Originally posted by MacsRgr8
The Dutch Apple Store (http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/nlstore/) INCLUDES 19% (yep, really...) VAT
VAT: VAcuum Tax.
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.
New PowerMacs and 20" LCD
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
VAT: VAcuum Tax.
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The loudness was merely a complaint. Nowhere did they admit it was an actual problem or design flaw. It was part of the original design. They listened to the feedback (and the noise), and now they've modified the new PowerMacs accordingly. They owe MDD owners nothing.
Re: Late to the party or what?
I try to get my machine on the end of the bell curve that way you get the most for your money ! Just look at everyone who bought a 1.25 dual say this past month! I can remember when i got my 733 if i had bought it just a week sooner i would have paid about $1500 more for it! sure i didnt get the l3 but who cares! anyways the 1 gig machine is a great price but i wonder now about the imacs maybe 867 and a 1 giger on a 133 bus?
If you deride the PowerMac DDR as "fake" it is logically inconsistent to not see that a 133MHz bus is a significant advantage. The reason DDR memory in the PowerMac line doesn't double memory performance is because the bottleneck is at the FSB. A 133MHz FSb instead of 100MHz is a significant improvement (33% improvement if you do the hard math
I would think that the performance of an updated iMac (say upgraded to 1Ghz in a few weeks) will not be 33% worse than a 1Ghz PowerMac. If you spend the same amount of money for an iMac and PowerMac, the performance improvement that you would get by purchasing a PowerMac isn't significant enough to buy a PowerMac instead of an iMac. The iMac comes with such a nice monitor, while the 1Ghz PowerMac......well, lets not go there.
The only way Apple can differentiate the iMac's performance is to keep the iMac at 100Mhz FSB, which sucks because we all know they're crippling the iMac. You don't see the PC world cripple their own machines because the technology isn't there for them to make a wider range of computers with varying processor speeds. I understand where the poster from a previous reply is coming from. I own a PC Athlon 650Mhz and its blazing fast (believe it or not), and it has never had a problem in the 2 years I've owned it. And if I ever need to upgrade it, its fairly easy, and I'm sure I won't have any problems after an upgrade either, since I've never had a problem with any of the PC's I've ever owned. It rarely acts up, and I've never had the "crashes" that people in this forum seem to point to in justifying purchasing their Macs.
EDIT TO ADD: And if MorganX wanted to NOT use window, and use a UNIX based operating system, he can simply use Linux and ditch Windows.
However, the usability and feel of the two computers is different. Its like buying a $1500 Taylor acoustic guitar instead of a $200 Yamaha acoustic (the one I own
). Everybody thinks my acoustic sounds amazing for what I payed for it, and good when compared to some acoustic guitars that cost 3x more than mine, but once you pick up a Taylor.......well, its quite easy to tell the difference. Its not a HUGE difference in sound (definitely not 8x better, like the price would suggest), but if you're knowledgeable enough about guitars to tell the difference, then you may be willing to pay 8x more for the Taylor instead of the Yamaha, even if its not 8x better than the Yamaha. I still can't understand the purpose of the 1Ghz G4 PowerMac when they could have simply kept the Dual 867Mhz PowerMacs as their low end computer. They could have priced the dual 867 at the same price the single 1Ghz is at now!!!
And even if they couldn't, I'm sure the extra $150-$200 dollar difference between having a dual 867 and a single 1Ghz would have been worth it. Supposedly, its the ATI 9700. That's what people have told me, so I'm not 100% sure. I'm sure you wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference unless you were gaming like mad.
Priced out my system:
$2699 system + nvidia geoforce4 w/128mb + bluetooth + 20" lcd + appleCare
Total $4847 w/o tax.
Add 5.5% tax for Milwaukee, WI. (No VAT)
$2699 system + nvidia geoforce4 w/128mb + bluetooth + 20" lcd + appleCare
Total $4847 w/o tax.
Add 5.5% tax for Milwaukee, WI. (No VAT)
Re: Re: Someone explain Apple to me....
If you're buying a workstation, your user experience will be the applicaiton's UI which is identical in most instances between platforms. That leaves only price/peformance ratio.
