PDA

View Full Version : Where's DDR ?!


terramax
Nov 8, 2002, 09:38 AM
I just cannot believe this one... I mean you build a STATE of the ART notebook. Through in EVERYTHING and still make it look great and yet... oh, wait let me see, yeah let's stick with 133MHZ SDRAM !!!!!
What in the world where they smoking when they came up with that ?!

I mean no one. NO one releases laptops without DDR anymore. And yet apple just thinks... well, we don't need fast memory, no, no the titanium shell will sell this little baby.

I am deeply frustrated.

iGav
Nov 8, 2002, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by terramax
I just cannot believe this one... I mean you build a STATE of the ART notebook. Through in EVERYTHING and still make it look great and yet... oh, wait let me see, yeah let's stick with 133MHZ SDRAM !!!!!
What in the world where they smoking when they came up with that ?!

I mean no one. NO one releases laptops without DDR anymore. And yet apple just thinks... well, we don't need fast memory, no, no the titanium shell will sell this little baby.

I am deeply frustrated.

Oh dear........... :rolleyes:

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 10:39 AM
Two words:

No $H!T

evilpenguin21
Nov 8, 2002, 10:56 AM
If you love DDR ram so much just buy a Dell and shut your pie whole :-p

Jimong5
Nov 8, 2002, 11:46 AM
I was wondering how long this would take.....
(to get a flame that is):rolleyes:

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by evilpenguin21
If you love DDR ram so much just buy a Dell and shut your pie whole :-p

No, I bought a 2.2 ghz Xeon/128MBVCard/60GBHD/512MBRDRam for thousands less and twice the performance

I like Apple, but they DO need to do some catching up

Mr Jobs
Nov 8, 2002, 12:40 PM
whats the point of having DDR right now the current g3/4 dont even take full advantage of it and it cost three times as much as sd-ram. i rather save some (err a lot) money on memory.

ddtlm
Nov 8, 2002, 12:45 PM
Without a DDR FSB, DDR RAM in the PBook would be worthless ... and here I thought everyone knew that by now. :eek:

Sun Baked
Nov 8, 2002, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by agreenster


No, I bought a 2.2 ghz Xeon/128MBVCard/60GBHD/512MBRDRam for thousands less and twice the performance

I like Apple, but they DO need to do some catching up

Is it really twice the performance or just twice the MHz?

They really are two different concepts...

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 12:47 PM
I think thats what the original thread starter wanted to say. Why hasnt Apple made these advancements to their FSB so we could have ddr ram in the TiBook?

Apple sure is far behind for being so revolutionary

PLUS, if it saves money to have SDram in the Ti, then why are we paying so much for a Ti?

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Sun Baked


Is it really twice the performance or just twice the MHz?

They really are two different concepts...

I run Maya on both systems.

Twice the performance in display and development speed (modeling/animating/particles), and 3 times the speed in rendering

ddtlm
Nov 8, 2002, 12:50 PM
agreenster:

No, I bought a 2.2 ghz Xeon/128MBVCard/60GBHD/512MBRDRam for thousands less and twice the performance
Hopefully thats a dual Xeon cause otherwise you wasted your money. Single Xeons are more expensive than the essentially identical standard P4's, yet lack the 533mhz FSB.

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 12:51 PM
Yep.

ddtlm
Nov 8, 2002, 12:53 PM
agreenster:

Where did you find a dual Xeon for "thousands less", and why didn't you get a dual Athlon?

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 01:09 PM
My work bought my machine, and from what Ive heard, AMD is the way to go. I wish we would have gone with AMD.

Anyway, I recently saw some benchmarks in a recent issue of Computer Graphics World, and AMD keeps up with the XEON in everything but gaming fps. (and who cares about that anyway)

But yes, we got our dual Xeons for around 2000 bucks (w/ a monitor) w/ all the specs posted above. A dual 1gZ mac w/ the 128 Vid Card and big HD would run upwards of 3 grand or more.

