Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Why Macintosh's SUCK

Reply
Thread Tools

Why Macintosh's SUCK

 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
Senti wrote:
> Rich wrote:
>> Senti wrote:
>>
>>> When you buy software for your non-Mac computer, do you ever consider
>>> the system requirements for it? Unless you're totally clueless you
>>> do. Why would it be any different for a Mac?

>>
>>
>>> And where did you get the idea that "any software made by Mac is
>>> supposed to work on a Mac, period. No ifs, ands or buts about it"?
>>> Did you happen to see Apple ever claim that? No. In fact, if you
>>> were to do a little research (try http://www.apple.com/intel/ or
>>> http://www.apple.com/rosetta/ or http://www.apple.com/universal/ for
>>> starters) you'd see that Apple tells you that not all Apple software
>>> will run on an Intel-based Mac. In the case of purchasing Final Cut,
>>> the mistake was yours, pure and simple.
>>>

>>
>> It's not as clueless as you might think if you see it from this point
>> of view:
>>
>> In the Windows world, there is not a single manufacturer that builds
>> computers solely for the Windows OS. You have manufacturers such as
>> Dell, Gateway, HP and Alienware just to name a few.

>
> Which of these manufacturers include any OS *other* than Windows? Which
> of these manufacturers ships their product out with Linux for example?
> For all intents and purposes, those computers are built for Windows.
> Will any of them provide support if you throw another OS on it? No.
> You'll find they say "I'm sorry but we can't help you install your
> bundled software on Linux" (for example). All those manufacturers make
> computers that are capable of running WIndows. They will not guarantee
> that any other OS will work on them. Call and ask.
>


I don't have to call.

http://www.dell.com/linux

Dell n Series desktops will work with Linux and are designed to do so.
Licensing is available for Red Hat and SuSE (Novell).

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topi...555&l=en&s=biz

See header "Comprehensive Linux Support".

They build 'em and support 'em, even with Linux.

http://www.hp.com/linux

HP offers it as well.

http://www.hp.com/linux

You can order workstations preloaded with Linux which are also supported
(Red Hat or SuSE).

> All these
>> manufacturers build computers differently and have different
>> components (sound cards, video cards and so on). There is very little
>> consistency when you compare how one manufacturer builds a computer
>> compared to another. So yes, I always check system requirements before
>> purchasing software for my computer running Windows.

>
> First, Apple doesn't use the exact same components in every computer,
> either. Powermac G5's, for example, can come with either a Radeon or
> Nvidia graphics card. Plus you are free to use another video card if you
> want, and it won't even void your warranty (unless it causes physical
> damage). What kind of graphics card does Final Cut need? Do the 4
> different cards you can get with a Powermac G5 meet it's requirements?
> Something you should check with *any* computer when buying any video
> editing software.
>


The error you get when attempting to install FCE on a Intel Core Duo Mac
is that the card does not have AGP. The install halts at that point and
will not let you go any further. My iMac had the best video card
offerered by Apple, a 256MB ATI Radeon, but it doesn't have AGP and it's
not offered on the Intel-based iMacs (on the G5's it is). It should also
absolutely be not necessary for me to rip apart a brand new iMac just to
get certain software to work correctly. That's ridiculous.

>>
>> It would stand to reason that software programmed by the company who
>> makes the computers in the first place would make software that work
>> on everything they make.

