And the switch to Windows is on

[dwd3885]

What's the difference between buying a console for gaming and building a very cheap gaming PC?

because with the pc, you can do more than with a console. download patches, surf the web, download music, etc. It's just that it wouldn't be as high specced as say an Xbox 360.

 

[Play Ultimate]

applause...

Going to cite me for falling victim to the Wikipedia Reality Distortion Field?

Now for some quick questions with quick answers:
(omitted to save space)

Perfect.
Apple is SO far ahead of the stated schedule for its Intel transition and it seems everybody is complaining. Jobs stated mid-2006 - 2007 for the transition. Already the Mini, iMac, and MacBook Pro have transitioned. Software will come more slowly. But Intel is providing chips that have improved Apples offerings.

Having read these and others posts, I feel like I should open a whinery

 

[dwd3885]

Perfect.
Apple is SO far ahead of the stated schedule for its Intel transition and it seems everybody is complaining. Jobs stated mid-2006 - 2007 for the transition. Already the Mini, iMac, and MacBook Pro have transitioned. Software will come more slowly. But Intel is providing chips that have improved Apples offerings.

Having read these and others posts, I feel like I should open a whinery

but if you're apple, what's the point of making these computer avaliable early? when clearly the software is not there yet. It never is, in Macs and in PCs, that is always the case. But knowing good and well that companies weren't ready for this, they switched over to intel early anyway. It seems like bad strategy to me

 

[Eraserhead]

I agree with the above about Wikipedia it is generally accurate.

PS you guys realise that this is the most pro Vista thread I have *ever* seen

IMHO it will be rubbish, that seems to be a consenus with everyone except the hardest core Microsoft fanboys, who are shouted down by everyone else

sure Windows is better at a couple of things (the file browser/cutting files) but these will surely be added in 10.5 (if not Apple *ARE* awful)
The task scheduler is also better in Windows...

but apart from that Windows is rubbish in the real world... I mean how often do you see windows error boxes at Train Stations/Wherever this means windows is so rubbish (or at least the version they are using) that it can't *even* display text properly.

There are a few good new features in Vista
-1 the game updater, will actually be really useful! the best new feature.

-2 the world clock (already on the iPod though)

-3 the Welcome screen could be good, but as the OEM's can advertise and it will appear at *every* startup any usefulness will evaporate very very fast.

-4 It tells you what is slowing down your PC too.. (there is a screenshot on the internet that shows 3 major Windows components slowing the machine)

-5 It's fonts look smoother than on the Mac

and also what about the system requirements for Vista? Integrated Graphics - Nope... Will it run on any PC from 2000, even top of the range ones? (like Mac OS X 10.4 does?)

Will you get any security improvements over XP without all new software? Nope...

Sorry about this Anti Microsoft rant but Vista looks rubbish and bloated, for 6 years work a poor effort.

 

[aristobrat]

Intel chips should mean cheaper Macs. No questions about it.

How do you figure this?

Every article/podcast I've read/heard on the subject says that Apple is paying significantly more for Intel processors than they did for PowerPC processors -- up to $150 more on Core Duo models.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2006/tc20060119_311993.htm?campaign_id=rss_tech

 

[QCassidy352]

wow, talk about overreacting. Yeah, the announcement was disappointing in some ways, but spelling doom for apple? gimme a frickin break. "Making a mountain out of a molehill" doesn't begin to describe what you're doing here.

 

[Josh]

How do you figure this?

Every article/podcast I've read/heard on the subject says that Apple is paying significantly more for Intel processors than they did for PowerPC processors -- up to $150 more on Core Duo models.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2006/tc20060119_311993.htm?campaign_id=rss_tech

Other companies have to buy the chips too, they're not just being handed out.

If another company sells the chip cheaper than Apple does (which is what's happening) is when the issue arises.

Either a) Apple is being charged more for them than the other companies are (which is to be highly doubted)

or b) Apple is just charging you more for them than other companies are.

 

[dwd3885]

wow, talk about overreacting. Yeah, the announcement was disappointing in some ways, but spelling doom for apple? gimme a frickin break. "Making a mountain out of a molehill" doesn't begin to describe what you're doing here.

good start, finally somebody with some sense on calming me down! Instead of bashing me/amd/microsoft.

As you all know I am a confused person anyway who likes both Macs and PCs, but can't seem to stand firm on one decision one way or another. As I had pcs all the way until September, when I started this free for all spiral known as my computer buying habitts

 

[Play Ultimate]

Chicken or Egg

but if you're apple, what's the point of making these computer avaliable early? when clearly the software is not there yet. It never is, in Macs and in PCs, that is always the case. But knowing good and well that companies weren't ready for this, they switched over to intel early anyway. It seems like bad strategy to me

By moving to Intel as quickly as possible, Apple creates a market for UB software. Thus when the software comes out, there will actually be purchased computers that can use the software. I don't anybody that releases software for hardware that is not in the marketplace.

And, yes, the lag between hardware and software is painful. Over the past few years it has been difficult with the transition from 68K to PPC (Moto -> IBM) then for OS9 to OSX and now to Intel. Hopefully, in the next year or so, the Mac Platform will become stabilized with Intel and OSX.

 

[iPhil]

wow, talk about overreacting. Yeah, the announcement was disappointing in some ways, but spelling doom for apple? gimme a frickin break. "Making a mountain out of a molehill" doesn't begin to describe what you're doing here.

I second that thought .. This Still alive but this is DEAD

 

[munkees]

All of you that think an AMD running MS windows is cool, well go for it. I think windows blows chunks. It suck on a network, I know I have to support stupid windows computers for the US Army. Simple things like persmission on shared folders/drives everynow and then just stop letting people use them. I have to go in a fudge it back into action. Even sharing printers, will require the system to be reported to fix these problems. As for vista. Well you guys should search around and see what people are saying, it not good, it even bigger, and going to suck on older hardware.

BTW ever time i put a newer version on an old mac the machine ran quick. thats with out having to though more ram in.

As for the AMD vs Intel, well AMD sucks, and intel jumps ahead then it flips. Been like that now for over 10 years. The next 64bit Dual core Intel is going to be more advanced than the AMD, AMD not is great on Floating point, nor intel. But I see better performance coming from intel. they are moving more of the bridges into die. AMD is having trouble make a quad core CPU, into will have one end of year. AMD say maybe a 3 core, followed by a six in the future.

So the AMD Intel arguement is nto a great one, both seem to be about the same. On the over hand the PowerPC G5 with the Altivec was amazing. 2.3 Ghz gives 9.2 Gflops, fast intel and AMD is about 6 to 7GFlops running at a lot higher Ghz

Apple choice for intel, is a good choice, Intel make more than just CPU for laptops and desktops. And have a single vendor that can help integrate more than one product and become there largest customer, then they will be very willing to work with you.

When I was with Ericsson, Intel bent over backward to work with us, on a project. They like to move into new markets.

As for the i hate mac mini now, did you expect the imac features at the bottom of the product range, that would be silly. The mac mini with a dual core, with the Mac OS X experience, iLife etc, with a HD 24+ inch LCD max ram, wireless keyboard and usb tv tuner would make a great TV solution home soultion, and I cost it about $1600. I replacing my 21" TV with it. Clear picture, and yes it has enough power to deliever HD, while I watch. A great product for the family to use. That leaves me all the rest of the computers for my self(the plan, plus I getting another iMac but maxed out).

I will not buy a computer just because the processor and take maybe 20 sec of something I not do all the time. Mac OS X as an OS is so much bettern than an LINUX or Windows.

That is my 40cents. Go Apple

PS. I do agree that the Intel GM950 is a disappointment, shared memory for ram, retarded, but the product is still very usable, and feels a need and fit s my solution.

 

[aristobrat]

Other companies have to buy the chips too, they're not just being handed out.

My point was that compared to the Motorola processors that they were building with, Intel processors cost Apple a lot more money.

So your point is that even though it's costing Apple $150 more to build an Intel mac mini, they should have kept the price the same or lowered it?

 

[Chuckles]

You're comparing an iMac and a PowerMac to a Mac Mini?

Mac Mini = People who do multimedia, internet, and minor image editing/management

iMac = People who do multimedia, internet, image editing/management, minor-moderate video editing, and gaming

PowerMac = Professional multimedia, hard-core image editing, hard-core video editing, and the above

A Mac Mini is not a PowerMac OR an iMac! Get that straight!

 

[dwd3885]

right, now there should be a machine in the imac price range without a monitor, for people who don't like all in ones

 

[Timepass]

when i created this thread, i did not mean for it to be a "apple sells their computers for more than i can build." That's not an issue for me. Sure I'd like to save money, but I'm ok with buying apple refurb, which makes it seem like not a big deal.

my whole point of the thread was that the inclusion of the intel mini with integrated graphics was a sign of things to come from apple. under-specced, over priced, end of the world scenario ;-)

Hoping people could talk me back into sanity, not for it to become an AMD/Intel flame war. I love AMD because they lead in performance. That's all. Does that make me a fanboy? Liking the company that puts out the best chips? Fine then. Apple using Intel doesn't make them all that different anymore than HP/Dell.

lol not an AMD fanboy. let me list the things that you posted that show other wise

You have stated intel blows.
AMD chips are beat out Intel in everything.
You keep singing high praises of AMD and speak very low of intel
Endless praising of AMD.
You have never owned an intel computer nor do you ever want to have one.

Of the things that are typic fanboyism all of those are.
Depending on what you want the chip to do depends on which is better. In game yes AMD creams Intel no if and or buts about it. But AMD starts showing signs of weaking when it comes to multitasking. Intel Hypertreading starts to shine here. A lot of encoding stuff intel just better at. Yeah AMD made the move to x64 first and intel having a little growing pains there. Multiple cores yeah AMD got them out first but intel is up there and just as good.

For most test they are about even. AMD and intel. In desktop chips over all AMD is just a little better right now not much but they are better.

Now lets look at the other side moble chips.
Lets see AMD sucks big time here.
Since the pentium M Intel has been creaming AMD. The only people who state other wise are AMD fanboys. The test time and time again are proving intel is better in this market.
If you want moble computering power you use Intel. AMD sucks there. The chips suck way to much power, and make 2 much heat.

Other things Intel does better
Intel motherboards are general better than AMD's because intel has inhouse design and does not relay of 3rd party.
Intel can run DDR2 ram, AMD can not
For a while AMD chips could not run there ram dual channel. Any AMD chip on socket 754 is not running the ram in dual channel. They dont have the memory bandwith to handle it. In busseniss apps intel has historicly been a heck of a lot better than AMD. Right now AMD has a slight lead there but you can be sure intel will take it back and be better.


Also I am not an intel fanboy. I like AMD over intel and I think AMD chips are a bit better. Plus AMD R&D is a lot better for the ammount of money they spend on it.

 

[p0intblank]

I really do hate threads like this... if you don't like the Mac, then just use a PC as your primary machine. And while you're at it, enjoy those constant security updates, virus-removal programs and spyware cleaning tools.

I agree that yesterday's event was very... unlike Apple. But is anyone perfect? Do you really expect Apple to put out A+ products after A+ products? I have high hopes for everything they come out with, but they can't all be good. For example, I wasn't too fond of the Mighty Mouse when I first tried it and I still don't like it that much. Big deal, you don't like something. Move on. I agree with everyone being upset over Intel Integrated Graphics. This definitely upsets me a lot, but let's just hope Apple does something about it in the near future. And no, Apple is definitely not going downhill from here on. You keep forgetting something: the Mac mini is a bare bones system. We were lucky to get a dedicated GPU in the G4 models. You definitely don't have to worry about this sort of thing happening with any future Macs. I expect the iBook (MacBook) to retail for around $999, so I also expect Apple to include a dedicated GPU in this machine. I could go on and on about this, but I don't think you will really take it in and think about it. But remember this: you are wrong about more than half the things you are ranting about. It was wise for Apple to choose Intel. Do you really think Steve Jobs would make such a bold move if he knew it had a huge potential to fail? Intel's roadmap is looking a lot better than AMD's, especially in the "performance-per-watt" category.