Cmon. You know macs cost more, I shouldnt have to convince you

ddtlm
Nov 8, 2002, 01:16 PM
agreenster:

Of course I know how much Macs cost, but last time I had checked places like Dell also wanted an arm and a leg for dual Xeons. :) Typing this from my Linux-dual-P3-Xeon-1meg, by the way.;)

gopher
Nov 8, 2002, 01:18 PM
Thousands less? $1700 for an 867 Mhz dual processor G4 tower. To be thousands less it would have to be giving you money back...but how many thousands did you have to spend on security measures and system administration?

ddtlm
Nov 8, 2002, 01:22 PM
gopher:

Thanks, we needed a dose of irrational Mac-boosting. Really, we did. This place was, too, oh, logical. But you saved the day.

agreenster
Nov 8, 2002, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by gopher
Thousands less? $1700 for an 867 Mhz dual processor G4 tower. To be thousands less it would have to be giving you money back...but how many thousands did you have to spend on security measures and system administration?

Thousands less for an equivalent system. Your dual 867 has neither the processing power nor the Video Card nor the DDR ram that the PC has for less money

User X
Nov 8, 2002, 02:24 PM
I agree with MR JOBS. There would be no significant speed increase if they incuded DDR ram. We have seen it with the current powermacs. It would be nice to say you have a DDR sysytem but you could be sure there would not have been a $200 price drop. Until they come out with the power4lite DDR will not be utilized. I think Putting DDR in the powermacs was just done to passify complaints.

jefhatfield
Nov 8, 2002, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by ddtlm
Without a DDR FSB, DDR RAM in the PBook would be worthless ... and here I thought everyone knew that by now. :eek:

don't generalize and say "worthless"...stats show some improvement with DDR RAM as macworld has mentioned, but basically, you are right

i would have liked to have seen DDR and i think it will definitely be in the next version of the tibook

but we did get "1 ghz" and "superdrive"...things many of us posters have been asking for on these forums for some time now:D

Jimong5
Nov 8, 2002, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by agreenster
I think thats what the original thread starter wanted to say. Why hasnt Apple made these advancements to their FSB so we could have ddr ram in the TiBook?

Apple sure is far behind for being so revolutionary


You cant just slap a DDR FSB on any chip.. you need a chip designed for DDR to get it to work. This Is Motos fault, NOT apples, and most likely be fixed by the Moble 970/G5?

terramax
Nov 8, 2002, 10:31 PM
Firstly I have to say I love you guys. I put on a remark about the TiBook and a few hours later there's this big discussion going on... lovely.

To clarify things: I do not want to hurt anybody's feelings. I'm sorry if I might have phrased the question a little harshly. I do want to point out what I persume to be a major flaw in Apple's notebook.

I own a top-spec Tibook, albeit the second generation one and I am very happy with it. It just baffles me that Apple uses some very antiquated hardware by industry standarts.

And that includes the SLOW system bus (PC 400Mhz/Apple 133) the slow RAM (PC 266/Apple 133) and a, let's face it, old processor that was brilliant vor it's time but is just being milked and milked out... [ I was comparing "PC" laptops to Tibooks, therefore the stats, just to clarify]

Anyway, let's hope that Apple gets these pressing problems sorted out. Other than that - I mean, they are the bomb :)

yzedf
Nov 8, 2002, 11:12 PM
apple = eye candy

there is not much emphasis on performance, and there hasn't been for a while now... :-(

crappy system bus, memory bus, old processors, and odd choice in form factors.

the laptops i love! ddr would be nice, but whatever.

the desktops are, IMO, overpriced junk. they are not competitive with PC's in system performance, architecture, or configurability. th only thing they've got going for them is the OS. just now moving to ddr, using an implementation that tests no faster then the former generation pc133 generation! they are so bad, the only way to even try and compete is to double up the processors, which is only usefull for certain apps. did i mention price?

it would be nice if they could compete on something other than quality of hype and advertising...

