Why dosent apple adopt new technology?

[anonymous161]

I deleted my post because I didn't think it answered the question of the topic, but after I deleted it I realized it did. Such is life. Due to popular demand I will try to say what I said before, perhaps not as eloquently.

Like all companies, Apple celebrates their triumphs openly while downplaying or disguising their shortcomings.
I think that Apple desires to make products that its customers will find more useable, not just useful. They adopt technologies that allow them to create intuitive and reliable products. The longer you can develop a certain technology, the more reliable it becomes. Sometimes this puts them ahead of the curve, sometimes they are behind. The iPod was not the first harddrive player on the market, but it was the best. Almost 4 years later, the iPod line are not the most feature packed mp3 players, but they are still the most useable. Mac OS X was not the first consumer unix, but it is the easiest to use, the most intuitive. USB is great for connecting printers and keyboards, but the only 2.0 device I own is my shuffle, and that is only because their is no firewire option. If I could, I would buy only firewire devices, because they have been more reliable that twitchy USB. As I have said before, I buy computers to use them and , while discussing mbps, ghz, etc is fun, as long as I can accomplish what I want I could care less what the underpinnings are. If I want outright speed, I will build a linux cluster, but I don't want to maintain that. I am usually behind the technology curve a little anyway, but if you run a business that needs the latest tech I certainly understand, even though most businesses I have seen stay a little behind the curve for the sake of reliability. And I am still curious why any thread that speeds towards Pointlessville always seem to involve Timelessblur in some way or another.

I am male. At least, last time I checked.

 

[anonymous161]

Timelessblur- your arguements are contradictory at best.
You argue that floppies are still a viable transfer medium while blasting apple because they have not adopted dual layer- a technology that you say will start to come down in price shortly and truthfully has an incredibly short lifespan. Dual layer will last at most 3 years on the market. Blu-ray is coming rather quickly and for Apple- whose average user I would guess keeps their computer for 5 years- a technology with a longterm future is a much better alternative to one that has no future at all. You yourself say that you don't currently have anything large enough to fill up one layer of a dvd, let alone too. I think most people would feel the same. Why adopt tech that will double capacity when you can wait just a little longer and adopt techn that will increase capacity tenfold? Again, Apple makes intuitive, reliable products. These products have a long lifespan so it would be better to give them features that will be useful for that entire lifespan. Apple adopted USB quickly because it was an obvious improvement over the multitude of connections it replaced. Firewire was a necessary transfer speed for digital video- which apple saw as something the consumer desired. Same with dvd burners. Same with unix os. Same with wireless networking. They have made missteps, as all companies do. Steve Jobs himself said that they missed the boat on mp3, but they have more than made up for it since. If you look at it from the point of view of what is best, easiest, and most reliable for the consumer, you will see that Apple's path is very well defined.

 

[Timelessblur]

Timelessblur- your arguements are contradictory at best.
You argue that floppies are still a viable transfer medium while blasting apple because they have not adopted dual layer- a technology that you say will start to come down in price shortly and truthfully has an incredibly short lifespan. Dual layer will last at most 3 years on the market. Blu-ray is coming rather quickly and for Apple- whose average user I would guess keeps their computer for 5 years- a technology with a longterm future is a much better alternative to one that has no future at all. You yourself say that you don't currently have anything large enough to fill up one layer of a dvd, let alone too. I think most people would feel the same. Why adopt tech that will double capacity when you can wait just a little longer and adopt techn that will increase capacity tenfold? Again, Apple makes intuitive, reliable products. These products have a long lifespan so it would be better to give them features that will be useful for that entire lifespan. Apple adopted USB quickly because it was an obvious improvement over the multitude of connections it replaced. Firewire was a necessary transfer speed for digital video- which apple saw as something the consumer desired. Same with dvd burners. Same with unix os. Same with wireless networking. They have made missteps, as all companies do. But if you look at it from the point of view of what is best, easiest, and most reliable for the consumer, you will see they their path is very well defined.

Did I ever say that NO.

Mistake one you Assumed something about me.
Mistake 2 you think you understand me
Mistake 3 is you think I dont have that much data
I never SAID any where that I dont have that much data.

