Any PC users tempted by new Intel Macs?

[Ben Logan]

I can't afford one with a slot for my UA card, so I'm out of luck. Heck, I couldn't afford a Mac mini right now. But, I do have an older iMac that I use at work, and I'm a fan of the OS. I've also used the iMac for recording, prior to buying a UA card (which prompted my switch to PC).

Any PC users out there tempted to make a switch to one of the new Intel based Macs? They're supposed to double or even triple the speed (I know - relative terms here) of the older PowerMacs.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

AFAIK, nothing I use seriously will harness the extra processors so there's no real point yet.

 

[Dan Duskin]

lol.... no

 

[Trace]

Being that I use both platforms, I can say that right now there is no reason to go and get one of the new IntelMacs yet. For one thing they're not designed for Pro App use just yet. These are the early models and Apple tends to shoot for the Consumer models early and then release the more potent models later.

Right now we still don't have Apps written to work natively on the Intel Procs. There is a conversion program called Rosetta but it isn't efficient enough to be used by Pro Apps like DAW's. Soon Logic and all the apps like Final Cut Pro will be released in a Universal Version that will work on both Intel and PowerPC processors.

In time these machines will be more ready for use as a DAW, but at the moment everything isn't yet in place. With Apple its always best to be a little patient, since its the 2nd Rev. that tends to be the real sweet spot when they make a major change like this. The Quad Core G5 is a nice machine, that I wouldn't mind getting my hands on. Even still the next gen of those machines with the latest Intel Procs will be even more interesting.

I still wish they have gone with AMD instead. in fact the existing Architecture was VERY close to your typical AMD system already, with the exception of the PowerPC instead of an Opteron/Athlon. Everything else was pretty much an AMD system. I realize why they didn't do it and it had to do with Intel being a one stop shop. Since Apple makes other things besides computers and has plans for even more consumer electronic gagdets, intel is a better fit. Intel also provides the chipsets, so Apple can save money and not have to worry about dealing with Nvidia or Via etc. for chipsets. In addition to Intel being able to charge Apple less for everything, which is what really pleases Apple.

Anyway its best to wait a while before trying something like jumping into an IntelMac. They should produce some really interesting products in the future.

TRACE

 

[Paul Woodlock]

....

Any PC users out there tempted to make a switch to one of the new Intel based Macs? They're supposed to double or even triple the speed (I know - relative terms here) of the older PowerMacs.

Nope, not in a million years

Why change all my software from PC to Mac for no reason whatsoever.

I'm getting a dual-dualcore PC next. For some real power

 

[Celsius]

I've been building my own machines for ages, and
I doubt I'll ever buy a brand PC again. The fact that this PC is made by Apple doesn't change anything . At least not for me.
OSX..??
I try spending as little time as possible with the OS.

As it stands now, Im not really tempted no...

 

[Trace]

[quote="Ben Logan":3bkysuff]....

Any PC users out there tempted to make a switch to one of the new Intel based Macs? They're supposed to double or even triple the speed (I know - relative terms here) of the older PowerMacs.

Nope, not in a million years

Why change all my software from PC to Mac for no reason whatsoever.

I'm getting a dual-dualcore PC next. For some real power [/quote:3bkysuff]

Don't be so hasty. For one thing its already clear that people will be able to load Windows on the new IntelMacs, as some already have been working on it.

In addition, the system will be getting better and better over the next few years, as Intel starts to release better tech. But as I wrote in the post above, its way too early to make that kind of move.

TRACE

 

[geekeye]

i'm intriged by them, but defo wont be getting one of the first generation. one of the reasons i bought a motu soundcard and my uad1s was actually to give me the freedom to be able switch from pc to mac without losing too much investment. the only thing i would have to buy again (other than the new comp) would be a sequencer.

 

[Celsius]

It's just another PC.
With OSX running on PC's I bet there will be quite a few happy ex-logic users out there

 

[Trace]

It's just another PC.
With OSX running on PC's I bet there will be quite a few happy ex-logic users out there

Apple's being just another PC, Well that's a bit of an understatement, since design wise they have made some pretty unusual products, which have effected the market in a positive way. There isn't another product as well executed as the iMac yet. Oh there've been some PC's to attempt the same sort of form factor, but not on the same lavel. Now with better processors, i'd expect the insides to meet up the outside of the boxes a lot better. Apple has always been looking for this, but now they have a solid partner in Intel.

I've built many a PC in my time, but nothing has given me as much satisfaction as running my Macs over the years. The OS and the hardware have been rock solid. My last P4 I built was like that too. I was looking to build a new Dual Xeon or Opteron system, when I just called it a day and bought a G5. I just didn't feel like doing all that crap again this time. Really there's nothing easier to deal with in my experience than a solid Mac system. So if one day you can load both WinXP and MacOSX on a nice Dual DualCore machine, that you know is going to be high quality and easy to own, then that's not a bad thing at all.

