TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- the new Intel-core Apple laptops.. for producers??

the new Intel-core Apple laptops.. for producers??

WOw it's ehre already... I would have thought it would take until 2007 to release, but they've done it!...



and what's more is it's a dual-core!
So they've got pretty much the same specs as the 15 in G4 powerbooks, but the dual-core intel chips seem to double the power, with half the power-consumption. I see the whole thing as an accomplishment, and I hope to see the machine approved by digidesign, cuz I love my Pro-Tools!

The only problem I see is that the price is still considerably high. Most people had thought the intel-chip-based apple computers would be much less pricey. I guess Apple has to keep thier profits in line.... hmmmph!!

yeah its too pricey right now...with 2 grand..i rather go buy a Virus TI "D

also logic wont run natively on the new intels untill the end of feb I think.

I don't see why people would want to spend all that extra money to just run OSX and Mac software. You could get an Intel PC notebook much cheaper that would offer the same performance.

maybe i haven't looked around enough but i have yet to see any other laptops even close to the size,shape,look, or with intergrated web cam, integrated remote, wide screen, with a good battery life in real world applications.

I've never been a fan of intel but the laptops shure looks sweet anyway
I think apple made the right decision in the end, I'm guessing it's the dual core they were after from the beginning

quote:

Originally posted by Since Forever also logic wont run natively on the new intels untill the end of feb I think.

The upgrade is priced already on their site but I don't know if it is ready to go.
Be pissed if you just paid for the upgrade to 7 and now have to upgrade coz you buy a new computer. That's just crap, especially seeing that when the v7 was going to market Apple would have been preparing the change over.
just more profits i guess.

Don't Intel have a big issue with their dual cores? Or have they fixed this now?

For the same reason people go out and buy a BMW when they could instead buy a Ford Taurus for a lot less.

Apple laptops are built REALLY well, and have lots of great features. And combined with Mac OS X, everything "just works" and they are very slick to use.

Once you've owned a Mac and used it for a while, when you go back to using a Windows machine you'll notice all the little annoyances and quirks that aren't there with OS X.

quote:

Originally posted by wood0292 I don't see why people would want to spend all that extra money to just run OSX and Mac software. You could get an Intel PC notebook much cheaper that would offer the same performance.

quote:

Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 Don't Intel have a big issue with their dual cores? Or have they fixed this now?

It is only an issue if you are running a server and it is a security issue. As far as I know it is still an issue, but I have not checked up on it. The only reason I even researched it a while back is because they disabled hyperthreading in all our PCs at work because of it. Some guy wrote some code that exploited this to prove it, but I think it is farfetched that anyone could actually take advantage of the hole to steal someone's data.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 For the same reason people go out and buy a BMW when they could instead buy a Ford Taurus for a lot less.

Two completely different cars. If you want to use this example you would have to compare two cars with the same engine, yet one priced a bit more with some slightly different features.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Apple laptops are built REALLY well, and have lots of great features. And combined with Mac OS X, everything "just works" and they are very slick to use. Once you've owned a Mac and used it for a while, when you go back to using a Windows machine you'll notice all the little annoyances and quirks that aren't there with OS X.

This was my point. People are paying more for the operating system. Apple may build laptops really well, but I am sure one of the many companies who build Intel PC notebooks can do just as well. You really are paying more for the OS and the built in webcam.

I am not trying to bash on Macs or defend Windows at all. If I were to get a Mac notebook I would probably stick with a Power PC for a while.

Even if a Ford Taurus and a BMW used the same engine, everything else about the BMW is better. The processor doesn't make the computer, and frankly performance is really only a small factor in choosing a computer. Many people place too much weight on it, even though they will likely use about 5% of it's power.

Apple makes their money from selling hardware. And their hardware is very good. Just pickup a PowerBook/MacBook and compare it with a PC laptop (Dell, Thinkpad, etc.) and you can immediately see the attention to detail and the fit and finish.

Combine that with the OS X, which has been thoroughly tested on that exact laptop configuration so that everything works perfectly, and you have a whole package that is worth a premium price. I do agree that their premium prices are a bit steep, but not everyone needs the best laptop they make.

I bought a Mac Mini for $500, and even though it's not the fastest computer by far, it does everything I want without requiring me to fuss with it. It just sits there, taking up little space, making no noise, and is always in standby waiting for me to use it.

I write code all day for a living, and when I use my computer at home I just want to get things done, not mess around with installing Windows XP updates, virus SW updates, drivers, etc.

If Apple were to sell OS X for regular PC's, it would end up being just as terrible as Windows XP. The complexity of supporting all the various hardware configurations in PC land is just a disaster.

As for the original question... it'll be a while before the major production applications are available as a universal binary. And even when they are, it's uncertain whether the software companies will make the universal versions available to customers for no charge. And if you don't happen to own the latest version of the software, it's unlikely they'll just give you a brand new copy of the latest version for free... nor will they backport prior versions to universal binary.

