2020. 2. 11. 11:57ㆍ카테고리 없음
The latest Tweets from Alana Baxter (@alana_mac). Mom to Cam, girlfriend to John, friend to Reagan and Lauryn, skier (snow and water), quasi-triathlete who can't swim very well, Product Manager. //#Cliiiimb - 'a Strava geek-fest dream come true' - ScarletFire. Create New Directories and Subdirectories with One Terminal Command. 6 Mac OS X Terminal Tips. Alabama Cops Kill 21-Year-Old After They Say He Opened Fire In A Mall. Microsoft delivers Office 2019 for Mac test build. Microsoft's Office 2019 for Mac release, due later this year, includes features that the company already has rolled out to its Office 365 ProPlus.
It's not about 'better bang for the buck,' it's just to say that you custom built your Mac. I agree completely. FWIW, if you're looking for better bang for the buck, would you really be use Macintosh in the first place? (That is NOT troll or flamebait.keep reading:) ) Apple's own Mac systems aren't pitched as 'best bang for the buck' - these are highly integrated, highly specialized computers, designed to 'rise above the masses' of wintel machines.
The concept behind the 'build your own' PC follows a different set of rules when its applied to a Mac, because the Mac itself follows a different set of rules. Its great that more companies are offering customizable Mac systems - there is a market for this sort of thing! Don't compare these to an eMac, compare them to a G4 tower. For $849 you get a tower including PCI slots and and AGP port. If you're looking for a Macintosh that you can throw a couple of PCI cards (maybe a couple of SCSI adapters, whatever) but can't justify the price of a new Apple G4 system then maybe this is for you. For instance a dual 1.25 GHz Apple G4 tower costs $1999 with 256 MB RAM and an 80 GB hard drive. The site just stopped responding so I can't determine the price but presumably a dual 1.2 GHz their would be less than 2 grand.
The price of the dual 1.2 GHz kit is $1349, you could throw in 256 meg of ram and an 80 gig hard drive in for around 120 bucks, probably less. $120 sounds about right.
That makes it $1470. Let's toss in some other essentials:. keyboard and mouse - a decent pair might cost $50. MacOS X - $130. Combo DVD/CDRW drive - $60. Radeon 9000 Pro (64 MB) - $76 which brings us to $1786.
Compared to the $1999 Apple box, the savings are just over 10%, ignoring all the non-downloadable software that the Mac comes with. CoreCrib Dual 1200 Computer for $1799.99 CoreCrib Fully Assebled System G4 Dual 1200Mhz 2MB cache 1024MB Memory 52x CD-RW 120GB Harddrive Geforce4MX 32MB ADC DVI and DVI- VGA Adapter 2 Firewire, 2 USB Ports, Ethernet, Audio in/out Front Firewire, 2xUSB and Audio OUT Just Add keyboard, mouse, and OS ATA, Power Cable and Fans/Heatsink are included. Just plug in, add keyboard/mouse, boot from OS Install CD and install your OS. No hardware Installation! You're losing.05 ghz of speed (like you'll notice) but gaining ram and hd space for $200 cheaper. Well that depends.
I guess if you have some outdated Mac hardware lying around, you have a choice - ditch it all or upgrade it somehow. If upgrading turns out to be feasible via cards or a new box, why not do it?
And if the cheapest way happens to be some clone kit, it sounds a reasonable option assuming it has the proprietary ports such as the monitor connection and works out of the box with OS X. Now obviously if it's approaching the cost of a real mac, it isn't worth it, but if it were 2/3 the price, I'. Even those of us who don't use a mac for our bread and butter (I'm guessing you are meaning graphics professionals and the like) will keep buying our boxes from Cupertino.
The hardware engineering on Macs is quite nice. I'm posting this from a Cube, which has a cultish following due to its elegance even if the masses didn't get it. I'm probably one of the more geeky Mac users you will find, but I'm not going to be building a DIY Mac anytime in the forseeable future.
