I think you have to get all sweaty and breathy to really get the point across, then stop and hurl a chair.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Did Apple Do The Right Thing in Moving To Intel From PowerPC???
- Thread starter rashdown_online
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you have to get all sweaty and breathy to really get the point across, then stop and hurl a chair.
Hit the nail on the head right there. That's where we need to stop. Sure, new technology is nice, but there's no need for it. We need to break the cycle somehow.
For the many consumers, those who really just use a computer for email, the internet, and a few other tasks, there hasn't been a dramatic leap for a number of years. Whether it's a C2D or a 500mhz G4, the internet isn't any faster. For people who deal with video, huge image files (for those who think in terms of Terabyte), or simulations, it's an entirely different set of requirements.
The only thing that really drives hardware requirements for many consumers is the gaming industry, although that's changing with more consumers actually dealing with video and photos.
In the corporate environ, most of the hardware is wasted, I'm dealing with a group who has Core Duo machines and they're running stuff that worked on machines from 2000 and the general consensus is, the refresh didn't change a thing. But, they do like the new flat-screens and optical mice.
Well, there's a lot of marketing that drives computer purchases. Just like cars, where people talk about horsepower and handling when frankly the car exceeds their abilities, the computer market is driven by numerical "whose is bigger" games. I worked for one place where a computer was being flaky and the user complained, so I replaced the memory and in doing so I bought a 1GB chip because the cost was the same. The guy down the hall found out about this and demanded 1GB for his machine, even though he wasn't having any problems.
Pretty much my reasons too. Of course, I could use Bootcamp to run either but for my business laptop I don't need OSX and I just like the idea of a clean install.
That's pretty awesome if you can just direct install XP. Why the hell can't other manufacturers do this with OSX?
Apple won't license OS X to be used on commodity hardware, and I think it's been discussed ad nauseam as to why.
As for installing Windows over OSX, there's something deeply wrong with you.
As for installing Windows over OSX, there's something deeply wrong with you.
Nah, it's just that about 90% of businesses use Windows based apps so you've gotta go with the flow. Although I still prefer XP to Tiger...
Nah, it's just that about 90% of businesses use Windows based apps so you've gotta go with the flow. Although I still prefer XP to Tiger...
I understand exactly why would might want Windows, but still you're a sick puppy.
XP over Tiger? Really. Get thee to a pharmacist.
PPC or Intel
Hi Everyone, this is my first post at macrumors... I have been reading this thread, and I am interested when people are talking about apple and the G6 and G7's. I have been a user of the mac since the old 68k days..... moons ago.. The reason why apple has been calling the PowerPC range of mac's the G range officially from the G3 is because it was the (3rd Generation) of the powerPC processor (601, 603) the Powermac 6200 was the 603e processor i think as i had one. The G5 was the last in the G series as apple went over to intel... so technically the G series has come to an end... I did like the PowerPC processor and I did believe in the mhz myth about the pipeline tax and how PPC wipes the floor with intel.. but all GOOD things come to an end...unfortunately!!.
Hi Everyone, this is my first post at macrumors... I have been reading this thread, and I am interested when people are talking about apple and the G6 and G7's. I have been a user of the mac since the old 68k days..... moons ago.. The reason why apple has been calling the PowerPC range of mac's the G range officially from the G3 is because it was the (3rd Generation) of the powerPC processor (601, 603) the Powermac 6200 was the 603e processor i think as i had one. The G5 was the last in the G series as apple went over to intel... so technically the G series has come to an end... I did like the PowerPC processor and I did believe in the mhz myth about the pipeline tax and how PPC wipes the floor with intel.. but all GOOD things come to an end...unfortunately!!.
-followed by-
15 years ago?
Most of what we take for granted about Mac OS X today existed in NEXTSTEP 15 years ago, and was running quite nicely on 68030 and 68040 based systems. 15 years ago we had System 7 and A/UX for Macs, and 20 years ago we had Macs that could handle as much as 128 MB of memory. Had technology froze in place 15 years ago the one thing that we could guarantee about today is that technology that was in the $10,000 range (like a Quadra 950 for example) wouldn't cost that much today.
