The Hardware

Despite the fact that I started this lengthy article talking about how difficult it is to write because I'm not evaluating a piece of hardware, I have saved discussion about the Apple hardware until the end. Now that we're almost there, it is time to talk about the G5 hardware itself.

The machine itself is quite heavy thanks to massive processor heatsinks and a generally heavy case. As with most Apples in recent history, the G5 tower is easily accessible - flip a lever at the back and pull off one of the side panels. The motherboard is obviously a low production custom design, but the board and the internals of the box seem much more like what you'd find inside an x86 server rather than a desktop PC.

There are a total of 8 DIMM sockets on the motherboard, requiring 1GB modules to meet the 8GB memory limit the system supports. The memory, as I've mentioned before, is the same DDR400 that you use in PCs, but the motherboard is quite picky about the SPD programming on the modules. The modules that the board supports are also quite slow, with very conservative memory timings (3-3-3-8). I don't believe that I've ever tested anything that slow on a PC before. Luckily, you can get G5-compatible DDR400 from more sources than just Apple; OCZ was the first to send me some compatible sticks, both 512MB and 1GB versions that worked perfectly. Other manufacturers also have Mac-lines of their memory.

The system is incredibly quiet. I'd say that it's definitely on par with the quietest PCs I've ever used. You do notice it when the fans spin up and yes, upgrading to a Radeon 9800 Pro did make the system noticeably louder - courtesy of the 9800 Pro's fan. The 9600 that ships with the system is passively cooled, so it managed to spoil me.

As I mentioned before, the 2GHz G5 processors that were in the system didn't "feel" slow, but they definitely didn't feel like the fastest things out there. The system itself could use a little kick in the pants. I'm hoping that the new 2.5GHz system will alleviate some of that feeling, but at another $3000, it's difficult to justify the upgrade. That being said, it's not a system with which I find myself complaining about speed - mostly due to the performance of a couple of key applications as well as OS X's excellent job of caching.

The keyboard and mouse both look great but fall flat on their face when it comes to functionality. For a company that has seemingly done a good job of allowing form and function to go hand in hand, and for a company that has developed some of the best human interfaces to digital technology, the input devices are a strange enigma.

The Apple displays are impressive, I started using them with a PC well before I ever thought about buying and using a Mac. The problem again comes down to cost. At $3000 for a top of the line system, adding a pair of Apple displays onto the bottom line is a tough pill to swallow. Luckily, you can use any DVI monitor with the machine, which cuts down the barrier to entry by a little bit.

Games Final Words
Comments Locked

215 Comments

View All Comments

  • fxparis - Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - link

    FinalFantasy also wrote in #151: " a lot a stupidities "

    it doesn't matter for him. but please FinalWhoever don't misinform people that need fair information to make their choice ! specially when it come to audio video pro

    some young people will make a living from it. and they'll make a better living if they choose Mac since the beginning to work.
    it's IMPORTANT !
  • chrisnorth - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Regarding post #172 by Digstra, RIGHT ON! I think you have said, eloquently, what I was thinking. Of course, an open mind means that people need to recognize the good and the bad; nothing is perfect including OS X and the Mac. Having said all that, using XP may be subjecting yourself to unnessissary torture :-)
  • melgross - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Student/Teacher Office for the Mac sells for $135-150, and you don't have to show that you are anything other than willing to pay for it.

    About security. While I completely agree with those who say that we should all get a router, firewall, virus protection, and several spy-ware prevention programs, it just doesn't work for the average person.

    When I help someone with a PC who has a seriously infected machine, I find several things of interest.

    Most have an anti-virus program, but have let their subscription lapse. When I mention this, they get angry about the idea that they should HAVE to pay for a subscription. They feel as though they shouldn't have to pay for something on a yearly basis to use something that they have already bought.


    The idea of getting two or three anti-spy-ware programs is also something that they can't understand, or like. When I explain that even having these programs doesn't mean that they won't still get infected, even though the probability is much less, they are bewildered. They don't WANT to understand that they have to be proactive about these problems.

    They just want to use their machines.

    If you rarely buy anything, go to obscure sites (and with the new fly-by trojans...), not open e-mails, etc., you won't likely get infected. I suspect that those who have all of the protections, and claim to never get infected, don't really do as much as they have us think they do. I don't see Anand web surfing frivolously, downloading questionable files from newsgroups, and subscribing to porno sites etc.

    Most people do at least some of those things.

    No matter how you look at it, OS X is far more secure, for the average person, than XP. If we all played by the rules, and Microsoft did the right thing, it might be different.

    One reason that SP 2 is having as many problems as it has been, is because even though it's got a number of services turned off by default, when you use .net, or need certain services from office etc. they have to be turned on again. OS X doesn't need most of those services to accomplish the same things. FreeBSD is also one of the most secure UNIX variants. Linux, by the way, is turning out to be not that much more secure than XP is, going by all of the successful exploits reported.
  • Digsa - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Just wanted to say that - as a long-time Mac user - I really respected this article for its honesty of approach. I was really impressed. While of course I might quibble here and there about some things (Windows security, adware and virus issues were strangely absent;-)) I can genuinely trust the writer's attempts at balance, and I give his opinions the weight they deserve. he's done a fine job.

