I was present at Apple’s WWDC yesterday and witnessed one of the historical moments in Apple’s history, the introduction of their 64-bit platform. Am I impressed? The answer is complicated. I was happy to see Apple moving on and deliver. But I would have expected nothing less from a 4 billion tech company who had the need to catch up with the “other” platform, the 32-bit PC. You all heard by now what’s new in yesterday’s press releases and news coverings. But here is a wrap up of the first day of the conference and a commentary on what Apple really announced yesterday, underneath its surrounding distortion field.
We got there (myself and my friend, DesktopLinux.com’s Jill Ratkevic) quite early so we got through the media registration on time (thankfully they let me in, as they couldn’t find my name on their list, while I was already pre-registered via the Apple PR!!) and then we spoke to a few Apple people around. I waved to Steve Sakoman from a distance (the Newton & the BeBox architect; was at Be/PalmSource before he got back to Apple a few months ago after 13 years) and saw a few well known journalists in the tech area. At around 9:30 AM the gates opened, and they let us into the auditorium, where the keynote would take place.
The Media people were all in the left area of the room, next to the VIPs, and after half an hour everyone in the room was already sit, all 3,500 of us. Lighting was good, air conditioning was also good, and everything was going according to plan. All very well organized.
At 10:00 AM, Steve Jobs got on the stage. That was the second time I was seeing Steve live, but I somehow knew he would be… wearing the the same black t-shirt and jeans as in every other public appearance/event (yeah, for us women, clothing is a matter of discussion :).
So, the keynote kicked in with a roundup of the current achievements of Apple the past few months, the 5 million songs sold via iTunes, the iPod etc. Then, the Panther presentation started and we learned about the updated UFS file system (possibly with journaling support by default), Samba 3, VPN updates, rootless X11 by default included in the OS, faster Preview PDF version, local file encryption, built-in fax capability (showed in every Print dialog) and some font management. Nothing really groundbreaking here, just updates on the OS for things that were really needed and that other OSes already have. A nice update nevertheless.
The cool-stuff-to-look-at would definately be the new Finder, which is really not “new,” but it has being reworked on its usability side and now it includes more options on its root menu. A new “Actions” menu allows you to extend the functionality of the file manager while you now have the ability to add labels to your folders. What not many people have realized though, when Steve was doing the Finder search demo, is the kind of search that was performed. BeOS users would absolutely recognize the pattern of “spitting out” results in the search window, one by one. The new file system is obviously indexed by default and what remains to be seen is if Live Queries are also included. Live Queries is, in fact, the only feature that BeOS’ BFS still has over other fs implementations, as it requires kernel support. XFS has this feature, but the Linux kernel does not embrace it, and even worse, there are no Linux apps to actually support these specific XFS features.
So, what is “Live Queries” you ask? Well, let’s say that you have two Finder windows open, and you search on a large directory (let’s say, /Users/Eugenia/files/) for all files that start with the word “tap” on them. The search Finder window will get you the results. Now, go to the other Finder window and drop from your desktop the file taper.jpg to the /Users/Eugenia/files/ folder. Now watch the search Finder window and it has automatically updated its search results to include the new file! It might not sound very useful in this example, but under BeOS were every file had attributes, you could search by this attribute and have complex searches (“Queries”), which could also be saved for future searching). My husband never used an email client for example when he was using BeOS. Each email was an individual file under BeOS, so you could use the file manager itself to sort out your email via multiple/advanced ways! Anyways, enough ramblings about Finder and Live Queries. It is not much of a surprise though, as Dominic Giampaolo (creator of BeOS BFS) and Pavel Cisler (creator of BeOS Tracker file manager and part of the Easel Nautilus team) now work at Apple too!
Expose and Fast User Switching are impressive for “MacOS X first timers” as these feature sport funky visual effects when you use them. I heard a number of “wow” in the salle, including the journalist sitting next to me. I told him, “it is just Quartz Extreme hard at work, nothing new”. He wouldn’t listen. And at the end of that specific presentation, Steve Jobs said “so, you wonder how we do that? With Quartz Extreme!” And then the guy looked back at me and said “aaah…”. Just made me think how people get easily excited over a few visual effects, without understand what’s what and where they come from, and how much or how little engineering might these features really needed.
So, what is Expose? It is the Apple way of dealing with window clutter. It is Apple’s ‘virtual desktop’ solution. It zooms down the opened windows using Quartz Extreme’s 3D capabilities, and then you easily select which window you want to come into focus full-size. Fast User Switching is just like XP’s, but each time you are changing to a different user, it moves the whole screen as a cube to the other user’s desktop. Yeah, innovation. Pretty much like this innovation. Hehe…
And then, it was iChat AV and its iSight web camera (every attendee in the WWDC got one for free btw). Well, nothing to say about it really. The camera is slick looking (and shouldn’t have cost more than $80 or $90 at best), it is just an IM application with camera/audio support, just like MSN 6. Only with less features.
I was happy about the development updates though. The Apple version of GCC apparently supports precompiled headers just like Visual C++ has for years now (props! no other version of GCC does that), they now support distributed compiling (at last, Rendezvous hard at work!), Fix and Continue support (SGI does that since 1995, VC++ does that too now), and background compilation (just like Basic on AtariST – yeah). Well, no matter if the above sentence sounded bitter to you, it is not. I am happy seeing Apple providing good support for development stuff. But don’t expect it to be revolutionary and don’t believe Steve’s hype. It is definately evolutionary. It is a positive evolution. But it ain’t innovation. It is catch up.
And same goes for this Panther release. This release of the OS — at least the features presented to us — did not reveal any major innovations. No re-definitions of how we do things. Please, don’t think that I am negative on Apple, because it isn’t true. But I do see things the way they are and not as Steve Jobs would like me to. Last year’s Jaguar WAS innovative, WAS revolutionary: Quartz Extreme, Renderzvous, Inkwell, Sherlock 3. These were brand new features not found on other systems of the time. With Panther, we actually see Apple try to USE these technologies into their system instead of just having them lurking in the background having us pray that new apps might come out that actually use them. Yes people, Panther is the continuation of Jaguar; it is the version of the OS that uses these last year’s innovative technologies, but it doesn’t really include any new innovations of its own (except being 64-bit that is, which is not really a user feature, but a system feature). Where is full MIME support for example? But hey, you can’t (truly) innovate every year, I’ll give you that. 😉
Then, it was the time for the G5. Yes, this is an exciting hardware release. The G5 is a solid and fast machine. Some people said that it doesn’t look sexy, but I think that we see a turn of Apple into more workstation markets, so this “professional and serious-looking” case is actually appropriate and to be expected.
So, Apple now has a brand new 64-bit processor, the PPC970, with up to 2 GHz speeds and promises for 3 GHz in 12 months. Support for FW800, USB 2, AGP Pro 8x, PCI and PCI-X (depends which model you buy), 9-fan but quiet case, up to 8 GB RAM (“broke the 4 GB barrier” as Steve Jobs puts it), 1 GHz bus for the high-end model.
Let me jump the gun and say that if you plan to buy a G5, get the dual 2 GHz one, yes, the $3000 high-end one. The lower end ones are bad buys (especially the 1.6 GHz model). I don’t know what Apple was thinking when creating the 1.6 GHz (money probably) but they use DDR333 on a 800 Mhz bus. That means that the CPU has to wait for the RAM to finish its cycle before it receives the new data. They should have included DDR 400 on that model too in my opinion.
Apple showed us demos of Logic, Photoshop, Mathematica and a 3D rendering app going against a Dell dual Xeon machine. We were not told of the specifics of the Dell Xeon machine, nor if HT was properly turned on in the BIOS. We were also not told if these Mac apps were specifically optimized for the G5, e.g. if they were versions that will never see the light of day on a retail box, but built specifically for the demo. Anyhow, on all instances, the dual 2 GHz G5 had much-much better performance than the Dell machine. However, I would advise to not jump the gun so fast on this. I mean, come on, iTunes and Safari are still not baby-smooth… when resizing their windows on the fastest G5! I played with the machine for a few minutes and was [again this year] negatively surprised by this simple thing that Apple still haven’t being able to master with both Panther and the new CPU: scrolling and resizing. I think I will send a copy of BeOS or Windows XP to Steve Jobs for Christmas, just so he can compare.
Additionally, Apple did the SPEC benchmarks using GCC 3.3 on both x86 and PPC, while the vast majority of the C/C++ developers in the x86 Windows land actually use the much faster and much more optimized for P4/Xeons/HT Intel ICC compiler. Then, you will probably find out that Apple’s numbers are not really that fair. They keep calling their x86 benchmark results to have come out of the “best PC money can buy,” but they don’t explain to us how the Pentium 4 scores more than ~1200 at SPEC.org, while Apple gives it a measly ~800 number on its own results. Apparently, the PC they tested with, it’s not the fastest P4 money can buy. Most user-oriented applications are using integer and not floating point anyway (PPC970’s main strength). But workstation-class applications might need fp. [Update: Others had similar thoughts as well regarding the real speed of P4/Xeons. Here is another article as well at hand. And another one.]
I am not saying that G5 is slow. It is not! It is a fast machine. It is the product that has made Apple really caught up with the competition. But I don’t see the dual G5 at 2 GHz overcoming the x86 today. Intel released today a 3.2 GHz P4 and they expect a new P4 version (faster core per same speed), to go all the way up to 4 GHz before the end of this year. Apple’s roadmap is to reach 3 GHz in a year from now. So, has Apple caught up now for real, or Intel will speed through again and leave Apple in the same condition as it was until last Sunday night? We will know in a few months.
My other problem with the G5 is its entry-point price. The lowest-end model (the one with the slaughtered memory version) starts at a minimum of $2000. Seeing how close the prices of the 1.6 and 1.8 are, I would argue that Apple could go lower and introduce the low-end model for $1700 or $1800. This new G5 business, are really in need of a cheap offering. Oh, and while you are at it, move down the price of the eMac G4 to $499 to better compete with the cheap PCs. Apple really needs to offer cheaper computers. In my opinion, the important thing in this point in time in Apple’s history is not the profit margin. It is the market share percentage. This is where Apple loses a small sum everyday these days and it could prove fatal if developers leave the platform because of the declined user base. So Apple, show us that $499 eMac of yours! We know you got margins!
Anyway, enough rambling. After the keynote was over, we got downstairs to the actual showfloor, and it was nice to see companies like Perforce, Oracle, OpenOffice.org, Metrowerks, Trolltech, Big Nerd Ranch, LaCie, O’Reilly, 4D, Frontbase, REALBasic and more. The participation of the Mac developers was quite high. There were many people at the conference, even with this hefty registration fee. I suggest you go over to the conference sometime this week if you got the needed money to register. It is a nice, interesting, well-organized event overall with some interesting development sessions throughout the week. Get yourself up to speed with the Apple world. It’s worth it. Just don’t take into account everything as served to you by marketing, but use your head.
An SMP 64 bit system, with huge bus speeds. An operating system which updates it’s tools/libraries/relevant kernel pieces to the ones of FreeBSD 5. X11 included. Some Linux apis added. More security and better integration in corporate networks.
A couple of weeks ago there was an article on ThinkSecret saying that Apple is asking unix-shops which unix software they are using. Then they go to the unix software vendors, and push to get the software ported to macosx.
It’s pretty obvious that the powermac g5 is going against traditional Unix workstations. A blade 2000 costs allot fucking more than a powermac G5.
One of the obvious alternatives is a 4000$ Dual Xeon with Redhat Linux. In this respect it makes every bit of sense to do spec tests with GCC and on Linux. It also makes sense to test Mathematica and motion capturing for example, instead of ripping an audio cd or something like that.
if a moderator could fix the broken /B tag in that post I would be greatful
1) the G5 will enable apple to steal share from Sun, HP, SGI, etc in the scientific, creative, engineering market.
2) G5 will expand Apple’s lead in digital audio and video
3) the $1299 G4 mini-tower will provide a slight boost in volumes and correspondingly market share.
4) Phase two will see greater G5 price/performance improvements and more competitively priced consumer/general office mini-towers, leading to additional market share gains
5) apple’s market share goes up. By 2008 it will run between 20 and 30% of the pc market. Linux will also hit around the same and windows takes the remainder.
6) PC-Zealots will cry an ocean of tears and drown themselves in it, sorry couldn’t resist that one.
If you’d take your head out of the SPEC ratings and the pointless is it a evolution or revolution arguments you’d see that Apple now has a fully rounded product line that will lead to market share and sales gains without killing margins.
Come on folks did you really think that IBM would sit back and just watch intel dominate the PC CPU business forever. ha ha ha ha ha ha. Do you think that IBM would invest in this little venture while apple priced itself out of the market. Please look at their track record. We are talking about big blue not motorola. You know the company that actually retains people over the age of 40, unlike intel, especially R&D personel. the company that executes. Do you really think that this is it? No no no. This is act one. Just wait til you see the following acts.
Apple and IBM are back and poised to do what counts, gain market share. Watch it cause you can’t stop it.
XFS does not have the live queries feature, at least not the Irix version. Got any proof to the contrary ?
The G5 systems do look like a good deal, especially the dual 2Ghz. I just don’t happen to like Macs, otherwise I’d have seriously considered buying one.
Prediction 7) Movie will be released “Pirates of Sillicon Valley – Reloaded” with subtitle “Microsoft fucked and raped IBM and Apple. Now it’s payback time”
The preview of Panther showed some very nice features (the very cool Exposé, the much improved-looking Finder with live-searching and slicker design, Fast User Switching, much improved PDF rendering, and some welcome look & feel adjustments chief among them) and nice built-in functionality (font management app, faxing) but not quite as exciting as the Jaguar preview.
However, I also got the impression that this preview was somewhat muted as there’s still more work to do. Whether this is because Panther is a smaller upgrade, or there’s still yet more to come (as promised on http://www.apple.com/macosx/panther, and the “100 features” line) I guess we’ll just have to wait and see…
I could be wrong, but I believe that SPEC as an organization has strict rules about reporting results. If they are not submitting “official” results to SPEC, they are only allowed to quote “estimated” results. From this, I would assume that Apple plans to submit official SPEC results to the website. These results would be audited to ensure that they meet the strict rules for compile flag usage. In addition, results reported must be based upon a system (hardware, OS, and compiler) which ships to customers within 3 months of benchmark publication.
So, will they or won’t they be publishing official results on http://www.spec.org??!
If they don’t, it seems to me that Apple violated SPEC’s rules for using their benchmark…
>>You mean I need to replace my 4 month old Mac with a newer one just to match the UI performance of my old 300MHz Celeron?
Are you comparing an old Celeron with Win98 to OSX 10.2? Of course Win98 is faster! It’s also painfully ugly to look at and had very minimal visual feedback/effects. IMO the eye candy/effects are worth the overhead.
I’m amazed at all these people who would trust the SPEC times of a closed source compiler.
Compilers have replaced benchmark code with handcrafted assembler before, and I would imagine they still do.
LOL !!! It’s nice to see x86 lamers to uknowledge that their hyped machines are actually a lot slower in benchmarks life unless tweaked to death. Expect even less performace in real life usage.
At $3000 the new PowerMac is the BEST desktop system money can buy. Theodore Gray said it best: “why would you buy anything else ?”
>>Just because things aren’t spelled correctly doesn’t >>invalidate the entire point of a statement, even you, a >>great spelling god I’m sure, makes typos once in awhile, >>correct?
I don’t call it a typo when it happens more than once, that’s called plain ignorance. It’s a duty to educate the uneducated, otherwise, you will just bitch and complain about how you got laidoff even though you actually have technical talent. Even 2nd graders can spell ‘definitely’. And this is a public service, do you realize how most people learn to spell? By reading, and what is osnews filled with? Text. That’s right, so you, as a community are an influence on the future generation, or is it that you want a bunch of george w. bush’s running the world when you’re older? Let’s not get off on that rant…
Don’t be foolish, education is a necessity, don’t mistake it for an option. I have offered more than you can offer with your foolish flaming and un-original opinions. Besides, what good are you if I have both technical talents and literacy skills far above and beyond what you have? Maybe you can ask me if I want fries with that, somebody’s got to do it.
rendezvous:
I am not a big propoponent of Apple, but throuth is that initially zeroconf was started on network programmers’ mailing list called net-thinkers in 1997. It was not so new however. First implementation of automatic net config goes to MS I belive. See Windows ME UPnP (not enabled by default though it was easy to enable through control panel). The difference lies in the implementation: Zeroconf/rendezvous uses small DNS packets for service location, UPnP relies on HTTP and XML and tries to define exactly how those services are accessed.
Personally I think that rendezvous/upnp is still highly unsafe (unintended sharing happened to both implementations)
So the first thing to do is to disable service.
benchmarks:
Seen that before: supposely first incarnation of OS X was already faster that intel… but only on Apple web pages. That makes apple quite unreliable in terms of benchmark results.
Panther:
hopefully better as server that previous version. I had stability issues and I did not liked the fact that tools worked only partially:
for example Apache failing around 150-200 on virtual web servers. Directory Services hogging system with higher number of sites.
In general Apple is still in defense. This is why it allways compares Mac hardware to intel (never seen opposite as Intel does not care about Apple) same goes with OS comparisons: Apple against MS, Apple against UNIX (the add with dev/null was really stupid)
As as server is a toy for home users. As a desktop/workstation is as good as Windows (including price)so no specific reasons to switch one way or another.
For now I will stay with FBSD workstation/servers (or unix (not linux) in general)
Those who can, do. Those who can’t become critics and write reviews like this one. If you can do better than you have the right to criticize but I have never heard one…not one…original idea from this reviewer. All she ever does is look at one OS and say how Apple lacks this or that as if it is just a snap to code in every thing you like about other OSes and how Apple is so terrible for not doing so. Apple seems to me to be very aware of the problems in their OS and they are forever improving and addressing those issues on their platform as well as innovating new features/products. To say you were underwhelmed or to say they should have been at this point a long time ago is just naive. What other company listens to their users to this extent and addresses their products deficiencies in the manner that Apple does? It is so easy to point out what someone else is doing wrong but much tougher to do better or what is right or to do it “instantly” as the author seems to think is so easily done. WWDC was great for Apple. They have addressed yet again many of the things they needed to as well as announcing new innovative stuff. How much innovation can you even keep up with? They ditched motorola as they needed to and with the easiest migration path and best overall looking future. They have addressed a lot of those complaints about OS X clearly in the upcoming Panther. They also have kicked out a few good ideas. Not impressed Eugenia? You are a clear product (victim) of the internet age. You have heard about all this technology in advance so it doesn’t impress you when it comes out. Apple could never live up to your standards.
