Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Puckstopper · Mar 18, 2006, 08:25 AM

--- note: I originally posted this in the wrong category... S'cuze me! Here is a copy ---

Hi. I'm fed up with PC's and Windoze and all the probs that go with it, and am happily defecting to Macs. After much research, it seems I should have come to my senses and done this years ago and saved myself untold frustration, time and $$$$.

ANYWAYS, my question now becomes "Should I be one of the first batch to dive into a MacTel, or go with the proven and trusty establised technology of the iMac G5?!?"

As far as I've read, the G5 (and all other contemporary versions of Mac) are the sum total of what has made Mac so great for so long. The refinement and execution (I'm told) leaves us wanting for nothing (or at least, very little!). I'm currently drooling over a 2.0 20" iMac G5 at my local dealer.

On the other hand, Apple boast a 2x (+!!) performance increase with it's new Intel-powered Core Duo version.... is the (claimed) performance increase worth the risk of being amongst the first wave of takers in this new model? Will I be out in the cold in 18 mos for software, or will all forseeable versions run "natively" on the PowerPC version as well?!? While not concerned about re-sale value (if Macs are as cool as they seem, I'll never sell it! Just pass it down to the kids in 2 yrs!), will the G5 machine be useless in 2-3 yrs?

Without 'flaming' one another, I'd just like some honest opinions and/or stated corporate policies regarding the "old" version, which I can still buy brand new...

Thanks, dear experts!!!

'Greg.

baw · Mar 18, 2006, 09:40 AM

Just buy one and enjoy it.

jwoods · Mar 18, 2006, 11:55 AM

I think you are better off going with an Core Duo machine if you are just now switching.

You don't have any PPC apps, so you might as well go with the direction Apple is heading from the get go.

The intel iMacs are not 2x faster. It's quicker than the G5 on native apps, but not twice as fast. That was a very specific benchmark, and although not false, you won't see a 2x increase in most things.

Macs tend to have life spans of a few years while PC have life spans measured in months.

I have a Intel iMac (20") and I love it. Works as designed, and I haven't had any problems.

I would suggest you buy Applecare though. If you ever need it, it will pay dividends.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Josh Reid · Mar 18, 2006, 12:32 PM

Just chiming in to recommend the Intel iMac....I have one and absolutely love it; best computer I've ever owned.

larrinski · Mar 19, 2006, 10:30 PM

I've had both the imac G5 and the intel imac. They are both great. The 1st gen imac G5 had some problems, but the design has been worked on for a couple of years. My new 20" intel imac is great. I would recommend the Intel version, as over time, the G5 models will be fazed out. The G5 ones were a bit louder as well(the fans). Both are wicked, and you will be happy with either. The 1st gen of the intel isn't really a 1st gen imac.

Puckstopper · Mar 19, 2006, 10:49 PM

Hi, all... thanks for the advice posted. In addition to your replies, I've also sought advice elsewhere. Here's what I've concluded would work for me:

I understand all your cautions about going the "new direction", but I'm a skeptic by nature, and very hesitant to get on the 1st batch of MacIntels. B'sides, I've thought about why I'd want to buy Old-Mac software and have it translated (slowly) by Rosetta in "real-time", then go out again in a year and buy all my software again in Universal code?!?

Rather than buy a whiz-bang new machine, and have to wait until 1st-quarter 2007 for Photoshop in UB, I'd like something I can use NOW, and buy only ONCE! Similarly, I would have to wait for other manufacturers to develop UB versions of all their software if I wanted to take advantage of the performace gains of the Intel chip-set. It would frustrate the H*$& outta me to run 'old' software on a fast chip, hobbled by a translator running 24/7, and if that weren't bad enough, hafta go buy stuff again next year! Arrggh!!

Friends, co-workers and other misc well-meaning advisors have all assured me the current/old iMac G5 ROCKS and will churn out Photoshop picture-crunching with blazing speed, especially with decent RAM. Thank you for taking the time to help a Mac rookie. Now I'm off to enjoy a new 20" piece of working art!

