who here has or is gettin a g5?

I got a Dos compatible powermac 6100 at work the other day (saved it from being dumped), does that count??

I like the G4's for consumer use. I can't think of any scenarios where a G5 would be fully utilized by a consumer, even using it for video editing... but then again, maybe it is a really nice thing to never, ever use more than, say, 30-50% of the processing power.

I'd love to have a G5 to see how many different users could use it simultaneously, all logged in using Remote Desktop or vnc using older macs as desktop terminals.

I have a 1ghz DP G4and it's speedy if I'm just web browsing and such but when I start dealing with digital video it's sloooow. A 2 hour video takes me about 5 hours to render and burn to DVD. When the dual layer DVD burners arrive I expect that'll mean somewhere around 10 hours to render and burn.

Wayne

Too much power for me. After I saw the original ads and what it did to that house, I say No Thanks!

How much RAM do you have? I render DV all the time on my Powerbook 1Ghz 12", and its just fine, it certainly doesn't take that long for me to render a DVD (usually 2 X 40 minute episodes).

Are you running Panther? Its much faster than Jag or Puma.

I'm using 10.3.3 with 1.75 gb RAM
taking a 30gb iMovie and rendering for a DVD

Wayne

I wish I could take it off your hands.

when I do get a G5, my G4 will go to my mother who'll happlily be typing recipes on it and doing email. Even her beige G3 is under utilized but I'm hoping that more capabilities will encourage her to do more. The G3 mostly cured her of being afraid of hurting it. i'm hoping it'll spark an interest in digital video. If not, well it'll do a darn good job of those recipes.

Wayne

Well, I bought a G5 dual 2.0Ghz for myself, and I certainly don't feel like it has "more power than I need". Actually, it feels "just right" for OS X Panther and my uses (lots of 3D gaming, video editing and DVD creation, general Internet usage, and so on).

I had a dual 1.42Ghz G4 before this, and while it did a very respectable job of running most things, it was a bit lacking in the 3D graphics card area, and the 133Mhz bus speed kept it from really being competitive with the speed I'm used to seeing from my Pentium 4 based PC.

If all you do is type up papers and surf the net, you don't need a G5 ... but if you're going to play around with some of the open-source Unix stuff, you want a system that can compile source code into executables without it taking hours and hours. I also suspect VirtualPC may turn out to finally run Windows at a real usable speed whenever MS gets the G5 compatible version completed.

same here ... thought about getting a new AlBook but figured I'd get a G5 instead ... how do you like THESE apples???

Best Regards,

iceBook

same here ... thought about getting a new AlBook but figured I'd get a G5 instead ... how do you like THESE apples???

Best Regards,

iceBook

your link is dead

TOM

my god mac people need to learn a thing or two
4ghz? bah, thats nothing, and i know many places that the G5 is faster than a dual xenon, i disagree with that, but for the record, a top of the line dual opertron system would pwn them both

yes the G5 is fast, but too fast? god no
people who say they are using only 20-30% of thier cpu are lying, unless they are behind the helm of a cluster or supercomputer when not doing calculations, a pcu just doesnt work that way, it works in spurts, you opne a window? it hits 100 (or close to) maybe for a nanosecond, and maybe for 30 seconds, but it still uses 100% power, and the faster the cpu, the faster each task will be done

and so while yes, the G5 is crazy fast, and itunes loaded in a split second for me when i tried at the store, it was just sitting there, doing nothing, had i been surfing, photoshoping,chatting, etc. would it have loaded like that? god no

i havent spent too much time with a G5, but no computer i have used has been able to load many aplication without taking some to load, itunes is virtually built into osx and has prolly gone through many many optimizations for load time, hence why it loaded so quickly, had i clicked a 3rd party app, or somehting else, i would not expect the same.

and another note, dual 2 is the fastest, but a LARGE margin, the lower end ones are much slower (though still kicky fast) a single 1.6? that if anytthing not enough for some stuff

either way macs great, but PCs are faster, esp. for gamming, you want a top of the line gamming system? email me and i'll hook you up, for 1.8 grand less than what apple charges you, and you can play about 10x more games (and if you say all teh good oens come out for mac too, not only is that not true, but i dont have to wait half a year or more *cough* splinter cell *cough*)

but yeha, this argument get repeditive, by all mean, macs kick ass, and if the main point of your computer is not gamming, get a mac

(and i by no means would ever sugest anyone go out a 'buy' a PC, build one, its better cheaper and more fun than anyother option, but the elegance of a mac just cant be matched)

I'd have to say anyone who gets the single 1.6GHz model is a real fool. I dont even think apple should have released it. You want limited power from an expensive system, you get a dual G4. Enough said. Where's my donut?...

either way macs great, but PCs are faster, esp. for gamming, you want a top of the line gamming system? email me and i'll hook you up, for 1.8 grand less than what apple charges you, and you can play about 10x more games (and if you say all teh good oens come out for mac too, not only is that not true, but i dont have to wait half a year or more *cough* splinter cell *cough*)

thats mainly just cause the pc world is more popular by some twisted turn of fate and so the developpers will make more money. The price thing, well i reckon most apples are overpriced but the certain parts that are produced in lower numbers than pcs pushes the price up

(no means would ever sugest anyone go out a 'buy' a PC, build one, its better cheaper and more fun than anyother option, but the elegance of a mac just cant be matched)

i reckon apple should offer this option and it would be taken up by a certain number of people esp. if standard pc parts would work more easily

my 2c

agreed, but
"by some twisted turn of fate"
no, not really

apple has always made their own hardware and software, vertical integration.

most PC companies on the other hand are horizontally integrated, IBM especially so, because they are so widespread in the CPU market alone they even make em for apple.

