3 Years Later : Power Mac vs. Mac Pro , What Do You Prefer

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Amethyst, May 2, 2009.

  1. Amethyst macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #1
    I know, It has many topic that base on this question post on MR.

    but 3 years later.

    When you familar with a new name scheme
    (Some people here own 3-Generation mac pro :eek:)

    What do you think?
     
  2. aaronw1986 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    #2
    Mac Pro... it makes me sound powerful using the computer, rather than me using a powerful computer! :D
     
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    I have the last rev dual core G5, but I know for a fact the Mac Pros are better. A friend of mine bought one when they came out and I've used it- great machine.

    However, my G5 is still awesome and I plan to keep it for some time. The Mac Pros are just too expensive right now.

    The G5 is still better at many things like disc burning and video editing, than any Intel laptop I've used so far. That's certainly not to say the Intel laptops are slouches, they're great.
     
  4. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #4
    you included PowerMac's

    So... I miss my PowerMac G4 Cube, perhaps I should consider getting it out again? It is one of the very last systems to run MacOS9, afterall.
     
  5. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #5
    I think that they are talking about the name rather than the computer power. And I think I prefer the Mac Pro name a bit more, although both are fine.
     
  6. UltraNEO* macrumors 601

    UltraNEO*

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Location:
    近畿日本
    #6
    Oh... Well, the names they're called ain't all that important. Though for many readers, the newer name seems to confuse people alot, not just people but Google too! Ever googled for somehting about the MacPro's and get loads of pages for the MacBookPro too?
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    Ah...you're right. I prefer the old name better then. "Power Mac" is just too damn cool. :)
     
  8. grue macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere.
    #8
    Power Mac is better I think. Too many dumbasses confuse MacBook Pro with Mac Pro (probably the same batch of geniuses who say iTouch). Screws up google results, too.

    Power Mac.
    iMac
    PowerBook
    iBook.

    It made perfect sense, and clearly delineated products.

    Power- = good.
    i- = consumer toys :p
     
  9. Genghis Khan macrumors 65816

    Genghis Khan

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #9
    I prefer PowerMac

    In an industry that's constantly changing, it's hard to get any name that has any meaning. Like in the car industry, the names Bugatti and Mercedes have some heritage to them. In the computer industry, the PowerMac title can trace itself back to the Power Macintosh's of the early 90's. The name is half as old as the industry itself...
     
  10. valdore macrumors 65816

    valdore

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Location:
    Kansas City, Missouri. USA
    #10
    Regardless of naming and regardless of the internal bodyparts I sold to purchase my 8-core Clovertown Mac Pro two years ago, this was not a regrettable decision in the slightest. The machine is two years old now, works like it did the day it came out of the box, and will probably be in commission another two years from now. Hopefully still doing important work even beyond.


    (notwithstanding I was sent a completely DOA Mac Pro originally, and the one I have now was the replacement for the dead one).
     
  11. awmazz macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    #11
    I've never actually called them PowerMac. Always just refer to them as Macs - G4 Macs or G5 Macs, as opposed to G4 or G5 iMacs.

    G5 is a better name than Pro in my opinion. G6 would have been cool. I guess the newest ones would be G7s now, even cooler. G7 beats the heck of 'Mac Pro Early 2009' as a name.

    They should have stuck with the G-Series. I know G3, G4 and G5 refers to the processor but in most minds it refers to distinct Mac model series. They could have had the G6 Mac with Intel processors and the technicality wouldn't have made a difference to anyone except uber geeks.

    PS: With a name like Mac Pro, what's the next model makeover name going to be? What else can you do with 'Mac Pro'? Mac Pro II? Mac Pro Ultra? Mac Pro Pro?
     
  12. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #12
    I definitely prefer PowerMac.

    However I wish they would go back to the name and number system.