Steve and friends do too nice of a job fo. So, it's a G4/800 tower, for $775 plus extra hardware (hard drive, etc.) plus software (Mac OS X, applications). In contrast, the eMac is a G4/800 for $799 and includes a 17' monitor, 40GB hard drive, CD-ROM, Mac OS X, and a handful of software (AppleWorks, Quicken, World Book Encyclopedia, etc.). Oh, and a full 1-yr warranty from Apple.
Of course, the eMac isn't expandable (you can upgrade the RAM and add an AirPort card; everything else has to be external, and you can't run a split desktop on dual monitors). Still, compare to ebay.com. I completely agree. The problem in Mac-land right now is that while they have superior software (in just about every thing I can imagine), the hardware is so far behind.
This has been stated so many times but never hit home as true until Paladium started becoming a worrisome thing for me. Personally, I'de love to move to a Mac, but it's just out of the question to pay that much for hardware that I'm locked into for a long time. They have came a long way with standardization and upgradibility, but it's. Would Apple also be following industry standard on ATAPI devices? How about DDR ram? And PCI cards (like my new Audigy 2?) (Things I'de LOVE to know before I upgrade again) Yes.
You should be able to install just about any OS supported IDE CD-ROM drive in a newer tower. My 1GHz at work has 3 IDE intefaces ATA/100, ATA/66 and ATA and supports ATAPI (using cable select). As for PCI it supports PCI 2.1 at 33MHz (5, 12 or 3.3v).
AGP is 1.5V 4x. The new systems support PC2100 and PC2700 (dependin. Would Apple also be following industry standard on ATAPI devices? How about DDR ram?
And PCI cards (like my new Audigy 2?) (Things I'de LOVE to know before I upgrade again) Yes apple does follow the standard on ATAPI Devices. Apple just sticks standard CD/DVD drives in their systems. Yes they do use Standard DDR ram, in the higher end machines, PC133 in the lower machines like the eMac. Also, the laptop ram is standard SO-DIMM 133 or DDR in the case of the 17'. Yes, PCI cards can be put in the. I'd already moderated one post, but I just had to reply.
I've an off the shelf Maxtor hard drive in my older iMac; naturally, there's no room for three of them, but a PowerMac could hold them. You can also use PC USB mice and even keyboards with a Mac if you wish, though I'd recommend a Mac keyboard since there's a FEW differences in the keys used. The PowerMacs also have AGP for video cards, though you may need a firmware upgrade to use yours with a Mac; ATI's site should have more info on that. Like this self-built box states, you can drop in your own hard-drives, AGP cards, and everything. The only palces Apple breaks compatibility is where their tech is better. ADC is awesome, I wish PC manufacturer's would adopt - I have way too many cables behind my computer desk. Some goes for their slick way of hooking the mouse into the keyboard (less cabling, again).
You can get away with five cables from your tower (power, adc, keyboard, speakers, network), only one from your display (adc), a cab. I'de love to move to a Mac, but it's just out of the question to pay that much for hardware that I'm locked into for a long time.
First of all, Macs tend to be usable for longer than PCs, so a slower upgrade cycle mitigates the higher upfront cost somewhat. Two, resale values of Macs are much better than PCs (check eBay, for example). Now, what you don't get is a new toy as often as you used to, but upgrade cycles can be terribly time consuming and tedious, and occasionally risky.
It's also better for the environment to use your computer longer. Another question to ask yourself is, honestly, what do you use your computer for that you need all the power you can afford? What do you do that 'last year's computer' (and Macs are not as far behind as many people think) really really won't do? Is the speed difference so crucial that it overrides all the other benefits you notice with Macs?
Now, I'm not trying to conceal the raw speed problem with Macs. I'm just trying to promote a task-oriented view of computers. To give a fictitious example, if your PC is 10% faster, but crashes often and costs you about 50 minutes of productivity a day, then it's no faster than another computer that is more stable. The numbers are obviously made up, but try to think in that direction rather than just put specs up side by side. The PPC970 is not a pure RISC chip, if it were the decode stage would be unnecessary. There are a number of instructions that break down into two or more internal operations that the execution units have to deal with. From the IBM POWER whitepaper 'Cracked instructions flow into groups as any other instructions with one restriction.
