Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
They ought to call it IntellKiller...
as in...IntelKiller Inside.

Anyway, alpha, your point about the SCSI being expensive and all is well taken, I was just riffing off your comment that SCSI drives function fine on their sides.

Maybe the drives will be verticle on the long side, like the Xraids, the schematic looks a little off scale.
 
Originally posted by hitman
Apple's next chip probably won't carry the "G5" label since Moto already uses it for other purposes.
I'm not following you at all. Why wouldn't Apple continue to carry the G5 since Moto uses it?
 
Re: hoax

Originally posted by theranch
This "leaked" case is a hoax...and a ploy. Apple wouldn't build something like that after what they did with the imac. It's probably one of those 6 prototypes that were rumored to be floating around.

It is a hoax, but it is not a case. The ugly "case" is clearly a poorly crafted composite image composed of an edited image of a Quicksilver case placed over whatever that aluminum thing is. Those are all inserted into the image of a lab setting. I see parts of at least three separate images.

It is really distressing to see so many people going on and on about one of the silliest frauds ever to befall the Mac community. Whoever perpetrated it must really be having the laugh of a lifetime.
 
Originally posted by pgwalsh

I'm not following you at all. Why wouldn't Apple continue to carry the G5 since Moto uses it?

The "G5" in question made by Motorola is made for the embedded market in mind. That is the main purpose of this "G5" chip, not the desktop.

Now unless Apple adopts another chip by Motorola/IBM and terms it "G5" I don't think they will be using this particular "G5" chip.

They may continue the Gx series of naming, which in that case, a "G5" would be a logical progression. I'm not saying that they will never use the "G5" name; just that it won't be this particular chip that Apple calls a "G5."
 
What's wrong with vertically mounted HDs

Originally posted by Geert


That's what I like to know too...

Gravity. It causes uneven spinning and makes it hard to spin the drive back away from the ground. The PowerMac 6500 which was one of the first vertically mounted hard drive Macs (if not the first) is one of the most repaired Macs for failing hard drives at my local user group's Tuesday night clinic. Hopefully this won't mean further hard drive failures if it is vertically mounted.
 
I think we can all agree we love the Mac OS. Why else would we be here? And we hate the way M$ does business.

But a lot of us loyalists, who once touted the superiority of the hardware, software, and the company in general, seem to be waivering. Apple isn't the only one running a business in an "economic slowdown". Most of us are at least budgeting, and need the most bang for our bucks.

Sorry to tell you, but Wintels are the competition. If Apple wants to win consumers, and keep us non-zealot supporters, they need to wake up. If Motorola is lagging, find other ways to make things look better. Faster FSB, memory, IDE, overall system improvements. The cases are neat and all, but what about what's inside? The software is Fantastic, give us the hardware to prove it. We all dislike Windows.

And M$. So why conduct business like they do? I support them buying up other companies to innovate (Apple, not M$), and giving us new software solutions, but at what costs. Should we just accept it, because it's the lesser of 2 evils? Should we just say, "well that's the fastest Mac there is, so I'll buy it". Or "it looks so stylish, who cares if it's still using last years technology". Why become complacent with the obsolesencs?

Should we have to over pay for things that others offer for free, or at least cheaper? People are mad because they feel extorted, and dammit, they have every right to be pissed. They paid extra because they thought they were getting more. Now they're getting the old "bait and switch". The extras of .Mac are worth $100/year, if they work. But what about the "free for life" e-mail. Or paying $1,000 for a new OS X.2 Server Liscense 2 months after buying a $4,000+ xServe? Or even FULL PRICE for an upgrade. They want us to buy hardware before an Expo, then punish us if we do.

See if anybody buys a new Mac after they announce 10.3, but before they deliver it. Next it will be XP type registration practices. Isn't this why we're trying to move away M$. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't get new customers by p*ssing people off, and you lose those that used to support you. How many of us used to rave to our friends, family, and co-workers about Apples? How many of us now think twice before recommending them? They want to switch people, give them a better reason to want to switch.

They want to move into the Pro realm, give us Pro hardware. Who cares if you have a 1.2 GHz CPU, if it's surrounded by ATA/133 (which really is better than ATA/66), 120 GB+ Hard Drives, PC2700 DDR, 166 FSB (x2), 2 CD Drives, USB 2, built-in Bluetooth, etc. It matters now. You can do it. How many of us use GB Ethernet, or used USB or FW when they first came out? You can't use modern day specs!?!

You want to charge us more, give us more. All you zealots can flame away. "Apple good, Wintel bad, must hide head in sand". You should see what the other side is saying, I'm a zealot to them. But I'm just trying to be a realist here. I want a new Mac, but nothing on the current roster suits my needs. I'm not paying $2,000 for style. I can't afford to. Not many can (and if you can, lucky you). Mr. Jobs, give me something fairly decent and I'll take a (slight) performance hit for the extra stability and ease of use.

It's my $$$, I'll take it where I think it would serve me best. And telling people to just go buy a PC doesn't help. Actually it just proves my point. Because that's exactly what people do. This isn't a private club, it's a business claiming to want new customers, and in doing so doesn't seem to be catering to it's current base. If anything, it's p*ssing off it's most important clientel by making a lot of really bad choices. We're not happy, and we, the customer, are what matter.

Voice your opinions people. And b*tch all you want, until someone listens. Because no, it's not "good enough".

We're mad as Hell, and we're not gonna take it anymore.
 
Re: What's wrong with vertically mounted HDs

Originally posted by gopher
The PowerMac 6500 which was one of the first vertically mounted hard drive Macs (if not the first) is one of the most repaired Macs for failing hard drives
I think this is probably a manufactureing defect in the product. I imagine that all those PowerMac 6500 use drives from the same manufacturer and they're the same model. If you've ever seen the inside of a drive, mounting vertiacally or horizontally shouldn't make a difference.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.