Windows isn't that bad. OS X is better, and much more Windows-like than previous versions. That is why it is more appealing to Windows users. However, Apple hasn't reached the sweet spot for most PC users when it comes to price/performance. The user experience is desireable, but only worth so much. How much? For me, the current 17" iMac with 64MB MX video, 512MB RAM, and a 1GHz processor, AE, BT at the current price. I would like a faster superdrive or the option of purchasing this model with only a CDRW.
I don't know why some Mac users (I consider myself one) feel the need to convince user they don't want what they want, or need what they say, simply because Apple chooses not to make it available.
If you're buying a workstation, your user experience will be the applicaiton's UI which is identical in most instances between platforms. That leaves only price/peformance ratio.
Windows isn't that bad. OS X is better, and much more Windows-like than previous versions. That is why it is more appealing to Windows users. However, Apple hasn't reached the sweet spot for most PC users when it comes to price/performance. The user experience is desireable, but only worth so much. How much? For me, the current 17" iMac with 64MB MX video, 512MB RAM, and a 1GHz processor, AE, BT at the current price. I would like a faster superdrive or the option of purchasing this model with only a CDRW.
I don't know why some Mac users (I consider myself one) feel the need to convince user they don't want what they want, or need what they say, simply because Apple chooses not to make it available.
LCD Compatibility Question
Hi folks...
I have a seemingly Jurassic G4/466 powermac and feel no need to upgrade just yet, but the 20" monitor has my credit card quaking in fear. I've never had an lcd monitor before, does it plug right in to a 466 or do I need some sort of adapter?
Thanks
-Mike
Hi folks...
I have a seemingly Jurassic G4/466 powermac and feel no need to upgrade just yet, but the 20" monitor has my credit card quaking in fear. I've never had an lcd monitor before, does it plug right in to a 466 or do I need some sort of adapter?
Thanks
-Mike
Originally posted by Abstract
I still can't understand the purpose of the 1Ghz G4 PowerMac when they could have simply kept the Dual 867Mhz PowerMacs as their low end computer. They could have priced the dual 867 at the same price the single 1Ghz is at now!!!
Neither can I! I can see how a dual machine as an entry level (like the preious 867s) would be a fierce competitor in usability performance, but this machine is WORSE not better than the last entry level!
Originally posted by Abstract
. . . . I still can't understand the purpose of the 1Ghz G4 PowerMac when they could have simply kept the Dual 867Mhz PowerMacs as their low end computer. They could have priced the dual 867 at the same price the single 1Ghz is at now!!!
. . .
I'm missing this too. Why not add bluetooth support and FW800 into the "old" Dual 867? Keep the price the same or drop it $100. For $200 less, one gets one less processor, and FW800. Not very impressive.
I ment the new Macsdon't seem to have OS9 included even for use in classic - I don't care about 9 booting.
Anyway, I downloaded the spec sheet and it says in the Software section:
"Mac OS X with Classic environment"
So I was wrong.
concerning the 1 gig cpu's it looks like that is the chip that will be showing up everywhere across there line. So this may have something to do with how many they can get from motorola and dont forget this chip should show itself in the next imac. Superdrive cost more so thats another reason they could lower 1.25 price.
Re: Someone explain Apple to me....
You can't mix and match a Mac like you can a PC from Dell (for example) because Apple doesn't have warehouses full of generic, standard from cases and monitors like Dell does. You can't buy a completely custimized iMac for the same reason you can't buy a copmpletely custimized laptop. They both have propriatary case designs that must take into account size and shape of components aswell as the heat produced.
Lethal
You can't mix and match a Mac like you can a PC from Dell (for example) because Apple doesn't have warehouses full of generic, standard from cases and monitors like Dell does. You can't buy a completely custimized iMac for the same reason you can't buy a copmpletely custimized laptop. They both have propriatary case designs that must take into account size and shape of components aswell as the heat produced.
Lethal
One more comment for all you i love my pc guys out there! first what are you doing looking at a( gee we only have 5 % of the market MAC site? ) and second take any pc out of its box and sit it next to a MAC and you will know right away why macs hold their value better! Come on and get with it! you know you have Mac envy! Just admit it ------Now dont you feel better!
------Now dont you feel better!
I ordered the 23"
I've been waiting for months for this price decrease, and it was a much greater reduction than I could have hoped for. I ordered the 23 immediately. Woo hoo!
