What is Digg?75 Comments
- lepton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4When the G4 first came out, it WAS faster. But they weren't able to keep up the pace with speed and power consumption revs, and the Intels became faster and lower power. Thus, the switch.
- einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"...What EXACTLY are people using their macs for that is so much better than what people are using their pcs for?...(snip)..the Macs will go back to where they belong: in the recording studio, in the video editing studio, animation, image manipulation...you get idea?..."
You answered your own question.
Macs are the most prolific content creation platforms. Ever.
Print, web, video, film, novels, screenplays, music...creative people like to CREATE, not ***** about with the tools.
I have about 10 friends who have switched. All different ages, different backgrounds, different occupations. When asked "whaddya think about your new Mac?" they all say the same thing: "it's great. It just works." - einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Dtective...
'zzzzactly.
You can get the PC to work if you don't mind getting under the hood: create a user profile with stripped-down system overhead, load the bare bones drivers just to edit video. Adding another stick of RAM might have helped. And I suspect your hard drive was too slow and/or the OS was pinging it due to paging, so an extra hard drive on a dedicated SATA channel would have been great. $200-250 for ram, drive, and SATA card.
But the Mac -- with equal specs and about the same age -- does the job out of the box. Maccies are willing to pay the premium to not have to ***** around with the tools. - tophfisher, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7MAN.. It really kills _some_ of you haters out there that Apple gets this much attention. If your heads were not so far up your ass, and you could try and see past your Windows loving nose you might understand what makes people so passionate about Apple and OS X. But instead of trying to understand, you just post on digg and hate. Super cool.
- smeager, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Up until recently ( I would say the last 2 years) the PPC chip was faster (in raw performance) then its Intel x86 counterpart. With the release of dual core processors and newer architecture that is simple not true anymore. That is why Apple moved from IBM's PPC to Intel's Core Duo. If you were the head of a major company wouldn't you want the best product possible?
- beggersfunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For People who question/whining/complaining criticizing why this and that bout Mac ...dude you don't know what you are missing. And I am working under the most use OS in the world ( go figure ) and i am using Mac.
- einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"...wondering where the shift in allegiance came in!..."
Tried to find my earlier post; no avail.
Basically it comes down to Adobe hyper-optimizing the killer apps for the G4 and Altivec. Certain functions in After Effects and Photoshop were squeezed into shape and *totally* blew away the PC equivalent hardware on those same functions. 2x to 5x in most cases. And I think apps like ElectricImage fed the fud, delivering truly outstanding performance on a Mac-only app.
Keep in mind, this was 1997 thru about 2000/2001.
Things changed when Adobe and Apple got into a pissing match. Final Cut took Premiere out at the knees, effectively killing the Mac video editing market for Adobe. PCs were inexplicably being pulled into pre-press environments and even DESIGN shops, so the Wintel side of Adobe was blowing up big time. They focused efforts there, the hyper-optimization of code for Mac took a back seat, and all the while Motorola couldn't keep pace with Intel.
So the SPECS we all know about are specific to the power apps. No one in their right mind would tell you that surfing, email, or Excel were faster on the Mac. They just weren't. But ignorant users don't KNOW this, so they just keep repeating how fast Macs are without understanding the reality of the situation.
So there. - simX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"2007 will be the real-deal. OX X 10.5 running natively, and Vista will materialize. Then we'll see."
Um... yeah. What exactly do you mean by "OX [sic] X 10.5 running natively"? News flash -- OS X 10.4.4 is already native to Intel processors. Maybe you're talking about applications that will become native? Perhaps.
Otherwise, don't make me laugh when you mention Vista. Vista is competing with Mac OS X 10.4, not 10.5. 10.5 will already be way ahead of Vista by the time it comes out (if Microsoft doesn't delay it again or pull even more features), and it's just hilarious that you think Vista and OS X will be on par in 2007. - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"I applaud Steve Jobs for making it through an interview without being an ***** to the reporter or childishly bashing Microsoft/Windows."
------------------------------------------- But do you applaud him for being an "*****" in the new Apple ads that make Apple look like a school-child trying to make him/herself look good by making someone else look bad? The smart ones will see right through it. - Akram, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"Apple wants to control EVERYTHING you use your computer for. (think mac, itunes, ipod)."
hmmmm lets see....office, xbox, media centre, wmv, internet explorer - einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"...But I think people will be surprised at how fast OS X is..."