>
> No... it wouldn't. That's called an "assumption" and according to my
> high school teacher "When you assume you make an ass out of u and me".
> OS X is a totally different OS than OS 9, for example, but the majority
> of OS 9 apps won't run on OS X unless you install the Classic
> environment (which doesn't come with every Mac).
>
> There's also the fact that all computer manufacturers make computers for
> different customer groups. Three that come to mind are regular
> consumers, professional consumers, and and large corporations that have
> special needs (usually servers and the like). Apple makes computers for
> all of these. And they make computers for differing budgets. The newest
> computer isn't always the fastest/best computer they have. Heck, you
> should have gone for the Quad-core Powermac G5 with 16GB of RAM and 1TB
> of disk storage if you wanted the best! iMacs are aimed towards your
> average home user (who will be using iMovie and iDVD from the iLife
> suite) and so are made to run software also aimed at that group.
> Powermacs are Apple's "Professional" line and so tend to be come with
> more "power"... and the price reflects this.
>


One of the reasons I bought the iMac was size. The fact it's put
together in a pizza-box style was attractive. Professional videographers
I know use G4's right now which are less powerful compared to the
Intel-based Mac according to Apple. This means that the iMac should have
run FCE with absolutely zero hassle whatsoever, I wouldn't need a
super-duper Mac and the video memory provided should have been more than
enough.

> Apple may say that Macs are easy to use (and I find them infinitely
> easier to use and troubleshoot than any Windows box I've used), but they
> have never claimed that *every* Apple computer will run *all* Apple
> software. They have released all the information (and more) that you
> need to make an informed purchase. Your failure to research does not
> mean Apple has been derelict in their duty.
>
> When you buy a new Mac and
>> buy current (read: current) software made by Apple - it should be a
>> safe assumption that yes, it will work. Why wouldn't it?

>
> Why *would* it? Because then you wouldn't have made an error? If Apple
> made computers that were capable of running *all* the software they
> make, then iMacs would be $1000-$2000 more than they are now. You're
> being totally unreasonable.
>


Why is it not reasonable to assume (yes, I said assume) that software
programmed by Apple wouldn't run on a computer made by Apple? FCE isn't
a server application, nor is it anything that required power of a grand
scale.

I will agree to disagree on this point.

> All their computers
>> are supposed to have consistency to them because only one company
>> makes them - and that's where my "Any software made by Mac (by Apple)
>> is supposed to work on a Mac, period" comes from.
>>
>>> Mac software does work on Macs... It's just that not ALL Mac software
>>> works on ALL Macs. Do you expect Final Cut to run on a G3? A G3 is
>>> a Mac. Final Cut is Mac software. According to you, it should work.

>>
>>
>> Clarification: What I expected was a brand new Macintosh computer that
>> would run current software offered by the company who makes them. It's
>> not an issue of "Is the computer enough powerful enough to run
>> [this]", it's an expectation that the company (Apple) would make
>> current software that would run on its own current computers (Macs).

>
> And it *does* run on it's current computers... just not the one you bought.
>


No, Final Cut HD Express will not run on the Intel-based iMac, or any
other Intel-based Macintosh computer. Final Cut PRO will with the
Universal release, but Final Cut HD Express will not, and (as I've said
previously), Apple has no plans to release a Universal version of Final
Cut HD Express - and I don't have the extra $1000 to spend just to have
a "compatible" version (Final Cut Pro).

>>> To each their own. Some people like green, others like pink. (I'm
>>> one of the likers of green. I'm sorry your experience didn't turn
>>> out well, but sometimes that's the way it works. *shrug*

>>
>>
>> That was my whole point. I really, *really* wanted this Mac to work. I
>> was very much looking forward to using it as my main computer for all
>> my needs. I was so anxious to receive it. When I did, I was astonished
>> at how awesome the picture was, the color, the ease of setup and
>> everything inbetween. When I tried to installed Final Cut Express, it
>> was like a kick in the teeth. I just bought a brand new computer, only
>> to find out that the one thing I wanted to do (pro video editing) it
>> couldn't do. And iMovie just didn't have enough functionality.
>>
>> I tried like hell for a week straight to fix the issues I encountered
>> with it. I read mountains of online documentation (especially
>> concerning my own network) but I just couldn't get the iMac to do what
>> I wanted it to do. Friends of mine that have been using Macs for years
>> couldn't believe the problems I was encountering with it - stating
>> (and I quote), "They're not supposed to do that."

