# simply frustrated



## zoranb (Apr 29, 2006)

Ok so technology leaps fast, very fast but consumer wise many people are very frustrated by the fact that Apple during its transition phase (to intel) has dissapointed many customers with its careless upgrading. One of them surelly is the intel iMac upgrade that happened fast and offered a faster machine (core duo) not giving mutch time on the G5 cpu. Not that im in favour of older slower CPUs but u just dont sell slower stuff and then after a very short while make the upgrade with same price. I have friends that got the 2nd G5 iMac and not only the upcoming core duo iMac but also its price really pi@ed them off cause in the same price something mutch faster was announced. That really degraded their purchase of the 2nd generation of iMac.


----------



## camgangrel21 (Apr 29, 2006)

you stop your bitching. I talked my dad in to getting a 20" iMac G5 2.0 Ghz iMac. back in october. right before they put there web cam in the iMac G5's.
The way I see it and my dad sees it, is this. That iMac he got may be slower next to the new Intels but so what. His iMac he can use right now. And don't have to set around to get software that will work with his Mac. Also his Mac will still be good for about 8 years. Before he has to get a new Mac.


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 29, 2006)

It does seem odd to me that Apple released a major update to the iMac line just a month or so after the last major update. Especially since they had previously given no indication that the Intel switch would start quite so soon.


----------



## zoranb (Apr 29, 2006)

camgangrel21 said:
			
		

> you stop your bitching. I talked my dad in to getting a 20" iMac G5 2.0 Ghz iMac. back in october. right before they put there web cam in the iMac G5's.
> The way I see it and my dad sees it, is this. That iMac he got may be slower next to the new Intels but so what. His iMac he can use right now. And don't have to set around to get software that will work with his Mac. Also his Mac will still be good for about 8 years. Before he has to get a new Mac.



Bitchin? u better watch your mouth u Texan hillbilly   ::ha::  All users/buyers whether they need a machine or not should get better treatment and information on what the company Apple will release so they dont get degraded machines especially at the same price. I think the iMacG5/intel iMac is one of the most characteristic case of bad treatment Apple has offered.

Hasnt anyone thats got the 2nd iMac G5 been frustrated about the intel iMac?


----------



## zoranb (Apr 29, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> It does seem odd to me that Apple released a major update to the iMac line just a month or so after the last major update. Especially since they had previously given no indication that the Intel switch would start quite so soon.



Thanx for the support pal! I hope there could be more guys supporting this so we can raise a voice up and direct it to Apple. Actually this weird upgrade thing due to Intel transition continues, see MBP 15" and the new release MBP 17"... Apple dissapoints me cause it seems that she has entered into the PC competition zone and is twiching badly...she shouldnt!


----------



## camgangrel21 (Apr 29, 2006)

zoranb said:
			
		

> Bitchin? u better watch your mouth u Texan hillbilly  )


 First off you might take a look at who looks like a Red neck here with the way you type.  





			
				zoranb said:
			
		

> All users/buyers whether they need a machine or not should get better treatment and information on what the company Apple will release so they dont get degraded machines especially at the same price. I think the iMacG5/intel iMac is one of the most characteristic case of bad treatment Apple has offered.
> 
> Hasnt anyone thats got the 2nd iMac G5 been frustrated about the intel iMac?



2nd point is will taken. But here is what I see if Jobs had stayed on the time line, that he had made back a 05's WWDC. You would not see this being talking about at all. If you want to point fingers here you should look right back at Jobs not Apple for that short comeing. I would have to say the board members give the go ahead for the MacBook Pro. But I don't think that they gave the go ahead to the iMac. That says Jobs all over it. Not Apple.


----------



## zoranb (Apr 29, 2006)

Camgangrel21, when i want to point a finger im not intrested if its Jobs or anyone else, i see Apple, im not intrested in who within Apple is responsible, i care only in what the company provides. I hope i understood corectly what u stated!


----------



## camgangrel21 (Apr 30, 2006)

As for what you are saying, is that you don't want to find the person that had to put Apple in the place that it is today? I'm I reading what you have to say here right? That you would just run Apple in to the ground. As to putting the responsible on the person in this case Jobs. Not Apple as a whole. Right? I think that you are just a windows guy on here to make everone pissed at something/someone that we don't need to be.
Like I said befoe if Steve had kept to the timeline that was layed down a 2005s WWDC. If Jobs could have kept the desktop in the labs till June, we would not be talk about this. because Apple would have had time to work out the Bugs in the hardware and software. also a lot of software would have benn ported and tested and working right out the door. As far as i can tell your bitch here is with the bugs that are in the new Intel Macs. Will hate to tell you this that is what happens with the bleading edig not the cutting edig. As anyone that know about PC hardware this Bull happens about 2 to 3 times a year.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 1, 2006)

zoranb said:
			
		

> All users/buyers whether they need a machine or not should get better treatment and information on what the company Apple will release so they dont get degraded machines especially at the same price. I think the iMacG5/intel iMac is one of the most characteristic case of bad treatment Apple has offered.


Let's break this down like you say:

1) Apple sells you an iMac G5, which you deem perfectly acceptable for both price and performance.  It performs well.  You are happy with it.

2) Apple then releases a better iMac with a faster processor, and now, all of a sudden, your iMac G5 is "degraded?"

Please explain that to me -- it makes no sense.  Your iMac G5 was perfectly acceptable, but now that there's something better and faster out there, you're NOT satisfied with it?  Tell me this -- if Apple had NOT released an upgraded iMac and left the G5 iMac as the most powerful iMac, would you still feel this way?

Hey, technology changes.  Constantly.  At an alarming rate.  Computers are constantly being upgraded, which is why you purchase for your needs, not to have the fastest computer available.  The "fastest computer available" will only be the fastest for a short while, which could be a month or a year -- but you are guaranteed that it will not be the fastest computer forever.

I paid over $2000 for my G4 running at 400MHz in 1999.  Should I be ticked off that I can now get a 2.0GHz G5 machine for that same price?  There is only a difference of degree between that scenario and the iMac G5 -> iMac Core Duo scenario.  In my case, 7 years later I can get a much more powerful computer for the same price.  In your case, a few months later, you can get a slightly more powerful computer for the same price.  It's only a difference of degree.

I just don't understand how a machine sitting in your home, isolated from the outside world, is suddenly and adversely affected by the release of a newer, faster machine.  Did some magic particles come through the air and somehow degrade the performance of your computer when the new one was released?


----------



## zoranb (May 1, 2006)

ElDiabloConCaca said:
			
		

> Let's break this down like you say:



1999? I have no problem with sutch time upgrades but check the iMac thing, it was mutch less than 6months, and that my friend really bugs me yes. Of course the G5 iMac is degraded if in less than 6months another iMac 4x faster is produced! Actually Adobe really saved Apple from a total disaster degradation since she never released Universal binaries of CS2. If she did then the dillema that buyers would have would have been crucial, so until Adobe releases that stuff those IBM Macs that are around are still feeling safe and worhwhile since rosetta "degrades" those new Intel iMacs.

On the other hand Apple is anxious of releasing Intel Macs but she has lost a part of the game. She should also worry about what all those people that bought G5 macs and without any notice she upgraded to Intels. Its a good thing she hasnt upset -yet- its Power users and still hasnt upgraded the PowerMac line cause as u know that Quad machine can last long enough, well... it will last unlil the 64bit cpus are out and that wont be long!


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 1, 2006)

zoranb said:
			
		

> She should also worry about what all those people that bought G5 macs and without any notice she upgraded to Intels.


Without any notice?  Apple most definitely _did_ let everyone know that the transition to Intel was imminent.  It wasn't a surprise at all -- Apple announced that they were transitioning to the Intel processor long before they actually transitioned -- months, in fact.  Maybe the announcement that they were going with Intel could be deemed a "surprise," but hey, they let us know, then they did it.  It's not like they just switched processors on us out of the blue.

Just because a new computer is released doesn't negatively impact the performance of your current machine.  It doesn't somehow magically run any slower than it did when you bought it.  It doesn't make your performance suffer.  It doesn't affect your computer in the slightest -- your computer performs just as advertised, and just as it did the moment you bought it.

You bring up the point of Adobe's CS2, saying that performance on the older machines is degraded.  Well, CS2 runs under Rosetta, which negatively impacts the performance and probably makes it run slower than it would on an iMac G5 -- so, again, how is the G5's performance "degraded" in relation to CS2 on the Intel Macs?  CS2 runs _faster_ on the G5 iMacs than it does on the Intel iMacs... so... ???

I understand the frustration at seeing a newer, faster, better computer being release at the same price point as your old computer, but the only suggestion I can make is, "get used to it -- now."  Everyone does it and it's perfectly natural.  Apple is not going to stop innovating simply to give its users "warm, fuzzy" feelings that their 6-month-old computer is still top-of-the-line.

You purchase computers for your needs.  If you need more power tomorrow, then wait until tomorrow to purchase a computer and see if there's a faster one.  If you need more power now, buy now but realize there may be something even better tomorrow... this is nothing new -- it's been happening since the 1980s, and the best thing you can do is get used to it and don't let it get under your skin.


----------



## camgangrel21 (May 1, 2006)

Guy you just don't get it do you. What if you have gone and got oh lets just say a Dell 6 mouths ago. Now would you be piss at Dell when you found that the PC you "just" got from them is now just had one core on the CPU. And that your system is now 500 less then there Top of the line, and it was placed 2nd best on there site. Now just grow up and look around you. As soon as you buy that "New" car in 6 mouths after you get it, they come at with a new one that get 2 MPG more then yours. Would you be pissed at the car maker. No. Why? because everything today is only the "Top of the Line" for less and less time. Just look at your ISP one day you might say hay ok I'll get you DSL for 14.99 at you know maybe "5 MB down and 756 Kib up." then you in 6 mouths find out that now the DSL line pick you got is now the slowes. You don't go out and tell SBC to go F them selfs just because they did not "Tell you!" that they now have Fiber in your part of the town. No what do you do you upgrade. Not bitch cry at SBC for doing a good thing. I could see your point here if. "Apple" = "Steve Jobs" had come out and said once they moved over to Intel that no more PowerPC Software would be made. Now in that case yes you would have something to give Apple the bird over there. That mac you got is the sameone that My dad got when I talked him in to getting a mac. The thing about is by the time him or you will most like need to update your Macs, well most like be when Apple stops makeing OS that will run on that hardware. That is about 8 years from now. By then yeah your "New G5 iMac" would be slow. So I just wish that you could see that you are trying to run Apple into the ground when you don't need to. I meen if you where on PC's not macs. Then look at this way your "New hardware" would need to be updated in about 1 to 2 years. then in a 3 to 4 you would have to buy a new anyways.


----------



## zoranb (May 1, 2006)

In general terms i agree with u guys regarding technology running at the speed of light etc bla bla bla, i cannot agree regarding the iMac issue and specifically the transition from the  2nd edition G5 iMac and the intel iMac model that came without any notice and in about 2-3months after the presentation of the 2nd version G5 imac. Its as simple as that and plz think about it before you reply.

And about the degradation thing dont u feellike a jack ass if u get the G5iMac and after 2months u  see the new Intel iMac and at the same price?


----------



## camgangrel21 (May 1, 2006)

no.


----------



## zoranb (May 1, 2006)

cool that settles it then!


----------



## camgangrel21 (May 1, 2006)

as for you knowing what gen of iMac you have. there 4 gens of the iMac G5's before Intel. Just live with it. of you don't like it talk to apple and see if they will trade in your iMac for a Intel.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 1, 2006)

the iMac G5 iSight had a lot of internal switch arounds and changeovers.  they switch from AGP to a completely different PCI eXpress architecture, and also changed the way everything is positioned.  this compromised a lot of user friendliness (where did all the "look how easy it is to take the cover off the iMac" graphics go?) for no apparent reason.

i reckon, this was basically an intel iMac with a G5 put in it.  it was a prototype.  4 months later, they changed the G5 and the logic board to the intel version.  it works wonderfully.  4 months of bug fixes for free for them.  

take that as you will.


