for Microsoft, but I’ll bet Steve Jobs would be drinking champagne by the gallon.
Before people like Tom Barta refute this (I read your coments regarding the future of the x86 platform), you’re missing a large piece of the puzzle:
The x86 platform may die out someday (certainly no time in the foreseeable future), but there’s such a large userbase for the platform that x86 compatibility will likely be here in one form or another forever. At least as long as you or I am alive.
Let’s say that upstart “Company X” comes up with a spankin’ new processor that they feel can and should replace the x86 chips. This will never happen unless it can run x86 code (Either through an emulation layer, or through direct calls to the hardware).
There’s simply too much saturation for a 180 degree shift in peoples hardware choices. Now if a new CPU came out that could handle x86 code, in addition to providing a better, more robust computing environment, it might have a chance. People could continue to run what they already have, but also could begin developing optimized code for this new platform.
But what company (and realistically, it’s corporate acceptance that really drives the technology) would, or could justify dumping their entire computer investment, only to reinvest in brand new hardware that’s not compatible with any of their applications?
So realistically, even if you feel that the x86 platform’s not long for this world, it’s foolish to not design OS’s or software for it now.
If and when a new CPU comes to dethrone the x86 platform, chances are that it’ll allow you to run your old applications.
And realistically, if that’s why Jobs isn’t releasing OSX for PC’s (Yeah, yeah… I know: “Apples a hardware company man. Software’s just an afterthought”) he’s missing out on a lot of short term profits, and long term converts by not doing so.
Realisticaly… Let’s imagine your scenario of no more x86’s. If you’ve been running OSX for the last 10 years on an X86 platform, and are happy with it, chances are when you upgrade you’ll consider a machine that can run OSX (Be it Apples hardware, or this ficticous “X86 Killer” machine).
My 2 cents…
El-Al dons his asbestos suit, boots and gloves :oP
“Why don’t they do some Uber Geek adds that show what a Mac can really do that a PC can’t easily?”
Agreed– let’s hope that will be “phase 2” of the new ad campaign.
“Not that the 95% of the computer CPU market will just die out just because you, an Apple-head, said so.”
No, it will die out by obscelescence, if the G5 ever gets launched. And leave my “willie” out of this, if you please,
Inside every modern x86 Athlon or P4 is a cpu that bares very little resemblance to the crufty old 8086 of Jurassic times. These cpus because of their very high volumes can afford to pay the very complex x86 instruction decode tax to run old SW.
Either Intel or AMD could if they want introduce an off switch that would allow a new RISC instruction set similar to PPC or MIPS etc to run native on the raw HW, the x86 opcodes would be the compatibility layer, the new opcodes would be turbo mode.
Like that will ever happen.
No, it will die out by obscelescence, if the G5 ever gets launched.
Yes, and Windows will be obselete as soon as Amiga 4 is released
And the earth will only be inhabited by the devout as soon as Osama wins his lil’ war.
You get my point. To base business decisions on an “if” is asinine at best.
Someday we may all be ruled by intelligent apes (yes, it’s arguable that we already are), but does that mean I’m going around doing my part by killing all simians I come across?
No… So why would Apple base it’s world dominance plans on a semi-fictional CPU from a company that’s already proven they don’t have the business skills to “make it happen”?
AFAIK, they already do this, they run the RISC-type operations (ala dec ecx, jnz) very quickly but you get penalized harshly for using non-RISC instructions (ala loop).
“Apple’s entire equation would change if they made OS X available on more affordable hardware — either by making the OS available for x86 platforms or by making cheaper PowerPC hardware”
Remember OS/2? For a while, it was much better that any windows OS, ran on intel hardware and also ran windows apps. IBM spent around 4 billion trying to market it. It didn’t fly with the public. Please tell me why OS X would fare better than OS/2. Keep in mind that windows XP is way better than windows 3.1 was and is on par with OS X.
And if Apple were to port it to X86 and then sell X86 boxes, they would most likely sell them for more because Apple makes most of their money on hardware. I don’t see how the general public is going to shell out around $1000.00 more for an Apple 2.4 GHz P4 than a Dell 2.4GHz P4 given that all else (drive, video card, memory, etc) is relativly equal.