>
> And, in all honesty, wouldn't the 20 minutes (tops) of research prior to
> buying and having avoided all that aggravation been worth the time?
> Heck, you don't even have to do any internet searching, either. Call
> the 1-800-MY-APPLE number and you could have been transferred to someone
> who would have answered any pre-sales questions you had. They would
> ahve been the first to tell you that to do what you wanted you'd *have*
> to buy a PowerPC-based Mac.
>


I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a new
Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made by Apple.

That's an error I won't be making again.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Steve
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 03:35:16 GMT, Senti wrote:

<snip>
>
> If you're willing to filter through the **** in Margolotta's posts, you
> sometimes find a some information in there. Just make sure you're
> wearing hip-waders and a nose-plug.
>
> ~S


I think Margolotta is my ex-wife. I recognise the inability to say
something *once* and the fallback to verbal abuse (repeated) that comes
when they run out of steam.


--
Steve
?wollof ot drah yllaer sdaerht sekam gnitsop-pot taht erawa uoy ereW
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
In article <v7SKf.62$(E-Mail Removed)>, Rich
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> The error you get when attempting to install FCE on a Intel Core Duo Mac
> is that the card does not have AGP. The install halts at that point and
> will not let you go any further.

The requirements for the product specify that -- AGP card is necessary.

> It should also
> absolutely be not necessary for me to rip apart a brand new iMac just to
> get certain software to work correctly. That's ridiculous.

"Rip apart"? You don't think that description is a bit unreasonable?
In any case, there isn't anything to change -- if your machine didn't
have AGP, it will never have. You simply got the wrong version of Final
Cut.

> One of the reasons I bought the iMac was size. The fact it's put
> together in a pizza-box style was attractive. Professional videographers
> I know use G4's right now which are less powerful compared to the
> Intel-based Mac according to Apple. This means that the iMac should have
> run FCE with absolutely zero hassle whatsoever, I wouldn't need a
> super-duper Mac and the video memory provided should have been more than
> enough.

Yes, except the difference wasn't about processing ability, but writing
that version specifically for AGP cards. The next version will not be
written so. The previous version was not written so. You can use both
of those.

> Why is it not reasonable to assume (yes, I said assume) that software
> programmed by Apple wouldn't run on a computer made by Apple? FCE isn't
> a server application, nor is it anything that required power of a grand
> scale.

I would think it would be reasonable, just from their track record. I
had to look twice when that issue came up to make sure they'd really
made that difference in Final Cut. But I'd probably still have looked
at teh requirements, just to get an idea of what RAM it expected, for
instance.

> No, Final Cut HD Express will not run on the Intel-based iMac, or any
> other Intel-based Macintosh computer. Final Cut PRO will with the
> Universal release, but Final Cut HD Express will not, and (as I've said
> previously), Apple has no plans to release a Universal version of Final
> Cut HD Express - and I don't have the extra $1000 to spend just to have
> a "compatible" version (Final Cut Pro).


I'd be surprised if they didn't offer an 'Express' package in the near
future. Apple doesn't really like offering just Pro-level packages.

> I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a new
> Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made by Apple.


How much have you wrangled with their customer service?
This issue has come up with other users, in several ways -- I wouldn't
be surprised if Apple made some compromise about the product.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
Mitch wrote:
> In article <v7SKf.62$(E-Mail Removed)>, Rich
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> The error you get when attempting to install FCE on a Intel Core Duo Mac
>> is that the card does not have AGP. The install halts at that point and
>> will not let you go any further.

> The requirements for the product specify that -- AGP card is necessary.
>


Yes, I know that now. All too well. The Intel-based iMac has a PCI
Express video card in it.

When ordering the iMac from the Apple store it unfortunately does not
state that the video card is PCI Express. It's nowhere to be found. All
you have is the choice of whether to have 128MB or 256MB. When you click
"Learn more" there isn't any further information on the subject. If you
go *outside* the Apple Store
(http://www.apple.com/imac/whatsinside.html), then you can see that it
actually is a PCI Express video card.

>> It should also
>> absolutely be not necessary for me to rip apart a brand new iMac just to
>> get certain software to work correctly. That's ridiculous.

> "Rip apart"? You don't think that description is a bit unreasonable?
> In any case, there isn't anything to change -- if your machine didn't
> have AGP, it will never have. You simply got the wrong version of Final
> Cut.
>


I bought the version I could afford. The Pro version is $1000 more. It
wasn't a decision based on version. Had I the money, I would have
dropped $1299 on Final Cut Pro in a heartbeat. Apple themselves stated
to me on the phone that there are no plans to have the Express version
of Final Cut as a Universal release, so there isn't any "correct"
version (presently) to purchase unless you want to spend $1000 more.

http://www.apple.com/rosetta/

See the bottom right of that page. Express version isn't mentioned. When
I noticed that, that's when I called them to confirm whether there would
be an actual Universal release of FCE. They said "there are no plans to
do so".

>> One of the reasons I bought the iMac was size. The fact it's put
>> together in a pizza-box style was attractive. Professional videographers
>> I know use G4's right now which are less powerful compared to the
>> Intel-based Mac according to Apple. This means that the iMac should have
>> run FCE with absolutely zero hassle whatsoever, I wouldn't need a
>> super-duper Mac and the video memory provided should have been more than
>> enough.

> Yes, except the difference wasn't about processing ability, but writing
> that version specifically for AGP cards. The next version will not be
> written so. The previous version was not written so. You can use both
> of those.
>


It should not be necessary to hunt or wait for software to work on a
brand new offering by Apple that they do not sell in their own online store.

>> Why is it not reasonable to assume (yes, I said assume) that software
>> programmed by Apple wouldn't run on a computer made by Apple? FCE isn't
>> a server application, nor is it anything that required power of a grand
>> scale.

> I would think it would be reasonable, just from their track record. I
> had to look twice when that issue came up to make sure they'd really
> made that difference in Final Cut. But I'd probably still have looked
> at teh requirements, just to get an idea of what RAM it expected, for
> instance.
>


The iMac I bought was outfitted with the 20" screen, 1GB of RAM and the
best video card offered by Apple. Most video apps for Apple require at
least a minimum of 512MB RAM so I doubled that to be on the safe side.

>> No, Final Cut HD Express will not run on the Intel-based iMac, or any
>> other Intel-based Macintosh computer. Final Cut PRO will with the
>> Universal release, but Final Cut HD Express will not, and (as I've said
>> previously), Apple has no plans to release a Universal version of Final
>> Cut HD Express - and I don't have the extra $1000 to spend just to have
>> a "compatible" version (Final Cut Pro).

>
> I'd be surprised if they didn't offer an 'Express' package in the near
> future. Apple doesn't really like offering just Pro-level packages.
>


I was sincerely hoping Apple would say "Yes! We have a Universal version
of FCE and it will be available in March '06!", but the Apple rep on the
phone said otherwise.

And you're correct - it is unlike Apple to not offer an Express version,
especially for their newer computer releases. It was surprising to hear
when they told me directly there weren't any plans for FCE Universal
version.

>> I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a new
>> Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made by Apple.

>
> How much have you wrangled with their customer service?
> This issue has come up with other users, in several ways -- I wouldn't
> be surprised if Apple made some compromise about the product.


