What will Apple Computer Inc. look like by the end of 2003? The picture should come a lot clearer in the next couple of months, as Apple moves simultaneously on several fronts that encompass its home turf as well as new swathes of territory. Read the editorial at eWeek. Update: OSNews reader Charles Finch points us to another Apple-related article, a benchmark showing the fastest SMP Apple machines against a single Pentium4 3 GHz (two pages).
A New Leaf for Apple?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
What few outside the Mac world may not recognise is that Apple has been building up a lot of business objectives that were supposed to all be released at the release of Mac OS X… because it was supposed to coincide with the release of the G5.
because Moto dropped the ball, that agenda had to be postponed for a couple years till… well, a time period that will be ariving in the next few months (the time table when the 970 is to be released.
Apple’s strategy wont simply revolve around having a better OS and reclaiming its crown of having the fastest hardware, but there are several other strategies that have been building up that will be made known in short 2-3 month intervals.
The first Apple revival (origional iMac era) was not really a revival, but rather, a means to regain simply get healthy. That time has long since past. The “revivial” will will occur in 2004.
What will Apple Computer Inc. look like by the end of 2003?
1. <a href=”http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/706…
2. <a href=”http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/macvsx86/“>Underpowered</… (yeah, I know it’s a lil’ old, but the situation isn’t much better now than it was then.
and
4. <a href=”http://www.macnn.com/news/19099&startNumber=0“>Unfocused</a&g…
Let the flames begin!
8)=
I’m really impressed with apple, espcialy their networking stuff.
I suggest to not start flames, but talk nicely to each other. Any trolling will be moderated down, as always.
(Overpriced) Apple’s hardware isn’t overprice, although many might draw that conclusion simply because they don’t compete at the bare bones low-end levels like all the PC companies do. If you keep that in mind, a do cross-comparisions (feature for feature), between namebrand PC resellers and Apple hardware, they are typically $50 to $100 cheaper!
(Underpowered) Only for a short while. As mentioned in the first post, Apple will regain its speed crown once again.
(Unfocused) That’s funny. Apple, is without a doubt the most focused computer company on the market today. Profits are an indicator of focus. Apple has been 1 of only 2 continually profitable computer manufacturers throughout this bad economy on the market today.
What will Apple Computer Inc. look like by the end of 2003?
More of the same.
>>>“What will Apple Computer Inc. look like by the end of 2003?
More of the same.”
More of the same great products that keep the company going strong.
There are so many other factors that affect the price. Here’s one: With every Mac you get professional dev tools free. If you want to do serious development on a Windows PC you have to pony up nearly $1000 for Visual Studio (and no, the Standard versions at $100 don’t compare).
I understand there’s a new PPC chip coming out that’ll be faster than the fast x86’s, but how long will PPC be able to hold on to that crown before x86 development leapfrogs it again? Not aiming for flames, I just wanna know. What’s the long-term deal on PPC vs x86 speed?
The PPC was supposed to scale very well. The problems can possibly be attributed to Moto’s lack of focus, poor fab, misdirections and restructuring in their units and focus, and lack of incentive to push the desktop line of processors.
However, people act as if the PPC doesn’t have legs because Apple is the only mainstream desktop supporter–on the contrary, the processor is actually used throughout all segments of the chip industry.
IBM does much better with the PPC than Moto although they have focused on the highend. Fortunately, the highend is merging with the desktop so it’s not outlandish to predict good support, good scaling, and good volumes of the new segment of the PPC line 9×0.
The rumors are exactly that, but I do give some credence to the idea that not only is the 970 ramping well, but the fab is going so well that we can anticipate high yields of high frequency chips.
We can also expect IBM to be doing interesting things to be more a player in the chip biz–licensing, aprtnering, selling to more manufacturers.
And their new plants are geared to newer processes; IBM leads Intel and AMD in their ability to move to the newest process.
So… the future looks pretty good.
Did you by any chance take the brown acid????
Not one of your claims are based in fact. I know this is typical of most Mac users, but would you care to back up these outrageous claims with some actual fact please?
I know thats not a Mac users forte, but there is always a chance for redemption!!
(Overpriced) Apple’s hardware isn’t overprice, although many might draw that conclusion simply because they don’t compete at the bare bones low-end levels like all the PC companies do. If you keep that in mind, a do cross-comparisions (feature for feature), between namebrand PC resellers and Apple hardware, they are typically $50 to $100 cheaper!
(Underpowered) Only for a short while. As mentioned in the first post, Apple will regain its speed crown once again.
(Unfocused) That’s funny. Apple, is without a doubt the most focused computer company on the market today. Profits are an indicator of focus. Apple has been 1 of only 2 continually profitable computer manufacturers throughout this bad economy on the market today.
Based on the Processor Road map for the new IBM PPC, there is no reason why speed should slip behind again. It will be something close to Intel for Servers but at desktop prices.
A simple google reveals:
Profits at Apple Computer Are Down 65% in Quarter
By LAURIE J. FLYNN
iting the sluggish economy and declining sales in some of its core markets, Apple Computer Inc. reported lower profits yesterday, but the results still exceeded analysts’ expectations by 2 cents a share.
The company reported a net profit of $14 million for the fiscal second quarter ended March 29, or 4 cents a share, down 65 percent from $40 million, or 11 cents a share, in the quarter a year earlier. Revenue for the quarter was $1.48 billion, down 1 percent from last year, when revenue was $1.5 billion.
source: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/17/business/17APPL.html?ex=105115680…
how are those education sales? how about those non-existant business sales?
Let the facts begin!!!
>>>“I understand there’s a new PPC chip coming out that’ll be faster than the fast x86’s, but how long will PPC be able to hold on to that crown before x86 development leapfrogs it again? Not aiming for flames, I just wanna know. What’s the long-term deal on PPC vs x86 speed?”
Not a flame at all… a very legit question… which deserves a legit answer.
The PowerPC970 is based off of IBMs Power4 chip which as we all know is fast.
IBM recently released its latest update to the Power4… appropriately named the Power5. IBM recently announced that the Power 5 (and thus the PPC980 is 4x (400%) faster than the Power4.
It looks as if the 970 is only the beginning.
the fact that apple had a profit in this challenging market says a lot. There is no doubt though that they need to make inroad into new segments and fortify their position in some existing ones like education. The cheaper emacs was a nice start for educations. Perhaps we’ll see more of that.
did you miss the profit part of that?
Apple and Dell are the only computer companies making profits….hello!!! read before you post to keep yourself from looking silly.
>>>“Profits at Apple Computer Are Down 65% in Quarter”
That says profits are down… not that they are unproffitable.
I wish apple would make like a tree and leaf.
Get it? leaf..leave…never mind…
Rearden liked the joke…
ummm…actualy you are suppose to say leave rather than leaf….should we call you biff 🙂
“I wish apple would make like a tree and leaf.”
Me too… leaves tend to bear fruit.
actually it is flowers that bear fruit, not leaves
“should we call you biff 🙂”
Actually, i think biff said, “Why don’t you make like a tree and get out of here.”
JohnGalt’s comment was similar in spirit at least. =)
that was my point…biff always said it incorectly with the get out-a here….johnGalt said it incorectly also…hence the biff comment 😉
Apple has a chance, lets hope they do well. I thought they should have went ahead and bid on Universal, because then they would have something to fall back on in case their products didnt do as well. But, Steve may have something up his sleeve and sometimes I am impressed, the iPod impressed me, Safari impressed me so maybe I will be in “shock and awe ” at WWDC, I found out I will be attending because our Apple rep called today to find out if we would be going, I told him no but he went over my head to my boss and told him this is a WWDC we do not want to miss, so I have to go. Dont worry tho, I will be wearing my Linux Rulez T-Shirt and carrying my SuSE 8.2 Sony laptop, hehehehe. Will we be truly impressed? it depends on what happens at WWDC and what Steve announces. Free trip for me with company funds so I will be happy either way. Nathan, to answer your question ussually the speeds piggyback each other. One is never faster for long periods of time. PCs have stayed on top so much this time because MOTO is sitting on its hands. I do not think 64 bit is in the future anytime soon for Apple, but if Apple does go 64, It will depend on A) how it is marketed and who it is aimed at B) How will it be able to stand up to Itaniums and if it can keep the speed advantage over AMD and Intel. From what I have heard the Opteron runs circles around the Power4 and Itanium. Apple has the same chance Sun and SGI had at pushing 64 Bit, just sit back and see where the winds take you.
(Overpriced) Apple’s hardware isn’t overprice, although many might draw that conclusion simply because they don’t compete at the bare bones low-end levels like all the PC companies do.
I think that eMac is quite similiar to those cheap Duron boxes. The only difference is that it is slower and more expensive. Oh, and it’s Apple.
(Underpowered) Only for a short while. As mentioned in the first post, Apple will regain its speed crown once again.
It was underpowered for quite a long while, and those IBM CPUs still aren’t ready. Their cost is another problem – lower volume (compare the number of x86 and PPC CPUs sold every year) means much higher cost then one of Intel/AMD offerings.
(Unfocused) That’s funny. Apple, is without a doubt the most focused computer company on the market today. Profits are an indicator of focus.
Apple is “intensively” milking it’s shrinking market share. The question is: what would happen when it would run out of it?
The company I work for hasn’t bought much in the way of computers since the tech crash. Most of our users are using G4 450s with 256MBs RAM running 9.2. OS X is going to be a big jump for us (for a number of reasons), and though buisness is now recovering we probably won’t make any major buys until everyone is running OS X.
I wouldn’t be suprised if 10.3 is the changeover point for us, but I have to say that those 450s have held up well. If you find an equivelently clocked machine unsuitable for office work, maybe you should question your choice of OS.
did you miss the profit part of that?
No. I missed the part about Apple going to rule the world and having a great business strategy. I also missed any facts coming from MM to back up his hallucinatory claims.
If you want, I will fill these pages with info about the various sectors Apple is losing ground in: Education, Video, Content creation, etc..
I see two or three sectors Apple is doing well in:
1. Creating new cult members with a fancy ad campaign and promises of a UNIX like OS.
2. Hard drives that fit into your pocket with songs on them.
3. Portables that are cheap.
Where else? I want FACTS. Not Steve speak.
>>>“I think that eMac is quite similiar to those cheap Duron boxes. The only difference is that it is slower and more expensive. Oh, and it’s Apple.”
Sigh…
I said to compare Apple’s to Apples…
Asside from the fact that the emac obviously has a 17″ monitor, it also has speakers, iphoto, imovie, and itunes all of which proves my origional point in that Apple doesn’t compete in the ultra-low end market, but has less-expensive systems when you compare all that is had.
>>>“It was underpowered for quite a long while, and those IBM CPUs still aren’t ready.”
Apple has typically had faster machines for the vast majority of its lifetime. except at the very end (approximately 4 months) of a processor’s lifecycle. As far as the G4 is concerned, it saw it’s product lifecycle end about 1 year and a half ago…. and THEN moto started sitting on their hands… and didn’t provide Apple with the needed upgrade… hence PCs current speed crown.
>>>“Their cost is another problem – lower volume (compare the number of x86 and PPC CPUs sold every year) means much higher cost then one of Intel/AMD offerings.”
Yes, you’re right. That was a primary reason for Motorollas decision to stop pushing as hard and thus gave up the speed crown to AMD/Intel. Thankfully, the PPC has a worthy sucessor in IBM.
>>>“Apple is “intensively” milking it’s shrinking market share.”
If by milking you mean, offering better products that make its customers want to buy them… then yes… you may be right.
>>>“The question is: what would happen when it would run out of [market share]”
Probably explore new eareas to make money. Thankfully, we can be glad that Apple has enough market share to keep it profitable and has worthwhile plans to not only retain marketshare, but also increase it.
>>>“did you miss the profit part of that?”
>>“No. I missed the part about Apple going to rule the world and having a great business strategy.”
Nobody said anything about Apple ruling the world… but Apple does in fact have a good (great implies it can’t improve) business strategy.
“I also missed any facts coming from MM to back up his hallucinatory claims.
Many of them would only be apparent if you followed Mac news as closely as many of us have. Its pretty widely understood that Apple has a backlog of technology waiting to be released.
If you want, I will fill these pages with info about the various sectors Apple is losing ground in: Education, Video, Content creation, etc..
No need. We’re already aware of them as I’m sure many of us are also aware of the areas that Apple is gaining ground in: Web servers, Video, consumer electronics, wireless etc…
I see two or three sectors Apple is doing well in:
1. Creating new cult members with a fancy ad campaign and promises of a UNIX like OS.
Promises suggest that Apple hasn’t already been delived. Not to mention the fact that “cult” implies that we use Apple products without reason.
“2. Hard drives that fit into your pocket with songs on them.”
An over simplification of the incredible work that has been done with the ipod.
“3. Portables that are cheap.”
inexpensive yet pwerful might be a more appropriate set of adjectives.
Apple has typically had faster machines for the vast majority of its lifetime. except at the very end (approximately 4 months) of a processor’s lifecycle. As far as the G4 is concerned, it saw it’s product lifecycle end about 1 year and a half ago…. and THEN moto started sitting on their hands… and didn’t provide Apple with the needed upgrade… hence PCs current speed crown.
OK fine.. SPEC numbers please? You have YET to back up a single claim you are making.
Cut the marketing spew you read and produce facts.
You want him to back his claim that PC are currently faster than Macs?
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/725…
$3,799.00
http://www.alienware.com/system_pages/mj-12.aspx
$3,689.00
These two machines have pros and cons. and are within $100 in price.
SPEC
http://www.specbench.org/
1. Asside from the fact that the emac obviously has a 17″ monitor, it also has speakers, iphoto, imovie, and itunes all of which proves my origional point in that Apple doesn’t compete in the ultra-low end market, but has less-expensive systems when you compare all that is had.
Oh yeah, and one can’t buy cheap speakers and a 17″ monitor for a Duron box? This kind of hardware is too close to $300 Walmart PC + $200 17″ monitor to be worth it’s $1K price.
2. Apple has typically had faster machines for the vast majority of its lifetime.
Macs were and continue to be beaten by same-cost PCs. The only thing that Apple can do is quoting some “selected” benchmarks.
3. If by milking you mean, offering better products that make its customers want to buy them… then yes… you may be right.
I mean charging double price for generic components and offering to upgrade discounts for different releases of OS X.
4. Apple web servers? All five of them? You are seriously saying that it has any chances in the world of cheap Linux/BSD boxes? Consumer electronics? You mean ipod and… and nothing more?
Correction: to upgrade discounts -> no upgrade discounts
OK fine.. SPEC numbers please?
