PDA

View Full Version : Apple is starting to piss me off.


Pages : [1] 2 3

oldsk00l
06-28-05, 04:46 PM
Why do they even OFFER any of their PowerMacs right now?

The G5 WAS nice.

But, let's just price something out here. (just did some research for a friend)

A system with the following specs

Athlon64 FX-57
500W PSU
TWO GeForce 7800's
SLI capable mobo
1GB RAM
250GB HD (SATA)
Audigy 2 sound
DVD-RW drive
very contemporary case

runs you at about 3 grand, in most cases tack on an extra 100 bucks

Apple's offering is:
dual 2.7GHz G5 (slightly faster in some productivity cases)
512MB RAM (wtf?)
250GB SATA HD(decent)
a piece of garbage Radeon 9650 that is about as useful in a year as an S3 virge
mouse/keyboard, OSX tiger (garbage in about 18 months)
an extremely impressive software bundle, Quicken, Xcode, etc.

The problem is, that Xcode is largely a derivative of the KDE project's IDE, Kdevelop...which when I was recently messing around w/it I found it to be equally impressive and it too just uses GCC like Xcode falls back on.

You don't have to buy any hardware to get to Kdevelop or GCC.
Windows 2000 may be old but it works perfectly fine still. It wasn't made garbage the instant Windows XP came out.
For that matter, some Linux distro's beat the crap out of Windows anyway and you can just dual boot.
The software bundle for most Linux distro's actually yields open source programs that are far better than apps like Quicken etc.

and wtf with the video? I suppose when Apple goes Intel that the integrated extreme graphics will suffice or what? Why can't we have a 6600GT, or a 6800, or for that matter a Radeon 9800, or a regular X800 Pro, or an X50. Man, it's either a 6800DDL or an X850XT and you just need to stfu and take it up the ass for it.

I like OSX, I really do. I feel that I got a good powermac. Really. It's just unfortunate that it will be the worst computer purchase I've made when it comes to longevity.

Now my Mac Mini was a steal. For the price you get a very good system that you do not touch any games with at all. But it's a great moviemaker, image editor, and development tool. I could even send the gcc commands to make my binaries for anything I code in Xcode to a Linux/Windows system running gcc and generate PPC binaries pretty quickly that way.

Unfortunately, I'm probably going to fire-sale my PowerMac and build an entirely new system that is going to be much more powerful and cheaper. If I want an awesome desktop, that's what gnome or enlightenment will be for.

The PowerMac was worth it at the time because I was getting Tiger for free. I was expecting Apple to be using PPC for a long time with things floating about how IBM has already sampled silicon that would succeed the G5. Apple was saying they would be slowing the intervals of new OSX iterations.

Then WWDC happened. Apple says "welp, we're going to x86, despite our years of incessant bastardization attempts of x86 and having spent billions over time into PPC, oh and uh, Leopard out in '06".

So, what......I can't just buy something and be settled with it. Well I guess I'll be making good use of this 30" display for a while at least. Thank god I wasn't ripped off by the ipod at least.

Riptide
06-28-05, 05:01 PM
The display is nice, that's ofcourse the bright side. :)

Apple can get away with this because they are in control of their little slice of the market. And they have enough followers that they will probably be OK.

As much as I sometimes hate all the troubleshooting that goes into PCs (it won't just work) I have to say the alternative is not very attractive to me.

six_storm
06-29-05, 03:28 AM
Yeah, I didn't like Steve's announcements at WWDC 05 either (about the Intels). I know that gaming is a no-no on a Mac but Apple doesnt really give great options on the PowerMacs for graphics. As far as longevity, I think my iBook will last me a long time for the basic stuff I already do on it. I would however like to buy an iMac G5 before they switch everything to gay Intel CPUs. I know I've asked this before but won't the switch to Intel just make Apple computer even more expensive? That's not a smart move IMO.

Dazz
06-29-05, 08:21 AM
AH yes the S3 virge the 3D accelerator that doesn't do 3D hahaha.