*ducks flame*

Jimong5
Nov 8, 2002, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by yzedf
apple = eye candy

there is not much emphasis on performance, and there hasn't been for a while now... :-(

crappy system bus, memory bus, old processors, and odd choice in form factors.

the laptops i love! ddr would be nice, but whatever.

the desktops are, IMO, overpriced junk. they are not competitive with PC's in system performance, architecture, or configurability. th only thing they've got going for them is the OS. just now moving to ddr, using an implementation that tests no faster then the former generation pc133 generation! they are so bad, the only way to even try and compete is to double up the processors, which is only usefull for certain apps. did i mention price?

it would be nice if they could compete on something other than quality of hype and advertising...

*ducks flame*
OS X and iApps. 'nuff said. and I don't know what's wrong with what you've used, but my Dual 867 has met and exceeded my every demand.

jefhatfield
Nov 9, 2002, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Jimong5

OS X and iApps. 'nuff said. and I don't know what's wrong with what you've used, but my Dual 867 has met and exceeded my every demand.

good point

if a computer meets one's demands, then there really is no need to go for two or three gigahertz

i could buy a cinema screen and that would be nice, but since i don't need it, i refrain from buying it

BenderBot1138
Nov 9, 2002, 09:29 AM
You can find DDR in every non-Apple product that doesn't concern itself with Specifications. Maybe someday, something EVEN better than DDR will come out, so you can then ask where's that EVEN better stuff. DDR isn't in because it doesn't meet Apple's strict Specifications, and since Apple isn't in business to make Computers crash, and Customers develop a whole subculture around a "Blue Screen of Dealth" problem, lets put the DDR to bed until Apple says it meets their Specifications.

P.S. have you looked at your video memory lately? It's not like Apple couldn't do it if they wanted.

jefhatfield
Nov 9, 2002, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by BenderBot1138
You can find DDR in every non-Apple product that doesn't concern itself with Specifications. Maybe someday, something EVEN better than DDR will come out, so you can then ask where's that EVEN better stuff. DDR isn't in because it doesn't meet Apple's strict Specifications, and since Apple isn't in business to make Computers crash, and Customers develop a whole subculture around a "Blue Screen of Dealth" problem, lets put the DDR to bed until Apple says it meets their Specifications.

P.S. have you looked at your video memory lately? It's not like Apple couldn't do it if they wanted.

that's a good point

apple is very specific and their gear seems to still work better than pcs, so in that respect i am happy

apple meets my needs just fine

Backtothemac
Nov 9, 2002, 10:19 AM
Man, when is everyone going to get it? Apple is about a complete experience. it is not about GHZ and DDR, and Rapid I/O, well, not yet. The Apple experience is about having a computer that will let you work. Having a system that works for you instead of you having to work on it. It is about style, and simplisity. It is about not having to worry about the Klez virus, or 58 Windows updates in one year. Or about a 127MB update that if you can't download, that you have to pay Microsoft 19.95 for and all it does is fix security problems. Not new features.

it is about knowing, without a doubt that your system will boot after you install and app, or piece of hardware. It is about knowing that your system will always, and I mean always give you the blue screen of life, instead of the blue screen of death.

It is about never having to hear the words, "You need to download windows drives to support that product". It is about being a small, savy, group of users that would prefer so called slower computing for stable computing. Even though I think the slower computing is crap.

jefhatfield
Nov 9, 2002, 10:24 AM
great to see you, bttm!

ovi needs company in the political threads

you are the conservative foreign policy expert;)

iGav
Nov 9, 2002, 10:28 AM
Well I can't wait to get my PowerBook G4 1GHz with 1GB RAM, and 'Superdrive'...... ;) :D

And anyone that doesn't like it can kiss my booty............ :eek: :D :p It's one Hot Mutha!! Well for a portable anyway.... heh heh!! :p

jefhatfield
Nov 9, 2002, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by iGAV
Well I can't wait to get my PowerBook G4 1GHz with 1GB RAM, and 'Superdrive'...... ;) :D

And anyone that doesn't like it can kiss my booty............ :eek: :D :p It's one Hot Mutha!! Well for a portable anyway.... heh heh!! :p

i would take that tibook over any pc laptop any day

did it cost more than $2999 us?

if i wanted a pc laptop as a second machine, it would definitely be the VAIO

iGav
Nov 9, 2002, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by jefhatfield


i would take that tibook over any pc laptop any day

did it cost more than $2999 us?

if i wanted a pc laptop as a second machine, it would definitely be the VAIO

It's costing me 2042 and I don't have to pay any TAX....... Tee Hee!! That's the absolute cheapest I've seen it in the UK...... I have no idea what BTTM could sell it for..... but I think he should consider branching out into the UK reseller market if it's cheaper!!

