DDR PowerMacs?

[arn]

ThinkSecret (http://www.thinksecret.com/features/ddrpowermacs.html) updates with concerns that the DDR Motherboards may be delaying the introduction of the next geneartion PowerMacs.

[mischief]

2Ghz for 5 minutes. Fizzzle.

[Catfish_Man]

...lack of DDR is probably the biggest performance hangup of the current Powermacs, so I hope they iron out those problems.

[AmbitiousLemon]

jeez this just sucks. its been so long since apple had a decent pro desktop. now problems with the motherboards, and no one is even talking g5 anymore. its disgusting how apple is holding on to the g4 way beyond its life. let it go apple. its got a cozy home in a beautiful new imac. let the powermacs move on. the g4 was only slated to go 1ghz. now they have "revised" the roadmap to take it kicking and screamning a few measly steps further. get over it people. there must be some seriousl issues with the g5 if moto is so interested into beating the dead horse that is the g4 powermac. im disgusted with all of this. why doesnt apple just drop moto on is starstartstar. let ibm take over and go shopping for a new third wheel. so much for steve's "vision." the g4 was revolutionary 4 years ago, now its just an anachronism. especially with osx highlighting all of the processor's short comings. i mean have u used a dual ghz g4? sure its fast. but just the fact that we even talk about the time it takes to load a simple window, or bring up a window with a lot of items is ridiculous. we shouldnt even be able to tell the difference in simple system level tasks like that over apple's entire product line. that should be so low level a task that it is done properly and indistinguishably fast by all macs. and yet apples ghz processor cant even do a decent job.

thanks for the operating system of the future steve, now how about some hardware that can run it properly?

[nero007]

From what I've read the current G4 chip isn't the same as the first G4 chip and that is why they're continuing with it. All of the problems that G5 was suppose to fix is going to be included in the new G4s.

[Beej]

I really hope that Macs don't get any faster for a long time, because I just got a new one! :D

[AmbitiousLemon]

:) hahaha Beej ur great. hahaha.

i think ur prayers are being answered by the idiots at moto.

id rather see apple not release any more power macs until the g5 is done even if it takes 12 months. let the g5 be a real big advance, blow everyone away. and dont waste resources on something else in the meantime. if they keep cannabalizing all of the g5's features and slapping them maphazardly onto the g4 then the g5 wont be quite so impressive to the masses. like i said g4 powermacs... let them die siliently. its time for the next revolution in desktop computing.

[OSeXy!]

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
...its time for the next revolution in desktop computing.

I agree. But Apple will probably try to sell us the "DDR myth" or the "fast bus" fallacy next...

I hope the rumours that IBM might make the "G5", or whatever they might chose to call it, are true...

[theranch]

Well...I'm growing tired of the wait. It's getting harder and harder using this 1st gen G4 350mhz machine. I can deal with it but when MWTY comes and goes without new G5 hardware OR MWNY comes and goes without new G5 hardware then the wait for a G5 "will become very tiresome"(SNL Deiter skit).
The wait is only getting hard because I keep reading these damn rumor sites and getting my hopes up. If I had just not read the rumor sites then I would be ok.
See...when I make the jump to a new machine I want it to be a big one. Obviously getting any new machine from the current lineup would be a big jump but not like a move to a G5 with some crazy a** case.

[kirknord]

the g4 was revolutionary 4 years ago, now its just an anachronism.]
I'm sorry but the G4 was released in August of '99. That's two and a half years ago. Two and a half years is not THAT long for a chip to be shipping.

[Dunepilot]

I have to say that the G4 PowerMac just isn't impressive any more.

What do we have in the professional Mac box?
DDR - no, ATA 133 - no, G5 -certainly not for a long time....

Apple have really let the ball drop for far too long.

2 years ago we were in a decent position related to the P3s and early athlons that were shipping. They had the clock speed advantage, but even a quick look at Barefeats.com tells you that the Pro-level Macs aren't keeping pace with the top PCs.

Fast system bus please? I want to get myself a new Mac for recording audio _this summer_ and I'd like it to be a _really fast one_ with a better chip architecture. The G4 has had its day as a pro-level processor, and they can do what they like to it, lengthening the pipeline etc, but it just seems to me that Apple can't make claims about MHz myth when they're using the same tricks to get more out of the Moto processors, giving the Apollo G4s false longevity.

The Dunepilot

[mischief]

Realize: many of the hundreds of vendors that Apple, IBM, and Moto have been using and subsiquently their vendors and so on have been either entrenched against an adverse market or killed by it.

The initial release of the new machines we'll see at MWNY were probably first scheduled for this spring's seybold. The whole process is lagging a bit currently, not just Apple or Moto.