I like your style. Tell it like it is!
Luigi
Somehow (and please be not offended) Apple’s way of going on reminds me of a drag show. There is not much performance here, but a lot of glamour, light, colors and presentation. And yes, attitude and bravery.
it’s already apparent apple can do nothing to impress osnews, so just stop writing about them.
I’m sorry for your nostic view on Apple Eugenia, like we are “really supposed to find out” what really went on or secretly went on yesterday when it showcased its new G5 machine.
Just take deap breath, Apple has passed Wintel with IMB. It’s not Apple’s distortion field, its your own. You have been distorted by Gate’s Windows or whatever else you buddy too. Risc is good!
It’s not Apples fought that wintel challenges them and they have to turn around and beat them with OS X(unix), 970, 64 bit, Final Cut,etc. Find that on Windoz, you won’t. I’m using a Dull right now and I don’t see any of that on here. But it did come with Pinball…
Eugenia your the same as the others on here. You complain no matter what Apple does or doesn’t. Or there is always a but to every good thing you say about Apple,,,but..
apple is relevant again. people that didn’t consider apple an option 4 days ago will probably become customers. The G5 and price reductions are part of that. the ongoing software products and improvements and integration are the rest. Osnews does not get this. The world is about sales not benchmarks.
Don’t be foolish, education is a necessity, don’t mistake it for an option. I have offered more than you can offer with your foolish flaming and un-original opinions. Besides, what good are you if I have both technical talents and literacy skills far above and beyond what you have? Maybe you can ask me if I want fries with that, somebody’s got to do it.
You arrogant little prick!!!
How can you say you have skills above mine? Do you know me? Have I revealed what technical skills I have to you in any comprehensive way?
And why is it your job to educate the “inferior” readers of OSNews?
Go become a F*CKING ENGLISH TEACHER!!!
Sorry to the rest of you that I had to stoop to this level to answer an annoying spelling troll. GRRRRRR
I think its really funny how everybody always talks about speed and how an Intel machine is faster than a Mac. I for one don’t care. I have never had the “Fastest computer” because it is always a moving target. I use a Mac, PC with Windows XP and various Linux and *BSD machines and they all have good points and bad points.
I agree with the Anonymous poster above about finding deficiencies in everything and how staying on top of technologies causes us all to want this feature and that.
The best computer is the one that you are most comfortable and efficient with. If you were to use a Mac exclusively for 30 or 60 days you would find the UI to be the best out there. This is something that the Linux UI developers need to study and build on for it to be a desktop OS. It really doesn’t matter if you have the fastest computer in the world running Linux or BSD if you cant do simple things like cut and paste from one program to another or run a popular program on it.
OS X is only in it’s second version and Panther will be thee third release, I think they have done more in the last few years then any other OS Developer.
Sorry to sound like a Mac zealot. I am just tired of hearing arguments going nowhere.
Cheers,
Sweetsdream
GCC PPC traditionaly lagged behind the x86 version. x86 fanatics insisting that we should put Apple/GCC vs Dell/Intel C++ are idiots. That speaks about SPEC “benchmark”, let alone comparing different CPU architectures.
The issue here is how can Dell tells us that has a 1089 SPECint result, when it manages only 836 using GCC (the same compiler Apple used).
But I don’t really care about benchmarks. I come from a creative background unlike most x86 users who gather into lame sites spending hours of running/analysing meaningless benchmarks. The next PowerMac seems ideal for me and I’ll buy it. And CPU SPEC performance is hardly the decision maker.
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296
A very interesting read, its abit of an eye opener esp. if you believe what Steve Jobs says about the new G5’s.
Ok.. here’s a coupel of tiid bits on the G5 and its comparision to the Athlon/operton:
“Back to the G5/PowerPC 970. There is no doubt that IBM has done a great job with the CPU that is a close relative to their server chips. The funny thing is how Jobs claimed that Apple had worked with IBM for years to design the CPU. Unlikely. While Motorola was stalling PowerPC production and dragging Apple along IBM was doing their own PowerPC thing aimed squarely at servers. Apple is not a CPU design firm. IBM is. IBM designed this CPU, and I’m doubtful that Apples input was significant. The PowerPC 970 is impressive though. Up to a 2GHz clock speed, 64 bit support, a 512KB L2 cache, and a 64 KB L1 cache, GHz bus. Contrasted to the available Opteron at 1.8GHz, 64 bit support, 1MB L2 cache, 128KB L1 cache, and 800MHz bus the two seem fairly evenly matched. So let’s take a bit of a look at Apple’s performance claims.”
“….Without specs for the machines they tested it is hard to tell, and the benchmarks can not be validated. Here the Athlon 3200+ smacks the G5 handily, and the Opteron blows it out of the water. Of course so do the other CPUs, and in particular the G5’s cousin the Power4 smacks around the fastest workstation masquerading as a desktop on the planet.”
Regards the case design, I really liked the G4 tower, but the G5 is just ugly. Is it just me or does the case of the new mac look like a fridge freezer from the front ??
Nice article Eugenia !!
;o)>
Harjtt
I too tire of hearing this same mythology repeated. What PARC has was good and what Apple was doing was good. PARC’s reality would not have been realizable without the inputs of Apple’s engineers. One of the critical aspects of this was QuickDraw. Raskin and others were working on this with “windows” and “menus” BEFORE Apple visited PARC. What they saw at PARC confirmed what they were doing and provided some new ideas to there system. Jef Raskin has defended this chronology numerous times – most recently (last three months) on MacinTouch website. What else did Apple bring for innovation- to name a few:
True Plug and Play during the NuBus days
SCSI
Simple file sharing through AppleTalk
Overlapping windows (something PARC didn’t have)!
floppy less computers
FireWire
But this is history. I happen to agree with Eugenia that Panther is more evolution than revolution. I would have liked to see Piles, better or new use of InkWell, System use of metadata (like BeOS), and saved/updating searches.
cheers
twocents
That AMD site has there own spin on things. Yes AMD is the almighty chipmaker.
The fact is Hypertransport is linking parts of the G5 watch the video again.
While I think this is splitting hairs JOB’s and Apple keep refering the G5 as a Personal Computer. All the AMD 64 bit chips are in servers right now and going into wroksations.
Like I said that is splitting hairs mind you.
AMDZone is really lame site and very biased to Macs. They were really upset when their rumours of Apple using Opteron for their NG PowerMacs were trashed by reality. You should’nt really believe anything they say.
You arrogant little prick!!!
How can you say you have skills above mine? Do you know me? Have I revealed what technical skills I have to you in any comprehensive way?
And why is it your job to educate the “inferior” readers of OSNews?
Go become a F*CKING ENGLISH TEACHER!!!
Sorry to the rest of you that I had to stoop to this level to answer an annoying spelling troll. GRRRRRR
Muhahahhahhahaa!! This is too funny!
Nobody said osnews readers were inferior, that’s your own insecurity. Calm down, they’re just words, no? Muhahah, case in point, the correct usage of them can kick some serious ass.
That’s innovation in marketing, something which i never denied Apple was good at…but it’s not innovation in TECHNOLOGY which is what my arguments were based on.
Stopping talking out your butt. Marketing has nothing to do with the technological innovation that Apple put into giving your standard desktop user a GUI. Along with the cleaned up user interface, if you haven’t seen an Alto screenshot, they again were innovative in providing it into a consumer PC. The Alto was a veritable mini-computer which still required a trained operator to manage. The Lisa and Mac were PC’s which everyday users were able to work with. PARC, and their Alto, were revolutionary. The Mac and Lisa were very innovative, and revolutionary from a desktop perspective, not an all encompassing computer perspective. Again their innovation was making it fit into a relatively affordable and easy to use desktop computer, not the underlying concept of a GUI itself.
If you want some more info on the Alto, I suggest you go here:
http://www.spies.com/~aek/alto/index.html
You’ll see that the “stolen” technology and “no Apple innovation in GUI design” argument vaporizes before your very eyes.
(IP: —.ztay.compaq.com)
AHAH!!! That explains why you’re such an arrogant prick
Sorry to all the other compaq employees I’m lumping in with ya, stevo
Oh wait, I just used ya…better come hunt me down grammar Nazi.
Your comments and unfortunately, now my replies lend no value to this discussion, good day sir, this is my last reply to you, no matter how arrogant or insulting your reply to this comment is.
http://veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/default.asp?visitor=X
This is the only verified benchmarks I have found. Anyone have others that are VERIFIED BECHMARKS?
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10086
Ok this is a seriously long article but check it out.