But most of what we amaze ourselves with today was around 15 years ago. A good example of this is my SGI Indy, which is able to capture video at full frame size at full frame rate. That system is from 1993, but most people assumed that doing video was something that you could only do on new systems (like since the turn of the century). But SGI wasn't alone in being able to do video, Macs were doing video 10 to 15 years ago too (just not to the same quality level as SGIs).
So sure, Cassie's parents may have been DOS users 15 years ago, but a lot of us were existing in computer environments that really aren't all that drastically different from what we have now. And I still use 10-15 year old systems for a ton of productive stuff.
The one thing that has changed is the near complete lack of optimization of software on the part of developers today. Memory and processor power should be used for actual tasks rather than to support bloated code. It is because of this bloat that systems of today aren't as radically faster than systems of 15 years ago as their MHz/GHz ratings would suggest.
As for the productivity end of things, I do stuff with 10-15 year old systems that most people with thousands of dollars invested in the newest systems can't do. It constantly amazes me that people assume that the ability to do some of the stuff we take for granted today must have popped up within the last few years when in reality the ability to do such things has been around for a decade or more!
If you are just now figuring out that you can do video editing or 3D animation on your system, I've got news for you... you're a little late to the party.
Did Apple Do The Right Thing in Moving To Intel From PowerPC???
It's too early to tell. Wait until the Mac OS goes through some hard times. If software develops drop support for the Mac like they did in the 90's, then there is a danger that more and more Mac users will just switch to running Windows on their Macs. It doesn't look very likely at the moment, but that's because Apple is on a high at the moment.
It's too early to tell. Wait until the Mac OS goes through some hard times. If software develops drop support for the Mac like they did in the 90's, then there is a danger that more and more Mac users will just switch to running Windows on their Macs. It doesn't look very likely at the moment, but that's because Apple is on a high at the moment.
Well...mixed feelings for me
I don't know. First of all, Apple really had no choice. PowerPC in the days of the switch were a dead end street. The G5 sort of hit the wall. It wasn't properly scaled up (remember the 3 Ghz fiasco) and it wasn't scaled down properly either (Powerbook G5, anyone?).
Nevertheless I don't like my four Intel iMacs. They all just don't feel right. O.K., Parallels is a sweetie. Without it, I would have chosen Dell or HP to be my work computers, as I need Windows. But compared to my Powerbook, they really feel cheap. Their build quality is extrordinary - extrordinary craptastic. One machine by now (16 months of use) has currently 16 vertical lines over the display, number constantly growing. One machine was DOA and replaced. Another one has a very noisy (and in my eyes therefore faulty) Superdrive. The last of the four has bad screws on the RAM expansion slot (forced me to break some plastic).
Those four machines were bought with 4 different resellers, so I think having 4 lemons is not just bad luck. Apple has become cheap. So typing this in my Powerbook I can tell you, Apple has headed the wrong direction.
Looking at both Next-Gen consoles, I don't feel that PowerPC itself is a dead end. My Xbox 360 may be noisy as hell, but it sure works nice. AFAIK the PS3 is pretty amazing on Folding @ home. People run Linux on it and feel quite happy. So Power processors still evolve quite nice.
So my major hope is, that Universal binaries are here to stay. My hope is, that we will see some PowerPC driven PowerMac sometime down the road. Something working with a Power6 derivate or even an optimized and refined Cell.
I wouldn't mind staying Intel, if Apple could just get their quality back to the glory of the Power days. Those were the days, when we really were different. And mind you, my Powerbook still feels fantastic with Tiger and iLife '06. I refrain using iLife '08, as I guess Apple injected tons of Intel optimized code, just to tease me to buy another Intel Mac. Alas my experience has been so bad, they either really surprise me with their next gen MBP, or I'll reconsider the dark side for myself after nearly 10 years of Macdom.
I don't know. First of all, Apple really had no choice. PowerPC in the days of the switch were a dead end street. The G5 sort of hit the wall. It wasn't properly scaled up (remember the 3 Ghz fiasco) and it wasn't scaled down properly either (Powerbook G5, anyone?).
