Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Steve Jobs: G4 is slower than Intel CPUs  (Read 11042 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Waccoon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 1057
    • Show all replies
Re: Steve Jobs: G4 is slower than Intel CPUs
« on: September 17, 2003, 09:24:57 AM »
Quote
DaveP:  To use a G5 requires a new northbridge, which requires getting one from the same place Apple does or waiting for a supplier of northbridges to come out with their own. Oh, and that is just the start of your design issues.

Why, oh why, couldn't people see that earlier?  Even if the CPU was faster than any X86 chip, you still have to deal with the motherboard.  I don't care what hardware I use so long as it's a good value.  PowerPC systems, on the whole, are not.

The big reason I'm so harsh on PowerPC is because I really hate proprietary hardware, in general.  With so few choices in that market, you just have to take what's there.  Hardware is only a means to an end.  Software is what matters.  Why people absolutely kill themselves just so they have the novelty of using "non Intel" hardware is beyond me.

Recently, Kodak offered us an "upgrade" to our DLS photo minilab workstation. They told us that after working with IBM for a while, they couldn't get any systems with newer motherboards to work, because they aren't compatible with their proprietary SCSI film scanner.  Yes, regular SCSI wasn't good enough for them, so they made their *own* SCSI card, that just happens to work in only one IBM motherboard.  So, they are offering us the "only thing they can":  A CPU upgrade.  For $5,000, we'll get a refurbished machine, exactly the same as we already have, but instead of having dual 450 Mhz processors, it will have 800Mhz processors.  Nothing else will change.

Hmm...  800Mhz, same hard drive models, same memory, same SCSI config (3 controllers and five hard drives), all squeezed into a minitower... and it's *USED*, all for an amazing bargain of $5,000!  Wow!  Where do I sign up?!

Of course, my boss DID sign up, because, "It's the only upgrade they offer."  I told him that buying it is a very bad idea, because the DLS system is very hard-drive crazy, and new CPUs won't noticably improve performance without newer hard drives, and for $5,000 the system is a complete ripoff.  I told him, point blank, that the upgrade is near worthless and we should go without.

To that, my boss said... quote, "You need to get into the 21st century."

Oh yeah, and they hard-code their software by CPU serial number and an exact model of SCSI card, so if you try to upgrade the CPUs or HD controllers on your own, your license is rendered invalid and the software won't boot... plus, your service warantee is void.

I think I'm in the wrong business.
 

Offline Waccoon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 1057
    • Show all replies
Re: Steve Jobs: G4 is slower than Intel CPUs
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2003, 05:52:19 AM »
Quote
AmigaMac:  "What do you mean PowerPC is so proprietary? I guess you can go down to your Local Radio Shack, but some silicon wafers and a few transistors and make your own homegrown x86 CPU? How absurd!"

Have you ever built a PC before, or more importantly, RE-built a PC?

Quote
"Everything matters, not just software. And people don't go out of their way to buy 'non Intel' based hardware. Some people actually do give a rats arse about the hardware as much as the software. I personally think PowerPC is technically better than x86 (though that's my own opinion on the subject)."

Technically better, yes.  But slower, more expensive, fewer development tools, low availabilty, contract restrictions with Apple...

Yes, everything matters, including the ability to serve its purpose.  x86 is less efficient, but performs the job better overall.  That may change eventually, but that is not the case now.

Please note the largest orders for PowerPC chips are for embedded applications, hence the reason PowerPC was not an evolution of 68K, and provided virtually no backwards compatibility.  Apple gets the desktop versions under contract, so Amiga is left to fight for either the embeddable chips (unsuitable for desktops), or last year's model (which is slow).  Yeah, that's what I want in my PC, and I'll pay $800 for it, too!

Quote
"Some people prefer commodity over quality... and vice versa!"

So, what commodity does PowerPC offer?  The only one I can think of is power consumption, which means almost nothing to desktop users.  As for noise, I dare you to listen to my new P4 system.  I replaced my Athlon with a P4 and an Antec case strictly to reduce noise, and I can assure you that it is VERY hard to beat.  Improvements in cooling are very impressive with the new P4 CPUs.

If you're using Athlon as your reference for x86 cooling, no wonder you're not impressed!  My Athlon was a good performer, but, man, did the noise and cooling SUCK.  This P4 is amazing.

Quote
"You're short-sighted reasoning above almost contradicts what Amigans have been fighting for all this time."

Don't make me laugh.  Most Amigans have given up and gone to other platforms -- usually x86.  The only people left are a very tiny hardcore audience, and those people hardly provide any "long-sighted" business potential.  I think most people would have supported the switch to x86, but we'll never find out now, will we?

Quote
"It would be like me asking why are all these Amiga freaks so hell bent on using 'non-Microsoft' software?

...Which has nothing to do with PowerPC.  Technically, you can run your non-Microsoft software on any platform, provided the developers make the call.

Quote
"...Because they have a preference on what they believe is a better solution for their own wants and/or needs, PERIOD!"

...Which apparently involves paying a lot of money for slower hardware that follows standards several years old.  Would you pay $50,000 for an electric car with 50HP, no A/C, and a cramped interior?  Some people will, but not enough to matter in the marketplace.  Eventually, we'll all drive electric cars, but it's not a realistic option, today.