Riptide
06-29-05, 08:39 AM
I know I've asked this before but won't the switch to Intel just make Apple computer even more expensive? That's not a smart move IMO.Why do you believe this?

As far as Intel and the "gay ass CPU" comments, I find that particularly hilarious seeing as just about any current Intel CPU would probably poop all over that G4 of yours.

nutball
06-29-05, 09:21 AM
I've never got my head round the PPC v. x86 thing, from a technical point-of-view. The "we're different" thing I do understand, but Mac folks talk about their love for PPC as if they spend all day hacking away coding in assembler. Who the hell cares about ISAs these days? The RISC v. CISC war died a decade ago, CISC is RISC and RISC is CISC today.

Oh well, that's my little missive of befuddlement.

Zelda_fan
06-29-05, 09:49 AM
Apple has really turned into an embarassment as of lately. Why anyone would purchase PCs from them is beyond me. They should just stick to iPods, laptops, and LCDs. I'll never forget the day when Steve Jobs announced that they were working with M$ and that M$ bought a large market share of Apple. Lol they had a big ass picture of bill gates up on the projector, and the crowd was FLIPPIN out. Ahhh that was a great day. Now it's even worse once they announced they are going to Intel processors. I double checked the date when I heard that to make sure it wasn't April Fools or something. They say they have high standards and will never bow down to companies like Intel and M$, but they embarass themsevles time and time again. Sooner of later their fans are gonna get sick of it, and not buy their stuff anymore. You know what I think their next move is? Switching to a windows OS. Yep that's right, and I knowmost people won't blieve it, but who whould have blieved the deal with M$ and Intel?

OWA
06-29-05, 10:02 AM
Apple can get away with this because they are in control of their little slice of the market. And they have enough followers that they will probably be OK.
That's definitely the way it is at work. Most of the Mac users I know don't want to think about hardware or software and they know very little about computers in general. They just want to turn it on, have it work and that's all they care about so basically whatever Apple says or does is fine with them. I haven't heard a single person complain about the switch to Intel. I also think the Mac users we have here are atypical for Mac users.

six_storm
06-29-05, 11:05 AM
They just want to turn it on, have it work and that's all they care about so basically whatever Apple says or does is fine with them. I haven't heard a single person complain about the switch to Intel.

I've complained. :D I've just never been impressed with Intel's products, quite frankly. And hey, it's a cool thing to know that when you turn on your Mac, you know that everything is going to work and you don't have to fool around with crap (I haven't had any problems yet). Does anybody have any comparisson benchies or something on a G5 vs Intel? I'm just one of those "I don't believe it until I see it" kinda guy lol.

nutball
06-29-05, 11:21 AM
And hey, it's a cool thing to know that when you turn on your Mac, you know that everything is going to work and you don't have to fool around with crap (I haven't had any problems yet).

I think you're mixing up Intel processors with the PC architecture. The cruddiness of the PC has very little to do with the processors, it has everything to do with 20 years of hardware cruft.

iApple86 won't be a PC, and if done properly won't have the baggage of a PC. Being a closed system the OS won't have to support the vast range of hardware that Winblows does. It'll be ... hmm... just like a PPC Mac, but faster.

Zelda_fan
06-29-05, 11:21 AM
I've complained. :D I've just never been impressed with Intel's products, quite frankly. And hey, it's a cool thing to know that when you turn on your Mac, you know that everything is going to work and you don't have to fool around with crap (I haven't had any problems yet). Does anybody have any comparisson benchies or something on a G5 vs Intel? I'm just one of those "I don't believe it until I see it" kinda guy lol.

not on OSX, however, I saw some benchmarks on a Windows top of the line PC vs a Mac top of the line, and Windows came out on top in like 95% of the benches.

oldsk00l
06-29-05, 11:22 AM
About the retort to the "gay ass cpu" point, I think the major source of frustration is going to be in the software itself not the hardware. At some point in the relatively near future you are going to start seeing packages that aren't "universal binaries". This is where you are going to see the amount of darwinports installs balloon significantly because going to a meta-OS like Gentoo is going to be the only way to get a large amount of software anymore. It really wouldn't be "gay ass" if Intel was making a PPC CPU. I really think Intel is capable of just taking a fab design/layout and just running with it...they just don't want to swallow that pride.