I currently have 15 DVD full of back up data. and 4 gigs of crictacl stuff back on on the 4 gig hard drive that I had spare that I put in my computer/ and I have used about 10 DVDs to give stuff to a friend. So think again. I burn a cd almost weekly just almost every cd has 200 megs+ worth of data on it. Considering I had 30 gigs worth of raw data on my hard drive that should state something. So think again. I use floppy because they are easy and fast for moving small files around. when you only need to move a meg it just as easy to use a floppy as it is a USB drive to sometime faster and easier. Data corpution normal takes time. Not something that normal happen in under 10 mins.

that last time I used a floppy was last week when I need a program that was on my desktop on my laptop. I had a spare floppy put the 1.2 meg install file on it. put the floppy in my laptop installed the software I need. The little program was for my laptop. It was easier and faster than finding my flash stick or hooking up the ipod. Faster then burning a CD or a CD-RW.

Blue ray for players are over a year away before they have a chance to get in a resible price range) and then it be 2-4 years after that before enough of them will be out that it can become a standard for tranfering data then a few more years after that for the media to be resible price

Dual layer can play on any DVD player so there is not that lag in waiting for Drives to get out that can play them. Lets see DVD burner are what 3-4 years old now and they just really started enter good means for data tranfersing in the past 2 years.

Dont assume anything about me. You dont know me

 

[mkrishnan]

I am male. At least, last time I checked.

Sorry , and thanks for the repost. Yes, what you said is definitely true. I, OTOH, come to this thread purely for amusement purposes.

 

[anonymous161]

I didn't assume anything about you. I replied to what I read, ie WHAT YOU POSTED. I don't know you and I don't want to. Sorry. I am glad you have so much data- it sounds like you have a need for a dual layer burner. Good for you. You also don't own a Macintosh, you own a PC. You troll around here righteously "setting Mac zealots straight" when the topic of this thread is "Why doesn't Apple adopt new technology?" not "why PC tech pwns apple" We are intelligent people and we realize that dual layer and other technology exists. What I and others were trying to explain is that we feel that Apple is not always ahead of everyone else because they value reliability and user experience over the bleeding edge. They sell machines to users, not to technophiles. I am sorry if Apple's ideaology offends you but I am more sorry that you feel compelled to correct everyone while not listening to what they have to say.

 

[IndyGopher]

But my question is, Why dosent apple utilize new hardware. They always wait until the technology isnt as spectacular anymore until they release a product with it. Such as PCI express...

One reason is that "new technology" is often not so great.. a couple PC ideas that were hailed as the penultimate solutions that went away pretty quickly (for the most part) are:

Vesa Local Bus video and I/O controllers
EISA
MicroChannel Architecture
MFM hard drives
RLL hard drives
ESDI hard drives
RAMBus RAM

The list goes on a while... some were the best available technology at the time, some were marginal improvements that were known to be stop-gap measures from the moment they were introduced (I'm looking at YOU, Mr. VLB) but nothing STAYS the latest and greatest, that's sorta where the phrase comes from... Anyway, I think does a good job of making sure a technology has some legs before jumping ship and including it in their machines. A lot of people were upset that Apple took forever to embrace IDE drives in their better machines, but I don't recall anyone complaining that their SCSI hard drives died very slowly and gave them ample time and warning to backup their data and replace it. For years, IDE drives were notorious for working fine one day, and doing the spin-up-and-click-down dance of death the next.

Now, that said, Apple has chosen some real crap designs themselves in the past, but for the most part they stuck it in Performas. (COM slot modems and NICs, anyone?)

 

[James Philp]

I use floppy because they are easy and fast for moving small files around. when you only need to move a meg it just as easy to use a floppy as it is a USB drive to sometime faster and easier. Data corpution normal takes time. Not something that normal happen in under 10 mins.

that last time I used a floppy was last week when I need a program that was on my desktop on my laptop. I had a spare floppy put the 1.2 meg install file on it. put the floppy in my laptop installed the software I need. The little program was for my laptop. It was easier and faster than finding my flash stick or hooking up the ipod. Faster then burning a CD or a CD-RW.

In my experience, Floppy has been slow as hell since OS X.
I just use Wifi for my local file trasfers
Faster that using a crossover cable?
Cable (Firewire, Ethernet):
Plug into computers, mount drive (as guest even) drag file.

Floppy (I know yours is ):
Put into Laptop (probably external usb drive - which you may have to plug in first), wait for floppy to mount, drag into floppy, wait to be to be transfered, eject and safley remove floppy, put floppy into other machine, wait to mount, open and drag out (again waiting for transfer). eject floppy (and format it is you want to go back to stage 1). Simple!

I have to say quickly though, it's a damn good thing that file wasn't 300K larger!

