Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I don't agree with you, Matt. There are several differences between the G5 class desk-top machines and the G4's they replace - the largest being in memory and memory-graphics bandwidth. Because Aperture uses CoreGraphics extensively those are going to play a really big part in its performance. It's silly of Apple to design a high-performance application to be backward compatible with its older machines because the application technology has evolved since then and it's only going to get better as their architecture improves (with future PowerPC machines and ultimately with their shift to the next-generation Intel chips). So for new applications I don't feel betrayed. I usually upgrade a desktop system when the replacement is 5x the speed of the current one and that will be the case this time (although just barely). On 11/27/05, Matt Powell <wooderson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/27/05, Adam Bridge <abridge@gmail.com> wrote: > > It's on the Apple web site! > That's what I wondered, because I think they're trying to pull a fast one. > > The only difference in a 17"PB of recent vintage and a dual-G4 is that > the PB has a 128MB graphics card that's capable of some of the new > tricks found in OS X Tiger (the ripples when you drop a widget and > such). Memory-wise and processor-wise, the dual should actually be > superior. > > I suspect they're fudging the requirements to get people to buy a new > G5 machine - but they can't do that with PBs since they never > shoehorned in a G5. > > I love my Apple, but boy do I find the company frustrating much of the > time. > > -- > MP > wooderson@gmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >