Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
And hopefully its elimination, eh?
I actually joined this forum because of Apple's announcement. As mentioned in another thread I took heat for being ignorant in, I just bought a dual 2.3 G5. I'm sure other people have concerns, so I figured I'd make a quick list and thread. G5's Future Unless Apple jumps back on IBM's side, G5s seem a dead-end. They certainly are for the near-future, and even if they were revisited 4 years down the line, the PPC architecture would probably have evolved quite a bit. So, that raises a number of concerns in my mind that hopefully you experts can dash:
I've often heard it said that Apple is a hardware company, deriving most of its profits from computer sales (and/or more recently ipod sales). I don't have the numbers so I don't really know, but going to the world of pc hardware seems like a threat to that. Possibly a business paradigm shift.
Regardless, I'm not claiming to be all doom-and-gloom, or very knowledgable. Just a bit concerned, and a bit excited -- the idea of pitting IBM against Intel for Apple's blessing does seem cool, and in the meantime Intel may have better chips in the works. I wasn't in secret meetings with them. Feel free to defend Intel to the death now (I kid, I kid... assuage my fears if you like). Last edited by directedchaos : 2005-06-07 at 23:29. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
quote |
Veteran Member
|
Quote:
Pricing trends have nothing to do with G5-compatible memory (read: JEDEC-compliant PC3200), but rather with general industry movement and supply-demand issues. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Thanks for the response MCQ.
Quote:
Quote:
There are a plenty of developers who haven't really bothered to optimize for the G5s yet, and given their imminent demise probably won't. I guess we'll see how G5 sales go over the next couple years. I'm kinda curious what'll happen to Virtual PC. Kinda negates the point, eh? Although it'd be neat if they could just remove the hardware emulation layer and just have it run natively as a sub-OS to prevent the need for dual boot (if Apple would even allow XP/Longhorn to work on their systems, that is). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
G5s still don't seem that old... I was looking forward to apps being optimized for my 64-bit dual processor (because I know they aren't now). Ah well, sleep washes away pessimism... maybe in a couple years I'll get my first Intel machine... |
||||||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dubuque, IA
|
Quote:
From Macworld Apple wants a Pentium M, IBM wants an Xbox By Tom Krazit, IDG News Service "IBM’s PowerPC 970FX chip, which Apple called the G5, simply doesn’t lend itself to PC designs that require low power consumption, such as notebooks and small form factor desktops, Jobs said. Apple was also frustrated by IBM’s inability to supply it with sufficient processors last year as the chip maker struggled with yield problems while getting its new manufacturing facility in East Fishkill, New York, up and running. But Apple accounted for just around 2 percent of IBM’s chip wafer production in East Fishkill, according to industry sources, and IBM is moving away from making chips for the PC market in favor of gaming consoles and high-end servers. An IBM spokesman declined to comment on the nature of his company’s relationship with Apple, but the company put out a statement indicating it probably won’t miss Apple’s business. “IBM is aggressively moving the Power Architecture beyond the PC, as shown by our recent successes with the next-generation gaming systems announced by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. … IBM is focused on the highest value opportunities in each marketplace, and our direction with the Power Architecture is consistent with that strategy,” the company said in a written statement. Console makers like Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., Microsoft Corp., and Nintendo Co. Ltd. will sell tens of millions of units combined over the next couple of years, and it’s likely that IBM would rather focus its attention on the deals it has struck with all three companies, as opposed to taking on the engineering challenge of making a low-power G5 processor to suit Apple’s small market share." |
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
----- I've been calmed on the memory situation by learning that many PC users prefer [memory following] the rigid JEDEC(?) compliance that the G5 requires, and if dual bios/driver solutions keep new graphics cards working on G5s for several years to come then they'll be adequately upgradable. (correct me if I've misinterpreted anything) Thanks to everyone for their input so far! Last edited by directedchaos : 2005-06-08 at 17:39. |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
If Apple only made Desktops, I'm sure they would of picked AMD.