The current high end default G4 is Maxed out for RAM and comes with 2 80Gb HDs. Apple only does this when they're gonna discontinue a case.

[StealthRider]

Originally posted by kirknord

I'm sorry but the G4 was released in August of '99. That's two and a half years ago. Two and a half years is not THAT long for a chip to be shipping.

Too true. The Pentium III is 3 to 4 YEARS old, and no one in Windoze world's complaining about that.....

[spikey]

Originally posted by StealthRider


Too true. The Pentium III is 3 to 4 YEARS old, and no one in Windoze world's complaining about that.....

No one in the windows world complains because most of them are stupid and dont know jack ****ing crap about PCs. And aslso the PC experts dont complain because they dont care, the are half intelligent and use athlons.

How long did it take thinksecret to assume this???
For ****s sake, they should read this forum and realise its what i for one have been saying now for 2 months.

[Dunepilot]

Originally posted by StealthRider


Too true. The Pentium III is 3 to 4 YEARS old, and no one in Windoze world's complaining about that.....


The original PIII was announced at the end of Feb 99 (in fact, 3 years today).

The G4 7400 was announced in a Powermac in September of that same year.

So, there was a few months lag in getting the G4 out of the door after the P3. So what? Well, in case you hadn't noticed, Mac users are no longer in the enviable position of being a processor generation ahead, as we were with the G3 against the PII. We don't remotely match clock speed, and Intel have leapfrogged to a whole new generation of processor.

Noone's complaining about the PIII because they have a PIV and a damn fast system bus available to them as a high-end option. Moreover, you don't even see many PIIIs these days because the PIVs are so cheap. Mac users demand and expect more speed and architecture innovation than we've seen in the last 2 years. I know that a lot of people solely blame Moto for the problems, but IBM haven't exactly stepped into the breach because they're also concerned about their embedded bottom line.

Ultimately the AIM alliance is hurting Apple's ability to gain new converts. If they'd shipped a MUCH faster G4 or a DDR motherboard last month maybe people would be more optimistic. Instead it looks like they're
a)waiting to release all the goodies with the G5
b)they're having problems, which is where this thread started from

[The Fatman]

Wouldn't it be nice if they came out and surprised us with QBM (provided it is faster, there was talk of latency). I didn't see Apples name on the QBM group though

[mischief]

Huh?:confused:

[The Fatman]

Quad Band Memory. VIA is introducing a chipset in Q2 2002.

www.quadbandmemory.com/

[mangis]

Who cares what they call the chip? The apollo could have been called a G5 to make you happy. Quit getting so hung up on a name. My new dual gig screams, and it will hold its own for years. You people bitch for no good reason. Apple has the best computers, and all you do it complain. Besides, don't you think that apple wants to sell you a better computer? What do you think they do over there all day long, but make better machines.

[Grokgod]

:p I agree that the new g4's are fast and very useful.
Yet I think that there is more at stake here than merely getting a
machine that is useful for our purposes at the moment.

There is an opportunity that needs to be taken advantage of, by Apple. They have set it up and seem to be having trouble following through.
Namely delivering the final and defeating blow to the ugly Micro/Intel juggernaut.
Apple has created a grand scenario with its digital hub, great design and the sweet osx. Bring ing the potential for a new era in computing that we all feel is arrving. These creations make pc's pale in comparison. The final act will be the crushing weight of new hardware that will deliver apple from the stat and spec wars
so gazed upon as gospel by the masses.
To reign supreme and deliver the world from big brother and its attempt to dominate all that it desires to control.

I think that Jobs obviously knows this and is equally angered that his timing is being twarted by hardware problems, the showman that he is. I applaud his demeaner and calm in a situation which I would be red with angst!

I hope he pulls it through, I will buy it when he does.
I have faith in the fact that Jobs knows the value of his work on a
socialogical and cultural level.
I just hope that my heart can stand the strain of waiting and reading all the posts for rumors of he next move.

[AmbitiousLemon]

well put grok, and optimistic to boot.

it is easy to get anxious reading posts here. but i think most people not associated with the rumor boards still have a feeling that apple has fallen behind these last two years.

ibm has done some truly amazing things with the g3, and has used the g3 in other products so they dont have to rely on apple. this is why i think moto needs to be dropped. they havent been able to keep the g4 faster than the g3. its pretty sad that apple has to use slower g3 just so they dont out perform the g4s. if ibm can do that with a g3 i would just them to develop the next step. moto needs to be dropped, they have dropped the ball for apple a number of times. wait til the g5 is finshed. drop the moto. apple and ibm buy out the moto microprocessor division. ibm and apple continue development while apple goes shopping for a new member to fill out the triumvirate.

it seems so simple. i can only guess moto has something really great to keep apple interested after all the problems they have given apple. i mean have you guys read the transcripts of steve's comments on moto. the guy used the f-word more time in one sentence than i thought possible. steve isnt happy with moto. so i wonder why apple is staying so loyal.