Nevertheless I don't like my four Intel iMacs. They all just don't feel right. O.K., Parallels is a sweetie. Without it, I would have chosen Dell or HP to be my work computers, as I need Windows. But compared to my Powerbook, they really feel cheap. Their build quality is extrordinary - extrordinary craptastic. One machine by now (16 months of use) has currently 16 vertical lines over the display, number constantly growing. One machine was DOA and replaced. Another one has a very noisy (and in my eyes therefore faulty) Superdrive. The last of the four has bad screws on the RAM expansion slot (forced me to break some plastic).
Those four machines were bought with 4 different resellers, so I think having 4 lemons is not just bad luck. Apple has become cheap. So typing this in my Powerbook I can tell you, Apple has headed the wrong direction.
Looking at both Next-Gen consoles, I don't feel that PowerPC itself is a dead end. My Xbox 360 may be noisy as hell, but it sure works nice. AFAIK the PS3 is pretty amazing on Folding @ home. People run Linux on it and feel quite happy. So Power processors still evolve quite nice.
So my major hope is, that Universal binaries are here to stay. My hope is, that we will see some PowerPC driven PowerMac sometime down the road. Something working with a Power6 derivate or even an optimized and refined Cell.
I wouldn't mind staying Intel, if Apple could just get their quality back to the glory of the Power days. Those were the days, when we really were different. And mind you, my Powerbook still feels fantastic with Tiger and iLife '06. I refrain using iLife '08, as I guess Apple injected tons of Intel optimized code, just to tease me to buy another Intel Mac. Alas my experience has been so bad, they either really surprise me with their next gen MBP, or I'll reconsider the dark side for myself after nearly 10 years of Macdom.
Yeah, great! I think the MacPro build quality shouldn't be as bad as the iMac's.
*now hugging his Powerbook - a real Apple product with superior quality rocking for approx. 4 years and still feeling comfortable*
Hi Everyone, this is my first post at macrumors... I have been reading this thread, and I am interested when people are talking about apple and the G6 and G7's. I have been a user of the mac since the old 68k days...
...PPC wipes the floor with intel.. but all GOOD things come to an end...unfortunately!!.
Very informative! Thank you and welcome to macrumors forums!
I'm with Cassie! I love my iMac G3's more than any of my Macs!! I have lots of different and new Macs. PPC G3's work fine for anything online...well maybe excluding myspace!
__________________________
7 iMac G3's 400-600, 17" iMac G4 1GHz, G4 Cube450, 12'' iBook G3 500, 14'' iBook G4 1.42, PowerMac G4 533,*NEW* Mac mini C2D 1.83,Touch 8GB,2 Shuffles
Well, for the general consumer this is all rather new. But, you're correct about both the SGI's and Macs even 15 years ago, especially the SGI machines which were really cool. My dad has an Indigo and Onyx at home.
Nope, as I'm still waiting for it, leaving 'Public Beta' status. OTOH I'm happy with Tiger, and there is absolutely no touted feature, I'd need. I can perfectly live without CoverFlow, Stacks, QuickLook, Spaces and TimeMachine (since that still doesn't work with wireless solutions).
And to your info (thoug it's Off Topic): Leopard is the first OS X release, that I didn't order in a heartbeat. I remember the excitement acoompanied with Jag, I loved Panther and I still adore Tiger. Leopard just leeaves me cold.
Power5 and Power6 would not be the same things as G5 and G6. These cpu's are what IBM uses in it's high-end servers. Apple would have wanted a scaled down PowerPC version of the same chips. For whatever reason IBM was unwilling to do that. They offered Apple the Cell (what is in the PS3) but Apple declined. I think the decision to change was the right one.
The question is did Apple do the right thing in moving to Intel from PowerPC? Yes, absolutely! It is something they should have done years before they did.
Absolutely wrong. You want to stop human progress and effectively keep the human race using the same technology as we have now for the rest of our existence? Because that would be the end result. So much is dependent on computers now that if computer technology halted we would have to say good bye to an awful lot.
Want a cure for cancer? Need better computers. Want to find a way to beat AIDS? Better start looking at better computers.
Medicine, physics, maths, government there are so many things that need faster computers that it would be absolutely impossible to give up on developing faster computers.
yes and I think it was a good idea. it has moved and convinced pc people to switch over but at the same time gave them an option to use both os if they'd like instead of just being tied down to only using one os. I myself liked it alot