The worst Apple designs, ever.

[sushi]

But no machine that I can think of off the top of my head was replaced with something slower. Of course a low end system was going to be slower than a high end system from one or two years ago.

Off the top of my head, when the PowerMacs using the PPC 601 CPU were introduced, this situation occurred.

At the time, Apple did not have a native running system for the PPC architecture so they emulated the Mortorolla 68 series until the system could be ported over. So the early 601 based systems were slower on many tasks compared to older 68040 based systems.

 

[DZ/015]

The quadra 630. Try getting one of those suckers apart. Damn near impossible.

 

[dpaanlka]

Off the top of my head, when the PowerMacs using the PPC 601 CPU were introduced, this situation occurred.

At the time, Apple did not have a native running system for the PPC architecture so they emulated the Mortorolla 68 series until the system could be ported over. So the early 601 based systems were slower on many tasks compared to older 68040 based systems.

Well yeah the Intels are still slower at PowerPC stuff like Office and Photoshop. As 7.5 came out, then 7.6 and 8.1, more and more PowerPC was added to the systems. The computer itself is not slower.

 

[sushi]

The computer itself is not slower.

It depends on how someone perceives their system's speed.

For example, if you have a PM based upon the PPC 601 and a PM based upon the 68040 running side by side with an early version of the Mac OS, and the PM based upon the 68040 does things faster, the average person is going to assume that they have a faster system. Which, based upon observations, would be true.

Just like having a similar system that is 32 bit verses 64 bit. If the OS and apps do not take advantage of the different architecture, the user will see little difference and will perceive that the 64 bit system is no faster than the 32 bit system.

So for some, perceptions become reality. For the end user, this is true most of the time.

 

[dpaanlka]

It depends on how someone perceives their system's speed.

For example, if you have a PM based upon the PPC 601 and a PM based upon the 68040 running side by side with an early version of the Mac OS, and the PM based upon the 68040 does things faster, the average person is going to assume that they have a faster system. Which, based upon observations, would be true.

Just like having a similar system that is 32 bit verses 64 bit. If the OS and apps do not take advantage of the different architecture, the user will see little difference and will perceive that the 64 bit system is no faster than the 32 bit system.

So for some, perceptions become reality. For the end user, this is true most of the time.

Yes, but the computers themselves were (much) faster, regardless of the user's interpretation. It's their problem if they had only 68k apps.

 

[SpookTheHamster]

I'm also going to have to say Mighty Mouse (I'm calling up to try to get mine replaced), puck mouse and the power adaptor that came with my G4 PB, I've had two brake at the point where it plugs into the computer and my girlfriend's also broke.