Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

G5s Start Shipping

Hemos posted more than 11 years ago | from the c'mon-and-get-it dept.

IBM 909

jocknerd writes "Apple is now shipping its G5. The 1.6ghz and 1.8ghz are shipping while the dual processor 2.0ghz will ship at the end of the month."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Article? (5, Informative)

Richardsonke1 (612224) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723408)

You could like to an article, like The Register [theregister.co.uk] or Apple PR [apple.com] itself.

Re:Article? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723424)

what if i dislike the register or apple pr?

Re:Article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723448)

what if i dislike the register or apple pr?

Then you are clearly in need of Slashdot-Style Re-Education! A non-Slashbot is among us! INTRUDER!!!

Re:Article? (0)

Richardsonke1 (612224) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723430)

link, you could link to an article...grr, i need to preview more...

Re:Article? (-1, Troll)

th77 (515478) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723463)

Yes, but slashcode also needs to allow users to correct their mistakes.

Re:Article? (-1)

Dr. Cockulus (684502) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723653)

After that maybe slashcode can be made to allow your mother to correct her mistakes. Fucking pussy.

Re:Article? (-1, Flamebait)

desenz (687520) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723450)

Like it matters. Nobody really reads them.

I like to think of it as the complete opposite of playboy.

hurray for apple (2, Interesting)

selderrr (523988) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723415)

does anyone know how many pre-orders there were ? According to the usual zealot sources, the G5 is supposed to be the stemcell of apples resurection. Albeit a fabulous machine, I wonder if there will be enough sales momentum to influence marketshare.

Re:hurray for apple (5, Informative)

CoolQ (31072) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723431)

100,000 pre-orders according to Apple PR. Which you would have found if you had read this [apple.com] .
--Quentin

The NYT reports... (4, Informative)

MyNameIsFred (543994) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723458)

that Apple has over 100,000 pre-orders of the Power Mac G5. See the link. [nytimes.com]

Re:hurray for apple (2, Informative)

danigiri (310827) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723471)

No way, but around 100.000 machines were ordered. Not bad for an high-end product line.
Checkout the press release [prnewswire.com] .

dani++

Re:hurray for apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723506)

Hmm.. I sleep much better, thank you ;)

Re:hurray for apple (5, Insightful)

phillymjs (234426) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723527)

I would tend to believe the numbers, no matter how large.

Many people have been in a holding pattern, using old machines running OS 9 for two reasons:

1) They would need a new machine to really make the most of OS X, and they wanted to wait until the successor to the G4 was available.

2) They didn't want to make the move to OS X until a native QuarkXPress was available for it.

Both of those conditions have now been fulfilled. Apple will not be able to crank out these things fast enough (even moreso than usual) to meet all the pent-up demand.

I bet once the numbers are in, we'll find out that this was Apple's best quarter in a few years, maybe even since the return of Jobs.

~Philly

Re:hurray for apple (2, Redundant)

DrXym (126579) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723619)

I don't see a machine like this being the ressurection of Apple until they produce a consumer version. That leaves the professional Apple users and there are only so many in the world, especially those who *need* a new Mac.


Of course many Mac heads would love a new machine for the sake of it (count me in since my dual CPU G4 runs like a slug) but I wonder how many will justify the expense of it.


I also have my doubts of forking out for a machine which regards '64-bit' in the much same sense as Windows 95 did with '32-bit'. Maybe the hardware is 64-bit but I wonder how long it will take for the operating system let alone anything else to make proper use of it. And if we're talking some months, it seems that waiting is the most prudent thing to do. Hey, it's not like Apple haven't had production problems before now (*cough* G4 cube) so maybe this is smart anyway.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

kaan (88626) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723417)

first post?

Re:fp (-1, Offtopic)

Tirel (692085) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723425)

i'm afraid not.

Congratulations (-1, Offtopic)

jared_hanson (514797) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723460)

I believe you are the first person to ever get an Informative mod for a YOU FAIL IT style post. May I please have the same for pointing this out?

Re:Congratulations (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723540)

yeah well it got from "3" to "2" in 5 minutes, and then from "2" to "-1" in 5 seconds. i guess that's what they call the ``editor bitchslap``. either that or a rat must be crawling on tacos keyboard again.

but guess what, my karma can't go any higher than it already is! that's right, slashdot staff fails it!