[Grokgod]

I am sure that Steve is very angry with Moto!

I dont think that he is being loyal to Moto, considering they are such an unreliable company. Not to mention that Jobs is certain to see this as his legacy to the world of computing and history, there is a lot at stake.

I think that there has been a lengthy timeline to the G5 or upgrades to the G4 and its motherboards. And its not feasible to cut off Moto at this point, when they are hopefully nearing completion of the timeline and its tasks. So Jobs is bearing the brunt of being saddled with a idle headed partner. A situation most of us have experienced in business or life. :)

He is grinning and bearing it, the fact that he sometimes verbally
speaks ill of his associates merely proofs the fact of what i spoke of previously. That Jobs is aware of the need for the proper hardware to complete his plan and is neither depriving us or waiting for anything other than fate to lend a hand in dealing with a difficult situation with Moto.

Hopefully he has a trick up his sleeve to push it through.
I wouldnt be surprised if a certain competing company is paying Moto off to drag its heels!

[GyroFX]

one thing i noticed about reading these rumor site is that it brings people down... I just got my Dual Ghz about 2 weeks ago and people are already bashing the hell out its performance and how sucky it is. When will you guys ever get enough power? the answer is never... What do the majority of people do on computers? They write, play games, listen to music, and occasionally do some imaging work. The normal consumer does not need all that power in a computer. Sure, it would be nice to have all that, but how much power really is enough power? There is not a set standard for how powerful a computer gets...until the day everything is done instantly, maybe. until then...stop complaining about how "slow" all the new computers are and focus on what you need to do with it instead...stop whinning like a bunch of peecee users, of whom does a lot of complaining cuz i live with 3 of them...

just my thought...

[Dunepilot]

The main thing that's holding me back from buying a new mac is that I would really like to buy a desktop that has a massive performance jump over my powerbook G3.

I'm glad you're all happy with your Dual G4s, and I'm sure I would be too, but part of me wants an entirely new MoBo with a significantly faster chip than Apple are currently shipping so that I can run OS X and feel that perfomance is a lot better than I get out of 9, and no matter what everyone tells you, there's still a perfomance hit to suffer when you make the transition.

But I guess that's the nature of these boards - they always stress the 'I want' people over the 'thank you's from others.

If we weren't so passionate about the subject there wouldn't be so many post though....:rolleyes:

[nero007]

The G4 7400 was announced in a Powermac in September of that same year.

Aren't they currently using the G4 7450?

[kaneda]

I don't think the speed 1.6 ghz will not reach til next year....Apple will never speed up their powermac that quick. That is just my thought though..I hope Steve will prove me wrong.

G5 will be next year...but if they release this year...their stock will sky rocket...becoz everyone is waiting for it...:O) that is just my thought...

[AmbitiousLemon]

im not power hungry just cuz i want more. im not some idiot who always asks for more. some of you people just dont get it. i was very happy with my 333 mhz until i started using osx. then i started checking out how osx ran on all thew new machines and was pissed off to find that osx drags on any machine.

im not asking for more power for games, or rendering, or filters. i was happy waiting there. but i cant stand an os that drags. some of you are happy with osx performance. but most people arent. i found it ridiculous that people are talking about window load times and window resizing issues. is this a joke. these sort of system level tasks should not tax any cpu in the lineup.

this is why we all suddenly are begging for more power. we couldnt care less what intel and amd is doing, o sure it would be nice to have some bragging rights, but really all we want is a responsive osx.

play some in os9. thats how quickly things should load. um instantly. thats what we are used to, and we arent asking too much to have that back. the only reason i really use os9 is because its fast.

and why do i use a mac? not because i "think different" although im fond of the phrase. not because im a rebel and have to be different or i have some weird affinity for apples. no, i use mac because i always shop around and i expect more. i expect perfection. at work i deliver nothing short of perfection, and i work to exhaustion until i get it. i use apple because its the best plain and simple. i call myself a machead, but if windows delivered a better system even with their anti competitive attitudes id switch in a second. but apple is the best. bu that doesnt mean i dont expect more. there is nothing wrong with someone wanting their machine to work properly and not to have to wait for low level system tasks.

[OSeXy!]

Couldn't agree more, ambitiouslemon.