I agree with you in that the PowerPC hardware should be sold much cheaper. IMO, I think Apple would be better off selling their computers for less and making up the lost profits by the (hopefully) increased sales of these lower cost boxes.
I don’t know. I’m willing to bet there is a significant potential userbase for a high-performance non-x86 chip. I for example, run Linux, so I really couldn’t care less what CPU is underneath. Hell, since all the software on my system was compiled on my system (with the exception of my NVIDIA drivers) using an alternate CPU would be perfectly feasible for me. Due to the rise of open source software becoming widely used (particularly in the server arena) the market for non-x86 chips in the mainstream is definately there.
However, there are two things that keep me on x86:
1) Cost. x86 is simply cheaper than anything else.
2) Performance. Non-x86 systems do not start to match the performance of high-end (1.5+ GHz Athlon, 2.2+ GHz P4) x86 systems until you get an order of magnitude away in price. Taking a look at the SPEC results (which, for those who aren’t familiar with them, test real apps like gzip and gcc) is enlightening. In the SpecInt test, the fastest chip is the 2.53Ghz P4, which is a full 10% faster than the Power4. The Power4 is a 400mmsq chip (4 times the size of an athlon-xp) with 128MB of L3 cache! In the specfp, the Power4 is 30% faster, but let me reiterate, its a 400mmsq chip with 128MB of L3 cache! The P4 beats the UltraSparc III 1GHz in every single test. At a measly 600MHz, none of the MIPS chips are even applicable. The closest non-x86 competitor is the Alpha 21264C (EV67) which is around 40% slower in SpecInt, but comes within 10% (sometimes winning, sometimes losing) in SpecFP. All at only 1GHz. It is also the one that had the biggest shot at the single-CPU workstation market due to its compatively reasonable price. Of course, it is also the only one of these CPUs that’s officially dead (ironic, ain’t it?). Intel and AMD have the fab technology to out-MHz everyone else. Because of this, x86 chips will lead in the forseeable future in terms of single-chip performance. And once you get into the multi-CPU arena (where the non-x86 chips really shine) you’ve totally blown the mainstream price-range.
While running linux, you’d think that going on a different architecture means nothing, but in reality it actually does. I switched from x86 to Alpha, cause i was under the impression that i could run all my software on it. I was wrong, not dead wrong, but still wrong. I was surprised to see how much software is really x86 only. Some have been coded by coders who take for granted things (like pointers being 32bit), others have x86 assembly to speed things up. You have no idea what a pain it was for me to find a video player, as most use win32 codecs. Not to mention the hoops i had to jump through to get divx going. But, it IS possible to get a very working linux box on other architectures but x86, you just have to make a few sacrifices here and there.
the market for non-x86 chips in the mainstream is definitely there
For servers, I agree with you. No problems there. But for home systems, you have yet to back up your claims. The vast majority of people (what, like 95%) run Windows on an x86-compatible machine. To switch platforms not only might mean higher hardware costs (since x86 is so cheap), but possibly one hell of an investment in new software. Sure, you can get Office for, say, the Mac, but do you really want to spend hundreds re-buying what you already own? It’s the same thing with all the other software you or your business may own.
Also, in general, when you say ‘source is architecture-independent,’ you really shouldn’t be using the term “mainstream” in the same thought.
What is the big deal with OS X.X I was under the impression that it is a polished version of freeBSD, pretty buttons and hypnotizing screensavers
Freebsd A stable OS that runs without any issues on the x86 platform
So now that it is running on the apple all the Mac elites is going to credit apple for the development of the operating system for the next generation that was really developed by your parents many years ago.
Mr. Jobs is on hell of a spin doctor!!!
I just have a question to the beta testers of Jaguar out there. I think of buying an IBook2 but I´m quite uncertain if this one will take a use of Quarz Extreme. His Greatness 🙂 told that you need 32 MB graphics RAM, but if my resolution is only 1024×786, shouldn´t 16 MB be enough?.
