[selowitch]

I'm under the impression that the desktop G5s represent an awful lot more speed and power than most users need.

The 1GHz G4 chip found in the current PowerBooks is probably sufficient for most people for the time being and well into the next 24 months or so.

I think now, more than ever, is a time when an Apple consumer is better off with a notebook, since most of them can pretty much replace a desktop machine satisfactorily, so long as we are not deceived into thinking we need the absolute faster machine available.

[NYCFarmboy]

The G5 is very necessary for video/imovie/idvd/photoshop.

If just doing web surfing/email then a old G3 300mhz machine is all you need.

[naknek]

I've been running the 1Ghz PB12 for a few months now, and it's done OK for website building, although Dreamweaver can be a bit pokey sometimes. But the sluggishness really begins to show when doing a larger document (about 300 pages) in InDesign. And iMovie has been a rather leisurely affair, as well. Given that the Powerbooks and towers are marketed for professionals, I'd say there's no such thing as overkill for those models at this point.

For most consumers, the iBooks/eMacs are a great bet, though. Of course, there will always be new software to push the envelope.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by naknek:
I've been running the 1Ghz PB12 for a few months now, and it's done OK for website building, although Dreamweaver can be a bit pokey sometimes.

Heh. I'll bet you'd find DWMX pokey even on a G5. That program is such an accursedly bloated dauchsand!

I gave up on DWMX and now use Transmit for FTP and PageSpinner for HTML coding. The only time I resort to DWMX is if I have a whole lot of nested tables or other visual complexities that require a WYSIWYG view.

I hate the fact that DWMX's FTP engine isn't multithreaded; you can't work on one file while another is uploading/downloading. That's deplorable!

[naknek]

Originally posted by selowitch:
Heh. I'll bet you'd find DWMX pokey even on a G5. That program is such an accursedly bloated dauchsand!

Yes, software bloat seems to be the norm rather than the exception these days. It seems the only time I've really gotten speedy performance from my Macs in recent years has been when I'm using software that is about 2 years older than the computer itself.

That's why I'm so glad we're almost past the G4 roadblock era ... Apple can start making serious speed jumps every year again. The G5 Powerbooks can't come too soon for me!

[SEkker]

I do not find PS work a chore on my PB. But video editing work DOES take advantage of the new power found in desktop machines. And I find the limitation on hard drive speed and space to be a bigger bottleneck than CPU speed.

I still think >95% of consumer use does not even need a G4. An 800 MHz G3 iBook is more than good enough. Heck, even a 400 MHz Pismo with Panther is a terrific computer and runs the iApps (except iMovie) just fine.

Would I like a G5 PB? Maybe. If it had decent power consumption, was quiet, and did not burn my lap -- then yes.

Until then, my 1GHz G4 will serve me well.

[Judge_Fire]

Software gobbles up any GHz you throw at it.

Photoshop is finally becoming the 16-bit/channel app it should be, and it will benefit from 64-bit, a fast bus, more and more memory and obviously, faster CPUs and GPUs.

The average image file will be higher quality and a lot larger.


Video, as mentioned, is a resource hog. Imagine what happens, when the current standards debate on DVD-HD settles, and producers start working in HDTV image sizes. Actually, since Apple is targeting film, the need is there for a small group already.


In music production, you can pile up endless effects and virtual instruments, while simultaneously running apps stream audio to each other. My G4 chokes too easily, constraining me.


I'm seriously looking at a G5 from the next revision. Hopefully it'd be a small form factor one, though.

J

[Eug Wanker]

Until EVERYTHING on the computer is instantaneous, then one can never have enough speed.

I look forward to a G5 1.6 PowerBook, to replace my TiBook 1 GHz.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
I look forward to a G5 1.6 PowerBook, to replace my TiBook 1 GHz.

Would be nice indeed, although you may find that you can fry an egg on that wicked beast!

[The Jackalope]

~1.4ghz G5 laptops in around a year. Prediction in!

[KraziKid]

Originally posted by The Jackalope:
~1.4ghz G5 laptops in around a year. Prediction in!

In all seriousness, this is most likely one of the best predictions I have seen here. Most people are living in the pipe-dream that G5 PowerBooks will be out before the summer, with high speeds.

[JHromadka]

Originally posted by SEkker:
[B]I still think >95% of consumer use does not even need a G4. An 800 MHz G3 iBook is more than good enough. Heck, even a 400 MHz Pismo with Panther is a terrific computer and runs the iApps (except iMovie) just fine.

Hah! That's a good one. I love my Tibook 400, but sometimes I long for something faster, especially after using my parents' iMac 20". iPhoto 2 is a dog (haven't gotten iLife '04 yet), and ripping a CD is around 2x speed according to iTunes.

I just ordered a 512 MB stick of RAM and hopefully can eek some more life out of it until a PB G5 comes out.

[The Jackalope]

Originally posted by KraziKid:
In all seriousness, this is most likely one of the best predictions I have seen here. Most people are living in the pipe-dream that G5 PowerBooks will be out before the summer, with high speeds.