“… What’s interesting to note here is how Opteron scales from two-way to four-way. For the two-way result, the 1.8 GHz Opteron platform bettered the 2.8 GHz Xeon system by 12%. The four-way result shows the same Opteron processor competing against a 2 GHz Xeon MP system that has over twice the on-die cache, yet it still trails Opteron by 18%”
Harjtt
: o )>
http://www.macbidouille.com/article.php?id=119
* A more refined aqua (no stripes in window bar, more subtle color differentiations in a window, better looking tabs,..)
* The return of the sheduled boot and shutdown.
* Secure file deletion
* Return of folder actions (without the trip to Applescript)
That’s a poor choice of options, ain’t it?
What happened to solid progress?
Let’s see what we’ve got: a machine that IS in fact competitive with the best Wintel (and company) offerings. Whether that’s slightly behind or slightly ahead. It’s still competitive.
The fastest FSB on the market. A controller that is extremely impressive (point to point, birectional for every component).
A chipset that includes tech that is available, but ABSOLUTELY will not be mainstream in the PC world for months to come or much longer — S-ATA, PCI-X, optical digital I/O, FW800, GigE, etc…
A machine that is competitive on price with most comparable offerings (Nix stations, Opterons, dual Xeon boxes, etc…)
In terms of OS, we have a strategy that means Apple may be able to deliver a solid offering of new features (whether or not they exist in other OSes) every year. (I can name many features MacOS has that others don’t).
We haven’t even seen much of Panther. I do not believe we are seeing a complete feature list. (In fact, with Apple pushing back the date from Sept. to year end, I suspect they are definitely hiding a few things.)
In terms of simple progress, Apple has incorporated FreeBSD 5.0 in a short span, refined the UI, added Linux APIs, UFS support (although I still haven’t heard confirmation if it’s the new filesystem or if HFS+ has been improved), VPN support, further improvements to QT, better thread support.
It’s added a new UI concept/feature/tool in Expose. It’s not fair to say it’s just QE–QE is a graphics engine. Expose is a feature meant to handle an issue–window clutter and navigation.
It’s 64 bit.
So rather than ask: innovative (which is a retarded standard anyway) or catch up (which is fine: some features weren’t even on the wishlist of former Mac users; some features only OS X has), let’s ask: did Apple make substantial progress in a year?
The answer: YES.
Apple has done an incredible good job. It has to fight against the most corrupt/abusive kartel in the world (Wintel). Along with the manipulation of the market and the many IT companies they sabotage (or plot with) systematic. Given these facts and comparing the sizes cq resources of Wintel against Apple most critics towards Apple seem very unjust and unfair.
Apple is the only real innovative ‘PC’ company in the world, both in hard- and software. I do Windows trouble-shooting for a living, and for people who love a good OS design it is very frustrating that such a poor design as all the windows versions are, has such a great market share and that has nothing to do with quality.
If you use Windows and MacOS daily you realize that MacOS always lacked a taskbar to control your windows. Expose is nothing more than a fancy/eye-candy loaded taskbar. MacOS was always about window clutter on the desktop and they never really solved this usability issue. Try try to find a specific window if you have 10 apps open. On Windows/KDE/Gnome this is a breeze. On MacOS it is/was just plain annoying.
Personally I am more of a task switcher person, e.g. I keep my windows always maximized and switch between them. I guess that habit comes from my AmigaOS days.
(maybe they’ll be readily available by then
…but i’m not a gamer or DV guy; i make music with logic and pro tools, which are, practiacally speaking, mac apps. the floating point operations *are* more important in that context, and all that potential memory is a real boon (some sample libraries can easily chew up a gig of ram).
it may not be the fastest desktop computer ever, but it’s definitely the fastest mac ever, and for anyone who’s tied to apps like logic or pro tools, that’s great news. they’re finally catering to the market that supported them for so many years again. that integrated optical s/pdif’s a nice touch, as well.
i liked eugenia’s article, though i found the haxial one altogether more damning of apple and jobs than panther and g5, which is as it should be.
i’ll still buy one of these when i really need and can comfortably afford one.
“If you use Windows and MacOS daily you realize that MacOS always lacked a taskbar to control your windows.”
It sounds like: If you are use to using the Windows metaphor, you are confused about how to manage windows on a Mac and don’t know what you are talking about.
Mac had app switcher for quite a while; it now has the Doc. It’s easy to cycle between windows within an app, and between app windows. It is extremely easy to hide the foremost app or all apps.
“I keep my windows always maximized and switch between them.” You could do this on a Mac if you wanted to. What’s your point? That you don’t use the spatial strengths of the Mac. That you do not see the advantage to not having an app window (which is why Window and other users are “used to” fully maxed windows and alt-tabbing: because you usually cannot see another app or doc beneath the foreground. Most Mac users are comfortable and familiar with working with different docs and apps at the same time, particularly graphic designers.
Eugenia, market share is not user base. Apple can have lower market share but increased user base.
Market share is a hype too.
… it isn’t necessarily unique. I seem to remember some sort of window shrinking feature in some of those Longhorn UI videos from way back (or was it just MS Research stuff) that I now suspect was something very similar to Expose.
Apple does get kudos though for bringing it to the users first.
Quartz Extreme and the Longhorn equivalent (when it eventually arrives) are going to spur some very interesting UI ideas over the next several years. I look forward to the competition.
PS: Can 3rd parties get at QE at the levels needed to implement features like Expose (ie: manipulate the windows of other apps)?
Apple doesn’t need “market share” to succeed. And it does not try to “survive” as lame AmdZone insists. Apple right now is strong, VERY strong. On the other hand, Dell, Intel, AMD loose market share and they are as good as dead.
http://www.jefraskin.com/forjef2/jefweb-compiled/published/holes.ht…
RTFM
Expose is kind of a first step towards (or maybe a more practical subset, depending on your POV) of Jef Raskin’s zoomable UI concepts.
Leave it to OSNews to put a negative spin on a good show. Everything they showed was good.
New features in Panther are good. granted these are not new OS features but new MacOSX features so I don’t understand the negative spin. iSight and iChatAV were conveniently dismissed as useless.
” Just made me think how people get easily excited over a few visual effects, without understand what’s what and where they come from, and how much or how little engineering might these features really needed. ”
Not everyone sits in front of their computer all day figuring stuff out nor do they want to. Just because something is easily explained or dismissed doesn’t mean it is easy to do.
I mean, here is an articel on Apple’s software developer conference, and two (or tree) paragraphs of this 8 paragraph article is spent on How BeOS did this, How BeOS did that what my husband (a BeOS employee) did when using BeOS, what former BeOS engineers I waved at, what are current BeOS engineers doing …. blah blah blah. Oh’ c’mon Egunia. I really like your website, I really like your articles, and I find myself agreeing with most of what you say, but when can we see an article from you, with less focus on BeOS?
I mean, the way I see it, BeOS lacked 20,000 important features, but had smooth scrolling. Mac OS X currently doesn’t match BeOS when it comes to scrolling but has got 20,000 more important features. Is this scrolling thing really that much a great deal? Apple here is changing an architecture, introducing new high-end systems, introducing new operating system, introducing new applications, and all you can say is why it doesn’t scroll smoothly. Duh!
I guess scrolling is the metric used by OSNews to gauge overall system performance. At least it can be done in a minute. Scrolling on a G4 is fine, I don’t see the unnecessary drama here.
“It sounds like: If you are use to using the Windows metaphor, you are confused about how to manage windows on a Mac and don’t know what you are talking about.”
I have been using MacOS for more than 10 years now, professionally and private as a developer. I also own a iBook.
Sure, there are shortcuts to everything. That said, I am not a fan of emacs either. I do not use alt-tab either on windows or any other platform. I simply want a graphical way to select my active window in a centralized place. And a taskbar does exactly that job. Or lets rather call it a tabbed interface to sound less Windows centric.
Keeping you windows maximized is close to impossible in MacOS. Most applications will not correctly respect maximized window mode. That includes CodeWarrior where I spent 90% of my time to deal with Carbon programming. Maybe I just do not like MacOS UI in general, that is simply a matter of taste and habit.
I also just tried the new Finder, after I got the Panther CD at the WWDC today. It’s improved but still no match to something like the file managment konqueror or nautilus provides (again to avoid mentioning Explorer, which I replaced with Directory Opus on my PC anyway).
I’m not saying you have a problem, or that I have a problem with you. I’m just saying that the limitation YOU perceive on the Mac, I and others do not. The wonder of the taskbar that you enjoy, I do not. I do not like application windows, and to this day, no one can explain the need for them to me. Maybe this is m personal interpretation as well.
But… to say that Expose doesn’t count as a good or new edition for the Mac because it solves a problem that is not present on the PC is bullsh!t.
The Mac OS provides more options for navigating windows that Windows (Go menu and shortcuts, Dock, app-tabbing, Hide (All)/Show (All), keyboard shortcuts for these actions, cycling through doc windows within an app, navigating through hierarchies using window bars, etc…) Now there is expose. And the Taskbar sucks in Windows… in my personal opinion.
“Peter Glaskowsky, editor-in-chief of Microprocessor Report, said a company could get better benchmark results using a Dell machine with Intel and Microsoft compilers than with a Linux machine and GCC compiler. However, he also noted that Intel’s chips perform disproportionately well on SPEC’s tests because Intel has optimized its compiler for such tests.”
This makes me wonder if perhaps the “bogus” SPEC results are the ones on the SPEC website, not the ones VeriTest produced.
On User Change{
Using Quartz Extreme{
Simulate Cube{
Rotate through deg(90)
}
Swap old user
Activate new user
}
}
Yes, it’s great how easily Apple can use Quartz Extreme to do just about anything these days Eugenia. You show great wisdom and insight in your article. If only Apple could introduce a machine that could levitate, that might surely warrant a raised eyebrow from you.
I fail to see how anything more than a casual examination of the benchmarks would lead to the “Apple cheated” claim. As many times many others have pointed out, when you benchmark you compare both the compiler AND the hardware. And, even if you can’t get your head around that idea, there are always the PS and Logic tests–unless you’d like to claim that Apple was able to recompile both of those with gcc as well. Finally, as for HT, read Ars Technica’s review–basically, HT is of little or no help for these types of tasks, as it’s all a question of bandwidth–which the G5 has in spades.
Eugenia, I usually like your articles, but this (as evidenced by the number of comments) is nothing but flamebait.
KOMPRESSOR
In Mac OS X just right click (control click) the application hosting the window and a list of all it’s windows will appear as a contextual menu.
In Mac OS 9 in apple-tab to the application in question and look under thw Window menu.
Personally, I need to see my desktop when I’m working… Working with a fully maximized window is like working with one arm tied behind my back.
Troll on.
I once bought a $3,000 system, many many years ago. However I find that price unreasonable today. Just because a VCR used to cost $300, doesn’t mean I would pay that much for one now. As far as a PC (or Mac) goes, $1,000 is as much as I would consider, and for a VCR, about $50-$75. Unfortunately most of Apple’s systems are above the $1,000 limit which puts them out of reach of today’s consumers. Apple needs more at the low-end than just the eMac, because while I would LOVE to have an Apple G4 for $800, I don’t want that big heavy monitor stuck in it. I already have a nice 17-inch flat panel and would gladly part with $800 to attach it to a low-end headless Mac. I do not want a CRT (so the eMac is out), and I don’t want to buy another 17-inch flat panel (so the iMac is out). Come on apple, please, please, PLEASE put out a low end monitorless system. You’re missing out on a HUGE market, I think, because I have heard my exact sentiments echoed from friends and family as well as in forums like these.
if even Slashdot offers articles from 2 different angles (they cheated on benchmarks vs no they did not), where osnews well, is very single minded.
I think it is the largest strategic failure of Apple management to not make available a headless 1Ghz G4 system at price that is in the $400 to $650 range.
Much of OS X Panther is designed to require at least 1 Ghz G4 to work well.
Apple absolutely needs to deliver an affordable G4 system. An eMac is not what most people want. And outside of an eMac, nothing is affordable.
I think the G5 is a stunning system for the high-end and will likely purchase one later this year after the bugs are worked out.
However, I would have much rather seen a 1Ghz G4 “iBox” at a reasonable price and an iBook upgrade to a 1Ghz G4.
will beos or yellow dog linux run on the new g5s?
Who on earth buys a computer without a monitor?
Um, me?
When I bought a Mac I already had a 21″ Viewsonic that is quite nice.
And IMO the real place that Apple is missing on the low end isn’t the eMac but rather the cheap headless Mac. The iMac is quite innovative but monitors don’t need to be bundled in….
will beos or yellow dog linux run on the new g5s?
Yellow dog Linux will run on it.
As for BeOS.. I hate to break this to you, but it’s dead.. The alternative projects have more important things to worry about (like being usable :-))
Name some reallly innovative features in Panther?
I’d say Expose is at least. Yeah, that was written off because it used QE. And it’s not even vaguely like that 3-d desktop utility. Supposedly QE was innovative in Jaguar. But was it really? (using this tough standard) I mean, QE is just a trick to speed up Quartz using the graphics card. And Quartz is old news. It wasn’t even innovative in 10.0.
Something doesn’t have to be earth-shattering and jaw-dropping to be innovation.
And so has Pentium4 and the new chip. Intel also has a lot of Mhz margins.
Yeah, Intel will just keep adding pipeline stages until they can reach 10 GHz!!!
LOL
So I think the bottom line is that even if this performance advantage is real, it is not at the right part of the market (the consumer desktop), and it isn’t quite large enough anyway.
Here is they key:
Speed used to be a reason NOT to switch. That reason has been removed.
Games used to be a reason NOT to switch. That reason is being removed. (I have too many games to play now and too little time!!)
People who considered Apple but didn’t switch for various reasons are having many of those reasons removed. This can and will lead to switchers (as evidenced by comments in this and other threads)
What? I’m writing this on a Mac I bought this year, and scrolling in Safari is not nearly as fast as Net+ used to be on my 300MHz BeOS box. After all, if scrolling had never been an issue for OS X, why did Jobs make such a great deal out of the fast scrolling in Preview?
I didn’t see this part of the demo – but I actually switched my PDF viewer to Acrobat Reader because Preview is SUCH A DOG! Switching from page to page takes forever……
But that’s totally different from safari scrolling. That’s smooth and instantaneous for me on a 2×867. Resizing is another matter but I honestly don’t do that often.
I think it’s amazing how everyone can be so humdrum about Apple’s tech nowadays. Can someone please tell why every new incarnation of Windows is received like a gift from heaven while Apple is the perpetual subject of FUD? How “innovative” have the last few incarnations of Windows been? The Windows GUI is still horrendous; virtually every major feature in it has been a rip-off of some other OS. Yet, Apple’s OS, which is superior to Windows in virtually every PRACTICAL manner is treated like “ho Hum.” Unbelievable. Apple comes out with a PC crammed with almost EVERY new PC tech and generally outperforms anything on the x86 side and the only thing anyone has to say is “Wait til the 4GHz P4 come out.” Gig for gig, the 970 is superior to the P4 but that’s still not enough. What is it going to take? Apple has come out with a true workstation for a max price of $3000 and THAT’S NOT IMPRESSIVE? I guess nothing Apple does will satisfy people whose minds are already closed.
i’ve got 4 monitors already. so shaddupa your face.
The courts proved that Microsoft illegally maintained their OS monopoly by extending it to other markets, not optain their monopoly. In other words, Windows is a completely legal monopoly, IE isn’t. And… oh wait, I promised not to enter the antitrust is evil debate again. Frankly, Microsoft is a rather easy target for the really low end market, and there is so little people actually realizing that.
While Microsoft has not been found guilty of breaking any laws in the creation of its monopoly it wouldn’t be a stretch to argue that it was created illegally. The original consent decree with Microsoft happened because it was operating using highly anticompetitive practices that many considered illegal. These practices directly led to the monopoly.
Microsoft obtained their monopoly legally just like OJ Simpson performed whatever actions he did on that particular night legally….
😀
and what is even worse, is to see people who constantly bash Microsoft for their monopolistic behavior then praise and hype Intel (a very aggresive company in their business practices. Ask AMD about it) and bash the smaller competitors like Apple~IBM.
here:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=nest…
Greg Joswiak, vice president of hardware product marketing at Apple, in a phone interview today, defended Apple’s http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/“>performance for its upcoming Power Mac G5, after they <A HREF=”//apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/1232237&tid=181″> ;came under fire in the wake of <A HREF=”//apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/23/198247&tid=174″> yesterday’s announcement.
Joswiak went over the points in turn, but first said that they set out from the beginning to do a fair and even comparison, which is why they used an independent lab and provided full disclosure of the methods used in the tests, which would be “a silly way to do things” if Apple were intending to be deceptive.
He said <a href=”http://www.veritest.com/“>Veritest used gcc for both platforms, instead of Intel’s compiler, simply because the benchmarks measure two things at the same time: compiler, and hardware. To test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation — using the same version and similar settings — and, if anything, Joswiak said, gcc has been available on the Intel platform for a lot longer and is more optimized for Intel than for PowerPC.
He conceded readily that the Dell numbers would be higher with the Intel compiler, but that the Apple numbers could be higher with a different compiler too.
Joswiak added that in the Intel modifications for the tests, they chose the option that provided higher scores for the Intel machine, not lower. The scores were higher under Linux than under Windows, and in the rate test, the scores were higher with hyperthreading disabled than enabled. He also said they would be happy to do the tests on Windows and with hyperthreading enabled, if people wanted it, as it would only make the G5 look better.
In the G5 modifications, they were made because shipping systems will have those options available. For example, memory read bypass was turned on, for even though it is not on by default in the tested prototypes, it will be on by default for the shipping systems. Software-based prefetching was turned off and a high-performance malloc was used because those options will be available on the shipping systems (Joswiak did not know whether this malloc, which is faster but less memory efficient, will be the default in the shipping systems).
As to not using SSE2, Joswiak said they enabled the correct flags for it, as documented on the gcc web site, so that SSE2 was enabled (the http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf… lists the options used for each test, which appears to include the appropriate flags).
I watched the keynote via satellite here at home so maybe I didn’t have the distractions you did.