'Greg.

hickey · Mar 19, 2006, 10:59 PM

post pics and experiences with whatever Mac you get. I know youll be happy with it no matter what you choose.

macintologist · 02:31 AM

Get the intel Mac

Originally Posted by Puckstopper

Hi, all... thanks for the advice posted. In addition to your replies, I've also sought advice elsewhere. Here's what I've concluded would work for me:

I understand all your cautions about going the "new direction", but I'm a skeptic by nature, and very hesitant to get on the 1st batch of MacIntels. B'sides, I've thought about why I'd want to buy Old-Mac software and have it translated (slowly) by Rosetta in "real-time", then go out again in a year and buy all my software again in Universal code?!?

Rather than buy a whiz-bang new machine, and have to wait until 1st-quarter 2007 for Photoshop in UB, I'd like something I can use NOW, and buy only ONCE! Similarly, I would have to wait for other manufacturers to develop UB versions of all their software if I wanted to take advantage of the performace gains of the Intel chip-set. It would frustrate the H*$& outta me to run 'old' software on a fast chip, hobbled by a translator running 24/7, and if that weren't bad enough, hafta go buy stuff again next year! Arrggh!!

Friends, co-workers and other misc well-meaning advisors have all assured me the current/old iMac G5 ROCKS and will churn out Photoshop picture-crunching with blazing speed, especially with decent RAM. Thank you for taking the time to help a Mac rookie. Now I'm off to enjoy a new 20" piece of working art!

'Greg.

Dude, Rosetta is f*cking fast for what it does. Don't be stupid. Get the intel Mac. It's dual processors, do you know what the long-term implications of a dual processor machine are?

Dude don't be a simpleton and assume that Rosetta is slow. Instead of make your purchasing decisions based on your "feelings" why don't you look at the Photoshop benchmark thread and see how intel macs match up against Powermac G5s

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=263394&page=5

Puckstopper · Mar 20, 2006, 01:56 AM

Hi Mac Gurus... and Mr. Macintologist in particular. Thank you for pointing out the benchmark test data to me. That was an interesting read. Now, is that a 'typical' command execution, or a specific (and therfore not necessarily representative) function. I understand the Intel Duo is fast, and has GREAT potential, especially when running software it can actually understand!

Your kind words of advice, however, still do not address my (primary, or at least significant) concern of buying software I can use today, then buy it again in Universal Binary version in order to realize the advertised performance gains. For about a year (according to the nice folks at Adobe), I either buy PPC software and have Rosetta do her dirty work, only to buy it again in UB, or else go without much software for many months!

That don't sound like much of a solution, regardless of how much of an improvement the new hardware might be! Without associated (appropriate) software, it's just a pretty box! It seems as if Apple Corp didn't give developers enough of a 'Heads-Up' before springing this to market, leaving all current (and potential) users running software written for a completely different architecture.

Now, if UB software of all our favorite programs came out at the same time (as happenned in '95 with Windoze), then you are ABSOLUTELY correct, and I would be a fool for buying yesterday's offerings. However, 8-12 mos with only pre-packaged programs is not acceptable. Instead, I'll buy/borrow/steal current software and run it TODAY!

As much as I appreciate your advice (but to a lesser extent, the wording of such!), this simpleton is about to enjoy the world of Photoshop-on-a-Mac starting immediately! Thanks all!

elvis2000 · Mar 20, 2006, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Puckstopper

---

ANYWAYS, my question now becomes "Should I be one of the first batch to dive into a MacTel, or go with the proven and trusty establised technology of the iMac G5?!?"

As far as I've read, the G5 (and all other contemporary versions of Mac) are the sum total of what has made Mac so great for so long. The refinement and execution (I'm told) leaves us wanting for nothing (or at least, very little!). I'm currently drooling over a 2.0 20" iMac G5 at my local dealer.

I've got a 20" 2.1Ghz iMac and don't wish for a second I had an Intel. Let everyone else serve as beta testers... the G5 will be supported for awhile.

elvis2000 · Mar 20, 2006, 12:08 PM

I should add... I first started with the Intel Mac and returned it for the G5. If this guy is JUST NOW switching, he's going to have a difficult enough time re-orienting to the smaller market of Mac, much less the sub-market of Universal Binaries.

