The Brad Hole

I'd certainly agree about XCode - text editing, and indexing in particular, can be horrendously slow. I use it, but have several bugs on radar that have been there for 1+ years. Hopefully, they forked 1.2 long ago and there's something cool to be announced. Speaking of TBA, anyone notice that the WWDC schedule has a disproportionately high number of TBAs?

I'm interested in your comment about 2.5 ghz being a blow. While I'm first to wish they really had hit 3, it seems Apple is on par with AMD in terms of mhz speed. So, in relation to games, is this really such bad news? I'm just wondering, I don't know much about the situation.

I'm using a dual 2ghz G5, Radeon 9800 pro, and I'm pretty happy with the game performance, I must say.

"So, in relation to games, is this really such bad news?"

Only in regards to perception. The fastest PC setup will remain faster than the fastest Mac with regards to gaming performance, so this doesn't help Apple or Mac gaming. The larger issue is the low-end. Since minimum requirements on games are increasing to the 1GHz level or higher (a matter of triviality on the PC), it's important for the Mac upgrade cycle to kick into gear and get a lot of 1.6GHz G5s or higher out there as soon as possible. Given the reported lackluster sales of Mac desktops recently, I wonder if this perceived "bad news" will continue to keep desktop sales slow. If so, it could cause the Mac gaming market serious problems over the next year as games demand more than what a disproportionately large number of Mac gamers have.

Anyway, when I said it was a "blow", I was mainly speaking personally. I feel like I've essentially wasted 12 months waiting for the new CPU announcements only to find out they're just marginally better. I could have had a 2GHz G5 a year ago and really made use of it. I was trying to be smart about the upgrade cycle, given Jobs' prediction last year. Oops. :-)

Gocha... and that makes sense. You know, I wonder how many people held off like you, and I wonder how many non professionals are holding off upgrading their iMacs and Powerbooks because they want a consumer level G5?

I might be wrong, but the biggest problem I see in the lower end Mac models is that they need a faster graphics chip.

Anyway, I feel your pain. :) As for me, I got a Wallstreet in 98, and have been waiting since then to get a new computer... I refused to get aG5, as I kept thinking G4's were around the corner. As a result, I saved up enough cash for my new computer to have what I described, plus a 23" LCD display. My waiting paid off. ;)

Er... edit... "I refused to get a G4" Not "I refused to get a G5". ;)

I too hope Apples sales numbers pick up a bit.

Well, the G4s were around the corner... just the other corner that you walked around ;)

Over the years I've learned to never rely on release dates, and don't expect too much at keynotes. So, I think the 500 MHz increase is fine particularly since all the manufacturers are having a tough time dealing with the laws of physics. Not much Apple can do about that. The 2.5 GHz meets my minimum requirement for an upgrade. Double the MHz... But now I have the choice of buy a G5 or buy a house...

Brad, good thing you're not staying the entire week. You need to get back to work on my free copy of KotOR!! ;)

You know what sucks? I was going to say 'KOTOR' just on a whim, and never did. Dang! ;)

Is it just me, or is it odd that a 1GHz speed bump is considered "marginal" these days :-)

I couldn't agree more about XCode, though. A nice shiny new debugger and maybe some improvements to dependencies between multiple projects would be most welcome.

Well, the nice thing from my perspective is that there's chance of buyer's guilt when I go out this summer and get a new PowerBook, now that Apple has made it clear that we're still a way off from seeing a G5-based 'book.

"Is it just me, or is it odd that a 1GHz speed bump is considered "marginal" these days :-)"

I'd be peeing my pants over a 1GHz "bump" announcement as it would have several psychological benefits on top of the practical ones. But we got a 500MHz bump, so... ;-)

Anyway, your point is well taken. I clearly recall the "dark" days of the G4 where we were stuck at 500 MHz for 18 long months. To be underwhelmed by a bump of that much today is a bit ironic. :-)

2, 2.5, or 3 GHz doesn't matter to me personally; any way it goes, I can't afford them and don't need the CPU power. But I'd like to replace my G3/400 iMac one of these years. I long for the days of employment..

I think quite a few people held off buying a G5, specifically because Steve "promised" 3 GHz within a year. That's a very significant speed increase over 2 GHz, and for people who had already been holding out for faster Macs, another year doesn't seem like much for a $3000+ investment.

I've been lusting after a new Mac for years (bought mine in '96, and have upgraded everything but the... wait... I *have* upgraded everything), but I thought, "Hey, I can wait a year. Save up some money, and get a Mac that's 50% faster." If Steve hadn't said anything about 3 GHz, I would've been looking for a way to go into debt 11 months ago, especially given Apple's previous record for snail-paced speed increases. I would have assumed a year ago we might have hit 2.2 or 2.4 by now, but not 3.

This is why Apple never pre-announces anything. It's guaranteed to cannibalize sales. I was surprised Steve did it, and at the time, he must have had a really good reason for it. Possibly info from IBM that said they'd be able to do it. Or maybe just a burning desire to rub 3 GHz in the face of either Motorola or Intel.

Anyway, 2.5 GHz is pretty stinkin' impressive, especially since the dual 1 GHz G4 I use at work seems plenty fast for me. I'm looking for a way to go into debt again.

And while I'm posting an inordinately long comment (I have a tendency to do that... just ask Brad), I feel a mini-rant about bloatware is in order. I think it's too bad that games "require" such ridiculous computing power. I certainly don't think they're any more fun than older games. Sure, they look pretty, but an upholstered outhouse is still an outhouse. ;)

True enough, but gah... Halo would be a great game with 2d sprites, and yet, I am SO very happy it is pretty as it is. :) A good game that is gorgeous is even better. It's just a pity that folks seems to look at the latter first.

Also, I think, in a way (maybe, I don't know) game developers are getting a bit careless with system resources, as RAM and hard drive space are much more prolific these days. I suppose Brad would know more than I do. :)

* Where did you see any performance improvements in the Finder? I find the Panther Finder to be a lot slower on a lot of common tasks. The only part where it's better is that it does not lock down the whole CPU when an AppleShare remote volume is shutdown without warning.

* Xcode improvements: I second the wish for a no more snaily text editor. I would add a debugger that allows you to debug C++ code code from a Objective-C++ code. This is so ridiculous it's not working. I would also add numerous bug fixes. In particular the one involving precomp headers which is telling you sometimes that you have thousands of billions of errors in your code and the next you compile, everything is fine.

* The only thing I am asking for games is to speed Flash rendering as I'm currently playing a lot of these funny small games available on the net.

"Where did you see any performance improvements in the Finder?"

I notice it primarily when I open a folder with a large number (many thousands) of files.

Try opening a folder with thousands of files in List View mode sorted by kind. List view seems to get the least amount of attention from Apple but it's the view I use the most since I like to sort by date. When sorted by kind, I quite often get the BBoD.

What annoys me the most is when keyboard shortcuts stop working in Finder. It happens quite often after I delete files using the keyboard short cut. I typically use command-delete to movie things to trash then command-shift-delete to empty it. About half the time I delete things command-delete stops working.

Nathan, you hit the bulls-eye. Steve-O totally cannibalized all of the G5 sales by saying that within a year, the G5's would be over 50% faster. I mean, for those holding out for the top of the line, who wouldn't wait. That and who really wants a first gen machine. I think Steve's ego go to the best of him, and when he couldn't deliver, he wet himself. I will say this though; look for sales of the dual 2.5 machines to fly off the shelves. We aren't gonna hit 3 anytime soon, and everyone who has been waiting isn't gonna wait for another 8 months.

The only thing that makes me upset is the lack of PCI Express. I REALLY want a mac version of the Radeon X800.

It was almost a certainty that PCI Express wouldn't be part of the Rev 2 package. For sometime now Apple has been delivering 2 revisions for each case and motherboard design. Also, I dare say this update to the PowerMac line has been ready and waiting for sometime, but the release date for the system has been pushed back due to processor yields.

As far as Apple quoting that the PPC970 (G5) won't hit 3Ghz anytime soon, this may merely be an attempt to boost sales of PowerMac systems. Assuming that IBMs fabrication at 90nm is settling into its stride now.

2.5Ghz is a very respectable speed, but I am disapointed that the low and middle end products are so far behind the top end system (I was hoping for a 2.2/2.3Ghz mid range product). However I assume this has been done to reduce pressure on production of the processors.

Also despite the more competative CPU speeds Apple still seems to be continuing on its Dual Processor path which is a little disapointing as it drives prices higher and not alot of people will see benefit from such systems.

The use of SMP within applications just doesn't seem to have happened.

Ah, but if you're one of those folks that like to listen to iTunes while playing games, dual procs are a god send! ;)