Still looking… (I’m having trouble finding old benchmarks that showed the speed advantages that the 68040 had over the 386… and the 603’s speed advantages over the 486 and the 604’s speed advantages over the Pentum (up until the last four months of its lifetime) and the G3’s speed advantages over the Pentium Pro and pentium II (up until the last four months of its lifetime). The G4 only held a speed advantage over the PIII and PIIII up until Motorola’s “G4 debacle” It would have retained a speed advantage for a short while longer with the updates that Apple unveiled, but Moto released the chips nearly 5 month later. Since then, Apple’s speed advantages could only be associated to unique tasks that took advantage of altivec or dual processors. Speed benchmarks simply aren’t listed anywhere (at least not that I can find anyways) in the ways you want them. You simply need to have been watching back when it happened…
http://www.forbes.com/2002/03/20/0320apple.html“>Growth
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/03/13.10.shtml“>ipod
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/28.server.php“>Xserve
http://marketwatch-cnet.com.com/2100-1039-996921.html?type=pt&part=… (It was faster throughout its entire
You have YET to back up a single claim you are making.
http://www.forbes.com/2002/03/20/0320apple.html“>Growth
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/03/13.10.shtml“>ipod
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/28.server.php“>Xserve
http://marketwatch-cnet.com.com/2100-1039-996921.html?type=pt&part=…
Have any of you actually done price comparisons with Apple machines?
My father recentely purchased a 1.25ghz iMac, including a $300 printer/scanner and Office, for several hundred dollars cheaper than a comparable Gateway without a printer or Office.
Forgive me, as I am at work and thusly do not have access to any actual numbers, but I do remember helping him at computers, and him telling me how much cheaper the Mac was than anything Gateway or Dell offered.
Where?
Where are the OS X webservers? Netcraft certainly aint showing em.
Listen MM. Facts (which I have asked you for repeatedly), are not something you just make up, without having something to back up your claims. I can and will, back up my counter claims to every single one of your arguments.
Using the word “we” in your sentences, does not add any validity to your arguments. In fact, what it does is make the rational among us admire the power of Apple’s advertising to create a tribe of ‘belongers’, who center themselves around colored plastic boxes and candy like GUI’s.
Facts please, before I tire of the typical Mac Fanbot material.
SPECint2000
PPC970 1.8GHz 937
Pentium-4 3.06GHz 1130
Athlon XP 2800+ 933
Athlon XP 2200+ 765
Pentium-4 1.8GHz 612
SPECfp2000
PPC970 1.8GHz 1051
Pentium-4 3.06GHz 1103
Athlon XP 2800+ 843
Athlon XP 2200+ 671
Pentium-4 1.8GHz 678
Dhrystone
PPC970 1.8GHz 5220
Pentium-4 3.06GHz 7724 (Hyperthreaded), 7009 (without HT)
Athlon XP 2800+ (2.25GHz) 6406
Athlon XP 2200+ (1.8GHz) 5125
Pentium-4 1.8GHz 4119
IBM has made several claims about ramping the PPC970 line up to 2.5GHz, as well. This release will coincide with the release of the Intel Prescott core, which is expected to be ramped up to 5GHz. After that will come the Power5-derived line, and a move to a 90 nm process. The timing for this will more or less coincide with Intel’s move to a 90 nm process as well, and their release of the Tejas core, which is expected to clock in at 5GHz initially then be ramped all the way up to 9.
Unfortunately, this is all just speculation based upon the most recently available processor roadmaps. What will actually happen, of course, remains to be seen.
One thing to keep in mind, however, is that IBM currently has the lead in fabrication technologies. IBM recently opened the world’s largest and most advanced chip fabrication plant (see http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/01/business/01BLUE.html ). Furthermore, IBM was the first with a commercially available SOI technology (see http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/bluelogic/showcase/soi/ )
Bottom line: don’t underestimate IBM.
“Oh yeah, and one can’t buy cheap speakers and a 17″ monitor for a Duron box? This kind of hardware is too close to $300 Walmart PC + $200 17” monitor to be worth it’s $1K price.
Add the necessary $50 speakers that I mentioned as well as equivilent software to iphoto, imovie, iDVD and itunes and you well get the $500 I was talking about
“Macs were and continue to be beaten by same-cost PCs.”
Its as if you’re not even listening. You’re not comparing Apple’s to Apples. Your analyis would be like comparing a budget MP3 player to the ipod.
Throughout the past year and a half, Apple’s computer have definately been slower. The increased cost for Apples machines is appropriated by additional hardware and/or software advantages…. Some of which I’ve already mentioned.
“The only thing that Apple can do is quoting some “selected” benchmarks.
For the past year and a half that is correct… and even some of THOSE selected benchamrks are not even valid any more. Apple doesn;t have many (any?) advantages as far as raw speed anymore (although that seems likely to change inthe near future)
“I mean charging double price for generic components”
Considering the fact that Apple doesn’t sell many of its hardware components seperately, I can only assume that you are making the broad generalization about how an average PC with average parts costs less than a Mac with similar parts… (internal speaking of course) Again, you’re forgetting that Apple is including software on the computer that would otherwise make the price of the PC the same or slightly more…. hence the reason why i keep saying that Apple computers are in fact the same and often times less expensive than an equivilent PC… but Apple simply doesn’t compete in the low-end computer business.
“and offering to upgrade discounts for different releases of OS X.”
This statement didn’t really make sense. I can only assume that you’re talking about how Apple charged for Jaguar and don’t honor the upgrade coupons that came with the first copy of OS X. Ya, that was frusterating. But thankfully, the update was one worthy of the sum they asked… (unlike other operating system suppliers that charge for OS upgrades yet give you the same features that you could have had for free by way of several downloads)
“4. Apple web servers? All five of them? You are seriously saying that it has any chances in the world of cheap Linux/BSD boxes?
Apple has experienced some incredible growth its its web server markets. As far as competing against hardware utilizing Linux or BSD… Many reports have shown that an xserve can be more cost effective that one using either of these OSes.
<i.”Consumer electronics? You mean ipod and… and nothing more?”[/i]
Yes, iPod is one, another is airport. (Apple has said more are soon to come)
Thanks…
Now how about the SPEC marks to back up MM’s claim:
Apple has typically had faster machines for the vast majority of its lifetime. except at the very end (approximately 4 months) of a processor’s lifecycle. As far as the G4 is concerned, it saw it’s product lifecycle end about 1 year and a half ago…. and THEN moto started sitting on their hands… and didn’t provide Apple with the needed upgrade… hence PCs current speed crown.
Apple must be *praying* that PPC970 comes to fruition eh?
People get so swept up
. It’s just a hardware platform. Doesn’t anyone feel a little… silly?
Compare Apple’s 15″ Powerbook to Dell’s new Inspiron 8500.
Almost identical machines in terms of specs (the Dell does have DDR Ram and a slight speed advantage, but it is a brand new model, and the next 15″ powerbook update will largely cancel these factors out).
The Dell is 1cm thicker, 1 kilo heavier, has about 1 hour less battery life in it, and it’s 300 bucks more. Oh, and not to mention it’s ugly as sh*t.
Of course apple’s are not nearly as cheap as no-name, no-frills beige boxes. But compare them to Dell’s, Compaq’s, IBM’s etc and the average difference is really not worth discussing.
L.
“Where are the OS X webservers? Netcraft certainly aint showing em.”
Obviously someones buying them with the kind of growth that is being reported… http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0210/28.server.php
“Market research firm Garner Dataquest recently offered up a new report on the state of the worldwide and US server markets, and Apple’s numbers are on the list. While Apple’s percentages are small compared with other more established players in the server market, the study may provide some sort of baseline to judge future performance on.
Specifically, Gartner Dataquest’s US figures break out Apple’s performance. Out of a total of 488,858 units shipping this quarter, 5,700 were Apple systems — a 1.2 percent marketshare. On their own the numbers aren’t overwhelming, but consider that for the same quarter a year ago, Apple shipped only 1,525 server units. That’s a year-to-year growth of 273.8 percent, the best growth on the list.
The difference? This year, Apple began shipping the Xserve. Xserve is a rack-mounted system which runs Mac OS X Server. Last year at this time, Apple’s servers were still exclusively Power Mac G4 desktop systems reconfigured with server software.