Thx for answering
OpenBeOS won’t Be ready for another 3 years(at least) and IBM is in bed with that beta o.s.(linux).
The only hope for another good o.s. is Microsoft. That would be cool. You’d Be buying a Microsoft PowerMS =)
>>>Motorola doesn’t give a damned sh*t about their PPC line of CPUs.
Of course, Motorola cares about their PPC line of CPU’s — but given that 3/4 of all PPC CPU’s go into embedded devices like big ass distributed routers, you can’t blame them for not focusing their people on desktop PPC line of CPU.
>>Inside every modern x86 Athlon or P4 is a cpu that bares very little resemblance to the crufty old 8086 of Jurassic times.<<
Is why it can still run unmodified DOS binaries?
The iBook2 handles Jaguar well. You don’t even need the full 16 MB of VRAM for 1024×768. The 32 MB is listed as the “optimal” figure. Jaguar runs well on the iBook2. What I might be shot for reminding people of is that for most of your apps, the iBook2 700 will perform comparably with the lowend TiBook 667. But, to answer your question –
it works pretty well. Toss in 384 MB RAM and don’t have 40-odd windows open all the time like me and you’ll be golden.
But get the 12″ model @ 700 MHz. The larger screen is a rip, as it’s the same damned resolution as the smaller one, costs more and appears less bright (to me).
Anton, it will run okay, but, at 16 MB, will just not be abe to take advantage of Extreme Quartz. I would bet anything that the next iBook upgrade will have a 32 MB card <g>. It’s hard to say, the next update may have a G4 instead of a G3 too.
About the cost of Apple hardware, my wife got an eMac. Aside from shipping with too little RAM, this is much more in line with the way things should be – G4 700 MHz, 32 MB video RAM, big hard drive, powerful built-in speakers in the $1,100.00 price range. This is more like it.
“AFAIK, they already do this, they run the RISC-type operations (ala dec ecx, jnz) very quickly but you get penalized harshly for using non-RISC instructions (ala loop).”
No thats not what I meant. x86 has been divided into 1st,2nd class since 486. The 2nd class codes like bcd math & hundreds others should not be used routinely. The 1st class opcodes (described in several Pentium Asm books) are the reg to reg lite codes that do run at full risc speed, BUT they still are crufty encoded in multiple length byte codes & they only use 8 regs or less.
Now AMD Hammer has done a little of what I suggested, new opcodes that would be 1st class & access 16 64bit regs. This is a good improvement, since most true riscs have lots of wide regs. What I want to see is new high performance opcode set that can be used in “turbo mode” falling back to x86 std. Such an opcode set would likely be fully 32b encoded & reach all the 32 plus regs x86 hides behind reg renaming HW.
We would still have the half assed ability to run DOS & BIOS boot codes as well as prepping the cpu for a gradual transition to better opcodes. Eventually the crafty stuff could be abandoned in some models for much cheaper chips, the rare stuff can always be trapped & emulated.
“Is why it can still run unmodified DOS binaries?”
it has the same instruction set architexture (well actuall modern x86 cpu’s have an expanded ISA, but for the sake of arguement we will ignore this fact)
you can run unmodified dos binaries on a macintosh as well (albeit under an emulator), does that make the g4 and g3 resemble the “crufty old 8086 of Jurassic times” ?
@TLFord and other Jaguar beta tester,
tnx for answering my question. But I have to ask ultimatively: Will IBook2 will able to run Extreme Quarz (I mean all that stuff with Hardware-OpenGL-acceleration) or not?
Tnx for answering.
Greetings from Anton.
And MacOS X “Jaguar”…
And to whom still think and whine “Macs are too expensive”, y’all need to go back to the days when the 8500 and 9600 were around. Oh, want one of those 9500’s? That’ll (!!!) set you back a nice $5,000!
How do I know? I *bought* one back then!
Shit… a mere $1,099 for a whopping, jamming eMac and people are still whining how “expensive” they are… y’all haven’t got a clue have you?
I’m listing a few, for sale, on eBay, if anyone wants one… 🙂
No, not eMacs… CLUES!