Some people will always feel more comfortable rolling their own system, but the Apple option is pretty nice too.

TRACE

 

[Celsius]

Apple's being just another PC, Well that's a bit of an understatement, since design wise they have made some pretty unusual products, which have effected the market in a positive way.

What they have done in the past is relevant as to where it stands now.
The fact that they have made some unusual product(A mouse with one button springs to mind) doesn't negate the fact that the Mac is dead and we are now looking at a ....PC .
Apples impact on the market has nothing to do with it either. It's a PC.

There isn't another product as well executed as the iMac yet. Oh there've been some PC's to attempt the same sort of form factor, but not on the same lavel.

That depends who you ask, and despite Apple design and marketing strategies, their market shares have remained miniscule.

Now with better processors, i'd expect the insides to meet up the outside of the boxes a lot better. Apple has always been looking for this, but now they have a solid partner in Intel.

It took them long enough to find it, wouldn't you say?

 

[Henchman]

I will probably upgrade to a new laptop by the end of the year. the kind of laptops I'm interested in are Desktop rep[lacements. Lot's of power.
If apple has a laptop at that point that is close to the price of a pro-laptop (17\" screen, dual internal harddrives.), and is at least as fast as any PC laptop, I would consider it from a compatability point for work. (Audio-Post). And run a dualboot system.

The current offerings don't even come close.

 

[fj]

I usually don't like to jump in on these flame issues but I will put in my 2 cents. I was a PC user for the past 20 years. I switched to Mac two years ago and would never go back. The stability of the system is great, let alone the frills like a fast search engine and the seamless integration of Itunes, Iphoto, etc. If Macs will be able to run Windows in parellel to OSX I will dump the 3 PCs I have and run Gigastudio and Wavelab on the Mac platform.

 

[fv]

Hi,

I don't know why people get so hung up on these things - they're just computers. :roll: :lol:

Seriously, I use both and wouldn't want it any other way. I feel like I have the best of both worlds. With the PC, I have access to some plugins and programs that would otherwise be unavailable to me on a Mac and vice versa. Both systems are ridiculously powerful and I'm doing things that I could only dream of less than 10 years ago.

FV

 

[Trace]

Apple's being just another PC, Well that's a bit of an understatement, since design wise they have made some pretty unusual products, which have effected the market in a positive way.

What they have done in the past is relevant as to where it stands now.
The fact that they have made some unusual product(A mouse with one button springs to mind) doesn't negate the fact that the Mac is dead and we are now looking at a ....PC .
Apples impact on the market has nothing to do with it either. It's a PC.

There isn't another product as well executed as the iMac yet. Oh there've been some PC's to attempt the same sort of form factor, but not on the same lavel.

That depends who you ask, and despite Apple design and marketing strategies, their market shares have remained miniscule.

[quote:1764fdap]
Now with better processors, i'd expect the insides to meet up the outside of the boxes a lot better. Apple has always been looking for this, but now they have a solid partner in Intel.

It took them long enough to find it, wouldn't you say?
[/quote:1764fdap]

You seem to be only interested in a flame war, since most of your comments lack any real insight and only seem aimed at provocation. You seem to have no respect for a company that has survived for 30 years and kicked off the personal computer revolution. A company that put out the 1st GUI based personal computer OS and that one button mouse you cracked on.

Of course its just a PC. That's missing the point. Apple has pushed the industry to change in many ways with regard to appealling to the avg consumer. They've also been strong in the creative fields for a long time. In 1985 They made desktop publishing a reality.

Overall Market share is not the important part of the equation. What matters is whether Apple has been competitive in the areas that matter most to the company and they have.

Apple's been strong in the music arena for a long time and they are still major players and a worthy consideration for building a system.

Now that it may be possible to run both WinXP and MacOSX on the same box natively, this is indeed a very good thing for many people out there who may have wanted to have access to Mac Apps, but not want to have a Mac and WinPC to do it. Now you may actually be able to run both at full power on a single dual boot system. That is a VERY good thing. Intel and Apple working together is a good thing. I think they'll turnout some very compelling products over the next few years.

TRACE

 

[Celsius]

You seem to be only interested in a flame war, since most of your comments lack any real insight and only seem aimed at provocation.

Nope not interrested in any flame war. Just stating facts.
The fact remains: None of Apples previous achievements in technology, design marketing or whatever changes the fact that it is now a PC
Why you find this statement provoking is beyond me.

You seem to have no respect for a company that has survived for 30 years and kicked off the personal computer revolution. A company that put out the 1st GUI based personal computer OS and that one button mouse you cracked on.

