PDA

View Full Version : Has Apple lied to us


furryrabidbunny
Jun 6, 2005, 06:14 PM
For years we have heard of the megahertz myth, and how the PPC architecture is simply superior to the x86. I have believed it, and so have others, and for the most part, the "megahertz myth" was true. Then why such a rapid change in architecture? Granted IBM and Freescale have been slow to develop a devoted notebook ship, and have been slow to up the clockspeed, they have made progress. Dual core was coming. Low power consumption chips were coming. Or were they actually not coming any time soon? Was IBM simply lying about their progress, or has apple suddenly become tired of waited and is abandoning their research and IBM's and Moto's. Jobs said G5's were going to be continued to be developed and put out. What happens if we get a G5 powerbook, maybe a complete G5 line, and the Benchmarks blow away intel. Are we screwed? This is what I believe will happen. The G5 powerbook becomes vaporware, never happens. G5s barely top 3 GHZ, and still need to be liquid cooled. 10.5 comes out on a complete dual core intel pentium line, consumer products with the m line for a great value and extremely low power, and the pro line gets a p5 dual core. That new line also comes with a handy new feature; run your current Windows setup with migration assistance or that newly released "longhorn" to help in your home's or business' transition to the mac platform.

risc
Jun 6, 2005, 06:17 PM
Apple are a corporation they are in the business of making money, do you really need to ask if they lied to you?

dotdotdot
Jun 6, 2005, 06:20 PM
I can't read through that whole thing without line break ups, but my general answer:

Simply because the intel processors have advanced so much since when the G5s were released, and all the G5s got were 2.7 while Intel processors can reach almost 4 GHz, AND over 4 GHz with overclocking.

Also, dual Intel processors are much cheaper than dual IBM G5s.

I can almost guarrantee that the lower class macs, like the eMac and the mini, will swith to intel first to keep the same price but THEY make more money, and they will be able to boost up the stuff like RAM and video for less money.

And 10.5 will have support for Intel out of the box, while 10.4 may just get an update, or no support at all.

mymemory
Jun 6, 2005, 06:29 PM
Dotdotdot, take a look at the keynote... OSX have been Intel based all the time.

Apple just wanted to take a different road from the PC market but it just didn't happen.

AMD was not a choice because if they ever felt the need of switching they won't take more risks. Intel have been there always.

Yes in a way, Apple has lied in the way they couldn't mask any more the lack of speed by pushing their OS but is good in a way.

Maxiseller
Jun 6, 2005, 06:47 PM
The thing is, while Apple class it as the "megahertz" myth, it is really the "OS" myth - after all, we haven't all been complaining about the speed of the Macs to a great deal. I think every Mac fan accepts that the PPC architecture is in fact beter - but when there's almost 1.5 GHz between the fastest pentium and the fastest G5, we know somthing is wrong.

We've all been pushing Steve to do somthing about the ridiculous 167 system bus and not even up to 2Ghz in the Powerbooks - and now he has.

He's fixed the problem by going with a manufacturer who has the largest of all supplies. They will ALWAYS design new chips, and they have many, many customers. Apple is no longer one voice in the mist - it can too fight for the fastest chips along with the many computer manufacturers. They will still use proprietory hardware, and you wil still require a Mac to run it on, it just helps us all in the long run.

I say "cheers" to the journey.

Hey come on, at least we've all got somthing to chat about!

bosrs1
Jun 6, 2005, 06:50 PM
Dotdotdot, take a look at the keynote... OSX have been Intel based all the time.

Apple just wanted to take a different road from the PC market but it just didn't happen.

AMD was not a choice because if they ever felt the need of switching they won't take more risks. Intel have been there always.

Yes in a way, Apple has lied in the way they couldn't mask any more the lack of speed by pushing their OS but is good in a way.
Exactly. They weren't lying at first, but as Intel and AMD have pulled away it has developed into a lie. One they intend to put to rest.

javiercr
Jun 6, 2005, 06:50 PM
Apple are a corporation they are in the business of making money, do you really need to ask if they lied to you?

there you go!

