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.
Happy 20th Birthday!
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Crippled Apples
There's probably more than one example.
One that I remember clearly was the Quadra 605. While every other Quadra used the 68040 proc, the 605 used the 68LC040, which didn't have the integrated FPU. Since the Quadras were the "high-end" models at the time, a lot of people screamed that Apple was trying to pull a fast one -- putting a crippled processor in a Quadra box and hoping no one would notice.
JohnnyJibbs take note: removing an FPU from a processor qualifies as "crippling". Selling a box that's not as fast as another box does NOT qualify as "crippling".
There's probably more than one example.
One that I remember clearly was the Quadra 605. While every other Quadra used the 68040 proc, the 605 used the 68LC040, which didn't have the integrated FPU. Since the Quadras were the "high-end" models at the time, a lot of people screamed that Apple was trying to pull a fast one -- putting a crippled processor in a Quadra box and hoping no one would notice.
JohnnyJibbs take note: removing an FPU from a processor qualifies as "crippling". Selling a box that's not as fast as another box does NOT qualify as "crippling".
Re: Re: Slower Processing
$3774 USD today will buy a G5 Duallie 2.0, and the 1gb memory upgrade, and the 2x250 GB hard drive upgrade.
I would not consider a new computer without memory and hard drive upgrades.
New computer can wait until my current G4-733 (upgraded ram and hard drives) no longer does what I need it to do.
... another 2 or 3 years, maybe?
=-=
JJ
$3774 USD today will buy a G5 Duallie 2.0, and the 1gb memory upgrade, and the 2x250 GB hard drive upgrade.
I would not consider a new computer without memory and hard drive upgrades.
New computer can wait until my current G4-733 (upgraded ram and hard drives) no longer does what I need it to do.
... another 2 or 3 years, maybe?
=-=
JJ
Re: Slower Processing
Oh yeah thats right, I do recall reading that somewhere, but it had just slipped my mind. Thanks for clearing it up.
Still than all that talk really refers to one incident which occurred many years ago. I don't think its fair or relevant to current events to keep on saying those sort of things.
Oh yeah thats right, I do recall reading that somewhere, but it had just slipped my mind. Thanks for clearing it up.
Still than all that talk really refers to one incident which occurred many years ago. I don't think its fair or relevant to current events to keep on saying those sort of things.
Re: Re: Slower Processing
I agree. Something that happened 15 years ago, back in the last century, has little relevance to current computer business philosophies.
Apple has expanded "flavors" of a computer to more than just the color of the plastic shell. Adding another model in a family-shell of computers seems to be working very well. iPod is an example of that success.
So, nowadays, business as usual: a new processor is slowed down for one model, and the full-speed processor is available for another member of the family-shell.
=-=
JJ
I agree. Something that happened 15 years ago, back in the last century, has little relevance to current computer business philosophies.
Apple has expanded "flavors" of a computer to more than just the color of the plastic shell. Adding another model in a family-shell of computers seems to be working very well. iPod is an example of that success.
So, nowadays, business as usual: a new processor is slowed down for one model, and the full-speed processor is available for another member of the family-shell.
=-=
JJ
Re: Crippled Apples
mmm, but wasn't the 68LC040 not just another version (cheaper version) of the 68040 processor? I mean didn't Motorola just make them like that (without the FPU)? and wasnt the Quadra 605 just a step-in model of the Quadra range? Than it wouldnt really be crippling on Apples side.
mmm, but wasn't the 68LC040 not just another version (cheaper version) of the 68040 processor? I mean didn't Motorola just make them like that (without the FPU)? and wasnt the Quadra 605 just a step-in model of the Quadra range? Than it wouldnt really be crippling on Apples side.
Re: Re: Crippled Apples
Hmmm. Now that I think about it, the 68LC040 was actually the low-power variant for laptops -- it was used in some Powerbooks. It ended up getting used in a bunch of those generic Performa models, because it was a lot cheaper than the full '040.
