Of Aperture, Intel, and Universal Binaries

So I'm just throwing this overview on the future cost-performance of Aperture out there for anyone else who is interested (and disappointed that Aperture doesn't work on anything less than the top $3300 Powermacs).

A. Aperture does not run well on any G5s except the quad-G5 ($3300), and it runs "okay" on the newer dual-core machines ($2000+). Aperture does not run well (at all?) on the new Intel-based iMac and Macbook.

B. Universal Binary versions of applications running on Intel machines run about 40-100% faster than their counterparts on IBM G5 machines of similar specs. Universal Binary versions of all of Apple's "Pro" software should be available by March 31st, 2006 according to Apple.

C. Apple will release Intel-based (quad-core?) Powermacs probably June this year (maybe sooner) and will provide an 80% or so speed boost for the same cost as current Powermacs.

D. Thus, incredibly fast Universal Binary versions of Photoshop Camera RAW and Aperture will be available at that point for relatively low total monetary cost. Perhaps around $2000 for the Powermac plus $50 or so for the Universal Binary versions of PS and Aperture.

E. Finally, Aperture may become viable on Macbooks as soon as it becomes available in Universal Binary form (03/31/06). Currently, the Macbook dual-core 1.83GHz outperforms dual-2Ghz G5 Powermacs at most native tasks... so as soon as Aperture runs natively on Intel, traveling photographers will be able to run Aperture-based operations on-the-go.

I'm on a dual-1.8GHz Powermac G5 right now and Aperture doesn't cut it speed wise and I can't afford a quad-core G5 right now, so I guess I'll be waiting until

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aerotheque.com/photography/

(continued)

...I'll be purchasing either a $2500 Macbook with Aperture (and a fast external FW800 drive) for mobile developing or the baseline $2000 Intel Powermac that will most likely run Aperture better than the fastest current G5 Powermac.

Cheers-

Jacob

-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aerotheque.com/photography/

how much ram have you got in your dual 1.8?

aerotheque said:

So I'm just throwing this overview on the future cost-performance
of Aperture out there for anyone else who is interested (and
disappointed that Aperture doesn't work on anything less than the
top $3300 Powermacs).

Click to expand...

Do not agree at all. It runs perfectly well on my Dual 2.7 and it runs well on my 20" iMac G5/2.0Ghz. It is even usable (while sluggish) on my 17" Powerbook (1.5GHz). This is 100% in line with Apple's published system requirements and recommendations, so what is the point?

aerotheque said:

A. Aperture does not run well on any G5s except the quad-G5
($3300), and it runs "okay" on the newer dual-core machines
($2000+). Aperture does not run well (at all?) on the new
Intel-based iMac and Macbook.

Click to expand...

According to Apple's Aperture System Requirements page, it does not run at all under Rosetta, so Intel Mac users will have to wait for the universal binary. It is announced to be available on or before March 31st and will be a free download via "Software Update"; if you want a new DVD set from Apple you will have to pay 49 USD. Cannot see anything wrong here either.

aerotheque said:

C. Apple will release Intel-based (quad-core?) Powermacs probably
June this year (maybe sooner) and will provide an 80% or so speed
boost for the same cost as current Powermacs.

Click to expand...

I don't know where you got that date from and so far Apple has not even announced which CPUs it will use for the PowerMac replacements. Looking at the latest and greatest on Intel's road map we might also look at late (November/December) 2006 for shipping versions. Without knowing the CPU choice assuming the speed increase is also fairly hypothetic. We will also have to wait for software availability from other companies, as having a faster machine and no software for it will not really help. A huge amount of vendors (most notably Adobe/Macromedia) have not even announced universal binaries until now and they might be expensive.

aerotheque said:

D. Thus, incredibly fast Universal Binary versions of Photoshop
Camera RAW and Aperture will be available at that point for
relatively low total monetary cost. Perhaps around $2000 for the
Powermac plus $50 or so for the Universal Binary versions of PS and
Aperture.

Click to expand...

As said above, Aperture update will be available for free, you only have to pay if you want new disks from Apple. Adobe has not done any announcement for any product, most people expect compatible/universal software not to be available before the release of CS3. This will be definitely more than 50 USD.

aerotheque said:

I'm on a dual-1.8GHz Powermac G5 right now and Aperture doesn't cut
it speed wise and I can't afford a quad-core G5 right now, so I
guess I'll be waiting until

Click to expand...

Well, should be the right decision. I do not think anybody who has any G5 Powermac will consider upgrading until the specs of the future replacement will be available. You might be able to cover that period cheaper and with more satisfaction using Aperture by considering a video card update for your dual 1.8. The processor speed of your machine is most likely not the bottleneck.

Cheers,
Uwe

Some of those statements need a bit of clarification.

aerotheque said:

A. Aperture does not run well on any G5s except the quad-G5
($3300), and it runs "okay" on the newer dual-core machines
($2000+). Aperture does not run well (at all?) on the new
Intel-based iMac and Macbook.

Click to expand...

It's running well on my rev A dual 2GHz G5. There are points where it's a bit slow, but far better than "okay".

aerotheque said:

B. Universal Binary versions of applications running on Intel
machines run about 40-100% faster than their counterparts on IBM G5
machines of similar specs.

Click to expand...

The Intel iMac is 10-100% faster than the (single-core) G5 iMac (as expected), but I've yet to see a test where it beats a dual-core G5 on anything but boot speed or video playback. Should be way faster than any G4 laptop, though.

aerotheque said:

aerotheque said:

C. Apple will release Intel-based (quad-core?) Powermacs probably

Click to expand...

