PDA

View Full Version : The wait till the intel switch


Darwin
2005-10-12, 12:20
So i think as for a new computer i might as well just horde untill this? i imagine this will effect the price structure. id hate to feel silly in a few months

i guess for now i can just borrow something

WBG4
2005-10-12, 12:31
I for one will avoid the first few revs of the intelmachines like the plauge. They will be buggy

staph
2005-10-12, 13:07
What's more I kind of get the impression that they might not be coming until the second half of next year… that's a lot of hoarding.

Of course, you could get a laptop and then ebay it for the nominal drop in value when an intel machine comes out.

Powerdoc
2005-10-12, 13:42
Two things to consider for the switch :

- the bugs who came often with every new design
- the need to update most of your software, if you don't want to use the emulator


The new I mac look like a good bargain (the video card is not that crappy : enfin !). May be the best I mac will be this one.

staph
2005-10-12, 13:45
The new I mac look like a good bargain (the video card is not that crappy : enfin !). May be the best I mac will be this one.

Hell, it's the only PCI-Express graphics card in the whole Apple line up.

WBG4
2005-10-12, 15:40
That means new G5s soon

Matsu
2005-10-13, 07:07
Wait for the switch. Basically, if you haven't needed a mac untill now, you don't one right now either, and if you already have a PPC mac, that's good enough for the legacy library. The only exception would be someone who need s very specific mac product for professional use, and that doesn't mean playing with professional gear. It means someone who has paying customers who cannot afford to wait. These people may need said product (HW or SW) now, or may have a large investment in PPC software, and need more seats for it.

For the rest of us, anything Apple does between now and Intel is just a glamour. PPC is dead. Apple can sugar-coat it, they have to do that to protect their bottom line, but it doesn't change a thing. Never expect continuing software support to be anything but half hearted at best. What you can expect will be more along the lines of: "it works, but it works better on these shiny new intel macs, now available at Apple Store and Apple Online Store." Don't be had. WAIT!

Don't Listen to any of that "Intel mac will be buggy" garbage either. Chances are good that they will be more thoroughly tested/debugged than any rev.1 PPC product Apple has ever launched. Intel does much more work in this regard than IBM or moto ever did.

Also, the first rev myth is far far overstated. Just about every rev -- first, second, third etc etc... -- has potential problems. A miniscule but vocal minority on the web then equates whatever issue (they aren't always real problems) with the fact that said machine is the first revision. We all know the stories, and if you enumerate them it may seem like there is some truth to the "first rev" myth, but if you bother to count the actual cases of *whatever* versus total units shipped, you quickly see that your chances of a first rev product failure are really not any better or worse than any other rev.

WBG4
2005-10-13, 10:11
Wait for the switch. Basically, if you haven't needed a mac untill now, you don't one right now either, and if you already have a PPC mac, that's good enough for the legacy library. The only exception would be someone who need s very specific mac product for professional use, and that doesn't mean playing with professional gear. It means someone who has paying customers who cannot afford to wait. These people may need said product (HW or SW) now, or may have a large investment in PPC software, and need more seats for it.

For the rest of us, anything Apple does between now and Intel is just a glamour. PPC is dead. Apple can sugar-coat it, they have to do that to protect their bottom line, but it doesn't change a thing. Never expect continuing software support to be anything but half hearted at best. What you can expect will be more along the lines of: "it works, but it works better on these shiny new intel macs, now available at Apple Store and Apple Online Store." Don't be had. WAIT!

Don't Listen to any of that "Intel mac will be buggy" garbage either. Chances are good that they will be more thoroughly tested/debugged than any rev.1 PPC product Apple has ever launched. Intel does much more work in this regard than IBM or moto ever did.

Also, the first rev myth is far far overstated. Just about every rev -- first, second, third etc etc... -- has potential problems. A miniscule but vocal minority on the web then equates whatever issue (they aren't always real problems) with the fact that said machine is the first revision. We all know the stories, and if you enumerate them it may seem like there is some truth to the "first rev" myth, but if you bother to count the actual cases of *whatever* versus total units shipped, you quickly see that your chances of a first rev product failure are really not any better or worse than any other rev.
The X100 anyone? The beige g3 anyone? the Yikes G4? With the code not being optimized for intel yet many apps WILL probably run slower. Not only that but new towers are not coming till 2007. I need a tower for school and i can't wait till late 2007 to get it. I'll be getting the next rev G5

Matsu
2005-10-13, 13:47
You fail to list what percentage of those machines had problems.

10%, 5%, 2%, 1%, 0.1%, less?

