[gambit-7]

I've spent the last few days in frustration due to the fact that I want to upgrade my video card. It seems that I've two choices when it comes to purchasing the card I want: go with some damned expensive reseller for my 9800 OR buy a converted PC card off Ebay for what would amount to be a decent price (around $250us) for a flashed Mac-compatible 9800. Given those choices, I've decided to write to ATI and let them know I'm not happy about these options! I think if we as a community banded together to voice our concerns and complaints, maybe, just maybe, someone up on high will see that there's customers out there that they're actually losing due to the fact that they treat us Mac users like garbage.

My problem is ATI's treatment of customers who use the Macintosh platform. I'm sick and tired of being treated as a second-class citizen just because of my platform of choice. My first problem is the pricing of all cards for Macintosh. There are, of course, the current arguments that it costs more to develop Macintosh video cards hence the price difference in comparison with the PC versions of cards, but there are those out there that are taking PC-video cards, flashing the ROMs, and then selling them for significantly less than current Mac cards cost, while still being significantly higher than the PC-offerings. If an individual can buy, reformat, and then resell the card for significantly less than the cost of a 'true' Mac card, then why can't ATI sell us a card directly that is competitive with the PC offerings?

Second, ATI offers an upgrade path for anyone looking to use any new ATI card via it's ATI Trade-up program. I thought that idea was a good one.... that is, until I actually tried to use it to buy a 9800 for Macintosh. Apparently, though it says nothing to state otherwise, Mac users are out of luck if they want to use this option as ATI doesn't allow for Mac cards to be traded-up-to. Frankly, I'm tired of being treated as a second-class citizen and I'm tired of companies not responding to the needs of Mac users. Market-share arguments aside, ATI needs to start treating its Mac customers with more respect because these are the types of things we look at when it comes to choose who we purchase our products from.

Frankly, I don't know what to do but I definitely think SOMETHING should be done! That's why I'm reaching out to you guys and seeing if you have any suggestions. If we don't draw the line and let them know they can't do this to us, companies like ATI will continue to dismiss their Macintosh audience as people they can take advantage of.


a disappointed Mac fan,
michael de agonia

[the_glassman]

Doesn't Apple set the prices for the cards? Shouldn't we be mad at them? I agree, the price gouging has gone on long enough. It's pretty ridiculous that you can purchase an equivalent PC card for 1/2 the price and after a simple flash it will work fine in a Mac.

[swichd]

Dude, crying about it won't change a thing. Maybe you should by a Nvidia video card and don't use ATI if you don't like the way they do business. I've never purchased an ATI card that wasn't built in to one of my computers.

[PeterThomas]

The reason that ATI Mac cards cost more to develop is because they sell less of them, its that simple.

I have no idea how many Mac cards ATI sell as opposed to PC cards, but I'd imagine its something like a 1-20 ratio, at best. It costs the same to develop a Mac driver/firmware combo and make sure the card works on a Mac as it does to do the same on a PC. The problem is they sell 20 times fewer cards, this means the development costs per card are higher... hence the higher price.

People on ebay wouldnt be able to reflash the cards if the Mac firmware had never been developed to start with, would they? Unless they subsidise their Mac business with their PC business, Mac versions are always going to be more expensive.

[-Q-]

I think your anger is misdirected. It's not ATIs fault they're selling to a market that has, at best, 5% of the home computing platform. They have to recoup the costs of development for their products. Unfortunately, we're victims of simple economics. Go tell Apple to sell more Macs so the economies of scale will get better.

[Buck_Naked]

You should boycott ATI, other than that we have limited choice as Apple users

[swichd]

Originally posted by Buck_Naked:
You should boycott ATI, other than that we have limited choice as Apple users

Nvidia makes Mac graphics card now.

[Link]

Just buy a PC card off newegg and flash it using the 64kb rom. It won't entirely solve your problem (you can't get a 9500, 9600, x800, or any all in wonder cards for the mac), but it'll help

[Hydra]

Originally posted by swichd:
Nvidia makes Mac graphics card now.

No. That is incorrect. Apple makes those cards. Nvidia doesn't make any cards for anyone - they make chips, reference designs and drivers . All Nvidia cards found in Apple computers are made by Apple. I think a great example of how small market means more cost is the new Nvidia 6800 DDL, made by Apple and sold through the Apple Store, this card has a special dual-link DVI set-up to allow 2 30" cinema displays to be driven. It costs $600 which is about $100 more at least than a PC version w/o these connectors. If they make less of them they will need to cost more money.

Ati actually sells retail cards to the Mac consumer and have to work with Apple to develop the drivers so it costs them something to develop the drivers. Nvidia's drivers are completely controlled by Apple and for the most part it seems Apple foots the entire bill for those drivers. The Mac being a small market leaves less choices for hardware and the choices will cost more. There is no way around this it would seem.

-Jerry C.

[Luca Rescigno]

I think it's Apple's fault, honestly. Well, the blame lies on both of them. But I think Apple is forcing ATI to heavily restrict the number of upgrade options for owners of older PowerMacs. Think of it this way - people who want something nicer than the GeForce 4MX or Radeon 9000 that came with their PowerMac G4 have a few things to consider when looking for a card:

1) Significant performance increase
2) Ability to use their old monitor
3) Support for the newest graphics features
4) Easy availability in retail channels
5) Compatible with their computer

I can't think of a video card that has all of those things going for it. All that is offered for G4s are the 128 MB Radeon 9000 and the Radeon 9800 Pro. The 9000 does not provide a good performance increase and it doesn't have new features like pixel shaders that are important for CoreImage. The 9800, meanwhile, meets all the criteria except for the compatibility with old monitors, as it doesn't have an ADC port. I truly think Apple is making ATI not offer a good, midrange, "do-it-all" card for G4 owners. They could make a 9600XT with ADC and G4 compatibility, and sell it for $200 (overpriced, but not THAT bad). I bet ATI would be fine with that but Apple might think it would discourage G4 owners from replacing their machines with either new PowerMac G5s or a different machine.

I dunno. It's possible. I really don't know why ATI would keep making Radeon 9000s unless Apple asked them to.

[-Q-]

That's an awfully big conspiracy theory. I think it's a simple matter of economics. The mac updgrade market is not nearly as big as the PC side of things. It only makes economic sense for ATI to produce only one or two cards for really older Macs. If ATI saw there was a market for older mac graphics cards, I'm sure they'd make more available, Apple be damned. Companies really are about making money.

[a2daj]

I'd have to agree with -Q-. I don't think Apple is forcing ATI's hand directly, but instead, it's the Mac video card market itself. Most of the Macs sold do not have upgradable cards. Of those that do (just the PowerMacs) only a small number actually upgrade their video cards. Having too many options would probably dilute sales in all the boards across the line, so they offer a limited number of cards and charge what they deem appropriate. When the Mac 9800 Pro was released in the summer of 2003, it was the same price as the PC version. Since then, the typical street price of the PC version has dropped by about half, while the Mac version has only dropped by about and eighth. This probably has much to do with unit sales.

Apple does front a large part of the driver development bill due to the ATI/Apple OEM contract, but the retail cards still require retail specific development and QA. Even sharing a similar PCB as the PC card (like the Radeon 9800 Pro 128 Mac and PC cards), there's enough modified on the Mac card to warrant QA along with the firmware/driver adjustments. Adding a completely different connector, or a whole new card, like the 9200, requires much more work, and price will usual reflect the additional work. The X800 in the G5 at the Digital Life expo has an ADC connector, and a dual link DVI connector. That sounds like a whole new board design.

[Link]

Well, I do think Apple is forcing ATI to limit their options, think about it.

Do you know why the Radeon 9800 has no ADC? Or why the Radeon 9800 for G5 doesn't work on older macs?

Simple. When the G5 came out, apple moved the power jack that ADC uses internally, so that it can't be used with older cards, and older cards can't be used with the newer machines.

[a2daj]

Originally posted by Link:
Well, I do think Apple is forcing ATI to limit their options, think about it.

Do you know why the Radeon 9800 has no ADC? Or why the Radeon 9800 for G5 doesn't work on older macs?

Simple. When the G5 came out, apple moved the power jack that ADC uses internally, so that it can't be used with older cards, and older cards can't be used with the newer machines.

The G5s have AGP Pro slots, which I believe conflict with where the ADC nub was before. If anything, it was poor foresight and not Apple forcing ATI to limit their options.