I think Rosetta and the other emulation will be disappointing, speed-wise. 2006 is not the year of the power-user. Adobe CS3, Quark 7, After Effects 7, Final Cut 6, in 2007 when they're running 100% native on an intelMac, THAT'S when people will say "holy *****". I don't care how fast Safari is if Dreamweaver is still running like *****. And any penalty in rendering/encoding is simply unacceptable; people will keep a FCP machine running 10.3.9 if that means 5% faster rendering.
2007 will be the real-deal. OX X 10.5 running natively, and Vista will materialize. Then we'll see. - buryme, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like how the article is on msnbc...
- kabz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For compiling software, my Pentium-M laptop (Dell Precision M60) kicks the ass of my GX270 P4 3.0 Gig. And that includes being handicapped by a laptop hard drive.
The 'Scottish Laptop' (Mac Book) has about twice the processing power of my M60. The Mac Book Pro, and the other Core Duo based laptops are going to simply 'p0wn' most of what's around at the moment, unless it's some gargantuan AMD64 lap incinerator or something. - einsteindesign, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@michaelbuddy...
Are you ***** kidding me? Ever adjust the tracking speed of your mouse? And if you can't handle dialogs and windows, just unplug the damn thing. Go back to linear editing if you cant handle the hardware.
"...You can't do as much..."
Patently untrue.
"...I used to use a 25,000 editing suite on the best macs in 2000. Back then they were said to be the best, and then they ***** sucked...."
Don't blame the CPU if your Avid skills *****. Or if your array is *****.
I edited a 180 minute documentary in 1998 on a G3 233 (rev A no less) using EditDV and 3 16 GB drives. Laying segments off to tape, recapturing, over and over and over. A $4000 system and it worked 100% of the time, the only exception being drift due to Canon's arbitrary non-48khz sampling rate.
Perhaps your hardware was junk, and perhaps your experience was atypical, but don't generalize. You accuse Apple of being misleading? Holy ***** dude, get a clue. - aerius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Apple wants to control EVERYTHING you use your computer for. (think mac, itunes, ipod)"
You act like this is some conspiracy theory you've come up with... read the interview!! This is exactly what Jobbs says.
"The problem is, the PC model doesn’t work in the consumer electronics industry, where you’ve got all these companies and some does one thing and another does another thing. It just doesn’t work." - phlll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0lepton said:
"When the G4 first came out, it WAS faster. But they weren't able to keep up the pace with speed and power consumption revs, and the Intels became faster and lower power. Thus, the switch."
Thanks for the info, without being smarmy about it. I actually didn't know, and was wondering where the shift in allegiance came in! - manicarzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The form factors [the physical design] are perfect, we don’t know how to make them any better. And now we’ve got Intel processors in them so obviously they run a lot faster."
I don't get it... all the previous years, hasn't Jobs always tried to show how much faster Apple computers ran things like Photoshop rendering and other graphic-intensive apps? Then he goes off and says this? Uhhhh... marketing anybody? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dont forget PC gaming isnt all about firs person shooters. RTS games have a huge fan base as well.
- Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"When the G4 first came out, it WAS faster. But they weren't able to keep up the pace with speed and power consumption revs, and the Intels became faster and lower power. Thus, the switch."
There's no denying that the G5 is powerful--more powerful even than the Intel Penium M and Core lineups in most performances. The quad-core models are ridiculously powerful. Try using a compiling-intense distro of Linux on it (Gentoo), you'll see just how the quad-core G5 screams.
But the fact is that they could not make a power-efficient version to put into laptops. If you put a G5 in a laptop, you'd have about 30 minutes of battery life, if the thing didn't fry in the first place. It's ridiculous how ong the G4 has been used in the Powerbooks... imagine if HP and Dell continued to use Pentium III's in their laptops.
I have a feeling the G5-based PowerMacs will still be an option for a while to come. It is a powerful chip, and it has its uses. But being in a laptop is not one of those uses.
Although, what bothers me is that somehow IBM found a way to put the G5 in the Xbox 360 and Nintendo Revolution, two systems that are small enough they almost might as well be laptops. Maybe if they Apple and IBM had as good relations as Microsoft and Nintendo do with IBM, they could have figured out something with the G5. - SkaAgent11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The RISC vs. CISC argument is *****. All RISC vs. CISC means is that there is more stress put on the memory to CPU bus than the actual processor itself.