I must admit I can't wait to get my mitts on it, even if it's less exciting than when I bought my first TiBook at the start of 2001............ (I know what to expect with form factor etc, just can't wait to make a speed comparison between my PowerBook G4 500 and my PowerBook G4 1GHz....... heh heh I'm expecting a huge increase in performance!!

I confident that there isn't a better portable on this planet that suits my needs so well!! It's the daddy!!

SNAP on the PC laptop, the only one I'd consider is a VIAO.......... I was thinkng about getting one of those for cross-platform development...... but I only need a super slim one, not a fully featuered mutha!! I'd like to be able to carry it in the same laptop bag as my TiBook......

Backtothemac
Nov 9, 2002, 10:50 AM
Yep. I am totally happy with my iMac 800 17". Last night I realized that I did not have an OCR for OS X. So, what did I do? Curse the Mac? Nope. Booted Virtual PC, and installed my scanner there. Used the free OCR that came with it. Scaned, and then saved to a shared folder on the Mac's hard drive :)

Lets see someone with a PC launch Virtual Mac, and run say, Final Cut Pro, or DVD Studio Pro? Wait, they can't. I still have a PC, and I have never crashed it in four years. It runs AutoCad faster than the PIII 800's at the University. It is called Virtual PC, and it gives me the best of both worlds.

B2TM

Vroem
Nov 9, 2002, 11:44 AM
Hi
Just wanted to say this: You won't get a PC laptop with the performance and the possibilities of a powerbook, you'll only get a "portable desktop" with these specifications.

You won't get an operating system with a user interface on a PC. You'll either get an operating system that doesn't operate (windows) or a user interface that you almost can't use (windows/kde/gnome/all kinds of command prompts etc). On a mac you get a macOS.

Dunepilot
Nov 9, 2002, 03:06 PM
How do you avoid paying tax?!

I'm a student from the UK and I have no idea how that's possible...

As an aside, I have to add that I would NEVER buy a sony laptop if I had to take the Windows route - I worked for 13 months at a major computer reseller and the return rate on them was ridiculous (both DOA and subsequent problems). This was particularly a problem with the ultra-thin models which are made to be about as sturdy as paper. They're damn ugly, but if I had to take the PC laptop, it would have to be an IBM

Ambrose

Originally posted by iGAV


It's costing me 2042 and I don't have to pay any TAX....... Tee Hee!! That's the absolute cheapest I've seen it in the UK...... I have no idea what BTTM could sell it for..... but I think he should consider branching out into the UK reseller market if it's cheaper!!

I must admit I can't wait to get my mitts on it, even if it's less exciting than when I bought my first TiBook at the start of 2001............ (I know what to expect with form factor etc, just can't wait to make a speed comparison between my PowerBook G4 500 and my PowerBook G4 1GHz....... heh heh I'm expecting a huge increase in performance!!

I confident that there isn't a better portable on this planet that suits my needs so well!! It's the daddy!!

SNAP on the PC laptop, the only one I'd consider is a VIAO.......... I was thinkng about getting one of those for cross-platform development...... but I only need a super slim one, not a fully featuered mutha!! I'd like to be able to carry it in the same laptop bag as my TiBook......

MacCoaster
Nov 9, 2002, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by Vroem
Hi
Just wanted to say this: You won't get a PC laptop with the performance and the possibilities of a powerbook, you'll only get a "portable desktop" with these specifications.
Uh, yes you can get a PC laptop with even better performance and possibilities of a PowerBook G4.

http://www.sony.com/hitbox/goto-nav-sel-computers.shtml

Select the GXR600 series.

You get DVD-R/RW drive. A G4-crushing Pentium 4 processor, a 16.1" UXGA screen (goddamnit, Apple needs to update their LCD screens to be UXGA) with 1600x1200 pixels, DDR RAM, 400MHz Bus, etc.