But since a great portion of Apple's income comes from the iBook and Powerbook, they can't play around with that already wall hitting lines. And the Desktops will reach there apex with the G5 chips(3Ghz) and I don't see going with either Intel or AMD changing that for a long time. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Quote:
Oh, and JEDEC is an industry standards body that designs the specifications for most memory standards (SDRAM, DDR, etc). Using non-standards compliant components always has the risk of non-standard compliant errors |
|
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
Back in like '99 (I don't remember the exact year now... but the speeds had stagnated a bit, and the model I got had the most updates in the last round of upgrades) I got a 400 mhz G4. It was either middle of the line or an entry-level machine... regardless, it chirped along astonishingly well. Every once in a while I enchanced it a bit: more memory as I collected it from here and there (I ended up with what, 1.5 gigs at the end? There was lots of swapping with a friend who had a similar model), a new harddrive (120 gigs for 120 bucks yay! IDE at the time, but ATAs shouldn't go anywhere so I'm not worried about that on my G5 -- I shouldn't be, correct?), and, here's the crux of the story, a new pimp 64 MB radeon a year and a half ago or so (time is a funny thing). With all these upgrades I managed to keep a 5 year old mac running new games -- Warcraft III, WoW, even a bit of UT but I really wanted the frames on that fast-paced of an fps so I didn't get it after trying the demo. None of them ran spectacularly, but I bet it'd be a hard feat to get a 5-6 year old PC to run modern stuff so well... (the last month before I bought a G5 I even borrowed a friend's old 500 mhz G4, which gave a very noticable boost to overall performance ) but anyway, the point is I was able to buy almost top-of-the-line upgrades for my very old computer (I'm kind of flip-flopping on whether a processor upgrade would ever have been worth it). If AGP cards disappear two years from now, that'd be much more concerning than a few optimization issues. I thought the latest and greatest now didn't approach the speeds allowed by AGP 8x? Hmm, more to mull. |
|
quote |
New Member
Join Date: May 2005
|
Do you know, I hate this cycle of buying hardware, using it till it's superceded, and then dumping it for new.
If Apple could adopt a recycling policy, so that customers could get some money off when upgrading. I for one would feel a lot more at ease about buying something with as much inbuilt obsolescence as a compuer. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Quote:
Generally the highest Radeon of GeForce is a prestige product for the company. That is, they're just trying to show off how advanced their technology is to beat each other in the media war --- they don't really expect (many) people to buy it. Hence the high price, high margins, low production runs and the cards essentially get gobbled up by enthusiasts. The cards below that level such as the X700, or the 9600, etc. are what are targeted for "high-end" PC desktops, so those will likely retain AGP versions for a longer period of time. Then there are other hardware transitions --- from IDE to Serial-ATA. Of course the PowerMac already made this one. Of course IDE hard drives are likely to last a lot longer since a big harddrive targets most of the market, and the current installed base want to upgrade, etc. Again most HDs can't really perform significantly different on SATA-150 than they could on IDE UltraDMA/133, however Serial ATA should be cheaper to manufacturer in the long run --- and gets rid of those damned ribbon cables you see flying all over the place in a PC :P UltraATA/133 requires ribbon cables with 40 ground wires to complement the 40 wires which actually do something, as well as requiring the cables to be no longer than 18 inches. I believe an SATA cable has 4 wires. Just a matter of trying to kill a technology which has been extended for too long. (Of course I could say the same about x86 but I digress) |
|
quote |
ಠ_ರೃ
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
Another benefit to PCI Express is SLI. You can have multiple video cards in a system, either driving separate displays or working together to give you tremendous power. With AGP, you were limited to one slot so any extra graphics cards were necessarily crippled by the slow PCI bus.
A lot of these new technologies are great not because they're just faster, but because of the extra features they enable. A cool thing about SATA is that it supports hot-plugging, so you can connect and disconnect external SATA drives without having to convert it to Firewire. There are several SATA hard drive cases that just use standard-issue SATA cables to connect to the computer, so essentially you get 3x the bandwidth of Firewire for a lot less money (SATA-Firewire enclosures are really expensive, but straight SATA cases are cheap). And of course you don't have to mess with jumper settings or cable locations either. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
Although, SLI does sound pretty cool... Quote:
Thanks for the thoughts! |
||
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
Quote:
An equal-time rebuttal to the effectiveness of the iPod recycling program alone, which frustratingly includes the statement: "The 'iPods become obsolete in a year, because the battery runs out after 12 months, and it's actually cheaper to buy a new one than to get a new battery,' al-Hajj explained." |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mile 1
|
I just hope they don't solder the CPU to the motherboard...
|
quote |
ಠ_ರೃ
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
In the PowerMacs? No way. Nearly every PowerMac ever made has had an upgradable processor - the only exceptions were the original x100 series, the 7200, the 4400, and the 5000- and 6000-series models. Besides, the 5000-6000 models weren't even really PowerMacs anyway... they were usually sold as Performas and filled the consumer market before the introduction of the iMac as the de facto consumer Mac.
