Sign In
Register
Help
im buying a mac... which is funny because i was so anti mac before i went to college.. now i am a mac guy without a mac (i even buy macworld every month)
i am getting a powermac... but im torn.
here are the 2 sides:
G5: if i get a G5 i can run everything i need natively, which is great... BUT im very worried that apple and other software/hardware manufacturers will cease to make products that are compatible with the G5's as the intels are soon to take over and i will be unable to get software for my baby.
intel: fast and 'new' and all that jazz.. and all the new software will be intel native.. but i'll have to wait on some things being native... like avid... which i need as i am an editor. and since i need to rebuy avid within the next 3 months... i dont want to have to rebuy it twice. and i am a little iffy on such new technology.
so im torn... can anyone shed some light on all of this for me?
so
Intel Powermacs VS. G5 Powermacs
MultiQuote
#2
Nobody 
- Power User
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 58,347
- Joined: 18-October 07
Posted 28 June 2006 - 05:20 PM
You may wish to read a little around this forum, there have been several threads discussing many of these issues.
Briefly, if you need (not the same as want) it now, G5 PM is the fastest and will remain very usable for quite a while... the newer binary versions are going to run on a G5 as well as on Intel machines and not just Intel alone. If your needs are not urgent, waiting would be a wiser thing because not only the native (better performing-- but don't expect them to be 5x faster a la hoopla /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif) Apps would then be available, the next generation of machines are likely to better and would be shipping with OSX 10.5. [Wonder if Apple would skip OSXIII! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif]
Briefly, if you need (not the same as want) it now, G5 PM is the fastest and will remain very usable for quite a while... the newer binary versions are going to run on a G5 as well as on Intel machines and not just Intel alone. If your needs are not urgent, waiting would be a wiser thing because not only the native (better performing-- but don't expect them to be 5x faster a la hoopla /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif) Apps would then be available, the next generation of machines are likely to better and would be shipping with OSX 10.5. [Wonder if Apple would skip OSXIII! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif]
#5
mdawson
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,803
- Joined: 31-August 04
Posted 29 June 2006 - 02:07 PM
Alam has pretty much covered the basics on this one. The mantra on this matter is:
If you need it now, get it now.
Apple has bent over backwards to insure backward compatibility and easy forward migration. Considering how recent the Mac OS X transition has been, Apple had to go that route and realistically, the OS X transition was also pretty smooth thanks to the Classic environmentthe ability to run Mac OS 9 (Classic Mac OS) within Mac OS X.
The Intel Macs do not support Classic, but they have their own backward compatibility environment, Rosetta. Rosetta permits PowerPC-native Mac software to run on Intel-based Macs. As to software that will run natively on the Intel-based Macs, such software is compiled in universal binaries and will therefore run on both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs, hence the universal.
If you buy a Power Mac G5 now, it will be supported for its usable life. Despite the fact that the entire Mac product line will be running on Intel processors in the next six months, that does not change the fact that the majority of Mac users still have PowerPC Macs. It also does not change the fact that due to design Mac users typically find their computers to be usable for much longer; there are people still happily chugging along with late generation G3s. Apple is aware of the user trend and has announced support for the PowerPC platform accordingly.
As you have indicated that you can wait until September than you should be paying close attention to what gets announced at WWDC 2006 in August. Beyond that, just get the most powerful Power Mac that you can afford and you will not be disappointed.
If you need it now, get it now.
Apple has bent over backwards to insure backward compatibility and easy forward migration. Considering how recent the Mac OS X transition has been, Apple had to go that route and realistically, the OS X transition was also pretty smooth thanks to the Classic environmentthe ability to run Mac OS 9 (Classic Mac OS) within Mac OS X.
The Intel Macs do not support Classic, but they have their own backward compatibility environment, Rosetta. Rosetta permits PowerPC-native Mac software to run on Intel-based Macs. As to software that will run natively on the Intel-based Macs, such software is compiled in universal binaries and will therefore run on both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs, hence the universal.
If you buy a Power Mac G5 now, it will be supported for its usable life. Despite the fact that the entire Mac product line will be running on Intel processors in the next six months, that does not change the fact that the majority of Mac users still have PowerPC Macs. It also does not change the fact that due to design Mac users typically find their computers to be usable for much longer; there are people still happily chugging along with late generation G3s. Apple is aware of the user trend and has announced support for the PowerPC platform accordingly.
As you have indicated that you can wait until September than you should be paying close attention to what gets announced at WWDC 2006 in August. Beyond that, just get the most powerful Power Mac that you can afford and you will not be disappointed.
#6
joom
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 16
- Joined: 28-June 06
Posted 29 June 2006 - 03:05 PM
why thank you... you have all been very helpful.
as i make the transition from the dark side (pc) to becoming a jedi (mac) i shall be asking many questions of this board... and you guys have proven thus far that you are very helpful nice people and i thank you for that
now i just hope avid brings out the intel native avid xpress pro soon after...
unless.... hmm.. someone was telling me that for $50 apple sold the upgrade from powerpc FCP to intel native final cut pro... if avis is planning to offer the same kind of deal i can buy avid when i buy the mac and just run it in rosetta for however long until the upgrade comes out.
thanks all
-Matt
as i make the transition from the dark side (pc) to becoming a jedi (mac) i shall be asking many questions of this board... and you guys have proven thus far that you are very helpful nice people and i thank you for that
now i just hope avid brings out the intel native avid xpress pro soon after...
unless.... hmm.. someone was telling me that for $50 apple sold the upgrade from powerpc FCP to intel native final cut pro... if avis is planning to offer the same kind of deal i can buy avid when i buy the mac and just run it in rosetta for however long until the upgrade comes out.
thanks all
-Matt
#7
mdawson
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,803
- Joined: 31-August 04
Posted 30 June 2006 - 07:27 AM
Perceived software performance in Rosetta is extremely relative. While Rosetta is an emulation engine and therefore suffers from performance hits of up to 50% or more, one has to realize that those stats come from comparisons of the first generation Intel-based Macs of a given model to the last generation of the PowerPC Macs of same lineage that the new machines replace. Given that most people are unlikely to replace a Mac that they just purchased, performance in Rosetta has to be considered based on the system that the buyer is upgrading from.