Best of all, you can choose from a variety of configurations resulting in a varying pricing scheme. You can get a DVD-R/RW laptop for $1100 less than a PowerBook G4.
You won't get an operating system with a user interface on a PC. You'll either get an operating system that doesn't operate (windows) or a user interface that you almost can't use (windows/kde/gnome/all kinds of command prompts etc). On a mac you get a macOS.
Uh, it depends on the person. For me, any OS works. Windows XP works great for me. Mac OS X works great for me too. If you're basing your Windows experience with 9x/Me, then yes they can't operate. However, with XP, Microsoft's reputation is beginning to change, and because of this, Apple needs to start worrying and boost up its hardware and OS X (at least to speed of OS 9 and incorporate old features from Mac OS 9 like the Open File... dialog--in OS X, it doesn't do much, that needs to be improved, and other stuff.

You DO have command prompts in Mac OS X--Terminal. So what?

Yes, on the Mac you get the Mac OS, which is very nice, but otherwise, you get overpriced old hardware.

What Apple needs to do to the PowerBook:

- UXGA!!! Don't make me say it again. Look at how much the Apple displays blow. I'm all for Formac.
- Faster processors, even though it's not Apple's fault, oh well... I'll dismiss this one.
- Integrated BT.
- DDR, even fake DDR. It proved a slight improvement on the desktops.

The only reason why I'm considering the PowerBook G4 1GHz is 1.) Mac OS X 2.) Bluetooth (via adapter) 3.) Superdrive 4.) iApps are actually nice 5.) and so on...

I don't know, the Sony laptops are tempting.

Btw, Backtothemac, I never worry about the Klez virus. Apple has just as much updates in a year but they're packaged in major updates (versioned by date, including the x.x.1 updates)... What 127MB update that I can't download? Please explain further. I've never came across anything I couldn't download. When did I ever pay Microsoft $19.95? My hardware works well with XP, I install apps without rebooting and it works well. BSODs are very rare with Windows XP unless you have a really crappy $199 PC. And believe it or not, I've heard "you need to download drivers for Mac OS X." So what? :rolleyes:

Also, BTTM, you've forgotten the old days of PowerPC 603e/604e when Macs truly were the fastest desktops. Oh, I forgot it's all Motorola's fault. :rolleyes: If the Mac experience didn't include being the fastest around, then why is Apple advertising their products as Pentium-crushing. I guess they meant the original Pentium. :rolleyes:

Apple truly needs to innovate, catch up, and price their stuff right. Please--don't tell me Rendezvous is innovative. Apple didn't create Rendezvous; they simply made an implementation of zero-conf for their OS.

[ducks flames that are not in reality, c'mon guys, you know you can't just sit around and do nothing and let Apple take advantage of your ignorance to sell overpriced hardware based on old technology, if enough of us bitches, perhaps Apple will finally deliver to our expectations; oh well, ignorance is bliss]

jefhatfield
Nov 10, 2002, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by MacCoaster



Apple truly needs to innovate, catch up, and price their stuff right. Please--don't tell me Rendezvous is innovative. Apple didn't create Rendezvous; they simply made an implementation of zero-conf for their OS.

[ducks flames that are not in reality, c'mon guys, you know you can't just sit around and do nothing and let Apple take advantage of your ignorance to sell overpriced hardware based on old technology, if enough of us bitches, perhaps Apple will finally deliver to our expectations; oh well, ignorance is bliss]

i am sure there are people at apple who feel the same and we will see new things

it's just when and how much?

agreenster
Nov 11, 2002, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Man, when is everyone going to get it? Apple is about a complete experience. it is not about GHZ and DDR, and Rapid I/O

For you.

For me, I need every ounce of speed and performance a computer can muster to keep the animation flowing, and if Apple is going to push Maya for the Mac and Shake and FCP, then they better have the speed to back it up. Right now, they dont.

The 'whole Apple experience' is great for typical consumers, but what I thought was obvious was that I am referring to higher-end users who want to gt away from SGI or PC's.

iGav
Nov 12, 2002, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Dunepilot
How do you avoid paying tax?!