Market leaders like HP and Dell don’t have much to fear from Apple, as they’re each shipping more than 100,000 servers each quarter, but Gartner Dataquest’s report is an indication that the Xserve is definitely attracting more interest than Apple’s previous server offerings.”
Facts (which I have asked you for repeatedly), are not something you just make up, without having something to back up your claims.
I’ve provided you with Facts. I gave links to back up all my claims.
“I can and will, back up my counter claims to every single one of your arguments.”
Hmmmm… You acusing me of not providing facts (even after I did so) and yet you not showing any yourself? Interesting…
Using the word “we” in your sentences, does not add any validity to your arguments.
I never said it did… no matter how much we all disagree with you.
All right, I’ve posted what facts I have, now time for the unsubstantiated rumours. The first are “leaked” SPEC scores for the 2.5GHz PPC970:
SPECint2000
PPC970 2.5GHz 1389
SPECfp2000
PPC970 2.5GHz 1531
And more from ZDnet, saying Apple *won’t* be using PPC970 until next year, and that the 2.5GHz PPC970 will also use a 90nm process. Whee, quality reporting from a quality news outlet:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html
Bottom line: There’s not enough hard facts out there to make an x86 vs PPC970 debate wortwhile at this time. Let’s all wait a months for the PPC970 to materialize before arguing which is better.
IBM, possibly ahead of schedule on PPC970 production?
http://www.architosh.com/news/2003-04/2003c-0404-ibm-push.phtml
Apple possibly ahead of schedule on PPC970 deployment? Talk of 15″ and 17″ PowerBooks already sporting the processor…
http://www.envestco2.com/macwhispers/archives/000056.php
People get so swept up
. It’s just a hardware platform. Doesn’t anyone feel a little… silly?
I agree with you.. I first worked with Windows (95-98), and then switched to Linux (from redhat linux 4.2 to gentoo 1.4rcX). I switched a couple of months ago to MacOSX (bought a sweet little ibook).
It is very likely that I will switch in the distant future. I just don’t see the point in getting hyped up over a platform, if I am going to switch in maybe 5-6 years. When you are a zealot, you will feel stupid if you switch to another platform. Worse even, you won’t consider another platform because you are afraid that you might like it more..
It’s funny that with a Microsoft DRM stormfront blowing in that will make “Shock and Awe” look like a picnic, that people still are getting into the Mac vs. PC slugfest. People, there are more important matters at hand.
Admittedly I have been very harsh on Apple in the past. However, in the face of the very real Microsoft threat, it is time to move past the high margins at expense of market share, the overpriced computers, the cheap parts, etc. Apple, at least as I write this, is not going down the PoliceState-DRM path as Microsoft is doing.
Yes, of course we could find that Apple really is going down the DRM path when OS X 10.3 sees the light of day. They’ve got to have some additional controls in the OS so that Apple’s music service will fly with the RIAA.
I’m hoping Apple doesn’t fuck over all their faithful users and champions. If any message were to be delivered to Apple at this time, it would be to respect their attitude about “1984” and not build Orwellian DRM into the OS.
It will be interesting to see what happens. Buying a large content company is the perfect brute force strategy of outflanking the inhumane policies of the RIAA and MPAA. I hope it happens. AppleUniversal and all its unleashed content would create an economic powerhouse.
“I hope it happens. AppleUniversal and all its unleashed content would create an economic powerhouse.”
The Apple universal deal probably wont go through. Steve J. announced yesterday: “Apple has never made any offer to invest in or acquire a major music company. The press statements this morning attributed to Vivendi board member Claude Bebear are untrue, as Mr. Bebear has confirmed in a later report. Beyond these comments, we will abide by Apple’s policy of not commenting on rumors.”
Look MM, I have been following Apple computer since I bought my first Apple II. So telling me I had to be there to see the overwealming speed advantages is absurd.
Apple has experienced some incredible growth its its web server markets. As far as competing against hardware utilizing Linux or BSD… Many reports have shown that an xserve can be more cost effective that one using either of these OSes.
Claiming that is absolutely insane. It may be worse than thought originally. Looks like 6-12 months in a deprogramming facility is in order.
While Gartner group is questionable. Here is what they say about Linux growth projections in the same ‘server’ market:
The report shows Linux server revenue rising from 2,422,266,299 in 2001 to 9,142,634,360 in 2005 and total units rising from 543,778 to 2,610,235 over the same period.
The data are broken down by server size and type for both revenue and units.
There is quite a spread between numbers for total XServe sales and total Linux growth. But these projections mean nothing unless you see hard usage data, especially in the web server market.
Also:
“The gains don’t surprise me,” Forrester analyst Charles Rutstein told NewsFactor. “Today, Linux provides Unix reliability but is very often deployed on a cheap Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) platform. So we get the cheap hardware and reliable software we’ve been looking for all along. The question is: Will Linux become mainstream? Well, for many of our clients, it already has.”
“Sun is on the wrong side of this one,” said Rutstein, noting that Sun’s history as a Unix vendor works against it as Linux gains popularity. “Sun has no choice” but to move toward Linux, he added. “They cannot stop the Linux momentum.”
Here are some more links:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131439,00.html
http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/1975911
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-219214.html?legacy=cnet
etc etc..
The story has been the same for linux for the past 4 years. Growth. In case you havent noticed, its been very newsworthy.
Aside from multiple copies of 10,000 mac news sites running those Gartner numbers, there hasnt been another news story that I can find to tell us how much OS X server is being adopted in serious server environments.
My guess is because its not. Yeah they had a big increase in total sales the first year they had a ‘serious’ server product (they have tried many times in the past, and like this one, they all failed because Apple doesnt have a real strategy for selling servers).
And dont even get me started on OS X in video and film production. Google linux film hollywood etc in various combinations.
The film industry is rapidly converting to Linux for all serious content creation. Why? Cost and the ability to create in house tools in a standard manner.
I know what you’re eluding to… he has the same IP as another individual on this board that likes to post under different names.
No, I was eluding to the fact that trolls say that “apple is dying” for years now..
“Look MM, I have been following Apple computer since I bought my first Apple II. So telling me I had to be there to see the overwealming speed advantages is absurd.”
Then you must have been only reading PC fanboy websites throughout the era when Apple had been retaining its speedcrown.
>>>“Apple has experienced some incredible growth its its web server markets. As far as competing against hardware utilizing Linux or BSD… Many reports have shown that an xserve can be more cost effective that one using either of these OSes.
[i]>>”Claiming that is absolutely insane. It may be worse than thought originally. Looks like 6-12 months in a deprogramming facility is in order.”
Times running out, you’d better get hopping.
I’m not the only one saying this, this has been reported all over the internet. Its important to preffice that Apple’s Xserve isn’t always the least expensive solution in these comparisons, but in several… it is. Again, this has been publicized all over the internet.
“While Gartner group is questionable. Here is what they say about Linux growth projections in the same ‘server’ market:
The report shows Linux server revenue rising from 2,422,266,299 in 2001 to 9,142,634,360 in 2005 and total units rising from 543,778 to 2,610,235 over the same period.
Keep in mind. Never did i say, nor would I say that Apple will overtake Linux (or BSD) in server sales. Rather, Apple is most poised to take market share away from Sun and Microsoft… although it will (for some instances) give Linux or BSD serving solutions a run for their money. Apple’s current Xserve is only the beginning. I predict that we well see it garner even more market share as time progresses.
“And dont even get me started on OS X in video and film production. Google linux film hollywood etc in various combinations.
Please start… as I keep reading about how nearly every news studio has dropped their old avid systems and are adopting the MUCH less expensive Final Cut Pro. And now with such multimedia packages as Shake 3, DVD Studio Pro 2, Soundtrack and the rest of Apple’s multimedia lineup under the company’s belt, industries requiring these solution are sure to follow.