If only OS X (or Aqua/Quartz) could be stripped back to 9-like simplicity (but leaving Darwin in tact, of course!). Zip!

If we could do that then I wouldn't be (as) concerned about the state of apple's motherboards.

Then, when the hardware can finally take it, we can just add-in as many bells and whistles as we want... Too much to ask?

[Grokgod]

I think that Lemon is correct.

I dont think that of always demanding the best, although that is a right, in a capitalistic monetary system.

I think that the current systems are poor in their performance at the OS functions. Which i find strange because Unix has a rep for speed but obviously the OSX shell has many graphic demands on the system. Which only increases the need for superior hardware.

The hardware changes MUST come soon, everyone knows it!
Of course Jobs is doing the best he can, but our griping and demands are important to feuling the fire of these changes.
We all love Mac's but that doesnt mean that we need to accept the current line! Not at all, in fact we demand that the systems function at the highest levels cinsidering currently available hardware specs. Apple knows this also, thats why they are trying to get all the Motherboard and cpu changes out!

It doesnt matter that the average consumer uses his computer to listen to music, play a few games and write a little, and that the current models should be fine for him.
Thats ridicluous! There are iMacs for those people.
Mac's are for professionals also and those units must function at the highest possible configurations.
There is never enough speed for rendering and other graphic needs, etc.

This isnt about average users, or the kid that wants his mp3's on an iPod. We need to make our demands known loud and clear and make our feeling known in the only way that finally matters, with cash flow. If you feel that mac is good as it is, then buy now.
If it isnt enough for you, hold out and wait!
Apple will feel the squeeze and will force the issue with Moto.
Till the G5's come out or something equal, anything that will increase the performance ratio for OSX.

[OSeXy!]

Exactly. Why did Apple have to put one of its fastest chips into its consumer model (which coincided with OS X as default)? Can't convert people to the platform if even window resizing is jerky!

[Grokgod]

Apple put the g4 into the consumer model imacs because with
OSX loading as default the unit needs all the power that it can get to make the OS function properly.

No, people will not move to an OS that works in a jerky manner.
Perhaps most people would not notice, but those that do will tell others their negative evaluations. Also Unit reviews which consumers read, will also state the obvious.

In this age of high computer speed and cheap ram, a slow OS based on Unix is NOT acceptable. And it wouldnt exist if not for the hardware issues, etc. That Apple is frenzied to fix.

[Pants]

Originally posted by Grokgod

In this age of high computer speed and cheap ram, a slow OS based on Unix is NOT acceptable. And it wouldnt exist if not for the hardware issues, etc. That Apple is frenzied to fix.

so you'd rather an OS based on uh.... NT? ;)

seriously dunepilot has it right - look folks teh IDF is on at the moment - Intel are demoing a 4Ghz p4 with hyperthreading due for next year and a 3ghz for later this year. Meanwhile AMD are demoing their 64bit 'hammer'.....and we are thankful for a mere 150odd mhz jump?? looks like the g5 will be late to market after all.....

[mischief]

Stop whining.

Is it so hard to wait? Does Apple have to have a new shiney for you every 2 weeks? Do any of you KNOW that Apple WON'T do something impressive this summer?

Reality check:

AMD's Hammer and Intel's 4Ghz chip won't be in any machine selling for less than $10,000.00 and those are most likely to be custom built Pro-E workstations and the like where the software and CPU together run 20 grand+!!!!!!! If you're gonna get your knickers in a twist about what chip makers are turning out for their high end workstations look at IBM NOT Apple.


Apple is (no matter how many pro's use them) a GENERALIST company. They are walking a fine line between consumers and Pros. They are competing with more companies than any of us can name in both of those fields. For Apple to have even a 3% marketshare is incredible considering the only other 2 companies that tried this path (Atari and Amiga) are long deceased.

Please keep context in mind regarding the likelihood of actually seeing a Gateway Nog-Box with a 4 Ghz processor. Just what do you think the marketshare is for a 4Ghz workstation? Maybe one pro in fifty?

All of those high end workstations are typically built for 1 specific program or other and have enough mods to the OS as to preclude the use of other software. I have watched my brother wrestle with this for 5 years. Every year a new $10-Grand whiz-bang PC that only runs Pro-E (another $10-Grand) and perhaps 3 other Apps.

Not to mention the main advantages here: Tech support takes about 2% as much arcane knowledge and less than half the time. 99% of the hardware you buy that says it's Mac compatible actually IS on the first try.

So please, if you have a hard time waiting, fine but please have a little more patience and faith.