Also, you didn't cmopare it to the percentage of rev 2,3,4 machines with problems. So how can you categorically say that any of those were inherently less reliable. I'm not saying they had no problems, just that you probably here about them more precisely because they are rev 1 products. I'd hazard that subsequent machines show very similar failure/fault rates, it's that 1.) you don't hear about it, and two, no one equates it with, or emphasizes, the particular rev cycle of that machine...

Also, '06 is practically upon us, and if you re-read my comments, I specify who should consider a current machine and who can do without. There is often an inversely proportional relationship between how much power a person imagines they need, and what they might in actual fact require for their main computing tasks...

chucker
2005-10-13, 13:47
Chances are good that they will be more thoroughly tested/debugged than any rev.1 PPC product Apple has ever launched. Intel does much more work in this regard than IBM or moto ever did.

Except this "work" has nothing to do with Intel, but with Apple. Unless Apple plans to change things around even more, the motherboard and chipset will still be Apple's. The 68k motherboards and chipsets were Apple's. The PowerPC motherboards and chipsets are and have always been Apple's. We have, so far, been given no reason to believe that the x86 motherboards and chipsets will be Intel's -- aside from the fact that the demo machine uses Intel hardware. But we all know that's neither to be considered a product, nor a design, nor anything else to look at. Its pure purpose is to let developers create apps.

Also, the first rev myth is far far overstated.

iMac Rev. A software update a few weeks ago? ATA problems with the Yosemite? The "Yikes" (come on, look at the name!)? The "airplane engine" MDD G4s?

Overstated, maybe. But not for no reason.

Matsu
2005-10-13, 17:04
fan noise and heat are actually nothing more than people expecting their computers to somehow be something just so far beyond other machines. When they weren't, people were disappointed but there was absolutely nothing operationally wrong with machines that ran either hot or loud. Most of the (contemporary) computers you could buy for a reasonable price were either hot or loud or both.

Rev a software is an entirely different issue from hardware. And as for hardware, I still haven't seen any numbers that compare the failure/fault rate in rev one products with those in any or all other revisions.

Darwin
2005-10-13, 22:54
i am really liking the new imacs... in fact thats where i think ima go with my money. i dont need a dualie and its mostly a media dvd machine

and i can get it with a gig of ram and 500 gig of sata ? for 2gs or there abouts? Fuck yes

Maciej
2005-10-13, 23:07
I'm gonna be on the Intel band wagon as soon as they come out... I'm sittin on a 1.25 Ghz PB, they were reved not a month after I bought mine, so I was a little dissapointed...

I wish people weren't so against buying Rev A. products, if someone didn't buy them the bugs wouldn't get fixed, and would carry onto the next Rev. Plus, how cool is it to have a brand new Rev. A product? Its just great!

Robo
2005-10-13, 23:26
I'm considering just picking up a Mac mini and waiting for the Intel transition, to be honest. The Powerbook update doesn't look good at all, and the iMac update was surprisingly awesome, but still...I don't know if I want to drop that much on a desktop. I mean, if I buy a desktop because the new Powerbook sucks, I can guarantee you I'll be first in line for the Intel Powerbook. I heart mobility.

So...maybe it'd just be better to just by a Mac mini? But the iMac update is really nice...and it dropped in price...and I regret not being able to own any of the previous iMacs...I might not be able to pass it up.

del-uks
2005-10-15, 22:03
I guess I should have take a look here before posting that (http://forums.applenova.com/showthread.php?postid=251253#post251253)... :rolleyes:

Anyway, I might go with a new iMac in the wait of the Intel transtion...

WBG4
2005-10-15, 22:20
iMac Rev. A software update a few weeks ago? ATA problems with the Yosemite? The "Yikes" (come on, look at the name!)? The "airplane engine" MDD G4s?

Overstated, maybe. But not for no reason. Also the first rev B&W G3 had weird firewire issues. Take a look at the x100 series powermac, yea they were cool but they kinda sucked in the end because the had nubus slots and slower ram then the next rev.

staph
2005-10-16, 00:51
fan noise and heat are actually nothing more than people expecting their computers to somehow be something just so far beyond other machines. When they weren't, people were disappointed but there was absolutely nothing operationally wrong with machines that ran either hot or loud. Most of the (contemporary) computers you could buy for a reasonable price were either hot or loud or both.

Matsu, as the proud owner of a rev A MDD PowerMac, I don't think you know what you're talking about. I know how loud normal computers are, and they were a lot louder. Not only were they louder, but it was fairly high-pitched, so it didn't fade into the background, ever. Of course there was nothing operationally wrong with them — except that being in their presence for more than 5 minutes put your teeth on edge.