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mile 1
|
Quote:
Yes, I want to be able to buy low and replace high when I finally give in and buy a MacIntel 3-5 years from now. I am just doing it now with my Socket 478 PC. In other news, my insurance company will pay for the repairs to my TiBook. Mile 1 |
|
quote |
Member
|
I just bought a dual 2ghz. I did worry initially. Now I hardly care I love my ppc and as the song goes "they can't take that away from me". I will leave the crystal ball gazing to others. In the end all computers become obsolete.
I'll drink to your leg |
quote |
New Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Caveat: If Jobs resigns and is replaced by a CEO with a "let's make money and sell out" philosophy, Apple is screwed. Quote:
The security problem I forsee with OS X is when users give the OK for apps and widgets to install even when the box comes up "Are you sure you want to install this program on your computer?" Of course, common sense tells you to never install any program unless you know what it does -- but that doesn't seem to stop people whether its for Windows or OS X... =( But at least OS X lets you know that something is being installed on your computer first. =) Quote:
Quote:
But what you probably won't see ever again from IBM is R&D money being spent on Apple-exclusive processors. Quote:
To wrap up, I'm sure I'm in the minority but my fear about the Intel move has been replaced by total excitement. My dad and I have been Mac fans for decades because Apple's GUI has always focused on innovation rather than duplication. The ease of programming and slick exterior computer designs in recent years are just the icing on the cake. We could care less what processors are "inside". You shouldn't either. I wanted to finish up with one more question for those who may have just bought a pricey Dual like I did recently or plan to do so this year: If you have extended Applecare (which lasts until 2008), and your G5 processor overheats or starts leaking cooling fluid exactly 2.9 years from the purchase date, will Apple still fix it -- or will they replace it with an Intel equivalent model assuming that the last of the G-series Macs rolls out in 2007? Just something to think about, because I love my dual G5 and would never want it replaced until 2008 or so. =) |
|||||||||
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Ugh. I don't know why I bother. There really needs to be some checks in place on people who register during Apple events and then start posting drivel all over the place. Well in the spirit of cooperation and enlightenment, allow me to answer the original queries. Maybe we'll get lucky and the thread will be put out of its misery since it really doesn't have anything to do with FUD reduction, but rather is likely to create it (for the uninitiated).
1a) G5 RAM isn't "picky". Picky?! Do you have even the slightest understanding of computer architecture and where RAM comes from or that it's standardized? There is nothing special about G5 RAM. It's PC3200 and it has been used by multiple platform vendors for about three years now. It's almost dropped to $100 / GB (!) so WTF are you talking about, exactly? 1b) Again, WTF are you talking about? Do you have first-hand knowledge of the G5 parts that are taping out at IBM right now, so that you know what's coming over the next 18 months (remember, Desktops will move to Intel last) and what isn't coming? As for upgrade cards, it's not even a relevant topic because the G5 was designed in such a way as to basically prevent their use. 1c) No, video card manufacturers do not have to develop two different versions of every card for Macs. While they are not always identical in their specs, the biggest difference is the driver. The cards themselves are virtually identical in most respects. I wouldn't be so harsh if you could manage to post even one on-topic point, that is backed up by a demonstrable fact. 2a) I don't believe for one second that you are a programmer or anything close to it. You are talking out of your ass. 2b) See 2a. Big Hint: there is a difference between the G5 going away and the entirte PowerMac product line going away. Even if there was no Intel deal, the G5 would find its way to pasture in a couple years most likely, as IBM moved on to new desktop architectures. G5 is the CPU, not the product line. It's a name. The point of a PowerMac is that they are highly expandable and normally use the best technologies available to Apple, in terms of speed and bandwidth and all the rest. That won't ever change, because it's not dependent upon any one company or product. BTW, have you read anything about some of Intel's more advanced chipsets for desktop workstations? They already have designed into them, basically everything PowerMac users have been asking for over the last year or so. Just so you know. Faster RAM, better PCI, overall bandwidth comparable to what we have now, etc. Re: Apple 1) The small minority of Windows users who have the time and inclination to get a copy of OS X for Intel to work on their beige box, are not Apple's concern. They're not supported, their hacks will not work that well in many cases, and in general it's not relevant. There will always be people hacking this system or that hardware to get it to do things it wasn't designed to do... so what? Do you think Dell or some other legitimate PC company is going to use a non-licensed technology to get Apple software running on their machines? If you do, you're not very familiar with the wonderful world of litigation. 2) Lose the OS dominance? If you're talking about marketshare, Apple is not now nor did it ever operate from a position of dominance. If you're talking about the quality of the OS, the hardware OS X runs on will have little or no bearing on its quality. Either it's going to have the interface, applications and features that make it better than the competing Windows product, or it won't. The CPU makes no difference in this regard unless one runs the OS much slower than another (unlikely in this scenario). 3)This is the only point or question you posit that makes any sense. Yes, if Apple started garnering much larger share of the market, there would likely be a larger number of attempts (and successes) at creating virii or other malware for OS X. That said, because of the technologies it's built on and because of the ease with which Apple can deliver security updates, I don't believe it will nearly be the shit-storm it is today on a PC. Every PC I've seen in recent months has to run virus scanning, spyware scanning, ad-blockers, 3rd party firewalls and all kinds of crap... just to get it into a semi-safe environment. OS X is unlikely to ever have that problem because of its built-in Firewall and other security features inherent to UNIX. 4) No. ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2005-06-12 at 17:06. |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If you still care to elaborate on how G5s differ from G4s in this upgradability manner, feel free. If there really would be no way for some third-party company like OWC to figure out how to make an upgrade -- or, just a straight swap like I've seen done on old G4s, then that would moot my concern on this issue (well, show that I was a stupid buyer who didn't do much research) Quote:
<skip personal opinion, which is a shame because 2a is a very serious issue in my mind -- software optimization -- particularly because of recent Rosetta tests... the emulation doesn't seem so great. 2b (about drivers) I readily admitted ignorance on, though I wouldn't toss it away as crudely as you did> Quote:
I'd like to draw your attention back to one comment you said: "The point of a PowerMac is that they are highly expandable" That's exactly WHY I'm posting. I'm concerned about their expandability/upgradability. It's expandability WAS dependent largely on TWO companies: Apple and IBM. IBM is out of the picture, and Apple wants people to switch to Intel. A year ago it was all about 64 bit dual proc optimization. Now it's make fat binaries. (because the third party companies who actually make the upgrades will follow the market, which is guided by those two companies. if there aren't future G5 users to shoulder the cost of upgrades, there won't be many upgrades. blah this is way too much repeat.) Quote:
Regardless, on the FUTURE hardware side I'm actually a bit excited. On MY CURRENT 2.5k PLOPPED DOWN hardware side I'm a bit worried, though significantly less so than when I started posting. That's the point of communication, to learn, right? Quote:
Now, from what I've heard and read about the hardware security features, I'm more and more thinking that hack will be too complicated for them to mess with and thus not as large a concern. My apologies to other board readers for so much repeat; I hope you understand why I felt this response necessary. Quote:
Another possibility would be that Apple systems actually become price-comparable with other systems (and thus an even more obvious choice). If a crapola Dell and an Intel Mac cost about the same for similar configurations (processor speed, memory, HD, PCIe ports, whatnot), then I bet Apple would see a lot more switchers. We'll see. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by directedchaos : 2005-06-12 at 19:02. |
||||||||||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Thanks for your civil response Max.
Quote:
My guess is a hybrid wouldn't be financially feasible. Wouldn't you practically have to start from scratch? New motherboard, some kind of video card converter (because I don't believe it's just a software issue, as mentioned in my last post)... really impractical IMHO, any other thoughts? Quote:
Which is more concerning to me. When you jump on with fat binaries, there's practically zilcho incentive to optimize for G5s, right? Whatever it spits out will _work_ on the G5, a dying PC chip, so why bother digging into the source code and optimizing for Altivec and 64 bit dual processing... You're the first person to really, in my opinion, address this concern I raised and you seem to agree with me. Someone else mentioned that the big-labels will probably upgrade another time or two (Adobe and whatnot), but that's rather specialized and soon enough those professionals will upgrade to the Intel Mac. Any other comments on this point? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The world can do funny things at small scales. Maybe quantum computers will set things upright Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||
quote |
Selfish Heathen
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Zone of Pain
|
Quote:
As for technological evidence? I guess you've never seen any of the flashable "PC video cards" that can be used in Macs. Here's just one listing of available options. Quote:
The quality of this board depends on the quality of the posts. The only way to guarantee thoughtful, informative discussion is to write thoughtful, informative posts. AppleNova is not a real-time chat forum. You have time to compose messages and edit them before and after posting. |
||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Quote:
Why do PC cards come out faster than Mac cards? I'm looking through the link and searching elsewhere online atm, so I can't get back to you yet about my opinion of their viability. It seems like a perfect place for a small start-up tech company to rush in: buy cheap flashable PC video cards, set the BIOS and whatnot to work on a Mac, then resell them. Inflated prices for easy conversions should never last long in a robust market. As mentioned, though, I'm still researching and will get back to you. Thanks for the information. Quote:
|