>Shit… a mere $1,099 for a whopping, jamming eMac and
>people are still whining how “expensive” they are…
>y’all haven’t got a clue have you?
May be cheap compared to old Macs but PCs were stupid prices once as well. However the Mac is still expensive compared to PCs.
However if you want to see a real price difference check the Prices of the top spec Ti book on the Apple web site:
Euros in the Netherlands: 5.377,61
Dollars in the USA: 3,799.00
Given the Dollar and Euro are pretty much the same right now could someone explain the $1,500 difference for the SAME ****ING PRODUCT???
Sales Tax do not make a 30% difference.
Why are we being ripped of so badly in Europe???
Anton, it will run it, but will not be able to takr full advantage of Quartz Extreme. I don’t know how else to put it. It will use it as far as its capabilities can.
Nicholas, I’ve heard about the Mac prices in Europe – incredible!
apparently you have not seen the switcher add that has a grey bearded Programmer yet.
is that not uber geeky enough?
how about all the Linux geeks that have Ti Powerbooks and use OS X as much as Linux?
what exactly qualifies as Uber geek to you?
to me…Uber Geek would be a person who uses PC, Mac, and any other platform AND enjoys all…..
Eugenia would qualify nicely…though she complains a bit much…she is more a pundent than a uber geek 🙂
2 things…..there could be more demand in europ or the european import tax on computers could be higher, or there could be an EU law that requires companies to include sales tax.
I would like to add an interesting observation….
the Euro beat the dollor in value last week….it should be less euro for a mac.
I recently did a comparison of consumer desktops, configured to similar specs. The iMac comes out about in the mid-range for computers from Gateway, HP, Dell, and Compaq. The eMac is a couple of hundred dollars more expensive than the nearest offering from the x86 crowd. Similarly, the PowerMac, configured as a consumer machine, comes out a few hundred dollars more.
All feature considerably lower monthly payments as compared to the other offerings.
Granted, a few hundred dollars might be quite important to some people, but I don’t think Apple’s prices are absurdly high. Consider also, for the more geeky crowd, the Apple computers come with the Apple Developer Tools for free. Try adding Mcrosoft or Borland compilers/IDEs to the price of an x86 machine and see how things compare.
“apparently you have not seen the switcher add that has a grey bearded Programmer yet.”
saw him, boring ad, but he’s probably a cool guy to work with!
“how about all the Linux geeks that have Ti Powerbooks and use OS X as much as Linux?”
Actually wish I new some people like that instead of mostly clueless win users!
“what exactly qualifies as Uber geek to you?”
That would depend, some moments in time from some old MacWorlds were really quite Uber. I used to work for a SW startup that made it, so I went to alot of Mac shows.
Like when MacWorld had good size Developer section with 20+ SW companies. Last show I went to, this was almost gone.
Like when PPC came out & Symantec had screwed up & MetroWerks comes along and saved Apples arse. I was a big Metro fan, till Moto came along and embedded them, not relevant anymore.
Levco was once Uber Uber geek, they put a Transputer or 4? in a MacSE? as a coprocessor, speed up was 10-20x?? Still BW though.
SuperMac & Radius were pretty Uber, bringing out the 1st giant color monitors for the II. Whats was $5k can now be <$200. Radius Pivot was Uber. So many other names have gone now.
Macs were usually the 1st to get lots of Uber devices, like full 33″ size inkjet printers, color scanners, color lasers, tablets, even the 1st digital camera, video editing HW SW. Stuff we couldn’t afford but sort of wanted.
The coprocessor industry was always Uber, I speeded up my slow LC 4-6x with a TokaMac 040, got it 1/2 price as a dev.
My 1st PPC 6100 was Uber till the nuBus turned it into a liability. Overclocked it to 80MHz with a xtal change, seems pretty lame now. Even fried the regulators, replaced them, added heatsinks, guess I was Uber too.
The classic Uber moment would have been the 1st showing of BeOS on Apple/other HW.
Basically MacWorld in the 80s was full of stuff you just couldn’t see didly in Windows without loughing. The idea of PCWorld was even a joke, I saw 1st one, overlapping windows was Uber to DOS users then.