“The film industry is rapidly converting to Linux for all serious content creation. Why? Cost and the ability to create in house tools in a standard manner.”
You have a point there… mostly as a result of Linux’s strength in 3D more than anything else.
Throw up any kind of Mac article and it always turns into a frickin spec war.
All Mac haters will always be Mac haters. All PC haters will always be PC haters. All Linux users will hate everything else but Linux.
I want to see one set of specs which no one talks about. With this new SPEED which we have in processors, is it making people work even faster and more efficient?
I highly doubt it.
$50 speakers? Like these ones? http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?cid=25608&PAGE=PRODUCT&PROD… . Are you serious ly saying that those speakers in front of eMac cost $50? It looks like you’re off by about $40.
Software? OS X costs $130 and (AFAIK) allows to install all that istuff.
Your analyis would be like comparing a budget MP3 player to the ipod.
Don’t call a less overpriced player a budget one. Unfortunately, they are all overpriced. I’d better let the early adopters recoup the development costs.
(unlike other operating system suppliers that charge for OS upgrades yet give you the same features that you could have had for free by way of several downloads)
10.2 could also be a free download. And some OSes, while having other quirks, are free downloads themselves. So what was your point?
Apple has experienced some incredible growth its its web server markets. As far as competing against hardware utilizing Linux or BSD… Many reports have shown that an xserve can be more cost effective that one using either of these OSes.
Growing from one server to 5 is an incredible 400% growth.
Now count in the grey boxes that were never officially sold as servers, but would be tucked in the corner and used as such. Number of Apples among them is close to zero.
“No, I was eluding to the fact that trolls say that “apple is dying” for years now..”
Heh.
Have you seen the MacObserver Death Knell Counter? Apple has been dead now according to all the experts… 22 Times Since February, 1996
“I want to see one set of specs which no one talks about. With this new SPEED which we have in processors, is it making people work even faster and more efficient?
I highly doubt it.”
All the more reason why these speed benchmarking issues are so rediculious. The two most important things now are which operating system makes you more efficient.
There were several studies on this in the mid-ninetys by independant research groups. I’d be interesting to see what the results say now.
The second most important thing… is having a platform that provides the most efficient solutions that take advantage of the speed we have. Most consumers dont need the speed they have… which makes it all the more important for solution providers to create them.
I wish Apple well in what they do. As a Windows user, I benefit from a healthy Apple, even if I never buy their products. So, here’s to the new 970; may it be all that everyone dreams it will be. Above all, may Apple start selling these wonder machines soon, because AMD and Intel are going to be moving to the next level this summer or fall.
I try to learn things from these exchanges. What have I learned from these? Oh lots. I learned that the best OS out there is Windows XP because it is. I learned that OS/X is the best OS out there because it is. I find this information shocking because I thought everyone knew that the best OS is TRSDOS.
I learned that all applications can be found on Windows machines, but they don’t work because of high latency. I learned that most applications can be found on Apples, but they suffer from low latency. I think there is a pill for that kind of problem, though.
Oh, and I learned that EVERYONE cares only for facts.
I wish Apple well in what they do. As a Windows user, I benefit from a healthy Apple, even if I never buy their products. So, here’s to the new 970; may it be all that everyone dreams it will be. Above all, may Apple start selling these wonder machines soon, because AMD and Intel are going to be moving to the next level this summer or fall.
I try to learn things from these exchanges. What have I learned from these? Oh lots. I learned that the best OS out there is Windows XP because it is. I learned that OS/X is the best OS out there because it is. I find this information shocking because I thought everyone knew that the best OS is TRSDOS.
I learned that all applications can be found on Windows machines, but they don’t work because of high latency. I learned that most applications can be found on Apples, but they suffer from low latency. I think there is a pill for that kind of problem, though.
Oh, and I learned that EVERYONE cares only for facts.
I wish Apple well in what they do. As a Windows user, I benefit from a healthy Apple, even if I never buy their products. So, here’s to the new 970; may it be all that everyone dreams it will be. Above all, may Apple start selling these wonder machines soon, because AMD and Intel are going to be moving to the next level this summer or fall.
Yeah, yer right. And the processor in my iPod benchmarks 15 times faster than the new 64bit computing coming down the pike.
I swear it does.
MM:
avid systems and are adopting the MUCH less expensive Final Cut Pro. And now with such multimedia packages as Shake 3, DVD Studio Pro 2, Soundtrack and the rest of Apple’s multimedia lineup under the company’s belt, industries requiring these solution are sure to follow.
The video wedding market will feel the reverberations for decades to come…
sigh
Despite the flat economy, Apple has done a good job of keeping on an even keel. This bodes well for when things pick up again. Apple is coming out with more and more compelling hardware and software.
At some point not too far in the future, it seems assured we’ll have 64 bit computing. It does not matter to get into a horse race with Intel as far as speed is concerned – the only thing that matters is that OS X runs nice and fast on it.
The Universal music thing is a rumor, but it is not a rumor that Apple will have a music service of some sort. This is totally in line with Job’s goal of becoming the Sony of America.
It also appears, according to Apple CFO Fred Anderson, that Apple is going to continue to come out with a ton os software.
So, things are looking good. It is discouraging to see people just put down OSes, hardware, software or blindly defend the same. Computing is the most fun when you have no baggage, no agenda and you can celebrate the diversity in computing.
You know, I miss TRSDOS.
(To the guy who said “Netcraft doesn’t show OS X web servers gaining any ground,” um, OS X web servers are likely to be in the big block of Apache ones. Hello! It doesn’t actually identify OS X correctly anyway, from what I can tell–tell it to tell you what server http://www.linvatec.com is on, and it will cheerfully report it’s running “Apache 1.3.23 (Darwin)” on Solaris. The Darwin part is right. The Solaris part isn’t.)
“Are you serious ly saying that those speakers in front of eMac cost $50? It looks like you’re off by about $40.”
You’re right… $50 may have been a bit steep. Make that figure closer to $15 or $20.
“Software? OS X costs $130 and (AFAIK) allows to install all that istuff.”
Yep, Apple sure offers an incredible value.
Find me equivilent software (idvd (last check approximately $250), iphoto, (last check approximately $100) imovie, (last check approximately $100), itunes (last check approximately $30).
The price difference was: $500
ilife software suite: $580
emac speakers $ 20
Looks like the prices are the same.
>>>“Your analyis would be like comparing a budget MP3 player to the ipod.
>>“Don’t call a less overpriced player a budget one.”
I didn’t. i your analysis would be like comparing a budget ($50-$100) MP3 player to Apple’s ipod. The ipod gives you so much more.
“Unfortunately, they are all overpriced. I’d better let the early adopters recoup the development costs.
Ya, they could all stand to come down a bit in price. I got a used 10 gig ipod off of ebay for only $200. That was a great value.
“10.2 could also be a free download.
No it couldn’t. Asside from the ilife software suite, none of it could be downloaded free of charge.
“And some OSes, while having other quirks, are free downloads themselves. So what was your point?
it was implied that Apple overcharged for its OS. i was simply showing that this wasn’t the case.
“Growing from one server to 5 is an incredible 400% growth.”
Yes, that would be. In this casuse however, Apple had sold quite a bit more than that. ; )
“The video wedding market will feel the reverberations for decades to come…
Hey, I don’t care how many people despise you… I think you’re funny.
“(To the guy who said “Netcraft doesn’t show OS X web servers gaining any ground,” um, OS X web servers are likely to be in the big block of Apache ones. Hello! It doesn’t actually identify OS X correctly anyway, from what I can tell–tell it to tell you what server http://www.linvatec.com is on, and it will cheerfully report it’s running “Apache 1.3.23 (Darwin)” on Solaris. The Darwin part is right. The Solaris part isn’t.)”
