As usual, John C. Dvorak’s articles are abrasive yet stimulating. His article this week inherently bashes Apple’s game plan yet simultaneously giving the good ol’ pat on the back for something Apple probably isn’t really doing.
Please read his article: Apple on the Brink.
The premise is that Apple is “brain-dead” for not wanting to release OS X into the entire x86 jungle; yet, he opines, that is not what Apple really intends to do, and that, instead, Dvorak sees Apple’s bluff in his crystal ball.
And it really is a fantastic concept he has forecasted. I thoroughly enjoyed indulging myself in the unfolding of events that he described. As much as I would like seeing it happen the way he described, and as clever as Jobs et al have been of late, I find it very difficult to believe that the scenario that Dvorak has described is even remotely close to the truth. Frankly, I don’t think that he does either. Beware: This pat on the back is likely a slap in the face, if only we had turned around to pay attention.
Great news. At the close of the fiscal quarter, Apple has found its profits $70 million in excess of its estimates, sitting at $320 million.
This is Apple’s best quarter. Ever. Read about it: Apple Tops Its Quarterly Earnings Record.
One thing that is very encouraging about this is to see that the iPod is not the hero that saved the ailing team here. The iPod had a significant share, as expected, but it was just a team player on Apple’s championship team.
Other key players: Mac OS X 10.4 and Mac sales. Sure, we like it when the team keeps winning, even when these players were on the bench, but now that they’re back in the game–and exercising a killer instinct–the game is so sweet to see.
Mac OS X 10.4 was the best-selling software release in the company’s history; Mac sales experienced a 35% increase over last year; iPod sales had a “record quarter” for the ninth time in a row. When all the key players score triple-doubles, the fans just go wild.
And the timing couldn’t be more perfect, since Apple’s sales my go into slight hibernation as the world awaits the first x86-based Mac. But that’s okay–Apple is ready.
There is a great pair of articles discussing the history of the PowerPC architecture on the Ars Technica website.
Check them out:
PowerPC on Apple: An Architectural History, Part I
PowerPC on Apple: An Architectural History, Part II
These are great reading for the pseudogeek. I say the pseudogeek, and not the ubergeek, because the ubergeek would already know all of this information, and it is too generalized. But for we geeks out there who also have lives, this is great reading, providing interesting facts and history, but without going overboard in depth.
My timing for blogging about these articles (which I’ve actually had bookmarked on my desktop for months) is ironic, being that it comes shortly after Apple’s announcement that it will be switching to the x86 architecture for future Macs over the course of the next 1-2 years.
I know, I have yet to blog about this; I have full intentions to. I purposefully did not blog about it when I first read about it, because first reactions sometimes can be very inaccurate ones. But the time is now ripe for comments, so I will be making some soon.
Again, with a bit of tongue-in-cheek irony, it is notable that the Ars Technica author wrote these articles at the behest of Mac enthusiasts, after he wrote a similar historical documentary on the Pentium line (Part I, Part II). I smell a “Part III” in the works!
Wow! I am impressed. I came to the realization awhile ago that the G4 line of PowerMacs were incredibly rich with upgrade potential, but where I erred was in thinking that I had saturated my QuickSilver’s potential when I upgraded it to 1.4GHz with 1.1GB RAM and a GF4Ti. Boy, was I wrong.
Check this out: Giga ships 2GHz processor upgrades.
Back in the day, I concluded that processor upgrades would never hit more than the 1.4GHz that Apple raised the G4 line to. I suspected that the bar would never raise any higher. Thus, a 1.4GHz upgrade, a nearly maxed-out RAM capacity of 1.1GB, and a GF4Ti–which is about all a 133MHz FSB can handle–left my machine pretty saturated. And it did indeed stay that way for quite some time. I am very pleased with my upgrade decisions, and my processor upgrade card specifically has served me very well since I bought it in August 2003.
And yet here we are, with a 4-year old machine originally set at 733MHz now capable of pushing 2GHz. After four years–nearly two years since being upgraded–I thought my machine was finally losing the vitality it once had, and I finally saw a G5 purchase looming in my future. But with a 2GHz upgrade looking back at me, it looks like the G5 will have to wait a bit longer before it can get a piece of me.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a sucker nor nieve. I appreciate that a G4 is still just a G4 and that it doesn’t hold a candle to a G5 per megahertz. I also appreciate that a G5 purchase would likely consist of a dual-processor system, which is even more powerful, especially for the apps that need it the most. And finally, I also appreciate that I’ll still have a suffocatingly narrow 133MHz FSB, compared to the G5 architectures that all straddle the 1GHz mark. Nevertheless, I know how pleased I am with my G4 running at 1.4GHz, and I know that an upgrade to 2GHz would be a huge shot in the arm. Considering the significant speed boost the upgrade would give my machine, and considering the cash back I would be able to garner by selling the 1.4GHz upgrade, a G5 just doesn’t look like a very wise choice. My Mac still has too much life left in it.