----------



## mdnky (May 1, 2006)

camgangrel21:  Please reread the board rules.


----------



## nixgeek (May 1, 2006)

I bought myself an iMac G5 knowing that this hardware would be more mature on OS X even after the transition to Intel.  I figured if I waited for the Intel iMacs, I would have to deal with the problems many early adopters are now having with the first gen Intel Macs.  What I didn't expect was for Apple to release a newer version of the iMac G5 a month after I purchased mine in September.  This was the first one to have the iSight built in as well as the slimmer cosmetic design.

Yes, I was a bit miffed, but you know what?  That's life.  There's always going to be something better.  I'll admit I tried to see about getting it switched, but I wasn't sad when they couldn't.  I was happy with my iMac G5 and I still am to this day, even with that newer version out at the time.  What made me feel even better was that my revision was the last to allow for easy upgrades to the system, something that was sorely lacking with the iSight/Front Row successor to my iMac G5.  And as far as I know, the Intel iMacs also suffer from this.  I can easily replace the memory and the hard drive on my iMac and I value that more as part of my computer's longevity than how spanky-new my CPU is.  Overall, I believe that my G5 is much better than the one that succeeded it and it's still holding strong as it comes to its 1-year birthday.

As I and others have said, there's always going to be something newer and better for a lot less than before.  Nothing you can do about it.  Just enjoy what you have and make the best of it.  Otherwise you're just going to make yourself miserable.


----------



## Veljo (May 6, 2006)

That's the problem with technology these days, it moves too fast. Sure, if history repeats itself then when I finally purchase a new Intel Mac one of these days a better one will be released months later. But that's just how it is, and if you live in the fear of 'what's coming out next' you'll never own anything.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 6, 2006)

it's always moved this fast, especially in computing.  except that a mac doesn't cost $8,000 any more.  and that works out as nearer $15,000 in converted dollars.


----------



## nixgeek (May 6, 2006)

It's interesting that PC users still say that Macs are expensive considering how they used to cost and how much they cost now.  And Apple didn't even include the software that includes in current Macs in the Macs of yesteryear!  If you ask me, I think the tables have turned.  PC manufacturers give you little to be excited about out of the box except for the included crapware and spyware (like what Dell has been doing for some time now....just ask their XPS customers... ).  Apple definitely offers a lot out of the box at a very affordable price....you actually get what you pay for.


----------



## camgangrel21 (May 6, 2006)

aman to that nixgeek!


----------



## davebz (May 31, 2006)

Let me just say that those that still have G5's still have an advantage over us Macintel users.  WE CAN'T RUN CERTAIN APPS ON THE NEW MACS YET.  For example:  If I needed Photoshop CS2, I have to go to the dark side (Windows)if I want reasonable performance.  There are other apps that are still not ported plus many games.  Halo, runs just OK.  Last I heard, a lot of the updates for games are still a ways off.  Does this mean intel machines are unusable?  HECK NO.  But, if you require PowerPC apps with full performance, than you G5 users have the edge.  So, I say be thankful for the time being.


----------



## nixgeek (May 31, 2006)

davebz said:
			
		

> Let me just say that those that still have G5's still have an advantage over us Macintel users.  WE CAN'T RUN CERTAIN APPS ON THE NEW MACS YET.  For example:  If I needed Photoshop CS2, I have to go to the dark side (Windows)if I want reasonable performance.  There are other apps that are still not ported plus many games.  Halo, runs just OK.  Last I heard, a lot of the updates for games are still a ways off.  Does this mean intel machines are unusable?  HECK NO.  But, if you require PowerPC apps with full performance, than you G5 users have the edge.  So, I say be thankful for the time being.



This was one of the reasons why I decided to go with my iMac G5 instead of waiting for the initial Macintels (I still like how that sounds even if Apple doesn't want them called as such ).  I knew that I would be using OS X as well as some older apps that I don't want to give up on yet for quite some time on this machine.  Plus, it's a great hardware platform (at least in my opinion ).  That's also why I have gone with a 68040 vintage Mac as well, and it hasn't failed me yet.  I can even stream MP3 stations like on DI.FM on that Quadra at 33 MHz!


----------