 

[mtscott]

PCI express is where everthing is going and apple has not gone there.

Yet. In your "opinion" when should Apple have introduced PCIe?

They where late picking up PCI-X.

Really? How so? It did come in the FIRST PowerMac G5. Explain how they were "late" picking it up?

Currently they are late in going to PCI express and late picking up the dual layer burners.

I'd agree that they should be supporting dual layer burners in the next PowerMac upgrade, which both YOU AND I don't know if they will. Thinksecret just posted rumors, they aren't always right. But, explain to me how Apple is late going to PCIe, since there seems to be no performance gains from using PCIe NOW, and it would just drive up the cost of the computer.

 

[Timelessblur]

In my experience, Floppy has been slow as hell since OS X.
I just use Wifi for my local file trasfers
Faster that using a crossover cable?
Cable (Firewire, Ethernet):
Plug into computers, mount drive (as guest even) drag file.

Floppy (I know yours is ):
Put into Laptop (probably external usb drive - which you may have to plug in first), wait for floppy to mount, drag into floppy, wait to be to be transfered, eject and safley remove floppy, put floppy into other machine, wait to mount, open and drag out (again waiting for transfer). eject floppy (and format it is you want to go back to stage 1). Simple!

I have to say quickly though, it's a damn good thing that file wasn't 300K larger!

no considering both computer has a floppy buillt in them 0 mount time. so I dont have to remove them. For usb it would of been wait for it to mount. Tranfer the file. remove drive then wait for it to mount open it up and tranfer to laptop

 

[Timelessblur]

I'd agree that they should be supporting dual layer burners in the next PowerMac upgrade, which both YOU AND I don't know if they will. Thinksecret just posted rumors, they aren't always right. But, explain to me how Apple is late going to PCIe, since there seems to be no performance gains from using PCIe NOW, and it would just drive up the cost of the computer.

Well there where gains. The extra cost is very small since I know ATI makes express verson of all there cards to I know at least 1 lv befow the 9600XT. They cost the same. They would allow for expation and future card. Right now I think we have seen the end of new cards for the AGP slot. X800 6800 ultra where both faster in their PCIe verson. But think about 2 years down the road those cards will drop in price by a huge amount and new top of the line cards will use PCIe.

Also PCIe allows for 2 graphic cards to work together. in the 6800 utrlas that where link the testers could not really hit the limit with the graphic card. They max out the setting and it could still pull it off. the CPU was showing more strain than anything else.

 

[mtscott]

Well there where gains.

Prove it. I want a link to a website that shows this. Put up or shut up.

 

[Timelessblur]

Prove it. I want a link to a website that shows this. Put up or shut up.

SLI mode is 2 card running as one something APG can not do. In the the same cards PCIe vs their AGP conter parts is about 1-5 fps which does not matter much. But the potention is there in the next 3 years AGP just not going to keep getting the up dates

Their below is a link to the prim example of what Express can do that AGP can not do
http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041123/sli-performance-10.html

Thank you have a nice day

 

[mtscott]

Their below is a link to the prim example of what Express can do that AGP can not do
http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041123/sli-performance-10.html

Yeah, that's great and all, but I said show me where there are performance gains in going from an AGP8x single card to a PCIe single card setup.

You yourself said there were gains. Now prove it, if you can.

But, explain to me how Apple is late going to PCIe, since there seems to be no performance gains from using PCIe NOW, and it would just drive up the cost of the computer.

Well there where gains.

 

[Timelessblur]

by your line of though then what was the point of going form x4 to x8. http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-04.html that show almost no gain in that jump.

It has a lot to with thing of dimision returns. The close you get to the max theoric limits of a bus the harder it is to get close to that max. It is not a linear advance ment. Moving up to the next leval means it is easier to make the cards faster and better.

In the other test it was very little gang like 1-5 fps. but when you are busting 60 fps that matters very little. The gain would mostlstly just be from the due to having that limit.

 

[uaaerospace]

Guys and Gals, I'm no expert on this matter, but I do NOT believe my brand spankin' new ATI X800 uses all of the AGP8X bandwidth, does it? If it doesn't, then why do we need PCI Express now? Maybe in the future we will, but not until the devices need it. BTW, I have 1 FW400, 0 FW800, 0 USB 2.0, and 2 USB 1.0 devices on my computer. For me, USB 2.0 is meaningless. Most things that I have seen on the market that would actually use the bandwidth of USB 2.0 also have firewire 400 or 800. Ehhhh? What's the point?

