Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

1 8800 and 3 ati 2600s

grue said:
Show me the last time Apple gave a damn about a customer who has a previous product and wants to use it with a current one.
Click to expand...

Tallest Skil said:
Remember the PowerPC Snow Leopard beta?

Oh, wait...:eek:

We're at a transitionary period of forced obsolescence. It'll pass.
Click to expand...

Uh...Apple supported PowerPC for almost two full OS versions after they switched to Intel. The only way the Snow Leopard comparison makes sense is if Apple had switched to Intel at the same time as they released of Tiger (instead of a few months later) and immediately dropped PowerPC support.

They didn't. When SL finally gets released this year, it will have been more than three years since the last PowerPC Mac was sold as new.
 
IgnatiusTheKing said:
You don't have a clue what Apple is going to do. But please, keep up the unreasonable pretension. Everyone around here benefits from the inane ramblings of know-it-all kids.
Click to expand...

Fine, then. Show me one thing from Apple's past that states that they give a crap of their own volition about backwards compatibility.

Not the original iMac. Not the introduction of ADB. Not their mini VGA or DVI ports...
 
Keep in mind, a DVI Graphics card to miniDisplayport monitor will require an ACTIVE adapter that converts the signal. This means that even if they did make the adapter, it will cost $100 each.
 
Here's one* more thing.













*by which I mean a million
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    19.1 KB · Views: 160
IgnatiusTheKing said:
No response?
Click to expand...

No, I just wasn't wasting time on the forums anymore.

The Mini DisplayPort-DVI adapter had to be done to work with the products that they sell currently.

I'm talking about having their new products be compatible with their old products.

Example, a new... display... (24" LED) that doesn't work with older computers. Heck, it doesn't work with HALF of their CURRENT computers.

Universal had to happen for the Intel transition to even be done. And now we have Snow Leopard saying "So long, and thanks for all the fish!" far sooner than people want.
 
Cool if they disconnect the 30 ACM I will get the 40 inch ACM when it comes out in 2 or 3 years.
 
Tallest Skil said:
No, I just wasn't wasting time on the forums anymore.
Click to expand...

Lies. It doesn't take a know-it-all to see that you posted multiple times between my two posts above.

Tallest Skil said:
The Mini DisplayPort-DVI adapter had to be done to work with the products that they sell currently.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Apple created an adapter so new products (notebooks with the Mini DisplayPort, for example) would be compatible with old products (displays without a MDP connector, for example).

Tallest Skil said:
Universal had to happen for the Intel transition to even be done.
Click to expand...

Yes. It's the perfect example of Apple creating something to ensure that old products worked with new ones. It is, you could say, the very definition of making sure old and new are compatible.

Tallest Skil said:
And now we have Snow Leopard saying "So long, and thanks for all the fish!" far sooner than people want.
Click to expand...

Any rational observer say that three years is enough time, especially since the new OS X is going to be made specifically for machines with multi-core processors. There really isn't any point to making a PowerPC version of Snow Leopard.
 
Why do you get so offended when he didn't respond immediately? Just because he posted several times doesn't mean that time was wasted, nor does it mean he was even thinking about looking at this topic.

And if you looked at the scores of PPC users on this forum, have you noticed that a lot of them WANT Snow Leopard for their PPC Macs? To say there isn't any point is a gross overgeneralization.
 
Mackilroy said:
And if you looked at the scores of PPC users on this forum, have you noticed that a lot of them WANT Snow Leopard for their PPC Macs?
Click to expand...

I fail to see how that's Apple's (or any other company's) problem anymore.

Just because a few people want something doesn't mean any company is obligated to give it to them. If you want the latest/greatest software, sometimes you have to have the latest (or at least fairly recent) hardware. You can't expect every company to make new software compatible with (in tech terms) ancient hardware.

Mackilroy said:
To say there isn't any point is a gross overgeneralization.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't. Apple has said that there will be no major innovations (in terms of new programs or gadgets) in Snow Leopard, but that it will be mainly concerned with making multi-core machines more efficient. How many PPC Macs are multi-core?
 
IgnatiusTheKing said:
I fail to see how that's Apple's (or any other company's) problem anymore.

Just because a few people want something doesn't mean any company is obligated to give it to them. If you want the latest/greatest software, sometimes you have to have the latest (or at least fairly recent) hardware. You can't expect every company to make new software compatible with (in tech terms) ancient hardware.



No, it wasn't. Apple has said that there will be no major innovations (in terms of new programs or gadgets) in Snow Leopard, but that it will be mainly concerned with making multi-core machines more efficient. How many PPC Macs are multi-core?
Click to expand...

Um, quite a few actually, every dual proc. G4 and G5. Not to mention that's only one aspect of the benefits of SL, and believe me, I am looking at purchasing a PPC machine sometime soon to hold over till the new Mac Pros debut, and I am very upset that I wouldn't be able to upgrade to SL. There's no reason why not, as Apple has said that they are making it physically smaller, plus even 10.5 runs beautifully on a minimum spec machine, so I would think SL that is even further optimized would run even better. And I think to a point, sure they aren't obligated, but they sure as hell will be missing out on profit.
 
macsForLife said:
There's no reason why not, as Apple has said that they are making it physically smaller, plus even 10.5 runs beautifully on a minimum spec machine, so I would think SL that is even further optimized would run even better. .
Click to expand...