After the power supply swap, they were more-or-less like other computers, that's true.

HezMah19
2005-10-16, 01:18
I dont think waiting 'till Intel is a good idea...
My PowerMac G5 DP1.8 (rev.A) had some of the WORST issues of ANY computer I've ever come into contact with. Windows included.
Countless problems that had me and Apple guessing for the first 3 months.

Allow me to enlighten you to the "repairs" it went through in its first 3 months of existence:
> Hard Drive Replacement
>Graphics Card Replaced
>Logic Board Replaced TWICE
>RAM Replaced
>OS X 10.3 Re-installed 20 times (I'm not joking, I marked down every-time I had to re-install it > Had intended to get the machine replaced) due to unexplainable errors and crashes after being used for more than 5 minutes.

And there's my dads iMac G5 17" Rev. A, with the current record of:
>Logic Board failure
>OS X issues, has had 5 clean installs of 10.3 since purchase, and Tiger has had to be re-installed twice.
:err:

Imagine what it's going to be like on the rev. A Mactel's...

I don't trust rev. A's

EDIT: Perhaps Apple just sends the crappy machines to Australia?

benkraft
2005-10-16, 02:35
Unless Apple plans to change things around even more, the motherboard and chipset will still be Apple's. The 68k motherboards and chipsets were Apple's. The PowerPC motherboards and chipsets are and have always been Apple's.

IMHO, it would make absoutely no sense for Apple to create their own chipsets for the Intel platform. Why? Intel makes extraordinarily strong, stable and fast chipsets (with certain glaring exceptions like the infamours i820 "camino") and tests them quite extensively. Why should Apple invest good money into R&D and QA if there's a pretty good basis to start from already? Granted, motherboard design may still stay with Apple, since they don't usually use standard form factors (iMac, Mac mini, etc) and like to put in extra stuff sometimes.
Also, there is a wide variety of chipsets to choose from made by other manufacturers: NVIDIA, VIA (Okay, Apple won't do THAT to us, hopefully), ULi, ATi, etc... The point is, unless Apple absolutely needs the chipset tailor-made for something, there's no good reason not to go with existing chipsets or ones in development.
Let me speculate on how that would work. Please note: I am aware that Apple won't use current hardware from Intel, but let's apply the chipset situation to the current line up, as if those platforms were to be used, just to think it through.

For example:
Entry Level Mac = Mac Mini
Chipset: i915G (Pentium 4) or 915Gm (Pentium M)
Features: integrated graphics, DDR / DDR2 memory support, PCI Express, USB 2, On-Board "Azalia" sound, SATA support

Consumer Mac = iMac
Chipset: NVIDIA nForce 4 Intel Edition / Intel i925
Features: see above, add integrated hardware firewall for nForce 4, both are DDR2 only, nForce 4 already has Dual-Core support

Pro Mac = PowerMac
Chipset: i925XE / i945 / i955 / nForce 4 Intel Edition
Features: as above, add SLI capabilities and Dual-Core support
(For Dual-Core Dual-Processor setups, there are also Workstation Boards from other companies - Tyan, for example. Supermicro and others could easily make boards as well, ServerWorks already has MP chipsets out).

chucker
2005-10-16, 02:48
IMHO, it would make absoutely no sense for Apple to create their own chipsets for the Intel platform. Why? Intel makes extraordinarily strong, stable and fast chipsets (with certain glaring exceptions like the infamours i820 "camino") and tests them quite extensively.

Yes, Intel makes good chipsets. And Synaptics makes good trackpads. That didn't stop Apple from dumping Synaptics -- despite having been a good business partner for many years -- and developing their own trackpad (for the iBooks and PowerBooks) and clickwheel (for the iPods and iPod minis). Why? Higher margins, in the long run.

Apple has a lot of experience in making chipsets. Not on x86, granted, but the architecture is only one component. Apple's chipsets handle, and will continue to handle, technologies like USB 2.0, FireWire, optical audio, etc. Apple's chipsets are and have been very powerful and versatile.

Why should Apple invest good money into R&D and QA if there's a pretty good basis to start from already?

It wouldn't be the first time.

Why buy from the competition if you can produce yourself for cheaper? Requires R&D and QA, yes, but only in the short term.

Granted, motherboard design may still stay with Apple, since they don't usually use standard form factors (iMac, Mac mini, etc) and like to put in extra stuff sometimes.

Exactly. Except for the PowerMac and Xserve, I don't see Apple changing to Intel (or non-Apple, for that matter) motherboard designs.

