How long before Apple goes bye bye... if ever?

[mwilcko]

After drastic pc price drops and benchmarks that show the the g4 is much much slower than a P3, how long will it be before Apple goes away?

If you open the Sunday paper you will see adds from Staples, Office Max, etc.. for full pc's(Celeron 700) with monitor, printer, etc... for $499 or less, without an ISP rebate!! Obviously for users of this forum, this is no powerful system but it gets teh job done for the average home user and competes directly with the Imac for $899 and up... Hmmmm. $400 more and no printer, good luck apple!

On the high end market Apple has always done well with graphic designers... but how long with this last with the price differences and graphic magazines showing real benchmarks... A computer graphics magazine did a test between Dual G4 500's and a single P3-933... sure on very select photoshop test the mac was faster, BUT on other tests(3d I believe, the fpu is the real test) the single P3 was 250% or more faster!!!!!!!!!

Hmm I can build a high end pc for less than a grand that will whip Apples top of the line G4.

While I think Apple has made some nice products and done a good job marketing, but can they compete long term?? Sure graphic designers like them, but when management sees the price difference, they will may end up with PC's when upgrade time rolls around.

This is just my personal opinion, but what do you think? Please reply!

 

[xtreme2k]

A Majority of people who buys apple doesnt really care about performance. They care about the look of their computers more than anything. They think apples are more easier to use. Therefore Apple will prolly not die. They have their niche of market.

 

[BuddyHolly]

Just saw an article saying that Apple was going to all lcd screens and away from crt's. That could be a make or break move for them..

 

[Shmorq]

I think that's the main reason why I haven't gone with Apple. Not too many choices are available to the end user. But I guess very few people, other than here, are very picky about what goes into their systems.

 

[KrispyKremer]

Wondered this myself. They did just open their first retail store, with plans to open about 25 more across the US (sorry, no link). I was an avid Amiga fan/user/supporter back in 87-91 and didn't understand why it didn't take off. Oh right, their marketing was horrible. But the technology of the machine was the best at the time, proving that the best technology does not always win *cough* Windows *cough*.

Musicians and Video Producers seem to prefer the Mac, generally. Supposedly Intel wants to offer a 2gig Pentium 4 machine (complete) for under a grand by the end of the year. How will Mac compete? Certainly not on price.

This is pure speculation/my opinion here, but I get the feeling that when Microsoft infused Apple with 250 million awhile back, he (Billie Boy) was granted the rights to use OS X technology interface designs without fear of being sued by Apple. Will be interesting to see how familiar OS X and Windows XP are.

 

[fkloster]

Heck, Apple computers trounce Intel & AMD in 'clock for clock' performance, doesn't that mean they're better?

 

[Daniel]

I was wondering that same thing about the lcd screens, it will have to jack prices up considerably I would think.

 

[KrispyKremer]

fkloster, what exactly do you mean by better? You're looking at one factor in this. Apple is such a small piece of the pie when it comes to the computer/tech industry, but enough to keep them in business. For the time being, anyway.
They have just enough support with enough software out there for some people to find it worth buying one.

Even though many complain about the Windows OS, it has more software available and this wider selection makes it more attractive. Whether people like it or not, it's the "standard".

Schmorq sums it up nicely. It's about chioce. Combined with the fact prices are consistently cheaper on the PC side doesn't make it easy for Apple.

I'm not bashing Apple. But it doesn't look good for them. The company comes across to me as just hanging on. The advancements in the technology don't seem to happen as fast with Apple, but with Nvidia and ATI releasing video cards for Apple's now, it doesn't hurt.

 

[huggiebear]

Macintosh is predominant in the graphics business and has over 50% of the 'electronic musician' business, so they probably aren't going bye bye anytime soon. Mac OS X is built on a BSD unix core, which will only fortify their position by enhancing high end video graphics processing (1:1 scalable processing power that M$ doesn't have).

IMHO, anybody who buys a Mac for to look cool in their living room is wasting their money. Apple is just a niche player in audio and graphics.

 

[huggiebear]

Oh yeah, kudos to Apple for using a standard PC SVGA connector instead of that proprietary stuff. Also the G4 733mhz case is one of the best design cases out there.

 

[kcbass]

Don't mean to offend anyone, but I think as far as apple goes, you can use a quote from the simpsons "It's a policy that guarantees a steady mix of the rich and the ignorant." I built my rig for a little over a grand, and I guarantee that it whips any G4 into applesauce

 

[benjamit]

cost is probably not a factor for most apple users
so i would like apple to include some of the better components in there lower level models and not worry about how much they're going to charge the user
they don't seem to worry about what price they are going to charge anyways
i have a new mac in my home that has a 5400 drive, the system complete was 1500
the imac would do better with a 7200 drive for little more money
as it is now the 5400 drive is as loud as the 7200 drives in my pc

 

[speedyray]

Apple is not going to die any time soon.

Even in its darkest days Apple was able to stay alive because it has a following. People love their Macs. You pay more for them because they are Mac and you don't think twice about it.

However, if you spec a machine from DELL with the fastest possible processor and all the same features down to the firewire and Ultra SCSI HD they cost within a 100 bucks of the same price and the DELL cannot burn DVDs. DELL does have the advantage with buss speeds and RAM speeds but an upcomming motherboard revision by Apple should fix that.

Mac OS X will solidify Apple's position as it allows for 32 processors to be used in the machine. With cheaper G4 and eventually G5 it seems as though Apple is preapering a quad processor machine for this fall or winter and they could just keep adding processors. At WWDC they stressed multithreading everything as multiproccessing was of highest priority. It don't make much sense to have all those processors if they have nothing to do.

As for the LCD thing, they are not bothering to offer a CRT themselves anymore but you can buy anything you want and put on them. Oh, and they just dropped the price on all the LCDs as well.

Mac OS X Server 2 was realsed yesterday as well, finally giving the Mac community a true server for the first time ever. Unlike Mac OS X Server 1 this one has documentation which was the single biggest flaw in the original server.

The retail stores are a plus as well.

Software is plentiful if you look around. OS X being a UNIX base is causing hundreds of applications to come to Mac that previously would not have.

All in all I think you guys will be on death watch for ever. Just like those predicting the demise in 97 are still on death watch.

 

[Spook]

I once refered to owning a MAC to being gay.....

It's not the most popular thing... but some people go that way....

 

[benjamit]

DELL does have the advantage with buss speeds and RAM speeds but an upcomming motherboard revision by Apple should fix that.


will apple charge more money than it is now for the new motherboard revision or will the prices be the same?

 

[Eug]

Apple isn't going to be selling CRTs anymore, but that doesn't mean people are forced to buy LCDs. Most Mac owners I know buy a Mac with a different CRT anyway.

I like the look of some of the Macs - I wished PCs looked as nice, because in general they look like crap. However, as others have posted this is not the primary reason people buy Macs. A big reason is that they have a big following by those into multimedia applications.

Gaming sucks, and even with the Geforce3, it ain't that great, but that's changing.

OS X is cool.

I'm a PCer, but I wish I had both a Mac and a PC.

 

[benjamit]

you can have both
just put it on a credit card

 

[formulav8]

<< Heck, Apple computers trounce Intel &amp; AMD in 'clock for clock' performance, doesn't that mean their better? >>




Talking out of your butt again?

 

[NateSLC]

<< I once refered to owning a MAC to being gay..... >>


Funny, I had to practically rip my boyfriend's 66Mhz mac away from him to replace it with a 600Mhz Duron.

 

[jeffrey]

Apple has:
Total Cash (mrq) $4.14B

They have over $4 billion in cash on their balance sheet and have returned to profitability. They aren't going to die soon.

 

[fkloster]

<< Talking out of your butt again? >>



Ummm, excuse me? Is there something about my factual and explicit statement that you did not comprehend? Let me spell it out for you formula...if you take an Intel/AMD cpu and clock it down to 733 and slap in photoshop or any other 'graphics professional' software for that matter and compare it with benchmarks to a 733 G4, the Intel/AMD solution would get bludgeoned. Get it? Motorola has got those G4's tweeked big time for 3d rendering and all that crap about clock for clock gets thrown out the window when were talking about apple ay? Be consistant...if you feel the need to compare stuff clock for clock, include macs then too. Clock for clock comparisons are not a valid measurement in todays hardware arena. If they were, everyone would be buying Macs.

 

[GTaudiophile]

OSX is to the Mac what Win95 was to the PC. I can say that OSX has far fewer bugs and is much more stable than Win95 could have ever dreamed of being. Not to mention, it is far more slick than any M$ OS I've seen.

I don't think Apple is going anywhere anytime soon. I hope they don't go anywhere, because the US needs more companies like Apple that have an eye for awesome Industrial Design! Besides, I think Apple's new G5 CPUs, clocking at or above 1Ghz, will give their boxes some much-needed wind.

I haven't considered buying a new Mac in years, but the new iBook gives me pause. I think it would make a great, first laptop.

 

[smp]

Macs are for yuppies. This is me with a Mac --->

&quot;Let's go to starbucks!!! We can take my new beetle.&quot;

No seriously. I work with both. I still like PC's more. I am kind of excited about OSx but I'm not that excited. The reason that designers prefer macs is because they don't know sh!t about computers. I know, I go to school with about a million of em. It's hegemony &quot;macs are better for graphics!&quot;.... no not really, but they are easier to set up if you're a ditsy art school student..
Just tellin it like it is.. straight out of art school.. glad to be on a PC.

 

[formulav8]

<<

<< Talking out of your butt again? >>



Ummm, excuse me? Is there something about my factual and explicit statement that you did not comprehend? Let me spell it out for you formula...if you take an Intel/AMD cpu and clock it down to 733 and slap in photoshop or any other 'graphics professional' software for that matter and compare it with benchmarks to a 733 G4, the Intel/AMD solution would get bludgeoned. Get it? Motorola has got those G4's tweeked big time for 3d rendering and all that crap about clock for clock gets thrown out the window when were talking about apple ay? Be consistant...if you feel the need to compare stuff clock for clock, include macs then too. Clock for clock comparisons are not a valid measurement in todays hardware arena. If they were, everyone would be buying Macs. >>




Excuse me? Theres nothing wrong with clock for clock. But you can't take a bench from photoshop and say that its the best clock for clock. One bench isn't anything. The platforms runs on completely different os's ect. With a Intel/Amd set you can run clock for clock, because the OS and everything is the same. Mac/Intel is completely different. Amd/Intel = x87 so you can run them with the same benches and get a conclusion. You are just upset because you need your P4 @ 1.7 just to beat a Pee3. If the P4 wasn't so crappy compared to the Pee3/Athlon you wouldn't have a problem with clock for clock. Even with the P4 at 2.2 and the Athlon at 1.5 the P4 still get owned in most benches(Not just one). But since it is so weak without the baby bottle(SSE2) you feel that a clock for clock isn't right. Intels own fault for making the FPU so weak. Your own fault for buying it.

Also I would like to know why clock for clock isn't valid in todays hardware?

I can't believe i'm in a arguement over something so stupid anyways. See Ya.



Jason

 

[jhu]

Heck, Apple computers trounce Intel &amp; AMD in 'clock for clock' performance, doesn't that mean their better?

yes. also it's &quot;they're&quot; not &quot;their&quot;