I had to make numerous phone calls to Apple concerning this whole
fracas. The compromise by Apple is that they were willing to take the
computer back and give me a full refund - and I'm thankful for that. I
could write about four screens worth concerning what I dealt with
getting Apple to *process* that return - but that's a whole other story.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Senti
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
Rich wrote:
> Senti wrote:
>
>> Rich wrote:
>>
>>> Senti wrote:
>>>
>>>> When you buy software for your non-Mac computer, do you ever
>>>> consider the system requirements for it? Unless you're totally
>>>> clueless you do. Why would it be any different for a Mac?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> And where did you get the idea that "any software made by Mac is
>>>> supposed to work on a Mac, period. No ifs, ands or buts about it"?
>>>> Did you happen to see Apple ever claim that? No. In fact, if you
>>>> were to do a little research (try http://www.apple.com/intel/ or
>>>> http://www.apple.com/rosetta/ or http://www.apple.com/universal/ for
>>>> starters) you'd see that Apple tells you that not all Apple software
>>>> will run on an Intel-based Mac. In the case of purchasing Final
>>>> Cut, the mistake was yours, pure and simple.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's not as clueless as you might think if you see it from this point
>>> of view:
>>>
>>> In the Windows world, there is not a single manufacturer that builds
>>> computers solely for the Windows OS. You have manufacturers such as
>>> Dell, Gateway, HP and Alienware just to name a few.

>>
>>
>> Which of these manufacturers include any OS *other* than Windows?
>> Which of these manufacturers ships their product out with Linux for
>> example? For all intents and purposes, those computers are built for
>> Windows. Will any of them provide support if you throw another OS on
>> it? No. You'll find they say "I'm sorry but we can't help you install
>> your bundled software on Linux" (for example). All those
>> manufacturers make computers that are capable of running WIndows.
>> They will not guarantee that any other OS will work on them. Call and
>> ask.
>>

>
> I don't have to call.
>
> http://www.dell.com/linux
>
> Dell n Series desktops will work with Linux and are designed to do so.
> Licensing is available for Red Hat and SuSE (Novell).
>
> http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topi...555&l=en&s=biz
>
>
> See header "Comprehensive Linux Support".
>
> They build 'em and support 'em, even with Linux.
>
> http://www.hp.com/linux
>
> HP offers it as well.
>
> http://www.hp.com/linux
>
> You can order workstations preloaded with Linux which are also supported
> (Red Hat or SuSE).
>


I'm too lazy to follow the links provided so I'll take you at your word
and concede the point.

> The error you get when attempting to install FCE on a Intel Core Duo Mac
> is that the card does not have AGP. The install halts at that point and
> will not let you go any further. My iMac had the best video card
> offerered by Apple, a 256MB ATI Radeon, but it doesn't have AGP and it's
> not offered on the Intel-based iMacs (on the G5's it is). It should also
> absolutely be not necessary for me to rip apart a brand new iMac just to
> get certain software to work correctly. That's ridiculous.


Again, that is something that would have been covered by researching
your purchase prior to making it. And no matter how much "ripping
apart" you do, it doesn't change the fact that you bought a computer
that wouldn't run the software you wanted it to. The blame isn't with
the computer, it performed exactly as advertised.
>
> One of the reasons I bought the iMac was size. The fact it's put
> together in a pizza-box style was attractive. Professional videographers
> I know use G4's right now which are less powerful compared to the
> Intel-based Mac according to Apple. This means that the iMac should have
> run FCE with absolutely zero hassle whatsoever, I wouldn't need a
> super-duper Mac and the video memory provided should have been more than
> enough.


Their size os one of the benefits of owning an iMac. As for the
professional videographers you mentioned, did you notice that their
computers meet FCE's system requirements by using a PowerPC G4 (or
better)? You're comparing apples (PowerPC-based, and no pun intended)
to oranges (Intel-based). Apple does not guarantee that ALL their
software will run on an Intel-based Mac. In fact they make it a point
of saying that not all will. Again, this is where proper research on
your part would have been handy. No matter how powerful your
Intel-based Mac is, it can't run the program because the program was
never coded to run on an Intel chip.

> Why is it not reasonable to assume (yes, I said assume) that software
> programmed by Apple wouldn't run on a computer made by Apple? FCE isn't
> a server application, nor is it anything that required power of a grand
> scale.
>
> I will agree to disagree on this point.


