Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => macOS => Topic started by: sway on 24 June 2003, 00:24
-
http://www.apple.com/powermac/ (http://www.apple.com/powermac/)
-
Looks good, and very fast. However, no-one is going to buy it, as it's too expencive...
-
i will buy one. i am going to buy one. a dual 2ghz g5. whats 3grand? fuck it. i need one. now. with panther installed in all of its badassness.
-
I can't get to the listing of Canadian prices (store is el-overloaded with visitors -- good work Apple!), but the low-end model's price looks to be a bit more than I paid for my iMac G3/600 awhile back.
Hopefully if I can't afford a new machine, that 10.3 will actually run on my iMac. ;)
[ June 23, 2003: Message edited by: Ravuya ]
-
I'm not sure what the sales will be like in the beggining with people realizing that the release of panther is later this year. Does anyone think that maybe the last design for the G4 was better? Also, when will Apple put the new processor into other desktops and their laptops? The PowerBook G5 would be nice . . .
-
the new design is more professional looking. comparing it to the g4 case sitting next to me, i would say the g4 case is more "toyish" than the g5 case. don't get me wrong, i love the look of the g4, but the g5 is so clean and solid looking. i dig it.
-
It looks almost old fashioned, yet COMPLETELY FUTURISTIC!!!!
-
(http://www.wired.com/news/images/full/g5_f.jpg)
Ha, that's what someone thought it would look like. Got the shape right, but I'm glad it doesn't have a heart on the side.
-
I just got back from the local mac store. Let me simply say I was more than impressed.
Panther is amazing, the G5 is jawdropping!
It floord, a dual 3.6Ghz Xeon setup!!!
AMazing...
I was reminded of the Longhorn demos with all their windoze spining around, and the host continualy added "there is no practical purpose for this except to illustrate the capability blah blah". When I saw Panther's new aditions, while very cool to look at, the eyecandy mearly served to enhance the functionality which was indeed truely inovative. M$ sux, they tried to copy the MAc... yet again, and again missed the point entirely.
Maybe that's why their pushing Longhorn back yet another year?
Jobs made fun of this at the Keynotes when he said:
"This is what we have been working on:" HE shows a video of a panther stalking thrugh the forest.
"THis is what our competitor has been working on:" Jobs puts on a video of a Longhorn cow chewing it's cud to an out of tune version of home on the range. HE is quick to add that M$ is considering pushing longhorn back to 2006.
This, of course, generated uproreus laughter.
So to all you naysayers, and doom predictors, I say this, there is a reason we Mac fans stick with Apple. It's because we know, that in the end, they will allways pull thrugh and deliver the best.
Without Apple there would be no PC's, and without them, there would never be any "true" inovation.
I know this sight has had a name change, but by golly if I don't go out and screem:
FUCK MICROSOFT!!! FUCK THEM IN THEIR PUCKERD ASSHOLE WITH A CHAINSAW TILL THEY BLEED!!!!!
[ June 23, 2003: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax:
Without Apple there would be no PC's, and without them, there would never be any "true" inovation.
I greatly doubt that.
-
quote:
Originally posted by fett101:
I greatly doubt that.
if it weren't for apples developing the gui for practical use and implementing it into their systems, microsoft would have nothing to copy. before i get reamed for the developing gui comment, i know xerox was doing it, but apple implemented it in a way that led to the modern computer. right? i think so...
-
quote:
I greatly doubt that.
The fact remains that it was only in response to the Apple II that IBM invested in the personal computer. And although Apple didn't invent the GUI, they did come up with the Macintosh interface that was copied by Microsoft. Don't try to argue that point; Bill Gates was quoted telling his GUI engineer 'Make Windows look just like the Mac'.
I don't know if Apple are the only innovators, but to my knowledge, there aren't many big players that make anything new nowadays.
-
quote:
Originally posted by fett101:
I greatly doubt that.
Well there's also a little thing called pull-down menus that Microsoft copied. The G5 and Panther here today are evidence that Apple is the leader in innovative computing, not to mention nearly everything Apple has come out with in the past decades. I don't understand how you could be ignorant to this fact.
-
Tut tut. Remember, it's IBM who made the G5, not Apple.
I almost forgot IBM; they may not be particularly innovative in the personal computer area, buy they are very much so when it comes to make processors (they were the first use copper instead of aluminium).
Redde Caesari quae sunt Caesari, and all that.
-
Yeah, they're cool. I remember when everyone called PCs IBMs. IBM has good commercials too. Perhaps they can teach Apple something...