So I was wrong -- Apple didn't "cripple" the proc. But at the time, many strongly opined that the LC040 shouldn't ever have seen the inside of a Quadra box. It would be like Apple offering a G5LC, with a G3 proc inside. Abomination!
Hmmm. Now that I think about it, the 68LC040 was actually the low-power variant for laptops -- it was used in some Powerbooks. It ended up getting used in a bunch of those generic Performa models, because it was a lot cheaper than the full '040.
So I was wrong -- Apple didn't "cripple" the proc. But at the time, many strongly opined that the LC040 shouldn't ever have seen the inside of a Quadra box. It would be like Apple offering a G5LC, with a G3 proc inside. Abomination!
Best crippling example is on the market now!
People, look no further than the iBook G4 for an example of Apple crippling a compter to not bite into another market.
One issue for Apple isthat the OS allows multiple monitors to be used, subject to the user's VRAM limitations and the ability to hook multiple monitors up to it. This has been part of the OS for years, if not a decade.
Since Apple has shipped notebooks, they've allowed monitor spanning between the onscreen display and the external monitor port.
Fast forward to Oct. 2003 - Apple upgraded the video card on the iBook to be a beefy 32 MB, more than capable enough for running the onboard LCD and a large external. But this, combined with the G4 upgrade, had them worry about canabalizing the PB models, so "cripple the iBook" was their solution.
Since the operating system BY DEFAULT supports a monitor spanning configuration, and Apple wasn't about to rewrite their entire OS merely to disable this, they used a PRAM setting to store a variable that disabled monitor spanning. Resetting this variable is all that the available patch does.
People, look no further than the iBook G4 for an example of Apple crippling a compter to not bite into another market.
One issue for Apple isthat the OS allows multiple monitors to be used, subject to the user's VRAM limitations and the ability to hook multiple monitors up to it. This has been part of the OS for years, if not a decade.
Since Apple has shipped notebooks, they've allowed monitor spanning between the onscreen display and the external monitor port.
Fast forward to Oct. 2003 - Apple upgraded the video card on the iBook to be a beefy 32 MB, more than capable enough for running the onboard LCD and a large external. But this, combined with the G4 upgrade, had them worry about canabalizing the PB models, so "cripple the iBook" was their solution.
Since the operating system BY DEFAULT supports a monitor spanning configuration, and Apple wasn't about to rewrite their entire OS merely to disable this, they used a PRAM setting to store a variable that disabled monitor spanning. Resetting this variable is all that the available patch does.
Re: Best crippling example is on the market now!
Are you saying you can patch an iBook G4 to use multiple displays, not just mirroring?
Are you saying you can patch an iBook G4 to use multiple displays, not just mirroring? Try this. Current feedback says it works on the G4 iBooks, but use at your own risk.
http://www.rutemoeller.com/mp/ibook/ibook_e.html
Everyone seems to be hoping for a new G5 release. Is a G5 beyond what is required or suitable for my purposes (e.g. Garageband, media encoding, photo/video editing, iDVD) would a G4 iMac be sufficient? From what Ive read, it seems that itll be some time before apps are written to take advantage of the G5! Is the Panther 64 Bit? Im thinking of switching!
I would have to say a G4 iMac is beyond sufficient. I just completed a feature film on my original 17" 800Mhz iMac in Final Cut, and encoded the DVD on the system. A G5 would definately be speedier (Final Cut and DVD Studio Pro take advantage of the G5, I believe), but an iMac should work just fine.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Panther isn't 64 bit. In the way of switching, do it! You won't be sorry!
(Oh, and on that film--in another shameless plug visit internetdetectives.coresoftcomputers.com for more information
)G4 vs. G5
Of course there are those who will say you need the fastest thing out there. I'm not one of them.
If you're making your living with your Mac (or plan to), and every minute is precious, and dollars aren't, then wait for the G5 speed bumps.