The reason it's going to take less space is because it won't be a bloated dual-architecture pig like Leopard is.

The reason why I'm super happy that they're cutting loose the PPC is that catering to archaic hardware holds back the developers from fully exploiting modern machines. I have a PowerPC notebook (because they haven't made an Intel-based portable worth buying, at least for my uses…) and I'm not going to hold a grudge that they're leaving it behind. Wasting resources on the past cuts back on the resources available for now, and the future.

Snow Leopard, in theory, is going to be what Leopard should have been in the first place: Lean, tightly coded, and fast.
 
IgnatiusTheKing said:
I fail to see how that's Apple's (or any other company's) problem anymore.
Click to expand...
Because it's good PR to support your customers for a long time. For all the things Microsoft does wrong, they do get that right.

IgnatiusTheKing said:
Just because a few people want something doesn't mean any company is obligated to give it to them. If you want the latest/greatest software, sometimes you have to have the latest (or at least fairly recent) hardware. You can't expect every company to make new software compatible with (in tech terms) ancient hardware.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. And sometimes, yes, you do. But is this really one of those times? Personally I don't care if Snow Leopard is Intel-only, because both of my Macs are Intel. But do you REALLY think that the quad-core Power Macs are ancient? They're still faster than quite a few of the Mactels, excepting the Mac Pros and highest-end iMacs.
 
Mackilroy said:
Because it's good PR to support your customers for a long time. For all the things Microsoft does wrong, they do get that right.


No, it doesn't. And sometimes, yes, you do. But is this really one of those times? Personally I don't care if Snow Leopard is Intel-only, because both of my Macs are Intel. But do you REALLY think that the quad-core Power Macs are ancient? They're still faster than quite a few of the Mactels, excepting the Mac Pros and highest-end iMacs.
Click to expand...

The only solution that'll make both parties happy is if they release 64-bit Snow Leopard for G5s, and make it a completely separate install from SL/Intel. I for one am sick of performance compromises to drag along the old hardware. If they want to have a team make it run on PPC, great, but don't punish those of us with current machines for it.
 
UltraNEO* said:
if they do or plan to terminated the 30, then the new adapter would be Apple's shortest product line... ever!
Click to expand...

Or maybe, because the 30" has cost its owners between $3,200 and $1,799, Apple might be catering to the people who don't want to have to buy another 30" display or two (or three, etc) just to use their new computer.

These people are obviously assumed to be the professional part of Apple's development, so Apple knows that if they're forced to buy something that they don't want to buy, they'll just go somewhere else.
 
Tallest Skil said:
Or maybe, because the 30" has cost its owners between $3,200 and $1,799, Apple might be catering to the people who don't want to have to buy another 30" display or two (or three, etc) just to use their new computer.

These people are obviously assumed to be the professional part of Apple's development, so Apple knows that if they're forced to buy something that they don't want to buy, they'll just go somewhere else.
Click to expand...

The glossy displays and single FireWire port on the MacBook Pro seem to indicate that Apple doesn't give a damn what professional users want.
 
grue said:
The glossy displays and single FireWire port on the MacBook Pro seem to indicate that Apple doesn't give a damn what professional users want.
Click to expand...

The whole glossy thing is debatable. The single FireWire wouldn't be a problem if it had been FireWire 3200, but as it stands, I don't think we'll see FireWire on the next case change.
 
grue said:
The glossy displays and single FireWire port on the MacBook Pro seem to indicate that Apple doesn't give a damn what professional users want.
Click to expand...

The missing FW400 is a non-issue. I seriously don't know why people on those forums are still ranting on about it. Open your mind and look at the other possibilities cause every MBP has this really cool and useful interface called ExpressCard34 slot. Professional users everywhere can buy add-on cards to expand their mobile platforms, giving them infinite access to whatever ports they require, for whatever reason.

Hmmm.... Am i in the wrong forum?
I swear it says "Mac Pro, Power Mac" up top...:rolleyes:
 
Mackilroy said:
Because it's good PR to support your customers for a long time. For all the things Microsoft does wrong, they do get that right.
Click to expand...

A ton of people who upgraded to Vista were forced to buy new hardware to make it work with their "old" XP machines, where they not?

The bottom line is: while it may suck for a small percentage of users who still have PPCs and want/are able to run a brand new version of OS, it obviously didn't make economic sense to Apple to continue developing new products for the old hardware.

Tallest Skil said:
Or maybe, because the 30" has cost its owners between $3,200 and $1,799, Apple might be catering to the people who don't want to have to buy another 30" display or two (or three, etc) just to use their new computer.

These people are obviously assumed to be the professional part of Apple's development, so Apple knows that if they're forced to buy something that they don't want to buy, they'll just go somewhere else.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%, but doesn't this comment directly contradict what you said about Apple not giving a crap about appeasing their customers with backwards compatibility?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back