AMD has even fab'd out a few G4's for Apple. Of course, this was as an independant contractor just giving them access to the foundry.

And about us not being atypical Mac users, you got that right.

I really think their laptops are good, their Mac Mini is good. However, it's a stretch to say that even their iMac G5 is decent. It has both horrible video, and it's needing a higher default RAM configuration.

Their powermac's are just awfully terrible and gratuitously over-priced.

I'm still miffed about leopard too.

Riptide
06-29-05, 11:53 AM
I've just never been impressed with Intel's products, quite frankly.The 386 was damn impressive. Granted, it was overpriced... But Intel has put out some nice CPUs. The Pentium M is also pretty noteworthy and for a while there the Northwood was very competitive. They can't scale it any more so it's not what it used to be compared to the (ahem) competition but it still did pretty well bang/buck up until the introduction of the A64.

Riptide
06-29-05, 11:55 AM
It really wouldn't be "gay ass" if Intel was making a PPC CPU. I really think Intel is capable of just taking a fab design/layout and just running with it...they just don't want to swallow that pride.I doubt it has anything to do at all with pride. If IBM didn't want to be bothered by Apple's small potatoes, why do you think Intel would?

oldsk00l
06-29-05, 11:58 AM
I doubt it has anything to do at all with pride. If IBM didn't want to be bothered by Apple's small potatoes, why do you think Intel would?

It would be a very feasible business if Apple had handed ALL of their PPC business to Intel. Apple's problem is that half of what they are selling are laptops, with G4 cores, coming from Freescale. Essentially business that IBM could never get - which is why it was "break even" for them.

Riptide
06-29-05, 12:01 PM
Yeah but here's the thing... IBM wasn't able to get the G5 working in a laptop from what I've heard. If true I doubt Intel would have either. So really that point is moot.

oldsk00l
06-29-05, 12:05 PM
Yeah but here's the thing... IBM wasn't able to get the G5 working in a laptop from what I've heard. If true I doubt Intel would have either. So really that point is moot.

I suppose a good question in all of this is:
Why didn't IBM manufacture any G4's instead of Freescale?

You'll notice that perpetually throughout Apple's history Motorola has supplied them with their processors. Things fell apart when Freescale entered the scene.

six_storm
06-29-05, 05:44 PM
I really think their laptops are good, their Mac Mini is good. However, it's a stretch to say that even their iMac G5 is decent. It has both horrible video, and it's needing a higher default RAM configuration. Their powermac's are just awfully terrible and gratuitously over-priced. I'm still miffed about leopard too.


Apple's laptops are pretty awesome. I'd have to have that I agree that the Power Mac isn't all that cracked up to be. Today, I went to the Apple store in Nashville and played around with every single model, doing various apps such as iChat (with iSight :D Frickin awesome quality), Safari, iDVD, iPhoto, Photoshop and Final Cut (yes, every system had all of this software plus more!) After playing around with the Power Mac Dual 2.7 G5s and 30" display (drool), I could definitly say that for the money, the Power Mac was a rip off.

I thought that the iMac G5 was the best desktop deal, as for the Powerbook for laptops. The iMac worked with the apps pretty well, even though it was short a descent graphics card (ATI Radeon 9600). The Powerbooks were pretty fast, efficient and had great response to iChat and Safari. Heck, the display on the Powerbooks are just amazing.

BTW, oldsk00l, if you haven't seen the iSight in action, you should try the multiperson conferencing. Talk about some great quality!!!

Also, if anyone is interested (and still in college), Apple is giving a free iPod Mini to anyone that buys a Mac computer (iMac or PowerMac) or laptop. I tried to get them to give me one since I just bought my iBook a little while ago . . . . . :rolleyes:

Marcos
06-30-05, 03:43 PM
Gay ass cpu? well their logo IS a rainbow....

oh nvm he meant intel..

