JPF Home Page Forums Musician Gear and Techniques General Technical Forum THE Ultimate Music Computer!

Apple announced the new G5 computer. http://www.apple.com

Now, anyone that argues Macs are overpriced compared to a PC has no feet to stand on. The new machine is $2,999. A comparable PC would cost a little over $4,000. And with over 6,000 applications now available for OSX, the "A PC has more software choices is mute too."

If you don't like Macs. No Biggie. But it is fun to drool over the new technology.

Jody

One would probably save more money on the mac if they built it themselves...

------------------
www.mp3.com/paulradelat

OK, NOW I'm drooling.

The G5s start at $1999. Must save my money...must save my money...must save my money...




------------------
Larry
www.audibleresponse.com

The G5 looks like a definite improvement over the G4 - a completely different processor, for one thing; probably faster and cooler-running. They say the fans are less noisy.

------------------
Later,

Pat

I don't think the G5s have fans, do they? I don't have one in my iMac. It's convection cooling.

The DP 2Gz G5 is reported to have 9 fans! Also said to be somwhere around 12 db quiter then current G4's.

Rob

Consider that you get the full benefit of 64 bits only from applications that have been written and compiled to take advantage of that.

Just how fast is this thing when running 32-bit applications?

got the G5 ad in the mail yesterday. They do have fans but they run at very low speeds because the architecture has been designed with cool areas and the heat is distributed in such a way that only low speed fans are needed which make it quieter. The iMacs are the ones with no fans.

JeanB

Here is the link to the benchmark results:

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

[This message has been edited by JeanB (edited 06-26-2003).]

Here's an excerpt from an article I read:

Jobs went on to tout the G5 Power Mac's performance against Dell. The dual 3.0GHz Xeon (533MHz Bus, 512MB RAM) from Dell costs $4000 and isn't as fast, according to Apple. SPEC int test that the dual-2GHz G5 outpaces, the 3GHz P4, and 3Ghz Xeon. Using the GCC 3.3 compiler, VeriTest independent test lab showed that the G5 is 10$ slower on integer, but 21% faster on FPU. The dual G5 bested the P4 and dual Xeon. It is 41% faster on FPU than the dual-Xeon and 3% faster on integer (via SPEC tests). Both single and dual processor tests were shown. Adobe said that Photoshop will be updated when these machines are released.

Finally, Phil Schiller showed bakeoff between the computers. Results indicated the G5 is 2.1x faster than the 3GHz PC. The G5 won in 3D rendering, using Mathematica 5. "The competition isn't PCs anymore. It's high-end Unix workstations, and the G5 is faster than them too." Schiller demo'd Emagic audio software where 1000 simultaneous voices can be played with 24-bit (high) quality stereo. He showed 100 EQs, 8 bands each (with stereo) -- the G5 handles it with only 25% usage.

Jobs then reported that the IBM processor roadmap calls for 3GHz G5 machines in under a year.



------------------
Later,

Pat

Apparently there is no speed hit for 32 bit applications. But this processor is gear for 64 bit stuff. Panther will likely take advantage of that before years end. As well, Logic audio - my main application will already be in with a sub-release that is likely to take advantage too. So will photoshop. I'm in fat cat heaven.

I did actually plunk down for the 2ghz the day they were announced. Can't be a 30 day trial. I'm sure if there is something that doesn't work in that time, then I'll know it.

Jody

Anybody hear about Pong for a Commodore 64 ?

Bob

Hey Bob, I think we have one of those in the back with the Mac Classics and the 5.25" floppy drives.
What am I bid? 25? 50? maybe even a whole dollar?

So what is the "Ultimate" now a few years later?

Brian

Well, in the PC world it's probably the dual-core processors like the Pentium D and also the Xeon quad-cores.

I've put an AMD3000+ type motherboard into my old case and am now trying out Novell Suse Linux Enterprise 10 on it. I don't think there are any good recording applications for Linux yet, but it behooves me to get familiar with this OS for general use I believe. Especially if Windows Vista turns out to be as restrictive as people on the Internets are saying.