This is just a first step...

quote:

Originally posted by wood0292 Two completely different cars. If you want to use this example you would have to compare two cars with the same engine, yet one priced a bit more with some slightly different features. This was my point. People are paying more for the operating system. Apple may build laptops really well, but I am sure one of the many companies who build Intel PC notebooks can do just as well. You really are paying more for the OS and the built in webcam. I am not trying to bash on Macs or defend Windows at all. If I were to get a Mac notebook I would probably stick with a Power PC for a while.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 Even if a Ford Taurus and a BMW used the same engine, everything else about the BMW is better. The processor doesn't make the computer, and frankly performance is really only a small factor in choosing a computer. Many people place too much weight on it, even though they will likely use about 5% of it's power. Apple makes their money from selling hardware. And their hardware is very good. Just pickup a PowerBook/MacBook and compare it with a PC laptop (Dell, Thinkpad, etc.) and you can immediately see the attention to detail and the fit and finish. Combine that with the OS X, which has been thoroughly tested on that exact laptop configuration so that everything works perfectly, and you have a whole package that is worth a premium price. I do agree that their premium prices are a bit steep, but not everyone needs the best laptop they make. I bought a Mac Mini for $500, and even though it's not the fastest computer by far, it does everything I want without requiring me to fuss with it. It just sits there, taking up little space, making no noise, and is always in standby waiting for me to use it. I write code all day for a living, and when I use my computer at home I just want to get things done, not mess around with installing Windows XP updates, virus SW updates, drivers, etc. If Apple were to sell OS X for regular PC's, it would end up being just as terrible as Windows XP. The complexity of supporting all the various hardware configurations in PC land is just a disaster. As for the original question... it'll be a while before the major production applications are available as a universal binary. And even when they are, it's uncertain whether the software companies will make the universal versions available to customers for no charge. And if you don't happen to own the latest version of the software, it's unlikely they'll just give you a brand new copy of the latest version for free... nor will they backport prior versions to universal binary. This is just a first step...

I write code all day for a living as well, but I don't think that makes me want to deal w/ PC/Windows problems any less than somebody who doesn't sit in front of a computer all day. I really don't spend any time doing that on the PC I built. I do spend time helping friends with that who don't know what they are doing get rid of spyware and viruses, but that would be the case no matter what OS I run at home.

This is not a simple CPU change, but a more significant architecture change. They are going from a big endian processor (PPC) to a little endian CPU(x86). All of the advantages that the Mac has with its current architecture are no longer there with the Intel CPU. The hardware inside is identical. But I agree that the external features of the notebook are superior to others, but personally I would still go PPC if I were to get a mac laptop.

I would not be surprised if people will try to run OSX on a PC in the next few years. More importantly Apple specific SW like Logic that is being ported to x86 will probably be available for Windows users eventually. It would be stupid not to market it to the other 90% of computer users who don't use Macs. Look how the sales of the Ipod skyrocketed once they were not compatible with Macs only.

quote:

Originally posted by wood0292 I write code all day for a living as well, but I don't think that makes me want to deal w/ PC/Windows problems any less than somebody who doesn't sit in front of a computer all day. I really don't spend any time doing that on the PC I built. I do spend time helping friends with that who don't know what they are doing get rid of spyware and viruses, but that would be the case no matter what OS I run at home.

I gave up on the building the PC thing, I built a bunch over the years but I think I've just grown apathetic to the whole idea. I just want to buy something that looks nice, is quiet and doesn't get in my way. Hence the Mac

quote:

This is not a simple CPU change, but a more significant architecture change. They are going from a big endian processor (PPC) to a little endian CPU(x86). All of the advantages that the Mac has with its current architecture are no longer there with the Intel CPU. The hardware inside is identical. But I agree that the external features of the notebook are superior to others, but personally I would still go PPC if I were to get a mac laptop.

Well of course the endianness has changed, as well as the RISC/CISC design. But those differences have really become less important over the years as the processors have evolved. I don't think the PPC architecture really offers any advantage at this point, and that's why Apple has abandonded it. They used to be able to lay claim that the PPC systems were faster, but Intel and AMD have surpassed them in so many other ways that it's no longer true.

There are also rumors that the new macs might not even have a BIOS, instead switching to the more modern EFI system. The new macs should have gotten rid of cruft such as UART, support for ISA in the chipset, etc. So there are some advantages there...

quote:

I would not be surprised if people will try to run OSX on a PC in the next few years. More importantly Apple specific SW like Logic that is being ported to x86 will probably be available for Windows users eventually. It would be stupid not to market it to the other 90% of computer users who don't use Macs. Look how the sales of the Ipod skyrocketed once they were not compatible with Macs only.

Actually people already are, with limited success. Right after the developer machines became available, users on the internet claimed to have Intel OS X running on ordinary PC's. Of course running it on unsupported hardware will cause so many problems it's not really worth doing...

As far as Logic and the like being available for Windows... switching an app from PPC OS X to Intel OS X (in cases where this isn't a lot of assembler or "endian" code in your SW) just requires a recompile. For them to port Logic to Windows would require MUCH more work, having to switch over all the OS and GUI libraries and such.

