 |
 |
The PPC G5 can't be that bad. I mean, Virginia Tech still stands.
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chile
Status:
Offline
|
|
So what about VTech ? These guys made the top 3 super computer using G5's at a record dollar/teraflop ratio.
Would be 2200 Intel chips make a faster cluster ?
I'm somewhat confused here.
|
:: frankenstein / lcd-less TiBook / 1GHz / radeon 9000 64MB / 1GB RAM / w/ext. 250GB fw drive / noname usb bluetooth dongle / d-link usb 2.0 pcmcia card / X.5.8
:: unibody macbook pro / 2.4 Ghz C2D / 6GB RAM / dell 2407wfp - X.6.3
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Upstate NY (cow country)
Status:
Offline
|
|
G5 is great for now. But it's not going anywhere. IBM is already way late with meeting their speed commitment. In a year or 2 the G5s at VTech will be slow dogs.
|
|
"Destroy your ego. Trust your brain. Destroy your beliefs. Trust your divinity." -Danny Carey
MacPro Quad 2.66, G4 MDD dual 867, 23" Cinema Display and 17" LCD, G4 Quicksilver dual 800, 12" Powerbook 867, iMac 300 Grape, B&W G3/300 with G4/450 running yellowdog, iPod 5GB, iPod mini, PowerCenter 150, Powercenter 132 tower, Performa 6116, Quadra 700, MacSE, LC II, eMate 300
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Status:
Offline
|
|
As said 100x before. It's about the fact that IBM is unable to deliver faster chips / new technology (dual core) so they have to switch to someone who guarantees them those faster chips and new technology.
|
iMac 20" C2D 2.16 | Acer Aspire One | Flickr
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status:
Offline
|
|
Who says the G5 is bad ? The G5 is still very good, for the present, but not the future.
I laugh at the clueless, ignorant morons who wish to dump their G5's.
These people aren't artists, true Mac users.
They'll be better off with a dell.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York City
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
While I certainly enjoyed being "different" even from the hardware standpoint, Steve Jobs had a great point. Until now, Apple always thought of itself as a hardware company. But they soon realized that it was software that made a Mac, not just the onnovative design. So OS X is the "soul" of the Macintosh. PowerPC or Intel, it shouldn't matter. You still have your Mac, you still have Photoshop and a Final Cut, that's what's important. 
I think Apple is pulling off a great transition given they're switching to a completely different architecture.
It's funny that it's almost identical to the 68K -> PPC transition. Initially, PPC apps will run slower on the Intel chip. Then the PPC stuff of that era will be emulated faster on the Intel chip than they would ever run on that PPC in the first place.
I was quite a bit hesitant at first, but then I realized I'd be able to use the Mac version Photoshop (albite, a bit slower) and Illustrator, AND play Counter-Strike and Infantry on the same computer. 
I can't wait.
|
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Semi Posting Retirement *ReJoice!*
Status:
Offline
|
|
there was talk going around about how it's not the architecture of the system that prevented pc games from running. we may not be able to play pc games in mac osx (atleast not without porting?) ... in that case, the pro's you stated may not be there...
|
No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Lancer409
there was talk going around about how it's not the architecture of the system that prevented pc games from running. we may not be able to play pc games in mac osx (atleast not without porting?) ... in that case, the pro's you stated may not be there...
Are you kidding? Games like Quake 3 contained a lot of x86 assembly. Porting a game now could get as simple as recompiling against WineLib. The game porting houses are shaking in their boots right now.
|
|
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by PacHead
I laugh at the clueless, ignorant morons who wish to dump their G5's.
These people aren't artists, true Mac users.
They'll be better off with a dell.
I really did LOL when I read that one. "These people aren't artists, true Mac users." Silly me, I thought using a Mac made one a Mac user! Apparently, you also have to be a pretentious ass to be a true Mac user.
God, I can't believe Apple's marketing worked so well on some people.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status:
Offline
|
|
Good lord, I must not be a Mac user because I'm not an artist. Damn... I'd better go buy a Dell now. Thanks for clearing thing up for me.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by olePigeon
play Counter-Strike and Infantry on the same computer.