I have seen several posts by people that have replaced their older G3 and G4 systems with Intel-based Macs and see equal of better performance with PowerPC-native software than what they had on their pervious Macs. Such perceived performance boosts make sense given that these are people that came from Macs that are anywhere from 3 to 6 years old. The same could be said of a PC user migrating from an older PC. Jobs suggested not running apps such as Photoshop in Rosetta due to the performance hit, but there are several Mac, and PC, home users that are running Photoshop and other processor-intensive apps on computers that are upwards of 4+ years old. Such users would easily see better performance on the entry-level a Mac mini Solo, let alone an iMac Duo or whatever Apple opts to call their Intel-based professional desktops.
Unless you are coming from a PC that was purchased in the last year or two, chances are the performance hit that you would encounter running PowerPC-native software in Rosetta will not be a major issue. As to upgrade expensesPowerPC version to Universal versionthat will vary from developer to developer. Some software companies are offering free upgrades to the universal versions of their software, like Bias is with Peak Pro, but others will make you pay for the next version of their software instead of offering a universal version of the current release. For instance, Photoshop will not go universal until the next release in 2007 and Microsoft has hinted at much the same for Office:mac; I do not recall a release date for the next version as yet being announced.
I have seen several posts by people that have replaced their older G3 and G4 systems with Intel-based Macs and see equal of better performance with PowerPC-native software than what they had on their pervious Macs. Such perceived performance boosts make sense given that these are people that came from Macs that are anywhere from 3 to 6 years old. The same could be said of a PC user migrating from an older PC. Jobs suggested not running apps such as Photoshop in Rosetta due to the performance hit, but there are several Mac, and PC, home users that are running Photoshop and other processor-intensive apps on computers that are upwards of 4+ years old. Such users would easily see better performance on the entry-level a Mac mini Solo, let alone an iMac Duo or whatever Apple opts to call their Intel-based professional desktops.
Unless you are coming from a PC that was purchased in the last year or two, chances are the performance hit that you would encounter running PowerPC-native software in Rosetta will not be a major issue. As to upgrade expensesPowerPC version to Universal versionthat will vary from developer to developer. Some software companies are offering free upgrades to the universal versions of their software, like Bias is with Peak Pro, but others will make you pay for the next version of their software instead of offering a universal version of the current release. For instance, Photoshop will not go universal until the next release in 2007 and Microsoft has hinted at much the same for Office:mac; I do not recall a release date for the next version as yet being announced.
#8
Martian
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,568
- Joined: 27-September 01
Posted 30 June 2006 - 11:09 AM
Many of us who have relied on PCs for at least some of our computing have permanently ruined our lives. (in less facetious terms), we may remain Windows dependant for some of our stuff.
Depending on your situation, you may need to retain some sort of permanent access either to a PC or an Intel Mac. Virtual PC (it runs only on a G3/4/5) is usable only for very casual use.
Waiting for native Photoshop seems to be the biggest compatibility problem for Mactel. I doubt that the non-native slowdown for Office will be noticeable.
Depending on your situation, you may need to retain some sort of permanent access either to a PC or an Intel Mac. Virtual PC (it runs only on a G3/4/5) is usable only for very casual use.
Waiting for native Photoshop seems to be the biggest compatibility problem for Mactel. I doubt that the non-native slowdown for Office will be noticeable.
#9
mdawson
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,803
- Joined: 31-August 04
Posted 30 June 2006 - 02:19 PM
In reply to:
Virtual PC (it runs only on a G3/4/5) is usable only for very casual use.
VirtualPC is pretty much a non-issue as far as Intel-based Macs are concerned. Should Microsoft drop the ball on this one, which looks to be the case at this point, the alternatives cropping up are (better) fitting the need for running Windows-only software on a Mac. Aside from Apples Boot Camp, which is more akin to using a sledgehammer to nail two studs together, software virtualization via products such as Parallels Desktop and Wine offer a better road to Windows compatibility. Emulation is no longer required now that Macs are on the same microprocessor platform as the average Wintel PC and virtualization does not suffer from the type of excessive performance hits that emulation creates.
Virtual PC (it runs only on a G3/4/5) is usable only for very casual use.
#10
Nobody
- Power User
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 58,347
- Joined: 18-October 07
Posted 30 June 2006 - 04:34 PM
Reminds me of justifications given for why sub-minimum wages are very good deals for illegal/pseudo-legal Mexicans. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
#12
Martian
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,568
- Joined: 27-September 01
Posted 01 July 2006 - 08:03 AM
What I meant to conclude was that since the G5/VirtualPC compatibility solution is a pain, a former PC user should absolutely rule out a G5 in favor of a Mactel unless he can guarantee continued convenient access to a PC. (I am eagerly awaiting the Mactel tower).
#14
icu400
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 541
- Joined: 31-July 04
Posted 02 July 2006 - 07:39 AM
at this point i'd probably wait, they should be out by september and you'll feel better having the latest technology (I bought my powermac about the beginning of june last year only to find out that less than 2 months later they came out with brand new ones with pci-e, quad core, and better graphics cards, i was kinda kicking myself that I didn't wait)