Anyone who is worried about buying a G4 Powerbook now and is waiting for the G5s will be waiting too damn long. This just makes sense. Unless they are thinking of upgrading next year...

[s0litude]

yup

[chrisutley]

I do all the things you mentioned on a 667 DVI. It all depends on how you use your computer. If I make my living compressing video and burning it to DVD's, I probably want the fastest Mac I can afford. For most consumers, I think the top of the line G4's is probably a good fit.

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
The G5 is very necessary for video/imovie/idvd/photoshop.

If just doing web surfing/email then a old G3 300mhz machine is all you need.

[HasanDaddy]

don't buy a G3

its outdated and on its way out ---- G3's have trouble running Panther at this point

get a G4

if you're doing Final Cut Pro stuff though, then a G5 is a great idea!

[Link]

Originally posted by selowitch:
I'm under the impression that the desktop G5s represent an awful lot more speed and power than most users need.
.....
The 1GHz G4 chip found in the current PowerBooks is probably sufficient for most people for the time being and well into the next 24 months or so.

Sorry man but you're in denial. End of story.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by Link:
Sorry man but you're in denial. End of story.

Well, in a sense, you're right — after all, who wouldn't love to have a PowerBook G5? My only point is that there are many folks, like me, who don't really require that much processor speed.

On many workdays, I am at the computer 90% of the time, coding web pages, writing, doing e-mail, some light image editing (nothing terribly intense), and running iTunes in the background. I'm doing all of this on a G4 450MHz AGP with 384MB of RAM running Jaguar, and I almost never have any noticeable performance issues.

If I replaced the tower with a 1GHz 12" or 15" PowerBook with, say, 512MB of RAM, I'd notice a significant bump up in speed in performance while adding portability. Sure it can always be faster and that's advantangeous (esp. if e.g., you are a heavy-duty Photoshop user), but for those whose budgets are not limitless and whose critical work is not particularly processor-intensive, we sometimes need to make sacrifices of speed and power in order to get our basic needs met and to lengthen the continuous cycle of obsolescence.

[Blackstealth]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
The G5 is very necessary for video/imovie/idvd/photoshop.

I beg to differ...

I'm running Final Cut and DVD Studio Pro on a dual 867 G4 and am not left wanting for any more performance. I'm also a heavy Photoshop user and don't find that using a G4 slows me down at all.

A couple years from now I might want a bit more horsepower (I'm sure that FCP6 won't be designed to run on a G4) but until then my MDD quite happily roars through anything I care to throw at it. Same goes for my AlBook - whilst primarily it's only used for Photoshop and Director it still has no problems with any tasks given to it.

The rest of the family uses a slightly upgraded iMac DV400 (1Gb Ram, 60Gb HD) which runs Panther and all the iApps (with the exception of iDVD) pretty quickly (I'm surprised by its current performance, it's on par with OS 9!) and without complaint.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by Blackstealth:
I beg to differ...

I'm running Final Cut and DVD Studio Pro on a dual 867 G4 and am not left wanting for any more performance. I'm also a heavy Photoshop user and don't find that using a G4 slows me down at all.

I'm sure that's true; however, surely you paid a fair sum for the dual-processor machine when it was new, so this is a case of your investment paying off and lasting, no?

[Blackstealth]

Originally posted by selowitch:
I'm sure that's true; however, surely you paid a fair sum for the dual-processor machine when it was new, so this is a case of your investment paying off and lasting, no?

I was on a student budget when I bought it and at the time it was the absolute bottom of the range PowerMac (I had it BTO with a Superdrive). With the education discount it was equivalent to buying a mid range iMac G4 at retail prices.

I have however added a few upgrades over time (as funds allow) to improve performance, 2Gb of Ram, approaching 500Gb of HD space, decent soundcard etc...

But even before my modifications it was still a reasonably powerful machine (as Macs go) in its stock configuration..

[KeilwerthSX90R]

iPhoto get sluggish with a lot of photos in it, do G5 users find the program faster?

[Eug Wanker]

I'm running Final Cut and DVD Studio Pro on a dual 867 G4 and am not left wanting for any more performance. I'm also a heavy Photoshop user and don't find that using a G4 slows me down at all.

Well, a dual 867 desktop is MUCH faster than a 1 GHz PowerBook. I'd still find a dual 867 a bit slow though, but it would be tolerable... at least for the short term.

Would be nice indeed, although you may find that you can fry an egg on that wicked beast!

An incorrect assumption, unless you consider a current 15" AluBook an egg fryer. It's more likely that a 90 nm G5 1.6 would be similar power to a G4 1.25 GHz.

It's interesting that these statements have been made. It's the same thing that was said during the time of the G3 PowerBook, and people were talking about a G4 PowerBook. "The G4 takes too much power. It'd fry your 'nads! Apple needs a completely new G4 chip design for laptops, and we won't see it for years. My G3 is fine and the G4 is overkill." etc.

Look where we are today... One can never have too much speed.