Also, there is a wide variety of chipsets to choose from made by other manufacturers: NVIDIA, VIA (Okay, Apple won't do THAT to us, hopefully), ULi, ATi, etc...

There was a wide variety of trackpad suppliers. Apple chose Synaptics, by far the biggest supplier. And then they dumped them, and made their own. Not because Synaptics sucked. Not because they didn't deliver or weren't good enough. No, purely because it made business sense.

The point is, unless Apple absolutely needs the chipset tailor-made for something, there's no good reason not to go with existing chipsets or ones in development.

Oh, but there is! :)

benkraft
2005-10-16, 04:48
Apple has a lot of experience in making chipsets. Not on x86, granted, but the architecture is only one component. Apple's chipsets handle, and will continue to handle, technologies like USB 2.0, FireWire, optical audio, etc. Apple's chipsets are and have been very powerful and versatile.


I'll concede that point. In the long run, it may cost less to fab your own chipsets than buy third-party ones. Still, I think that the first-gen MacIntels will use stock Intel chipsets on Apple-designed mainboards. Once Apple has some experience with the problems and finer points of designing around Intel, they may very well create their own designs or cooperate with others (read nVidia).
Somehow, I just don't see Apple plunging into the switch on all fronts at once, i.e. Hardware and software simultaneously. Wouldn't that require too many resources? It seems to make more sense to me to go through a phased transition: Software and platform first, then self-manufacrtured hardware... But I'm no business major. Just a translator :)

Oh, and as a kind of post-script. I don't see Apple using Intel mainboards, only the chipsets. Just to be clear on that.

del-uks
2005-10-16, 20:26
Arghhh...
I'm still confused here... :confused: ...and I'd apreciate getting your point of view...

I'm on the market for a new PowerMac.

I'm looking forward for the oct. 19th event and I'm quite excited about it.
But still, even if they bring the long awaited dual-dual PM, I'm not sure what to do...

I might actually just get a new iMac in the wait of the Intel switch... then sell the iMac and get a powerfull Intel-PM when it comes...
I don't know...!?!

Concerning the first MacIntel computers, I've been considering what people say about rev. A machines... but if they come up with a dual-core PPC... well that's gonna be rev. A too isn't it?

The true thing is I won't really need all that power before july '06 when I'll start a really big recording project.

Tough decision.

P.S. sorry for my poor english.

ast3r3x
2005-10-16, 20:58
> Hard Drive Replacement
Nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with Rev A.
>Graphics Card Replaced
Nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with Rev A.
>RAM Replaced
Nothing to do with Apple, nothing to do with Rev A.

I won't comment on the OS X reinstalls because I don't know what the issues were, but I doubt OS X had to be reinstalled. Most often people do that because it's 'easier' to fix the problem like that. Was the OS reinstalled all those times before or after those things were all replaced?

I am not trying to negate the importance of your problems, that sucks dude, but it's not common, you seem to be horribly unlucky. Hope everything got fixed up without cost to you.

Chinney
2005-10-16, 22:04
So i think as for a new computer i might as well just horde untill this? i imagine this will effect the price structure. id hate to feel silly in a few months

i guess for now i can just borrow something

It's best not to waste yourself with a temporary fling with a G5. Don't do it! You will just feel empty and cheap afterwards. When just the right nice Intel comes around, you will know it...and it will be for life. Until then, horde! horde!

dfiler
2005-10-17, 08:01
I must recommend the opposite, buy a Mac now and don't wait for the intel Macs.

I'm not so worried about rev A hardware issues. Software is the bigger gotcha.

Why run things through a translation layer when you don't have to? The PPC install base will be huge for many years to come. Pros are amoung the last to swtich so we can expect PPC app support for many years to come. If anything software support/compatability will be a bigger issue on intel macs over the next 2 or 3 years.

Apple couldn't spend enough on R&D to keep their own custom CPU architecture competative in the long run. Switching to intel means they can piggy-back on the rest of the industry's R&D. However, this doesn't mean that PPC macs are a bad buy at this point in history. The new iMac has PCI-E and it is expected that the next powermac rev will include PCI-E and dual cores. These are competative machines that are also likely to be the most compatible and supported for the next few years.

autodata
2005-10-17, 08:27
fan noise and heat are actually nothing more than people expecting their computers to somehow be something just so far beyond other machines.
You are simply wrong and uninformed. Apple has, at times, used cheaper louder fans when they could have (and previously did for that model) used quieter ones and other times there have been problems with fans kicking on too often. In a number of different mac models the fan noise was a hardware related problem that affected some machines but not others.