I've been waiting for months for this price decrease, and it was a much greater reduction than I could have hoped for. I ordered the 23 immediately. Woo hoo!
Overclocking and modding is a niche. People do it as a hobby. Believe it or not most people who mod PC cases and watercool their systems think that stuff is much cooler than an iMac or iPod. I personally think it's a waste of money in a niche market, but the demand is there. Too each his own.
Because this market is doing so well, the PC form factor is not progressing. I do not want to cut a Dragon in my PC with a neon light, I want an iMac.
Now I could go for a platinum dragon on the front of an iMac where the Apple logo is...
I can't speak for current chips, but Intel's P3 600 was exactly the same as their p3 800. The only difference was 100mhzFSB vs 133mhzFSB. And with how well the 2.4ghz P4's (I think that's right) OC I wouldn't be surprised if Intel was still giving the same chip 2 or 3 different "speeds" and selling them a different price points.
Lethal
Re: Re: Someone explain Apple to me....
I understand that, what I don't understand is Apple's performance tier creation.
Each fixed model should have high, mid, and low ends. I'm OK with that. I don't understand why there is a tier between families. From what I've read here, Apple intentionally cripples the iMac because it doesn't want it to cut into PowerMac sales. I don't understand that.
If a buyer wants as much horsepower as will fit into the iMac, they're not going to buy a PowerMac because Apple simply won't use a faster processor in the iMac. Obviously, if both machines had a 1GHz processor and 133Mhz FSB, I'm still going to buy an iMac if I want that form factor. If I want a tower with its expandability and monitor flexibility, I'm going to buy that.
I simply want to understand Apple's thinking here.
I understand that, what I don't understand is Apple's performance tier creation.
Each fixed model should have high, mid, and low ends. I'm OK with that. I don't understand why there is a tier between families. From what I've read here, Apple intentionally cripples the iMac because it doesn't want it to cut into PowerMac sales. I don't understand that.
If a buyer wants as much horsepower as will fit into the iMac, they're not going to buy a PowerMac because Apple simply won't use a faster processor in the iMac. Obviously, if both machines had a 1GHz processor and 133Mhz FSB, I'm still going to buy an iMac if I want that form factor. If I want a tower with its expandability and monitor flexibility, I'm going to buy that.
I simply want to understand Apple's thinking here.
Re: Someone explain Apple to me....
My answer to your real question (quoted here as we seem to have gotten off target) is simple: PROFIT.
Apple maintains huge margins compared to PC makers by doing things this way. It doesn't seem to keep enough people from buying theyre product either.
My prior comment plays into that - I am willing to put up with Apple's hardware inadequicies because I am infatuated with OS X and Final Cut Pro - and I work with a bunch of Unix geeks who agree 100% with me. (2 of which switched from Windows and Linux as their main desktops in the last 12 months)
Upon further review - I realized that my prior remark had nothig to do with your question. (Sorry!)
My answer to your real question (quoted here as we seem to have gotten off target) is simple: PROFIT.
Apple maintains huge margins compared to PC makers by doing things this way. It doesn't seem to keep enough people from buying theyre product either.
My prior comment plays into that - I am willing to put up with Apple's hardware inadequicies because I am infatuated with OS X and Final Cut Pro - and I work with a bunch of Unix geeks who agree 100% with me. (2 of which switched from Windows and Linux as their main desktops in the last 12 months)
With the slower FSB I'm sur ethe system used PC100 memory which allows for a lower overall system cost.
I believe all CPUs use the same process for rating them. And all technically can be overclocked. Stability is an issue. I guess we're at the mercy of all CPU manufacturers on that one.
Abstract:
AMD did the same thing with their Duron, until they discontinued it.
Preposterous. The Celeron has always been crippled by low L2 and a needlessly low FSB... it stayed 128k 66mhz FSB clear till 766mhz (link: http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1393&p=1). Even today it has 128k L2 and runs on a 400mhz FSB when the 533mhz FSB is readily available and when L2 cache is cheap to Intel.
AMD did the same thing with their Duron, until they discontinued it.
Re: Re: Re: Someone explain Apple to me....
They'll sell the least amout of iMac for the most amount of money as the market will support. As soon as iMac sales lag, you'll see them get faster. Like other's are saying here, I'd bet you'll see just that happen in the next week or so.