Good point.
I was going to mention that too, but he was implying that all the xserves being sold were probably sitting in the corner… So I assumed he simply didn’t know what he was talking about anyways, so trying to explain that every OS X installation comes with Apache and that this is how it would be reported might have been an exercise in futility.
Apple at the end of 2003?
PowerPC970 replacing the G4s in the towers, Moto G4s will still be used across the line and may even make its way into the next iBook rev.
15″ Aluminum PowerBook in the next few months definitely.
MacOSX 10.3 client and server.
Revised iPod.
Upgraded iApps and maybe a few more new ones. Apple is building on their reputation for creating good apps.
Apple is also targeting opening 70 stores by the end of the year.
Apple has had a good track record with execution but the hardware is still not competetively priced and the speed needs work.
I’ve noticed that Seth, BG and other degenerates frequent Mac articles even before “pro” Mac people like appleforever. Its a little desperate and pathetic actually. They have nothing constructive to say like Doenhert who dislikes Macs but is open minded to see what the other side has to say until he is flamed anyway.
Apple at the end of 2003?
“PowerPC970 replacing the G4s in the towers, Moto G4s will still be used across the line and may even make its way into the next iBook rev.
Considering Apple’s loathing of Motorola, i tend to adopt the theory that Apple will take all its business away from them and have IBM produce G4s for their consumer lineup. Another scanario (one which seems more appealing to me) is PPC970s will be put into the entire lineup and will be diferentiated by lower/higher MHz/GHz and single/dual/quad processor configurations.
“I’ve noticed that Seth, BG and other degenerates frequent Mac articles even before “pro” Mac people like appleforever. Its a little desperate and pathetic actually. They have nothing constructive to say like Doenhert who dislikes Macs but is open minded to see what the other side has to say until he is flamed anyway.
I’ve noticed that too. The problem is that while their posts are definately trolls/flames they’re worded in such a way that seperates them from the “MacSux! PCsRule!” type comments which are eventually moderated down (although not always)
I was looking around on ebay today for a new motherboard for my Athlon homebuilt (you see, I happened to pick an Asus that has terrible audio glitching, typical wintel!).
They are like 50 bucks! 100 bucks with a AMD XP whatever superfast!
It doesn’t matter how much good software apple puts out, how much effort they put into making it easier and better, how many more times they implement things first (eg iMovie, wireless networking). IT JUST DON’T MATTER.
Doehnert, Seth, the others — for them, it all ends with the price. Cheap, cheap PC hardware, build it yourself for pennies is for them, no matter what, and that means MEGA-DENIAL as to the mac advantages. It’s not about windows, it’s not about the software (well, maybe the games). It’s about cheap hardware. END OF STORY
“Software? OS X costs $130 and (AFAIK) allows to install all that istuff.”
Yep, Apple sure offers an incredible value.
Find me equivilent software (idvd (last check approximately $250), iphoto, (last check approximately $100) imovie, (last check approximately $100), itunes (last check approximately $30).
The price difference was: $500
ilife software suite: $580
Ok, I really like Apple and the iLife suite. But for one, since you’re talking about the $1000 eMac that has no DVD burner, you don’t get iDVD! Subtract the “$250” that you pulled out of your ass from your comparison. (For comparison sake, although I firmly believe iDVD to be the best of the DVD authoring programs out there, you can get DVD authoring programs such as Easy DVD Creator for $70).
Number two, while I love the design of iPhoto, please don’t try to tell me with a straight face that it would cost $100. Great comparable software for Windows can easily be had for $30, and they’ll be faster, too.
iMovie, again, in my opinion, is the best of the consumer-level software. But Windows Movie Maker 2.0 (which comes free with Windows XP) is surprisingly decent, and pretty nice third-party software for Windows can easily be found for $50.
$30 for iTunes? I assume this is to compete with the free Winamp and the free Windows Media Player? iTunes is certainly good, but $30? Give me a break!
You’re doing yourself, your argument, and ultimately Apple a great disservice by having to rely on “numbers” so suspect that they’re essentially outright lies to make your argument. There are many fine reasons to prefer a Mac, even though they are almost unilaterally more expensive.
“(To the guy who said “Netcraft doesn’t show OS X web servers gaining any ground,” um, OS X web servers are likely to be in the big block of Apache ones. Hello! It doesn’t actually identify OS X correctly anyway, from what I can tell–tell it to tell you what server http://www.linvatec.com is on, and it will cheerfully report it’s running “Apache 1.3.23 (Darwin)” on Solaris. The Darwin part is right. The Solaris part isn’t.)”
DOH~!!! MY BAD!!! Yep, its me the idiot.
OS X runs the interweb!!!!!
iPods running Apache 2.0 constitute 92.378% of all web services hosted.
The Newton running Sendmail is responsible for 120% of all email sent on the internet.
IMAP is just another name for Apple Share IP.
According to recent statistics, Apple’s new computer for the the education market, the eMac is a favorite amongst those who indulge in ‘clustering technologies’. Old abandoned shopping malls can be converted into a large space holding literally thousands of the $1000 computers in a server array that rivals such super computers as ASCII-White. Running the Apache webserver software in the ultra fast OS X, the cluster is able to, according to a spokeperson “Serve webpages so fast, when you click on a link in a browser, you will receive the page yesterday..”
can someone use the moderation-rhythm-stick right about now?
“I’ve noticed that Seth, BG and other degenerates frequent Mac articles even before “pro” Mac people like appleforever. Its a little desperate and pathetic actually. They have nothing constructive to say like Doenhert who dislikes Macs but is open minded to see what the other side has to say until he is flamed anyway.
I’ve noticed that too. The problem is that while their posts are definately trolls/flames they’re worded in such a way that seperates them from the “MacSux! PCsRule!” type comments which are eventually moderated down (although not always)”
I have something constructive to say:
After working with multiple OS’s over the many many years I have been computing. After using and loving Apple for many many years, through thick and thin. I have come to find (and these are only my opinions).
1. Linux is the only real place where interesting developments are happening in the computer arena on a large scale. Sure there are smaller OS’s (many featured here) that are doing great things.
2. Apple as a business has made, and continues to make stupid business moves that have driven the computer maker to the point of Sheer irrelevancy. The biggest mistake? Treating their core customer base as though they were peices of dog shit.
3. Having worked as Technology director/Lead Administrator in multiple school districts I can attest to the following:
a. Apple shits on their customers all the time
b. Apple DOES NOT when its time to sell computers.
c. Macintoshes are a bitch to administor in large numbers. OS X does not really solve this crisis.
d. Apple uses non-standard proprietary *everything*, making them basically worthless outside of their context.
I could go on and on like this, but its not worth it. Having used, supported, evanglized, administered, hacked on, etc Apple computers since the beginning of the company, continuing to this very day (I am writing this on a g4 tower), I can basically say this:
I run home every night to get onto my Gentoo linux machine.
For the last 7 years I have devoted my lifes work to removing Apple computers from Schools and school districts, and replacing them with Open Source and linux solutions.
I literally *despise* Microsoft, but sad to say, as of this point, even though OS X is “kinda nice”, I would use Windows 2000 or XP over it any day.
but i guess that is what separates us.
you loved apple. now you hate them. you loath microsoft, but you’d rather use windows then os-x (an os you find nice).
it’s too bad i can’t file away these comments with a name and a face.
cause you would go into the idiot pile.
you get almost an entire half decent sentence out, then you contradict yourself, sound petty, or sound like you need mental help.
“i run home to gentoo”…wtf?????