Last MacWorld I saw NY had almost no developers, & some of the Macs had flowers on them. Way too many artists hanging arounds. Def not Uber.
“to me…Uber Geek would be a person who uses PC, Mac, and any other platform AND enjoys all…..”
Apple’s low-end machines suffer from incredibly poor performance for your dollar. I think that’s a very important parameter that doesn’t get factored into most comparisons.
iMac/eMac = 100Mhz PC100 RAM (2+ years old)
iMac/eMac = 32MB GeForce2MX graphics (2+ years old)
iMac = non-upgradable 15″ 1024×768 display
iMac = 800Mhz G4 @ 100Mhz bus (2+ years old)
eMac = 700Mhz G4 @ 100Mhz bus (2+ years old)
eMac = non-upgradable 16″vis .25mm 1280×960 max
If we look at the Apple eMac, $2,032 gets you:
700Mhz G4 with 100Mhz bus
1GB PC100 RAM
40GB HD (5400 rpm? they don’t say 7200rpm)
CDRW 24x/10x/32x w/Toast with Jam
NVidia GeForce2MX w/32MB RAM
2 channel Apple sound
AppleCare 3-yr w/o on-site service
17″ flat screen monitor
Dell Dimension 4500, $1917
2.26Ghz Pentium 4 with 533Mhz FSB & 512K cache
1GB PC2100 DDR RAM
40GB HD (7200rpm)
CDRW 24x/10x/40x with EZ CD Creator
Nvidia GeForce4 Ti 4200 64MB DDR TV-out + DVI
Soundblaster Live! 5.1 channel sound
3 year warranty with on-site service
17″ flat screen monitor
So, PC vs. Mac, your $100 savings for a PC gives you:
PC: +1560Mhz of CPU power vs. Mac (3.2X the Mhz)
PC: ~ 2.5X the memory performance
PC: slightly faster CDRW
PC: over 4x faster graphics with 2X the RAM
PC: TV-out + DVI
PC: 6 channel digital sound vs. 2 channel sound
PC: upgradable monitor. video card supports > 1600×1200 res.
When you shop dollar-for-dollar, Apple undelivers on performance. The Dell will give you good performance for a long time and is capable of running any operating system at very good speed. And if you want to play games, Windows offers 10X the available games and the Dell will run them at 3X the framerates with killer sound.
The eMac is a dead-end machine. You cannot upgrade the graphics, the sound, the screen, anything. And 700Mhz of CPU on a 100Mhz bus is a dog of a processor with no forward horizon when it comes to running the cool apps of the next couple years.
Furthermore, you can upgrade the Dell with a killer GeForce 4 Ti 4600 card, ATI R300 card, NV30, whatever you want and extend the life of your machine. There is space for another optical drive. You can a DVD burner which you cannot do with the eMac. There is also space for a Zip drive. For your visual enjoyment, you can choose whatever display you want. Spend a bit more money and get a nicer 19″ CRT for still low dollars. Or splurge and get a fancy 17″ 1280×1024 DVI LCD.
This is the main problem with the Apple offerings — lack of performance for your dollar on the low-end and “ouch” high prices on Apple’s high-end. I believe someone from Apple said as much as the second post on this thread.
As for IDE’s… having worked on Borland’s C++ compiler a while back and used the latest C++ Builder and Visual Studio, they are much more capable and polished compared to the freeware collection Apple offers on OS X. With Borland’s latest C++ compiler, you can actually build cross-platform Windows/Linux applications using the CLX first introduced in Kylix/Delphi6. Cool. CLX maps down to Qt, so it also opens up some very interesting KDE possibilities. Having said that, I do want to say that the tools that Apple ships are very good, just not as good as the world’s leading development tools from Borland and Microsoft.
I don’t, what you should be comparing is what you are going to be doing with that machine. I am so sick of the SPEED issue that it makes me sick. I have seen many people buy a 2ghz machine only to surf the web, answer email, type out some letters, and then play a few online games at MSN and Yahoo.
WHAT THE HELL DID ALL THAT SPEED DO FOR THAT USER!