When asked what company is leading Apple, I would be happy with just one name. We don't need a list. You saying the list is too long to write is just a round about way of saying you haven't a clue. Just give us ONE name, and then this thread would actually have some substance rather than people just bickering. Let's compare specs rather than opinions.

 

[Earendil]

I just think you all can not get over the fact that apple screwed up and is lagging.

Actually, I can get over it, I don't live and breath by whether Apple releases new tech 6 months later or earlier than some other company
And *I* actually use and plan to use a Mac 24/7, unlike you who doesn't seem to use a Mac for all that long, and is getting more paranoid than most of us.

I think they pulled a knee jerk reaction. They went from leading and pushing to hard. They knew they needed to back off but they pulled back to far.

Please man, stop using such vague descriptions and black and white comments. Your arguments will sound better if you perhaps give dates. For example:
"Dell released a (insert tech here) back on this (insert date), It was Possible for Apple to beat them to it, and they could have on the release of the PowerMac revision (revision number) back in (insert date).
If you really want to try and make an argument, cite some sources for your arguments.

Your words lack meaning because they are so absolute. I wouldn't be able to tell if you meant that Apple is lagging by 2 weeks, or 2 decades. And the context of your posts gives nothing away.

Now to the meat of things...

They where the first to drop the floppy noughting wrong with that. Their mistake was they pulled the floppy to earily.

wait. It's ok they were the first to pull the floppy, but they did it to soon? WHEN, in YOUR opinion, would have been the best time for them to pull it? You must have an idea if you say they pulled it too soon. In my own opinion, I think it was the right thing to do (for me). As you've stated, an external floppy drive can be had for $10, so why build a large piece of equipment into their computers as standard, when a large majority of the population doesn't use them? Why not let those that think they need floppies, go and buy an external drive?
I've managed to live without floppies since 1996. That's right, 9 years now. Haven't touched one. And it's not as if I live a sheltered life away from a computer. I'm a freshmen in college, Computer Science major. I've always had a computer in my home, and have had access to my own (which I shared with my siblings) computer since I was 11. I've had plenty of uses for a floppy, and never needed it. I always found, what was for me, a better alternative.

They started using firewire and they pushed it extremly hard and the rest of the industy did not follow suit. USB became the big thing.

What? I don't think you understand USB and Firewire. But I could be wrong.

USB 1.1 was adopted to replace peripherals like mice and keyboards among other small devices that didn't need a good transfer rate. I started using USB 1.1 on my iMac back in 1997.

FireWire is Apple's technology, and is used NOT for mice and keyboards, but for fast data transfers, like DV Cameras, External Hard drive, as well as (at least in the case of Apple computers) a way to make direct file transfers, or too book a computer as an external HD for another computer (quite nifty, really). I'm pretty sure these technologies were not in direct competition with each other until USB 2.0 came along. USB 2.0 finally came close (but not beating) Firewire 400, but Firewire 800 was on it's heals, and trumps USB 2.0 anyway.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a "USB 2.0 DV Camera", they are all almost exclusively Firewire. Most hard drives come in Firewire and USB Flavors, but anyone that is smart will go with a Firewire drive. Or anyone that has the option to go Firewire will (Most Apple computers in the last 4 years, maybe longer?).

My Laptop has both Firewire 800, 400, as well as two USB 2.0 ports. My USB ports don't "compete" with my Firewire ports because they do two very different things. To say that
"the rest of the industy did not follow suit [With Firewire, and] USB became the big thing."
Is sort of rediculas, as USB became a big thing not because it beat Firewire. And Firewire has been adopted by every computer and device manufacture I know of.
NOW, this is not to say that both FireWire and USB aren't gearing up to compete with each other. I think USB would like to take the place of Firewire, as evident by the progression to USB 2.0 and faster transfer rates. But They haven't done so yet.
So... ? Can you show me an article where someone shows that Firewire is going the way of the Dinosaur, and that USB is going to replace it?

Timelessblur, you know a lot of stuff . But you are unaware of some gaps in your knowledge (or refuse to admit them) and come hear trying to inform us. That is fine, we are all wrong sometimes. But a wise person would pick his battles, and LEARN from the ones he loses. At least come back and try and refute arguments made with something better than "you're wrong, and let me repeat myself again". We aren't children here, we hear your original argument, we understood it, and we argued back. Don't repeat yourself as if we are 8 year olds that will be convinced if we hear the same thing enough times. A few of us are even in tech industries, or are heading there. Most of us here aren't zealots. A well informed and convincing argument WILL be taken seriously. Another Ignorant windows user trying to start flame wars on our boards will be thrashed Apple user style. Even an intelligent person that sounds like an ignorant windows user trying to start a flame war won't get anywhere.

