Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Apple Businesses

Apple Reverses G4 downgrade 119

Posted by Hemos
from the put-things-right dept.
puck13 writes "According to MacInTouch "Apple has reversed the cancellation of existing Power Mac G4 orders, according to impeccable sources, and is calling back customers to explain. The Apple Store will honor existing orders for the previous configurations at the previous prices. People who ordered the G4/500 model that cannot be produced due to Motorola's production issues, will be offered a choice of the original G4/450 configuration at the original price or a discount on their G4/500 configuration, as if it had been ordered custom-built with a 450-MHz processor selected. " Check out yesterday's story for more information.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Reverses G4 downgrade

Comments Filter:
  • Apple's reversal only applies to folks who have already placed orders. (And I suspect that their lawyers may have had more to do with it than the public outcry.)

    If you decide that you want a G4 today, you'll still be getting 50 MHz less than you would have gotten yesterday for the same price.

    Maybe this was Apple's plan... They raise prices and try to screw their customers, then they announce that they're not to screw their customers after all, and everyone on Slashdot ignores the ridiculous price hikes and praises them for "doing the Right Thing."
  • I head people say this "we've got to push Apple, force them back into cloning" and I think to myself. What are they smoking? What are you pushing Apple with? Your decision not to buy any more of their computers? Well, if enough people did this it would put them out of busniness. But so would allowing other companies to skim the cream of their hardware business while Apple pays for all the R&D. What's that you say? Forget about hardware and just do what it does well, the MacOS? Sorry to bring reality into this discussion but the MacOS doesn't have enough marketshare to enable Apple to survive on software alone. To win in the OS only business you've got to have a monopoly or be free. Apple needs its hardware as much as its software. That's a part of its success, its an integrated package, that is why it does what it does very well. cheers, Matthew Reilly
  • Apple really could/should slap that ATI bitch around some...

    Well, I was about to take what you were saying seriously but then you come out with this teenage loser comment. Apologies to all the teens out there to aren't losers.
  • >>Warning: Heavy Sarcasm
    Gee, I dunno, you could, I suppose, call them or something...

    sure. Give it a shot. 800-795-100

    Doh! (Jim Rome =+5)I hate to break it to you, but *CHOKE*. They don't have the pieholes to take the call on my rig. You're OUT.(/Jim Rome)
    ___
    "I know kung-fu."
  • The fact that you spell 'Mac' in all caps pretty much gives you away. Go away troll.

    (BTW: I'm running CW and Netscape at the same time - maybe the problem with your machine is operator error?)


    - Darchmare
    - Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
  • Apple sent me the cancellation email yesterday, and I wasn't very upset at all. I had the sense that rising RAM prices and the earthquake in Taiwan would make my purchase of the G4/450 a steal for me, and a loss for Apple. So I didn't feel bad, just figured I could re-order as soon as the original configuration returns. Which it will soon!

    HOWEVER: Today I received the following email...

    Dear Apple Customer,
    The following products have been shipped and are expected to be delivered on 10/16/1999.
    _________________________
    Z01B POWERMAC G4 1 2,848.00
    With the following configuration:
    PROCESSOR ............ 065-1744 450MHz G4 w/1MB L2 cache
    MEMORY ............... 065-1608 256MB SDRAM/1 DIMM
    HARD DRIVE ........... 065-1956 20GB Ultra ATA drive
    CD/DVD ROM ........... 065-1902 DVD ROM drive w/DVD Video
    REMOVABLE STORAGE .... 065-1911 Zip drive
    HIGH SPEED MODEM ..... 065-1821 56K internal modem w/FAXstf
    GRAPHIC SUPPORT ...... 065-1820 RAGE 128 GL card/16MB SDRAM
    HIGH SPEED NETWORKING: 065-1623 10/100 BASE T Ethernet
    SCSI SUPPORT ......... 065-1696 Ultra SCSI PCI card w/adapter
    KEYBOARD ............. 065-1995 USB Keyboard
    ACCESSORY KIT ........ 065-1732 ACCESSORY KIT
    OS LANGUAGE .......... 065-1984 MAC OS
    COMMUNICATION CARD ... 065-1899 No AirPort Card
    _________________________

    Looks as if Apple is doing the right thing, at least for those of us who ordered the G4 on the day it was announced! As for all the whiners out there, isn't screaming about it just the "adult" version of bawling yer poor little eyes out?

    Yeah, I'm a Mac programmer. You got a problem with that?
  • Why not wait for IBM's new ATX motherboard that accepts a Gx proccessor? This will alow people to get the best of both the pc and the mac worlds.

    Let's see, it doesn't run any Mac apps?

    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • Their next move will probably be to overclock 450MHZ chips to 500MHZ.

    That's not really overclocking. That's just "clocking." :) It's only overclocking if the user selects the speed higher than recommened.

    The chips do, in fact run at 500mhz, but not without a bug that Motorola recently discovered that only occurs at that speed.

    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • If any business let something go like this I'm sure they would see a lot of law suites for false advertising. You just can't treat customers like that or you're going to get burned.

    Apple is not the first company in the world to ever offer preorders on a product, then not have its suppliers able to fill demand. False advertising involves claiming something that you cannot or have no intention of delivering. Apple wants to ship these things just as much as customers want them.

    The main problem is that Motorola isn't that great at fabricating chips. Motorola said they'd ship something, but they couldn't and apparently not without an "errata." That's why Apple asked IBM to step in.

    They were completely within their legal rights to cancel the orders, but there was more backlash then they expected.

    - Scott

    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • by marmoset (3738)
    The Apple technote is here [apple.com]. The condensed version: at the price of breaking a few pieces of software that relied on an undocumented API call, the open file limit went from 348 to 8169.
  • "But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform? Sure, the hardware is much improved cost and feature-wise, but why bother with such poor software selection?"

    BBEdit
    Bryce
    Poser
    Final Cut
    AppleScript
    Mac OS

    Oh wait, you asked about things coming out first, and I went and made a list of Mac-only things. Sure, there are 50,000 or so programs for Windows and only 10,000 or so for Macs, but if BBEdit is not one of the 50,000 for Windows, then I don't give a crap about the rest!


    "...why bother with such poor software selection?"

    Poor software selection is better than a selection of poor software.
  • It's always been my observation that apple isn't percieved as a "benevolent underdog" based upon any of their OWN actions, but rather on people's inherent dislike for the Big Company. I mainly base this on apple's higher prices and unwillingness to allow clones[read - "competition"].
  • It's funny how much crap everybody here gives Microsoft and how everyone loves Apple no matter how stupid they get. I love their ad with the tanks in it saying that Pentiums aren't a threat. At least they work at rated speed. If any company other than Apple decided to do this they would be crucified by everyone. Long live Linux on multi processor PC'S!!! Apple's OS is just as closed as Microsoft's. I like the choice of Linux/___BSD with a multitude of desktop choices. Otherwise I'll just run Be.
  • You are wrong. Very wrong. Go read the spec benchmark. Under a small subset of hand tuned applications, Apples are faster. Same goes for P3's, and Athlons are quite a bit faster than both. Apple gets a higher price point because their users don't expect enough, and don't seem to be smart enough to read through the hype. you really need to do better than quoting a press release. As for "no one dares discredit" read up a bit, and you will find that just about no one believed those benchmark, except hopless, religious apple-heads.

    Oh, and if you like to read and quote press releases, go find Microsoft's "About Linux" release, and remember that they are always right too.
  • Ok, once apple gets all its customer base back they do this and that stupid upgrade thing and there back to where they are. They really need to learn to treat customers better. I mean come on, everyone knows people would want to upgrade from G3 to G4 so apple screwed it and made them buy a new box. Its a pain.
  • because he directly intervened and ordered that things should be set right.
  • I love Hotline (1.2.3 not that 1.5-1.7.2 crap, Roks you suck!) but calling users an underground community of active traders? LOL! Face it; it's war3z and pr0n p1mpz... be proud!
    --
  • oddly enough, that's not the first time I've heard this story. And I have a touch of wrist-tendonitis as well, probably caused by mousing, possibly aggrivated by typing. Maybe I *should* try this iMac mouse - but when I've played with store demos, I just hated them.

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • by Pope (17780)
    If I'm going to have to pay Adobe several hundred to upgrade my ancient copy of ATM Deluxe which works FINE on 8.6

    Well, look how long it took for Adobe to come out with a 8.6 compatible version of ATM 4.5!
    Adobe is one of the worst companies for keeping up with Apple these days, now that they make a lot of money on the Windez market.
    Acrobat 3.0 shipped with numerous features Windez-only, as did 4.0.
    Buncha mooks, you ask me.

    The ATM/OS 9 conflict involves OS 9's ability to have more open files, which is a Good ThingTM for sure.
    Why does Adobe drag their feet on this shit when they are one of the top Mac developers?

    PPoE
  • I've always maintained that the Stock Market has little if any relation to what happens in Real Life.

    ie. company fires a lot of people to save money, but the stock goes up because the company is now profitable on the books

    Apple has been profitable,Macs are selling well (so well, in fact, that Apple can't meet demand, as usual!) they look like they will still be profitable next quarter/next year, so they're a good investment, regardless of how you FEEL about the company.

    The thing that pisses me off the most about the computer media is that they still think that Windez is the only possible market, and that Apple is going to go away RealSoonNow. How can you say that about a company whose products are back-ordered to kingdom come because of outrageuous demand?

    Thank goodness I was waiting 'til February to buy a G4. By that time, they might actually have some in stock! :P

    PPoE
  • http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/A ppleStore?family=G4

    Nothing on Buy.html, Cause there was nothing there to start with.
  • by crayz (1056)
    is sort of like a little kid. Their hearts are in the right place most of the time, but every once in a while, they do something stupid. If the customers just sit back and let it happen they'll do it more.

    If they complain mildly, Apple will issue a press release and let their decision stand.

    To get the kid to shape up, you gotta give him a nice smack on the head. Same with Apple. A bunch of people who were ordering G4s were talking about a boycott or about buying Althons, and they were totally swamping any Apple e-mail address or phone number they could find.

    Well Apple took the hint.
  • I dunno. When was the last time you saw a revolutionary software product anywhere? Actually, I think part of the Mac's appeal to a lot of people is that they don't have to worry about rebooting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H having to use some "revolutionary software product" de jour.

    I don't think there have been any paradigm-busters like PageMaker was on the Mac platform (one I sadly left out) lately, but I guess what worries me about the Mac is that so little new development is happening at all. Without anything like 'killer apps' to differentiate the Mac from Windows, there's fewer and fewer reasons to stick with it.

    Oh, but what's with the weird examples? I don't know what Premiere is, but I don't see how Photoshop or Excel could be viewed as innovative. (?) They had reputations as pretty good products, but was either of them something new?

    Premiere - important video editing software.
    Photoshop - THE original killer app for the Mac. There's a reason why Photoshop benchmarks are what they use primarily to compare the PowerPPC and Pentium chips...
    Excel - Before Excel came around, everyone used something called Lotus 123. How many alternative spreadsheets have you seen lately?

    BTW, I'm skeptical that this seguey into the topic of Mac desirability actually has anything to do with the recent price scandal... but I guess everyone (even Mac users) have to let off a little AppleSteam now and then. That company sure makes a lot of ... interesting ... decisions.

    I guess for me, at least, it's relevant because folks are so willing to cheer or jeer Apple without considering the reasons why the Mac succeeded in the first place, and why it's still headed downhill. Whether it's Windows, Mac, Linux, or BE, a platform succeeds or fails ultimately because of the software you can run on it. Anyhow, it's not a jihad...it's a tool. Use whatever gets the job done (which is why I have boxes running NT, 98, Linux, *and* the Mac OS).

  • Are there actually any powerful OpenGL cards in consumer space that isn't targetted for games? Because those would be the ones that should be 'ported' to the Mac, right?

    I guess Permedia?

    Gamers are a different issue altogether, and my feeling on that is that the gamer niche is small enough that going with ATI is actually not a bad call. By going with ATI's Rage Fury chipset Apple get's a DVD ready solution with excellent video quality and decent TNT level OpenGL performance. This, I believe, is more than enough for 90% of users out there, and the other 10% would buy V3 boards or something.

    How about the iBook vs any WinTel notebook? I think Apple has the price/performance curve beat right there. Comparing an iMac C2 with a PC requires a system with DVD, Firewire, and movie editing software, which will add an additional $300 to the price outright. I don't see that there is a disadvantage in buying Mac, as far as price performance goes. Considering the following:

    ATI Rage Fury = $60
    64MB Ram = $180
    17" monitor = $350
    10GB HD = $120
    Speakers + Sound Card = $120
    FireWire card = $200
    Ethernet = $35
    Modem = $75
    Win9x = $60
    Movie Software = $140
    price = $1340

    Price drops if you go for a lower quality monitor, smaller 15" monitor, of course, but the Apple iMac C2 is still pretty competative; nothing compared to a scratch built bargain basement, but many don't have the skills or resources to build one of those!

    -AS
  • Due to the increase of file handles in OS 9, you can have 4 times as many fonts in your Fonts folder...

    if (nt == unstable) { switchTo.linux() }
  • by TheInternet (35082) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @03:19PM (#1613294) Homepage Journal

    I can't believe how many people are willing to fly off the handle without understanding what they're talking about.

    Major points:

    1. DRAM prices have doubled more or less in the last few months. Meanwhile, Apple's prices remained constant.
    2. The stock price is up nine points for two major reasons:
      1. IBM is going to making Motorola's G4s (HUGE!)
      2. Apple has $700 million in product backlog
      3. Apple CFO Fred Anderson was not shy about the fact that Apple's December quarter numbers will be substantially higher.