When I was small I lived in an isolated community that was only accessable by plane or car-Ferry. This taught me patience as getting anywhere required WAITING. There was a schedule and everybody knew the schedule. You get up and go to the terminal and WAIT for the next Ferry as inevitably you almost never get there when one's just coming in. Apple has a schedule:Every 3 months, give or take a week they release a new toy. Get used to waiting, learn the schedule and calm down.

[barkmonster]

If you read the specs on the motorola site you'll see that the G4, even the latest Apollo chip only has a 133Mhz FSB (front side bus), the fsb determines the type of RAM the CPU can use, DDR is 266Mhz so it won't work (please someone who understands this better, correct me if I'm wrong).

now when you concider that the largest cache on the G4 chips hasn't gone any higher than 250Mhz ever (the 533Mhz G4 is an exception but lets ignore that, it was mid range not high end). DDR ram could be used instead of the optional L3 cache, it'd save apple production costs for not having to add the extra cost of the cache and we'd all be happy.

look at the largest cache on the high end G4s since the G4's introduction:

500Mhz G4, 1Mb Cache at 250Mhz (2:1 ratio)
733Mhz G4, 1Mb Cache at 244Mhz (3:1 ratio)
1Ghz G4, 2Mb Cache at 250Mhz (4:1 ratio)

If apple get rid of the Level 3 cache and motorola increase the Level 2 cache to 512K and add 266Mhz DDR ram support, the G4s will scream compared to current models even if the clock speeds only increase to a maximum of 1.2Ghz on the high end and 1Ghz on the entry level by summer.

Just look how lame a G4 without the 2Mb cache compares to one with the cache and you'll see how the larger cache is just as much of a bottleneck as the slow memory. I use my mac for audio and unless I can get a good deal on the mid range mac near the end of the year, I'm gonna have to look at what End Of Life deals are around at the time and try and get the current 933Mhz model just so I know it performs well enough for my needs while remaining cheap enough for me to afford one.

[Grokgod]

Never said or want anything NT, XP, WIN or M$$$.

I love Unix! even this rendition of it.

What I said was a SLOW unix based OS.

Unix has always been speedy, it cant help but look bizarre and be preplexing to have a Unix system with a speed problem. Yes, I know it has the Aqua interface ontop and it, and slows because of it.

I dont think that patience is the issue hear, not at all.
Its the fact as PANTS has said, what is the competition doing?
Apple is putting millions or billions into design, stores, and god knows what. It needs a return on that money.

5 percent isnt the goal that Apple is looking for!
As Jobs stated "95% to go."

What is it going to take to get that percent moved over to what is an obviously better machine, os and company?

Jobs has many of the ingrediants for this pie of success ready.

The last ingrediant is the "Need for Speed!" that comes with state of the art hardware. That is recognized by the masses with the proper numbers and the obvious speed that it will bring to OSX.

Which will once and for all trump Micro$ and Inte*.

This is Jobs final goal and its almost here!
SOOo frustrating...

[AmbitiousLemon]

mischief: i think you missed our point here. we arent looking at amd and intel as reasons to increase speed. i think we would all love to see those snail with the pentium on its back again but these are mere bragging rights which can wait (although eventually it must be addressed).

all we really want is to be able to run the operating system apple has given us.

its really that simple.

apple's software has gotten too far ahead of its hardware and thats why people are all of a sudden screaming for more speed.

yes dv peeps can always use more, but if you look around everybody is asking for more.

its for one simple reason. osx does not run properly on ANY machine currently on the market.

many people will be satisfied with osx performance but most will not. like someone said previously, why did apple put the g4 in the imac after so many years. it is just a pro chip. they did it because they couldnt sell osx to consumers with the g3 in the imac. it was just too slow. apple admits this. steve has been quoted many times saying how they put the g4 in the imac for two reasons osx needs it and dvdr needs it.

apple is currenlt doing the best they can with what hardware they have available to them. putting pro chips in consumer models and such. but even with such extreme measures osx isnt up to speed.

also consider the fact that although we call osx version 10, it is more like version 1 of something completely new. and as a version 1, the complexity and need for speed will only increase as more and more features are added.

when thinking about this one begins to realize that osx can not evolve as long as the current hardware is belabored running what is already there.

for all of you who have not tried out osx on a new powermac i sincerely tell you that you need to get your hands on one. its easy when running osx on an old machine to think to yourself that your machine is just old and thats why osx is running poorly. but as soon as you play with osx on a dual ghz machine you will notice that window resizing is still jerky, opening windows still calls up a beach ball. opening windows with 50+ items still takes a long time. pull down menus in the menubar still do not appear instantly.

all the things i mentioned are low level system tasks. when you call up memory usage you will find that things such as the window server is eating up a considerable chunck of ram. more than some apps. basically your cpu is working hard at every task in osx. whether it be running a photoshop filter or opening a window. and this is not good. it is bad for the life of the hardware and it is trying on the patience of the user.

if someone's first exposure to mac os, is jerky window resizing and two second load times for windows to open i seriously doubt that person is going to jump on board.

this is why we want more speed, for our own personal interests in wanting our operating system to run at decent speeds, and so that when we show off our machines to our peecee friends we will impress them, not bore them with window launch wait times.