Ok, I'm done

~Tyler

PS
I lied, I used a floppy last summer. I used a PowerMac 8600 (120mhz) to make create an 800K floppy so that I could resurrect an old family Apple 512K. It worked too. I played the sliding puzzle game for half an hour on a 12in black and white screen
But do I wish I had a floppy drive built into my Powerbook... No.

 

[tykles]

ummmmmmmmm.....

by your line of though then what was the point of going form x4 to x8. http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-04.html that show almost no gain in that jump.

It has a lot to with thing of dimision returns. The close you get to the max theoric limits of a bus the harder it is to get close to that max. It is not a linear advance ment. Moving up to the next leval means it is easier to make the cards faster and better.

In the other test it was very little gang like 1-5 fps. but when you are busting 60 fps that matters very little. The gain would mostlstly just be from the due to having that limit.

Hi,
I'd like to say that I have REALLY been enjoying this thread a lot. I've learned a lot (from some people), and have learned other important life lessons from other people...
But how can you cite an article that concludes THIS as your 'evidence' for whatever you're trying to prove (still a bit unsure aboubt what that is):
"Conclusion? The tests show that there's no real difference in today's applications between AGP 4x and 8x. So if we can't see any difference between 1GB/s and 2GB/s bandwidth, then you really won't find any improvements if you scale it to 4GB/s with PCI Express . Maybe different latency times of the buses can make a differencebut it looks like PCI Express won't accelerate anything for graphics"
Dude, I'm sorry but you make no sense. Is Apple no longer an innovator because they don't include hardware that is effectively useless right now? By the time we need the extra bandwidth, a more elegant, cheaper solution might be there to accompany it. I can't help but picture dudes with Honda Civics where they have this huge exhaust system, but they're still running a little 1.6L stock motor- What's the point?
The thing that you don't seem to realize is that people responding to you aren't apologists, WE JUST THINK APPLE IS SMARTER THAN YOU. They have a clearer view of where things are headed and what have the most use for the consumer and the greatest longevity as a viable technology.

 

[jayscheuerle]

Just give us ONE name, and then this thread would actually have some substance rather than people just bickering. Let's compare specs rather than opinions.

Touché... or is it Threeché?

I'd actually put this as the FOURTH time he's been asked for ONE name of an industry leader...

 

[cgratti]

apple actually are usually pretty good at adopting new technology into their lineups, they have already signed up to use blu-ray burning technology, and they developed and had firewire before anyone else, they may miss the boat sometimes, but i think they do a fairly good job

Not in the area of gaming. They are terrible about 3 years behind. They need to work on gaming, maybe make a branch of just gaming for their macs.

PC do blow macs away when it comes to gaming, they need to catch up.

 

[eva01]

i just have to say this facing floppies, none of the computers i have seen in my school have them and teachers will not recieve any work done on floppies, only via email or CD-R. or also downloading it via the internet. Also they take work off of my iPod and put it onto theirs.



so enjoy using floppies at my school.

and for gaming, I use my Mac for productivity something that is actually worthwhile. Thats why i have a Nintendo for non-productive things.

 

[James Philp]

no considering both computer has a floppy buillt in them 0 mount time. so I dont have to remove them. For usb it would of been wait for it to mount. Tranfer the file. remove drive then wait for it to mount open it up and tranfer to laptop

Still not as fast as mount, drag!
And it doen't matter how "built in" a Floppy drive is, it still needs to spin up, read the file systems and then determine what to show in the Finder/Explorer(Eugh!). In my experience with computers of any kind, this takes time with Floppies. I also find they generally hate files that approach their capacity.

 

[Catfish_Man]

Just as an aside to the person claiming that Doom 3 isn't optimized on the Mac: They held the game for 4 months optimizing, and Apple released a system update that sped up some OpenGL paths that Doom 3 used. According to a person from the company there is still a few things they can do, but most further optimizations would require redesigning fairly large portions of the app. One thing I am hoping is that the new focus on multithreading will benefit Apple, since Apple has so many dual proc machines; we'll have to see what happens with the 970MP though.

 

[James Philp]

Not in the area of gaming. They are terrible about 3 years behind. They need to work on gaming, maybe make a branch of just gaming for their macs.