At this date I'd say the Mac Pro with dual dual cores. But in a few weeks that will change when the dual quad cores come out (that's what I'm waiting on for my next purchase.

Jody

What type of restrictions are they talking about Patrick? Music stuff or something else?

Brian

Music and video. I made another post with this link:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt

MS will be incorporating more Digital Rights Management which will kind of cripple the system for certain functions that we geeks love.

We're buying a Mac for the kids in the near future (fingers crossed) but it won't be the G5.


Figuring it's time to make the switch.

Linda

Well, the G5 is already gone. They're now onto the Mac Pro.

Jody

G5s are nice, But overpriced.

Apple doesn't really market for the average musician who spends more money than all the media and music tekheads. I have never understood this concept. They definitely have superior equipment, but really have an attitude problem with their R&D and marketing. As time goes on, they are getting closer and closer to redundant, and obsolete. That's the real news.

Nothing wrong with that. And nothing wrong with having a computer that is faster.

I am sure you all know that the scientific formula used to process the data in a PC and Apple are entirely different.

But PCs have come farther more recently in computer speed of processing than Apple. Apple is not the glamour queen of processing like it was a few years ago. Especially to the largest market segment that isn't working in the Advertising world or Music Tekhead world.

Obviously, I am not a tek head, but I do understand the differences in the processing of data between the two competitors.

Nothing has really changed for most people. I understand that you all are excited about this. That's great!

But the rest of the world spending $1500 on their home recording studio didn't notice, and it makes no difference to them at all.

PCs are much faster than they used to be. Apples and PC software are now compatible. Most people do understand that. That will not hurt PC sales.

Apple continues to unmarket themselves out of the largest market segment. Superior technology, maybe. For sure, they have a captive audience. But it could be shrinking. That is the news boys!

Their market share is low and will likely shrink more. PCs had the catching up to do as far as speed goes. They have made more progress than Apple has from what I know from my twp professional Apple using engineer best friends. This is why Jobs and company try to introduce products that are not PCs. They want to make money and expand there market elsewhere. Good for them! Competition is a great thing!

But , they are still snooty as far as most consumers are concerned. Once you investigate the price differential, a little bit of PCU or processing speed doesn't mean anything to the guy who isn't running 15 applications on the final master.

Blessings,


Johnboy

John, how about you prove your points with some facts? Like what is this scientific formula you refer to?

For marketshare I would ask you to name one manufacturer who gained more ground last year?

For price I would ask you to price out a current Mac (Macbook, Macbook Pro, Mac Mini, iMac, Mac Pro) to a similar PC (store brand like Dell, HP, Sony, etc) and prove with specs and price?

You are correct that Apple doesn't market to "average". They market to people that like to think different. I don't think Apple is going away any time soon, especially since they just posted a profit of $1 billion last year. That doesn't sound like a struggling company to me.

Please enlighten me with facts.

Jody

Howdy!

Jodi, I am not a Tek, so I can't give you facts about tek. If you read my statements closer, then you wouldn't have asked me for specs.

Yes, there were different formulas used to calculate the flow of data for Apples and PCS. The guys that charted the data flow for PCs were more scientific than practical, thus PCs were slower.

Apple designed their data flow with a more practical application for media. It was quicker. Surely you can accept that statement without a flow chart and speech. So far as I know, these were facts presented to me by a degreed audio engineer (best friend)with 30 years in the business. This made sense to me, and I didn't get upset or defensive.

I am an amateur, I know nothing compared to you.

Luckily, my best friend is an Audio engineer and Apple and Pro Tools fanatic who clues me in to what the differences were back then, and how they have changed.

Apple is still quicker and more well suited for media, but PCS have caught up considerably, they had the room to improve. I can call him and ask him to send me the articles and books he has read, but I sense you wouldn't appreciate that. My friend has never lied to me, saved my life a couple of times, and designs and builds recording studios for media.

Can't get specific about what the speed increase for PCs was, but it has happened.

