Macintosh -- Will you buy one now or later?

[AlbertSiegel]

With Apple switching to Intel CPUs, what do you plan to do? Will you buy a PowerPC based Macintosh while you can, or wait till the Intel based computers roll out next year?

What do you think this will do to the value of PowerPC based Macs?

[electrocat]

im buying one next week. I was waiting for wwdc for new models to come out but instead the intel news. Sales will go down, but i need a new computer and can't wait for one. I need one for work. when the intels come out, im sure i will buy one the first time there is an update to some software i can't live without. Im thinking probably a year after the intels are released.

[jim katta]

I've been hearing this discussion going on ever since the announcement, but I don't think there's much to decide about. the only alternatives are Windows and Linux. Most long time Mac users aren't going to switch to Windows, so most will probably stay with Mac no matter what the processor chip. I know I fit this category. I'm not fucking with Windows unless I absolutely am forced to. This Mac processor swich isn't that tipping point for me.

[FG Lurker]

I almost bought a Mac last summer when I was in the market for a new machine. Two things killed that deal:

1. Very large price difference.
2. I still must run Windows for some work-related tasks.

I think MacOS on Intel has a reasonable chance of fixing both of these problems. If it does, then when I am ready for another upgrade in a couple of years (perfect timing really!) there is little doubt that I will buy an Apple.

[cstaylor]

I'm buying a dual 2Ghz PowerMac this week... as a Apple Select developer, I get one 20% hardware coupon per year, and mine expires mid-June.

[Buraku]

It looks ok, but you might get better computer deals
I got a shit load of stuff from Malaysia, Europe and China already

[American Oyaji]

I should have a Mac mini within a month.

[electrocat]

I almost bought a Mac last summer when I was in the market for a new machine. Two things killed that deal:

1. Very large price difference.
2. I still must run Windows for some work-related tasks.

I think MacOS on Intel has a reasonable chance of fixing both of these problems. If it does, then when I am ready for another upgrade in a couple of years (perfect timing really!) there is little doubt that I will buy an Apple.

the mac mini was too expensive for you? without starting the whole mac vs pc.. you would save money on anitivirus software alone. Not to mention productivity

[Taro Toporific]

... I don't think there's much to decide about. the only alternatives are Windows and Linux. .... I'm not fucking with Windows unless I absolutely am forced to.
.

I'll move to Linux for my next machine in 2008. I wanted a 64-bit Cell Processor for my OS X 10.5. PBS' Robert X. Cringely puts it best for me....

Going for Broke By Robert X. Cringely ...WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON HERE!? Are these people drunk on Flav-r-Ade?! ...Apple was willing to consider a processor switch, moving to the Cell Processor would have made much more sense than going to Intel or AMD, so I simply have to conclude that technology has nothing at all to do with this decision. This is simply about business -- BIG business....

[FG Lurker]

[quote="electrocat"]the mac mini was too expensive for you? without starting the whole mac vs pc.. you would save money on anitivirus software alone. Not to mention productivity ]
The Mac Mini is underpowered for my needs. It's a cool machine, but it does not match up to an Athlon 64 3500+ with 2GB of memory and 400+GB of storage. I also don't know how well it would drive my 22" CRT at 1600x1200x32bit@85Hz.

As for antivirus software, I do run it, yes. However I have not personally had any virus problems in the last......13? years. That was on an Atari 1040ST and due to (cough) copied (cough) software. (For people with personal AV needs I always recommend AVG. Pretty lightweight, very easy to install and use, works perfectly, and it's free.)

[FG Lurker]

Another thing that the move to Intel might finally do is enable Mac users to upgrade their CPUs!

Once the prices on the dual core Athlons settle (later this year or early next) I will move from my single core 3500+ to a dual core, probably a 4400+. The 4400+ has two die-shrunk 3700+ cores and will provide a very nice performance bump for photo and video editing.

Hopefully Apple doesn't cripple things in such a way as to block users from enjoying such economical upgrades.

[cstaylor]

I can't imagine Apple technically blocking people from self-upgrading their CPUs as long as the Intel DRM still functions properly.