Both IOPs must be in the same group. If both IOPs cannot fit into the current group, the group is terminated and a new group is initiated. The instruction following the cracked instruction may be in the same group as the cracked instruction, assuming there is room in the group. Millicoded instructions always start a new group. The instruction following the millicoded instruction also initiates a new group.'
This is much closer to CISC-RISC translation that happens in all modern x86 cpu's then it is to a traditional RISC design. As I'm sure has been pointed out, you'd still need a decode stage in almost any but the most useless risc architecture - got to convert those opcodes to control lines (regwrite, memwrite/read) and register fields. This doesn't come 'for free', even with simple risc architectures like MIPS. Ergo, you need a decode stage. More complexity simply means more stages dedicated to decode (a la x86, power series.) Another point: POWER is not the same thing as the PowerPC ISA.
POWER (which is cisc) supports som. That's the bottom line here. Hardly anybody I know who owns a Mac is gonna want a case that looks like a PC. A fair amount of the fun of having a Mac is the wow factor when people come over and look at it. Superficial, yeah, but if you're gonna plunk down bucks to get a Mac you want it to LOOK like a Mac. My suggestion to whomever makes these cases: make it look cool and Mac like.
Don't make it look like PC. Even them AlienWare designs. Not good enough. Make it a big globe or a cylinder. Anything but a copy of a PC case.
Scarlet Fire Build For Mac
I mean, really, look at some of these responses. Of all places we see people crying 'Why would you want to do this?' Or, 'What's wrong with the eMac?' This is only the first (or one of the first) homebuilt Macs. If enough people jump on the bandwagon prices will eventually drop. As it is now, the price is competitive with a brand new eMac, the comparable version of which was only introduced days ago.
I want to see PowerPC chips on PriceWatch. I want to see different people competing to do motherb. At risk of getting modded down as a troll, I'd have to agree with you on this. There is something to be said about having the ability (be it a good idea or not) to build your own machine.
As an ex-mac user myself, I gotta say that the first time I built my own x86 PC, I felt great. Definitely more rewarding than the sensation of opening up a carton and putting the Mac on the desk. Sure, it's not rocket science, but the sense of accomplishment has to be worth something. If I still wanted a Mac, AND I could. I mean, really, look at some of these responses. Of all places we see people crying 'Why would you want to do this?'
Or, 'What's wrong with the eMac?' It's not so much a 'thin skin' thing as a reflection of the fact that slashdot isn't a homogenous group. Some people are going to want to do it because they can. Some people are going to want to do it to reach a new level of hardware customization.
Some people are going to want to do it to have the level of configurability/performance that they could g. Page: My first Mac was a Beige G3 junked from work. I upgraded it to the max, but found it lacking the speed needed to run OS X. I started looking into buying a Power Mac but I was turned off by the inflated prices. $1500 for a box w/ no monitor? I like Apple's constant innovation but their prices are way too high. I finally came across this story about John Fraser, and his idea to sell a Mac kit aimed at do-it-yourselfers.
I've built quite a few PC's but never a Mac. I decided this was the route for me. My core crib arrived on Sat. As you can see, it arrives in a non-descript brown box from USPS. The packaging was done well.
The CoreCrib was secure in the box and was not damaged. Contents include, power cable, tower case, Apple Gigabit Ethernet motherboard, Apple Power Supply and blue/pink LED case fan. This is a very barebones kit.
Provide your own IDE cables, drives, processesor, memory, video card etc. I had an old Beige G3 I decided I'd rob parts out of. Most of what was in that box was old PC hardware I had laying around. At first, I could not get the Crib to boot, I checked the support forums and noticed that the only other person who had received a CoreCrib kit said you 'HAD' to update the firmware on the motherboard. I assumed this was my problem. So I put the Crib aside and tried to track down an older G4 processor.
