Friday, June 03, 2005
Processor family compromises: the future is not now
Bill Davies makes the case in his MUG newsletter that not all of Apple's current hardware offerings are suited to handle HD:
"What do I mean when I say Tiger-compliant? There seem to be two things at work here: TigerÕs CoreImage technology and Quicktime7. For both of those to shine, you need a killer graphics card in your machine. The new operating system technologies are offloading more and more tasks to the graphics card. If yours is not up to snuff, you donÕt get all the features of these technologies."
The larger point he goes on to make, though, is not about the graphics card but about the processor. Bottom line is, if you don't have a G5 processor in your rig, your HD dreams are sunk:
"So, if you were the type of person who was going to want HD playback of DVD content, then the Mac mini, the iBook, and the Powerbook would be scratched off your list, because HD playback requires a G5. IÕll bet that made your shopping a whole lot easier, huh?"
I could point out that this is yet another case of a Mac geek being so deeply insulated inside the geek bubble that he forgot the eMac even exists, but that's already obvious to the ninety-nine percent of the world who isn't trapped in that bubble. Is it bad news or what when a Mac User Group leader doesn't know the eMac exists?
But we'll let it slide and instead point out that the man is not without a point, and one that I cringe at people's lack of understanding every time they try to compare a G5-based Mac to a G4-based Mac simply by looking at the Megahertz of the machine. In reality, to an extent at least, Megahertz is the last feature you should look at when buying a computer, Mac or PC for that matter. It's meaningless if you don't know the processor family, and it's still somewhat meaningless when you do. In the past I've pointed out that all G3-based laptops are more or less irrelevant at this point, while G4-based laptops with the same exact Megahertz are usually still good if not great for most tasks...and I've opined that the difference in relevance between the G5 and the G4 will end up being at least as big as the difference between the G4 and the G3. Some folks have responded by claiming that the only reason the G4 ended up being so much more relevant than the G3 is because the G3 wasn't designed with OS X in mind. But what those folks seem to miss is that innovation and design doesn't just stop when you reach the G4 or any other plateau -- there are always going to be new technological advancements, always new functionalities, and they're always going to be designed for the current processor family, not for some Megahertz range.
Davies oversimplifies things when he suggests crossing all of Apple's laptop models off your shopping list. At this point HD is just an obscure niche that down the road may or may not end up having any relevance at all. So unless you're planning on doing HD-related tasks right away or sometime soon, it's a lousy reason for a mobile user to give up on the portability of a laptop. Oh, you're dead sure that HD will be the future of everything? Try telling that to the folks who spent thousands to buy high-end Macs with DVD-RAM drives built in a few years ago. No, that's not a typo, there actually was such a thing as DVD-RAM, and for about fifteen minutes it was once thought to be the future of computing as well. Here in 2005, most folks don't know it ever existed.
So if you're a laptop user, don't give up your portability just because some new acronym might or might someday mean something to you. If you're ready to buy a Mac laptop, then go ahead and buy it...but I would suggest waiting until after Monday. For all we know Steve already has great news waiting for us, and the whole discussion is moot.
And yeah, if you're wondering, I've more or less decided to go for a new fifteen inch PowerBook within the next few months, G5 processor or not. It may end up not being a good long-term investment, but at this point I'm not interested in compromising down to a twelve inch iBook screen for my main machine...and I can't wait forever for the "mobile G5" thing to (maybe) happen. At this point, my only real internal debate is whether to consider springing for the seventeen inch model, as I have to figure out whether having a screen that large is worth having to carry around a machine that large.
Of course, if Steve gives us a hot-rodded new PowerBook on Monday, it would make my purchase a whole lot easier. See what happens, I suppose.
Bill Davies makes the case in his MUG newsletter that not all of Apple's current hardware offerings are suited to handle HD:
"What do I mean when I say Tiger-compliant? There seem to be two things at work here: TigerÕs CoreImage technology and Quicktime7. For both of those to shine, you need a killer graphics card in your machine. The new operating system technologies are offloading more and more tasks to the graphics card. If yours is not up to snuff, you donÕt get all the features of these technologies."
The larger point he goes on to make, though, is not about the graphics card but about the processor. Bottom line is, if you don't have a G5 processor in your rig, your HD dreams are sunk:
"So, if you were the type of person who was going to want HD playback of DVD content, then the Mac mini, the iBook, and the Powerbook would be scratched off your list, because HD playback requires a G5. IÕll bet that made your shopping a whole lot easier, huh?"
I could point out that this is yet another case of a Mac geek being so deeply insulated inside the geek bubble that he forgot the eMac even exists, but that's already obvious to the ninety-nine percent of the world who isn't trapped in that bubble. Is it bad news or what when a Mac User Group leader doesn't know the eMac exists?
But we'll let it slide and instead point out that the man is not without a point, and one that I cringe at people's lack of understanding every time they try to compare a G5-based Mac to a G4-based Mac simply by looking at the Megahertz of the machine. In reality, to an extent at least, Megahertz is the last feature you should look at when buying a computer, Mac or PC for that matter. It's meaningless if you don't know the processor family, and it's still somewhat meaningless when you do. In the past I've pointed out that all G3-based laptops are more or less irrelevant at this point, while G4-based laptops with the same exact Megahertz are usually still good if not great for most tasks...and I've opined that the difference in relevance between the G5 and the G4 will end up being at least as big as the difference between the G4 and the G3. Some folks have responded by claiming that the only reason the G4 ended up being so much more relevant than the G3 is because the G3 wasn't designed with OS X in mind. But what those folks seem to miss is that innovation and design doesn't just stop when you reach the G4 or any other plateau -- there are always going to be new technological advancements, always new functionalities, and they're always going to be designed for the current processor family, not for some Megahertz range.
Davies oversimplifies things when he suggests crossing all of Apple's laptop models off your shopping list. At this point HD is just an obscure niche that down the road may or may not end up having any relevance at all. So unless you're planning on doing HD-related tasks right away or sometime soon, it's a lousy reason for a mobile user to give up on the portability of a laptop. Oh, you're dead sure that HD will be the future of everything? Try telling that to the folks who spent thousands to buy high-end Macs with DVD-RAM drives built in a few years ago. No, that's not a typo, there actually was such a thing as DVD-RAM, and for about fifteen minutes it was once thought to be the future of computing as well. Here in 2005, most folks don't know it ever existed.
So if you're a laptop user, don't give up your portability just because some new acronym might or might someday mean something to you. If you're ready to buy a Mac laptop, then go ahead and buy it...but I would suggest waiting until after Monday. For all we know Steve already has great news waiting for us, and the whole discussion is moot.
And yeah, if you're wondering, I've more or less decided to go for a new fifteen inch PowerBook within the next few months, G5 processor or not. It may end up not being a good long-term investment, but at this point I'm not interested in compromising down to a twelve inch iBook screen for my main machine...and I can't wait forever for the "mobile G5" thing to (maybe) happen. At this point, my only real internal debate is whether to consider springing for the seventeen inch model, as I have to figure out whether having a screen that large is worth having to carry around a machine that large.
Of course, if Steve gives us a hot-rodded new PowerBook on Monday, it would make my purchase a whole lot easier. See what happens, I suppose.
Comments:
Post a Comment