I think the Logic was originally cross platform, prior to Apple buying the parent company.

anyone got the macbook pro? I'm very interested if all the rumours that it's 4x faster than the previous powermac are true, as I'm going to switch from windows to mac. I know that a lot of programs have to be updated to run properly under the new intel core processors and I'm looking around if someone has already tested it. tnx

I don't think they've even started shipping yet...

quote:

Originally posted by SouthernDJ anyone got the macbook pro? I'm very interested if all the rumours that it's 4x faster than the previous powermac are true, as I'm going to switch from windows to mac. I know that a lot of programs have to be updated to run properly under the new intel core processors and I'm looking around if someone has already tested it. tnx

quote:

Originally posted by wood0292 I would not be surprised if people will try to run OSX on a PC in the next few years. More importantly Apple specific SW like Logic that is being ported to x86 will probably be available for Windows users eventually.

exactly!

Exactly wrong!

Porting Logic to X86 is not the same as porting it to Windows. A HUGE amount of code is specific to the OS you're writing for, but not the underlying processor. Many programs can be "ported" to X86 on OS X with a simple re-compile (unless they use low-level assembler code, or have code which depends on correct endian byte ordering). Porting to Windows requires changing any operating sytems calls from within the application, which is a LOT of work.

Futher, Apple is a hardware company. They basically give away their OS with their hardware, since that is where they make there money. Why would they allow OS X to run on a standard PC, therefore hurting their hardware sales? Doesn't make sense. And running OS X on a cheapo PC ruins the "experience" you get of using a mac, where things "just work".

It's a certainty that they've put a number of "checks" in the OS that will prevent it from running on anything except an Apple machine. Sure, someone will probably figure out how to "hack" it, but as early attempts have already shown, it's a huge pain in the ass and most people would never figure it out.

And why would they release Logic for X86 (again)? It's a good reason for professional musicians to buy Mac's...

quote:

Originally posted by Mycron exactly!

quote:

Originally posted by Ryan0751 There are also rumors that the new macs might not even have a BIOS, instead switching to the more modern EFI system.

Looks like they already have. I read about a contest to see if people can get a dual boot on these new intel macs with XP. The prize is almost up to $10K already! Check it out:

http://windowsxp.onmac.net/The%20Contest.html

They don't ship for another couple of weeks, but it will be interesting to see how fast someone figures this out.

Logic 7 is the sole and only reason I would change to a mac at this point after having such a great experience with my AMD 64.... which is why I'm really rooting for this whole crossover thing.

Apparently there's also a beta version of some software made by Apple floating around which will allow Mac OS to run on PC. My brother and his friends (in taiwan) apparently got ahold of this and says it works perfectly. Him and his friends have been running OS X on pc for a couple weeks now. I did a search for this online but I really couldn't find anything on it except some old programs like Cherry OS and some other random one. But my brother insists that its true and he's been using the beta versions for a minute. I guess I'll find out in March if its for real when I visit Taiwan.

Wow, arent we all programmers...scary thing...(im C#) anyway, I think yes OSX is a superior OS, and the reason its not plagued by virii and spyware is because noone develops things to afflict the mac platform for much the same reason that you do not see .hqx files all over the internet. The Mac platform has a MUCH smaller following and userbase. Granted the sound and film industry all embrace the machines, but most software development firms and big businesses go with windows and PCs. As far as the intel chip causing mac machines to run like pcs. That is a rediculous statement. First of all, the most notable and obvious difference is the Operating System, this is really what gives the mac the professional finish and support that everyone is after. Macs will continue to run better than pcs because all of their internal hardware is made by apple, all of their software is optimized for the same hardware configuration (much like an xbox or ps2) and apple ensures rigerous quality assurance testing before releasing anything.

When you buy a PC you are buying a mess of parts that can be configured in thousands of ways and solid optimization is impossible.

As mentioned already..
I actually think its only a matter of time before some hacker gets the MACOSX (intel version) up and running on his or her p4 mobo. Im sure there are hackers working hard at it right now, the moment that happens we will really see if its the hardware or software that seperates mac from pc.

I also must comment that I do not think that apple would ever intentionally craft a version of thier OS that ran on normal non-apple machines. As mentioned previously, Apple makes their money on hardware and they lose the ability to maintain quality control on outside machines.

But..maybe..just maybe Apple has planned world domination by releasing their OS and making it compatible with the worlds existing machines so everyone will switch to mac, all the software vendors will switch to mac, and that will bring in revenue. Of course the quality will probably go out the window when they attempt to support everything on the face of the planet(as windows has done) but who knows.

So, would this make logic run faster then it would on a G4? How does the intel-chip compare to the g5?

It's supposedly 25% or so faster for most apps (in real life tests, unlike the "3-4 times as fast" advertised).

The G4 and G5 were great processors, but they were surpassed a while ago by Intel and AMD.

quote:

Originally posted by OurManFlint So, would this make logic run faster then it would on a G4? How does the intel-chip compare to the g5?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.