PC do blow macs away when it comes to gaming, they need to catch up.

Who cares about Gaming? No-one buys a Mac for gaming (Do they - i hope not! - I think I've said this about 5 times already on other threads, and this:
There's this great Mac accessory. It costs £100, has LOADS of games, plays them all really well, and has the BEST on-line gaming experience in the world. It's called an Xbox!)
Leave MS to cure us of our gaming woes!

Who really cares how many FPS doom 3 does, when it is so much more important how fast HD content will render!?

BTW the MAIN reason in the difference in PC and MAC gaming performance is NOT hardware, but the fact that most games on the Mac are PORTS from the PC. I'd love to see a developer mac a game specifically for the Mac and we could watch it SCREAM on the Dual G5, and then gaffaw as it sloggs along on a similar PC.

 

[mklos]

Get over the floppy good greif. 90% of the floppy crap was me making a statement that they are not worthless. What do you all take it as. Oh me saying floppies should still be added to computers. I stated that no where. There is a reason I call it my 10 buck insuresces. The drive costed me 10 bucks to add to my computer. 10 bucks for the just in case. If I never used it so I out 10 bucks. Not that everyone computer should have one. I just stated I call it my 10 buck insurences plan and it is really nice for those handful of times I needed to have one. I get flamed because of it and I defined myself.


I think a better way to put this thread would be apple has just become late at keeping up with a lot of standards.

They where late picking up PCI-X. they where late with the gigibyte eathernet ports, They where late going to USB 2.0. Currently they are late in going to PCI express and late picking up the dual layer burners. If the next power mac updates do not support the stuff they are out of excuse for not going to them.

You might as well stop while you're ahead (though you're not really ahead). First of all, get your facts straight before you rant and rave about Macs.

If you've ever owned a PowerMac, you know that you will almost never use one of the PCI-X slots. Heck, I know people who've owned a PowerMac for 4+ years and have never used them at all. I guarantee that if you buy a PowerMac you'll never use those slots at all.

Gigabit Ethernet was first available on a Mac back in 2001 with the Dual 500 MHz PowerMac G4. Like someone else pointed out, it was also available on the PowerBook FIRST before any other company.

They ship an optical mouse with every desktop computer...STILL the ONLY computer company to do that today!

They have the fastest FSB in the industry with the PowerMac architecture.

After this up and coming update, they will have the fastest 64-bit DESKTOP CPU on the market. I'm not talking about the high end server CPU's.

Since ATI nor NVIDIA has Mac PCI-Express Cards currently available, there's no sense in putting technology into a computer that you can't use. You can't blame Apple for neither company not having a card to ship yet. Most people don't even use the entire bandwidth of 8x AGP so PCI-Express isn't that much of an upgrade. I require you to find some damn good specs to prove me wrong with links!

If you want to reply...I want to see some facts with links to prove it! The crap that comes out of your head is just amazing.

 

[mtscott]

by your line of though then what was the point of going form x4 to x8. http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-04.html that show almost no gain in that jump.

It has a lot to with thing of dimision returns. The close you get to the max theoric limits of a bus the harder it is to get close to that max. It is not a linear advance ment. Moving up to the next leval means it is easier to make the cards faster and better.

In the other test it was very little gang like 1-5 fps. but when you are busting 60 fps that matters very little. The gain would mostlstly just be from the due to having that limit.

One thing became painfully clear at the recently held Intel Developer Forum, at which PCI Express was probably among the hottest topics on the agenda: PCI Express is going to be hard to sell to the consumers. Consequently, the biggest question was "How do I convince the consumer he/she needs this technology?" One could have almost gotten the impression that the experts assembled there were desperately searching for any argument in favor of PCI Express - at least for the graphics sector. Finally, the marketing experts singled out their new favorite killer application: real-time HDTV video editing. According to their (un)conventional wisdom, this is the application that will make consumers ditch their current motherboard and graphics card and trade them in for PCI Express components...

Not likely!

http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-06.html

That comes VERBATIM from the same article YOU QUOTED!

SLI is an intriguing future technology, but I don't know many people who would pay the price of 2 high end video cards just to take advantage of it.

Except of course Intel/AMD/Windows "ZEALOTS" who have nothing better to do than to post nonsensical, almost completely misspelt, self-contradicting, illogical rants on Mac boards because they're insecure about the computer that they purchased.

Come to think of it, maybe I do know someone.