I'm a student from the UK and I have no idea how that's possible...

As an aside, I have to add that I would NEVER buy a sony laptop if I had to take the Windows route - I worked for 13 months at a major computer reseller and the return rate on them was ridiculous (both DOA and subsequent problems). This was particularly a problem with the ultra-thin models which are made to be about as sturdy as paper. They're damn ugly, but if I had to take the PC laptop, it would have to be an IBM

Ambrose



I'm a freelancer so I don't pay VAT..... Tee Hee.... that's VAT on pretty much anything..... clothing, travel, electrical items etc etc........ The marvels of the British TAX system!! Open to abuse at all times!! Tee Hee!!

Alternatively if you know anybody that owns a business, and they're willing to, they'd probably put a Mac through their books for you.... Hey presto, you get you VAT back and the worlds a happier place!!

I'm the reverse to you, I'd never want a IBM laptop..... the things still look like they're from the 80's!! Black plastic..... Stunning!! I know the Sonys had problems, but that's why you have warranties and decent insurance......... everytime my Mac dies, my insurance company hires me a replacement and pays me for loss of earnings.... But hey you ought to see my premium!! Very Nasty!! :p :p :p

jefhatfield
Nov 12, 2002, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by agreenster


For you.

For me, I need every ounce of speed and performance a computer can muster to keep the animation flowing, and if Apple is going to push Maya for the Mac and Shake and FCP, then they better have the speed to back it up. Right now, they dont.

The 'whole Apple experience' is great for typical consumers, but what I thought was obvious was that I am referring to higher-end users who want to gt away from SGI or PC's.

do you think macs can compete with those ultra expensive 64 bit sgi machines? in the movie industry?

pearl harbor used macs in some of the preliminary stages but needs 64 bit powerhouse commecial level computing to pull off those visual effects...at least that's what i have heard

can a G4 do the effects of a movie like pearl harbor?

jefhatfield
Nov 12, 2002, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Vroem
Hi
Just wanted to say this: You won't get a PC laptop with the performance and the possibilities of a powerbook, you'll only get a "portable desktop" with these specifications.

You won't get an operating system with a user interface on a PC. You'll either get an operating system that doesn't operate (windows) or a user interface that you almost can't use (windows/kde/gnome/all kinds of command prompts etc). On a mac you get a macOS.

i agree with you 99 percent!

but sony has models that come close if you can get used to XP

and ibm, though ugly, do have some good models if you can get past the look and get past windows

strange as it seems, these two makes and toshiba rate near the top, but the top of the PC laptop and desktop reviews more often than not are,

hold your breath,

dells...yuck

...and i was a dell warranty tech and the things i saw go wrong with them made me never want to buy a dell

i will give dell two things;

1) design has improved
2) better stats and greatly reduced prices while still getting #1 ratings

but that said, give me a tibook anyday...however, i
could get any two PCs for the price of a tibook

hey, steve jobs, i have a suggestion regarding price...what if you...................:p

agreenster
Nov 12, 2002, 09:45 AM
Believe it or not, I have seen many benchmarks where a dual AMD can outrender and out-perform an O2 or Fuel box with dual MIPS 64 bit processors. Plus, they only have 32MB video cards, so the interface is still slow. We had some new O2s when I was in school (last year), but everyone used the dual P4's because they were faster.

So, if Apple could advance their speed and processing capabilities, they could make a move on the movie industry. (or any type of CG industry)

OSX, Unix, and 64 bits. Maya, Shake.....hmmm.

However, SGI DOES have them when it comes to really high end visualization systems--but that isnt Apples market anyway.

agreenster
Nov 12, 2002, 09:50 AM
I know OSX looks great and everyone loves it, but Ive been using XP for about 6 months, and have had ZERO problems with it....