Kojiro
07-05-05, 05:29 PM
Intel is the largets PC processor manufactuer period, no company comes even close.
Eventhough AMD had beat Intel in processor perfomance wise. It does not substitiute market domination. 80% of PC processor market belongs to Intel. Apple with IBM's Power PC architecture, was issolating themselfs from the manistream market. Everything Apple was proprietary and most things still are. This drives up price while Intel was selling it's x86 platform left and right, could aford to drop prices well below what Apple could compete with thus the dominance of modern PC sales versus Mac sales.

Apple has grown quite considerablely due to it's successfull marketing of the ipod. The ipod opens the path for other Apple products. Thus more people are using Macs now than ever before.

x86 will alow apple to rid it's self of proprietary issolation. Intel will not only make macs cheaper, but also easier to develop for since the multitude of x86 apps can be ported over effortlessly. Thus making apple more competitive with PC's.

Imagine building your own Mac. Or installing the next Mac OS on your Intel Based computer! That is what intel can bring if apple ever so wishes it.

oldsk00l
07-05-05, 06:12 PM
No, it's what AMD, Via, Transmeta, or Winchip could bring.

All Intel brings is a gay ass miserable worn out, downtrodden piece of **** desktop CPU....but a great high performing mobile platform that has the best power consumption around for its performance. Intel brings regular plain old x86 ISA in mass quantities to Apple.

The bit about AMD not being able to supply Apple though? :bs:

AMD having %20 of the PC marketshare (roughly, I understand that someone may come along and say "AHA, %18.0000003247263487263482768287462834268347238234 78263784234728362368468234236423268364283872378428 3746 TECHNICALLY, HAHAHAHAAHAH) and Apple is struggling for %4.

Apple's business to AMD would be less probably than Newegg's or HP.
Reputation? Intel has a good mobile rep, yes, but when desktops are concerned they are regarded as crappier generally more expensive product that performs slower for a higher price. Let's say Intel slits their own throat in discounts, it's still inferior product and AMD would have been able to supply the fastest part at cheaper than IBM could dream of.

So here is a plausible scenario, Apple sells Pentium-M based products as: Powerbooks, iBooks, eMacs, and Mini's.

Desktops, iMac and PowerMac - Athlon64's, X2's, FX's. This would give a user far more ability to "pick the right CPU configuration" that has plagued Apple for the last two years. Not to mention, OSX would benefit from a better 64-bit implementation, dual core technology being ready to exploit (iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, Pro Logic, Motion, and Final Cut are all multithreaded apps....), and a cooler system.

In digital video editing AMD parts spank the pants off of everything under the sun.

Compatibility-wise, there is also NO reason why your software won't be cross-compatible from K8 to Pentium-M excepting 64-bit modes.

Apple isn't known for wise hardware choices though.

Riptide
07-05-05, 07:00 PM
Perhaps Jobs knows something we don't. Maybe Intel has a very attractive desktop chip set to debut in a year or two. He could be forward thinking here. Admittedly current Intel desktop chips are pretty much meh, but it's not like the A64 is 10x better. Only an idiot fanboy would say such a thing.

oldsk00l
07-05-05, 07:02 PM
Perhaps Jobs knows something we don't. Maybe Intel has a very attractive desktop chip set to debut in a year or two. He could be forward thinking here. Admittedly current Intel desktop chips are pretty much meh, but it's not like the A64 is 10x better. Only an idiot fanboy would say such a thing.

I dunno, Intel has scrapped netburst, and whatever they replaced it with down the line may be a pretty good kicker.

Just have to play the waiting game I guess for that one.

junkbond-jones
07-05-05, 08:32 PM
:drooling:

mmmmmmmmmmm 30" cinema

Kamel
07-05-05, 09:30 PM
why couldn't they just partner with AMD? amd's technology is far superior right now anyway, i don't see people wanting inferior technology if they are going to be wanting a mac.