KVR Audio

AD80 · Post by **AD80** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:16 am

Green Red Brownell wrote:
arguru wrote:After this move I dont see any reason of Apple keeping in hardware business.
One more point that needs to be made... even though they will have Intel chips inside, these will still be Macs. They will not be vanilla beige PC's.

Beige PC's??

http://www.newegg.com/ProductSort/SubCa ... uter+Cases

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:18 am

Green Red Brownell wrote: The big reason for Apple to do this is that the entire market is moving more and more toward laptops, and Apple didn't have a good laptop story at all, with IBM processors. Intel just announced yesterday that Pentium M's are selling like hotcakes. Without some seriously strong laptops, Apple doesn't have much future as a hardware company. So, if ya con't make a G5 laptop, what are ya gonna do??

Exactly - IT news sites like http://www.theinquirer.net
announced in the last couple of weeks that the Laptop/desktop split of the global PC market has recently tipped in the favour of laptops. Currently laptops are 53% and rising.

Apple has no choice but to get with the program. I think it is interesting that no one has really addressed Sascha Franck's points about the lack of expansion and I/O in the Mac mini towers - besides the nonsensical contention that you can't use the expansion without electrical problems - (dude get a decent power supply!).

The funny thing is that while desktop workstations are more ergonomic if you spend many hours on them (you don't really want to spend hours looking down at a monitor or type on a small keyboard or use a less than optimal pointing device) they are rapidly going to become the preserve of those who have some special application - eg DAW. PVR, video editing workstation, high end gaming. Nearly all of these sorts of applications demand plenty of expansion and lots of disk I/O.

The only performance competitive Macs are the dual towers but they lack exactly what people go to a tower for - I/O and exansion slots. If the Mac is such a "Pro" solution WTF don't they even have as an option a tower case with 8x SATA and 6 expansion slots - you know, the sort of configuration you can get for $499 US in a PC?

A realistic assessment says that Macs aren't even slightly pro market oriented despite all the hype and haven't been since the 9600 - which did have 6 PCI slots and a dual PCI bridge.

Apple are like Sony - a stylish appliance company. Apple have stolen Sony's lunch with the iPod and they absolutely should have a top quality range of laptops. The Intel switch will fix that deficit but at what cost? Think about all the niche developers whose wares are the subject of most of the discussion here. Companies like PSP have spent simply ages porting their plugin range to OSX while releasing nothing new in some time. This work will not be completely trashed by the move to OSX-x86 but you would have to ask - would they (or another developer) have gone to the trouble of porting to Mac if they knew Altivec was going to be given the flick?

AD80 · Post by **AD80** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:22 am

egbert wrote:
A realistic assessment says that Macs aren't even slightly pro market oriented despite all the hype and haven't been since the 9600 - which did have 6 PCI slots and a dual PCI bridge.

But is the 9600 beige tho? Thats the most important part.

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:31 am

AD80 wrote:
egbert wrote:
A realistic assessment says that Macs aren't even slightly pro market oriented despite all the hype and haven't been since the 9600 - which did have 6 PCI slots and a dual PCI bridge.

But is the 9600 beige tho? Thats the most important part.

Actually it was! Where's Spindler when you need him

Green Red Brownell · Post by **Green Red Brownell** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:30 am

AD80 wrote:
Green Red Brownell wrote:
arguru wrote:After this move I dont see any reason of Apple keeping in hardware business.
One more point that needs to be made... even though they will have Intel chips inside, these will still be Macs. They will not be vanilla beige PC's.
Beige PC's??

http://www.newegg.com/ProductSort/SubCa ... uter+Cases

PC's are fecking boring, even if you load them up with neon lights. So, I still think of them all as beige. They're an appliance, like toaster. Except they give infintely more trouble than a toaster.

anopenscroll · Post by **anopenscroll** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:45 am

That's right, because macs are S-E-X-Y!

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:46 am

Green Red Brownell wrote: PC's are fecking boring, even if you load them up with neon lights. So, I still think of them all as beige. They're an appliance, like toaster. Except they give infintely more trouble than a toaster.

No PC of my acquaintance has ever filled the room with acrid smoke. You could probably stick a knife in a PC without getting fried too. I'm sure this last is an important consideration for some around here

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:32 am

egbert wrote: The only performance competitive Macs are the dual towers but they lack exactly what people go to a tower for - I/O and exansion slots. If the Mac is such a "Pro" solution WTF don't they even have as an option a tower case with 8x SATA and 6 expansion slots - you know, the sort of configuration you can get for $499 US in a PC?

