PowerPC vs. Pentium
5 messages in this thread
John,
My actual position regarding PowerPC and Pentium is of pretty mixed opinions
(not to talk about emotions). I have a bunch of pros and cons for both
platforms. The one that makes PPC useless for the people in this forum (at
least they want to have two platforms like us, KI) is that it lacks of 3DS. I
don't know if Autodesk and Gary have contacted Apple or IBM regarding a version
of 3DS for either the PMac or the new Power Personal running WPOS/2, but it
couldn't be easy to forget about the power and price of PPC based computers.
IMHO, the power/price relation will be always in favor of PPC-based machines.
Keep in mind that I am comparing Apple and IBM with a HP, DEC or Compaq
machine, which are not certainly a Gateway. And keep in mind what you are
getting for $4,000 in a 8100 box too. Looking at/in the box, working on them,
Apple are cheaper computers than Intel based ones.
What does an Intel machine need? First, an operating system that will let me
run all the hardware and software I install without a single glitch. Secondly,
more designs in the line of the DEC XL or the new highend Compaq (also XL! -it
seems that we are going into the extra-large computing era :). Third, and this
is for the people in this forum, get 3DS to this OS (whatever) and to support
things like OpenGL (which will let us use the upcoming boards based on GLiNT).
The bad thing about this is that I know that Intel WON'T do anything to support
us, 3D animators. That their chips won't never reach PPC or MIPS altitudes and
that the boxes based on Intel will be always business oriented because there is
where the big money is. 3DS got into the PC arena as the alternative to those
of us who didn't have the money to get into SGIwonderland. A tool to get
everyone in 3D animation. 3DS turned an (imperfect) business tool into an
animation tool the same way that Truevision boards transformed Lotus and
Wordperfect boxes in video tools. I like 3DS as much I dislike a machine that
use the keyboard to control memory! If 3DS is so good running in "digitalized
typewriters" <g>, think about it running on graphics oriented machines. I think
that everyone here should admit, not without pain, that IBM-clones running 3D
hardware is not the idea of the dream 3D production tool we all have in mind
(for the right price). Maybe PPC is the answer.
What the Yost Group or Autodesk should do is to make a pool about this subject
and have clear in their minds that "some" 3DS users have found that their Intel
machines don't let them grow in the way they want. I am sure that they already
have that idea in mind.
Personally, I want to keep all what I have learned about such a powerful tool
as 3DS but I want to expand their hardware horizons and make this tool even
more productive in a real graphic oriented machine instead of a
business-oriented-made-of-patches machine. I will only add that I am sure that
we will see a lot of changes in r4 and, althought DOS support will continue,
more options will become available for the people that want to change to a more
productive enviroment. You can translate all this message to: please make 3DS
available for Alpha, PPC and a serious OS. 🙂
ana /krazy images
Dear Krazy images:
Very well put. Like your analogy of "Lotus and Wordperfect box". I certainly
hope they port 3DS to PowerPC too. But keep your eyes open for Intel reducing
P5 prices [DSoon you will be able to buy a Pentium box at about the same as a
PowerPC box with very competitive performance. I'll bet on this.
Regards, Reza D.
Reza,
My problem is not with Intel. I can squeeze my Intel machines the same way I
can squeeze the PowerMac. But at what price? I doesn't mean CPU and peripheral
prices but time cost. How many times I have seen messages in this and other
boards about hardware conflicts? How many problem with Windows and memory
managers (or any other thing that doesn't have Microsoft in the label). People
say things like: I have been all the night or the weekend or a week tracking
down conflicts in my system. I think that everyone here, included me, jumped in
the intel bandwagon because it was cheap and it could be "easily" adapted to
our necesities.
This however, had and have its price. IMHO, we have been so close minded to
other solutions that we have ignore them in favor of a false sense of
"continuity" and, of course, for the price. I have had this position for years
until now. Now I see my error. It is the turn for Intel and Microsoft to make
powerful graphics oriented computers (and not only for having nice windows and
pointers, which is nothing but a pretty face for plain mind business people).
Or for IBM and software makers to make OS/2 a true graphics oriented platform
(which I prefer). It seems, however, that the idea of graphics on a PC is video
conferencing, charting programs and pencomputing based crosswords. I can send
by e-mail you the list of features of the new QuickDraw GX engine and you will
see clearly what graphics oriented computing means. That's exactly what I want
for my Intel boxes.
ana /krazy images
Dear Krazy Images: Once again, you're absolutely correct. The "false
sense of continuity" is true too i think. But it's a free market
system and as you have noted there are things like Mac and SGI for
graphics pros. By the way i read a news release about 3DS rendering
module being ported to SGI! Unusual!
I personally have stayed with PC because I plan to publish CD-ROM
based games for it. By the way what is your name? What does Krazy
images do?
KI is the name of my company, and we work on everything that has to do
with computer graphics and more. If you didn't notice, I sign all my
messages at the end with my name.
ana /krazy images
^^^
see? 🙂