Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
elmimmo said:
photoshop20050427.jpg
renderingsd20050427.jpg
lightwave20050427.jpg
aftereffects20050427.jpg
audio20050427.jpg
bbs20050427.jpg


I guess how Steve Jobs is going to explain all that ******** now. Oh, yeah, I know: he will not.

(Benchmarks kindly provided by Apple at http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/)


Simple...He was always compairing Apples to Oranges (or windows in this case) You'll see the same type of graphs for the new systems as well and guess what ....The Apple systems will still win!!!
 
ImAlwaysRight said:
However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.[/I]


And this quote is the sole reason I am DONE with mac. Windows sucks but it runs forever on any hardware and is not restrictive. Apple is all about screwing us. Don't think so? How about the iDVD lock out fiasco. Couldn't run an external superdrive or an DVD drive for that matter when it came out. They just want you to stay with their software and hardware, then they gouge you on the price, then they offer NO warranty worth a crap unless you pay for an overpriced applecare plan, then the change the platform constantly. Not to mention they screw us by SELLLING us BETA software. Remember OSX 10.0. No, I love the mac but the mac is now gone. Maybe 5 yrs from now if they have something better than anyone else I might look into apple but as far as I can see I am done. My 2 powerbooks will be retired to the tv with eyetv for television recording and then I am back to intel.

I am sick of Jobs constantly changing things, sick of his secrecy, sick of him suing news organizations devoted to him (jerk), but mostly sick of having to dump all off my software and hardware for all new every few years because Jobs says jump. Microsoft has its problems but the mostly let you alone. Even with their registration crap and viruses its still better in the long run.

Lets see, I upgraded my Mac because when we went from OS9 to OSX it was too slow. Ofcourse OSX was alpha when I got it so I was upset. Then when if finally got a bit faster they had Quartz extreme which made my Pismo obsolete because of the graphics card. Then I got a Titanium powerbook which became obsolete because of USB 2.0, Airport Extreme, Bluetooth and the graphics card which didn't support Core Image. So I pony up and get a new powerbook 1.67. I even get the 128mb video to be better future proofed with core image and 30" display. NOW THIS. What a load of crap.

END OF RANT.
 
Dr.Gargoyle said:
I was under the impression that the G5 chip was cheaper than the Intel chip?
Intel has the means to offer Apple and other vendors discounts (already offered to many of its chip buyers) that IBM didn't want to offer Apple. Intel also has the ability, and apparently the willingness, to work with Apple to create additional versions of the chips that Apple has been seeking from IBM. Intel produces their chips in such volume that discounts are easy to offer to their vendors. Would people be willing to see the "Intel Inside" logo to cut $50 to $75 off the price of each chip? Steve probably thought so.
 
First of all, I don't think this is good news.

I think lots of things are going to come up to bite Steve in the ass.

I can't see apple using x86 chipset as is....because we may as well go buy a PC now since Apple will be history.

Anyways, consider shoppers comparing prices. It's going to be hard to sell "an identical" machine that costs twice as much!! Using PowerPC gave Apple a competitive advantage, well, at least a differentiator. Even though Apple currently makes nice hardware, they are either going to have to give up their profit margin, or quality.

I can see them now selling bare-bones hardware to stay price competitive, and selling OSX, iLife, etc all separately. They should just change theit name to Applesoft....or Mapple? :-/

I hope Stevie thought this one through.
 
jZilla said:
Try this for size then, will CS3 - if released for X86 only run on the PPC G5?
It won't be. It will be available for both so Adobe can sell to as many people as they can. Besides, Adobe will be dead by then. Mac OS X has most of Photoshops power built right into the OS now. A very good third party app can easily come along a stomp Photoshop now.:cool:
 
Normally I am diligent and read all the posts before commenting but reading 666+ posts tonight is a few too many so here goes.

The Apple experience is what matters for me. Seamless integration and stable working.