“We were not told of the specifics of the Dell Xeon machine, nor if HT was properly turned on in the BIOS. We were also not told if these Mac apps were specifically optimized for the G5, e.g. if they were versions that will never see the light of day on a retail box, but built specifically for the demo. Anyhow, on all instances, the dual 2 GHz G5 had much-much better performance than the Dell machine.”
The specs for the Dell were given at the beginning of the demos. Dual Xeon 3.06 with comparable RAM and HD.
Further, the SPEC tests were done with GCC so that it was a level playing field. How can you post that here, on OSNews and ignore all the evidence that Intel’s compilers artificially inflate benchmarks?
> ignore all the evidence that Intel’s compilers artificially inflate benchmarks?
Excuse me, but this is laughable. Where did you hear that?
>the SPEC tests were done with GCC so that it was a level playing field
I am sorry, but Apple GCC vs RedHat9 GCC is not level field. This is not what Apple’s competition runs. Apple’s competition runs Windows and VC++. This is what it should have been tested with.
It’s a pity IBM no longer make PPC ThinkPads.
Still the Pentium-M looks like a reasonable chip.
>Other features like fast user switching, file system level encryption or video conferencting are standard in Windows XP<
Yeah.. I am stilll trying to get Windows video to work properly. IChatAV worked beautifully first time no configuration. THAT is revolutionary! Well, not for most Mac users.
While Microsoft has not been found guilty of breaking any laws in the creation of its monopoly it wouldn’t be a stretch to argue that it was created illegally. The original consent decree with Microsoft happened because it was operating using highly anticompetitive practices that many considered illegal. These practices directly led to the monopoly.
No wrong. Even with antitrust laws which I have extreme dislike of, it would be a long stretch to prove that Microsoft made their monopoly illegally. For example, with the OEMs – their control and pricing over it is significantly looser than of IBM and Apple. Nothing wrong there, every other potential antitrust ligitation causing factors to it have been practices also by the market dominators then. Pricing would be one area where the courts can question Microsoft, for charging less than their competitors, but if that can become the case, the same would for just about every Linux company making a free or near-free Linux distribution. Now would you say that those Linux companies are illegal?
Which really does show the problem with antitrust laws…
WHO THE HECK CARES WHAT THEY RUN!!!!
they are not doing a test to see what compiler and hardware mixture gives the best results. they were not showing that GCC compiles faster on apple thatn VC++ on windows. they used an application that is as close to the same on each platform as you can get. why? so tehy can show you how the PROCCESSOR performs, NOT the OS.
it was a hardware comparison.
I am sorry, but Apple GCC vs RedHat9 GCC is not level field. This is not what Apple’s competition runs. Apple’s competition runs Windows and VC++. This is what it should have been tested with.
No, that’s what application benchmarks are for. Those are for measuring system-specific enhancements, etc…
You’re obviously thinking of something other than the consent decree.
The consent decree only indirectly had to do with pricing. The consent decree was a result of Microsoft requring OEMs that wanted to sell DOS/Windows to pay for each computer sold rather than each computer sold with DOS or Windows. This was an anti-competitive business practice which had the direct effect of freezing all other OSes out of most of the major manufacturers.
There is disagreement over whether this is illegal, but a case can be made. This is why the case was brought against Microsoft. The government decided to negotiate a settlement where Microsoft agreed not to do certain things rather than go through years and years of court appeals. Obviously that plan didn’t work very well.
The thing that made the government’s case this last time around was the confiscated emails. Who knows what would have happened the first time if they had access to such a goldmine of information.
Apple has one problem. People like big numbers. They are going to look and go ‘oh, this one is 2.4ghz (P4) and it’s cheaper than this other 2ghz one (Mac).’ It doesn’t matter if the Apple is faster, people care about numbers. They have been taught all their lives bigger is better. Even when it’s not, they think it is. And let’s face it, while lots of us know better, the majority of people buying computers at this point in time are still going to be new computer buyers that don’t. Maybe someday in the future this will change, but I don’t forsee that for some time, if ever.
I like your style. Tell it like it is!
I think it’s more like, “Tell it just the way she sees it”. Sometimes she’s right. Sometimes, she’s wrong.
I don’t mind her as a poster, but I normally expect a little bit more neutral view from a stie maintainer. Sometimes, she is too defensive about her opinion, in my opinion.
I don’t think she hates Mac or something. More like she is irritated by the way Mac fans see things mostly in favor of Mac and Apple. But that’s what fans do. You don’t really need to enlighten them about everything
.
Anyway, although it is a great way to generate traffic , I normally feel uncomfortable with the style of Euginia’s posts and articles. They are too aggresive for my taste, although I found a lot of information from her very useful and insightful. But considering she is a real journalist and this is just her hobby, I really can blame her for being just herself.
And Byte256, what computer do you have in mind whe you said there were other computers like Apple I in similar price point? I can’t think of any. Altair was not really a personal computer, so what was you were talking about?
And you said MacOS X is basically NEXT technology. You are right. But who runs Apple now, they are all NEXT people, and who found Apple? Steve Jobs, and he was alos the founder of NEXT.
I won’t touch about XEROX, because you are not the only one who is misinformed.
And lowering price sometimes requires technological innovation. It might not ture that Apple used exactly same technology and could lower the price simply by mass marketing. I don’t know for sure, and I think you don’t either.
And what did you say… yes, iPod. Sony’s walkman was innovative when it was introduced. And you don’t think it was the first cassete player in the marke, do you? So declaring that it’s not innovative becaue MP3 players were around before that is not so compelling argument, don’t you think so?
Im amazed at how quickly you guys were to gloss over this… Several comments were suddenly rendered meaningless withing the following interview:
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/
http://www.veritest.com/
http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/apple/apple_performance.pdf
Greg Joswiak, vice president of hardware product marketing at Apple, in a phone interview today, defended Apple’s performance claims for its upcoming Power Mac G5, after they came under fire in the wake of yesterday’s announcement.
Joswiak went over the points in turn, but first said that they set out from the beginning to do a fair and even comparison, which is why they used an independent lab and provided full disclosure of the methods used in the tests, which would be “a silly way to do things” if Apple were intending to be deceptive.
He said Veritestused gcc for both platforms, instead of Intel’s compiler, simply because the benchmarks measure two things at the same time: compiler, and hardware. To test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation — using the same version and similar settings — and, if anything, Joswiak said, gcc has been available on the Intel platform for a lot longer and is more optimized for Intel than for PowerPC.
He conceded readily that the Dell numbers would be higher with the Intel compiler, but that the Apple numbers could be higher with a different compiler too.
Joswiak added that in the Intel modifications for the tests, they chose the option that provided higher scores for the Intel machine, not lower. The scores were higher under Linux than under Windows, and in the rate test, the scores were higher with hyperthreading disabled than enabled. He also said they would be happy to do the tests on Windows and with hyperthreading enabled, if people wanted it, as it would only make the G5 look better.
In the G5 modifications, they were made because shipping systems will have those options available. For example, memory read bypass was turned on, for even though it is not on by default in the tested prototypes, it will be on by default for the shipping systems. Software-based prefetching was turned off and a high-performance malloc was used because those options will be available on the shipping systems (Joswiak did not know whether this malloc, which is faster but less memory efficient, will be the default in the shipping systems).
As to not using SSE2, Joswiak said they enabled the correct flags for it, as documented on the gcc web site, so that SSE2 was enabled (the Veritest report lists the options used for each test, which appears to include the appropriate flags).
I think I might have a unbiased solution to this debate. I have before me a dual Xeon 2.8 533 FSB system, a Dual Opteron 1.8, and on its way a dual 2GHZ G5 Mac. I plan to load Linux Gentoo on all three systems and do a performance test of common linux benchmarks for my clients 2003 hardware updates. I also plan on testing my own signal processing apps. Over the years I have developed scientific libraries for both the altivec and SSE(1/2) style units. Since Intels IPP seems to lack in some areas I decided to do my own. I will be using gcc 3.3 and yes folks gcc is slightly more optimized for x86 but the ppc is not at that much of a disadvantage. Remember alot of cPCI and VMe systems use ppc hardware and gcc compilers. If Apple is polite enough I will try there improved gcc compiler if they provide me with source to gcc. I have benched stuff on the power4 so I’m looking forward to checking this hardware out. On the desktop scene I could really care less what eye candy each OS has. Both OsX and WinXP have their strengths and weaknesses, I’m just a Linux and Beos nut. If there are any suggestions on corresponding libraries for each system then drop me an line.
“If Apple is polite enough I will try there improved gcc compiler if they provide me with source to gcc.”
Remember, Apple didn’t choose the gcc compiler because it performed better on their machines and worse on Intel’s (as everyone here has so freequently said) but chose the gcc compiler because, to test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation — using the same version and similar settings.
If you’re going to use a different compiler on the Intel side, (one which will make the Intel scores look better, it is EQUALLY important to use the compiler which Apple would claim would produce the best numbers for it too.
Bet then again, if you did that, it wouldn’t be a truly accurate test now would it. To get the most accurate results, you must use a compiler that is available for both platforms. THIS is the reason why the gcc compiler was used for both.
If you want a truly accurate benchmark, you should compare with the gcc compiler.