I can't wait.
Infantry? As in, the game created by Harmless Games and then bought by Sony Online Entertainment? The game that maybe 1,000 people still play?
If you're talking about that game, then I'm curious, what's your alias? I quit at the end of 2002, because Infantry was taking over my life. It was the first game I ever played, and the last. My alias was "Toilet of Doom."
|
|
"Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world." -Archimedes
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2005
Location: chillin with Billy, James, D'Arcy and Jimmy
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by strictlyplaid
I really did LOL when I read that one. "These people aren't artists, true Mac users." Silly me, I thought using a Mac made one a Mac user! Apparently, you also have to be a pretentious ass to be a true Mac user.
God, I can't believe Apple's marketing worked so well on some people.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by strictlyplaid
I really did LOL when I read that one. "These people aren't artists, true Mac users." Silly me, I thought using a Mac made one a Mac user! Apparently, you also have to be a pretentious ass to be a true Mac user.
God, I can't believe Apple's marketing worked so well on some people.
Of course! You would think that! Wouldn't you!
For heaven's sake! Go and buy a dell!
*turns up his nose*
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by strictlyplaid
I really did LOL when I read that one. "These people aren't artists, true Mac users." Silly me, I thought using a Mac made one a Mac user! Apparently, you also have to be a pretentious ass to be a true Mac user.
God, I can't believe Apple's marketing worked so well on some people.
I'm talking about artists, the pro video people, the pro graphics people, the pro audio people, just about everyone I know who uses Macs falls into one of those categories, the "creative" types. The majority of these people on the Mac side are the hardcore Mac fanatics, and I doubt many of them are switching. There's no doubt that "creative" people gravitate towards the Mac, because of the most aesthetically looking and pleasing OS etc. In my opinion, most of these people "get it". They're the ones who purchase the PowerMacs etc.
So my theory is basically, a true artist would never leave the Mac OS. Using windoze OS (for example) almost makes me nauseous, just because of minor details in the OS which are unattractive, and look like they were made by some really unartistic types. Even the fonts and text look weird. Even longhorn has that "unartistic" and cheap look to it.
Anyhow, call me insane but that's my theory, and it has zilch to do with any marketing or whatever. When I first used an Apple (about 1980), I doubt they even had much marketing at the time.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by PacHead
The majority of these people on the Mac side are the hardcore Mac fanatics, and I doubt many of them are switching.
And maybe the more enlightened of those "majority of people on the Mac" understand that the PPC was central to the Mac's elegant and efficient design. Maybe the reason they're not switching is simply because there are no better alternatives to Mac OS X for graphic design, but they may still oppose this switch.
And please don't try to perpetuate the myth that the Mac is good only for graphic designers and go around telling people to get a Dell. The Mac has always been for people who can appreciate working on a better system and being more productive.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales
And please don't try to perpetuate the myth that the Mac is good only for graphic designers and go around telling people to get a Dell. The Mac has always been for people who can appreciate working on a better system and being more productive.
Macs are good for plenty of things. I'm not claiming that they're only good for graphics designers.
As for getting a Dell, well the people leaving the Mac platform are going to have to get something, so what's wrong with suggesting a Dell ?
(
Last edited by PacHead; Jun 8, 2005 at 05:51 AM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales
And maybe the more enlightened of those "majority of people on the Mac" understand that the PPC was central to the Mac's elegant and efficient design.
Maybe people understand that it's not the chip that matters but the OS. OSX is great on PPC and it'll be great on Intel chips. Windows blows on Intel and it would blow on PPC.
|
This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Randman
Maybe people understand that it's not the chip that matters but the OS. OSX is great on PPC and it'll be great on Intel chips.
And on what basis do you make that unqualified claim? I truly hope you're right, but how can you (and others) so cavalierly disregard the impact of a processor architecture that has been relied upon for a decade?
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm not disregarding anything (except Windows). The PPC is a fine chip and it's served well. But I don't have any particular fondness for it. Give me OSX on a better chip and I'll be happy. Give me a faster PowerBook with better battery life and I'll be happy.
If not, I won't spend my money on it. Plain and simple.
|
This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top