Unless their was a major change in the Apple that I am not aware of, and that is certainly possible, but unlikely, then PCs have moved closer in speed of calculating data. That's the point. I groove on all the numbers the other guy posted about the tests, but those are a bit like reading product reviews performed by dudes posing as neutral consumers, when they are really trying to sell Apples.

You sound more angry than rational. Your title of the post is all inclusive and one dimensional. Your call out sounds a bit junior high, forgive me, I don't mean to offend you, but you need a dose of humbleness.

I gave you the other side. It doesn't matter to me whether you can accept it or not. But you sound like your trying to tell me that a Rolls is a better car than a Toyota. Yes and No Dude.

My understanding about the scientific differences runs shallow , but my understanding of the theory is good enough to be able to detect flag waving. Go ahead, wave, it's your right.

My surfacey understanding is only as deep as my two friends experience, and they are well into their 40's and 60's.

When you call someone out, and you did, try to give them the benefit of the doubt, and don't ask them to do something they told you they couldn't. You might just be sorry some day.

To say that an Apple is the best, is a yes and no subject. Apples don't sound better that's for sure, its a digital signal.

The stuff about market share is expert future speculation on my part. I market television advertising nationally for a living and I understand the marketing of media products as well as anyone.

Apples recent ads are deceptive just like your sweeping generalization. That's the point. They attempt to make PCs look obsolete. They are wonderful devices that serve the majority of people very well. Apple has a small captive share that will always be loyal, and for good reasons.

Maybe my friend knows more than you?

Hope you feel better Dak, you would be much happier if you had compassion and empathy for other people. I remember you my friend. Its good to be able to put a face with that ugly attitude.

Blessings,


Johnboy

John,

Relax. Apparently you've missed some things recently.

1. This thread and it's title is over 3 years old. A lot has changed since then. Brian (JPF's founder) bumped the thread up, not me. At that time 3 years ago - it was true. Brian's question when he bumped it up was what the current state of "ultimate" computers for music is now. Patrick Bryant gave a nice post about the current PC's and I in turn gave my response for current Mac's. Patrick, the PC guy, also provided some information about Window's Vista that isn't very rosey for people who like to work in Audio and Video on PC's. I didn't do that.

2. I asked you for a cost comparison because your statement "G5s are nice, but overpriced" is no longer valid. If you compare PC's and Mac's side by side, feature for feature. It is no longer true that Mac's are over priced - often they are about the same or in some cases cheaper than equally equiped PC's. Can someone build a PC for less than a Mac, yes, but it won't perform at the same level.

3. On the "Tek" thing: Apples run Intel processors now and have been for a year, just like PC's do. Something you may have missed. So the whole speed thing that you're debating is unnecessary. I don't know why you're attacking me over that. I didn't change it, I only asked you to explain it.

4. I agree, you are speculating that Apple's market share is going to go down. However, you haven't provided any data to back that up - just opinion. From the news stories and reports I've been reading it's quite the opposite that has been happening. Here's a link to their current financial statement: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/17results.html Please show me your data that disproves it and I will gladly hang my head in shame.

I never said people shouldn't buy PC's. I'm not being illogical when I ask someone to back up their statements/arguments with facts. All I was asking for was hard proof to the statements you were making. That's all. Please inform me on how I'm being deceptive, so I can learn not to do that. Also, please give me a specific example where I'm being negative and ugly (or are you refering to Dak?). Thanks John, no ill will.

Jody

Hey Johnboy

Don't be so sensitive Buddy---There was NOTHING personal as I see it---just a vigorous defense of beliefs...your post challenged what some people here think, and they challenged you to back up what you said more factually... none of this is life or death---mostly just opinion...take a deep breath...

I don't know what Dak said, but I DO know that DAK and Jody offer some of the best advice on these boards...just agree to disagree if you choose---don't make it personal...I'm sure you're a really nice man.

Herbie

Johnboy,

Jody is a longtime user of Logic, which is owned by and runs only on Macs. He likes it and he likes Macs.