-
I just noticed that if you look at the bundled software, internet exploder is no longer included, they've now bundled Safari. Oh darn, :D . Does anyone know if Apple will also redesign the look of all of the other computers too? Last time I checked the best iBook still had a 900MHz G3. Just a rumour that probably isn't true, but I read that Apple intends to ship 3GHz processors by the end of the year. It would be amazing if it does happen.
[ June 23, 2003: Message edited by: M51DPS ]
-
Steve said in the Keynotes that they would be up to 3Ghz by the end of the year.
Also, Apple never copied Xerox, Im sick of dismissing this myth. So people get it straight.
Xerox had a wierd machine that had a couple of windows a clicking device, and some buttons that did stuff. It could bearly be calld an OS, or a true GUI. Jobs liked the idea and PAID Xerox to have his poeple come over and get "inspired" by it.
XEROX AGREED! Later when the Macintosh project began, XEROX lent asistance. One of the lead Mac Designers was a dude who worked on the Xerox GUI.
So enugh of that Bullshit, Apple invented the GUI, Xerox had a vague outline for what a GUI may be like. Kinda like the Wright bros. everyone had an idea about what a plane would be like, there were many crude designs, but the Wright bros. invented the Areoplane, case closed.
Furthermore, the facility which builds the G5 is a 5 billion dollor facility opend up by a joint effort between Apple and IBM. The G5 is not a pure Power4, it's one Apple and IBM co-engeneered. Jobs made it clear that this is a JOINT effort between IBM and Apple. Not only that, that same IBM facility produces one of the most important component to the G5 system architecture, the little chip on the mobo which basicaly rgulates all trafic (cant remember it's name (http://smile.gif) ).
In any case, again, the G5, the 64-bit processor are all apple inovations! Intel hasent even begun to consider 64-bit, the AMD 64-bit project has backward compatability issues and is not widely adopted. The G5 is fully 32-bit compatable, and recompiling for it is as simple as clicking a checkbox in XCode (which BTW was amazing (http://smile.gif) ).
So all you windoids can suck my ass! Apple Ownzz all of you HAHAHAAHAHHAAHHAHAHA!!!!
Sorry... Im extra giddy (http://smile.gif)
P.s. Also, it is important to note, that IBM now has a vested interest in Apple's success. It will be very interesting to see how their relationship developes. I don't think IBM is about to let Apple fall behind again anytime soo.
[ June 23, 2003: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]
-
Wow, hasn't even been two years since the 1 ghz came out.
-
quote:
Also, Apple never copied Xerox, Im sick of dismissing this myth. So people get it straight.
No one claimed that, Psyjax. Just because Apple weren't first does not mean that they copied on Xerox (I know the story). Workbench for Amiga came after and introduced new features (although the Amiga never had a pretty interface IMO). RiscOS for Archimedes (back then called Arthur) was far from being a clone. Windows, however, was a total rip-off of the Mac interface.
As for the G5, well, OK, so it is a joint project. Thanks for reminding me. But IBM are still innovators when it comes to processors.
Oh yeah, and APPLE RULES!!! (http://smile.gif) (http://smile.gif) (http://smile.gif)
-
What really burns me is whenever there is good news for Apple everyone seems to turn it around and make it bad news. Everyone is convinced that Apple is going to die tomorrow, and they've been convinced for years. I wonder what the bad news will be about the G5.
-
quote:
Originally posted by psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax:
bearly be calld an OS
Well, I know I like bears. But what does this have to do with anything? :confused:
(Sorry, I just had to. I had to.)
-
I'm not questioning any of the stuff Apple did, but that if Apple had not existed, there would be no personal computers in existence, and all inovation would heve been non existent on this earth. It's just a bit too... apple-centric.
-
There are many innovators. Apple is one, Microsoft is not. But there are more innovators - if not then why does Apple now use BSD / KHTML code? Because they saw more innovations and decided to co operate with the BSD / KHTML people in order to not only enhance their OS but enhance BSD / KHTML. (Note that I didn't use the "copy" word here, as this is cooperation not copying.) Apple is a company BTW, and companies do not innovate - the people they employ do. ;) I am sure that Apple would be nowhere if it werent for Babbage / Lovelace et al. Shoulders of giants etcetera.
Note: PLEASE do not take this as an anti Apple flame. It is obvious that they make quality, innovative products, it is just that they are not the only people to do so.
-
These are my predictions. At the next keynote Steve will introduce us to Panther (again, he likes to talk about software). About 45-60 minutes of praise and awe. Then he will talk about how much the digital hub has evolved since he first talked about it almost 2 years ago. Maybe iChat will become a part of iLife.
Before he leaves he will present a new Apple Cinema Display, maybe 25" and an update to the iBooks. They will be starting at 1 GHz and up to 1,3 GHz. The powerbooks in my scenario have already been updated half a month before this keynote, along with the iMacs.