    3. The G4/400 was not just increased in price. Virtually no one realizes it, but this is a NEW G4/400 model. A bit of background is necessary to explain:
      When the G4 first came out, the 400mhz version was the only one available. But it was not much more than a G3 in G4's clothing. This "low-end" G4 had a G4 CPU, and a G4 casing, but the motherboard was basically a G3. This motherboad is codenamed "Yikes." The "real" G4s use a motherboard called "Sawtooth." With this motherboard, you get:
      • AGP (instead of PCI)
      • twice the memory bandwidth -- 800MB/sec vs. of 400MB/sec
      • 1.5GB total RAM capacity vs. 1.0GB total RAM capacity
      • A Ultra ATA/66 interface
      • An internal FireWire port, in addition to the two external
      • Two independent USB buses
      • AirPort capabilities o Wiring to support Apple Cinema Display

      The old G4/400 has none of this. So although the G4/400 started out life as a Yikes based machine (a revamped G3), Apple just graduated it to a Sawtooth machine overnight, with significant enhancements. As such, the price increase is actually justified, particuarly when taking into account the RAM issue.

      So whoever preorded a G4/400 prior to all this is probably going to get much more than they originally bargained for -- at no additional cost.


    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • They're already at price/performance parity, more or less. The G4 is roughly triple the speed of a P3, and this is using Intel's own benchmarks, mind you. We're not talking Bytemarks here, boys and girls, we're talking benchmarks no one dares discredit.

    Oh lord. Another one falls for the Apple FUD.

    No, we're not talking Bytemarks here; this one, if you can believe it, is even worse. You see, at least Bytemarks is a benchmark. It's about 10 years old and has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the performance of a modern CPU, but at least when they came up with it, someone was trying to get an idea of how fast a chip would run.

    These 6 tests are not benchmarks, in any normal sense of the word. Benchmarks measure how long it takes for a computer to perform a real-world task. These tests (Apple's got 'em posted here [apple.com]; scroll to the bottom) measure the speed of individual ops.

    That's right: the G4 performs 6 specific operations an average of 3 times faster than a P3. We're talking things with names like "1024 dim. DotProd" and "256 Pt. Complex FFT". The G4 can take a dot product 3.68 times faster than a P3. Oh wait--not even that; a dot product in a specific dimension. Whoopdee. A 128-bit unit can do operations on very large numbers faster than a 32-bit one. Wow. This is like posting the fact that a 64-bit CPU can add two 64-bit numbers faster than a 32-bit one. Who would have thought.

    And yes, these benchmarks were "published on Intel's own website." Of course they were. In the technical specs on the SSE core. Deep in the technical specs on the SSE core. Where information that is completely useless to anyone not planning on optimizing a compiler belongs.

    Essentially, this benchmark is as misleading as quoting MFLOPS (oh yeah: Apple stooped to that one too...). Except that usually when you quote MFLOPS you at least generally need to average over the entire set of floating point ops. Not here folks. They picked out their favorite 6.

    Oh wait--here's another difference: when you quote MFLOPS, you actually need to, uh, benchmark the thing. These numbers are all theoretical--just compare the number of clock cycles it takes to do an operation, and multiply by MHz. Now, it turns out they'd probably be even more in the G4's favor in practice--if I remember correctly, the AltiVec unit has a much better designed pipeline than the P3's SSE unit. But still, these numbers are absolutely, completely, worthless.

    I don't have the URL offhand, but I've seen the Intel page they copied these tests from, and there were literally hundreds for them to choose from.

    The point is, you can always find an operation that is carried out in less clock cycles on one particular archicture as compared to another. Always. Now it turns out that, in this case, the AltiVec apparently really is vastly superior for the sorts of things it does when compared to Intel's SSE or AMD's 3DNow. (Of course, it also takes up half the chip. Any guesses as to why they can't fab any 500's??)

    However, the fact is that except for very specific applications (SETI@home in particular, and some signal processing stuff, IIRC), it doesn't make all too much of a difference. A 700 MHz Athlon will smoke a G4 450 or 500 or whatever on your basic integer stuff, and a 600 MHz P3'll be right up there with it. For the stuff that can be done with AltiVec, the G4'll certainly come out ahead, but for general floating point work, again, they're about equal. It goes without saying that, at this point, nothing crunches graphics like a year-old PC with an NVIDIA GeForce in it (except maybe something from sgi)--which, of course, is about the only thing the average user needs good float performance for anyways.

    In the end, the G4 is just a decent chip with a neat vector processor that's proving hard to fab. Is it damn fast? Yes. Is your new G4 450 going to touch the Coppermine P3 733 that's shipping by the time yours actually ships? Nope. Is it "two or three years ahead of its time" like Stevie says? No way.

    -Dave

    P.S. And yes, you can sell them to China as well. As much as I want to like Apple these days (a simplified vertically integrated product line is a very good idea in many cases; OS X just might be incredible; and geez--did you check out the new iMac subwoofer??), the fact that every single word out of their marketing department/CEO's lips is a baldfaced lie...gives me pause.
  • No chips is no prob. However, LOWERING specs that were advertised is a problem. If they lower prices, or offered to let people wait for what they ordered; then that would be another thing altogether. But they changed specs that were widely advertised. That's bad.

    Another beef: how healthy is it to presell so many systems? Intel delays chips all the time, but they seldom promise them to vendors who then sell systems based on them before all the components are avalible. That's idiotic, and Apple should've known response would be enormous. (the first Mac I would've considered buying, even at their inflated prices) Logically, a wait of a few months would not matter much in a sales sense; but would allow for inventories to fill up a little more. The fact that the 500Mhz G4's apparently have trouble working at all (but were presold anyways) seems to say Apple jumped too soon.

    What would've been bad about waiting till the X-mas rush to release the G4s in quantities/quality?
  • Scott,

    > They were completely within their legal rights
    > to cancel the orders, but there was more
    > backlash then they expected.


    You're completely right.

    I spoke way too soon on this...For some reason the impression I got from the article was that Apple said, "Well we can't produce these machines, so here you go, now you get a cheaper one at the same price." Which in my mind resulted in a big "screw you" from Apple. I really did not realize that the orders were cancelled until after I wrote this.

    I do think that its fair of a company to cancel orders because of a shortage based on another company's fault. I think that Apple should have some words with Motorola if they did promise to produce enough chips for shipment because whether it is Apple's fault or not this may hurt Apple's business.

    Although I think that in this case if I did have to cancel orders, I may offer another computer to the person with the cancelled order at the price that peticular computer was at when the original order was made (which I heard Apple is doing so cheers to them).

    Thanks for keeping me on track.

    Steve.
    ---
  • Apple has gotten into quite a mess this time. Their next move will probably be to overclock 450MHZ chips to 500MHZ. The effect of this would be sad, because the Mac empire is bad enough off already. Poor Steve...

    PLEASE VISIT http://www.ndnet.org/!
  • But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform?

    Studio Vision Pro [opcode.com], still not available on Windows. Maybe not the "last" product, but certainly a major reason that more pro audio facilities have Macs and not PCs in the booth.

  • That's not a fair comment, cancer. Macintosh logic boards aren't commodity items like the intel and intel-type chipsets you could pick up from a schlock shop in New York City or the monthly Ken Gordon show in New Jersey. They come from one supplier and the type of discounting you're used to simply does not exist. Logic board upgrades have never been a viable thing for Mac users, or for that matter any other platform that's not part of the 90% Wintel share.

    CPU upgrades are a bit better deal, thanks mainly to pioneers like Newer Tech, enough of a deal for Apple to have considered ways to block them.
  • Hey I'll admit it...I was a wee bit drunk when I responded to that comment.