Otherwise, you'll be happy with the G4, IMHO. Don't listen to all the whiners who are afraid of buying anything now, for fear that Apple will release The Next Big Thing in three weeks. The current iMacs are awesome.
No, Panther isn't a 64-bit OS. I'm sure that over time, Apple will add OS features to take advantage of the wider address space, but by the time it means anything to the average user, you'll probably have a new G7.
Just my $0.02.
Of course there are those who will say you need the fastest thing out there. I'm not one of them.
If you're making your living with your Mac (or plan to), and every minute is precious, and dollars aren't, then wait for the G5 speed bumps.
Otherwise, you'll be happy with the G4, IMHO. Don't listen to all the whiners who are afraid of buying anything now, for fear that Apple will release The Next Big Thing in three weeks. The current iMacs are awesome.
No, Panther isn't a 64-bit OS. I'm sure that over time, Apple will add OS features to take advantage of the wider address space, but by the time it means anything to the average user, you'll probably have a new G7.
Just my $0.02.
Gotta agree with the above posters - my 1.25 GHz G4 iMac is awesome! It does everything I need it to, and more, quicker and more efficiently and easily than my old PC ever could. Even when the new G5 iMacs are released, I won't feel bad or "outdated" at all - this beautiful machine will last me for the next 2-3 years easily. Then I'll get a G7.
And so passes a update-less day in the Central timezone. Happy birthday to Macs none the less, I've enjoyed my month old powerbook immensly, and I hope to for many, many more months to come.
...I would enjoy them even more with a more kindly priced high-quality DVD authoring app...
...I would enjoy them even more with a more kindly priced high-quality DVD authoring app...
(Probably the wrong thread to say this!) but the iMac isn't well suited to all home-user needs. If you're really into your gaming, the iMac won't cut the proverbial mustard. (I have one too). That's a rather gaping hole for a machine that's probably Apple's main home/consumer Mac.
For music editing, it *might* be enough. Though even with the sample songs included with GarageBand, my iMac starts to choke. My boss was almost a switcher, he bought one for home music editing, but similarly it couldn't handle enough tracks so he sold it again a couple of months later.
The processor is ok, but the bus and memory are just far, far too slow for a machine of it's price. (But I still ove mine anyway!)
It might be more of a problem with the harddisk. My G4 450 at home runs just fine even if I use 20+ tracks with effects on them in Cubase. Using a faster firewire harddisk might have solved his problems. Also I think GarageBand still needs some work on it's performance. Apps like Cubase or Logic can easily play many more tracks with effects on them than GarageBand can do.
THE APPLE HOME PAGE WAS UPDATED!
Even though it's just and ad for the iTunes Pepsi Giveaway, it's something...
Still waiting for a G5 update...
Even though it's just and ad for the iTunes Pepsi Giveaway, it's something...
Still waiting for a G5 update...
That's quite possible. I don't know how many tracks he generally uses, but it's probably quite a lot. It might have been optimistic expecting the iMac to handle it, but I think he based the purchase on price, 'any machine that costs 3K must be able fast enough'..
As for GarageBand's performance, I doubt it's an Apple priority. They've throttled app's performance in the past to encourage sales of high end softare, that may be the case here too.
Your probably right. For the 49 dollar/euro price you can't expect too much optimizing. But maybe we will see some speed improvements in the next version anyhow. Or Apple just hopes that everybody that have used GarageBand will now be ordering a G5.
Originally posted by Mac-Xpert
Your probably right. For the 49 dollar/euro price you can't expect too much optimizing. But maybe we will see some speed improvements in the next version anyhow. Or Apple just hopes that everybody that have used GarageBand will now be ordering a G5.
Well, I bought iLife, just to get GarageBand.
..and I'm getting the USB Midi keyboard because of GarageBand..
..and one for my boss too..
..and it's another reason for a G5 (in addition to games)
I'm not sure if GarageBand is a 20th birthday present for users, or for Apple!!