[WizOSX]

Another reason why the latest, fastest machine is often NOT overkill for the average user is that there often is that one app that just doesn't run fast enough. But you really want to use it frequently. In my case, its the webmail setup where I get most of my email. Sure I could use OSX's mail but then I have to download stuff to one machine. With webmail I can use any machine, anywhere to use email. BUT the setup that they use is brutally slow on my iBook 700mhz. And Safari is fairly slow on it as well (and, yes, I have DSL). Everything else that I do works fairly well on the iBook, so you could say that anything faster is "overkill." But, for me, a 1.6 G5 is about as slow as I'd really like to go for my Mac to be pleasurable. I've tried everything below 1.6ghz. Even a 1.25DP G4 isn't quite fast enough, just not enough pure speed.

[Eug]

Originally posted by WizOSX:
Another reason why the latest, fastest machine is often NOT overkill for the average user is that there often is that one app that just doesn't run fast enough. But you really want to use it frequently. In my case, its the webmail setup where I get most of my email. Sure I could use OSX's mail but then I have to download stuff to one machine. With webmail I can use any machine, anywhere to use email. BUT the setup that they use is brutally slow on my iBook 700mhz. And Safari is fairly slow on it as well (and, yes, I have DSL). Everything else that I do works fairly well on the iBook, so you could say that anything faster is "overkill." But, for me, a 1.6 G5 is about as slow as I'd really like to go for my Mac to be pleasurable. I've tried everything below 1.6ghz. Even a 1.25DP G4 isn't quite fast enough, just not enough pure speed.

Huh? Webmail speed is usually not strongly related to CPU speed.

[WizOSX]

Originally posted by Eug

Huh? Webmail speed is usually not strongly related to CPU speed.

I know. But in this case it is perfectly related with CPU speed. I am at a loss to explain it. In Windows XP the screens listing my emails are drawn very quickly. On the iBook they are drawn so slowly that you can sit there watching it happen and must be careful because you think its finally done drawing, begin to click on something and end up clicking the wrong line as it draws some more. I assume that the setup is optimized for IE in Windows. The webmail site is the local university's. However, I have tried iBooks, Powerbooks (12" and 17"), new eMacs, G4 towers and a 1.6ghz G5. And the faster the Mac processor the better time it has in overcoming the sluggishness. The G5 "feels" about the same as my 1.7ghz Pentium.

None of this, however, changes my basic point. I read over and over again in this forum that many of us have that one important piece of software that is just sluggish in OS X. Others will often reply "well, that software is just crap, I use such and such instead" but that really is not a useful answer. If the particular software is important to me then a faster processor may be the only way to make it fun and productive to use.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by WizOSX:
I know. But in this case it is perfectly related with CPU speed. I am at a loss to explain it. In Windows XP the screens listing my emails are drawn very quickly. On the iBook they are drawn so slowly that you can sit there watching it happen and must be careful because you think its finally done drawing, begin to click on something and end up clicking the wrong line as it draws some more. I assume that the setup is optimized for IE in Windows.

Actually, it sounds to me like this might be a VRAM issue. Does your iBook support Quartz Extreme? If it does not, that (rather than the processor speed) may account for the difference more than anything else.

[Eug Wanker]

My webmail accounts work fine on my GHz TiBook.

[WizOSX]

Originally posted by selowitch

Actually, it sounds to me like this might be a VRAM issue. Does your iBook support Quartz Extreme? If it does not, that (rather than the processor speed) may account for the difference more than anything else.

It has 16mb of VRAM so it does work fine with Quartz Extreme. 32mb is better, of course, but no other software has this particular problem. I'll have to do some digging to find out what's going on. Same thing happens in IE in OSX as well.

Originally posted by Eug Wanker

My webmail accounts work fine on my GHz TiBook.

I also have webmail with my DSL provider and that works fine. So it must be something in the program that the university uses. But that's where I get 99% of my email and I check it, of course, many times a day. So, G5 here we come!

[Link]

Sounds like java .. which performs awful on os x.

I don't know where this "I use a g4 and desire nothing faster" crap comes from. My dual 800 runs wonderful and all granted it's 2 and a half years old but I'd jump to a g5 the first chance I could -- render speed and whatnot would be extremely improved.

[wy4tt]

i just got adobe CS (finally), and i'm happy to say that my 1.25ghz pb is handling it very well. actually surprised me at how quickly ps is running. i'll be adding another 512 of ram soon, and then...world domination.

[selowitch]

Originally posted by Link:
I don't know where this "I use a g4 and desire nothing faster" crap comes from.

It comes from nowhere but out of your keister. Nobody here is saying that they "desire nothing faster."

What they are suggesting, however, is that when you have only $2,000.00 to spend, you have a choice of G4 laptop or a G5 desktop. One thing that might make you take the G4 laptop is portability and the opportunity to possibly replace whatever desktop machine you have with a laptop.

Of course I'd like something faster. The question is whether processor speed is what I'm willing to pay for ahead of other things.