    Okay, I got some minor details wrong, but essence of the argument is the same - Apple tried to rook its incredibly loyal customers and got caught.

    Anyone knows me personally knows that I really don't like Apple as a company or Steve Jobs. Mainly because of marketing tactics (Yea I know Microsoft's just as bad or even worse. That's not my point) & Job's swarmy used car salesman demeanor. I have no problems with the hardware and even occasionally enjoy fooling around with Macs just to see what else is out there. I just feel that Apple tends to take advantage of its position in the market to screw its loyal customers every chance they get. That whole G3 frimware upgrade that locked out G4 upgradeability comes to mind

    Pete
  • I am going to make an AI, and it will be made on the macintosh.

  • First of all, you should have heard the big news that Apple IS reneging on most of the pre-orders. Secondly, Apple is only adding memory to the Ultimate 450Mhz model. If you ordered a G4-450 w/ Sawtooth, you are going to get a G4-400 w/ Sawtooth for the same price. What a bargain?! Also, IBM has signed an manufacturing licensing agreement. No IBM-made G4 chips will appear for a minimum of 3 months. That means the huge backlogs must be filled by Motorola exclusively. The true test is Monday. People will have the opportunity to digest the news, and Apple will face the music.
  • If any business let something go like this I'm sure they would see a lot of law suites for false advertising. You just can't treat customers like that or you're going to get burned.
    ---
  • (besides FIRST POST! that is :) )

    Honestly, I'm glad to see Apple listening to its customers. I doubted they could really be stupid enough to pull a stunt like that, and I'm pleased to see I was right.

    Let's just hope they keep this idea of listening to the customer going in the future.
  • Agreed. It was simply too bone-headed a decision to last.

    I can see them changing prices for future Macs, maybe, but cancelling existing orders? No way. It would have ticked too many people off.

    CT

  • If this is true then their might be hope yet..

    Sounds like a good call by Apple managment, and another true sign of how this company changed from the bonehead Scully-Spindler-Amilleo days of old.

    Making fast smart decisions is what revived apple, glad to see that they realise and rectify the mistakes they make fast too.

    --------------------------------
  • Try checking out Macintouch, they need 24 to 48 hours to finalize everything, you'll get an email. Ric Ford verified it with Apple, it is happening.

    The phone peon probably hasn't even heard of the reversal yet, Steve Job's may have a Reality Distortion Field but he's never been known to have telepathy. Communication takes time.
  • by jht (5006)
    Apple actually did the Right Thing for once - be still my beating heart!

    For all their neat hardware and unique software and "cool" consumer appeal, Apple has a long and distinguished history of doing things that really piss off customers (the 1988 price hike, the cancellation of Performa free tech support, the PowerPC upgrade fiascos, etc.) yet they miraculously retain goodwill despite that. It's fine if Apple wants to change the base configs in order to ship product (they actually added RAM to a couple of them in this action), but cancelling existing orders was pure foolishness. It's good they saw the error of their ways. Were I Jobs, I'd have changed the speeds on the base models, filled all the existing orders except the G4-500's, and then asked the customers for those if they wanted to wait or if they wanted a 450 with more RAM instead. That's the only fair thing to do. I'm glad Apple finally seems to have gotten it for once.

    - -Josh Turiel
  • by etherwalker (78824) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @08:55AM (#1613317)
    After I read the Macintouch article I called Apple to see if they were really going to uncancel my order (placed early last month.) They weren't sure, but said I might be one of the "lucky ones" whose orders had already been sent into production.


    Doesn't sound like much of a reversal to me, if everybody who ordered after mid-September is still sh!t out of luck.
  • It's hard to cheer when a company basically tries to pull a fast one and reverses itself only when it gets called on it.

    Anyhow, am I the only one that doesn't understand why folks are so bully on Apple these days? I used to be a Machead myself years ago, when it was a platform of innovation (with stuff like Photoshop, Premiere, Excel, etc. being born and raised on it). But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform? Sure, the hardware is much improved cost and feature-wise, but why bother with such poor software selection?
  • Well, Apple has listened before. For example, when they came out with a new version of AppleShare IP (v6.2) earlier this year, they wanted to charge the same price ($499) for upgrades as for a new copy. Customers cried out, and Apple dropped the upgrade charge altogether.

    http://www1.macintouch.com/asip62up.html

    It was just another of those boneheaded moves that seem to happen to every company.

    -eo
  • if slashdot is read by people at apple...

    rob: You have access to the web logs... so.... how many hits from .apple.com?

    :-)
  • by cancrman (24472) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @09:10AM (#1613321) Homepage
    There's nothing like massive consumer & media backlash to make someone change their mind, huh?

    But the fact that they seriously thought that they could get away with it really bothered me. "Oh hey, we're Apple so you know that G4 400 that we said was going to cost you $1600? Well now that's gonna be a 350. But you can still get the 400 for $2,500 if you want." Total insanity. At least they got wise. I guess they banked on the fact that the Macintosh faithful are probably some of the most loyal consumers out there and thought that they could ream them just a little bit more.

    I can't believe I'm saying this but - Way to go angry Mac users!

    Pete

    Pete
  • I'm glad Apple did this, I want a G4 running MacOS X alongside my PIII 450 runing Linux. Once MacOS X rolls out I'll buy a midrange G4 nicely equipped, whatever midrange means at the time.
  • I think it's worth noting that all the major Mac websites had this up as well yesterday, and a *lot* of people who had preorders were steaming on the message boards I've seen.
  • I'm very suprised at Apple's actions today. Most people whould be able to tell you (meaning a corporation) that raising prices while lowering quality would piss a customer base off. I know that according to economics, raising price can raise profits even though it lowers the number of customers you have. However, in the PC market, the number of customers also affects the quality of the product (by enticing companies to write progams for it.) It also affects the customer satisfaction, which is incredibly important these days. Overall, pissing off so many people at once is a really bad idea.

    I am impressed that Apple has reversed their decision, but Apple is beginning to act more and more like a mindless, heedless corporation than the benevolent underdog of a company Apple used to be.

    -B
  • Seems Apple's got some sense after all. Props for reversing the cancellations, and mad props for actually calling their customers to explain -- I've never had that happen with anything I've ever ordered.

    This is the proper way to do business.

    - A.P.
    --


    "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad

  • until:
    1. Ship Mac OS X already!
    2. Unbundle ATI video
    3. Ship Pro models with Pro keyboard and Pro mouse instead of crappy iMac kbd&mouse.
    4. Reach MHz/price-parity with Intel.
    5. Fix QT 4.0 and Sherlock UI.


    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • Looks like this is legit. Apparently S. Jobs' email has been flooded with hate mail (heh), and he has been replying to customers saying that it will be 'set right' tomorrow.

    - Darchmare
    - Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
  • >>I doubted they could really be stupid enough to pull a stunt like that

    really?

    Not only did my G4/450 order get cancelled, i stupidly then ordered a G4/400 - i need a machine here, folks - this morning.

    Now, i'm reading all over the place that they are not cancelling the orders, and are, reinstating them...