Xtremehkr
Jun 6, 2005, 07:06 PM
I think IBM oversold the PowerPC and now that it has not become a reality, Apple are doing what needs to be done to correct that situation.

bosrs1
Jun 6, 2005, 07:17 PM
I think IBM oversold the PowerPC and now that it has not become a reality, Apple are doing what needs to be done to correct that situation.
Smartest post all day. I'm tired of the doomsayers. You're upset about having Intel... get over it. IBM was a dead end for Apple.

Benjamindaines
Jun 6, 2005, 10:09 PM
for a while the MHz myth was true but after a while intel WAY out performed Apple then it became pure marketing. C'mon try and name one company that hasnt lied to you at least once.... i betchya cant

bosrs1
Jun 6, 2005, 10:13 PM
for a while the MHz myth was true but after a while intel WAY out performed Apple then it became pure marketing. C'mon try and name one company that hasnt lied to you at least once.... i betchya cant
Burger King.

Benjamindaines
Jun 6, 2005, 10:15 PM
Burger King.
im sure someone can find something... come on help me out here people

Fiddytree85
Jun 6, 2005, 10:22 PM
Apple is the truth, the only truth. :rolleyes:

bosrs1
Jun 6, 2005, 10:23 PM
im sure someone can find something... come on help me out here people
There is no truth but the Whopper. You know this to be true.

dswoodley
Jun 6, 2005, 10:23 PM
im sure someone can find something... come on help me out here people

Burger king lies to me every week. "Have it your way" my ass

Benjamindaines
Jun 6, 2005, 10:26 PM
Burger king lies to me every week. "Have it your way" my ass
see there we go i told ya didnt i...

bosrs1
Jun 6, 2005, 10:29 PM
see there we go i told ya didnt i...
lalalalalalalalallalala....

Lies, all lies. He's a McDonald's employee.

Duff-Man
Jun 6, 2005, 10:36 PM
Duff-Man says....c'mon, really....we are talking about technology here. This business moves quickly....targets are missed...happens to Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Motorola - you name it. What Apple may have said in the past has very little bearing on what the reality is now and can't really in all honesty be called a "lie" - this business is bult on projections on future technologies that don't always pan out the way they are expected to. Apple/Steve made a tough decision and you can bet they did not make it in haste.....not everything is a big "conspiracy" to screw the customers....oh yeah!

Benjamindaines
Jun 6, 2005, 10:42 PM
lalalalalalalalallalala....

Lies, all lies. He's a McDonald's employee.
nope... cant drive a mercedes on a McDonald's pay check

dswoodley
Jun 6, 2005, 11:13 PM
Ok, I take it back. Burger King doesn't really lie to me, they just tell me what the can't do after I ask them (i.e. two pickles, but well drained; three concentric circles of mustard with two cocentric circles of ketchup on the inside, etc.)...yeah, i like being a pain in the ass.

Anyway, lie are all relevant in the business world

FoxyKaye
Jun 6, 2005, 11:31 PM
To paraphrase Obi-wan: Apple didn't lie to us, they just told us the truth from a certian perspective.

It's what all businesses do to make money.

IJ Reilly
Jun 6, 2005, 11:49 PM
Hey, maybe IBM is lying to Microsoft right now about delivering all those super-duper PPCs for the X-box. :D

spaceballl
Jun 6, 2005, 11:51 PM
You guys are morons if you ever thought that the CPUs were really faster than the stuff from AMD/Intel... Especially the newer 64 bit dual core stuff.

I am an Apple user because of OS X and iLife... If I wanted faster and better games, I'd go PC.

IJ Reilly
Jun 6, 2005, 11:54 PM
You guys are morons if you ever thought that the CPUs were really faster than the stuff from AMD/Intel... Especially the newer 64 bit dual core stuff.

I am an Apple user because of OS X and iLife... If I wanted faster and better games, I'd go PC.