May 6 another post arrived in the forums that the firmware was not needed to run newer CPUs. I then decided to investigate on my own. After an hour of testing, my problem was solved. The PC100 memory I tried to use from the Beige G3 did not like the faster G4 800 Giga Designs processor. I put a stick of PC133 memory in and the Crib instantly booted.
Here are some pictures of the box itself. Here are some photos after my parts were installed: Back plane is missing. Personally I don't care, I push it under a desk. The Crib has changed colors and price. It is now available as Pro model and comes in a nice gmono white case. My current expense list: CoreCrib kit: $379, Gigadesigns G4 800 cpu, $275, 256mb pc133 $20, ATI Radeon PCI 7000, $100 The other parts I installed were extras from upgrading PC's.
I've spent $775 on this machine and it runs OS X smoothly and without problems. I did purchase OS 10.2. I forgot to include that in the price.
2khappyware also sells complete and custom systems, you can add whatever parts you want if you don't want to buy them on your own. This case is expandable, you can add up to 5 hard-drives and multiple optical drives. Which is much different than the new Mirrored Power Macs.
My next stop is to add the Radeon 8500 AGP card, the PCI card doesn't do Quartz Graphics. Overall I'm extremely happy with the Crib. The noise level is very low. No windtunnel noise going on here.
It is upgradable to dual CPU's if you want to spend the cash. A new Support Forum has started flourishing, so help is available. I highly recommend buying this kit. Parts purchasing: Information: - Permalink Posted by Mark Dobie on 5/7/03; 11:36:45 AM. The CoreCrib will only interest./ build-your-own-PC types. First off, anybody who uses a Mac uses it because they don't want the agg of PCs and all of the various config problems with hardware.
Anybody who 'switched' sure as heck isn't going to suddenly decide they want to experiment by building a Mac. Heck, the whole reason they switched was to just use their damn computer! I just don't see this ever going any further than the techno inclined. And only to those who really want to run OS X.
And let's face it, a Mac capble of running OS X nicely can be had for 500 bucks now! Anybody who runs.nix is going to build a blow-em-away x86 box for the same price as the Core and not deal with the 'finding compatible hardware problem'. Besides that, at least for Linux, you basically have a choice between YDL, Mandrake (and Suse?). You got four times the distros for x86! I think this is a great idea, but for the price and maybe more importantly the warranty offered, I'd rather buy a used Mac from say macofalltrades.com. I may not get a brand new machine, but I can get a system that is equal or better than the Core machine with a 30 day warranty (and an option of a one year warranty). I hope it catches on though and I hope Apple maybe throws these guys a little help!
The CoreCrib will only interest./ build-your-own-PC types. I'm not sure who this kind of system is really aimed at.
If you want to hack together a system to run some kind of customised OS then Linux or.BSD on x86 hardware would be a better bet for you. If you want the Apple 'it just works' experience then buy from a vertical monopoly. One of the main reasons I'm considering swithcing to Apple is that all of their kit is designed and tested to work as a whole. You don't get that in the PC wor.
People wouldn't be going to such desperate measures as to build these special kits if Apple would simply sell their hardware at a more reasonable price. Yes, I'm aware that there are warranties, AppleCare, build quality, etc., but the fact is that the alternative - PCs - are a much better value overall. You can buy a PC with virtually all the features of a Mac that is far more powerful for less money. One of my current conundrums is whether I buy a Mac-based or PC-based video editing solution. Using the prices the author posts in the review, adding in $120 for Mac OS X and $50 for labor the real cost for hardware for this machine comes to $944, and that doesn't include shipping. Let's assume $5 per item and that's another $20 for a total of $964 for this 'low cost Mac' Okay, but Apple sells a spiffy new machine for $1,500.