[FG Lurker]

I can't imagine Apple technically blocking people from self-upgrading their CPUs as long as the Intel DRM still functions properly.

You'd really think that the entertainment industry would do a bit of history study. No matter how much DRM they try to force on consumers they will *never* kill piracy as long as people can actually see and/or listen to their products *AND* the products continue to be overpriced. Maybe they'll figure this out....or maybe not.

[cstaylor]

That's what iTunes is all about. It's a one-two punch: lower the price, but with DRM so people still have to pay. Let's be honest: if there's a way to copy music without paying, who would pay?

[FG Lurker]

That's what iTunes is all about. It's a one-two punch: lower the price, but with DRM so people still have to pay. Let's be honest: if there's a way to copy music without paying, who would pay?

Lots of people continue to pay... iTunes can be de-DRM'd, and anything available on iTunes can be found "elsewhere" if people look.

The problem with protection systems like this is that they cost the companies involved a fortune to design and implement... But the people who want to get around them are often young students who don't place a high value on their own time. Essentially the "breakers" work for free and the "makers" pay tons of cash. The breakers will always win in this situation.

[Scott]

Another thing that the move to Intel might finally do is enable Mac users to upgrade their CPUs!

Sweet Jesus, 'FG Lurker' is wrong. Macs can easily upgrade their CPUs - even the G3 LAPTOPS can have their processors upgraded. Try upgrading the CPU on a 6-year-old PC laptop.....

[FG Lurker]

Another thing that the move to Intel might finally do is enable Mac users to upgrade their CPUs!

Sweet Jesus, 'FG Lurker' is wrong. Macs can easily upgrade their CPUs - even the G3 LAPTOPS can have their processors upgraded. Try upgrading the CPU on a 6-year-old PC laptop.....

Some Mac notebooks can be upgraded with rather expensive 3rd party daughter cards if my memory services. Some PC notebooks can also be upgraded (generally by dropping in a faster Pentium M chip) but many of the most compact machines are not socketed. Notebooks in general tend to be a tradeoff of many things to get small sizes and light weights.

Back to the desktops that I originally posted about... How about the PowerMac G5s? Let's say I have a dual 2GHz setup and I want to upgrade to the dual-2.7GHz chips that are now available. Possible? Impossible? I've not seen it, but I suppose it isn't inconceivable.

[Edit: I ask about the dual 2GHz systems because that is what I would have bought last year when I bought the Athlon 64 3500+. I can upgrade the AMD system with a BIOS flash and a quick (<20minute) CPU swap. Would I be able to do the same if I had bought the Apple system?)

[mr. sparkle]

I'll move to Linux for my next machine in 2008. I wanted a 64-bit Cell Processor for my OS X 10.5. PBS' Robert X. Cringely puts it best for me....

What about a machine that would boot Mac OS X, Lurker's Windoze and Taro's Linux?

I'd buy that.

Going for Broke By Robert X. Cringely

Gotta love the guy.

Regarding Intel: should be an interesting ride for developers, then consumers. But that's about all I can say from here.....

BTW: Welcome Back T!

[mr. sparkle]

No matter how much DRM they try to force on consumers they will *never* kill piracy as long as people can actually see and/or listen to their products *AND* the products continue to be overpriced.

Never underestimate "The Man"

[FG Lurker]

No matter how much DRM they try to force on consumers they will *never* kill piracy as long as people can actually see and/or listen to their products *AND* the products continue to be overpriced.

Never underestimate "The Man"

Heh, I don't.

I've just been watching this "game" for a lotta years and the companies never come out on top. I don't see any reason why this is going to suddenly change unless the companies change their way of thinking & doing business.

[GomiGirl]

No matter how much DRM they try to force on consumers they will *never* kill piracy as long as people can actually see and/or listen to their products *AND* the products continue to be overpriced.

Never underestimate "The Man"

Heh, I don't.

I've just been watching this "game" for a lotta years and the companies never come out on top. I don't see any reason why this is going to suddenly change unless the companies change their way of thinking & doing business.

What is the change that companies should be adopting? Giving away their software for free just because there is piracy among individuals?