Eugenia,
Great review. I was at WWDC in 2000 and can certainly relate to the ‘hype’ that is generated there. And yes, he was wearing the same clothes then too.
=)
Thanks again.
Simon.
Simon,
I take issue with your use of the word “hype” as it implies that it was somehow over the top.
While yes, I would probably agree that if one factors in the amount of chatter and anticipation before the keynote, then the term “over the top”, would be a good adjective to describe the show.
However, because the tone of discussion on this thread has repeatedly implied that the speed benchmarks were miscalculated (or a blatent lie) and thus “over the top” (I.E. hype), some might misunderstand your comment to imply that the speed benchmarks were “hype”.
Lest anyone misunderstand, I thought I would take this quick time-out to help clarify the statement for those that are less savvy.
Can we please just stfu about BeOS this and BeOS that?
Look at the amount of software and hardware apple has introduced in the last year. It’s quite remarkable.
Don’t get hung up on whether things are ‘innovative.’ I could give less than 2 shits if an application is innovative, I just want applications that do things that are useful and let me do my work faster. ‘Innovative’ implies neither of these necessarily.
Panther is basically OS X refined. It has added a few new neat features, the one which I find coolest (maybe because it is both innovative AND useful) is Expose.
To me the most exciting thing was XCode which I am looking forward to trying out, though I admit I am a bit doubtful about the nitty gritty of how it will perform.
Well, I’m a bit surprised that they did a comparison with Logic on the PC and the Mac. AFAIK Logic 6 doesn’t exist and won’t exist on PC. Did Steve Jobs compared older versions of the software both machines ? Or Logic (Apple) 6 on Mac recompiled with best compiler options possible and Logic (5) on PC (with whatever compilations) ???
I really fail to see how they can make a real comparison with Logic…
As far as PARC goes, XEROX actually *invited* people from apple to look at their designs. XEROX was working towards dumping the ALTO since they really hadn’t found a market for it. Certainly several people at XEROX thought that this was madness, and I cannot say that I blame them. Yes, the idea of the GUI desktop was not an apple innovation. What was an apple innovation was WYSIWYG printing — yet another thing that XEROX abandoned. I only wish that apple would have seen fit to bring along a 3 button mouse — heck, Jobs even makes reference to using a 3 button mouse in his keynote speech. Yes I know that you can use a 3 button mouse on a mac, I’m doing it right now. It should be standard IMO.
All I have to say to iWhiners out there is that you people never know when to quit…
Apple always saying that Dual G4/1.42 was faster than P4/3GHz and you never did the noise that currently are doing! Damn! Apple must doing something right, this time around!
And I bet all those Photoshop, Mathematica, eMagic, Luxology, Blast, etc real world tests are fake too! Or the Adobe, Luxology, Mathematica, et al guys supporting Jobs hype on stage at the keynote were fake too!
Damn! We are talking about the same Adobe which recently created that PC Preferred fiasco for crying out loud!
Grow up iWhiners! This G5 eats your silicon for breakfast without even breaking sweat and is lower in price too!
Boom!
I take issue with your use of the word “hype” as it implies that it was somehow over the top.
Sure, let me be more clear. I’m not referring to the CPU benchmarks (although it’s interesting that some people interpret hype that way) by rather the feeling that I had as a member of the audience that watched Steve Jobs in action. He’s an amazing presenter, and if you don’t watch your reactions you can get swept up in the “hype” that he generates in the room. He really knows how to work the crowd, and developers, although a relatively logical bunch, can also be swept up in technilogical ‘goodies’ that removes all sense of logic, replacing it with elation and “hype” (i.e. felling hyper)
Reading Eugenias review I was taken back to the 2000 WWDC and the ‘hype’ that it generated. It was very cool of her to cut through that and present the REAL content of the conference from a more sober prespective. I agree with everything she said about the technology.
It’s a good point to be aware of these marketing phenomenon so that we as consumers, voters, and members of a PR invasive society can make choices that are based on the issues and facts, rather than Hype. That’s what I was congratulating Eugenia on.
Again, good job !
Simon
How can you not get excited about getting a free firewire iSight camera, a preview CD of Panther, XCode and its features and the fact that your apps will still run on a 64bit processor with little to no modification. As a developer this is a lot to get excited anout and we haven’t even gotten to the G5 system yet.
I guess having a press pass is not as exciting as having the developer pass at WWDC and in a way you can kind of see how someone gets miffed that someone right next to them gets all excited from all this free stuff they are getting.
I shall echo another compliment for Eugenia for an accessible article even though I disagree with her on some points. I just like to point out that Eugenia began the article by commenting on Steve Job’s attire by saying that for women it is an important subject of discussion. She then ends the article by saying that we should be aware of the “Steve Distortion Field” (SDF) effect on our judgement. So if you think that appearance is important, why should it be surprising that the reporter next to you be awed at Quarks’ prowness in showing off Exposé? Technically speaking, it might not be earth shatering, but hey it caught my attention without iDad wearing a Dolce Gabbana suit. My point is that packaging is important and an attire and Exposé are basically the same concept.
I’m a Macophile, I don’t understand why neither. The SDF seems to be clouding my shopping logics, but it is not enough to trick me into thinking that Apple is faster than Wintels. But I don’t care if my PB 12″ is slow, because when you sit on the many “terrasses” of Parisian cafes with your PB, you get more attention than your neighbour with his ugly Dell notebooks. Furthermore I can watch a DVD while I’m fiddling with my GROMACS codes (GROMACS is a MD Simulation program) under Apple’s X11 WITHOUT rebooting between Linux/Windows!
Yeah I’m a Fashion Victim Geek, and I’m proud of it 🙂
.. it is possible to control the iSight-Cam via iMovie or FCP or whatever?
Any Experience?
s@cgo
sing with me;
I have a pc and I’m;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
I like to tinker and leech and I’m;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
XP is oh so stable and never reboots, but hey I’m;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
A virus don’t bug me and yes I’m;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
The RIAA can’t sew me but hey I’m;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
Maybe I should bite the APPLE so I don’t have to be;
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
JEALOUS
Real mature, reeeeeeeeeeeeeeal mature.
Apple’s are nice, but for a lot of reasons I don’t want one…
Yeah i’m reeeal jealous…
I hate being able to choose which manufacturer I buy my hardware from
And boy does it ever suck being able to take almost any piece of hardware off the shelf and put it into my machine
And ya know what I really hate? Being able to run Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and Solaris all on the same box, without buying emulator software. It’d be so much nicer having to buy VirtualPC, or just deal with only running MacOS, Linux, and NetBSD.
Yeah damn it sucks having a CHOICE.
– Exposé’s F9 functionality is something new, F10 and F11 aren’t. Somehow I wasn’t really touched by being able to switch between applications visually by means of temporary tiling, as the good old taskbar is the best tool for the job. Too bad apple is missing one. BTW, you can do switch by tiling in KDE with two mouse clicks instead of a single keypress if you are son inclined.
– leveling compilers with gcc is a complicated beast actually. many compilers, including icc, do spec-only optimizations. gcc doesn’t; neither on x86 nor on PPC. OTOH x86 and PPC code generators are completly independent. It is outright lying to say using gcc on two different platforms is “using the same compiler”
– 970 is a very nice CPU with a lot of potential. However as far as I can tell it is not the fastest one *right now* and will nowhere be the fastest one *in september*. Fastest P4, Xeon and Opterons are faster now and Opterons scale better than everything else in MP configurations. It is not a big deal, that 970 isn’t the fastes as 970 *is* fast but I’d hate to educate MAC zealots for years to come about the fact. Such is life…
Xerox is being credited for many things it has not developed by itself alone. Some people want to believe that while PARC was doing all the onnovations out there the rest of the world was just partying around. It is incredible how easy the history is written/changed when a few decades pass, especially when you have money to spend in lawyers and governmental support.
It seems to me that the Dual G5 would be faster in some cases and not in others. I don’t think it’s the worlds fastest personal computer..but for someone like me who is a filmmaker..that extra 4 GB of ram will come in handy. I also think that for people in Biotech and other sciences the G5 will prove to be “faster” than the current comp (manely because of the bandwith).
I’ve priced dual xeon systems and the G5 is CHEAPER and probably FASTER for the type of work I do. It is definatley cheaper than a lot of UNIX workstations I’ve priced.
I’m really curious as to what Intel will do with the IA-64 and if this will put pressure on Wintel developers to starting making more 64-bit apps for the AMD opteron. I have spoken to several devoplers and they pretty excited about making 64-bit Apps for the G5 (mostly film related stuff)
I’m also happy to see Apple still has their “old” G4’s for sale at greatly reduced prices..the 1.25 Ghz starting at 1,299
***on a side note…..
If Apple/IBM do plan on scaling as fast as possible to 3Ghz…I’m pretty sure that the PPC970 will make it’s way into iMacs and eMacs early next year…
I won’t go over all 195 comments so I think you’ve been told several times already, but I think you were a bit “too much” biased against Apple just by style you wrote that column.
I think what your article was trying to show us is “Look I’ve seen many OSes and I am expert”. But I need not to read this sort of stuff for more reasons(I know that “you are” but also “i am” and also “other’s are” etc.).