Are you some kind of axe grinding, emotionally scarred, microsoft loathing, (but loath apple more) twit, trying to pass your comments off as constructive and objective?
i’ve said it before, i’ll say it again…reasonably intelligent, technical, people I choose to deal with, are involved with a variety of platforms. Most of us ARE enthusiastic about linux and are actively learning, using, admining it.
but you won’t find any of us hating ANY computer. nor will you find us loathing the company that produces it. sure i have plenty to disagree with when it comes to Apple’s or Microsoft’s policies. Sure I think MS was rightfully found guilty of abusing their power.
but do i LOATHEEEEEEEE them?
no.
i use mac os, linux, windows ,bsd whatever. I’ll probably never BUY a mac…and my windows usage is becoming very small in comparison to my linux/freebsd usage.
so you could say that i have entered a period where OSS is very important to me.
and to think that you and i are united by the common usage of linux….all i can do is roll my eyes, and hope that if i were to run into someone like you in real life, that you would show your true colors just like you do in this forum.
i’ll save MY love and loathing for more important things.
get a life.
BG,
I don’y agree with some of your points but others are right on the money.
1. Apple should not and does not need to resort to RDF to sell their products but they do.
2. Apple does treat their customers like crap sometimes. I hate the buying experience at Apple stores because of the snobs that work their, especially the repair techs and the nerds at the “genius bar”. I don’t buy anything in the retail stores because the pricing on everything is an insult.
3. Apple makes a LOT of bad business choices. I wonder if there is anyone at the top with common sense. They have so much IP that they barely exploit.
Here are the points I don’t agree with:
“Macintoshes are a bitch to administor in large numbers. OS X does not really solve this crisis.”
Administation of MacOS and MacOSX can be done with the right admin tools and MacOSX makes things much easier. I can do full system restores with ASR models or CCC. Since you work in a school enviroment then you have plenty of labs so why not use NetBoot? MacOS9 multiple user accounts was a joke but MacOSX is better and secure.
“Apple uses non-standard proprietary *everything*, making them basically worthless outside of their context”
This is just not true. As a tecnologist in education you really should know better. Standard Mac CDRWs are LiteOns, the combo drives are usually Toshibas. You can find IBM GXP180s and Seagate Barracuda ATA V hard drives.
G4 Towers that ship today can drive an ADC, DVI and VGA displays and will run dual dispays, mirrored or spanned right out of the box with no additional software.
Apple uses ATI and Nvidia hardware. The ROMS are different but people have flashed PC video cards to run in Macs.
As far as memory goes, Macs uses PC133, SODIMM, PC2100, PC2700. Sounds like stuff you would put in a PC to me.
Is the mobo, processor and chipset proprietary? Sure they are but it doesn’t keep Apple from using off the shelf commodity hardware. I a thousands others have been able to use PC hardware in Macs.
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
The idea that Apple is so proprietary that they are usesless outside of their context doesn’t really hold up. A G4 for a graphic designer can also be converted to be used as a Server, it can host an internal IDE RAID or control an external SCSI RAID. Their is SAN software for Mac. An eMac will run MacOSX Server or Mandrake Linux just fine. A home iMac is also a great NetBoot client. Apple laptops are great for wordprocessing, email all the way up to DVD authoring and video editing. Some of the client systems at work run MacOSX on some old Mac hardware with very few problems.
I can appreciate your argument but I really don’t see your point when you say that Macs are useless outside of their context.
I would like to comment on the barefeat benchmarks. First, the guy doing this benchmarking is serious. Unlike the happy wedding video PC guy whose silly benchmarks usually get posted on os news, Barefeats understand the difference between threaded apps (Cinema 4d, some photoshop functions) and non threaded ones (bryce). The result of his benchmarks reflects what I encounter in real life (animation, cgi and compositing): overall the performance gain on big pentium boxes is not that significant, and multitasking on windows is pretty horrid when you get several serious computing apps running.
Also, keep in mind that the g4 has a slow memory bus. Between high memory bandwith and much higher clock cycle, the P4 should be much, much faster.
the Alienware?Apple price comparison was not realistic. The Alienware PC is a far higher spec machine than the Apple. Dual Xeaons, sata raid and a worksation quality graphics card.
A much more realistic performance comparison is as follows:
dual Athlon 1800 MP
Tyan Tiger MP
This one statement alone steams me to no end.
People who still use this argument about a Mac should have any and all of their certifications or degrees revoked. If you are that stupid in believing in this one statement you do not belong in this industry for you have not kept up with industry trends.
I recieved the latest (Australian) Apple catalogue in my mail this morning so I can do a price comparison.
******All prices are Australian dollars (approx 0.6 US dollars)********
Emac 700 MHz 128 MB ram AU$1995
PC equiv – no machine available with such low specs.
The closest equiv PC machine (faster/better quality components than eMac).
Duron 1.2 GHZ $70
Asus nforce integrated MB (nvidia GF2) $120
128 meg DDR PC 2100 RAM $50
combo drive $150
case/mouse/KB $200
40GB HD $120
Windows XP oem $200
17″ flatscreen monitor $200
Labour $100
Total AU$880
nb. for an extra $200 upgrade to Soltek nforce 2 MB (dual channel memory), nVidia GF4 MX GF Athlon XP 2000+ and 2X256MB RAM which will be far faster than the 1GHZ Power PC G4.
Power Mac G4 1GHz 256 MB RAM AU$3099
PC equiv: Athlon 1800+ (considerably faster than 1GHz Power Mac but slowest Athlon available)
approx AU$900 with Windows XP oem
Power Mac G4 dual 1.42 GHz 512 MB RAM AU$5699
Equiv PC machine (all prices current today)
Athlon XP3000+ $650
2X256 Meg PC 2700 RAM $110
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro $200
DVD/RW $450
Soltek Nforce 2 MB (LAN, Firewire,
sata, dual channel memory, USB 2.0) $175
Seagate 120 Meg 7200 HD $240
Windows XP oem $200
Case Mouse+keyboard (Antec) $300
Labour+ miscparts $100
Total AU$2325
nb. These are not cheap oem parts but high quality (equal/better than Apple)components.
If I wanted price parity I could build a Dual Athlon XP2400MP (or 800MHZ FSB Intel Pentium 4 3GHZ)with sata Raid (2×120 GB), 2GB dual channel RAM, ATI Radeon 9700Pro for less than AU$4000.
For around The AU$5700 price of the dual processor Powermac G4 I can build a dual 2.4GHZ Intel Xeon system with 4GB RAM.
The extra software iApps and Apple works all have cheap shareware/free equivalents eg Open Office.
@Doug, I still get puzzled looks when I tell people that I can: install a 7.1 sound card for my Mac, that I can buy a HD, DVD, CDRW, Combo or SuperDrive from any PC site and install and use it in my Mac. I can use just about any USB1 or USB2 card out there. People get the impression that because it is a Mac it is not compatible with anything. When I hear “computer professionals” say these things I automatically relegate them to NOOB status.