I think that anybody making software, music or even a simple retail store, expect a certain amount of theft - lets call it by its real name and not a "game".

Most companies are just trying to minimise piracy so the "average" person will have to pay for what they use. There will always be hackers out there who can break this but there needs to be a certain amount of technical skill.

What solution do you propose?

[FG Lurker]

I am a capitalist to my core GG so I really see the business side of this too, and having worked as a developer before I also see the content producer side.

I just think that companies who are spending more and more money (ie most of the entertainment industry) to try and "protect" their products are wasting their money. People who are going to copy are going to copy, especially the younger net-connected generation.

Once people hit a certain age and income level they are going to buy most of their stuff. Like me, for example. In the time it would take me to find and "get" a movie online, uncompress it, burn it out, print the cover, cut it up, label the disc... I could make more money doing some consulting work and just buy the damn thing (and get all the advantages of buying it). It is no longer "worth it" even in a pure financial sense. For a student or some kid making min wage though...Then the time is worth less than the product and many of these people will spend the time to download things.

(Yes, I know I have completely ignored the moral arguments against copying... I don't think most people who copy will be affected by moral arguments though.)

[GomiGirl]

Lurker.. all what you say is good but you haven't suggested any alternative.. as a SW developer company this is something that we do condsider.

The Collective Commons wave is sweeping the world especially in the area of stock photos and other internent creative pursuits.. what about the traditional buisiness models where people do want to get paid for their efforts... what is a solution for them (ie me)

[Scott]

What about a machine that would boot Mac OS X, Lurker's Windoze and Taro's Linux?

That's totally doable, if not with those flavors, you can get windows/linux/mac on one machine. Lots of guys have shoe-horned that into place. Try the Yellow Hat Linux guys, they're usually the guys to post their instructions.

Some Mac notebooks can be upgraded with rather expensive 3rd party daughter cards if my memory services.

Actually, the vendor has a cheap CPU swap-out service. The new CPU gets soldered into place, depending on the model.

Let's say I have a dual 2GHz setup and I want to upgrade to the dual-2.7GHz chips that are now available. Possible?

Very possible. The vendors will put something out CPU upgrades in a few more months.

What you aren't aware of is that Apple CPU speed increases *generally* see simultaneous and quietly-announced other improvements: bus-speeds increase, slightly better video cards, not to mention the occassional faster-RAM situation.

The 2nd & 3rd Revision machines aren't 100% faster, but they are generally the way to go for those who 'need' a faster rig. Because if you have the money, it's better to sell the old rig (usually for a good price) and get the all-new rig for *about* the cost of a CPU upgrade.
[/quote]

[FG Lurker]

Lurker.. all what you say is good but you haven't suggested any alternative.. as a SW developer company this is something that we do condsider.

The Collective Commons wave is sweeping the world especially in the area of stock photos and other internent creative pursuits.. what about the traditional buisiness models where people do want to get paid for their efforts... what is a solution for them (ie me)

Of course you raise valid points.

For a software developer I think there are still many avenues that can be taken. Five ideas that come to mind immediately are:

1. Develop business-oriented products rather than products for individual end-users. Make the product prices reasonable (or even zero initial cost) but tie the use of the product to regular yearly (or monthly) charges for service/support/updates.

2. Develop products that are tied to specific hardware that requires the expertise of your company. Point of Sale systems are a very common example of this. Parking lot control systems are another.

3. Develop educational products and market them to educational institutions, not to individual students. The price per user would have to be quite low but the volume would be high. Further, such contracts usually can have a "no end-user support provided" clause.

4. Provide software as a service, not as a packaged product. (I think this is what you do now, no?)

5. Don't directly develop software anymore; provide service, support, and paid-for customizations to existing free software. (Along the lines of what IBM is making billions doing.)

Not all examples will work for all companies of course... However I think that any software company that has talented people and is willing to adapt will be able to do fine even in the "creative commons" world.