I think you didn’t quite understood what a leap apple did. When BeOS(a dead OS btw like in moderated down comment mentioned) does insignificant thing, you praise it. When Apple finally introduce really fast(i mean fc%$ing fast, faster than my current pretty fast PC) machine which is to tell the truth around P4C 2.6Ghz speedlike but more usefull due to it’s architecture, you are saying it’s beeing ONLY cathing up. When Apple finally integrates(but heck what a fine integration) all that awesome features into really stable and working OS, you are saying it’s ONLY beeing cathing up(because some “student” Gnome project on sourceforge already existed?). When Apple introduce(among other things) very usefull and strong PDF previewer, and you should read some more info on this, you are noticing it as insignificant feature(just imagine enviroment witout postscript printer using this feature) and Apple only catching UP. When Apple catches up other’s commercial compilers but gives it to you for free you are saying it’s only catches up. Hmm I don’t understand your attitude towards Apple.
You know it’s not that far away(only 3-4 months) when “professional” journalists were claiming Apple is dead/Apple must switch to (ugly btw)x86, Apple is this Apple is that. Apple those times were really slow(and clear wine on this), about 2.5times slower that available x86PC. Now Apple did many great things(and I am not counting massive desktop 64bit movement) and you are writing your article in a mood like that: “Apple isn’t worth it, it didn’t conquered the world”.
But I am saying, Apple need not. It’s strenght is elsewhere…
P.S. Intel won’t have 4Ghz(nor 3.8 and likely even not 3.6Ghz) processor this year, nor will it have 1Ghz FSB sooner as to Q2 of 2004.
P.S.2 I am not apple fun(far from it) but also not PC zealot.
As a Mac/ Windows user, I will say the article was very fair Eugenia.
I think it’s hilarious that the Apple defenders are saying “it’s OK for one OS to use the features of another” or “borrow innovation.” There’s about 15 or so of those statements in here. That just takes the cake.
Personally I have no problem with it, since each platform has innovated considerably and it helps the evolution of desktop systems as a whole. Sure Apple may be borrowing ideas from others and there are probably no actually innovative ideas in the new Panther, but it’s the polish that Apple puts on the products that makes them so nice. As Eugenia said, the iChat & iSight aren’t doing anything MSN Messenger 6 hasn’t done. However, I’ve never thought of using Messenger.
I like the way separate user spaces (profiles) became a standard feature in all OSes, and now Fast User Switching is becoming a standard feature. When something makes sense, it becomes commonplace. Encrypted file systems, integrated browser, media players, thumbnail viewers, TCP/IP, CD/ DVD burning, etc. Linux and Apple are both reinforcing MS’s decision to integrate “extra functionality” into the OS. Some don’t like that, most do. When Longhorn comes out with resizable icons on the fly, I will be very happy. I really love the Expose feature – it’s something I’ve wanted forever. It’s almost as important as the menu bar. That’ll be in Longhorn/ KDE/ Gnome I bet because it just makes sense.
I wish to God the PC would get a menu bar-like functionality with a separate window for each open instance of an app (and no, the Stardock version doesn’t cut it). Those who’ve never used a Mac do not comprehend how this smooths workflow, like multi-monitors. It’s like using Windows KB-only if your mouse dies for 2 weeks, but then you finally buy a new mouse. It’s THAT BIG of a deal. Working in Photoshop or multiple documents on a PC is a pain.
As far as smooth scrolling/ resizing, this is a big deal. For those that say it isn’t, you absolutely DO NOT use OS X. I can’t see anyone who uses OS X saying it isn’t a big deal. It’s the single thing that keeps me from replacing my OS 9 box at home. It’s a deal killer it’s that bad. People who say it isn’t a problem have masked it/ adapted which translates into making excuses for poor design. There is no hardware config that is immune. IT’S MISERABLE. Since I have to use OS X and W2K at work and XP and OS 9 at home, I can’t get the habit of scrolling in small increments to form like full-time users.
As far as why “PC users” are hacking The Steve’s benchmarks, it’s because he’s such an egregious liar. NVidia, Intel, AMD, ATi, etc may screw benchmarks some. But absolutely NO ONE screws them to the degree The Steve does. He turns benchmarks into such outright fabrications I’m surprised Apple hasn’t been fined under the Truth in Advertising Act. For the Mac only users, grow up. Look at the specs published at SPEC. The figures the Steve puts up are almost half the standard P4 3.0 specs. Stop defending the jerk and hold his feet to the fire. I want faster now!! It’s the zealots swinging from his n***s that holds OUR whole platform back.
The critics aren’t raining on OUR parade, they are calling The Steve out on his lies. If The Steve had said, “these new slowest are twice as fast as our old fastest” or some other internal comparison, the PC crowd wouldn’t have blinked. But he put up the benchmarks and said this is how it compares. He brought it on himself.
Mac users are such cows. They accept him constantly screwing 3rd party developers (the UI tweak crowd esp). They accept him screwing over everyone in his retail chain so that everyone hates selling Macs. Microsoft doesn’t treat it’s fanboy sites the way Apple does – it’s like the once-a-month lawsuit threat if you run a Mac site. They accept him charging for Service Packs. They don’t mind the 20% profit margin on each machine sold, when the PC crowd pays only razor thin margins. That’s the difference in cost folks – not quality of the work.
The PC tech crowd is like rabid piranhas “60,000 bugs in Windows 2000!” “NVidia cheats benchmarks!” “P3 1.3G is broken.” “AMD has severe cooling problems.” “Linux has more security flaws than Windows!!” We have our share of problems too, but Mac users make excuses instead of demanding fixes. Mac users need to turn into wolves and start dictating to him, instead of biting the critics. “The customer is always right.” Fix my scroll you lazy SOBs! And don’t make me pay for it either.
wow, sorry for the long post…
> The figures the Steve puts up are almost half the standard P4 3.0 specs.
No, it’s that x86 perform half of what the lame sites have made to you believe.
> They accept him charging for Service Packs.
“Service Pack” is a Micro$oft TM ;-). OSX updates are free but you are expected to pay for 10.1->10.2 and 10.2->10.3
That’s nothing compared to what you have to pay to M$ for downgrading from Win2000 to WinXP.
Exhibit D… the iPod…i have nothing else to say about that, MP3 players have been around since Napster!!
Oh come on!
Sure mp3 players were around before that, but the ipod was the first (still only?) to use firewire rather than USB, this makes a HUGE difference in speed when loading it with music, or whatever else you want because it’s also a sweet portable FAST external hard drive. Also at the time it had a relatively huge capacity of 5GB, all in something the size of a deck of cards with a battery that lasted 10 hours and could be charged to 80% in 1 hour.
Today, I have the 30GB model, with about 25 Gigs of music on it, the extra 5 gigs lets me move files around much faster than my 100Mbit network.
Your comparison is like comparing the stealth fighter to the Wright brother’s first plane. So please, enlighten us, what innovations have you come up with, or do you simply sit around and whine?
I have to admit they look like neat littel creatures. A few friends of mine have them, and they seem like sweet little MP3 players. However, I will not be buying one at those price points until they feature some sort of PDA OS. I’m not saying that they aren’t “kickass” (to use a Jobsism) — I’m saying that I have no use for a $250 MP3 player.
Price is, without a doubt, apple’s largest stumbling block. Apples cost too much, period. This is from a person who has been using macintosh since before it was released to the public. A few days ago there were wild claims that the G5 was going to enter the market at the current G4 price point and then drive the prices of the rest of the stuff down. Well, all I can say is that entry level G3 iBooks are still $1500 — way too much. I have been a huge fan since the release of OSX, and especially since x.2.3 — at home I never even use my windows machine anymore. That being said, I’m in the market for a laptop, I *REALLY* want to run OSX on it, but there’s simply no way in hell that I’m paying half again as much for 5 year old technology.
And people who are claiming that there’s extra quality in the hardware are mistaken — the over all designs might be excellent, and I do not own an iMac, but the components in my 900MHz G4 are strictly OEM x86 parts. I don’t have a problem with that, but it certainly isn’t super high quality that you cannot find anywhere else.
The OS on the other hand R-O-C-K-S. I have more or less stopped using my linux boxen for anything besides serving music. I absolutely love OSX. I wasn’t drooling over the hardware (partly because there’s no way in hell I can afford a $3k box). I was drooling over Panther. I use SuSE, Redhat, Win98/2k/XP/OSX, and I would rather use OSX than any of the others. The new features apple is including by default simply rock. I never had a problem with ‘windows explorer’ — in fact I found it a convenient way to browse the file tree, but it always bothered me that I coudn’t add a few ‘virtual root’ folders. Though people have complained that the new look of the finder is iTuneslike, I love it. I HATED the old 3 window finder — talk about a PITA.
I really wish I could understand all of the foaming at the mouth going on around here. Sure, I like Mac, but I’m not a blind follower of anyone’s OS. I used to LOVE linux, but sysconfig sucks. I ‘ve never loved windows, and I use it daily. Being the industry standard makes life so much easier. Mac pre-OSX was finished. I simply hated OS9. OSX.2.3 made all the difference — but I’m still not about to call someone who can’t spend the cash and doesn’t like UNIX an idiot for not wanting to buy a home PC for $2k.