Chinney
2005-10-17, 09:35
I must recommend the opposite, buy a Mac now and don't wait for the intel Macs.

[...]



I was kidding in my post. I guess that did not come out clearly enough. ;)

I had my PPC to Intel worries in June, but I got over them and bought my my iMac G5 in July. I really don't think that the switchover is going to be a big deal for the PPC base. There will be years of support.

bassplayinMacFiend
2005-10-17, 13:32
Also, the first rev myth is far far overstated. Just about every rev -- first, second, third etc etc... -- has potential problems. A miniscule but vocal minority on the web then equates whatever issue (they aren't always real problems) with the fact that said machine is the first revision. We all know the stories, and if you enumerate them it may seem like there is some truth to the "first rev" myth, but if you bother to count the actual cases of *whatever* versus total units shipped, you quickly see that your chances of a first rev product failure are really not any better or worse than any other rev.

I've owned 3 Rev A Apple computers since 2001. Every single one of them have had to go back to Apple for hardware repair (TiBook faulty DVD and dead HD, AlBook white spot issue, iMac G5 overheat issue). In fact, my Rev A iMac G5 needs to make another trip as it still overheats. I will never ever ever buy a Rev A Apple product again and would advise anyone else not to do so either.

del-uks
2005-10-18, 04:48
I will never ever ever buy a Rev A Apple product again and would advise anyone else not to do so either.

So tomorrow we'll finaly see the first dual-core PowerMac... but... it's kind of a rev. A isn't it!... so maybe I should wait a few more months for the MacIntel... but... arghhh it's gonna be rav A. too... ;)

HezMah19
2005-10-18, 06:07
Was the OS reinstalled all those times before or after those things were all replaced?

:(

Before anything was replaced, and after each individual part was replaced...several times...

Yea, the technicians at the Apple Centre joke about the "Maher Macs" as they have been dubbed, we've been very unlucky with our Macs.

HOWEVER I will say that I would NEVER go back to Windows, unlucky or not
:D

Its weird, after all that, I feel more attached to my PowerMac, they offered to replace it, but It felt "wrong" to...?

beardedmacuser
2005-10-18, 07:13
Also the first rev B&W G3 had weird firewire issues.

As well as non-functioning Firewire it had a dodgy onboard IDE bus too. Nice one Apple. During development did they ever test the machine with a Firewire device or IDE hard drive? The built-in Firewire ports on my Rev. A B&W G3 PowerMac have never even come close to working with any device I've tried.

But with an IDE PCI card and a combo Firewire/USB2 PCI card, it's still running sweet and running Tiger great 24/7. Yes it's Rev. A, but with a bit of care it's still very usable (6 years on?). It's what I'm writing this on...

The concerns with Rev. A Intel Macs are all about the software. Not hardware. Essentially you're changing to a different operating system, which happens to contain a very transparent emulator for running PPC software.

beardedmacuser
2005-10-18, 07:18
Apple has, at times, used cheaper louder fans when they could have (and previously did for that model) used quieter ones and other times there have been problems with fans kicking on too often.

It really wasn't difficult to replace the fans in a MDD PowerMac using fans which were really not very expensive. The result was a MUCH MUCH quieter PowerMac and it ran cooler too!

But why couldn't Apple have used decent fans to start with? It wasn't a budget Mac mini with margins cut to the minimum. It was the very top of the range dual-G4 PowerMac which at the time cost serious money. A few extra quid spent on decent fans is surely worth the sanity of the Pro-users who would depend on such a machine?

And this was a Rev. C model too. It's not only Rev. A models which can have silly hardware issues.

Doxxic
2005-10-20, 06:07
Anyone have the slightest idea which Macs are moving to Intel first? Pro or consumer? Desktop or portable?

I've been searching all over the web but couldn't find it, though I remember vaguely that something has been said about it some time...

:\

Doxxic
2005-10-20, 07:20
Anyone have the slightest idea which Macs are moving to Intel first? Pro or consumer? Desktop or portable?

I've been searching all over the web but couldn't find it, though I remember vaguely that something has been said about it some time...

:\

Yey, found the answer here, myself, in the Intel Switch sticky on Apple Insider.

Steve has said that they start with the low-end products in 2006 and move up to being "mostly done" by mid-2007.

del-uks
2005-10-20, 09:16
Steve has said that they start with the low-end products in 2006 and move up to being "mostly done" by mid-2007.

I don't trust Steve that much when he's talking about the future (I guess I'm still waiting for a 3GHz G5 ;) )

Anyway, I'll get the new iMac tomorrow and wait for Intel-PowerMac.