I'm good for it (3, Funny)

boomerny (670029) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723419)

anybody want to loan me $3000?

Yeah, but they're dangerous! (4, Funny)

pmz (462998) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723420)

I wonder how many lawsuits will be filed by people blown through the walls of their house?

Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous! (3, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723519)

Well the neat thing about technology, When you get a faster computer you start working with it without really noticing a major speed change. But then after a week you go back to your old system then you see the difference.

Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous! (1)

pmz (462998) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723600)

When you get a faster computer you start working with it without really noticing a major speed change. But then after a week you go back to your old system then you see the difference.

My fastest computer at home is six years old and has a 300MHz CPU--I guess I can dream, though.

Re:Yeah, but they're dangerous! (2, Funny)

el-spectre (668104) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723574)

I kinda wondered why they were gonna ship 'em. I figured just tell the mac its new address and let it go!

So NOW! (-1, Flamebait)

Iowaguy (621828) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723421)

Let the holy war begin.

All hail the LEADER!!!!!

I want one! (-1, Flamebait)

zojas (530814) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723422)

but I have no money :(

Re:I want one! (1)

bedeutungslos (686392) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723438)

I think that's everyone's tale of woe.

Re:I want one! (3, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723485)

Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips. And many flaws from long term use will be helped fixed (like the PowerBook paint peeling). Also you can hopefully get some more real benchmarks and not from people who are guessing. As well as seeing how people like them after a year. Lilke most things with computers never try to get version x.00 Try to get the next version up. That way they can fix many of the issues, that have not been expected.

Re:I want one! (1)

zojas (530814) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723537)

yes, waiting is a good plan. that way I can save up the money and won't have to buy it on credit. plus in a year they'll probably be 3 ghz rather than 2

Re:I want one! (2, Funny)

Feathers McGraw (180980) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723544)

Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips.

It's not just a good idea, it's Moore's Law.

Re:I want one! (4, Funny)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723656)

"Well I would still recommend waiting a year. Then they will have faster chips."

Yeah, Apple is always trying to screw the customer, by selling computers, and then coming out with faster ones!

ObWhines (5, Funny)

tbone1 (309237) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723434)

1) One button mouse
2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job
3) Quicktime should be open source
4) Ogg Vorbis? Hel-LO!!!
5) I can't run 12-year old software on it
6) They should give it away for free
7) No x86 (though this is actually a plus

Re:ObWhines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723465)

I can't decide if the parent is a troll or trying to be funny.

Re:ObWhines (1)

SirSlud (67381) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723478)

you mean

2) I can't afford one because I'd rather spend 3000$ of my own time fixing Windows than the extra 1000$ it costs to buy a Mac.

Time is money, and this is where people get the equation wrong.

Re:ObWhines (3, Insightful)

rifter (147452) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723565)

you mean

2) I can't afford one because I'd rather spend 3000$ of my own time fixing Windows than the extra 1000$ it costs to buy a Mac.

Time is money, and this is where people get the equation wrong.

Actually, if you build it yourself, a very decent x86 box can be had for $600. Then again, you can get one from Dell or IBM or Compaq that is not horrible for that price with a monitor. The last machine I built cost me less than $500. The one I am building this week was around $200. New hardware.

As for Windows problems, I have none. You see there is this littel OS called Linux. Prhaps you have heard of it?

It would be pretty tough to build a $3000 - $5000 x86 desktop these days, and if you did, it would probably have at minimum twice the Ghz of the G5 per proc.

Re:ObWhines (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723646)

It would be pretty tough to build a $3000 - $5000 x86 desktop these days

Unless you go for a dual CPU PC with a 18-19" high contrast/high luminescence flat screen with digital input.

Building an average PC was always boring, so I've built Alphas and seriously optimized, high-performance multi-CPU PCs as a challenge. Sure it cost me a lot of money (although I've sold most of my hardware), but damn it was great getting your Alpha running 64-bit Linux for the first time already in the 1990s...

more reasons (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723503)

1) Pay more for software than with other platforms.
2) Proprietary hardware.
3) Misleading marketing saying it's the "fastest PC".
4) Less choice.
5) Vendor tie-ins. Can't escape from Apple.
6) Arrogant arty Apple types that can't even touch type thinking differently.
7) #6 flaming you and scoring the truth as "troll".

Re:ObWhines (1, Funny)

momerath2003 (606823) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723538)

I can't run 12-year old software on it

Why would you want to run a twelve-year-old on your computer, you dirty baster?

Re:ObWhines (4, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723575)

1) One button mouse

The one button doesn't bother me, but the lack of wheel does. On the other hand, I now have a logitech (USB) keyboard on my PC which has Apple symbols on the keycaps so presumably works on the Mac. It has a scrollwheel to the left of the keys, which I prefer using since it can be used by any finger easily, which reduces finger strain from stroking the mouse.

2) I can't afford one because I'm too lame to have a good job

Yeah, that was a shame. I'd been trying to avoid having a real job, but then when I saw Apple's prices I finally bit the bullet. Now a fully paid up member of the establishment.

3) Quicktime should be open source

I don't care if Quicktime is open source, free software, or dictated to a trained monkey by God himself and compiled in secret. It should, however, support full screen video playback without upgrading to Pro for $30.

4) Ogg Vorbis? Hel-LO!!!

Hello [vorbis.com]

5) I can't run 12-year old software on it

Software lasts more than 18 months? Wow.

6) They should give it away for free

Well, I really can't disagree with this one. Of course they shouldn't give it away for free to everyone, just me.

7) No x86 (though this is actually a plus

More to the point, no x87. Now that is one brain-dead architecture...

Re:ObWhines (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723652)

It has a scrollwheel to the left of the keys, which I prefer using since it can be used by any finger easily, which reduces finger strain from stroking the mouse.

All I can say is you're a very sick sick SICK man!

Re:ObWhines (1)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723674)

Yeah, what the hell was apple smoking with a one button mouse? It makes all sorts of input slower, clumasier, or impossible. Having 2 mouse buttons is nearly essential for any FPS, preferably more than that for various keybinds. It's much faster to click a mouse button than type a key because of little things called stroke length and seek time which are both practically zero on the mouse. 2-button scrollwheel mice should be standard on every computer, i'm sick of those dinky useless 1-button puck mice on all the macs at my school. (actually, several of them have real mice, but they're not even configured to support the 2nd button or the scrollwheel because OS9 doesn't even support that by default (lol).

New G5 dual 2.0 orders don't ship until november (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723436)

My friend was trying to order one of the duel 2.0 GHz G5 machines and got a quote of november at the earliest for s ship date. So much for G5 production.

it's about freaking time! (1, Interesting)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723437)

I'm sorry, but they have been advertising this thing a little heavy considering they weren't even shipping them. I've visited the apple store here at least twice, seen the ad, and then looked in the store for the box. It is really disappointing to see the ad up as if the computer is right there, and it's not. I surely hope for their sake that there are no major bugs, recalls, etc! Could this be the box that changes the tide? interesting to think about.

Re:it's about freaking time! (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723482)

ummm...yeah.

it is called pre-ads.

do you bitch about movies that are advertised on TV and are not in theaters yet?

oh wait...they say when they will be out.

doh...apple said they would ship at the end of the summer.

Re:it's about freaking time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723547)

Uhhuh? And Opteron is shipping just when, AMD-fanboy?

The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (-1, Flamebait)

neiffer (698776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723439)

Although I could never afford one of these machines (I'll admit it, I'd pick one up if I had a wad of cash), it might be worth picking up since I think it will be the last in an era. The next generation of Apple computers will run Intel or AMD 64 bit processors with the Linux-based OSX.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (1)

Trigun (685027) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723507)

Somehow I doubt that they will downgrade their platform, especially with Big Blue ready to churn out the PPC 970 chips like crazy. Apple hardware is going to become commodity stuff, just like wintel crap.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (1)

alien666 (623909) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723515)

"Troll" is giving the parent post too much credit. Doesn't even have a good hook. "Retarded" would be much more appropriate moderation. Please add "retarded" to the moderation options!

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (1)

neiffer (698776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723548)

The best you have is retarded? Nice one.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (1)

alien666 (623909) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723617)

Linux-based?! Ha, I didn't even see that.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (0, Flamebait)

neiffer (698776) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723664)

OSX is Linux based, in case you haven't updated since 7.4.1.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (2, Informative)

StarmanDeluxe (648985) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723526)

The PPC Processors work very well. Considering the tons of time and money that must have been poured into the research of the G5, there is (approximately) a 0% chance of Macs switching to x86.

This was a semi-viable (though far-fetched) rumor before the G5s debuted; now it's just standard FUD.

Re:The last of the Apple-based OSX machines? (1)

jared_hanson (514797) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723560)

I can't beleive that posts that get unfairly moderated in the Apple section. I mean, come on, this guy is not trolling. Speculation about Apple switching to x86 has been going on for a while, and in plenty of well respected sites.

Anyway, just had to stand up for the parent poster and point out a percieved wrong. Go ahead and mod me troll. I can handle it.

That box! (4, Interesting)

JHromadka (88188) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723452)

Once again, Apple releases a product whose packaging [apple.com] is almost as desireable as the contents inside! Now if only they would update the Powerbook 15" line.

Re:That box! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723502)

I wonder how long it will be until we see G5 boxes on eBay.

ANd how much will they go for?

Re:That box! (1)

alien666 (623909) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723545)

If anything like the other Apples on fleaBay, they will bid them up so high that you'd be much better off buying new.

Re:That box! (1)

danigiri (310827) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723543)

Any time now... just delay those purchases a little now. Check our the latest PB revision rumours here [thinksecret.com] . Well, someday they are going to update 'em.

dani++

Re:That box! (4, Interesting)

Darth Maul (19860) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723556)

The box for the iPod is a work of art; the clamshell design is wonderful. I'm just amazed at Apple's attention to detail with something so seemingly trivial as product packaging.

P.S. - rumour has it that new 17 and 15 inch powerbooks are coming out soon. Head on over to thinksecret.com.

Re:That box! (2, Insightful)

doc_traig (453913) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723557)


"Steal me now!"

Re:That box! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723581)

WTF?

I mean W-T-F?

What does packaging have got to do with anything? Does "packaging" encode your OGGs or AVIs any faster? No? Does it get you higher score on Seti? No it doesn't? Does it compile Linux kernel any faster, no it doesn't.

Fucking Mac-moron.

Re:That box! (4, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723613)

Don't worry, they will. I'm planning on getting a PowerBook in the next couple of months, and as soon as I do they will instantly release a 1.2GHz G5 based version...

Re:That box! (1, Troll)

The Bungi (221687) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723639)

Once again, proof that "ooohhh, shiny!" is one of the primary motivations for Apple customers to part with their hard-earned money.

hmmm.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723457)

$3000 for a nice new G5
OR
$699 for a SCO-enchanced Linux kernel

THAT is the question;)

Re:hmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723541)

I'd pay the $699 to someone who could guarantee that there were no SCO "enhancements" in my 2.4 Kernel.

G6? (1)

dlosey (688472) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723459)

So does this mean that in another 3 weeks they will be announcing their new G6 processor developments?

Re:G6? (1)

speechpoet (562513) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723568)

That became a certainty the day I pre-ordered.

Apple's Market Share (0, Redundant)

wwhsgrad2002 (698991) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723467)

The only thing that prevents Apple from grabbing a serious share of the market are their prices.

Re:Apple's Market Share (1)

tinkertank (587672) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723562)

and their lack of machine stability

Re:Apple's Market Share (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723577)

Very true, but the Apple Zealots, and they are fanatics, are worng once again. It is an underpowered, barely upgradeable piece of Apple dung. What would an Apple user do when confronted by a multi-button mouse? Hopefully kill themselves from utter inability to grasp the concept. Apple ceased to be news of any kind right after the Lisa came out!

Re:Apple's Market Share (2, Insightful)

DavidinAla (639952) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723578)

And the only thing that prevents BMW from grabbing a serious share of the market are THEIR prices. While there are certainly exceptions to the norm, you TEND to get what you pay for.

Re:Apple's Market Share (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723597)

And their kludge of an "OS".

Re:Apple's Market Share (5, Insightful)

SirSlud (67381) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723657)

No, its that consumers still don't 'value' OSes at their true value. Just because Ladas were cheaper than Hondas didn't mean Ladas outsold. Why? Cause people knew Ladas sucked shit, and Hondas didn't.

If Microsoft advertising ever stops drowning everybody out and they stop forcing computer distributors to *only* offer their OS, then people still start to gain a little more visibility. It really wasn't all that long ago that people knew Amiga, Commadore, Apple, IBM existed .. and we'll see such a day again. When the average consumer understands that the OS market does offer a few choices, and that actually choosing a better OS is a money-saving decision, Apple will do better.

I know of at least two people recently who bought a whole new computer cause they fucked up their Windows installation and figured it'd be easier to buy a new machine. This is an excellant example of how little choice consumers feel they have in the OS world. Who the hell buys something, watches it break from every day use, and goes out to buy the exact same thing? Obviously, somebody who feels that there isn't much else to buy.

Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM, and nobody ever felt alone suffering through Windows problems. When more of your friends have Apple, you'll be more likely to see the value of spending more on a computer (and subsequently buying computers/OS upgrades less often) .. being a consumer is about being educated to make strong decisions. Ask anybody why they bought Windows today, and 95% of the time, the person will answer along the lines of "What else is there" or "Because of work/school/friend/game/application, I didn't have any other choice". 4% will say something along the lines of "Well, its the most popular OS, so how bad can it be?" .. your usual leader-worshippers .. the same folks who equate financial success with product superiority (tho engineers know better.) The last 1% actually like Windows, but they also happen to be the 1% of the population that exhibits a distinct interest in sadomasochism.

And of course I run Windows. Because my neighbours do .. although at the rate I'm being asked to fix peoples computers, its probably worth the extra 1000$ for me to *not* have Windows and be able to feign ignorance when begged for help.

Finally.... (4, Funny)

nizo (81281) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723480)

a good reason to go out and get a job instead of posting here all day.

Or.... (1)

phloydphreak (691922) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723535)

sit at work and post to this... I bet you your boss does the same thing: its how he got there.

Not the fastest anymore (-1, Troll)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723483)

Remember those "We have the fastest machine ever" benchmarks (that were a bit dodgy anyway..), well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them. Oh well.

Re:Not the fastest anymore (1)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723522)

you say tehy were dodgey....most people say tehy were fine...including NASA.

Re:Not the fastest anymore (2, Insightful)

NetCurl (54699) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723523)

well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them

A quick look where? These OS topics quickly desolve into unsubstantiated ramblings, so please post links not opinions...

currently available configurations (5, Informative)

kaan (88626) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723492)

from the Apple store [apple.com] :

$1,999.00

1.6GHz PowerPC G5
800MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
256MB DDR333 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

$2,399.00

1.8GHz PowerPC G5
900MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
512MB DDR400 128-bit SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

damnit! (5, Funny)

cannes (151121) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723493)



i'm still broke from the last apple i bought.. and now they have to make another one.. i can only donate sperm once a week.. that's a lot of clown punching for a cheese grater..

Rumors for powerbook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723495)

anyone has any info?

In What Quantity? (4, Insightful)

TPIRman (142895) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723500)

The story is pretty useless until we get an idea of the quantity of shipping G5s we're talking about here. I'm betting it's just a trickle. When the PowerBook G4s first came out, the backorder queue remained quite long for weeks after Apple claimed the 'Books were "shipping," because the actual number of units being shipped was relatively small. I hope there's a flood of G5s making their way from Apple's factory in Taiwan, but from previous experience, I bet that isn't the case.

beware the differences between the 1.6 & the 1 (4, Informative)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723510)

Okay, I just noticed this today (forgive me for being slow), but there are 2 potentially-important differences between the 1.6GHz machine and the 1.8GHz machine:

1) The 1.6 only uses DDR333 memory, not DDR400 (I dunno if it can make use of DDR400 if you replace the DDR333 it comes with). The DDR400 being used in the 1.8 & 2.0 machines is apparently not that great (typical of Apple!). I'm wondering if the mobo can handle some Mushkin 2-2-2 PC3200 RAM if I got it?
2) The 1.6 can 'only' use up to 4GB of memory, vs 8GB for the 1.8 and 2.0 machines.

FYI if either of these things bugs you, be warned. Shop smart, shop...S-Mart!

Re:beware the differences between the 1.6 & th (1)

th77 (515478) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723655)

Yes, the 1.6GHz model is significantly less advanced than the others. I read an intial review/reaction article way-back-when in which the author strongly recommended getting at least the 1.8GHz model. Can't remember the source, sorry...

Soon we will have 64-bit laptops (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723516)

Soon we will have 64-bit laptops.