For all the reasons I outlined in my last reply.

>>> Clarification: What I expected was a brand new Macintosh computer
>>> that would run current software offered by the company who makes
>>> them. It's not an issue of "Is the computer enough powerful enough to
>>> run [this]", it's an expectation that the company (Apple) would make
>>> current software that would run on its own current computers (Macs).

>>
>>
>> And it *does* run on it's current computers... just not the one you
>> bought.
>>

>
> No, Final Cut HD Express will not run on the Intel-based iMac, or any
> other Intel-based Macintosh computer. Final Cut PRO will with the
> Universal release, but Final Cut HD Express will not, and (as I've said
> previously), Apple has no plans to release a Universal version of Final
> Cut HD Express - and I don't have the extra $1000 to spend just to have
> a "compatible" version (Final Cut Pro).


You said: "What I expected was a brand new Macintosh computer that would
run current software offered by the company who makes them."

And they do make brand new computers that will run Final Cut HD Express.
They all use the PowerPC processor. And the system requirements for
the software state that a PowerPC is *required*. Ergo... you bought the
wrong computer or the wrong software.

> I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a new
> Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made by Apple.
>
> That's an error I won't be making again.


So if you admit to making a wrong assumption, then how is it Apple's
fault? Nothing Apple said or did led you to believe it would work. In
fact, Apple stated quite clearly in every place you would normally look,
that the software would *only* run on a PowerPC-based Mac. Also, you
knew that all your professional videographer friends/acquaintances who
were running FCE were running the software on PowerPCs. So again I ask,
how is it Apple's fault?

~S
 
Reply With Quote
 
Senti
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
Rich wrote:
> Mitch wrote:
>
>> In article <v7SKf.62$(E-Mail Removed)>, Rich
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> The error you get when attempting to install FCE on a Intel Core Duo
>>> Mac is that the card does not have AGP. The install halts at that
>>> point and will not let you go any further.

>>
>> The requirements for the product specify that -- AGP card is necessary.
>>

>
> Yes, I know that now. All too well. The Intel-based iMac has a PCI
> Express video card in it.
>
> When ordering the iMac from the Apple store it unfortunately does not
> state that the video card is PCI Express. It's nowhere to be found. All
> you have is the choice of whether to have 128MB or 256MB. When you click
> "Learn more" there isn't any further information on the subject. If you
> go *outside* the Apple Store
> (http://www.apple.com/imac/whatsinside.html), then you can see that it
> actually is a PCI Express video card.


But it does state that the iMac uses an ATI Radeon X1600 which, if you
had researched, you would know is a PCI-Express card. Once again, a
minute or two of research would have saved a lot of aggravation.

>
>>> It should also absolutely be not necessary for me to rip apart a
>>> brand new iMac just to get certain software to work correctly. That's
>>> ridiculous.

>>
>> "Rip apart"? You don't think that description is a bit unreasonable?
>> In any case, there isn't anything to change -- if your machine didn't
>> have AGP, it will never have. You simply got the wrong version of Final
>> Cut.
>>

>
> I bought the version I could afford. The Pro version is $1000 more. It
> wasn't a decision based on version. Had I the money, I would have
> dropped $1299 on Final Cut Pro in a heartbeat. Apple themselves stated
> to me on the phone that there are no plans to have the Express version
> of Final Cut as a Universal release, so there isn't any "correct"
> version (presently) to purchase unless you want to spend $1000 more.


Price doesn't determine whether or not it's the right version for your
system.

You mentioned the Apple store earlier. Did you happen to read what it
had to say about Final Cut HD Express in the Apple store online? It's
all near the bottom at this link:

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...ore=M9732Z%2FA
or
http://tinyurl.com/n55jc

I'll quote it for you: "...not supported to run on Intel-based Macintosh
computers with Rosetta."