I am excited by the future and as long as they stick to the experience then we should have no issues. For the doubters out there look to the 5+ years or x86 running (Marklar etc) as committment to making this correct.

I am confident that this will work and that we will see more exciting computing in the future.

One last point some people here have commented that this will immediately slow down sales etc. When did you last buy a Mac for a year or two. I type this on my 1 y.o. Powerbook, a 4 y.o iMac working away quietly in the background and back home with my parents an old LCIII and a 13y.o. SE Plus still run. I think once we have launch dates for the first x86 based Mac then sales will slow but by then expect to see heavy halo effect from the iPod and price cutting as the G5's get less costly to produce.

Fortune favours the brave - Go to it Apple.

John
 
Iroganai said:
Thanks, just fired up QuickTime 7 !
Is this H.264 ?

Edit: Confirmed. It is H.264 (from Cmd-I), and is extremely crisp.

Do you have an URL for that?

A chance to test the QT7 Preview for Windows :p
 
Dr.Gargoyle said:
The Marklar has been a rumor for year, but so has little green men from Mars. :rolleyes:
Hmmmmm, I should perhaps get an insurance for alien abduction? :p
Today's announcement (and demo) appears to indicate that it was not a "rumor" after all. As for the little green men ... I'll leave that one to you. :D
 
Apple Hardware Sales will be Fine.

Dr.Gargoyle said:
I would say that most of us buys the Mac experience. A machine designed for the software and vice versa. The problem is that sales will take a nose dive right now. The question is: Will Apple have any customers in two years time? or worse, will Apple be around at all in two years time?

As someone who used to make his living selling personal computers to the masses, I have trouble justifying this logic. The idea that Apple won't have any customers in the future is complete and total nonsense. It's like saying that the whole market will stop buying computers for the next two years just to see what's coming. Will most of us rumor mongers and IT geeks wait to see what's going to happen? Sure, I'll stick by my 12 inch Powerbook for 2 more years and wait to upgrade. But will the rest of the computer purchasing market? Of course not!

People buy computers for many reasons that boil down to one basic reason: They want, or need a new computer soon (or today). They either feel that their current machine is too slow, too old, won't do what they want it to do, or it's broken (OS problems or Hardware issues). So they'll walk into a CompUSA, an Apple Store, a Best Buy, Microcenter, etc, etc, and they'll buy a computer that suits their needs at the time of thier purchase. Most people who buy a computer don't even think past 2 years (Disclaimer: please note, I say most, as in, almost no one who reads rumor sites and/or is a PowerGeek).

It's like when OSX first came out, and I was a commission salesman at CompUSA in college. Any person would come in, and I'd ask them what they needed their computer to do. The most common answers were: eMail, Internet, Office, Photos, Music. I'd take them to the Macs, and I'd take them to the PCs. Guess what? OSX won out most of the time. It's because the bottom line is that these people needed a computer to fit their needs for now, not for 2 years in the future. Sure, most people wanted a FAST computer that would run software in the future, but they never asked me if the transition from OS9 to OSX was going to kill off Apple and their computer would be unsupported. On the odd power user who was actually concerned with the transition from OS9 to OSX, I would explain Apple's compatibility plan for them, and they were satisified, ready to upgrade. It will be just the same way for the next two years. When an average user (the market Apple is concerend about getting to buy computers) comes in to buy a Computer, they'll have to decide between OSX and Windows. When a Power User (lets be honest, while we're Sneezers **read Purple Cow by Seth Godin for reference**, we're not Apples true target market) comes in to upgrade, they'll be told not to worry, and why, and they'll upgrade.

If anything, and this does turn out to be a poor financial decision for Mac Hardware (and I'd bet everything that Apple will be able to bull through it by increased sales from switchers from all of those Apple stores they've been building), this is the Perfect time to do it, with all of that extra iPod cash reserves they're building.

Get it through your heads NaySayers: Apple Will Be Fine. Your Computer Using Expereince will Likely Not Change enough for you to Notice. If you're so worried about upgrading software, go torrent it and keep an eye on Mac sales as they keep increasing, built on the Strength of their USER EXPERIENCE and OPERATING SYSTEM!

Here's an exercise for you NaySayers and WorryWarts to prove my point, and calm your minds: Find a basic computer user, a relative, a friend, who does what most people do, and uses their computer for pictures, email, music, internet, and office apps. (Computer gamers don't apply, because you know darn well that the basic computer user is more likely to plunk down the money for a PS2, X-Box, or GameCube). Take that person to a Computer Store that sells both Apples & PC's, or to a PC Seller and then an Apple Store. Show them the difference between the two. Show them the pros of buying an Apple. If they don't choose the Apple, you're either a poor salesman, or you didn't follow the criteria. I made tens of thousands of dollars in sales, to customers who were so happy I pointed them to a Mac, that they came and thanked me afterwords and refered me to their friends, based on this strategy.

On a side, and unrelated note, I'm hoping this switch will reduce the prices on eBay for origional iMacs & PowerMac g3's that I so covet for upgrading :D :D :D But with the nostalga factor of those cool boxes, I find it unfortunately unlikely ;)
 
Well, I will say that I'm disappointed that some of my legacy software won't be supported. I have a not-insubstantial amount of software that I sometimes want to run that runs only in Classic. From what's been said, it looks like that's out the window. So, for those softwares, I'll have to keep an older computer around.

I suspect that this will be somewhat akin to the whole 'needs to boot in 9' hardware transition. For those of us that need Classic still, the older machines will still be sold.

I guess I'm also a little disappointed that IBM didn't come through. I had high hopes for the Power derivative processors. It seemed like we had a great roadmap into the future with them. Oh well.

I'm also astonished at how fast this thread is growing. It seems that if I take the time to read a whole page, two more pages worth of posts have been posted by the time I'm done. Now there's a formula for getting farther and farther behind. So, I don't even try to read them all.

Ah well. The only thing that remains the same is change...
 
goof_ball said:
Anyways, consider shoppers comparing prices. It's going to be hard to sell "an identical" machine that costs twice as much!!
Not a hard sell for me. I will still buy a Mac for the quality and design of the hardware and most of all for the OS. I refuse to run Windows. It's Mac OS X or nothing. I don't care about the chip.:cool:
 
goof_ball said:
First of all, I don't think this is good news.

I think lots of things are going to come up to bite Steve in the ass.

I can't see apple using x86 chipset as is....because we may as well go buy a PC now since Apple will be history.

Anyways, consider shoppers comparing prices. It's going to be hard to sell "an identical" machine that costs twice as much!! Using PowerPC gave Apple a competitive advantage, well, at least a differentiator. Even though Apple currently makes nice hardware, they are either going to have to give up their profit margin, or quality.

I can see them now selling bare-bones hardware to stay price competitive, and selling OSX, iLife, etc all separately. They should just change theit name to Applesoft....or Mapple? :-/

I hope Stevie thought this one through.

good points.
 
What was the demo run on? Like what type of Mac??

Originally Posted by goof_ball
Anyways, consider shoppers comparing prices. It's going to be hard to sell "an identical" machine that costs twice as much!!
80% of computer users won't know that. The Mac will still look different than they ugly PC.
 
Earendil said:
OMG. You guys are acting as if you are using an Apple machine because it uses a Motorola/IBM chip.

Because some people are using it for that very reason. Remeber all the recent kudos Apple has been getting from the scientific community because of their IBM 64 BIT PROCESSOR being so great for genetic analysis?

A few of you have gone so far as to say you are going to buy a windows box now because of this. WHY?!

Because the idea of owning a Mac that has an Intel processor inside makes some people throw up a little in their mouth? :)

Seriouly though, maybe because people are tired of being taken through one rough transition after another in the Mac world, and the Wintel camp is actully starting to look, dare I say it, more stable.

I personally use Apple computers for the operating system, and the quality of the computer is a huge bonus.

I'm somewhat worried about the quality of the computer going down because of this. Macs used to use SCSI drives because they were more reliable than ATA drives, and they only had one fan (in the power supply). It seems the more Macs share basic components with PC's the less quality the Mac user gets for his premium price.

None of you are going to notice the transition, except for perhaps a faster computer. Get over yourself.

IBM has made more progress with the G5 mhz wise than Intel has with Pentiums these last two years, so I'm having a hard time believing chips speeds will increase faster now that we're using Intel's too. :rolleyes:

If there is one thing this change accomplishes it abolishes any Mhz myth marketting. Consumers can directly compare the speeds of mac and PC's, which I guess would be a good thing if the average consumer wasn't all about the price.
 
Microsoft threat greater than ever.

If, as Apple stated, users can run Windows on an Apptel computer what's the incentive for Adobe, Microsoft, and others to build OS X versions of their software in the first place?

I think Apple will be forced to licensce OS X.
 
Snowy_River said:
Well, I will say that I'm disappointed that some of my legacy software won't be supported. I have a not-insubstantial amount of software that I sometimes want to run that runs only in Classic. From what's been said, it looks like that's out the window. So, for those softwares, I'll have to keep an older computer around.
Yes you certainly will. It's 2005, time to put that stuff to bed already! ;)
 
Too much crying for PPC!

The move to Intel should be great news for any would be iBook/Powerbook owner. Personally, I am thrilled about the possibilities of a Pentium-M based 'book (except for deciphering the damn number-based marketing scheme!).

Let's look at what the top-of-the-line Powerbook offers TODAY:

An overclocked G4 @ 1.67Ghz with a *167Mhz* memory bus and lousy real-world battery life.

Does it even matter what Motorola has on its ficticious roadmap?

What Intel is offering TODAY:

A 2.13 Ghz Pentium M on a *533 Mhz* memory bus with equal, if not better, battery life.

And "Yonah" will bring dual-core to the laptop this time next year.

The move to Intel is great and I want to extend my appreciation to the developers who will be making this work! I just hope my Pismo lasts another year!
 
my question is

My question is if they're going to ask intel to make special chips just for apple or the'yre going to use regular old p4s. If they're using regualr chips..then why whould I buy an apple? Why not buy a pc and tehn put osx on it later? Stupid move by apple..shoulda annonced it when they had everything ready to go. Yes IBM wasn't meeting their goals...but moving to intel with a 2 year intermission will ruin them.
 
Apple has let me down. They tell me how much better the PPC platform is over the x86..then BAM, they switch. Apple seems to be the Charlie Brown of the computer business..they mean well, but there's always a Lucy there to yank the ball away from them just when they get ready to kick it. I was buying a powerbook and a 20" LCD this year, but i'll wait to see this ROAD map they have.

I'm not really liking apple right now. Good thing i didn't buy a G5.
 
tdar said:
Simple...He was always compairing Apples to Oranges (or windows in this case) You'll see the same type of graphs for the new systems as well and guess what ....The Apple systems will still win!!!


Open your eyes quick, you are being led over a cliff. OSX is way slower than windows, its just a better OS than Windows. Those graphs are a lie and have always been so. I have NEVER seen a graph on apples website that ever showed windwos or intel in the lead. Although I have seen those graphs elsewhere umm I mean everywhere.
 
Multitasking commodore

iMeowbot said:
The Apple II and the toy Commodores had the same CPU.
The original Mac and the toy Ataris had the same CPU.
The current Mac and the toy Xbox 360 have the same CPU.
And now, the new Macs and the toy peecees will have the same CPU.

Somebody's got to show those toys how to act when they grow up :D
that's preemptive multitasking commodore toy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.