Quote
"I could care less what Amiga Inc. puts inside the case. If they offer both PPC and x86, then we all win as consumers"

I agree with this, but that assumes that their fabled "DE" technology fulfills the promise of running on any hardware.  So far, nothing has been demonstrated beyond OS4, which only runs on PowerPC.  If they want to offer PowerPC as an option, for those who want more technically advanced hardware, that's fine.  But for the majority of us who want the best value, PowerPC doesn't deliver, and that's the only choice Amigans have because that's what Hyperion wanted.

I don't care what they offer, either, so long as it's competitive.  G4's are not.  I completely lost interest in Amiga when they said OS4 would only work on PowerPC.  I just want to see if DE is alive and might be released, and then I'm out of here.

I'll wait for another new company to deliver an Amiga-like OS for x86.  AROS is definately interesting, though I still can't get it to work on my PC because I don't have a serial mouse, anymore.

Quote
ACE:  "What I don't neccessarily agree with is the diversity issue (look at consoles for example) ...yes, they are slightly limited towards the end of there lifecycle, but you know you have a platform which will (hopefully) be supported for a set period of time."

That's because consoles are not about hardware, they are about software, and the companies that make consoles specialize in making and licensing games.  A powerful, cheap console with lousy games and bad management won't sell.  Even the GameBoy would not have been a success without a powerful library of great games, despite its awesome battery life and compact size.  I have a PS2, and I think the hardware is pretty flakey and unreliable, but I can't deny that games like Sly  Cooper, GT3, and Rachet and Clank made my purchase a good one.

BTW, I'm a big Dreamcast fan, and that wasn't based on big, powerful hardware, either.  I bought that long before the PS2, even though I knew it would die next to the hype of the PS2.  It was the games, not the hardware, that sold me.

Quote
Wain:  "I understand 80x86 is readily and cheaply available, but all it will do is throw the Amiga market into the "every month I need to upgrade "group, which is a place where it will surely be overwhelmed."

Limited availability of drivers will prevent that just fine.  :-)

Quote
"The 80x86 chipsets are being phased out, and being slowly replaced by incompatible CPU's"

And you see the Amiga incapable of adapting?  What of the hundreds of millions of Windows machines out there?  Will they all go belly-up?  It all depends how programmers write their code and if they can re-compile it easily.  Well-written code can be translated to other CPUs.  Old code runs under IA32 emulation, which isn't all THAT slow.  The only peope who lose out big time are those poor assembly hackers, and I could care less about those people.  The programming language, not the hardware, is the barrier.  x86 is as irrelivent as PowerPC in this respect.  Again, it all boils down to value and development procedure, not an exact CPU.

Quote
"So G4 isn't "brand new top of the line" as of what 4 months ago or something? It's an excellent CPU, that is going to go down in price due to the new processor line, and puts the AmigaOne on track for relatively painless upgrading."

Well, it would be nice if things like SerialATA and Gigabit ethernet were available on the AmigaOne, which is not the case, and won't be for a while.  AmigaOne is OK for hobyists who like their old hardware, but it can hardly be considered competitive.

I should note that I use my PC for work and play.  I suppose if all I did was e-mail and browse the web all day, a G3 would be fine.  But then, I wouldn't need an Amiga, would I?  I'd be perfectly happy with a Mac, since it can browse the web just fine.  A five year old Mac, at that...

Quote
iamaboringperson:  "If you're worrying about these machines not using the old x86 hardware then you're not thinking about the long term future enough."

See above.  x86 is the most popular architecture in the world, and the most widely supported.  There are ways to convert software to new CPUs with a minimal performance hit.  The whole world isn't going to drop x86 overnight, and IA64 has PLENTY of time to overtake the market (and possibly lose it, too).

In 5-10 years, I doubt Intel and AMD will be the star players, anymore.  I also doubt that Amiga Inc will be alive then, the way things are going (but, hey, we all knew that, right?)

I still have faith in AROS, QNX, Linux, and other x86 contenders, so long as they continue to grow and collect a community of talented people who can turn these OS's into real desktop operating systems, and not just embedded or hobby projects.  GUI design and intuition is my biggest complaint, as QNX and Linux, in particular, still drive me insane (can you say, "By Programmers, For Programmers?")

Oh yeah, and if it runs on x86, I can try before I buy, which is the ONLY way I'll consider buying a new OS.  Of course, you could always go to the store to see the latest Macs, but they are usually the ones running MPEG movies all day, or have their hard drives renamed to obscenities.  Yeah, that'll convince me to buy it!   :-D
 

Offline Waccoon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 1057
    • Show all replies
Re: Steve Jobs: G4 is slower than Intel CPUs
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2003, 06:22:55 AM »
Quote
PS I remember a small mac g4 cube that had real heating problems so bad that we could cook an egg on it's heat vent. It was so bad that it cracked all the cases of that particular Mac. So the PC exhaust problems are not anywhere near as bad as some of the earlier Mac PPCs..

Whoever designed the cube was *ON* crack.  It uses only passive cooling, and was so packed on the inside it's amazing it gets any airflow at all.  I don't know for certain, but I believe most of the heat is from the hard drive and GFX chip, not the PPC.  I would have understood the cube more if they had used a notebook hard drive and a slow-spinning 60mm fan on the bottom.

As for cracked cases, is that really true?  I thought the infamouse "cracks" were simply moulding edges because they didn't put enough thought into manufacturing.  Seems typical, though, that a company would spend all that time developing a computer simply for athetics, and then resort to cheap, badly moulded plastic.

Oop... sorry, off topic again...