[elgruga]

I tried a PC running xp in a store the other day.......(gasp!)
I am not going to buy one, it was a horrible experience all except for one thing (I think it was a Sony):
It was bloody quick! The windows opened - bang - no delay at all.
IE - instant on - it was so fast it was scary.
Now if X was that fast - it would be unbeatable.

But X is sluggish - I have tweaked it and fiddled and ********d about with it, maxed out the ram, faster drives, blah, blah, blah, but its still sluggish.

Thats why Lemon is complaining - and he's right.

We need and want faster architecture and chips - NOW.

Who cares what Apple use? They dont make chips, they buy 'em - so buy 'em from whoever and make it work .
Bus speed must be way faster, chip speed faster, and ram faster.
Also, faster drives will help.

Screw bloody altivec - it isnt cutting the mustard.

Give us some speed, Steve!

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by barkmonster
If you read the specs on the motorola site you'll see that the G4, even the latest Apollo chip only has a 133Mhz FSB (front side bus), the fsb determines the type of RAM the CPU can use, DDR is 266Mhz so it won't work (please someone who understands this better, correct me if I'm wrong).

now when you concider that the largest cache on the G4 chips hasn't gone any higher than 250Mhz ever (the 533Mhz G4 is an exception but lets ignore that, it was mid range not high end). DDR ram could be used instead of the optional L3 cache, it'd save apple production costs for not having to add the extra cost of the cache and we'd all be happy.

look at the largest cache on the high end G4s since the G4's introduction:

500Mhz G4, 1Mb Cache at 250Mhz (2:1 ratio)
733Mhz G4, 1Mb Cache at 244Mhz (3:1 ratio)
1Ghz G4, 2Mb Cache at 250Mhz (4:1 ratio)

If apple get rid of the Level 3 cache and motorola increase the Level 2 cache to 512K and add 266Mhz DDR ram support, the G4s will scream compared to current models even if the clock speeds only increase to a maximum of 1.2Ghz on the high end and 1Ghz on the entry level by summer.

Just look how lame a G4 without the 2Mb cache compares to one with the cache and you'll see how the larger cache is just as much of a bottleneck as the slow memory. I use my mac for audio and unless I can get a good deal on the mid range mac near the end of the year, I'm gonna have to look at what End Of Life deals are around at the time and try and get the current 933Mhz model just so I know it performs well enough for my needs while remaining cheap enough for me to afford one.

The new G4 has DDR L3 cache, so it's actually like this:
L2 cache: 256k 1:1 (1GHz)
L3 cache: 2MB 1:2 (250MHz x 2)

[Grokgod]

I totally agree with Lemon and elruga!

Thats a good point about it actually being version one of osx
and future version will need even more hardware strengths.

I believe that OSX is the future of computing.
Also that the Micro$ machines have run their course!
I really believe that!

Xp is a totally irritating and buggy. Not to mention that it is invasive to our lives and controling! Ever try to activate XP without being called a thief! It lacks any finess or style.
The fact that Xp is the most widely used and supposed best that the human race can achieve in the field of operating systems for the planet is incredible pathetic.

I have an XP box for work and to be compatible with the majority of the universities that i work for. WHne I boot it , i wince!
Yet there is NO doubt that it is fast, if you dont add X times the numer of reboots and the time to clean the screen after spitting at it.


Osx must destroy this lame beast and put it out of its misery!

Hey , I think I got a good rant going! that was fun.

Give us speed, Jobs!

[krossfyter]

intresting. i havent had any slow resizing windows issues with osx or slow launching apps issues etc. etc. ive seen the beachball at times but not much.
the other day i was using illustrator 10, photoshop 6, dreameaver and itunes in classic mode and i was switching back and forth with them on the fly. no slowing down. im serious. i mean i was using filters and etc. in photoshop and i was impressed with the speed. maybe im tripping or something but i havent had any trouble. however i hear you all,those that need more speed, ....for this is the nature of the computer world.