And a little further down: "The next feature release of Final Cut
Express will be a Universal application, which will run natively on both
PowerPC- and Intel-based Mac computers...For more information, go to the
Final Cut Express HD website at: http://www.apple.com/finalcutexpress"

So there you go... all the information you would have needed to know.
You could have decided whether or not you were willing to wait for the
Universal version before you bought your computer, or you could have
decided to buy a G5.

> It should not be necessary to hunt or wait for software to work on a
> brand new offering by Apple that they do not sell in their own online
> store.


Whether or not it should or shouldn't be necessary to wait is
irrelevant. What *is* relevant is that it has been, and currently is,
*always* necessary to compare the software's system requirements to your
computer. *You* chose not to do that. Apple had nothing to do with
that choice. If they hadn't posted all the needed information, then I'd
be siding with you. But they did. And it's incredibly easy to find.
You made the choice not to look for it. Apple didn't force you not to look.

>>> Why is it not reasonable to assume (yes, I said assume) that software
>>> programmed by Apple wouldn't run on a computer made by Apple? FCE
>>> isn't a server application, nor is it anything that required power of
>>> a grand scale.

>>
>> I would think it would be reasonable, just from their track record. I
>> had to look twice when that issue came up to make sure they'd really
>> made that difference in Final Cut. But I'd probably still have looked
>> at teh requirements, just to get an idea of what RAM it expected, for
>> instance.
>>

>
> The iMac I bought was outfitted with the 20" screen, 1GB of RAM and the
> best video card offered by Apple. Most video apps for Apple require at
> least a minimum of 512MB RAM so I doubled that to be on the safe side.


So you assumed that since older (or even other newer) similar software
had certain system requirements that FCE would be the same? If you had
been wrong and FCE needed 2GB of RAM to run, would that be Apple's fault?

>>> No, Final Cut HD Express will not run on the Intel-based iMac, or any
>>> other Intel-based Macintosh computer. Final Cut PRO will with the
>>> Universal release, but Final Cut HD Express will not, and (as I've
>>> said previously), Apple has no plans to release a Universal version
>>> of Final Cut HD Express - and I don't have the extra $1000 to spend
>>> just to have a "compatible" version (Final Cut Pro).

>>
>>
>> I'd be surprised if they didn't offer an 'Express' package in the near
>> future. Apple doesn't really like offering just Pro-level packages.


According to the FCE page, the next feature release of it *will* be a
Universal binary.

> I was sincerely hoping Apple would say "Yes! We have a Universal version
> of FCE and it will be available in March '06!", but the Apple rep on the
> phone said otherwise.
>
> And you're correct - it is unlike Apple to not offer an Express version,
> especially for their newer computer releases. It was surprising to hear
> when they told me directly there weren't any plans for FCE Universal
> version.


I don't know when you asked, but at the time maybe they didn't have any
plans to do it.

>>> I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a
>>> new Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made
>>> by Apple.

>>
>> How much have you wrangled with their customer service?
>> This issue has come up with other users, in several ways -- I wouldn't
>> be surprised if Apple made some compromise about the product.

>
> I had to make numerous phone calls to Apple concerning this whole
> fracas. The compromise by Apple is that they were willing to take the
> computer back and give me a full refund - and I'm thankful for that. I
> could write about four screens worth concerning what I dealt with
> getting Apple to *process* that return - but that's a whole other story.
>


So why didn't you just exchange it for a G5? A 20-inch iMac G5 is
(currently) $200 cheaper than a 20-inch iMac Intel.

~S
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
> So why didn't you just exchange it for a G5? A 20-inch iMac G5 is
> (currently) $200 cheaper than a 20-inch iMac Intel.
>


I asked Apple if they would exchange my Intel-based iMac for the G5.
They refused and decided to refund instead stating it was a "complex
order". I honestly don't know what was so "complex" about it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
In article <3f2Lf.11$(E-Mail Removed)>, Rich
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > I'd be surprised if they didn't offer an 'Express' package in the near
> > future. Apple doesn't really like offering just Pro-level packages.
> >

>
> I was sincerely hoping Apple would say "Yes! We have a Universal version
> of FCE and it will be available in March '06!", but the Apple rep on the
> phone said otherwise.
>
> And you're correct - it is unlike Apple to not offer an Express version,
> especially for their newer computer releases. It was surprising to hear
> when they told me directly there weren't any plans for FCE Universal
> version.