    So now, either i'm getting no machine or two machines... i guess we'll just have to see what happens
    ___
    "I know kung-fu."
  • I think the quarterly profits got Steve in one of those PowerTrip moods and he started barking orders without really thinking about them. Customer response was swift, and he realized very quickly what a disaster this could turn into. It takes a big man to admit he's wrong, especially with so much at stake. Kudos for that...

    Steve has a unique management style, and although some dislike him personally, it is obviously effective. Check out the two year stock chart [yahoo.com]

    In other news: IBM is now also making G4 chips (*with* AltiVec) which should help to get the G4s out the door faster. If I was a gambling man (i.e. if I had any money) I would be putting all I could into AAPL. If the current backlog of orders is any indication, the next quarter could be the most profitable yet... and investors will reap the rewards. (Along with the Mac faithful who are rewarded with that Good Feeling(TM) ;-)

    Great work Steve... just dont let it go to your head.

  • 1. Ship Mac OS X already!

    Get it through your skull: good software takes time to write. Linux was not written in a day, so it's lunacy to believe that OSX could be. Yeah, we joke about all the delays in Microsoft's stuff, but even M$ under the same burden (that is, before they finally decide to skip quality control just to get the product out the door). Better to wait a few more months than to get a buggy piece of crap.

    2. Unbundle ATI video

    And replace it with... what? You need video, most users can't be bothered to slap a video card into their machines (most users would probably mess it up anyway, as any tech support rep can tell you), ATI still makes some of the best video cards out there (notice I didn't say the best; I don't want to start a flamewar), and no other company is as good when it comes to Mac support.

    3. Ship Pro models with Pro keyboard and Pro mouse instead of crappy iMac kbd&mouse.

    Agreed, totally. I hate the iMac keyboard. I couldn't care less about the mouse (I use trackballs anyway), but the keyboard is simply too small.

    4. Reach MHz/price-parity with Intel.

    They're already at price/performance parity, more or less. The G4 is roughly triple the speed of a P3, and this is using Intel's own benchmarks, mind you. We're not talking Bytemarks here, boys and girls, we're talking benchmarks no one dares discredit. MHz-wise, I do see the psychological value of a 600-MHz G4, but please realize that this isn't Apple's fault. Apple doesn't make the chips; all it can sell is what it gets from Motorola and IBM.
    As for price-parity, why should Apple be forced to charge less than the machine is worth? You get what you pay for, simple as that; Apple deserves a higher price point. The machines are simply better in terms of performance, reliability, ease of upgrading and servicing, and even aesthetics. I might also add that studies show the average Mac to have twice as long of a useful life as the average Intel-based box. It's a question of value, and you get it from a Mac.

    5. Fix QT 4.0 and Sherlock UI.

    Agreed. At least to the point where you can see the names of stuff in the drawers, and preferably by scrapping the interfaces completely and going back to real MacOS interfaces.

    Anyway, I'm not going to buy a G4, but for a totally different reason: I'm satisfied with my beige G3 as it is, at least for the time being. Though I hope they don't end the trade-in programs anytime soon...
  • by jafac (1449)
    eh - I'd moderate you up "informative" for that.

    I didn't know about the more open files with OS 9.

    How many more? I've got a LOT of fonts.

    - -
    Yes, Adobe has produced a LOT of suckage for the Mac market lately, (especially with their stubbornness on DPS, which was a big reason why OS X is delayed, because Apple had to roll their own display system, Quartz, which is arguably better, but still - is OS X going to ship in my lifetime? I've been waiting for Copeland since 1994 dammit!)

    Symantec has also greatly SUCKED as far as keeping up to date. How long did it take for them to support HFS+? Even tho HFS+ was available as beta to developers for like a year before it shipped.

    Um. Let me see, what other Mac software vendors SUCK. Intuit. Um, Hasbro. Um. NOvell, (not an accidental typo), Apple (can you say Cyberdog? OpenDoc? QD3D?). How about Palm - or whomever is responsible for that Palm Desktop attrocity, that we have to PAY EXTRA for, okay 2.x is much better, but why must we pay? I paid thru the NOSE for my meager Palm III hardware, software should NOT be extra. Ooops - the company I work for (which shall remain nameless).

    Damn, I'm just in a shitty mood today. Everywhere I look. Heads up asses.

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • by mcc (14761) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Thursday October 14, 1999 @12:42PM (#1613332) Homepage
    ok.. so apple makes a kind of bad decision that annoys some of its customers. by 24 hours later, it has realized its mistake, listented to its customers, and done something rather nice to everyone who had ordered a 450 model. (in the process giving up quite a bit of money..)

    after apple makes the mistake, slashdot is flooded with people flaming apple. Apple is arrogant, apple is screwing its customers, apple is nonresponsive, apple is self-destructive and stupid. Almost none of these people posting were affected in any way by the order cancellations. The people posting who _were_ affected were just kind of calmly shrugged it off.

    so now that apple has actually _listened to its customers_.. what happens? do the slashdot posters come back and appologize for being too hasty to flame? well, no. instead what we get is.. more apple bashing. people say "well it's a good thing apple is doing this", and then immediately go right on with the flaming. Mostly saying the exact same thing they were after yesterday's article. What is this? How many other companies would _do_ this? If compaq cancelled a bunch of orders and said "i'm sorry, we can't fufill these, you'll have to reorder".. would _they_ have listened to any customer complaints? (Compaq being a hypothetical example.. i've never dealt with them)

    Oh, and btw i think i can say with almost absoloute certainty that apple did _not_ make the decision to give discounts to the people who had originally ordered 500s based on anything related in any way to slashdot. And the downgrade wasn't covered by any other "media" sources except macintouch/macnn. Apple based what they did on customer feedback..

    meanwhile, other people in the current thread are complaining that apple effectively raised the prices for people who are going to buy new G4s after that. um, so? are you going to be buying a G4? if not why are you complaining? shouldn't apple have the right to charge what they like, especially if (because of rising DRAM prices) it is costing them more to make the product then it was awhile back? it's amazing the people who don't care about or pay attention to apple _at all_.. except when there's a /. posting about some mistake apple made, and then suddenly they're experts..
    there are times when slashdot is full of interesting people with great technical knowledge and a willingness to share it, and informed insights on the thing being spoken on. These times almost never occur if apple's involved in some way. oh well. i'm done ranting now.