- adamS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A lot of you have mentioned things that I think are critical for Apple gaining more desktop computer market share. Gaming, high-end applications - these both need to work at least as well as they do on the PC, or work at all for that matter.
When they've figured out how I can take my DVD from Battlefield 2 or F.E.A.R., slap it in my Mac, install and run without any emulation *****, or run Eclipse/Dreamweaver without massive slowdowns, then my PC will be out the window. I already own a PowerBook - they could easily seduce me into an iMac or PowerMac if they managed to pull this off. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This really is an excellent article. Great interview with some good insight into the computer industry as a whole. Its fun when steve is all secretive about something, but here he was very open and the interview was very refreshing.
Plus... steve predicts an "X-Player" from microsoft. Classic! - ct2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Your new iLife software has a blogging application. When will you start your own blog?
(Laughs.) After I get a few days of rest.
there you go no need to read it now - ewingsquadron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hope he actually does start a blog. That could be entertaining.
- JetwingX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well, if jobs publishes a Blog, you can bet it would be at http://homepage.mac.com/steve
- jonathanex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hope he doees a podcast with his blog too. I hear he's got some great sources inside apple! :P
- phlll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0But you have to admit RvC was a point used in flamewars past.
- silentauthority, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"How is battery life with the MacBook?
About the same—this with a dual processor [chip]! Each processor is as fast as a G5, and the battery life will be the same as [the previous PowerBook’s] G4."
Solves the battery question. Is he lying though ;) ? - Abx0r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I hope he doesn't. Everyday we'd have a new front page story about Steve Jobs' life. Ohh wait, that already happens, silly me.
- SkaAgent11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0On a RISC processor, that is.
- cwcentral, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"the PC model doesn’t work in the consumer electronics industry, where you’ve got all these companies and some does one thing and another does another thing. It just doesn’t work. What’s going to happen is that Microsoft is going to have to get into the hardware business of making MP3 players. This year. X-player, or whatever."
Wow. He slams both Dell and Microsoft in the same paragraph. With the cash and bling Apple has gotten the last 2 years, he sure has developed a Woz mentality. - _HAM_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"I don't get it... all the previous years, hasn't Jobs always tried to show how much faster Apple computers ran things like Photoshop rendering and other graphic-intensive apps? Then he goes off and says this? Uhhhh... marketing anybody?"
The PPC fell behind many years ago. The only thing keeping them competitive was the Vec unit, allowing them to run some graphic packages at a good pace.
Too bad the went with intel and didn't embrace AMD but oh well.
Really the PPC started dying around the time Jobs came back to the company, everything about apple was dying then. Everything got saved, except the PPC (and a huge portion of thier education market). - dinkoarun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Apple could have put the G5 chip into their powerbooks, just like how it was done in xBox or Revolution. But the problem was the ratio between the G5 and the battery power would have dropped significantly when compared to the G4.
The reason they moved to the Dual Cores is that they don't have to compromise speed for battery life. - dSlifer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"How will the speed of these machines compare to Windows machines?
You’re asking a very interesting question, a software question. On the same hardware, what is the performance of Mac OS X plus Safari [Apple’s browser] compared to Windows XP, plus Internet Explorer? You need to get the apps in native code [to judge], so I can’t say definitively. But I think people will be surprised at how fast OS X is."
Probably the best answer I've seen for that debate, good job Jobs! - DtectiveGFriday, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Steve Jobs? Blog? I'm there.
"What EXACTLY are people using their macs for that is so much better than what people are using their pcs for?"
Hey I switched from a pc to a mac about a month ago. On my old pc, I tried to edit family videos, makes simple slideshows of vacations, and even just use the web. It was a two year old gateway with 1 gig of ram and 1.5 ghz of processor speed. It couldn not handle video files over 3 minutes, and definetely not anything HD. I have an o;der imac G5 and can edit HD video in realtime, any multimedia project works beutifully. This G5 is running on 1gig of ram and 1.5 ghz of processor speed.
Thank you Steve Jobs. - Wasyu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Most of the performace gains which which are some what inflated "but doesn't eveyone in the industry do that ?" are from the new graphics controller and the faster PCIe x16 bus and faster memory buses not and is not nesscarly due to the faster cpu.
