The fundamental difference is that between RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer=MAC) and CISC (Complex Instrucion Set Computer=PC) chip design.

Apparently the two are becoming more alike anyway which fuels the original argument of this post that the machines are becoming essentially equivalent in power/stability.

Here is a good excerpt from webopoedia.com:

Pronounced risk, acronym for reduced instruction set computer, a type of microprocessor that recognizes a relatively limited number of instructions. Until the mid-1980s, the tendency among computer manufacturers was to build increasingly complex CPUs that had ever-larger sets of instructions. At that time, however, a number of computer manufacturers decided to reverse this trend by building CPUs capable of executing only a very limited set of instructions. One advantage of reduced instruction set computers is that they can execute their instructions very fast because the instructions are so simple. Another, perhaps more important advantage, is that RISC chips require fewer transistors, which makes them cheaper to design and produce. Since the emergence of RISC computers, conventional computers have been referred to as CISCs (complex instruction set computers).
There is still considerable controversy among experts about the ultimate value of RISC architectures. Its proponents argue that RISC machines are both cheaper and faster, and are therefore the machines of the future. Skeptics note that by making the hardware simpler, RISC architectures put a greater burden on the software. They argue that this is not worth the trouble because conventional microprocessors are becoming increasingly fast and cheap anyway.

To some extent, the argument is becoming moot because CISC and RISC implementations are becoming more and more alike. Many of today's RISC chips support as many instructions as yesterday's CISC chips. And today's CISC chips use many techniques formerly associated with RISC chips.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/R/RISC.html

Well, the difference USED to be that one was RISC, and one was CISC, but mac is now switching to intel chips, and they will hit the market in about a year(although you TI users know about how the "ship date" can lag)

the G5 was sucking too much power, and Apple is basically trying to take down Microsoft. More power to them i say!

I am a computer nerd by trade, and the PowerPC chip was the reason i was saving to buy a mac... Now? who knows, who cares, i'll take the best deal and run with it!

Since March, I believe the G5 laptop has been pulled totally. Ie. there isn't going to be one, due to heat issues.

Shouldn't that have been re-phrased....

? :)

The Intel roadmap is looking good, though. Especially the evolution of the Centrinos. It will be great to see what Apple do with them, too.

Windows and OSX will be truly comparable. The wars have just started!! (Great for consumers)

Right on!

Definatly great for consumers, and even better for intel, finally someone will push the processor to take full advantage of a FLOP.... AMD is interestingly enough not in that mix, i expected them to be, excepty i suppose they are having some power issues as well....

The pentium M i believe is the chip that they are really looking to expand, and like you, i cant wait to see what the next level will be...


you know what the saddest part about this is?

i'm talking about the most technical part of computing, and i cant figure out how to put the quote boxes in my messages :oops:

oh, right, the quote button. well isn't THAT confusing

Is this speculation Timo - or have you heard this news from a decent source?

I just hope they dont release them before I get a chance to ebay-off my powerbook g4...

cheers

blay

this is a classic fight, PCers vs MACers, all i can say is that, PC nowdays still freezes and shows that "Blue Screen of Death", it is still a very capricious machine, when you buy and install a new hardware, you are always fearing its behaviour .

I've seen a friend's G5 in action and also used it a little, and i can insure you never worry or think about getting an Fatal Error or some shit like that.
It is true that sometimes (raaaaaarely), it freezes for some unknown reasons, you just restart the machine and everything's ok again.

Anyway, i am still a PC user (A7N8X Deluxe mobo, AMD3000+, 512 RAM), and i still have problems on my machine, I make music, so i have all the shit you all have, i do programming (Soft and Web), so i have also all the designers and progrmamers shit installed, i also play games etc etc. All this leads to conflicts on Windows and freezing problems.

Now you should say "ok the problem is windows, not PC", BUT, do we have any other choice? if one day we will be able to make music & play games on Linux, then i will certainly switch, but for now, there is PC and it sucks, you have to format it usually to be sure it is clean, run a regfix, care about DLL versions, languages, Virii............ Computers a re supposed to make your life easier not a hell.

Conclusion: following my own experience, i'd say Mac is certainly more stable and more reliable, PC, despite its popularity still have a long way to go. It is not a matter of computing speed, it is a matter of ergonomy and reliablity, and on these points, Mac OS is far better than PC.

I disagree.

We have a Mac dual G4 in the studio and I have a 2.8GHz PC at home dedicated to music (and video stuff).

My friend came round to show me some after effects stuff (he uses a G5) and he was amazed at how much quicker everything ran on my PC. We had things rendering in about 60% of the time taken on his system.

Since my latest rebuild (bought a new 10,000RPM Raptor C: Drive) I have not had ANY instability whatsoever, it is absolutely rock solid.

I put it all down to research and buying the right parts. If done properly a PC can outclass the best Macs anyday.


The debate goes on (and probably always will)...

Drammy

I have a truly ancient Athlon 700MHz CPU and mobo, and must admit crashes were very frequent when using Win98se...

...BUT! I upgraded to Win XP on the exact same machine for the last year and have NEVER(!!) had a blue screen of death, or any lockups! It's brilliant. If a window ever happens to stop function because I openly abused and punished my available system resources I could easily end that program without it affecting the rest of the system. Works like a charm. Even on an old and relatively incompatible system like mine.

Timo,

In response to your signature - I think they are already on OS 1.8 or something :wink: