Updates from New York Media Event

[Tuttle]

Looks like the PowerMac update was carefully chosen to not to give the appearance that getting dumped by IBM and being forced to use Intel chips was a disaster. Gotta give the remaing Mac faithful a reason to upgrade but not balk when the lower performance Intel desktops are all Apple is offering next year...

This half-hearted update shows why we are hearing reports of Apple begging Intel to get them their next gen chips earlier.

 

[solvs]

Well, it's nice and all, but I was hoping for a new low-end PowerMac too. Something around $1500 like the old single 1.8. I guess I'll have to see if they have any cheaper refurbs coming out (which I should have done months ago), or just get an iMac. External devices work just as well, I suppose, and I can hack it to have dual displays. I'd buy the new dual core 2.0GHz, but $2000 still seems like an awful lot of money for what you get otherwise. I figured they might even do a price drop a little because of the impending Intel switch, but I suppose people are still buying Macs. Even $1699 is above what I wanted to spend.

Guess I won't be buying that new iPod then unless I go with the refurb 2.0GHz 20" iMac.

 

[Demon Hunter]

First off, is Adobe that all-powerfull that we should be afraid of incurring their wrath?..

In a word... yes.

But I'm sure Apple worked closely with Adobe to avoid conflict...

 

[greenstork]

Man, why can't that 7800 graphics card be available BTO like it says it is on the Power Mac page. I called the Apple store and they didn't seem to have an answer to that, only to say that the 7800 option was not available.

 

[wildmac]

Among the updates today this was the most suprising. As a photographer who has tried to manage my photos using iPhoto and run away screaming at how terribly slow it is, I hope this is better. I would have to see this app in action before I pulnked down a cent on it. Apple's photo track record is pretty weak.

It will be interesting to see if this app survives in the highly competitive photo market. With a price point of $500 and system requirements that rule out any computer less than 6 months old, they are really aiming at a very small market. And even though it does different things than Photoshop, for cost conscious consumers who need Photoshop's advanced editing, justifying another $500 is going to be really hard.

Also, did anyone else notice the small print about native PSD support... no layers or alpha channels. In other words, no PSD support. Why bother, since a PSD without layers might as well be a TIFF.

Agree on your first point, but....

This could replace Nikon capture, CaptureOne, Bibble, etc. Also the portfolio programs.

Your last point... that is to make it work with Adobe. You import into PS. Work on your raw files in Aperture (do you really like ACR??) and THEN go into PS.

 

[devman]

Does anyone see a reason why Aperture wouldn't work on a 12" Powerbook plugged into a Cinema Display?

Speculating but most likely the GPU.

 

[wildmac]

But from what Adobe has been updating, it looks like Adobe was headed this way already. CS2 revamped the RAW support and File/Broswer/Version Cue is headed in the direction of being an alternative to Portfolio.

Frankly however, it's about time Adobe had some real competition. The CS2 update (with the exception of Illustrator) is pretty weak.

Adobe's attempts in this area have been poor.

Did you hear about the guy who bought $2000 of images through Adobe Bridge, had a system crash, lost everything, and was told by Adobe "tough luck" because the original software was hosed?...

Competition is good...

 

[gotohamish]

Speculating but most likely the GPU.

I have the current model - even on that one?

 

[Naimfan]

I should perhaps note that I am not a traditional "power user" who needs the raw processing power of a Power Mac. That said, my impression is that the new Power Macs are worthy updates, and as has often been mentioned, the Quad looks unreal in terms of its processing power.

The Powerbook "update" strikes me as rather underwhelming. However, I agree with the folks who point out that Apple can only use for CPUs what Freescale can reliably deliver. I would be curious to see how a new PB with a 7200 RPM drive compares with my old 1.5 Ghz PB--I would expect the new model to be faster, but I don't have any sense of how much.

Finally, I have to say it is inconceivable that Apple is not trying to make the best computers they can--in terms of speed, reliability, price, etc. I flatly do not believe that Apple would purposely limit the performance of their computers to try to save upgrades that they can use later.

Best,

Bob

 

[CalfCanuck]

And I have no clue why folks are hung up on this being a PS competitor, in this incarnation it is, at most, an Adobe Bridge competitor. It's clearly meant to be a *culling and management tool* with some capability to mildly tweak images that are good right out of the camera. There was a great lightbox program with a cool digital loupe feature for the PC (DigitalPro) , one of the apps I truly miss from the PC sides. Apps like this can be enormous time savers if done well.

JCT,
I think that this is a bigger deal to a smooth workflow for the active photographer than you perceive. While you are right that v 1.0 ("in this incarnation") will surely be improved in later versions, I mentioned in another post that this could do for digital photography what FCP did for digital video.

As an active PS user since version 2, I wouldn't change it for anything. But at the same time, it doesn't really work the way I do. I've tried all sorts of solutions (including a $5000 Cumulus server, even upgraded, that now sits on the shelf).

My shooting is similar to photojournalism, so I shoot in the field for weeks at a time. The work flow they hint at seems quite nice.

As for the editing capabilities, we'll have to wait and see. But here's the Apple specs, and if it does them well I sure won't miss 99% of the filters - to me "Brush strokes" type filters are an eye candy joke for my daily digital darkroom needs:

"Image Processing

Non-destructive image processing
Master image becomes locked digital negative
Create alternate versions without using extra disk space
Photographer’s “Essential” non-destructive editing tools
Exposure
Histogram
Crop
Highlights & Shadows
Sharpen
RGB Channel Mixer
Levels
White Balance
Straighten
Red Eye Correction
Noise Reduction
Modify and suspend adjustments at any time
Dust, spot, blemish, red-eye, and patch tools
Lift and Stamp tool to copy and paste adjustments
Use Stacks to manage alternate versions
Seamless Photoshop integration
One-click export directly into Photoshop as .PSD or TIFF
Native support for flattened or single-layer .PSD files
Manage Photoshop-generated image versions"

 

[devman]

I have the current model - even on that one?

Nope. The 5200 is not listed. http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs.html

 

[CalfCanuck]

am i just reading this system requirements list wrong or am i actually not able to use Aperture on my Dual 1.8 G5 w/GeForce FX 5200?!?

You're probably looking at the "Recommended System" rather than the minimum (G4 1.25) ...

 

[visualanté]

designers

being honest iv been doing award wining work on a g3 powerbook that is now showing age...you all complain powerbook is too slow.....but the most important feature was updated, its the display which shows your work.....speed dif isnt THAT crucial unless rendering but then use a tower....adobe cs2 on a g4 1.6 is great, flash mx too....speed wont improve creativity much if its 5seconds faster....i like the update

 

[jayb2000]

$3299??!!! - Well, yes actually.

I was curious how far out of line the pricing was for this system.
So I went to Dull and configured a system as closely as I could. I made sure I got rid of the monitor, it is XP pro, etc.
It came out as $5,549.

If anyone sees any glaring mistakes I made, please feel free to correct it, but otherwise, I don't see any system coming close to this for price/performance, not even taking into account OS X, iLife, etc.

 

[MacTruck]

Well all I have to say is its about damn time apple. I have been waiting for that quad system since last year. Also, I bought my powerbook when it first came out and its STILL the fastest one available. That makes me feel good.

Now lets talk about the powermacs. First of all they are a bit out of wack. That 2.0 system is so freakin old. I got a refurb dual 2.0 from apple like 6 months ago for $1599 and I love it but selling them still for $2000 is a little rotten. The $1999 system should be the dual 2.3ghz, the $2500 system should be a dual 2.5ghz or a dual 2.7ghz. The quad system should be $2999. If apple is going to charge $3300 for it they need to give at least another Gig of ram in it or at least a 400gb hard drive and bluetooth and wireless standard. Now I know that ram is not that expensive but hey it all ads up man and its a matter of perception. The argument for more ram goes both ways. People will say hey you can get another Gb of ram from crucial for around $130 and thats cheap but if that is the case, that its so cheap, then why can't apple throw that in? Anyways enough about the ram.

Another big problem is that this quad system would have been a valued purchase like 6 months ago minumum but now we are like less than a year away from a whole change to intel and dumping $3300, lets add tax and ram and its like $4000 is just not a wise decision. Sure if you run a render farm and make massive money based on time then sure go for it but if you need a machine and you have to save for it then the new powermacs are not a good idea. Now don't get me wrong I want that new quad but I have a hard time justifying its price tag. Had it been released for $2500 I would jump on it but its just a little too far out of reach for most of us. You dump $4000 on a system you are going to expect at least 3 years of service from it and nobody right now can say 100% that this is the case.

Apple lower them prices or up the ram and hard drives.

 

[devman]

You're probably looking at the "Recommended System" rather than the minimum (G4 1.25) ...

True but he also only as a 5200 GPU and that does not even make the minimum list.

Well all I have to say is its about damn time apple. I have been waiting for that quad system since last year. Also, I bought my powerbook when it first came out and its STILL the fastest one available. That makes me feel good.

Now lets talk about the powermacs. First of all they are a bit out of wack. That 2.0 system is so freakin old. I got a refurb dual 2.0 from apple like 6 months ago for $1599 and I love it but selling them still for $2000 is a little rotten. The $1999 system should be the dual 2.3ghz, the $2500 system should be a dual 2.5ghz or a dual 2.7ghz. The quad system should be $2999. If apple is going to charge $3300 for it they need to give at least another Gig of ram in it or at least a 400gb hard drive and bluetooth and wireless standard. Now I know that ram is not that expensive but hey it all ads up man and its a matter of perception. The argument for more ram goes both ways. People will say hey you can get another Gb of ram from crucial for around $130 and thats cheap but if that is the case, that its so cheap, then why can't apple throw that in? Anyways enough about the ram.

Another big problem is that this quad system would have been a valued purchase like 6 months ago minumum but now we are like less than a year away from a whole change to intel and dumping $3300, lets add tax and ram and its like $4000 is just not a wise decision. Sure if you run a render farm and make massive money based on time then sure go for it but if you need a machine and you have to save for it then the new powermacs are not a good idea. Now don't get me wrong I want that new quad but I have a hard time justifying its price tag. Had it been released for $2500 I would jump on it but its just a little too far out of reach for most of us. You dump $4000 on a system you are going to expect at least 3 years of service from it and nobody right now can say 100% that this is the case.

Apple lower them prices or up the ram and hard drives.

Why wouldn't you get 3 years of service from a new quad?

 

[MacTruck]

Why wouldn't you get 3 years of service from a new quad?

Hmm, probably as soon as the first app that rocks comes out only for intel macs then that makes it absolete.

I thought my Powermac 8500 was going to last forever even with the osx switch but then came osx only safari and osx only iLife. As soon as this happens for intel macs and then the G5 is worthless. Kind of like my 8500 is worthless even though you can put a G4 800 upgrade card in it and make it fast enough never mind the hacks to install osx on it, thats more headache than its worth. But like I said in my original post nobody knows what is going to happen to the Powerpc line as its all up to developers.


Then again new software for intel might be very late starting out and you could get 10 yrs out of a G5 without breaking a sweat but nobody knows for sure so forking out $4000 now is a gamble.

 

[JackieTreehorn]

Damn you Apple...I had hoped that PB upgrade would coincide with a price drop, but that PB just got 100 euros more expensive for a minor speed bump, higher resolution and a SD I really don't have any use for.

I like that picture on the new PowerBooks though. It's the Erasmus Brug in Rotterdam, pretty near to where I live.

 

[freddiecable]

swedish test of a dualcore 2.3. looks promising. there are some benchmarks:

http://www.99mac.se/forum/showthread.php?p=619773#post619773

 

[nagromme]

Hmm, probably as soon as the first app that rocks comes out only for intel macs then that makes it absolete.

Don't expect much of that ANY time soon. Apple has made it easy for developers to compile for both platforms with one click. And they'll be happy to do so: the number of PPC users out there will be a MUCH larger market than the number of Intel users out there--for a long time to come.

Someday some app will come along that demands more speed than you have--but that always happens.

 

[shooterlv]

How long has GraphicConverter been bundled with new Powermacs?

At least since the Dual 1.25 GHz G4's Thats what we have at my office and they came with Graphic Converter.

BTW anybody notice that the Refurb 30" are the same price as the new 30" Displays.

 

[CandyApple]

Originally Posted by Naimfan
Finally, I have to say it is inconceivable that Apple is not trying to make the best computers they can--in terms of speed, reliability, price, etc. I flatly do not believe that Apple would purposely limit the performance of their computers to try to save upgrades that they can use later.

I flatly do believe it. Why? Because Apple does it. I agree completely that Apple is trying to make the best computers they can, but they knew quite a awhile ago that the G4 was at the end of it's life, and they do restrict the processor specifically for the sake of later giving it incremental updates.

In the past year alone, we've seen the PB's go from 1 Ghz to 1.25 to 1.33 to 1.5 to 1.67. And this is all using the same G4 Chip, just clocked by Apple at different speeds. Apple has had a dead chip for a long time now and has had to concoct this ever-so-marginal-processor-speed-update-scheme to keep things "fresh."

It's also not as though the iBooks couldn't have a 1.67 G4 right now, they could, as they are the same G4 chips that are running at 1.42. It just doesn't fit the line-up, and so Apple purposefully limits the performance of this computer.

This has been a problem with Apple's portables for awhile now. Without actual, better, more expensive tech for the pro line, and consumer tech for the iBook line, Apple has had the same tech for both and has had to make BS updates and cripple products.

And I know Apple has no choice. They can only take what Freescale gives. But what is dissapointing is the prices they charge. It is OLD tech for BLEEDING EDGE prices. And people can point to things like new DDR2 4200 Ram, but its crippled by the OLD motherboard, and Apple is likely just putting it in there because it is easier for them to get a supply of it - not because they have actually made any other improvements to utilize this better ram.

The other updates like slightly better HD, Display, etc are welcome but are also expected because that it what is in the supply chain at the moment for any computer manufacturer. That's what happens - you don't update your PBs for X months and in X months, some marginally better tech is on the market. And to people who say, "you mean Apple should give us a better HD and more RAM and lower the price?!?!?", the answer is absolutely yes. Apple has done nothing special with the Powerbooks to justify thier high price for some time now.

Bottom line is, Powerbooks are good portables, if you don't have one and want one, get it, and you'll probably like it. I like mine. But they are definitely outdated and overpriced.

Here's to the Intel books'.

 

[fred_garvin]

This is complete BS. You can find older systems still available new (or refurbished) and this is exactly what you're looking for. It's not the latest cutting edge technology, which you don't really want or can afford. But it's a G5, decent video card, and I hate to break it to you but that is all that exists in your price range. That's not Apple's fault. Cutting edge tech costs $$$. Here is a whole range of older machines, being sold new, in the box, over at Small Dog electronics:

http://www.smalldog.com/category/x/x/G5+Minitowers/G5+Minitowers/wag100/wag10000

Yes it is Apple's fault. Give me the iMac without the monitor/iSight in a Shuttle PC sized case. They could easily offer 2 models for $999 and $1299. Give it optical audio out and front row. Then it makes a good desktop with a cinema display or a good media PC to use with my HDTV. Make it BYOKDM as the mini.

I'd buy that in a sec.

 

[Shuh]

Mac Ram

Hi folks,

I'm a little disappointed about the lack of 12" updates, but I'm going to go ahead and buy a 12" Powerbook, regardless (Apple work environment...smallest Apple PB...). I'd like to install my own RAM to offset some of the cost. Someone mentioned that Crucial is a good brand option. Can anyone point me to the proper model (1GB) on a site like NCIX. I know, I know, I should be able to figure it out by reading the specs, but I'm just trying to make sure I don't make a stupid mistake and have to send it back. I'd like to draw on your collective experience and knowledge. Thanks.

PS. First Mac...very excited.

Marc

 

[Passante]

Probably already been mentioned, but Aperture won't even run on a current iBook or 12" PowerBook. It requires an iMac G5, Power Mac G5 or 15" or 17" PowerBook G4. Some pretty hefty video card requirements too. The recommended requirements are a dual 2.0 GHz G5 with at least an X800.

Of these updates only the Power Mac G5 Quad is interesting to me. If I had enough money, I'd buy one as a last PowerPC machine, and use it until software support for PowerPC ends in 5 or so years.

Just priced out a maxed out BTO Power Mac G5 Quad with 2 30" displays, and with educational discount, it comes out to $20,667.00! The Quadro FX 4500 upgrade alone is $1485! Of course, you could knock that price down a lot with third party RAM, Apple is charging $10,000+ for an upgrade to 16 GB of ECC RAM.

It actually states a Powerbook with a 1.25 GHz G4. I'm hoping it will run on my G4 DP 1.25 GH