The memory bus thoughput is one reason why AMDs nearly allways beat intel chips in real world situations.
I'm releaved he didn't screw up the switch by using intel's lack luster graphics processors but I am sure the battery life claims are inflated and any improvements will mostly be from improved battery tech and improved power switching circuits.
Using higher frequency switch mode regulators and heavier inductors then the competition will give better battery life for example.
Though I still think he would have done better using AMD's new mobile chips which do outperform the pentium D series which really are not the great performers the media hype makes them out to be.
Also AMD based notes do not run all that hot .My acer AMD64 M based notebook does run cooler then P4 based note it replaced but not as cool as P mobile based ones.
But even a sempron 64 will easily out perform a Pentium mobile by a considerable margin in most appplications. - _HAM_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"2007 will be the real-deal. OX X 10.5 running natively, and Vista will materialize. Then we'll see."
I'm actually getting excited. We might actually get to see a real OS showdown coming in the next few years. ***** the superbowl. This is going to be good. - scottgfx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Re; RISC Vs CISC
You have to remember that the concept for RISC chips came out a long time ago. In the 20 years since, what were CISC chip designs (x86) starting borrowing concepts from RISC processors. If you look at something like AMD's offerings, you see a RISC core wrapped in a translation envelope. CISC instruction comes in and gets translated quickly to it's native instruction.
At the same time, What started out at simpler RISC designs keep having things added to them, adding to their complexity. The reality is; there really isn't anything that can be purely called RISC or CISC anymore. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm still debating wether to use my tax return on a sexy mac or a windows pc that just WORKS FOR ME[plays my games, and I dont want any brute to tell me what I should or shouldnt do with MY computer i.e play age of empires 3 and other RTS games on a mac and then I'll be happy enough to switch with no doubts..]
- engalicorn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I love Steve Jobs almost as much as I love Kevin Rose!
- andreizilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I bet Steve Jobs will start a blog... but will Bill Gates start one before him? Will Bill Gates ever start a blog?
THAT would be entertaining. Then I want to see Bill and Steve leave comments on each other blogs. THAT WOULD BE HILLARIOUS! - JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I love the question about the iPod killers. Seeing as how the Zen Vision: M got best in show by many outlets, most of them calling it the complete 5G iPod killer.
- zetsurin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm experienced with administering freebsd boxes and I will say that the nix underpinnings of OSX is a wonderful thing to have. Having said that, you can also do a lot of useful stuff with AppleScript. I would suggest that michaelbuddy probably hasn't met too many people from the mac dev community, just the designer types. And michaelbuddy, unless you have personally met 'most', then stfu about generalisations.
- hotwaterham, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I applaud Steve Jobs for making it through an interview without being an ***** to the reporter or childishly bashing Microsoft/Windows.
- Mist0r_Wiggles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0when are people going to realize that there is going to be no "iPod" killer. the new Creative ZEN Vision
is thicker than the 4G iPods. So what if its got all the software and specs? It doesnt look half as cool and most people that own an MP3 player are shallow!!! - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Michaelbuddy said:
"Mac users... no very little about working on their system..."
What's worse, that you couldn't figure out how to change settings on your Mac, or that you can't spell "know?" - gamabunta, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2should be "each processor runs as fast as my mouth."
- menace303, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"X-player, or whatever."
ooh, that stings! - michaelbuddy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It's not about hating macs, or mac users. It's more about hating their marketing and lies. And that their machines are aways touted as the media computer. I used to use a 25,000 editing suite on the best macs in 2000. Back then they were said to be the best, and then they ***** sucked. Right now they still have some stupidity about them. Windowing is the worst for me. Can't resize windows from all sides, only that little corner. Windows falling below the annoying doc. This is the ***** that I ***** with instead of getting things done. Blame the apps if you want, but the OS windows are wierd too. Mouse feels gross to me. It's always way too slow. None of the customizations are really that custom. Everyone always says, hey it's unix you can just script in your preferences. But why have I never seen anyone do this? Because mac users, in my experience no very little about working on their system. This isn't everyone, it's just most. Mac doesn't let you stretch in my opinion. Easy, simple maybe, but that can mean lacking features. That's what another digger wrote in another column about macs being underengineered. You can't do as much. This argument is probably never going to change a thing, so I guess I'll just cry until 5 years from now when Linux has a big graphics, animation, editing suite that I can use.
-
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is