That's a difference of $536. Now the question is this: Are the 'extras' you get with the new Apple Mac worth the extra $536? Lets look at the 'extras': (numbers in parenthesis are estimated upgrade costs) 1. Support and warranty. You have someone to point the finger at with hardware failures (priceless??) 2. 200Mhz faster CPU speed ($225 assumes purchasing 1Ghz instead of 800) 3. Faster bus speed (can't upgrade) 4.
2x faster memory (can't upgrade) 5. 32MB more Video RAM ( $65 more than the 7000 for the Radeon 8500) 6. GPU is about 2x more powerful 7. FireWire 800 ($100 includes USB2) 8.
Built-in AirPort antenna 10. AGP port is 2x faster (can't upgrade) 11. A better looking case The things that can be upgraded will cost $390 to do so, and a total build-it-yourself cost of $1,356. And this machine still doesn't perform as well as the new system will, and would cost only $140 less than the new Apple PowerMac. I'll take the Apple eqipment for the extra $140. I'm more on the graphics side of things than most posters here, but I did start to play around with Solaris and LinuxPPC before Mac OS X, and I've noticed since the release of OS X that Apple has a growing contingent of people who want to be users but can't deal with their hardware restrictions. My thoughts on how they might feasibly begin to encroach on Windows/Intel/AMD/Linux.
The need to address a new market. Currently their hardware appeals mainly to: 1.
Professional graphics dorks 2.edu (losing battle) and home users 3. Some small business professionals - music, a few lawyers, etc. Servers meant for Pro use, but too pricey for pro-sumer or consumer use. But their new OS appeals to computer professionals, higher end educational and scientific professionals, and anybody else who wants to experiment with and learn about an OS from the ground up. The robustness of the OS is going to be fairly transparent to their current hardware purchasers, manifested by the fact that it doesn't crash and is easy to use (two things which should be expected). But the people who are attracted to the OS by its capability and flexibility expect the same from the hardware and Apple doesn't currently offer that.
I say reconfigure the product line and the store. Keep the beautiful professional and entry level laptops. Keep the readymade economic and powerful desktop options. But give us one more category.
Scarlet Fire S Build For Macbook Pro
The Tinker-Mac.Appealing yet super-functional case. Easy to open. Designed more to the aesthetic of the Xserve than a desktop. Sleek, basic, tough looking.' Apple' processors in several grades.The option to add another processor.Optional HD's. Space for 2-3.Optional optical media.Optional video board.One Enet card + slot for at least one more.As many open PCI slots as possible -Firewire, USB, etc (optional?) preferably on the front -Feel free to contribute what I'm forgetting.
$400-500 Apple needs to capitalize on the fact that many people who like to tinker with the OS and box love their OS, and want a box that's affordable enough to truly personalize. And I think they'd make a ton of dough by offering this option. They give us the option of an empty case with that's capable of running their OS on their processor spec, and accept that the people buying it are capable of researching compatible components on their own will not only sell a boatload of boxes, but persuade more HW developers to write drivers for OS X. Or the open source community will. Screw all this 'port to Intel' crapola. Apple needs to accept that there are people who want to run their OS in a build-your-own manner, and they can build the bare bones machines for that crowd, make it a unique selling point, and still make their margins. I agree with your main points here, especially about security.
Everyone knows you shouldn't go with Swiss - it's full of holes! Munster is too soft, so is mozarella. Feta crumbles under any attack, and gorgonzola's security just plain stinks. Don't get me started on that mass-produced processed cheese! As soon as you take it out of the wrapper, it goes all limp and falls to pieces! In the end, I made the only decision that made sense: parmesan.
It's hardened, very difficult to cut through, and versa. Hate to break it to the Mac-crowd. But those of us who has stuck to the open 'standard' that the ordinary. PC is has been able to do this for years Oh really, and we all though that this was something innovative!?! Of course we know that.
No one claimed that this was something new, just something that is more novel for the Mac. Can you piece something together cheaper that'll run faster around an x86 mobo, of course, no kidding. Again, not the point.
It's a hobbiest system for those who are interes.