[OSeXy!]

krossfyter:

Are you saying that you don't notice ANY difference in the overall "snappiness" of the System when you switch from OS 9 (native) to OS X? If that's true, I want the machine you're running!

So far, my experience has been a little like when I installed System 7.5 on my LC II! It "worked" fine. But was sluggish (compared to System 6) opening and closing windows, arranging long file lists in views, launching apps, etc. Same thing when I put OS 8.6 on a Performa 5200. No actual problems, just that dragged-down feeling... of the software being more sophisticated than the hardware running it.

OK, I'm talking about a Pismo 500 512MB, which I know is a bit old fashioned... HOLD ON, that was the top of the line Pro portable 15 months ago!

I'm used to built-in obsolescence -- bane of capitalist existence -- but this is a bit ridiculous... since some people here are saying that their machines in effect ARRIVED obsolete.

But I'm interested to hear that you have enough power not to notice. I believe you, and that cheers me up! There's hope.

[mischief]

Yes, all these things need to happen but they won't happen tomorrow or next week. They will happen at MWNY at the earliest. Apple is well aware of their HW shortcomings. Scully/Gil put Apple behind schedule by at least five years. SJ has to catch up with the original plan AND try to repair the dammage Apple incurred under such business-school twits.

I cannot stress this enough: THE MARKET SUCKS RIGHT NOW.

Asking Apple to accelerate when their sales base is busy making rent and their suppliers are dropping like flys is REALLY OBNOXIOUS and very unfair.

Apple will have a 333Mhz DDR mobo with ATA100 soon enough and it will have a G5 on it. Go back to your novel.

BTW:I have found that when you keep it healthy OS X.1.3 is no slower than OS 9.2.1 on either a G4 400 AGP, G4 DP 533 or G4 DP 800. Many of my apps are actually faster. My only complaint so far is the shoddy 3rd party software.

I use OS X every day for CAD, Photoshop, managing a LAN, DSL, iTunes, etc. I usually run all these things at once. The only thing that's slow about X is APP launching and that, I think is all about security: Think about it. XP is basically core-open, when an App launches it doesn't matter what or where it is---it launches. In OS X I think it's slow init is due to a system level version of what Norton used to drive us nuts with. The ease of multitasking and stability are well worth slow init of apps.

We must also remember that Apple has stated that 1:there will be no new CPUs for at least a couple months and 2: that iMac is the FIRST Mac designed specifically for X. This means ALL the other CPUs will rev in the next year to "X native" architecture.

Just settle on what you want,we'll make a list and SPAM Apple with it if you want. But most of all-cool it. Apple isn't gonna go back to 9 just because some of you feel screwed.

[LesMoore]

Why whine about g5? Why not the next gen architecture beyond RISC? Alot of you complaining. Just remember Jobs and NextSTEP and try to see why hardware is taking some time to develop. g4, g5, piii, piv, what's the problem. What we need is beyond the Gen chips. I'm telling ya, RISC was a step in the right direction, but lets think beyond. Besides, its not all up to Jobs anyway.

[elgruga]

Today I used Office X for the first time in a "got to get this thing done NOW" work situation.
we had about 2 hours to fix up a small biz plan with excel charts embedded etc.etc.
Originally we had done this thing in OS 9, and then did the last 2 or 3 drafts in OS X.
well it wasnt pretty. Running a 450 G4 with 512 ram and some fast drives it was very sluggish, esp. when changing things in the excel stuff.
Then the bloody thing crashed (the word app). Before the crash, it had been getting slower and slower.... so force quit and off again.
Yes, I know that the system didnt crash. Its kind of like the car that never crashes because it never leaves the driveway.

OS X is too damn slow, and that is a priority and I dont care what anyone thinks - ITS A PRIORITY - get this thing moving.

We got the job done, of course. And yes, I think M$ are wankers, and maybe it was partly Office X to blame.

You just wouldnt believe the spinning beach ball when I changed text in an excel chart - ridiculous. And no beach in sight......

I may go back to OS 9 for a while - groan.
But its been about 6 weeks on OS X and I am kind of committed to X, (changed things over, email programs etc. some new software, about 30 hours of messing with it to make it better, fruitmenu, compress windows, and all that stuff)

So if I am committed to X, like so many of us are, is it ok to ask that Apple put some serious resources into making it more useable in real-world situations - like I had today?

As for whining - I dont do it. This is called telling it like it is.

SPEED UP THE ********** OS, APPLE - ASAP!

[Grokgod]

SPEED UP THE FU***** OS! NOW, APPLE

We are not buying anything new till you do!

[Deadalus]

The main reasons for the G-5's delay are several but key.