    If someone said they had a PowerMac 9600/200MP. You knew it had a dual 604e running at 200mhz, case design and expansion capabilities. Whereas if someone says they have a Mac Pro you have no idea: what CPU is in it, what generation it is, what expansion capabilities does it have. The iMac being the worst offender being you have no clue: what it looks like, what CPU architecture it has, what its expansion capabilities are, or basically any useful information. All you know is that it is a G3 or better and a desktop computer.

    This held true for PowerMac G3's, G4's and G5's as well. So they had to be given sub names to at least define the Motherboard generation. With G4's you must say Yikes, Sawtooth, Gigabit Ethernet, Digital Audio, Quicksilver 2001, Quicksilver 2002, Mirror Drive Door or Firewire 800. With the G5's it is Revision A, Revision B, that one just before last:rolleyes:, and dual core.
     
  13. K3mp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 4, 2008
    Location:
    S.E. Louisiana
    #13
    What laptop where you using? a 1.83 Ghz macbook? I really don't care about the name as long as it is not horrible like AppleTower G5.
     
  14. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #14
    The name doesn't make any difference to me. The Mac is a much stronger competitor as a consequence of the Intel switch, and that's what matters.
     
  15. remmy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #15
    The name means very little. The difference I like the most, ignoring speed etc is that the Mac Pro run allot cooler. Used to use a Power Mac with it under the desk, my legs felt like they were being roasted.
     
  16. jeanlain macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    #16
    I too prefer "Power Mac". What does "pro" mean anyway? That this Mac is designed for pros, not for amateurs? Every product can be dubbed "-pro", like some "ATi radeon HD187999 XTX PRO Extreme Titanium edition".
    And yes, many people confuse "Mac Pro" with "MacBook Pro".

    PS. I own a Mac Pro. :D
     
  17. wpc33 macrumors 6502

    wpc33

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #17
    Edge PRO GEL


    for professional...um, shavers...

    That word has been abused so much...but I still prefer Mac Pro, despite the Power Mac G5 sounding like some awesome, complicated piece of machinery, that probably runs on a combination of steam and radon.
    You know what? Power Mac G5 for the title.
     
  18. Shake 'n' Bake macrumors 68020

    Shake 'n' Bake

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Location:
    Albany
    #18
    I prefer any PPC product over Intel. And PowerMac sounds way better. The PPC made Apple's computers unique and different. THough they did have their problems like getting too hot and not reaching 3 GHz, they are kind of special because the only thing I know of that uses a PPC chip now is the Xbox 360. Nearly forgot to add: The PowerMacs looked a lot better. Now that we've had that aluminum case for so long, it is really boring. The best looking PM, I think, was the MDD and the one right before that.
     
  19. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #19
    The PS3 also uses a chip that's related to the PPC.
     
  20. Shake 'n' Bake macrumors 68020

    Shake 'n' Bake

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Location:
    Albany
    #20
    I did not know that. I knew that it was designed by IBM though. I know of no computer that I can buy now that uses a PPC chip. Is there one?
     
  21. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #21
    Nothing that anyone on this board could dream of affording, I believe.
     
  22. trainguy77 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    #22
    The xbox 360 is the closest you will get probably, you can "run" OS X on it after all.
     
  23. psingh01 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #23
    IBM servers run on POWER chips of which ppc are derivatives.
     
  24. m1stake macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philly
    #24
    I remember the original 360 development kit was literally a G5 Quad with a core disabled.
     
  25. Dr.Pants macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #25
    REALLY?! :D:D:D That's friggin' cool. Could that mean I could turn a G5 into a 360? Probably not, all the firmware updates, etc...

    But yeah. The Cell processor in the PS3 is based off of the power architechture, as well as XBox 360; technically, the 360 uses the Xenon processor, some strange varient of the Cell. Oddly enough, the Wii uses the "Broadway" processor, also made by IBM.

    So, on the bright side, IBM has gone from producing powerful computers to powerful consoles. The three major consoles all use the Power architechture... Cell, Xenon, Broadway. Seems to me that there's a monopoly going on :D

    EDIT - Not to rip on Nintendo, but I can't beleive I just inferred the Wii as "powerful".
     

Share This Page