If you don't feel like reading the above paragraph, then just read this:

If you don't like the Mac, then move on. No one is forcing you to use anything.

 

[zap2]

The PowerMacs, or what ever they will be called, will be great. Perhaps your the kind of user who needs a higher end model.

Don't judge Apple whole line up based on one thing(and the Dual Core Minis SMOKE the G4 Minis) beccuase if we judged any PC maker on its cheapest PC, they would all suck. The Mini does not need a high end graphics card, and were not even sure how they compare yet..... some source say the intel graphic card is better (at least on paper)

 

[Josh]

I really do hate threads like this... if you don't like the Mac, then just use a PC as your primary machine. And while you're at it, enjoy those constant security updates, virus-removal programs and spyware cleaning tools.

I wasn't aware Linux was affected by such problems. OH! You're assuming everyone who uses a PC instead of a Mac is a Windows user....

I'm both a Mac and PC user, using OS X, Windows, and Linux.

I have used Windows for over 10 years without one bit of anti-virus software, and never, ever, have I had a single problem from a virus or pop-ups.

The idea that Windows = virus/pop-ups is absurd.

If someone you don't know emails you a program, are you going to open it?

No?

Guess what? Windows users aren't going to either.

A virus attacks the user, not the computer. If the user is going to visit shady sites, open unknown files, and accept connections with unknown people, then they are inviting a virus.

For someone who doesn't do the above things, a virus is a rare, rare, thing.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I have used Windows for over 10 years without one bit of anti-virus software, and never, ever, have I had a single problem from a virus or pop-ups.

I have no reason to doubt you - but you have to admit that your experience is quite atypical, stastically speaking. Joe Blow Wintel user usually has a bunch of malware on his system and doesn't know it.

I think the general negative reaction to the Minis just a knee-jerk tantrum and within a year, when most software is Universal and all Macs are Intel, everybody will be happy.

 

[p0intblank]

When I said PC, I was implying a Windows user. Linux users are in the minority when it comes to discussing the "PC" so that was my fault. I've never used Linux, so I would never say anything bad about it. But as for Windows, I have to disagree with this:

The idea that Windows = virus/pop-ups is absurd.

When I think of Windows, the first thing that comes to mind is the insane amount of spyware floating around out there. The average user doesn't know how dodge spyware like we experienced users do. I use both a Windows machine and a Mac. I know how to protect myself when using Windows. I know how to avoid getting a virus. I know not open e-mail attachments from people I am not familiar with. This is because I am an experienced computer user. I'm talking about your everyday Windows user. Now and then I get friends asking me "how I do I fix this?", "how do I not get pop-ups?", "why is this program suddenly not working right?"... my answer is usually "download FireFox" or "get yourself a good spyware removal tool" A good friend of mine has ZoneAlarm running in the background at all times on his Windows machine. A computer user shouldn't have to do these kinds of tasks. We use computers to make everyday tasks easier and quicker to accomplish. So yes, Windows IS considered that kind of operating system. Why do you think I use a Mac? Well for one I trust it way more than I do my Windows machine. Two, OS X runs circles around Windows as far as stability, ease of use, and features go. Three, it just works. I can't say the same about Windows. Random error here and there... registry problems... etc. etc. etc.

I know someone here has to agree with me. But don't forget, I do use both OS's. My Windows machine is used for gaming and my Mac is used for everything else.

 

[Maedus]

Quoting Wikipedia is no different than saying "insert name of random forum member says.........so it must be true!"

Wikipedia is a great concept, but its credability is questionable. I could edit that very page and say that the PPC was first built in the jungles of South America. Is that true? No. So who knows what else in there is.

I agree that each system/hardware/etc has a pro and a con, but we're not talking about the 1990s. We're talking about right now, and the current G4/G5's do *not* out perform Intel or AMD, and they haven't done so in the last 6 years either.

And a build-it-yourself system? That's the very best way to go.

I could build a system for $500 (not a penny more) that would DESTROY the mini in benchmarks, and run circles around the iMac, and compete on-par (if not better) than the base model PowerMac.

As far as I'm concerned, the mini is not marketted at the casual home user, it's marketted towards the uneducated, the foolish, and the blind.

If Apple continues, they mode of marketting is going to work its way up the line and saturate the higher end products as well. Before you know it, Apple will be selling $5000 PowerMacs that perform like $900 machines.

People aren't just upset about the mini, they are upset because this may be the another sign as to where Apple is headed. Other products have hinted at it, and now this makes it look even more inevitable. This downward slide in performance, and and upward slide in price, is what has got people upset. And they have every right to be.

If you edited obviously false information into Wikipedia, it'd be edited out because it's false. Basically I was just looking for the fact that PPC have outperformed x86 because how you said it, it sounded like PPC has never outperformed x86 (the rest of my post was aimed at the thread in general because I was addressing several people at once). From recollection, this is usually when a new PPC generation is released and soon after, Intel catches up and PPCs are once again slower. I just didn't feel like scouring the internet for a white paper texts demonstrating this since you'd have probably have to read the entire report and probably a couple others to get "PowerPC has sometimes outperformed x86." But the problem is just as you said, PowerPC hasn't outperformed jack in a while, but when Apple decides to switch, people start whining that Intels suck and we should be on AMD or just stayed with PowerPC. So my choices are 1) a company who is currently on top but may not be for long and doesn't have the resources to help Apple transition into an entirely new platform or 2) a company who has habitually failed to deliver on their promises or deadlines on performance development and meeting supply demands and no longer seems interested in developing non-server computer processors because we can't choose 3) a company who makes good processors that may not be on top right now but are snapping at the leader's heels, who can meet supply demand on new processors not only for one company but for an entire industry, who is actively developing their processors with a large research budget and who also has a large wealth of technologies for computer industry its developing.

Sure, maybe AMD would be better for the end user in the short run, but Intel is probably better for Apple in the short and long run and maybe after Apple is experienced at making x86 computers, it will start using AMD in addition to Intel.

And I wasn't saying a build it yourself computer can't be very powerful for relatively cheap. I was saying that if you're going to dismiss every company that has had a crappy product release, you're going to eliminate the entire market until that is your only option. Besides, a lot of people lack the know how or desire to figure out which parts to choose and how to assemble them to make their own computer. And then the ability to be their own tech support.

As for the people using the Mac Mini to define an entire company, I could simply point at the new iMacs. They're better than the old ones for the same price. They look just like another iMac G5 revision that adds features but keeps the same price point, but this time, they put an Intel in there instead of a G5.

Now the Mac Mini looks like a POS, but that doesn't mean I'm going to look at that iMac that looks great and say, "sorry iMac, you fulfill all my needs and then some at a price I can live with, but your sibling, the Mac Mini, who I have no interest in, is an overpriced POS. And PowerMac (or whatever you'll be named), even though I have no idea what you'll be like, you'll be a POS too because Mac Mini is."

good start, finally somebody with some sense on calming me down! Instead of bashing me/amd/microsoft.

As you all know I am a confused person anyway who likes both Macs and PCs, but can't seem to stand firm on one decision one way or another. As I had pcs all the way until September, when I started this free for all spiral known as my computer buying habitts

Well, when you title a thread "And the switch to Windows is on" and proceed to complain and whine about how Apple is going downhill due to a single media event that didn't pertain to you or had less than stellar products tends to get people annoyed at best, angry at worst, and they no longer desire to help you. If you'd written your post like:

Thread Title: What's going on at Apple? (A little belligerent in tone, but it captures your idea and is racy enough to grab attention.)