I’ve seen the Barefeats article before. From my own personal experience my Dual 1.25 can keep up with my AthlonXP1600+ in general tasks, they feel equally fast. The Mac gets left far behind in gaming however. The Mac is of course a better multitasker and feels faster and more responsive under heavy load.
can u buy a PC AGP or PCI video card and stick it in a mac? Can u run that TV card u bought and stick it in a Mac, or even find drivers for it? Can you run the PC software u got with that burner you bought in a Mac? Can you? Can you run extra IDE or SCSI controllers in that Mac? Can you replace the cpu for something faster? 7.1 sound cards work in Macs? Which ones? Are they cheap? Are any Mac cards cheap like PC equivalents? Can you replace the mainboard for something with more features as soon as the new features become available by several competing mainboard manufacturers as soon as they are released? Replace the CPU for a faster one at any computer store? Or do you need to buy a new computer on Apple’s schedule, and at their prices? Do you get support for non-standard parts?
during the whole existence of this planet a leaf even tended to bear fruit. Never ever.
why is it that more and more I feel like osnews is just trolling for hits? I’m so glad I turned off the banner ads at the top on your site.
disappointed.
joe, some of the things you mentioned can be done with a Mac…i.e., there are at least four companies that do processor upgrades. Some of the things you mentioned cannot be done, especially on consumer Macs, which Apple makes to be pretty much non-upgradable in most areas. Other things are such that they exist – like video cards – but you have to order them. This used to be a big hassle, but today, things are shipped so fast, it doesn’t make that much difference. However, because the Mac market is so much smaller, you are right, generally speaking, you cannot go into Wal*Mart and get a Mac video or sound card. It’s a matter of supply and demand, of course.
However, if you had a Mac, you would be surprised at what all there is out there if you look or keep up with the Mac web sites. It’s always been this way with Macs. Part of owning Apple products is this searching out of solutions. My God, there’ even a slot loading SuperDruve for the Cube now!
Video cards for Mac?
Nvidia and ATI are OEM vendors, Radeon, 8500, 9000 are available now, and the 9700 will be available soon
Elgato makes TiVO solution for Mac.
Why do you need to use PC drivers for a CDRW? Thats dumb, just use the Mac drivers.
http://forums.xlr8yourmac.com/drivedb/search.drivedb.lasso
SCSI, IDE cards?
ATTO, Adaptec, Sonnet, Acard, SIIG, Initio Miles, and Orange Micro.
http://eshop.macsales.com/Catalog_Page.cfm?Parent=96&Title=SCSI~*~@…
CPU upgrades?
Sonnnet, Powerlogix, and Gigadesigns. CPU upgrades for the 6100 all the way up to the Quicksilvers, the MDDs are socketed so upgrades will be available for those as well.
7.1 Sound card
m-audio.com They make recording studio and pro level audio equipment so I think they will be as good as soundblaster.
Cheap PCI cards?
Usually the same price, sometimes they cost more. IF you’ve dropped 2K for a Mac its not like you don’t have money.
Motherboards?
Apple makes the motherboards, not cheap and not easily available. I usually sell my old Mac and use the proceeds to buy a new one. Mac resale value is high.
http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?cgiurl=http%3A%2F~…
This is just for a G4/400, I have dual 1.25 so I am sure I can get $1500 easy.
Support for non-standard hardware?
You won’t get support for non-standard configs but Dell, Gateway, HP, Compaq and IBM don’t support non standard configs either.
I guess what you are trying to get at Joe is that Macs can’t be expanded and you can’t install anything in them and you can’t upgrade them without spending $100,000 on a new system. With that in mind, whats your point because you haven’t made a case for it, except a motherboard and companies like Dell don’t support “ASUS, Gigabyte, ECS motherboards” in their system. Try putting one in a GX50 as an example, its not going to happen.
Like I said, Whats your point?
do you have a handicap of some sort or just stupid?
any moron can pull up prices on anything.
do we really need to see that here? I’m typing this from a 2400xp oc’d to 2241Mhz. but at work, i use a dual 1.4 g4.
this is how it works: ANY computer under US $3500 is considered cheap(at my job), and they can afford any system I want.
This is OSnews. Not LinuxNews. Not X86News. (even though i’m writing this from redhat on that oc’d 2400xp using mozilla)
so why don’t you F off? if i see an article about Macs, I’d like to read something useful…cause I do have access to them.
I don’t want to see morons like you posting, over and over, how you can get motherboard X, for five cents.
who gives a fuck? I’ll spend whatever amount I want.
this is not LowPriceNews.
what’s next? Dialog about the cost of x86 versus Suns or SGIs?
This is a technology site. Want to be a fanboy, go over to PimplyFaced12yearoldoverclockingHis$200computerExtreme.com
on this good friday, i can honestly say, you’d be pulling my boot from your ass, for being an idiot.
I saw the benchmarks linked to on the main page to this discussion, and they’re all a matter of literally seconds.
1. That the Macs are beat by only seconds to the much hyped 3 ghz ddr machines with much faster buses and etc, is pretty surprising, given how much these seconds mean to some of the real turbo PC fans, it’s kind of silly, and you’d think the difference was a question of minutes or hours. Get real.
2. The factor of literally some seconds isn’t enough to make me toss any Mac in the bucket, much less buy a PC.
“do you have a handicap of some sort or just stupid?”
Why hasn’t this arsehole been moderated down?
When you’ve done that you can moderate down this post as well.
yes macs cost more and are slower.
get over it.
the multiplatform proficient are tired of reading fanboys wage war.
moderate this down too. thanks.
Hear hear
http://www.creativemac.com/2003/04_apr/tutorials/aerender030408.htm
nb. These are not cheap oem parts but high quality (equal/better than Apple)components.
but apple uses cheap oem parts only…
Yes, Apple is using cheap OEM 802.11g cards, cheap FireWire 800 controllers, cheap gigabit ethernet chipsets, and cheap slot loading DVD-R drives designed for laptops. That’s not to mention cheap 17″ LCDs for notebooks, or cheap 23″ plasma displays.
Reality check here… if these are truly OEM components, why is Apple the only one using them?
this is hilarious. religious wars concerning software and hardware. maybe we should change the subject to something that results in less polemic vitriol. what’s the best browser?
it’s regrettable that there exists a bottom-line mentality that yields the unfortunate spiral of (highest) speed for (lowest) price equals “the best.” functionality, it seems to me, should be the final arbiter. if a presario with “windows 95” is sufficient for you, great.
where am i coming from? read the subject line…
You know what? It doesn’t do a bit of good to tell me that Macs aren’t proprietary. They ARE. Try upgrading your motherboard… CAN’T. Try upgrading your CPU… CAN’T. Power Supply… NOPE… Wanna put all your stuff in a new fancy case… HELL NO! Not unless it’s Apple stuff. THAT is what makes Apple proprietary, not thier hard drives, cdrom, etc. Hell if you ask me, my laptop isn’t proprietary either. It uses a standard VGA port on the back to hook up to a monitor. It uses a standard slimline IDE CD-ROM, and a standard 2.5inch hard drive. But you know what? ITS STILL PROPRIETARY ANY WAY YOU LOOK AT IT…
” it’s regrettable that there exists a bottom-line mentality that yields the unfortunate spiral of (highest) speed for (lowest) price equals “the best.””
Here, here.
I hope the comments section of this site doesn’t degenerate into this type of spiral, which can be seen on any 3 PC centric sites around the net. It has the effect of making every discussion become a function of “I can save $50 by using part/machine/component X therefore component X….” etc.
for the Mac articles you always have the haters popping up distorting the discussion to “macs drool and pcs rulz” type of discussions. They can never say anything constructive despite being “experts and knowing everything” about Macs.
They tell you how Macs cost thousands of dollars but they can build a PC for $300. My comments on that is not everyone is Sanford & Son or George Constanza. Money is NOT my point in buying a computer. I’ll buy a Mac if it costs $200, I’ll still buy it if it costs $2000. People buying Macs are just not fixated on price, sorry. I know Macs are expensive but I don’t cry about every chance I get and it really doesn’t bother me that I have to voice it every time I see a Mac article which seems to be the case.
These people can never seem to shut up and they have to put people down for using Macs cause it makes them feel good for choosing a PC.
I have many friends that use PCs and I can tell you that none of their rigs are particlarly spectacular in looks, performance or reliability. They do win in price however but its like someone in a Chevy Nova putting you down because they can beat your BMW 3 series in 0-60. They discount everything else like.