    -mcc-baka
    (this message sent from LinuxPPC r5)
  • With 13% of iMac buyers having bought their first Mac having previously owned PCs (and a goodly number more having bought their first computer period), I should daresay that Apple is getting new customers. The iMacs increased market share for Apple. They certainly didn't cause it to dwindle (it outsold all other low end computers for months, and still continues to sell well).
  • by Anonymous Coward
    It seems a company can only remain young and vital so long as they are also small and the underdog. As soon as a company starts to get big they just loose that spark that made them special. Good example: 3dfx. They rocked the world with Voodoo technology and then upped the ante with Voodoo2. What have they done since then? Well, not much really. I mean the Voodoo3 is cool and all (I own one) but it's just not the groundbreaking technology the Voodoo was. Or actually, mroe appropriately it IS the same technology as the Voodoo. 3dfx hasn't really changed techonology since they first invented it (yes the orignal Voodoo1 could do multi-texturing, Quantum3d made a multi texture version). They've just made it faster and smaller. That's well and good, but in that time other companies have surpassed them. Now I think they are mostly rolling on name alone. Same thing with Apple, they revolutionized computer interfaces by bringing the GUI to the mass market but they really haven't DONE anything since then. Coloured cases, ya well, big deal. Their OS? It suffers from 3dfx syndrome (using old technology) which they plan to fix with OSX, but still. When you're little you have to fight in the only way you can and that is to be better than everyone else. The only thing that matters is succeeding through excellence. Once you get big, all that matters is what your stock does, and many companies, including Apple it seems, wiill do whatever it takes to make that stock go up.
  • >Photoshop - THE original killer app for the Mac. There's a reason why Photoshop benchmarks are what
    they use primarily to compare the PowerPPC and Pentium chips...

    Funny. I could have sworn the reason was that it sucked so much CPU that it made testing insanely easy (because discrepancies are quite apparent). :)

    I still consider WYSIWYG printing to be the Mac's killer app. Imagine, in 1984, being able to print to a printer exactly what you saw on your screen. What a novel concept that was! :)
  • by Pierre (6251)
    Where have you been hiding these?

    I know that IBM released some specs for a PowerPC chip. Did this spec include the G4?

    I have an bunch of old parts sitting around a P133 that would be happier stuck on one of these boards but I'll wait to see some products before I start looking for my screwdriver....
  • I haven't read through the whole discussion here, so please excuse me if this is has already been said. I just feel the point needs to be made!

    When Apple decided to charge the 500MHz price for the 450MHz system, they also threw in 128MB of RAM--for free--to compensate. At current prices, that just about makes up the original cost difference between the 500MHz and 450MHz model.

    From MacNN: [httpp]

    From: "Brad Bradley"
    Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 11:50:03 -0600
    To: general@macnn.com
    Subject: The reality of the price thing

    Something to try...

    I went to the Apple Store and custom built a G4-450(G4/40/128/20GB/DVD-ROM/Zip/modem/AGP) like the one that I currently have on my desk. The total tab was $2849. That is $350 dollars more that I paid for my computer. Now factor in the problem created with rising RAM prices and another rise in chips that took the Tiwan earthquake hit and I think that Apple is doing the reasonable thing considering the market prices it has to pay for parts. They have to pass the price along to the consumer. The hit looks really big if you only price the pre-built configurations form Apple. The reality is that it is not nearly as bad as most are making it sound.

    Oh, and for those that don't believe me I will gladly purchase your working 128 meg PC100 RAM modules from you for last summers prices of $122.00 so you can go purchase new ones form the Chip Merchant today for $342.00

    Let me say that I'm not condoning Apple's handling of this matter. They should have contacted the affected customers via, first, email, and then if no response within 48 hours, telephone, asking them if they wanted to "trade" 50MHz for 128MB of RAM added to their system. As it is now, Apple can't deliver the 500MHz chips; if they'd asked their customers if they would be willing to trade MHz for MB, I'm positive that the reaction on Slashdot would have been damned near positive!


  • I don't think the mouse is that bad... once you have a realization and find that it works better as a fingertip-only mouse, rather than full-palm, it becomes a joy to use!
  • But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform?

    Oh... I dunno. There was that whole Mosaic web browser thing, but I don't know what those guys were thinking... beat the PC version onto the Internet by two weeks. And then there's that Myst game... made entirely on Macs (Quadras at the time, actually), running StrataStudio.


  • How do you feel about the "direct intervention" now?

    Unless you are one of the lucky few whose systems are already in production, I bet you don't feel very generous about Apple right now.
  • >like they did to Power Computing, Newton Inc., Claris (oops, it's starting to sound like Microsoft's lineup of acquisitions, isn't it?).

    Um, just thought I'd mention, Newton Inc and Claris were both Apple spin-offs. Every Newton I've ever seen has had an Apple logo on it, and Claris? Well, it was originally a combination of the MacDraw, MacWrite, and othe Mac* programs. I don't think this even comes close to Microsoft's lineup of acquisitions.

    If this news story shows one thing, it's that Apple changes its mind whenever it pleases. It changed its mind when clones started leeching sales, it changed its mind about spinning out the Newton (to kill it, basically), it changed its mind about Claris (because it was offering the same software functionality and ease to Windows, AFAIK), it changed its mind about 33.6 modems in iMacs, it changed its mind about charging for AppleShare IP upgrades...when you think about it, Apple changes its mind A LOT. It responds to the market. People don't like something and make motions about it (the iMac modems, AppleShare IP, etc.) it changes.
  • This fiasco is only partially Apple's fault.

    The real problem lies with Motorola. As far back as I remember, Motorola has never delivered a CPU on-time and in quantity.

    The only reason this is Apple's fault is because they should know better than to trust Motorola. The 68020 was amazingly late. The 68060 was so late that Apple abandoned the chip family. Their biggest mistake was not going with Intel when they had the chance.

    Don't get me wrong -- I much prefer the 68K architecture to anything Intel ever created. Especially the nice, clean instruction set. But Intel has consistently outperformed Motorola in getting chips out the door, at the fastest possible speed, and in quantity.
  • Actually, the Mhz parity is an important issue for marketing Apple computers. People view Mhz as a quick way to judge the processor. Whenever Intel introduces a new product family, they always make sure the Mhz also add up. When PII came out, it started at 233, the highest Pentium speed at the time. When PIII was introduced, it also started at 450mhz, the highest PII speed then. But as far as the "upgrade path" goes, many people don't upgrade their OS. Many people are happily running Win95 right now. Similarly, many people who run Win98 will not lay hands on Win2k or Millenium. To top it all off, piracy is rampant in the Windows world as well. Finally, I think the best processor out there right now is not the G4. It's the Athlon. Running the standard office apps and internet browser software, the PIII is comparable in power to a G4, and the Athlon is 15-30% faster on the same rating. The disparity becomes even greater on games. The G4 gains its performance advantage in applications with lots of data manipulation but little code processing [SETI@home being an excellent example) plus graphical apps [also data intensive]. But overall - Athlon is a clear winner for 80% of the apps out there. Motorola's own benchmarks prove it.
  • The neat thing about pc's is that many many people make them, so you don't have to wait for them.

    If you'd kind notice that the G4 shortage is a Motorola problem. It can't make enough chips to fill demand.

    If Intel delayed a chip, no amount of Compaqs and Dells would make it ship faster. What might happen is AMD would step in and take up the slack, which is exactly what IBM is doing for Apple.

    - Scott
    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • >>But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform? Sure, the hardware is much improved cost and feature-wise, but why bother with such poor software selection?

    um.. because for the consumer, the only other alternative is Windows 98.
    ___
    "I know kung-fu."
  • I'm also glad to see Apple listened, but as to your comment "I doubted they could really be stupid enough to pull a stunt like that..." Some of us have been here before.

    Around April of this year (I think? Maybe earlier...) Apple issued a bug fix/maintenance release of their AppleShareIP small office file/web/mail/print server suite (version 6.2). These maintenance releases had always been free, until this one which they wanted $499 for.