Exactly my point. To get as much connectivity AND performance (in terms of storage space and data throughput), you will have to spend another 500 bucks at least.
Add to that that Apple has continuosly f**ked up their PCI slot models. Just ask UAD or RME users.
And hell no, advices such as "get a firewire PoCo" defenitely don't help them to save their asses.
I expect my audio cards to "just work" in whatever machine I'm buying for DAW purposes. And it's exactly like that with PCs.

Apart from that, regarding the "sexy" look... oh yeah, you surely place your "jet-fan powered" G5 next to you in a studio environment. Many people I know even have a machine room. And personally I hide my computers as good as possible. The only thing I need to access them for is loading CDs. I'd rather place a nice flower, a sculpture or - heck - even an ashtray at some visually exposed place, instead of a computer, no matter how sexy it might look.

AD80 · Post by **AD80** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:44 am

I dont know who decided the G5 was sexy looking. To me it looks like some sort of meat locker. Its enormous for no reason and has no color. Bleh.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:08 am

BONES wrote:
pdxindy wrote:I do video work and there is nothing quite as nice as Final Cut on Windows. Also, Motion has no equal. It rocks!
You're obviously an editor. Motion is a toy designed for editors, it is in no way a serious compositing application. FCP OTOH, has raised the bar for desktop editing but is still very much an entry-level tool. Clearly Apple hoped to repeat teh success of FCP in buying Logic and Shake but they seem to have failed because they pissed to many people off by killing the Windows version.

Motion is not a toy. It is an amazing tool for the price and capability. I own After Effects and Combustion, and even when I plan to create the final effects in one of those apps, Motion is so very useful for laying out ideas fast. The simulations of forces etc are remarkably easy. I could go on.

From working as a beta tester for high end software, I have quite a few business aquaintances at all levels of the broadcast and film industries. A number of them are using Motion in their workflow because of its speed while doing certain things very well, even at the top studios in the country. Many people recognize its value. Nobody calls it a comprehensive composition application. Neither do they call it a toy as in being beneath serious work.

jon9091 · Post by **jon9091** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:15 am

Sascha Franck wrote: I'd rather place a nice flower, a sculpture or - heck - even an ashtray

All of which have been known to be optional accessories on PC cases.

jon9091 · Post by **jon9091** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:21 am

AD80 wrote:I dont know who decided the G5 was sexy looking. To me it looks like some sort of meat locker. Its enormous for no reason and has no color. Bleh.

Agreed. Everyone with any eye for design can see this this is MUCH better

http://www.alienware.com/product_detail ... KU-DEFAULT

realmarco · Post by **realmarco** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:37 am

one thing that puzzles me is why they said since 1994 the mac used ibm powerpc processors...i thought it was motorolla and then ibm(recently)

one thing is for sure my ibm stock dropped ...lost 10k on the market

Stupid American Pig · Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:45 am

anopenscroll wrote:That's right, because macs are S-E-X-Y!

Because when I think sex, I think about apple macs...

Macs are pcs for hardware snobs...

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Sun Jun 12, 2005 12:49 am

Sascha Franck wrote: Apart from that, regarding the "sexy" look... oh yeah, you surely place your "jet-fan powered" G5 next to you in a studio environment. Many people I know even have a machine room. And personally I hide my computers as good as possible. The only thing I need to access them for is loading CDs. I'd rather place a nice flower, a sculpture or - heck - even an ashtray at some visually exposed place, instead of a computer, no matter how sexy it might look.

My G5 is quiet, which is important to me. I am annoyed by the case, cause the look of the case is meaningless to me and it seems a waste. I also prefer to have the box out of sight.

As for the switch to Intel, seems like a good idea. In any case, the various people I work with are all using FCP on Macs, and I am happy with my G5 and will be using it for a few years regardless of whether Apple switched or did not, or even went out of business. And if Apple did go out of business, I'd be using PC's and wouldn't skip a beat other than not liking giving money to Microsoft.

I'd love to be able to install OSX on any PC hardware. Even better, I wish there was good audio/video sotware for Linux.

Apple ditches IBM power PC chip and will use Intel.