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.
Just for fun...
- Thread starter otis123
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i like my ibook, but i LOVE my macbook. almost everything about it is better: the keyboard, the built-in isight, front row, mag safe, user-replaceable hard drive, magnetic latch. i think we're all fortunate apple went the intel route. this way, customers don't have to compare core duos with g5s, and we don't have to keep spewing out the megahertz myth.
PPC because all my apps are native. I refuse to run any software with any kind of processor emulation. Don't try and make me or I'll pull out the sack of nickels and bring out the noise bring out the funk, yo.
But when everything I can think of is Universal, I'll take my Powerbook G4 for a nice drive in the woods and drop him off at the farm in Jersey with all of my other old computers.
But when everything I can think of is Universal, I'll take my Powerbook G4 for a nice drive in the woods and drop him off at the farm in Jersey with all of my other old computers.
Though I am a recent switcher, I have used macs for a long time at my research jobs. I love my macbook and c2d iMac, but the dual core G5 was a beautiful machine and pleasure to work with. I'm glad they made the switch though, because the Intel roadmap looks far more promising and gives us the ability to run WinXp and Vista without Virtualization...even though I would never want to do such a thing anyways, it's nice to have the option and not need it than to need the option and not have it. So, I guess my vote would have to go with Intel.
I love Intel because it is Industry Standard.
I hate crap like PPC because it consists of lots of "any of that crap", and nothing to show for it.
I have a historic fondness for PPC chips for a couple of reasons. For one thing, they carried us through the dark days in the early Pentium years with style--they were hot stuff back then. I liked the vector processing unit back when that was more unique and provided a really big speed boost over the x86 architecture. I also believe that early on PPC was a far better design than at least Intel's x86 (the crusty "MHz over actual speed" P4, for example), but the Core architecture has totally changed that--it's quite nice.
Most of all, though, I liked PPC because there was at least the theoretical chance that IBM/Freescale/whoever would come up with something REALLY revolutionary (like the early G5s if they had actually scaled as well as expected), which would then be exclusive to the MacOS and *nixes that ran on it. Now, if there is a huge breakthrough, everybody else gets it too.
That said, as much as I love my G5 tower, Apple picked exactly the right time to switch. If they'd done it during the P4 years, it would have been a mistake, as the G5 really was superior early on. But the Core architecture has spectacular potential, and so we got on the boat at the best possible moment.
And my CD MBP is great, too.
(Of course, frankly, who cares what it runs if it runs fast and does its job.)
Most of all, though, I liked PPC because there was at least the theoretical chance that IBM/Freescale/whoever would come up with something REALLY revolutionary (like the early G5s if they had actually scaled as well as expected), which would then be exclusive to the MacOS and *nixes that ran on it. Now, if there is a huge breakthrough, everybody else gets it too.
That said, as much as I love my G5 tower, Apple picked exactly the right time to switch. If they'd done it during the P4 years, it would have been a mistake, as the G5 really was superior early on. But the Core architecture has spectacular potential, and so we got on the boat at the best possible moment.
And my CD MBP is great, too.
(Of course, frankly, who cares what it runs if it runs fast and does its job.)