There will be casualties -- some companies and markets will not survive. From a software perspective relational databases and server OSes are moving towards becoming commodity items. This may take another decade to happen but I have no doubt that it eventually will. In the hardware/software combined market there are some very big changes happening with PBXes. In the telephony service market IP telephony is completely altering the landscape. Change provides opportunities though. IBM, SAP, MySQL, Red Hat, Digium, Vonage, and Skype are all examples of companies adapting and taking advantage of the opportunities created by changes currently taking place.

[FG Lurker]

Let's say I have a dual 2GHz setup and I want to upgrade to the dual-2.7GHz chips that are now available. Possible?

Very possible. The vendors will put something out CPU upgrades in a few more months.

What you aren't aware of is that Apple CPU speed increases *generally* see simultaneous and quietly-announced other improvements: bus-speeds increase, slightly better video cards, not to mention the occassional faster-RAM situation.

The 2nd & 3rd Revision machines aren't 100% faster, but they are generally the way to go for those who 'need' a faster rig. Because if you have the money, it's better to sell the old rig (usually for a good price) and get the all-new rig for *about* the cost of a CPU upgrade.

Actually I am aware of how the Apple system revision upgrades work. I'm not anti-Apple, I just feel that the products (although very nice) are too expensive.

It will be interesting to see how vendors handle upgrades from 2GHz to 2.5 or 2.7. Considering Apple felt they needed liquid cooling on the faster chips... I suppose one could do it with air cooling and just have a very noisy system though.

In a few months' time I will move from a single Athlon 64 3500+ to a dual-core 4400+ (two 3700+ cores) for a total cost of about 40,000yen and about 20 minutes of my time. To me that is an economical upgrade. (I already have a good ATI video card, 2GB of DDR400 memory, 10,000rpm boot and 7200rpm data drives.)

[AlbertSiegel]

I wonder how this will affect Apple's sales? I would imagine many people would rather buy a Mac Mini that can run windows rather than a normal PC at the same price.

I am quite excited about this. I only with I could get a copy of Mac-OS fr x86 to try it out now. I hate to need to wait.

Do any of you plan to wait for the Apple Intel boxes?

[FG Lurker]

Will Apple use LaGrande to lock down OS X?
arstechnica.com, June 14, 2005

According to VUNET, Gartner just released a report suggesting that Apple may use Intel's LaGrande to lock OS X to Apple hardware. Since the Apple-Intel announcement, I thought that this was a no-brainer if Apple is serious about keeping OS X off of commodity PCs. But it's not yet clear that Apple intends to do this.

[...]

So, will Apple use LaGrande to tie OS X to the Macintosh? That depends on one whether or not Apple is really serious about locking OS X to Apple machines alone. And the answer to that question depends on how Apple envisions "the Macintosh" as a platform in the post-PC, post-PowerPC era. [...]

(Full Story)

Another interesting Ars article. Worth the read, in my opinion.

[mr. sparkle]

My contract at Apple is now officially over....

But I'm gonna get my buddy to get me a discount on a 2.7 Dual G4, 4 GB RAM and a 23" flat screen. With the discount, I'm hoping to get in under $4 large.

I'm trying to hold out for one more PHAT speed bump, as that didn't happen at WWDC. I'd like to see a Quad 3.0 G4 before putting the chip on ice. Who knows what's gonna happen, though.

I'm kinda glad the Apple ride is over, but I'm gonna miss that phat paycheck.

Maybe I'll come to see ya if the blast furnace has not begun yet.

[tonikoro]

buddy to get me a discount on a 2.7 Dual G4, 4 GB RAM and a 23" flat screen.

Don't you mean 2.7 dual G5? -As currently there is no 2.7 G4 in the apple line up in desktops nor PBooks?

I think there are two questions that have seemed a bit vague since the word on a Pentium powered Mac has dropped.

-One, where does this leave classic support (even though there is only one app I use in classic, it's still vital as fuck to me)?

-Where is the 64bit support going to be in an Intel based Mac, as we have yet to really see a 64Bit Pentium where AMD already had them beat?

I'm going to run with the horses and see how this pentium/OSX thing plays out, but I'm gonna sit tight on my G5 and G4-17" for the next 3 years not giving a shit.