Plus, when it comes to connecting to servers, my laptop always needs a restart after I plug in the ethernet cable (which is such a hassle) AND takes a good 20 seconds before it recognizes the server. (not just on one particular server, even when I just connect my laptop and G4 tower)

Windows recognizes it instantly, and in about 2 seconds. Plus, you dont have to 'connect to server,' it just does instantly.

jefhatfield
Nov 12, 2002, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by agreenster
Believe it or not, I have seen many benchmarks where a dual AMD can outrender and out-perform an O2 or Fuel box with dual MIPS 64 bit processors. Plus, they only have 32MB video cards, so the interface is still slow. We had some new O2s when I was in school (last year), but everyone used the dual P4's because they were faster.

So, if Apple could advance their speed and processing capabilities, they could make a move on the movie industry. (or any type of CG industry)

OSX, Unix, and 64 bits. Maya, Shake.....hmmm.

However, SGI DOES have them when it comes to really high end visualization systems--but that isnt Apples market anyway.

SGI has to have something...they are almost out of business so who knows, maybe they will need to expand elsewhere leaving room for a financially more healthy (barely) apple to take up the slack:p

actually, i am kidding...apple needs to hang onto their r and d money, as it is shrinking very fast and continue on its safe path for now until they can, if they need to, make a big move

i have not heard a lot about the ibm 970 lately and if it happens, it won't be anytime soon

better to have a 1.25 ghz G4 than a processor which may not exist in any number in the outside world

i have heard about hard drives which were small in their physical size and can hold terabytes but supposedly, they are used for an agency that deals with commercial shipping and other nautical purposes

i don't see a terabyte hard drive coming soon to a mall near you in a PC or mac:p ;) :D

ffakr
Nov 12, 2002, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by MacCoaster

http://www.sony.com/hitbox/goto-nav-sel-computers.shtml

Select the GXR600 series.

You get DVD-R/RW drive. A G4-crushing Pentium 4 processor, a 16.1" UXGA screen (goddamnit, Apple needs to update their LCD screens to be UXGA)

um, yea.. because I love reading text at 1600x1200 on a 15 or 16" screen.
Originally posted by MacCoaster

Best of all, you can choose from a variety of configurations resulting in a varying pricing scheme. You can get a DVD-R/RW laptop for $1100 less than a PowerBook G4.

So, what are you smoking? The base model is $1900... that has a DVD-CDR (not a DVDR-CDR). It has a 30gig drive and 256MB ram. It uses Radeon 7500 vid chip and it weighs 8 lbs!!!.. no wait...they are being sneaky... the tech specs say 8.4lbs with one battery and the removable drive plugged in the bay!
The base TiG4 has the same CDr/DVD config, same memory, 10GB MORE hard drive for $2300. The TiG4 has the Radeon 9000 mobile vid chip and weighs 5.4lbs! Biggest difference are processor and screen.... and the fact that the Sony is 2.6 lbs heavier (if you plug it in and remove the battery and CD drive ;-).
If you move to the mid range G4, you get a bit closer to your claimed price disparity... it costs $800 more than the base sony, but you get twice the memory, twice the hard drive, a faster G4 (than the Apple base model), twice the video ram (to back up the much faster vid chip).... and still at almost half the weight.
Oh yea, The mac gets you 6 pin Firewire too, not the crappy 4pin iLink unpowered variation that sony ships.

I guess that your choice isn't all that clear cut a victory for the PC world, is it?

...ffakr

oh geez, it gets better (I have to edit this one..)
You can get the second from lowest Sony for $2200.. still has a 1.8GHz Mobile (er. castrated) P4 and it ups the memory to 512MB. Still half the hard drive of the 'better' TiG4, all other stats the same. You don't get a DVDR until you hit the $2500 price point, but you still only get a 40GB hard drive.
Don't get me wrong, this would be a nice 8.4lb LCD desktop at $2500, but I'd pay to see 'the love' after you had to carry this sucker around for 8 hours in your laptop bag. ;-)

All in all, I'd take the G4... from strictly a hardware standpoint (even considering price). It is good enough in all that matters... good battery life, good screen, great video, lots of space, good looks (somewhat important), more than enough horsepower for a portable... and it's better than the sony in other ways, better video, less heat, better firewire (no extra cable for your 2.5" FW drive), and of course it weighs a ton less.

