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

Has Apple lied to us

furryrabidbunny

furryrabidbunny

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 10, 2005
475
0
Mesa, AZ
For years we have heard of the megahertz myth, and how the PPC architecture is simply superior to the x86. I have believed it, and so have others, and for the most part, the "megahertz myth" was true. Then why such a rapid change in architecture? Granted IBM and Freescale have been slow to develop a devoted notebook ship, and have been slow to up the clockspeed, they have made progress. Dual core was coming. Low power consumption chips were coming. Or were they actually not coming any time soon? Was IBM simply lying about their progress, or has apple suddenly become tired of waited and is abandoning their research and IBM's and Moto's. Jobs said G5's were going to be continued to be developed and put out. What happens if we get a G5 powerbook, maybe a complete G5 line, and the Benchmarks blow away intel. Are we screwed? This is what I believe will happen. The G5 powerbook becomes vaporware, never happens. G5s barely top 3 GHZ, and still need to be liquid cooled. 10.5 comes out on a complete dual core intel pentium line, consumer products with the m line for a great value and extremely low power, and the pro line gets a p5 dual core. That new line also comes with a handy new feature; run your current Windows setup with migration assistance or that newly released "longhorn" to help in your home's or business' transition to the mac platform.
 
I can't read through that whole thing without line break ups, but my general answer:

Simply because the intel processors have advanced so much since when the G5s were released, and all the G5s got were 2.7 while Intel processors can reach almost 4 GHz, AND over 4 GHz with overclocking.

Also, dual Intel processors are much cheaper than dual IBM G5s.

I can almost guarrantee that the lower class macs, like the eMac and the mini, will swith to intel first to keep the same price but THEY make more money, and they will be able to boost up the stuff like RAM and video for less money.

And 10.5 will have support for Intel out of the box, while 10.4 may just get an update, or no support at all.
 
Dotdotdot, take a look at the keynote... OSX have been Intel based all the time.

Apple just wanted to take a different road from the PC market but it just didn't happen.

AMD was not a choice because if they ever felt the need of switching they won't take more risks. Intel have been there always.

Yes in a way, Apple has lied in the way they couldn't mask any more the lack of speed by pushing their OS but is good in a way.
 
The thing is, while Apple class it as the "megahertz" myth, it is really the "OS" myth - after all, we haven't all been complaining about the speed of the Macs to a great deal. I think every Mac fan accepts that the PPC architecture is in fact beter - but when there's almost 1.5 GHz between the fastest pentium and the fastest G5, we know somthing is wrong.

We've all been pushing Steve to do somthing about the ridiculous 167 system bus and not even up to 2Ghz in the Powerbooks - and now he has.

He's fixed the problem by going with a manufacturer who has the largest of all supplies. They will ALWAYS design new chips, and they have many, many customers. Apple is no longer one voice in the mist - it can too fight for the fastest chips along with the many computer manufacturers. They will still use proprietory hardware, and you wil still require a Mac to run it on, it just helps us all in the long run.

I say "cheers" to the journey.

Hey come on, at least we've all got somthing to chat about!
 
mymemory said:
Dotdotdot, take a look at the keynote... OSX have been Intel based all the time.

Apple just wanted to take a different road from the PC market but it just didn't happen.

AMD was not a choice because if they ever felt the need of switching they won't take more risks. Intel have been there always.

Yes in a way, Apple has lied in the way they couldn't mask any more the lack of speed by pushing their OS but is good in a way.
Click to expand...
Exactly. They weren't lying at first, but as Intel and AMD have pulled away it has developed into a lie. One they intend to put to rest.
 
I think IBM oversold the PowerPC and now that it has not become a reality, Apple are doing what needs to be done to correct that situation.
 
Xtremehkr said:
I think IBM oversold the PowerPC and now that it has not become a reality, Apple are doing what needs to be done to correct that situation.
Click to expand...
Smartest post all day. I'm tired of the doomsayers. You're upset about having Intel... get over it. IBM was a dead end for Apple.
 
benjamindaines said:
for a while the MHz myth was true but after a while intel WAY out performed Apple then it became pure marketing. C'mon try and name one company that hasnt lied to you at least once.... i betchya cant
Click to expand...
Burger King.
 
benjamindaines said:
im sure someone can find something... come on help me out here people
Click to expand...
There is no truth but the Whopper. You know this to be true.
 
Duff-Man says....c'mon, really....we are talking about technology here. This business moves quickly....targets are missed...happens to Apple, Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Motorola - you name it. What Apple may have said in the past has very little bearing on what the reality is now and can't really in all honesty be called a "lie" - this business is bult on projections on future technologies that don't always pan out the way they are expected to. Apple/Steve made a tough decision and you can bet they did not make it in haste.....not everything is a big "conspiracy" to screw the customers....oh yeah!
 
Ok, I take it back. Burger King doesn't really lie to me, they just tell me what the can't do after I ask them (i.e. two pickles, but well drained; three concentric circles of mustard with two cocentric circles of ketchup on the inside, etc.)...yeah, i like being a pain in the ass.

Anyway, lie are all relevant in the business world
 
You guys are morons if you ever thought that the CPUs were really faster than the stuff from AMD/Intel... Especially the newer 64 bit dual core stuff.

I am an Apple user because of OS X and iLife... If I wanted faster and better games, I'd go PC.
 
spaceballl said:
You guys are morons if you ever thought that the CPUs were really faster than the stuff from AMD/Intel... Especially the newer 64 bit dual core stuff.

I am an Apple user because of OS X and iLife... If I wanted faster and better games, I'd go PC.
Click to expand...

Morons, eh? Nice way to enter a discussion. :(
 
ok. lying was a strong word. My thing is it doesn't seem like apple gave the g5 enough time to truely develop. How can you suddenly explain away all those benchmarks on the powermac pages about how much incredibly faster a g5 is at working with pro apps when they are switching to the "slower" processor??? Unless intel has some amazing things coming with the pentium m (which should be the main chip used, super thin and small desktops and notebooks running super cool and super fast) and the pentium 4 d (which if i understand it isn't even truly dual core, that they just bascially "glued" two dies together) it just simply seems like we haven't been getting a true picture of things, or the G5 is truely just a bad chip with no future.

p.s. I can't wait to see what IBM comes up with for the next generation playstation xbox and revolution. Seeing how none of the chips (minus maybe cell) are close to what they are claiming to be able to do, with less than a year before they debut. People will be disappointed when 3 core 3.2 ghz power processor don't exist.
 
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