Now, some people may feel that 64 bits is not needed; that 32 bits is fine. However, certain hi-end rendering applications are already feeling the confines of a 32-bit application; since gaming uses rendering technology, games will also be feeling the limits of 32-bits in the foreseeable future.

Another application of 64 bits: Certain cryptographic algorithms (Whirlpool hash, Tiger hash, and the Hasty Pudding Cipher) are designed for 64-bit systems; these systems perform poorly on 32-bit systems.

The G5 is the first 64-bit computer-dummy-desktop available; in particular, high-quality laptops need to be produced in large numbers, and must be computer-dummy friendly. Hence, this will be the first time a high quality (small, light; tadpoles are neither small nor light) 64-bit laptop will be available.

Re:Soon we will have 64-bit laptops (4, Interesting)

raverbuzzy (603708) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723624)

Soon?

Now [tadpolecomputer.com] (64bit sparc laptop)

Geeks changing to Apple (4, Funny)

QEDog (610238) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723528)

I have a lot of geek friends that have been switching to Apples since OSX came out. They are very good computers, but it is weird to see the geeks and the hip stereotypes converging like this. Has anyone else observed this biblical effect?

Gen 3:1Now the Apple was more subtil than any beast of the field which the God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every computer of the garden?
Gen 3:6And when the linux geek saw that the G5 good for Unix, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one hip, took of the Apple thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto the other geeks; and they did eat.
Gen 3:7And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they weren't using Open Source; and they compiled aprons something using gpp.
Gen 3:13 And the LinusGod said unto the geek, What is this that thou hast done? And the linux geek said, The Apples are so sexy, they beguiled me, and I did eat.

FUD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723580)

Truth : linux market share -> up.
Truth : apple market share -> down.

Re:Geeks changing to Apple (1)

KirkH (148427) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723622)

Oh, yeah. No doubt. The mostly Linux shop I work at has been buying up G4 laptops like crazy for a while now. Everyone from IT to programmers are getting them. I think we've even got some XServes in the racks now as well.

Re:Geeks changing to Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723638)

Gen 3:1Now the Apple was more subtil than any beast of the field which the God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every computer of the garden?

It's subtle, you German fagot.

Still suck (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723536)

Still a slow computer.

Apple: Still not worth the money after all these years. Still overpriced since 1984.

So what does apple do again? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723542)

The OS is from the BSD/Darwin folks. The chip is from IBM. Um, so what is it that Apple actually designs or produces anymore?

Re:So what does apple do again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723602)

Um, hardware? MacOS-X (there's more to an OS than just its "core" components)? A gaggle of software titles?

Perhaps a quick jaunt to http://www.apple.com would be in line. Doing research before posting has never been popular on Slashdot but it's never too late to begin good habits.

Re:So what does apple do again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723627)

A hackneyed business model that guarantees a clique following but broad-based and long-term failure.

I really can't imagine (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723573)

... that anyone could buy a computer with half the speed of a current pc.

What is up with slashdot? (2, Funny)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723606)

Half the posts here are trolls who say Macs are slow,gay, etc.

Personally, I wish I had the money to get a G5 for college. My friend picked an Alienware over a G5, but I have a feeling he will regret it.

Wheeeeeeeeee! (-1, Redundant)

HarveyBirdman (627248) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723635)

Nuff said. :-D

Meh. (1, Troll)

Mantrid (250133) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723637)

I still can't figure out the allure of Mac's. Are these boxes significantly faster than the latest Windows XP Pro, P4 or AMD box? I wonder where one could find a sort of speed vs. price blow by blow breakdown? I'm not talking a Windows Fan Boy vs. Mac Fan Boy flame fest - just one that is as unbiased as possible!

Crash Different (1)

telstar (236404) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723643)

Unfortunately, Slashdot will probably bring this down, but check out the new Apple Crash Different [waveworks.net] movie.

Liars (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6723647)

Apple claim the new machines are the "fastest personal computer". They are liars.

OS X version 10.2.7? (2, Interesting)

kaan (88626) | more than 11 years ago | (#6723650)

According to the Jaguar upgrade website [apple.com] , the latest available version of OS X is 10.2.5. But according to The Register [theregister.co.uk] , "All three systems will ship with Mac OS X 10.2.7, a 32-bit version of the operating system optimised for the new CPU".

Does anybody have any insights into what optimizations might be included? Are there any enhancements or features that aren't present in 10.2.5?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?