Morons, eh? Nice way to enter a discussion. :(

furryrabidbunny
Jun 7, 2005, 01:32 AM
ok. lying was a strong word. My thing is it doesn't seem like apple gave the g5 enough time to truely develop. How can you suddenly explain away all those benchmarks on the powermac pages about how much incredibly faster a g5 is at working with pro apps when they are switching to the "slower" processor??? Unless intel has some amazing things coming with the pentium m (which should be the main chip used, super thin and small desktops and notebooks running super cool and super fast) and the pentium 4 d (which if i understand it isn't even truly dual core, that they just bascially "glued" two dies together) it just simply seems like we haven't been getting a true picture of things, or the G5 is truely just a bad chip with no future.

p.s. I can't wait to see what IBM comes up with for the next generation playstation xbox and revolution. Seeing how none of the chips (minus maybe cell) are close to what they are claiming to be able to do, with less than a year before they debut. People will be disappointed when 3 core 3.2 ghz power processor don't exist.

risc
Jun 7, 2005, 02:19 AM
My thing is it doesn't seem like apple gave the g5 enough time to truely develop.

Have you entertained the thought that maybe it was IBM that gave up on the G5? They can't get it in to a notebook, so they are missing out a huge chunk of the Apple market, I look at it this way Apple sell a large amount of G5 based boxes _BUT_ Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are a HUGE HUGE market for IBM processors I know where I'd be putting my R&D money if I was IBM.

It's all speculation though I love OS X if my next Mac has an Intel CPU in it, it's all good!

furryrabidbunny
Jun 7, 2005, 01:05 PM
Have you entertained the thought that maybe it was IBM that gave up on the G5? They can't get it in to a notebook, so they are missing out a huge chunk of the Apple market, I look at it this way Apple sell a large amount of G5 based boxes _BUT_ Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are a HUGE HUGE market for IBM processors I know where I'd be putting my R&D money if I was IBM.

It's all speculation though I love OS X if my next Mac has an Intel CPU in it, it's all good!
IBM probably did give up. Apple probably pushed and pushed for R&D and wasn't getting it because of all those little pretty game units they are making chips for. I doubt though that IBM will make huge profit off of them, unless sony, nintendo, and microsoft plan on taking all the loss. I also really doubt right now that IBM can manufacture enough chips for all these systems. Hell, they couldn't even make enough for powermacs and imacs.

Toe
Jun 7, 2005, 01:19 PM
So what's up with this page?
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

It says over and over that Power Mac G5 stomps Pentium 4s. And the first sentence bluntly states: "The PowerPC G5 out-shoots the Pentium 4 in a battery of tests."

What are we to make of this? It doesn't mention Windows at all. It doesn't mention OS X architecture in terms of speed. It is all about the hardware.

Seems like they may need to, ahem, clarify this, no? :rolleyes: That may be a bit difficult when they will be trying to sell G5's on the high end for another year or two....

wordmunger
Jun 7, 2005, 01:27 PM
So what's up with this page?
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

It says over and over that Power Mac G5 stomps Pentium 4s. And the first sentence bluntly states: "The PowerPC G5 out-shoots the Pentium 4 in a battery of tests."

What are we to make of this? It doesn't mention Windows at all. It doesn't mention OS X architecture in terms of speed. It is all about the hardware.

Seems like they may need to, ahem, clarify this, no? :rolleyes: That may be a bit difficult when they will be trying to sell G5's on the high end for another year or two....

see this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130854&highlight=powerpc+pentium).

(brief summary: it's not about P4 vs. G5, it's about Pentium-M vs. G4)

bug
Jun 7, 2005, 03:36 PM
So what's up with this page?
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

It says over and over that Power Mac G5 stomps Pentium 4s. And the first sentence bluntly states: "The PowerPC G5 out-shoots the Pentium 4 in a battery of tests."


Itís about the future. 2007 powermacs are not going to have current Intel chips in them, they will have 2007 Intel chips.

That and the mobile line from Intel just kills the G4 so much so that it is embarrassing.

No one is lying to you, but it's technology - what is 'the best' is constantly changing. If you get caught up in the ideology of it, you loose.