How about this?
-
Apple Benchmarketing Raises Questions
-
how come apple didn't compare the G5 to a system running Itaniums? How could the Xeon possibly be better, its no 64bits. Kind of scary. Apple may not be the cream of the crop, in speed anyway. (as usual)
-
quote:
Originally posted by jeffberg: Mac Capitalist:
how come apple didn't compare the G5 to a system running Itaniums? How could the Xeon possibly be better, its no 64bits. Kind of scary. Apple may not be the cream of the crop, in speed anyway. (as usual)
Because Itaniums are not also targeted at the mainstreem, and several benchmarks and reviews have placed the Xeon at an advantage.
In otherwords, there isn't much difference between the two, and Apple was very clear that in some cases the Xeon was indeed faster, but the G5 pulled ahead overall.
That article fett101 posted.... I don't get it?
So the guy is skeptical. Shit, I saw the dual Xeon get creemed, optimization or not.
And XCode, is very inovative. The way it lets you build and fix while the application is running, and also is able to use free processor cycles on your local network. Plz... that's fucking awsome.
I have never seen a compiler that can do this.
-
Here is a summarised rebuttal from the Hardware VP of Apple himself:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=181 (http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=181)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7:
Here is a summarised rebuttal from the Hardware VP of Apple himself:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=181 (http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=181)
That's my story and Im sticking to it ;)
No seriously. I can imagine Apple may have fudged the numbers a bit in their favor.. lets play the Devil's advocate, let's say, that you could tweek teh Xeons to be faster.
How much faster would they actually be? In the end, the G5 is at least as good as a top of the line Xeon. But these are just number tests... personaly I could care less weather the G5 scored 30, or a million and two.
I wan't to see real world apps. and indeed, those photoshop tests, 3d tests, and math tests were more than impresive. G5 wiped the floor withe Xeon, I don't care if the G5 ran at 8Mhz, fact is, whatever Apple voodoo they put in those things makes 'em fast, abd makes them work.
If anything, it means Apple can be viable competition once more. And with IBM with them, they can stay a contender in the Mhz race.
-
BTW, Apple used Linux on the P4 and Xeon systems because windows wasn
-
quote:
Originally posted by cahult:
BTW, Apple used Linux on the P4 and Xeon systems because windows wasn
-
quote:
Originally posted by Panos:
LOL :D Well, the new G5 looks awesome and I'm sure it runs great BUT who the hell is going to buy a system starting from 1,999$? :eek: Give me a break here! I love Apple's hardware but this is damn expensive!
"I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you there" I think its cheap considering its 64bit. How much can u get an Itanium system for? Xeon's also cost a lot. I think they are a good value, but they are out of my price range.
-
And it's not so much the actual performance, but whenever someone claims to have the fastest something ever, it's always utter BS. No matter what corperation says it.
-
quote:
Originally posted by fett101:
And it's not so much the actual performance, but whenever someone claims to have the fastest something ever, it's always utter BS. No matter what corperation says it.
This doesn't make any sense. You're claiming that if everyone claims that their machine is the fastest, including the one who does have the fastest machine, then someone has to have a machine faster than the fastest machine, even though everyone else have slower machines.
-
You gotta make it so confusing.
There's likely some machines that are faster in some respects then others. But There may be other areas where other machines stand out. And then that may all flip flop depending on what task you want to acomplish. Besides, speed isn't all you need.
-
Yeah but its about all you need from a processor. Other than low temperatures and stability... And I cant see Apple being stupid enough to release an unstable / hot processor. At the end of the day if a bit of extra speed when using the applications benchmarked is what you want for that price then go for it. If not, don't. "Fastest processor" is bullshit, but if it ran my apps noticeably faster then I'm interested, and thats what I think they're claiming.
-
this is from the NASA benchmark test notice the INTEL running Linux !! ahead by a hair !!
I didn't even read the article. Like usual I just looked at the pictures, so this graph may be totaly out of context, so I sugest reading the article.
link below
(http://members.cox.net/craig.hunter/g5/ms.jpg)
Link to the site here (http://members.cox.net/craig.hunter/g5/)
-
Here's what I think. I think Apple is a great company, but they need to work on the prices of their lower end computers. Sure the PowerMac is a terrific deal, but the kind of person who would buy one isn't really looking for a good deal, they just need the best computer to get the job done, and that it is. What Apple needs to work on is the price of their lower end computers. $800 bucks is not a good starting price. Come on Apple, get a hint. $800 is not a decent price. I think $3000 is an exellent price for the G5 considering what you get, but come on Apple, get with the program, you need the major market and the major market doesn't need a supercomputer!!!