    Needless to say, a lot of us Apple admins bitched very loudly. Within a week, they had done a similar reversal and the update became free for all of us that had 6.0 or 6.1. A much more equitable solution.

    I'm glad Apple did the right thing with the G4 processor squeeze and I remain that most rare of slashdotters, a relatively content Apple user :-). But I'm sensing a trend here of testing customers and pulling back only if it looks like the water's too cold.

    -A.
  • 4. Reach MHz/price-parity with Intel.


    This is unnecesary as every Equivelant MHZ Mac has been able to trash the hell out of its Intel counterpart. So paying for that 400mhz Mac is closer to paying for an 800mhz intel chip.

    Kintanon
  • It's hard to cheer when a company basically tries to pull a fast one and reverses itself only when it gets called on it.

    Agreed. It's not like they did something good -- they simply changed their mind about doing something bad.

    Anyhow, am I the only one that doesn't understand why folks are so bully on Apple these days? I used to be a Machead myself years ago, when it was a platform of innovation (with stuff like Photoshop, Premiere, Excel, etc. being born and raised on it). But what was the last revolutionary software product to come out first on the Mac platform?

    I dunno. When was the last time you saw a revolutionary software product anywhere? Actually, I think part of the Mac's appeal to a lot of people is that they don't have to worry about rebooting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H having to use some "revolutionary software product" de jour.

    Oh, but what's with the weird examples? I don't know what Premiere is, but I don't see how Photoshop or Excel could be viewed as innovative. (?) They had reputations as pretty good products, but was either of them something new?

    Sure, the hardware is much improved cost and feature-wise, but why bother with such poor software selection?

    Er, wait a minute... what poor selection? It might not have as many open source projects going for it as some of the Unixy systems, but it has plenty of "mainstream" products, and that type of selection seems to be acceptable to the 'Doze users.

    BTW, I'm skeptical that this seguey into the topic of Mac desirability actually has anything to do with the recent price scandal... but I guess everyone (even Mac users) have to let off a little AppleSteam now and then. That company sure makes a lot of ... interesting ... decisions.


    ---
  • by Sloppy (14984) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @09:51AM (#1613356) Homepage Journal

    4. Reach MHz/price-parity with Intel.

    If this is one of the things holding you back, then you may have made a very foolish decision.

    First of all, when was the last time you needed a certain clock rate? Are you trying to listen to your computer on the radio, and your radio only receives the 500-600 MHz bands? Isn't it enough that the Macs have already met and exceeded the performance you can get with Intel machines?

    As for price, I can see your point and have sympathy. But keep in mind that a lot of people who buy Intel machines also end up using Microsoft software, thereby getting trapped in the annual or biannual software rental process (a.k.a. the "upgrade path"). For most people (granted, I'm not counting the Linux users), Macs are cheaper than their Intel counterparts. One of the reasons that the Mac appears so expensive at first is that they come bundled with an OS that you have to mostly pay for "up front".


    ---
  • by um... Lucas (13147) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @09:54AM (#1613357) Homepage Journal
    1 - OS X will ship when it's ready. Do you want them to pull a Microsoft and ship it sooner and then augment it with service packs to get it to a useable state?

    2 - Apples just not large enough to offer a wide variety of video cards... They commit to buying all their chips from ATI and presumably get a huge discount because of that...

    3 - I have to agree with that... Those keyboards suck

    4 - Is a non-issue... Only someone that has no idea as to how the innards work and that is resistant to having it explained would really request this. If Apple can achieve equivilant performance with 1/2 the MHz, what do i care?

    5 - I haven't seen Sherlock 2 yet (OS 9 apparently kills ATM, and i can't have that!) but let apple do whatever they want with their bundled apps... It's not terribly difficult to develope a quicktime player using Apple's API's and overlaying an interface of your choice on top of it.
  • 1 - I want Apple to FORGET Carbon, forget Java in yellowbox -er Cocoa. And ship the technology they HAVE, excuse me, HAD a year ago. They're delaying it to polish Carbon integration, and converting Cocoa over so you can code in Java instead of Objective-C, which, IMO, is complete excrement.

    If Apple wants to attract programmers, it should expose its interfaces via languages that most programmers use. There has to be a 10,000:1 ratio of Java programmers to Objective-C programmers.

    And the difference between OSX Server and OSX is a LOT more than Carbon/Cocoa. There's a different interface (Apple is porting the Finder to a new OS). There's the small matter of porting ColorSync and AppleScript. There's a completely new graphics system (built on PDF) that remove the royalty-laden (and never-upgraded) Display PostScript.

    2 - Yes, but why can't they unbundle the ATI cards, and say, hey, if you want to BTO a box on our site, we'll ship you a box w/o this substandard peice of crap (well, my big gripe is with ATI's drivers), and you can order one from a third party, or hey, we'll ship you a Doodoo 3 with our outrageous markup (which would still be preferable to paying the outrageous markup for the ATI crap which would just get chucked anyway).

    Apple is NEVER going to unbundle those ATI cards. The entire goal of their product line is simplicity. It makes products cheaper, and it makes it easier for consumers to understand what they're buying. Giving the rare case (you) greater choice means making everything more expensive for everyone else. Sounds like poor economics to me.

    5b - OS 9 kills ATM. Same reason I'm not going to buy OS 9. If I'm going to have to pay Adobe several hundred to upgrade my ancient copy of ATM Deluxe which works FINE on 8.6, then I'll wait until OS X comes out and breaks it again, so I don't have to pay for two ATM upgrades in 1 year. Perhaps this was technically unavoidable.

    Turns out that ATM 3.9 works fine with OS 9. If Adobe releases crappy software, this is Apple's fault?

    -jon

  • Warning: Heavy Sarcasm

    Gee, I dunno, you could, I suppose, call them or something....

    I personally don't think this was the smartest thing Apple ever did, myself, but really, complaining about something that can be fixed with a simple phone call (admittedly, possibly with a wait on the phone) isn't exactly the greatest thing in the world either.

    But, I suppose, that's just me....

  • 'Cause what apple pulled was so blatantly obnoxious and insulting that they never ever should have done it in the first place. Then they reversed the descision and began running their business with at least a hint of ethics...that is what we EXPECT. Should we say "Sorry Steve Jobs for calling you nasty names for pulling a crass and high-handed move"? I don't think so...
  • Seems to me that the other main reason why Apple backed down (in addition to the large backlash) was because they hadn't yet taken customers' money and thus still had an incentive to please them.

    My own experience in dealing with store.apple.com a few months back is that the salesdroid was willing to bend over backwards to please me only until the moment my credit card was charged. While writing up my order she claimed her computer "wasn't letting her" put in the price she'd quoted me a day earlier, but my credit card would be refunded the difference.

    Well, the computer arrived and of course my card was charged the higher price, sans refund. I called the salesperson, who was apparently overcome with amnesia, claiming that the price in the computer was the final selling price and that I'd have to provide written documentation of any promised refund. Hello? Written documentation? They didn't even send me a written receipt until two months later!