What's to respect? It's a company in the business of making money.
Personally I find some of their strategies for doing this bad for the consumer(just like Gates/MS). >They both like to keep their users locked in.
1. Giving Apple full credit for kicking of the personal computer revolution is a historical fallacy.
2. They ripped the GUI from Xerox.
3 Sticking to a 1-button mouse, while the rest of the world moves forward can hardly be called an achievement. (They couldn't even come up with their own name for the damn thing).


If you should find this provoking, please tell why.
The fact that they are still in business does deserve a little 'respect' yes.

Of course its just a PC. That's missing the point.

So we agree on that. It's just a PC.
Am I tempted to buy a PC from Apple? No.

How is it that I am missing the point?

Apple has pushed the industry to change in many ways with regard to appealling to the avg consumer. They've also been strong in the creative fields for a long time. In 1985 They made desktop publishing a reality.

I wasn't aware this thread was about Apple history.
Now who's missing the point?

Overall Market share is not the important part of the equation. What matters is whether Apple has been competitive in the areas that matter most to the company and they have.

Apple's been strong in the music arena for a long time and they are still major players and a worthy consideration for building a system.

More now than before IMO.

Now that it may be possible to run both WinXP and MacOSX on the same box natively, this is indeed a very good thing for many people out there who may have wanted to have access to Mac Apps, but not want to have a Mac and WinPC to do it. Now you may actually be able to run both at full power on a single dual boot system. That is a VERY good thing. Intel and Apple working together is a good thing. I think they'll turnout some very compelling products over the next few years.

TRACE

I agree that it's a good thing.
You really shouldn't let any of this provoke you in anyway.

Let's call it what it is. A PC with an Apple logo built by ASUS or Quanta.
No point in a PC vs. PC debate is there?

 

[fj]

Using a Pentium processor does not make it a PC with an Apple Logo. There's a lot more to a computer than just the processor.

 

[Trace]

You seem to be only interested in a flame war, since most of your comments lack any real insight and only seem aimed at provocation.

Nope not interrested in any flame war. Just stating facts.
The fact remains: None of Apples previous achievements in technology, design marketing or whatever changes the fact that it is now a PC
Why you find this statement provoking is beyond me.

No you're not just stating the facts. You're doing what many PC fans have done over the years, which is fine, just don't try to make it sound like you're being objective.

Right now the move to Intel Procs makes the whole situation much more intersting. I happen to think that Apple and Intel will be a good partnership. I think that this 1st run of IntelMacs should be avoided by any serious Pro users. Wait for the next Gen, since by then they will really have gotten to the more highend stuff and more of the bugs will have been worked out.

Overall there is a lot of tech that needs to catchup to make the whole thing really sing. The lack of PCI-e Audio devices is one thing. The industry will obviously start gearing their products in this direction, but its gonna take time. Until the Pro line of IntelMacs is released I don't expect a lot of movement from the Pro Audio industry. They'll be more patient to see what the end result is and then move in.

We know Digidesign and Magma are already set to pounce with new PCI-e products. The one big mistake that Apple could make is if they totally get rid of FW800 in their Pro line. I don't think this will happen, but it could. RME was having good success with the Fireface 800 and Since FW800 was ubiquitous on the Mac it would seem a very rash thing to do. There are so many FW800 HD systems out there as well. Its definitely going to be interesting.

TRACE

 

[Celsius]

Using a Pentium processor does not make it a PC with an Apple Logo. There's a lot more to a computer than just the processor.

What separates it from a PC?
All they need is the ability to boot from EFI rather than BIOS

 

[Ben Logan]

We're lucky to be living in an age where all this powerful and fun technology is available to the consumer. I use both PC's and Macs. Usuallly what I get are hand me downs from my father in law. Being a school teacher (a job I love), I'm a little light on bread.

The iMacs I've used, which have been much lower in clock speed (first one was a 333 mhz, the second one was a 700 mhz) than the PC's I've owned, have gotten the job done in terms of track count, number of plugins, ease of work flow, and stability, more effectively than the PC's with at least double the clock speeds. Maybe I could have configured the PCs better, I dunno. Just my experience, but my experience has made me a Mac fan. And computers are a big part of the equation in what we do. We spend a lot of our LIVES behind one of these things!

As far as the new intel Macs being PCs (i.e. \"mac is dead\"), I'm not I understand that observation. For me, it's about how the software flows under the OS. Logic on the Mac just flowed so much more smoothly than Logic under Windows. So, if the new intel Macs look and feel like the Motorolla macs, why should the chip manufacturer matter?

Then again, I haven't used one yet. Maybe the intel chips will ruin the feel of OSX. \"Feel\" is important to me. Just as it is when struggling to lay down a groove behind the drums, or what have ya.