Get the G5. It's fast and 100% supported.

larrinski · Mar 20, 2006, 09:19 PM

I just don't see it that way. The Intel imac is not a brand new product. The majority of the engineering was done on the G5. I sent my G5 back as it had problems with the fans and the superdrive spitting out discs. Those problems are fixed with the intel imacs. If Photoshop is so important to you, then why get a computer that won't support new software in the future. Who knows when software won't work on the G5...No one has been talking about the Universal stuff running on G5s in the future. Maybe I am wrong, but in the not too distant future, G5s will be a thing of the past...Cutting edge software isn't written for old technology. And, Photoshop stll works under Intel. So what if it works better under the G5. It won't in the future...

jwoods · Mar 22, 2006, 12:53 AM

Personally, I think the universal binaries are a relatively short term project. The G5 is gone for the most part, and support will be available for the near future from outside developers. At some point, developers will stop creating universals and just ship the intel binaries.

In other words, you are going to get more mileage from a intel iMac than a G5 as the future marches on. I really don't see PPC support going for more than another year or so from developers. Apple will likely support it longer.

Mojo · Mar 23, 2006, 06:09 PM

It makes no sense to me that third party developers will drop G5 support in a year or so, considering all the G5 and earlier Macs out there. Apple is still selling G5 PowerMacs and will be for the foreseeable future, and you are saying that they will essentially become obsolete in around a year?

From what I have read it isn't a big deal for developers to develop Universal Binary applications, depending on what software they use to compile the code, so what would motivate a developer to alienate their pre-Intel Mac users by dropping support for non-Intel Macs?

alice_curiouser · Mar 23, 2006, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by elvis2000

I've got a 20" 2.1Ghz iMac and don't wish for a second I had an Intel. Let everyone else serve as beta testers.

Originally Posted by elvis2000

If this guy is JUST NOW switching, he's going to have a difficult enough time re-orienting to the smaller market of Mac, much less the sub-market of Universal Binaries.

I agree, on both counts. I faced the same choice, and ended up buying the 20" G5. I'm sure the Intel machines are nice, but I haven't had the best luck buying the first batch of anything computer-related. *cough*win98*cough*

The smaller software market is also a valid concern. The days of picking up a new game at Target are OVER when you switch to Mac. In fact, if you don't live a large city or near an Apple store, you're almost forced to buy all your software online. It's worth it, IMO, but it IS a big shift for a former Windows user. To have to search for your favourite apps in an even smaller, even more select market, would be a difficult adjustment.

Again, not that there's anything wrong with the Intel machines, but I'm VERY happy with my G5. Whichever one you choose, it beats the heck out of the alternative.

Mojo · Mar 23, 2006, 07:37 PM

Keep in mind that G5 iMacs can be had at substantial discounts at some college bookstores and Costco; I got mine for $1300.

jwoods · Mar 23, 2006, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

It makes no sense to me that third party developers will drop G5 support in a year or so, considering all the G5 and earlier Macs out there. Apple is still selling G5 PowerMacs and will be for the foreseeable future, and you are saying that they will essentially become obsolete in around a year?

From what I have read it isn't a big deal for developers to develop Universal Binary applications, depending on what software they use to compile the code, so what would motivate a developer to alienate their pre-Intel Mac users by dropping support for non-Intel Macs?

I should have not put a time frame in it, true. However, at some point, the G5's are not going to be supported. IF you are buying now, I think your money is better spent on an intel machine. Just an opinion.

What motivates any developer? Money. If they money stays at an exceptable level...they will continue to develop. If it doesn't.....adios to the platform.

*Opinion.......all of it.

J

Rainy Day · Mar 24, 2006, 10:20 PM

In the last Mac processor migration (i.e. from 68K to PPC), the 68K was supported for about 4-5 years by most software vendors.

bowwowman · Mar 26, 2006, 09:00 AM

In the last Mac processor migration (i.e. from 68K to PPC), the 68K was supported for about 4-5 years by most software vendors.

True, but that was a L O N G time ago, and the business world is FAR different nowdays......and so is Apple, the Mac, it's s/w developers, and it's user base.....

Things that made sense back then just dont get the same consideration today!