• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So I am talking to these Mac dudes

I

imported_Lucifer

Diamond Member
About the whole Apple going Intel thing. There were 4 guys. 3 of them said they are happy that Apple is going Intel, and that Apple made a great decision.

The other dude said: I feel betrayed. I'm never buying another Mac again. 🙁🙁🙁

LOLOLOL
 
I work in a Mac based publications office and when the news came out about Intel CPU's many of them were fine with it as long as they could still use the MacOS.

A few seemed really bummed. Betrayed if you will. But lately they've been coming around saying that it's really Microsoft that they don't like and don't mind Intel so much. Of course, they are using MS Office, Entourage, and Outlook on their Mac, but that's okay. 😕
 
Originally posted by: misle
I work in a Mac based publications office and when the news came out about Intel CPU's many of them were fine with it as long as they could still use the MacOS.

A few seemed really bummed. Betrayed if you will. But lately they've been coming around saying that it's really Microsoft that they don't like and don't mind Intel so much. Of course, they are using MS Office, Entourage, and Outlook on their Mac, but that's okay. 😕
Click to expand...

Some Mac fans are overboard, but most of them are pretty normal. BTW, Entourage = Outlook on Mac.
 
I just had an Apple rep call about a Powerbook. I didn't know we had powerbooks here.

</totally irrelevant but still somehow relevant comment>
 
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
I just had an Apple rep call about a Powerbook. I didn't know we had powerbooks here.

</totally irrelevant but still somehow relevant comment>
Click to expand...

I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance... no I didn't, Geiko sucks.

</totally irrelevant but still somehow... no, it's still pretty much totally irrelevant>
 
Originally posted by: SLCentral
Originally posted by: misle
I work in a Mac based publications office and when the news came out about Intel CPU's many of them were fine with it as long as they could still use the MacOS.

A few seemed really bummed. Betrayed if you will. But lately they've been coming around saying that it's really Microsoft that they don't like and don't mind Intel so much. Of course, they are using MS Office, Entourage, and Outlook on their Mac, but that's okay. 😕
Click to expand...

Some Mac fans are overboard, but most of them are pretty normal. BTW, Entourage = Outlook on Mac.
Click to expand...

I have Entourage on my Powermac. Can't seem to figure out how to use it. 😛
 
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: GML3G0
Originally posted by: Citrix
what do MAC's use now for a proc?

<<not a mac user and havent touched one since 1985 in high school.
Click to expand...

IBM's PowerPC G4 and G5.
Click to expand...

The G4 processor is not an IBM processr. The G4 is Motorola. The G5 is an IBM processor.
Click to expand...

M68K was Motorola, G1 (AKA PPC601, 602, 603) were IBM, G2 (AKA 604, 604e) was Moto, G3 was Moto, G4 Moto, G5 is IBM, they're moving to Intel to replace the G4, and in the fairly near future, I would not be surprised to see x86-64 AMD's replace the G5's.
 
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: GML3G0
Originally posted by: Citrix
what do MAC's use now for a proc?

<<not a mac user and havent touched one since 1985 in high school.
Click to expand...

IBM's PowerPC G4 and G5.
Click to expand...

The G4 processor is not an IBM processr. The G4 is Motorola. The G5 is an IBM processor.
Click to expand...


M68K was Motorola, G1 (AKA PPC601, 602, 603) were IBM, G2 (AKA 604, 604e) was Moto, G3 was Moto, G4 Moto, G5 is IBM, they're moving to Intel to replace the G4, and in the fairly near future, I would not be surprised to see x86-64 AMD's replace the G5's.
Click to expand...

Uh, the Intel processors are replacing the G5's too. They are replacing the G4's in the Mac mini's, Powerbooks, etc first. Then they will be replacing the G5 with Intel processors later on in Late '06 or early '07 I believe.

I wish Apple chose AMD. 🙁
 
I think Apple made the right choice. I'm more of an AMD fan myself, but I think they made a smart business decision because:

No shortage or delays in manufacturing
A low-power, cooler chip for quietness
The ability to justify their high prices

Although, with the Pentium M as is, they are missing out on 64-bit processing. A mobile Sempron or Turion could fill that gap.
 
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: GML3G0
Originally posted by: Citrix
what do MAC's use now for a proc?

<<not a mac user and havent touched one since 1985 in high school.
Click to expand...

IBM's PowerPC G4 and G5.
Click to expand...

The G4 processor is not an IBM processr. The G4 is Motorola. The G5 is an IBM processor.
Click to expand...


M68K was Motorola, G1 (AKA PPC601, 602, 603) were IBM, G2 (AKA 604, 604e) was Moto, G3 was Moto, G4 Moto, G5 is IBM, they're moving to Intel to replace the G4, and in the fairly near future, I would not be surprised to see x86-64 AMD's replace the G5's.
Click to expand...