1) during the huge layoffs the last 2 quarters at Motorola have reduced their research and production & testing staff to minimal. A lot of their OEM chip customers have left, some new ones climbed on board after Apple took this major opportunity to head up the research & design of Motorolas G-5 chip, of which I think they're now about 60% in control of the decision making process.

2) because of the nature of the copyright laws and contract between Motorola, IBM, and Apple binds them and divides them much like the Fellowship of the Ring; what i mean is that IBM is forbidden to research the G-4's Altivec technology and to sell a chip based on that technology as its own by Motorola. (remember Motorola's Execs are still pissed--cash convertible options weren't much an option 4 years ago-when Apple had delayed and revamped the Mhz line of the original PowerMac G4 and blamed openly Motorola). Thats why IBM has made huge advancements with the G3 chip!!! Although the Altivec technology was a joint interest between Apple and Motorola the later fully owns all rights to it. bummer!

3) Remember although mostly a server for corporate users and a PC product company IBM could make their own version of the G5 but Motorola has the experience of Dual, Quad processors able to fully communicate and shift processess to and from one another natively without the software being written for it (remember the dual G3 at 233/266mhz way back in the day??!!!). This is what Apple is secretly loving about Motorola openning up more sales to corporate customers of lately that genetics company they just recently co-written software for the Mac OS X for them to use on Dual G4 PowerMacs.

4) Because of the renewed contract between them Apples is still binded and under Motorolas multi-vector processing lure in their chips, also doesn't IBM have yet to announce a success in a fully capable 64-bit chip?? Not sure there, but the G5 is supposed to, and capable of 256-bit processing with 32-bit processing capability (for older Mac OS') Think how much IBM would stand to gain if this work was passed onto them, and how much more competitive the PC world would be if AMD or gods below allowing Intel or ARM to get a hold of that holy grail??

5) Apple is smart their not gonna just release a horrible G5 with performance only 33% better than a Dual G4 running at 800Mhz or with only 25% better than a Dual G4 running at 1 Ghz! That like Palm releasing the M515 with slightly brighter screen and 8 more Mb or standard RAM with the same processor; in the Palms case is completely stupid and as customers the $200 extra cost of the m515 we should be getting imbedded Bluetooth. Well Apple isn't playing a game here folks; The 500Mhz G4 Sawtooth board wasnt a significant increase over the 500Mhz G4 before it only the 4x AGP slot helped it sell so a DDR board on a Dual G4 1Ghz is going to outsell the non DDR board Dual 1 Ghz G4 ==== can you say hurting overstock, rock bottom prices stock price drop!!

I think when Apple does release the G5 it may be at 1.5Ghz or even 1.9Ghz with DDR-RAM and maybe that fangled bus speed technology headed by AMD--forgot what its called. Also maybe a faster AGP bus (6x or 8x???)?????!!


Lastly the main selling point for this Dual G4 is that performance gain is significant over the 867mhz G4 and the going price of SDRAM is extremely cheap even by Canadian dollar prices!!!! Try getting a Dual G4 with 1 GB or SDRAM today compared to early summer last year!?!? Today you'd most surely save yourself $400 US with offers from Apple and about $550 US aftermarket compared to early last summer.

[Catfish_Man]

...there are NO 128 or 256 bit processors. The G4 is 32 bit with 128 bit Altivec, Hammer is 32/64 bit, Itanium is 64 bit, Power4 is 64 bit (I think), MAJC is 64 bit, Crusoe is 32 bit (I think), G5 will be either 32 or 32/64 with 128 bit Altivec (unless it's an IBM chip), P4 is 32 bit, AthlonXP is 32 bit, etc...

Everyone seems to think that because Altivec can handle 4 32 bit chunks at once (128 bit), the G4 is 128 bit. The reason the Sawtooth board wasn't much faster was that it was the same processor. If the rumors about the G5's bus speed are correct then a 1.9 GHz G5 is not possible. Processor speed is a multiple of bus speed, and no company I've ever heard of uses anything but whole number or .5 multipliers (the 1GHz [actually 997.5MHz] G4 is a 7.5x multiplier on a 133MHz bus, the G5 will hopefully be released as 3x, 3.5x, and 4x on a 500MHz RapidIO bus for 1.5, 1.75, and 2GHz [assuming the bus rumors are right]. It might just be 2.5, 3, and 3.5 for 1.25GHz, 1.5GHz, and 1.75GHz, or they could use some really wierd multiplier and prove me wrong.) The original Yikes G4 was a G4 tacked onto a G3 mobo, Sawtooth was what the G4 was supposed to be. Also, what are these dual G3s you're talking about? Last I heard the G3 didn't support SMP.