||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Half an hour of googling has me thinking that only a limited number of cards are identical in pc and mac flavors, allowing the flash solution. And you'd have to be absolutely sure they're identical... and then you'd have to constantly muck with it as new OSes come out. And some chip makers actually prevent the rom from being flashed, or change details like the size, trying to make that gap stronger to validate their higher prices. (and you need a PC for the first few steps)
Do I have anything incorrect thus far? |
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
directedchaos,
I get the distinct impression you are not very well read on any of these issues / that maybe you're relatively new to Macs in general? I'm no engineer but I've been around Macs long enough (well over a decade) and read up on the engineering /geekoid issues enough times to know you're out of your element. Just tell us up front that you have limited knowledge about this stuff, but you'd like to ask some questions so you understand it better (or whatever). We all have stuff to learn. That goes over a lot better than you asserting something, being proven wrong and then back-tracking and trying to re-state your assertion in a different way to save face. Either way, there was never any problem with G5 RAM. Apple has been using standards-compliant RAM in all of its machines for *years*. I'm not sure where you got this as a point of concern. Regardless of computer manufacturer, RAM is always a commodity part manufactured by third parties like Micron or Kingston. Regarding the G5 and upgrade processors: I'm even sure why you brought it up. Even if IBM kept making G5s for other reasons besides Apple (thereby making them available to upgrade manufacturers), it wouldn't have an impact on Mac users because G5 PM was designed not to allow such devices because they cut into Apple's profits (traditionally). It's a moot point. I think you're missing the larger point and that is that PowerMac "expandability" / "upgradability" deals with the *amount* of RAM you can add (much more than other Apple models), the number of hard drives, the number of Firewire and USB ports via PCI expansion, the type of optical drive, the type of audio cards etc etc etc. NONE of those things are affected by which CPU Apple uses or doesn't use. That will always be the advantage of any PowerMac (or whatever new name Apple gives their next gen towers). Regarding the video cards: it's simple economics. There is no way in hell ATi or Nvidia would develop separate video cards (by that I mean significantly different in design and pcb layout) just for Mac customers. It costs a lot of money to develop new cards, test them and market them. Think about the size of the Mac market. Now subtract all laptops, iMacs and eMacs because those never get upgraded. You're telling me video card manufacturers are going to spend all the time and money required to do that - for every card they make - just to cater to a couple generations of PowerMac owners? If you owned those companies, would you authorize that kind of expenditure every year? The drivers and the ROM are the primary differences between the Mac and PC versions. Hence the reason you can buy a PC card, flash the ROM and get it to work inside a Mac (as Brad mentioned). Go look at some specs if you don't believe us. Same chipsets, same ports, same dimensions... ad infinitum. Slam me all you want bud, won't make you any less incorrect. ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2005-06-12 at 20:25. Reason: Clarification on expandability |
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Thank you for a much more civil response Moogs!
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
EDIT: My bad, it looks like your original response was the first time this point came up. Sorry, I get a bit flustered under heat. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by directedchaos : 2005-06-12 at 21:01. |
||||||
quote |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
Moogs' attitude reminds me of that Saturday Night Live skit with Jimmy Fallon, "Nick Burns, The Computer Guy." Demonstrating such frustration that it comes across as cocky and somewhat hostile.
|
quote |
Hates the Infotainment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NSA Archives
|
Apologies if I seem hostile. The medium sucks when it comes to conveying emphasis and intent. I do not harbor ill will against chaos or other new members who come in and sort of stir up a debate when there's no basis for one, but it does frustrate me.
Believe me I am no computer Melvin, but I do have a concern about misinformation being spread (even if unintentionally which I believe is the case here). I also am bothered when these otherwise well-balanced forums get overloaded with [random and often baseless threads], every time there is an Apple event. Stick around for a year and you'll see what I'm talking about. I try to welcome new members whenever I notice them in the threads I read, but it's hard to do that in cases like this. My first reaction is always to correct the misinformation, basically. Anyway, welcome both of you and enjoy the forums. Just do me and the other (more tactful) veterans [a favor] and make sure you've got some grounding behind your posts, should you want to debate something. chaos: Apple has been using JDEC-compliant RAM for a long time. As far as your question about why a third party hasn't offered some type of ROM-flashing product for PC video cards, most likely it's to avoid legal trouble. ...into the light of a dark black night. Last edited by Moogs : 2005-06-12 at 22:58. Reason: corrected embarrasing omission (gah!) |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to live without fear in America | Wrao | AppleOutsider | 9 | 2004-11-02 00:25 |
Advice need for the 100km hike (aka FEAR TEH TRAILWALKER!) | stoo | AppleOutsider | 3 | 2004-06-30 02:52 |