    At the moment I am travelling in the opposite direction to the author - I've just started using an XP machine for course work - and this article has helped me to see my experience in a more balanced light. Some of the criticisms he has - and my own criticisms when using XP - are based upon long-established working habits and prejudices. The clever trick is to see through those prejudices to look to the root of the system. What is the system trying to achieve? Does it do it better or worse? Honestly?

    OS X is a wonderful system, and I recommend those who haven't looked at it to do so. I'm enjoying the journey of discovery with XP - and trying to keep an open mind when it does something I'm unaccustomed to. However, the best lesson is perspective. If we don't give the other system a proper try, how can we make justified comments upon it. The author of this piece set out to do just that - and the results speak for themselves.

    I suppose my one crucial point is this - if we all keep open minds about the possibilities for innovation from different computer systems, and don't let the zealots on both sides take over the asylum, then we are all winners. Because the market in ideas can function without prejudice, and a good technology implementation can be seen for what it is - rather than through the prism of reality distortion fields or slick marketing.
  • chrisnorth - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    In reply to post #167 by Victor, thanks for the commentary.

    Yes, I could have been much more specific. So perhaps I should have reworded my thoughts to read "10 most popular software requests" or some such thing. Also, I was playing "Devil's Advocate" to some degree as I believe a somewhat critical eye represents the best approach when you want to improve something.

    I agree, Mellel is a first rate word processor and an excellent deal. I've been using it since its early days. I think it cost $19.95 when I purchased it. Instead of BBEdit, I use skEdit, which is reasonably capable and has great potential. As for Filemaker Pro, it is an expensive option as is Keynote, given that they represent the equivalent of only a single module each from the Office suite. Mesa 3 from P&L software is a top rate spreadsheet and at $30.00 a great value.

    Hadn't heard of Blogwave Studio. I use the freeware MacJournal, which is an excellent Journal hampered only by its limited functionality. Haven't heard of Quicksilver, and can't use it anyway since I'm waiting for Tiger before upgrading from Jaguar. As for the other suggestions, been there and not terribly impressed generally.

    Any other thoughts on great Mac software deals anyone?
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    FinalFantasy wrote in #169: Victor...you are a monster...wow... hehe ;D

    My 4-1/2 year old son likes to have me pretend I'm one... :-)

    I'm just a regular guy who thought he had finally overcome his addiction to discussion forums...not... well, it's better than video lottery terminals, I suppose. Anyhoo, I'll probably wind down my posts because I *really* need to get a life... :-)

    If this were a group in physical space and I'd just won at the VLT I'd invite y'all for a round of brewskis... make that a keg, on me. Oops, maybe not everyone here is of drinking age... :-D

    Hey Anand, ever tried Stella Artois?
  • FinalFantasy - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Victor...you are a monster...wow...hehe ;D
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Re: inexpensive alternative to MS Office

    If you really need ALL the functions of Office, the total cost of the apps listed above would exceed the price of Office 2004 for the Mac (C$560 Std, C$700 Pro). So, at this time there seems to be no inexpensive substitute. One avenue you might try is to enrol in a community college course and use student status to purchase Student/Teacher Edition of Office (about C$225), which would allow you to install on up to 3 machines.
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Chris North wrote in #166: How about the top ten most needed apps on the Mac

    Top ten most needed from what perspective? CAD? Web design? Database development? 3D Rendering? Business intelligence? Customer relationship management? Seismic data interpretation? Medical imaging? Small business collaboration?

    Anyway, some suggestions based on your list:

    Advanced inexpensive OS X native CSS Editor
    StyleMaster, http://www.westciv.com/software/index.html

    Advanced inexpensive OS X Native XML Editor
    Hmm... they all seem to be Java-based, so no go...

    However, for text editing, instead of BBEdit, try
    TextMate, http://macromates.com/

    OS X advanced personal journal with photo and file wells
    BlogWave Studio, http://www.littlehj.com/

    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternative to Photoshop
    Stone Design Stone Studio, http://www.stone.com/

    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternate to MS Office
    Word: Mellel, http://www.redlers.com/
    Excel: MarinerCalc, http://www.marinersoftware.com
    PowerPoint: Keynote, http://www.apple.com/keynote
    Access: FileMaker Pro, http://www.filemaker.com

    Oh, and if you're on OS X 10.3, you should try QuickSilver:
    http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/
  • chrisnorth - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    Further to my last post, here's a thought for Anand: If you are looking for a followup article to do on Macs, how about the top ten most needed apps on the Mac? You could take a poll or something then describe where the biggest deficiencies lie and which apps would best fill them. Maybe, you could help convince a few companies like Jasc, or Xara to port their products.

    Here is a quick list to start with:
    Advanced inexpensive OS X native CSS Editor
    Advanced inexpensive OS X Native XML Editor
    OS X advanced personal journal with photo and file wells.
    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternative to Photoshop
    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternate to MS Office.

    Please no multi-platform java apps.

    Just a thought...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now