Uh, the Intel processors are replacing the G5's too. They are replacing the G4's in the Mac mini's, Powerbooks, etc first. Then they will be replacing the G5 with Intel processors later on in Late '06 or early '07 I believe.

I wish Apple chose AMD. 🙁
Click to expand...

They won't scale back their 64bit CPUs to 32bit. The reason they're not doing it NOW is because Intel has no viable, large-production 64bit platform - and I honestly doubt they'll have one in 06 or 07, either. That leaves one place to go.
 
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: GML3G0
Originally posted by: Citrix
what do MAC's use now for a proc?

<<not a mac user and havent touched one since 1985 in high school.
Click to expand...

IBM's PowerPC G4 and G5.
Click to expand...

The G4 processor is not an IBM processr. The G4 is Motorola. The G5 is an IBM processor.
Click to expand...


M68K was Motorola, G1 (AKA PPC601, 602, 603) were IBM, G2 (AKA 604, 604e) was Moto, G3 was Moto, G4 Moto, G5 is IBM, they're moving to Intel to replace the G4, and in the fairly near future, I would not be surprised to see x86-64 AMD's replace the G5's.
Click to expand...

Uh, the Intel processors are replacing the G5's too. They are replacing the G4's in the Mac mini's, Powerbooks, etc first. Then they will be replacing the G5 with Intel processors later on in Late '06 or early '07 I believe.

I wish Apple chose AMD. 🙁
Click to expand...

They won't scale back their 64bit CPUs to 32bit. The reason they're not doing it NOW is because Intel has no viable, large-production 64bit platform - and I honestly doubt they'll have one in 06 or 07, either. That leaves one place to go.
Click to expand...

It was said AMD was out of the picture..

If Apple kept the G5's but replaced the G4 processor with Intel processors (in the lowend macs) it wouldnt make sense because the lowend Macs would be faster than the G5's. I doubt Apple will be using AMD in the future.

Makes absolutely no sense
 
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Originally posted by: Lucifer
Originally posted by: GML3G0
Originally posted by: Citrix
what do MAC's use now for a proc?

<<not a mac user and havent touched one since 1985 in high school.
Click to expand...

IBM's PowerPC G4 and G5.
Click to expand...

The G4 processor is not an IBM processr. The G4 is Motorola. The G5 is an IBM processor.
Click to expand...


M68K was Motorola, G1 (AKA PPC601, 602, 603) were IBM, G2 (AKA 604, 604e) was Moto, G3 was Moto, G4 Moto, G5 is IBM, they're moving to Intel to replace the G4, and in the fairly near future, I would not be surprised to see x86-64 AMD's replace the G5's.
Click to expand...

Uh, the Intel processors are replacing the G5's too. They are replacing the G4's in the Mac mini's, Powerbooks, etc first. Then they will be replacing the G5 with Intel processors later on in Late '06 or early '07 I believe.

I wish Apple chose AMD. 🙁
Click to expand...

They won't scale back their 64bit CPUs to 32bit. The reason they're not doing it NOW is because Intel has no viable, large-production 64bit platform - and I honestly doubt they'll have one in 06 or 07, either. That leaves one place to go.
Click to expand...

It was said AMD was out of the picture..

If Apple kept the G5's but replaced the G4 processor with Intel processors (in the lowend macs) it wouldnt make sense because the lowend Macs would be faster than the G5's. I doubt Apple will be using AMD in the future.

Makes absolutely no sense
Click to expand...

There are also barely any applications on the Mac that actually take advantage of the 64-bit part of the G5. It is a non-issue, for the most part. The reason you see big gains with AMD64 is because additional registers in the cpu are available when in 64-bit mode. The G5 has no such advantage, and is actually slower in some instances when using 64 bit software. I highly doubt Apple will ever switch to AMD, no matter how bad intel gets. They simply can't fill the demand (albeit small demand) on a concrete time schedule like Intel will be able to.
 
Originally posted by: SLCentral
Originally posted by: misle
I work in a Mac based publications office and when the news came out about Intel CPU's many of them were fine with it as long as they could still use the MacOS.

A few seemed really bummed. Betrayed if you will. But lately they've been coming around saying that it's really Microsoft that they don't like and don't mind Intel so much. Of course, they are using MS Office, Entourage, and Outlook on their Mac, but that's okay. 😕
Click to expand...

Some Mac fans are overboard, but most of them are pretty normal. BTW, Entourage = Outlook on Mac.
Click to expand...

Not quite. Outlook 2001 is a much better program for an office environment, but we have to run it in Classic mode. Entourage 2004 is much more like Outlook Express and isn't that great of a program. I wish they would go ahead and make an OS 10 version of Outlook.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top