It is strange news. Maybe they'll be repackaging the whole thing as an
iMovie Pro, or renaming their multimedia tools into a consumer package.
I just can't see them leaving that segment completely.
Nevertheless, the fact that the rep didn't know of anything suggests it
isn't going to happen very soon. (But at Apple, that might just mean
it'll be next month.)

> >> I didn't have any pre-sales questions because yes, I assumed that a new
> >> Mac computer made by Apple would run current software also made by Apple.

> >
> > How much have you wrangled with their customer service?
> > This issue has come up with other users, in several ways -- I wouldn't
> > be surprised if Apple made some compromise about the product.

>
> I had to make numerous phone calls to Apple concerning this whole
> fracas. The compromise by Apple is that they were willing to take the
> computer back and give me a full refund - and I'm thankful for that. I
> could write about four screens worth concerning what I dealt with
> getting Apple to *process* that return - but that's a whole other story.


And not the response I would hope Apple to have.
They're not often hard-nosed about sales issues -- I wonder how long
it'll take someone there to offer a resolution for this software issue.

In any case, I'd suggest holding fast if that's the only difficulty and
you can wait. Someone at Apple probably has an offer or solution
available to you.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
Margolotta <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Intel only software will have to be rewritten from the ground up, so you
> won't see any for a couple of years at least. Universal binaries will come
> first (and I reckon all software will be UB until at least 2009). I reckon
> that it will be at least 2010 before we see Intel-only software.



They don't really have to start that raw; about halfway, I think.
And I'm not sure Intel Native is going to be a huge performance
difference from Universal Binaries.

And since Apple's Devleoper Toolkit is mostly up to speed, we'll see
Intel-native apps before the end of the year, for sure.

Curious readers can see Apple's plans and tools here:
http://developer.apple.com/transition/

And if you're curious that there is anything available in certain
categories for Mac OS X:
http://guide.apple.com/index.lasso
(not a comprehesive guide, but a good list.)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-23-2006
Mitch wrote:

> In any case, I'd suggest holding fast if that's the only difficulty and
> you can wait. Someone at Apple probably has an offer or solution
> available to you.


There is one shining ray of hope here.

There's no way I'm going to be able to resell my copy of Final Cut HD
Express for the price I paid for it, so.. the Apple Store is selling
refurb'd iMac G5's for as low as $749 USD with the 17" screen (as of
right now), free shipping and a one-year warranty. When the 20" model
G5's get down to that price (as I'm sure they will) I will entertain the
idea of getting one. I have had good luck with refurbished computers in
the past. I have a Dell Dimension 4400 that I bought refurb'd for $625
direct from Dell several years ago when the model was still current. The
only thing that ever went wrong with it was a power supply (replaced for
$25). I still have it and it's clicking right along. Hopefully I would
have the same good luck with a used iMac.

At the sub-800 dollar mark I could deal with the quirky (my opinion)
nature of the box. If anything were to go wrong with it physically,
it would most likely happen within the warranty's period.

The 20" models may go down to that price mark in less than 6 months.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Why the Perl docs are so great was why the perl docs suck Al Perl Misc 1 10-16-2005 06:35 PM
why does std_logic_arith suck? Toby VHDL 4 09-07-2005 04:43 PM
Why do Marines call the USMC "The Suck" Goth Loser Digital Photography 152 08-04-2005 04:33 AM
Why suck hatred towards me David Postill Computer Security 9 05-22-2004 04:19 PM



Advertisments