Anyway, the newest-generation Macs have Intel processors, just like most Windows machines, so there isn't all that much difference between the two as far as how the processing works, anymore.

The Mac is an integrated system that uses mostly Apple parts, while the Windows PC is more of an open system. But they're both tools to do a job. Not even apples and oranges, more like navel oranges and oranges.

I hope we can discuss our differences of opinion calmly around here.

Johnboy, I'm doing great, thank you. In reality I normally have a wonderful attitude, with lots of empathy, and compassion, for those who deserve it.
Remember, you're the one that got defensive and nasty over an old thread and an older post. It's obvious from this thread, and your reaction, that you are the one who cannot even look at another's viewpoint let alone accept it. As Jody mentioned, and you apparently missed, is the age of this thread.
Again you get all bunched up over an old thread. If your panties are still bunched over that minor incident from some time ago, you have real issues that need to be addressed before you kill yourself. You really should back away from the computer, take deep breaths, slowly, slowly inhaling and exhaling while moving your brain energy to a mellower place and willing your heartbeat to slow. Once your heart rate is down and you're calm and rational, come back and re-read the post. I think you'll find the thread really wasn't worth getting in a snit over.


Not that it interests you, but I too feel Mac people are overly protective of their systems. It happens to be one's choice. I happen to prefer Linux as an OS, realizing the current audio limitations. For recording I dual boot to a Windows OS.
So, you see, sometimes even we can agree.

How about that TRS-80, man that's a computer!

Naw, the true ultimate 1981 computer was the Commodore BIC-20 Disposable computer! The computer that you could just throw away! Remember the ads with John McEnroe? Where he would yell,"Syntax error?! That line was on the ball!" Then he would bat it over the wall with his tennis racquet. But he could then pull out another one, they came 10 to a package. Ah, good days!

Patrick,

What in the hell are you talking about? Was that a real product?

Brian

I believe he was being a little tongue-in-cheek. There was a Commodore VIC-20.

Actually, the Sinclair was pretty close to a disposable computer, if you happen to remember them.

You must be tired Brian,

Remember the Commodore VIC20? That and the disposable BIC lighters. I bet you could really burn up the intranets with that BIC20.

Gibsons suck, Fenders rule.

Yes, the BIC-20! Just a little parody I made up back in the day. John McEnroe was a pitchman for BIC razors at one time so it was a logical progression.

Just to have something recent back OT....;)

The new iMacs, which have dual core Intel CPUs start at only $999. Upgrade the memory, get a 2nd hard disk, and you're set to go, and they come with their own monitor.

Finally, the Mac laptops are also now competitive in performance to the PC laptops. The old G4 laptops were pretty dismal in performance compared to a similarly-priced PC. However, the new MacBooks are also dual-core Intel chips and I've been hearing about some pretty awesome performance from them.

...and you can run Windows XP OR Mac OS X on the new Macs. You just set up a separate partition for each operating system.

Top of the line Mac right now is the dual processor, dual core 3Ghz MacPro. It's like having four processers. The rumor mill says that quad-core processors will be hitting the market by summer. That will be equivalent to having 8 processors.

I don't know that a similarly-equiped PC is much (if any) cheaper than a new Mac these days. (Yaa!)

I've recently purchased some high-end HP rack-mount servers for my day-job company. They really do push the envelope: 4 dual-core processors, 32GB of RAM (yes that's Gigabytes) and SAN storage (in the multiple Terabyte range). Of course, these cost about $35K each configured with Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition, a support plan, backup software licenses, etc, etc.

There are now also some nicely configured PC-based audio workstations at more real-world prices. I really don't think a budget PC (<$700) is comparable to either audio workstations built for that purpose or to a Mac, which is pretty much designed from the ground up for audio and video performance.

For about $1500 with either a Mac or a PC, you can get a computer completely set up to do some amazing things nowdays. That's certainly good news.

Fenders rule but Gibsons rule as well.

Imagine that!

Well I find the Fenders are more of a creative machine, but the Gibson has a faster processor.