To buy or not to buy????

[ky2auburn]

***

 

[efoto]

Trust me, I know the dilemma. I debated what to do as well...wait, or not? I even considered - briefly - buying another PC.

Of course I'd love it if my new PowerBook was the fastest laptop on earth. But it's not. But I am not buying a machine because it has the fastest processor. I am buying a machine that I feel gives me the best overall laptop experience, and best helps me do the jobs I want to do. No matter how fast it is, a Dell will never have the awesome OS, excellent suite of installed media programs, or freedom from virtually all virus concerns that my Powerbook does. Not to mention the industrial design or performance longevity. Sure, the Dell may be a little quicker out of the box, but will it really perform well for the duration you own it? My Dell has not.

You could always wait for an iBook update, but before you know it, months go by and you may be kicking yourself.

Good luck making your choice!

Discussed in the x86 thread, the holes allowing the exploit of viruses and other slow-downs are in the OS, not the chip (for the most part) so OSX will continue to be a great OS regardless of the switch (FYI if you were worried)

The other point of note, and my real reason for response, was that computers running XP have the 'slow-down' phenomina (sp?), if you can call it that. This is due to the OS and basically states, as a rule, that the first day you get and boot your computer will be it's best and fatest day. From that point on, you will continually slow down slowly, each time you add apps, change files, etc etc, as a 'feature' of the OS

If you really want to outdate your computer fast, but XP on it....then just sit back and compute as usual. In seemingly no time (in reality some time) the computer will feel like the 233Mhz PII I used to play Sega Rally Championship on

 

[faintember]

Point

More than one.
1.) If you're a developer who owns an Intel Mac but no PPC Mac, you'd have to ship the PPC binary completely untested. No good idea I can tell you, think about endianess (if Steve Jobs tries to tell us that it is sufficient to test the Intel-binary then this simply shows that he doesn't know anything about programming and testing).
2.) Intel-only binaries are smaller.
3.) PPC code will be slower, since I'm pretty sure that Apple won't continue to improve the PPC compiler. In addition, no new PPC machines will be produced, so the Intel version will run hell of a lot faster.
4.) You don't have to support what you don't provide. Why support a PPC version that is only used by 5-10% of the users? (in a few years, PPC Macs will be the minority).
5.) It's faster to compile only once (Intel + PPC would mean two separate compiler runs).

Counterpoint

1)What current Mac developer dosen't own a PPC mac now? They can rent the new dev. kit and get their Intel Mac....so there ya go, they have a PPC and Intel Mac...so no excuses. Period.

2) PPC only binaries are smaller than universal ones as well. File size should not be a problem. Most of us have a HD that is > 40 gigs today.

3)Maybe...Who really knows???

4)Because until next year we wont even have the possiblity of seeing a Intel Mac, and even at that i highly doubt that every Mac user will be dropping $1,000-$2,000+ to get a rev. a computer running on a unfamiliar chip. (at least until some people do some early reviews)

5)Faster? Bah...compiling software is part of a programmers job. I do audio editing, should i complain that i have to do real-time dumps from DAT tapes, instead of just importing audio at 8-24x when ripping from a CD? No. Use that longer compile time to grab a cup of coffee, harass a fellow employee, or attempt to retrieve your red Swingline stapler!


So to the fjs08, my advice would be for him to buy an used or new 1Ghz Ti PB (has all the goodies already to last him a good 3-4 years from now). You might have to do some searching around to find a company that sells the older Ti PB that i mentioned, he should be able to get it for a fair amount cheaper than the current PB line. I did this so i could dual boot, and save a little cash at the same time.

Edit
On a re-read of this post my "Counterpoint" kinda sounded like a flame. I didnt mean to be rude, just posting my own two cents. I dont have a politically correct filter installed between my brain and mouth.

 

[efoto]

1)What current Mac developer dosen't own a PPC mac now? They can rent the new dev. kit and get their Intel Mac....so there ya go, they have a PPC and Intel Mac...so no excuses. Period.

2) PPC only binaries are smaller than universal ones as well. File size should not be a problem. Most of us have a HD that is > 40 gigs today.

3)Maybe...Who really knows???

4)Because until next year we wont even have the possiblity of seeing a Intel Mac, and even at that i highly doubt that every Mac user will be dropping $1,000-$2,000+ to get a rev. a computer running on a unfamiliar chip. (at least until some people do some early reviews)

5)Faster? Bah...compiling software is part of a programmers job. I do audio editing, should i complain that i have to do real-time dumps from DAT tapes, instead of just importing audio at 8-24x when ripping from a CD? No. Use that longer compile time to grab a cup of coffee, harass a fellow employee, or attempt to retrieve your red Swingline stapler!


So to the fjs08, my advice would be for him to buy an used or new 1Ghz Ti PB (has all the goodies already to last him a good 3-4 years from now). You might have to do some searching around to find a company that sells the older Ti PB that i mentioned, he should be able to get it for a fair amount cheaper than the current PB line. I did this so i could dual boot, and save a little cash at the same time.

Edit
On a re-read of this post my "Counterpoint" kinda sounded like a flame. I didnt mean to be rude, just posting my own two cents. I dont have a politically correct filter installed between my brain and mouth.

I have to agree that Apple is going to alow the developers to just drop PPC development, afterall Jobs did say he would continue to support the PPC based Macs for years to come...and I doubt he wants to drop his zealot/mac-head community that helped him rise to his current popularity. Afterall, when Apple makes the crusade on Silicon Valley (New Jerusalem) he will need the loyal zealot-crusaders to protect him against the Gates Army of the Tyranic.

Okay....I'm really tired, forget that. I'm not worried about PPC Mac support, I think its here for many years to come and think SJ won't just drop all his loyal customs for a new custom base. Afterall, he has to know that the bulk of people he will pickup in Mac sales will be the ignorami of PC users who now think Mac = PC since they use the same chip Good for Jobs, bad for Windows OS pcees.

 

[beerstine]

What bothers me is that the high-end pro users may be the ones most screwed by this move and they're the ones whol'll spend the most on hardware to begin with. If you already have a relatively current G5 you can ride out a two year product cycle, but G4 users who are the prime targets for new hardware and anyone who wants PCI-Express or dual-core performance may be waiting awhile. Do you really think IBM will advance the G5 very much with the business going away...they're off to console-land.

Buying a G5 today could be a very expensive dead end. In 2 or 3 years, there's no guarantee that future versions of pro software will work well on the PPC. Will developers (including Apple) make the effort to support Altivec apps on machines with a rapidly declining user base.

About the only way I can see Apple moving these G5s in the next couple of years is with pretty serious discounting.