Microsoft is the same way, they make the OS for almost all of the computers, it allows them to set a standard, windows is windows on any PC (well its alot more like OSX on mine, but thats not the point) setting an OS standard, for every peice of hardware, allows the user to go and buy any old hunk of junk crapper, load windoze onto it, and it will at least half function, and they didnt need to pay a premium, its putting products into the hand of those who couldnt otherwise afford a computer.

However, this stratagey is inherently flawed, since windows has to work for every peice of hardware, its often bulky and unefficient. Most the time it doesnt even work right, especially to those who buy the junker PCs to save cash, but did so not knowing that they would be crap, nor knowing how to do anything about it.

Durring a time period where it was basically a necessity to have a PC, all of these companies offering 600 dollar desktops are raking in the cash. up until the imac, there was no real cost effective mac for home use. macs took a back seat for awhile.

but now, i see things changing, i would say the eMac is the best deal out there, and especially for those who really dont know shit about computers. For laptops, apple reigns supreme, find me a PC laptop that doesnt have some sort of driver problem, and doesnt come full of unnecissary applications running in the backround, appl elaptops are simple and in my eyes, the perfect laptops.(gamming to any real extent on a laptop just isnt realistic)

Dell, the previous premium PC manufacturer is basically down the tubes, filling in compaq's niche, (value computers for those smart enough to know that HPs are crap) and they are trying to hold onto their previous status, but the quality just isnt there. Gateway has a chance at filling that top of the line gap, and maybe IBM again(but unlikely). to me the PC manufacturer world is being consumed by HP and emachines, they are doomed for failure.

more people are building their own, and more people are using macs, i think the ipod really did it for most people, "whoa, this is nice, apple must make good things!" *buys ibook* *buys imac* etc.
when someone asks me which to get, i tell them mac. (most gamers already use PCs and know to stay there for gaming)

As for cusomization and support for more hardware, apple should not, it would ruin their product strategey. apples are the most reliable beasts on the planet, they hold solid, dont really need drivers, and thats great. If you start supporting more hardware, you loose that. Yes they could release OSX for x86, on one level i want them to, and people are like, "yeah, they should do that, then everyone would use OSX" well no, they wouldnt, because if they did, OSX for a PC could just plain not be as good as OSX for a mac, its just couldnt be. Most of waht makes OSX great, the reliablity, the integration, the whole shebang would be gone.

Apple's market plan may end up in them losing suppport from time to time, but they sit there like a rock, and poeple are begining to realize. The PC market is flying all over the place, you buy a PC who knows what you are gunna get. You get a mac, you know its gunna be good. period.

anybody else think i write too much?

"(gamming to any real extent on a laptop just isnt realistic)"
Actually, gaming notebooks are starting to pop up in places. AMD's mobile barton series as well as the mobile AGP slot (not to mention the agressive marketing of products for said slot) are good indicators of this.

But that doesen't make Apple's laptops any worse in my eyes, PC laptops still have a LOT of catching up to do.

(I was going to say more in response to these two posts, but I'm running very low on time. I've been really busy lately.)

actually the hot gammin laptop chip right now is the P4 desktop, they have the 3.4EE packed into aome laptops now, i knows its a fad i just dont find it at all realistic, gammin laptops are huge and bulky

and as for macs in comparison, apple laptops are god

A laptop is bound to be huge if you put a desktop chip in it, especially something like a P4 3.4 (The guy who designed the EE series should be shot. I know! I'll design a processor that costs three times the amount of a regular system!). Hence the mobile Barton series. Quite a fast chip, but it runs really cool and it has a bunch of mobile optimizitizings, like the lower voltage, and PowerNow (or whatever it's called) and such. So, you don't need a huge cooling system and thus the size problem is pretty much solved.

Besides, Gaming is all in the graphics card unless you're using software rendering.

I'd take an apple portable over a PC one anyday, but I'd take a desktop PC over anything. Never liked laptops.

I’d take an apple portable over a PC one anyday, but I’d take a desktop PC over anything.

word
pretty much my entire stratagey

yes, alot of it is in the graphics card, but not all, especially in games like HL2, its the physics man, the physics!
the 3.4EE is non existent for one (at least i cant find one) pretty sure i made that one up, the 3.2EE is only a grand, yeah, i'm not buying it, but buy be 3 ssystem for the price, its not that bad

and yes it huge, but thats what idiots buy, th

Haven't you heard of alienware (www.alienware.co.uk). They do custom 17" laptops that are better than most desktops (except the alienware ones).

nope never
yes i've heard of alienware, their laptops have desktop P4s and radeon 9600 mobiles, better than many desktops yeah, but hot as hell, and huge, mother f**ing huge. not too pratical. AND i'm not really in the mood to be playing farcry on my laptop, maybe if i had a mouse, but then why bother with the laptop when i could have a desktop with better speakers a better display, a real keyboard, and an all around better machine.

and also: alienware's PCs arent the greatest, they are nice for the gamer who doesnt know jack about coputers, but they are hella $$$ and i'd prefer a voodoo if i dont want to be in and out of my computer, but for my money i'd rather get a water cooled P4 OCed to 3.6ghz with a side of OCed 9800XT

Alienware laptops are WAY overpriced. Especially considering they are just rebranded laptops from another manufacturer. My friend bought a laptop that was *exactly* the same as an Alienware one (i.e. - direct from the manufacturer instead of third party through AW) and it was something like a grand less than its AW counterpart. I'll ask him what the site was where you can get them next time I talk to him.