    Anyway, I'm still an Apple fan but would think twice before ordering from store.apple.com again. Congrats to those who were un-screwed in the latest fiasco.

  • Maybe the fact that they're annoying to use encourages one to use it less and hence experience less RSI. :-)

    But seriously, I like my iCatch [macsensetech.com].
    --
  • Apple is NEVER going to unbundle those ATI cards. The entire goal of their product line is simplicity. It makes products cheaper, and it makes it easier for consumers to understand what they're buying. Giving the rare case (you) greater choice means making everything more expensive for everyone else. Sounds like poor economics to me.

    I agree with you with respect to the iMac, but the G3's and G4's are expensive enough that they should really be more configurable, especially in video, a comparable performance PC workstation would certainly be configurable.
    --
  • "There has to be a 10,000:1 ratio of Java programmers to Objective-C
    programmers."

    If Apple would promote Objective-C instead of burying it - that ratio would be different. Everything I've heard about Objective-C is that there's literally no learning curve if you understand OOP, and know C well.

    Other points about differences between OS X Consumer and Server are taken. ColorSync would be an issue - however that's a Moot point if Apple loses that lawsuit. :) I would argue that Apple could have/should have slapped that Adobe bitch around some regarding DPS. AppleScript could have been abandoned in favor of - gasp! Shell Scripting/Perl - since it would have BSD underpinnings - though this may be a naive opinion.
    All of your points are really valid, despite my arguments and protestations. I say again: I've been waiting for Copeland since 1994 dammit!

    "Sounds like poor economics to me"
    Apple really could/should slap that ATI bitch around some, and get them to write decent drivers, or release technology that's up to par with the rest of the world. Rage128 was da shit when they announced it, and when it was first released to reviewers, but - HOW long did it take them to actually release that card? Then how long did folks have to wait until we could get one other than the B&W model? By that time, Rage128 was 5 minutes ago technology. Now it's not even that.

    "Turns out that ATM 3.9 works fine"
    oh - thanks, I didn't know that. I guess my bitching about OS 9 is pretty much unfounded. Does this apply to ATM Deluxe? No, it's not really Apple's fault Adobe is sticking them with a strap-on. But like I said above, I wish Apple could slap these bitches around like they did to Power Computing, Newton Inc., Claris (oops, it's starting to sound like Microsoft's lineup of acquisitions, isn't it?).


    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • "sounds like poor economics to me"

    ooops - what I meant to say is, you portray my opinon about Apple and ATI as a minority one, but I hear this complaint all over the internet. I don't think anybody wants Apple to ditch ATI wholesale, but all I'm asking for is a choice.

    Maybe when I buy my G4, there will be an AGP Rage128 for sale on eBay. . .

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Thursday October 14, 1999 @01:48PM (#1613370)
    The problem for Apple is that they aren't likely to ever attract a significant number of new customers until they change their business practices.

    That is a rather fanstastic assertion given the fact of the matter is that 50% of iMac sales are first time Apple customers.

  • Okay, I can see how I came off as one of those "jerks who don't know PPC is twice as fast - because of RISC - etc."

    Not the case- but here's why I still think it's necessary.
    G3 came out.
    Apple said "twice as fast". Used ByteMark. Inteliots said ByteMark sucks, use SPEC.
    G4 came out.
    Apple said "twice as fast". Used SPEC.
    Now "they" say that benchmarks don't mean anything, hardware's still closed (IBM's POP), overpriced (difficult price/performance comparison), OS sucks (X), etc. etc.

    MHz is the language the computer market understands. You can't convince people with something as esoteric (even though they mean well) as benchmarks. As soon as intel gained dominance in the 80s, and they latched onto MHz as a metric, as bogus as it is for x-platform comparison, the game was intel's. Now intel has been able to totally sit on their ass, as long as they can stay ahead in the MHz game. And that's what really sucks.
    Now, not that I really care that my PPC runs at the same 700MHz as some intel "coppermine" (disclaimer - does *NOT* contain copper wiring!), nor do I care for bragging rights. A 700MHz G4 would be kick ass. And Moto SHOULD be able to deliver it (and I believe they are fully capable of doing it) if they didn't have their heads up their asses about what consumers want, and would pay TONS of money for, and what would put Motorola in Intel's current and enviable position in probably the space of 6 months.

    Then I wouldn't have to worry about hiccups like this threatening the life of my favorite platform.

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • No, Steve used quarterly profits as a smokescreen to try to pull some shit. Didn't work. Then again, have you seen AAPL's stock price? Whoo!

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • 1 - I want Apple to FORGET Carbon, forget Java in yellowbox -er Cocoa. And ship the technology they HAVE, excuse me, HAD a year ago. They're delaying it to polish Carbon integration, and converting Cocoa over so you can code in Java instead of Objective-C, which, IMO, is complete excrement.

    2 - Yes, but why can't they unbundle the ATI cards, and say, hey, if you want to BTO a box on our site, we'll ship you a box w/o this substandard peice of crap (well, my big gripe is with ATI's drivers), and you can order one from a third party, or hey, we'll ship you a Doodoo 3 with our outrageous markup (which would still be preferable to paying the outrageous markup for the ATI crap which would just get chucked anyway).

    3 - only Steve Jobs would disagree with this one.

    4 - I explained myself with another post. I only sound ignorant of the PPC advantages - but really, this is in support of broad market acceptance, not penis length comparisons with celery.

    5 - I have not read one positive review of the UI for QT 4.0 and Sherlock 2. What are they thinking, anyway? They sometimes listen to their customers, but often they don't.
    5b - OS 9 kills ATM. Same reason I'm not going to buy OS 9. If I'm going to have to pay Adobe several hundred to upgrade my ancient copy of ATM Deluxe which works FINE on 8.6, then I'll wait until OS X comes out and breaks it again, so I don't have to pay for two ATM upgrades in 1 year. Perhaps this was technically unavoidable. It's not really Apple's fault that ATM Deluxe costs way, way too much, but then again, it's Apples fault anyone should NEED ATM Deluxe, because of the crappy OS reliance on file handles for loaded fonts (what, I can't have more than 200 or so fonts in my Fonts folder? I have 2000 on my NT box at work!)

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • Mac OSX is not ready. DO not ask for it if all it is going to do is break your, and everybody else's, hearts.

    Apple has no choice, I suspect, except to bundle ATI video. They need a supplier who is willing to work closely with Apple and write drivers; 3dfx? NVIDIA? Matrox? Who?

    I agree with your Pro announcements -)

    I don't care about MHz parity; Price parity is non-existent because most Intel machines are crappy. Add in quality components and a Intel machines starts to approach the cost of a Mac machine. Almost every Mac is desktop graphics ready out of the box, or very nearly so, if I am not mistaken.

    No comment possible on QT4 or Sherlock, never used them.


    -AS
  • www.apple.com/powermac/buy.html [apple.com]

    nothing there as of 1:47 pacific western time

  • 4:01PM 73 3/16 +9 5/32 +14.30%

    in addition to this news also reports of shortages?!? WTF?

In the sciences, we are now uniquely priviledged to sit side by side with the giants on whose shoulders we stand. -- Gerald Holton

Working...