SQUAT!!!!!! Oh sure it made his spell checker work a little faster, BIG F’N DEAL!
These type of people can get away with an older P3 500mhz machine with 128mb of ram, 16mb video card, 40gb hard drive, ethernet card or 56k (depending on your neck of the woods) and pay as little as $450 for the machine (that includes a monitor). It will run everything they need for their purposes.
I am now telling everyone not to buy a PC or a Mac and tell them to pay for a PS2/XBox or an older Dreamcast and get online. You can play games, write letters, surf the internet all for a fraction of the cost of a PC. They can sit at their favorite easy chair and view the happenings on their big screen TV’s.
COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY IS GETTING BORING!
TechXNY was BORING!
CES WAS BORING!
COMDEX WAS BORING!
TabletPC – OLD TECH JUST LOADED WITH XP, BIG DEAL!
It’s been 20 years since I first started playing with computers. The Apple ][+ was my first machine. 1Mhz 6502 and 48K RAM. One 143K floppy drive. I still remember my opcodes for JMP, $4C, $6C. I think JSR was $20. Maybe if I had stuck to 40 columns and upper case, I wouldn’t have needed to add that Z80 coprocessor for Turbo Pascal 😉 Heck knows with USCD p-System, some extra Mhz would have made me happy! Especially when I was playing Wizardry 😉 Or Ultima. Or Starblazer. Or AE. Or Swashbuckler. Or many of the other totally amazing games for the Apple that were lovingly and painstakingly handcrafted in assembly language. When you meet a Tony Suzuki (Starblazer), you see someone who is absolutely dedicated to software as an art form. If anything is missing today, it is that same dedication. We live in a ship crap / ship it early / ship it often world that has lost a clear sight of software craftsmanship.
Yes, it is easy to say speed is not important if someone is simply using the web (unless they play back video), doing email, word processing, etc. There certainly is some level of CPU power that is sufficient for these tasks. A Celeron would do quite well. Or a G3 Mac.
So if you know you are not going to be writing software, playing modern games, or multi-tasking, do not waste your money on getting more PC than you need. With Moore’s Law, you will be able to get a new PC when you need it instead of buying the too-powerful PC today.
I see personal computers as being on the edge of what I think of as the second revolution. All the power is there to create some incredible applications that will make life much better for people. Applications that will enable us to do more of what we want. To do things that we couldn’t dream of doing without this incredibly capable, adaptable, useful tool called the personal computer. With lower and lower fabrication costs, is home medicine far away?
This is why Linux, MacOSX, UNIX, Windows, and all the other operating systems excite me. Because they are all rapidly evolving technology that collectively enable people in the world to communicate, collaborate, and dream like they were not able to before.
Technology is power, part of life’s tendency to evolve to higher and higher ordered states. What we do with this power, well, therein lies the rub. My faith is that humanity will get better and better at using technology to make life better. Computers are enabling us to understand the universe much better than we ever have before. And that gives me hope that we will overcome our poor start on using technology wisely.
There is one major advantage that PPc has over x86 that no one has mentioned yet. Heat. Im losing track of the number of x86 boxen that I have seen fried because the chipset fan died, or the case fan died of some other random fan died.
A modern high end x86 machine has 6-7 fans in it, and the case is still warm and sounds like a private jet taking off!! A comprably equiped Mac has 2-3, and runs cooler and quieter.
x86 – powersupply, chipset, video card, processor, 2-3 case fans.
PPC – powersupply, video card, possibly processor
I am currently using x86, but this reason alone is making me contemplate the switch.
A couple of years ago as a first time computer buyer, I came to the same conclusions as Michael above. I didn’t know exactly how much power I really needed, but I certainly wasn’t going to pay more money to get less! Being unknowlegable regarding the difference between Mac and Intel architecture, the mhz, memory, storage, and other statistics were all I had to go on. Additionally, the iMac had no CD writer, no floppy drive, and the screen was tiny.
In this state of technology, the inability to upgrade hardware components is inexcusable!