Just MHO... Ffakr

LethalWolfe
Nov 12, 2002, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by agreenster
Believe it or not, I have seen many benchmarks where a dual AMD can outrender and out-perform an O2 or Fuel box with dual MIPS 64 bit processors. Plus, they only have 32MB video cards, so the interface is still slow. We had some new O2s when I was in school (last year), but everyone used the dual P4's because they were faster.

So, if Apple could advance their speed and processing capabilities, they could make a move on the movie industry. (or any type of CG industry)

OSX, Unix, and 64 bits. Maya, Shake.....hmmm.

However, SGI DOES have them when it comes to really high end visualization systems--but that isnt Apples market anyway.


I realize yer comments are targeted towards 3D/CG, but Apple already owns the TV and Movie industries. The FXs might be done on an SGI machine, but the editing is done on a Mac.


Lethal

agreenster
Nov 12, 2002, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by LethalWolfe



I realize yer comments are targeted towards 3D/CG, but Apple already owns the TV and Movie industries. The FXs might be done on an SGI machine, but the editing is done on a Mac.


Lethal

No they arent. Im not going to into all the why's, but film is rarely cut on a mac. Only recently have directors been cutting movies on a mac (soderburgh) but very rarely. Trailers are often cut on a mac, but not the final film output.

As for TV, higher end systems are also used like Video Toaster, and systems that can do D1 full frame uncompressed video. Even Avid is still used quite a bit (The wondows version). Macs dont do full frame video very well, unless coupled with all the necessary D1 hardware (which, is so modified, might as well have just gotten a different computer altogether.--like a PC for half the price!) But, yes, Macs are used more on video editing than Film.

Now that Apple has bought Shake.....who knows though

Anyway, do your homework and find out what people are really cutting their stuff with. I would say less than 25 percent use macs.

Bottom line though--APple needs to do two things:

Cut the price
Speed up the box

Other than that, they are great machines.

MacCoaster
Nov 12, 2002, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by ffakr
um, yea.. because I love reading text at 1600x1200 on a 15 or 16" screen.
Damn right. It's a lot better than the PowerBook's ****ty LCD. Have you *EVER* experienced those 16.1" LCD screens? They're godly.
So, what are you smoking? The base model is $1900... that has a DVD-CDR [b](not a DVDR-CDR). It has a 30gig drive and 256MB ram. It uses Radeon 7500 vid chip and it weighs 8 lbs!!!.. no wait...they are being sneaky... the tech specs say 8.4lbs with one battery and the removable drive plugged in the bay!
Whoops, sorry. Glanced at the wrong number, was in a hurry. I'll give you that. However, take the top two end. Still $200+ difference. I get more for less.
The base TiG4 has the same CDr/DVD config, same memory, 10GB MORE hard drive for $2300. The TiG4 has the Radeon 9000 mobile vid chip and weighs 5.4lbs! Biggest difference are processor and screen.... and the fact that the Sony is 2.6 lbs heavier (if you plug it in and remove the battery and CD drive ;-).
Radeon 9000 == Slightly improved 7500. Not much difference except squeezing out battery life, 5 more fps (doesn't matter esp on Laptops... PowerBook's LCD is so damn bad... the UXGA ones have better refresh rate/response rates).
oh geez, it gets better (I have to edit this one..)
You can get the second from lowest Sony for $2200.. still has a 1.8GHz Mobile (er. castrated) P4 and it ups the memory to 512MB. Still half the hard drive of the 'better' TiG4, all other stats the same. You don't get a DVDR until you hit the $2500 price point, but you still only get a 40GB hard drive.
Don't get me wrong, this would be a nice 8.4lb LCD desktop at $2500, but I'd pay to see 'the love' after you had to carry this sucker around for 8 hours in your laptop bag. ;-)
The Pentium 4 is still faster than the G4, even at that speed.

And damn, if you complain about ~2 lbs difference, you've got a problem. Excercise! I drag more than 20 pounds on a constant basis everyday, so weight isn't that much of an issue.

$2500 is a lot less than $3000 on such a worthless screen, overpriced processor, etc. The only good thing on the PowerBook is the superdrive and Mac OS X.