But the small marketshare has much more to do with it. Mac users just love conspiracies.

[Luca Rescigno]

It would be cheaper for ATI to just set aside a small percentage of the Radeon 9600XTs they make for use as Mac-compatible cards. There's absolutely no reason they would continue making Radeon 9000s for the Mac when they could just convert one of their current video cards over to the Mac instead. There must be some other reason why they're selling the 9000 where they should be selling the 9600. Look at the 9800 Pro, for instance. It's physically identical to the PC version... and that means lower production costs. So if ATI had their way they'd just slap a Mac ROM on the 9600 and sell it at a slightly inflated price.

It's kind of the same as how Apple no longer makes 5 GB iPods, or Seagate no longer makes 20 GB hard drives. Yes, some people would like to buy a 5 GB iPod or a 20 GB hard drive, but they're not made anymore because it's quicker and easier to just make a 20 GB iPod and an 80 GB hard drive. It would probably cost more to make a 20 GB drive than it would to make an 80 GB one these days. So the Mac Radeon 9000s that ATI is making are probably costing just as much to build as the PC Radeon 9600XTs that they're also making, if not more.

[new newton]

None of you seem to be considering development costs, inventory costs, production costs (it does cost more to produce "odd" cards), and carrying costs.

[swichd]

Originally posted by Hydra:
No. That is incorrect. Apple makes those cards. Nvidia doesn't make any cards for anyone - they make chips, reference designs and drivers . All Nvidia cards found in Apple computers are made by Apple. I think a great example of how small market means more cost is the new Nvidia 6800 DDL, made by Apple and sold through the Apple Store, this card has a special dual-link DVI set-up to allow 2 30" cinema displays to be driven. It costs $600 which is about $100 more at least than a PC version w/o these connectors. If they make less of them they will need to cost more money.

Ati actually sells retail cards to the Mac consumer and have to work with Apple to develop the drivers so it costs them something to develop the drivers. Nvidia's drivers are completely controlled by Apple and for the most part it seems Apple foots the entire bill for those drivers. The Mac being a small market leaves less choices for hardware and the choices will cost more. There is no way around this it would seem.

-Jerry C.

Sorry about my stupid post! You're right. What Apple needs is some good, old competition. Maybe some company that makes ATI/Nvidia based video cards can make one that works with Macs. Why not? Would it *really* cost that much to add Mac support?

[Amacapart]

I totally agree with Luca. (Perhaps an Italian conspiracy?) Once you have tried both a Radeon 9000 and a Radeon 9600 in a G4, you wonder why the hell there is no 9600 for G4 and why there is still a 9000. Moving 1 connector on 9600 board would allow it to be a G4 retail option, dual digital, just like 9000. Just like 9000 except that:

1. Has 4 rendering pipelines instead of 2 (or is it 1 in 9000?)

2. Is 50% faster

3. Runs pixel shaders, Halo (& future apps) looks like it was meant to. With a 9000 it looks like "Intergalactic Mudwrestling"

4. Uses a low power/low heat GPU.

So, I think it is likely that Apple discourages ATI from offering a mid-range G4 option. And everyone who buys a 9000 now is going to be CRYING in 6 months when they don't see the "water splash/spinning vortex of infinity/perpendicular drop-shadow edge-lit edging" that Tiger has but is invisible on the "pig with lipstick" 9000 and other non-supported cards.

I say, keep up the flashing & flashing research. If we could flash 9600's, a LOT of people would benefit.

For that matter, it is possible now to purchase a PC 9800 for $170 or so and flash it on your Mac with a small ROM, no resistor move needed.

Here is a little secret ATI and Apple would like you to not figure out. Mac Pro SE and XT are SAME card. I got an SE and popped off fan, R360, the XT core. Only difference may be in RAM spec, otherwise same card, new fan.

I need help to keep figuring out cards. I personally have added GF3 Ti series, Radeon 7200 AGP, and Radeon 9800XT to the list of do-ables. I NEED hi-res images of Ti 4600 and I may be able to add this to list. If I could do that I am fairly sure I could ad the 4200 which might be a good Cube choice.

The 9800 XT "secret":

http://www.amacapart.com/images/xtres.jpg

Now who is gonna get me those 4600 pix?