I would certainly purchase a Mac OS if it could run on my Dell. And due to the fact that it is upgradable, I plan on keeping this machine for years. So they’ve lost me this time around again – maybe someday they’ll give up on trying to sell me a hardware/OS package and let me be a customer!
Think with your head, not with your willie. Duh.
TB gets the grecian smackdown! keke
Re: Re: “which is good news for the company in a tough year”
Now if a new CPU came out that could handle x86 code, in addition to providing a better, more robust computing environment, it might have a chance. People could continue to run what they already have, but also could begin developing optimized code for this new platform.
transmeta! OSX on OQO
Well I just got back from Rome, Italy and figured I’d stop by and see what all the fuss is this time on the Mac vs. PC debate…
I notice people are still dreaming about Mac OS X making it to x86. Well it’s still not going to happen and it would be ultimate suicide if Apple even brought up the notion. Steve Jobs has already said no to the idea a few months ago and it looks like PPC isn’t going anywhere and will be further developed as IBM and Motorola have stated earlier this year.
To be honest I don’t think even if Apple ever released Mac OS X on PCs that it would dethrone Windows, not because of technical superiority, but because Microsoft and Windows it too entrenched in the PC platform and it would not be Apple’s best interest. I think Linux has a better chance than Apple. Once the Linux community rids itself of all the infighting between KDE and GNOME and other such nonsense, then Linux will become more of a serious contender in the Wintel world, helk it is already showing promise in the server market, only time will tell though!
OK.. here goes… oce again its Mac vs Windoze/ PPC vs X86
There are x86 processors on the market that don’t need fans – Crusoe for instance.. or the VIA Eden or C3 Socket 370 chips. C3 at 800+ mhz needs a small fan, Eden ( 400+ mhz ) just needs a heatsink. Slower C3s ( they run from 533 to 1000mhz ) also run happily, fanless.
My Athlon 1000mhz system only has one fan and runs modern software very well.. as does my Celeron 500. Maybe AXP or P4s need 7 fans but I think somone’s exaggerating there…
Maybe the Dell 2.5 Ghz machine is excessively fast.. but having played with gigahertz powermacs, all I can say is they feel slow and lumbering compared to a fast X86 box, and that justifies sticking with X86 for me.
One last thing re price.
Whatever a Mac costs in Dollar, expect it to cost the same figure in UK Pounds. Not due to taxes or import costs – just money-grabbing by Apple.
I can’t stand this industry any more. Computers and software just don’t work as advertised up to 50% of the time. That’s not acceptable to me.
People have been brainwashed to accept this shit as “normality” and it disgusts me.
>There are x86 processors on the market that don’t need fans – Crusoe for >instance.. or the VIA Eden or C3 Socket 370 chips. C3 at 800+ mhz needs a >small fan, Eden ( 400+ mhz ) just needs a heatsink. Slower C3s ( they run >from 533 to 1000mhz ) also run happily, fanless.
And where can I buy a system with one of these? And how does it price compare to AXP, P4 or G4? And how does their performance compare? Serious questions, not flamebait.
>My Athlon 1000mhz system only has one fan
Only one? So are you letting the power supply or the processor cook??
Also, what viedo card are you running? Most GeForce2 cards have a fan, all GeForce4s do, so do most Radeons, and the new parhelion. Or do you not do 3D HW acceleration? And what is you case temperature like? Remember, elevated temps == lower life expectancy of almost all components.
>and runs modern software very well.. as does my Celeron 500.
So does my K6-2-400, but I want to upgrade in ~ a year for better 3D and Matlab performance.
>Maybe AXP or P4s need 7 fans but I think somone’s exaggerating there…
I did say _modern_, by which I mean top of the line 1 year ago to present. Look at my list and tell me where I am exagerating.
>Maybe the Dell 2.5 Ghz machine is excessively fast.. but having played with >gigahertz powermacs, all I can say is they feel slow and lumbering >compared to a fast X86 box, and that justifies sticking with X86 for me.
True, true, but everything feels slow after BeOS (now _that_ was a fast GUI) and Im loking at buying in a little less than a year, PPC will get faster, but I doubt x86 will be producing less heat.