Body: I was reviewing the mac mini they just released today, and I have to say, what happened? I was expecting much better than that![/rant]

But seriously, I was wondering, why did Apple even switch to Intel? I think the AMD chips are much better than Intel's and Intel doesn't look like they're going to catch up soon. The iMac looked good when it was released, but that's only going from a single core G5 to an Intel Core Duo, but with the recent mac mini release, it has me worried about how good of a job Apple will do when they update the PowerMacs. How are they going to transition from dual G5s to an Intel processor? Won't the dual G5s outperform an Intel processor and wouldn't Apple be better served going with AMD who has much faster processors? I can't believe the Mini went up in price! Are the new PowerMacs going to go up in price too?

I just feel anxious with Apple's future after seeing the new Mac Mini and I need somebody to calm my fears. I'd hate to find when it comes time to upgrade my PowerMac G5, it will be with something awesome because I love the video performance, such as Final Cut Pro, I have on this machine and the ease of use it provides, especially for transferring video to an iPod. Please, having recently started using macs, remind me why I still want to be a mac user, please.


While that still seems a bit whiny and a little belligerent, it at least has questions of what you want to know and it tells us you just need to be reassured why you own a PowerMac G5 and it doesn't have all the "I'm switching to windows because of something trivial" trollness to it. And then you'd probably get some attacking responses, but a lot less. And you'd probably get, "do a search before posting this. I've seen this a dozen times already" replies. And then you'd get a lot more people who calmly and with good nature, answers your questions and the thread breaks down into a informative and possibly joking thread as people happily interact. But when you cry gloom and doom for Apple and how you're going to use Vista, then it breaks down into people who think everybody who doesn't complain and denounce Apple is a fanboy and into people who think you're a troll and treats you that way.

 

[aristobrat]

I have no reason to doubt you - but you have to admit that your experience is quite atypical, stastically speaking. Joe Blow Wintel user usually has a bunch of malware on his system and doesn't know it.

No joke!

Maybe Josh could do some one-on-one training with my friends and co-workers because I'm definately tired of having to fix their Window boxes on a regular basis.

And if I could just get them to understand the concepts of RPMs and dependencies, they'd love Linux. not.

 

[Josh]

No joke!

Maybe Josh could do some one-on-one training with my friends and co-workers because I'm definately tired of having to fix their Window boxes on a regular basis.

And if I could just get them to understand the concepts of RPMs and dependencies, they'd love Linux. not.

Hehe...$25 an hour, and you got a deal

Ubuntu & apt-get makes installing things on Linux a breeze. Lock them in a room with a linux box, and tell them you wont let them out until they install 3 things with apt-get.

They'll be out in under 30 minutes (ok..maybe 45..lol).

wait...do you *like* these co-workers? BSD might be an option...they'll never make it out.

 

[cnakeitaro]

Mac Mini prices.....yes they've gone up, but so has the price of the components. Ok yes they suck with the integrated graphics card issue, but honestly who was gonna buy one anyways. Apple isn't trying to switch me, they already did it with my iBook and now my new Macintel iMac.

Honestly tho, the Mac Mini was introduced at a time in which the G4 chip was a dime a dozen. I don't really know how much they are spending, but the retail price for a 1.66 ghz core duo is $250. They have now also thrown in an apple remote, and I/R sensor. In general, I guess the point I am making is that the component prices of the Mac Mini has gone up.

There's probably more than we think for the integrated graphics issue, most likely the lame intel logic board design, which they are fitting into a little box, plus intel is kinda famous for the lame integrated graphics engines. It was most likely a cost cutting issue, since it was available, which was probably something not available on the G4 logic boards.

Now, these missions aren't meant to be powerhouses. It just got a bump of 4x the speed, and yes it has to share with the GPU. This machine is perfect for getting someone a taste of what MacOS is all about. Most people aren't going to be pushing it to its limit, with Photoshop, and other graphically intensive programs. If you need to use those, buy a pro-machine. Simple.

 

[liquidh2o]

You didn't check very thoroughly. HP sells QUAD dual-core Opteron machines right now, and has been selling them for months. That's EIGHT cores.

Intel may catch up eventually, who knows. I doubt it.

Guess I didn't! Kudos for pointing it out. Seems they're available at the server and workstation level. Thankfully they're at a pricepoint that wouldn't put them in direct competition with powermacs.