June this year (maybe sooner) and will provide an 80% or so speed
boost for the same cost as current Powermacs.

Click to expand...

Intel aren't expected to release quad-core processors (I assume you mean Woodcrest/Conroe) until late 2007. :-(

aerotheque said:

aerotheque said:

D. Thus, incredibly fast Universal Binary versions of Photoshop

Click to expand...

Camera RAW and Aperture will be available at that point for
relatively low total monetary cost. Perhaps around $2000 for the
Powermac plus $50 or so for the Universal Binary versions of PS and
Aperture.

Click to expand...

Adobe's official line is that the next version of PS will probably[ i] be a universal binary, but that they have no plans to release anything before then. The UB version of Aperture will (according to the main Aperture page) be free via Software Update. If planned right (upgrading PS as usual) it shouldn't cost any more than usual, but will probably take awhile.

aerotheque said:

aerotheque said:

E. Finally, Aperture may become viable on Macbooks as soon as it

Click to expand...

becomes available in Universal Binary form (03/31/06).

Click to expand...

Agreed, the top-end MBP with the 256MB graphics card should make a great Aperture machine.

Ian

aerotheque said:

B. Universal Binary versions of applications running on Intel
machines run about 40-100% faster than their counterparts on IBM G5
machines of similar specs.

Click to expand...

From where do you have that information? This would be great... Aperture would run faster on Intel than on Powermac? Or do I understand here something wrong?

lila44 said:

aerotheque said:

B. Universal Binary versions of applications running on Intel
machines run about 40-100% faster than their counterparts on IBM G5
machines of similar specs.

Click to expand...

From where do you have that information? This would be great...
Aperture would run faster on Intel than on Powermac? Or do I
understand here something wrong?

Click to expand...

You understand nothing wrong, because it doesn't appear to be true. From all the tests I've seen, the dual-core Intel processor in the iMac appears to be roughly similar in processing power to a dual-core G5 processor of the same clock speed. Comparisons against the G5 iMac are not like-for-like because the G5 iMac is single-core.

Laptops are another matter - the G4 processor is hobbled by it's slow FSB and the MacBooks should fly in comparison, assuming native applications.

Ian

aerotheque said:

A. Aperture does not run well on any G5s except the quad-G5
($3300), and it runs "okay" on the newer dual-core machines
($2000+). Aperture does not run well (at all?) on the new
Intel-based iMac and Macbook.

Click to expand...

Nope, it runs fine on my "old" G5 2.0. I had 1.5 gig of memory and upped it by another gig and it really runs a lot faster. I typically have Aperture and Photoshop open at the same time and both were "snappy" with 1.5 gig and are even better with 2.5

aerotheque said:

B. Universal Binary versions of applications running on Intel
machines run about 40-100% faster than their counterparts on IBM G5
machines of similar specs. Universal Binary versions of all of
Apple's "Pro" software should be available by March 31st, 2006
according to Apple.

Click to expand...

I don't know about the benchmark speeds, too early to tell. Any numbers being thrown out are usually from marketing department and have no basis in reality but your right about the date. The proof will be in the pudding when they come out.

aerotheque said:

C. Apple will release Intel-based (quad-core?) Powermacs probably
June this year (maybe sooner) and will provide an 80% or so speed
boost for the same cost as current Powermacs.

Click to expand...

Who knows you state this as a fact but only apple knows the timing but where did you get an 80% speed boost? The G5's are a little bit slower on some things and a little bit faster on others as compared to Intel chip so where does the 80% come from?

aerotheque said:

D. Thus, incredibly fast Universal Binary versions of Photoshop
Camera RAW and Aperture will be available at that point for
relatively low total monetary cost. Perhaps around $2000 for the
Powermac plus $50 or so for the Universal Binary versions of PS and
Aperture.

Click to expand...

aerotheque said:

E. Finally, Aperture may become viable on Macbooks as soon as it
becomes available in Universal Binary form (03/31/06). Currently,
the Macbook dual-core 1.83GHz outperforms dual-2Ghz G5 Powermacs at
most native tasks... so as soon as Aperture runs natively on Intel,
traveling photographers will be able to run Aperture-based
operations on-the-go.

Click to expand...

Well considering the current non universal binary version is a viable option now, I'd say yes.

aerotheque said:

I'm on a dual-1.8GHz Powermac G5 right now and Aperture doesn't cut
it speed wise and I can't afford a quad-core G5 right now, so I
guess I'll be waiting until

Click to expand...

How much memory do you have because as I've stated on my 2.0 its very responsive and snappy.

I seem to recall last year that Steve Jobs said that all Apple's software development was working with Universal Binaries. So this year when Apple said that pro apps would not be ready until March I was a bit surprised. Then yesterday, Apple releases Logic Pro 7 for music at the NAMM music show. Hmmmm. Makes me wonder if indeed these universal apps are ready and they are being held back as fodder for new publicity announcements? Also the timing is curious. It would seem odd for Apple to bring out universal pro software in March and not have some announcement of pro MacIntel computers to run them on other than the 15" MacBook. I wager that more's coming from Apple around that time.

aerotheque said:

So I'm just throwing this overview on the future cost-performance
of Aperture out there for anyone else who is interested (and
disappointed that Aperture doesn't work on anything less than the
top $3300 Powermacs).

A. Aperture does not run well on any G5s except the quad-G5
($3300), and it runs "okay" on the newer dual-core machines
($2000+). Aperture does not run well (at all?) on the new
Intel-based iMac and Macbook.

Click to expand...

It runs pretty well on my DP 1.8 G5, years old now - and that's with only a Radeon 9800 in it. In fact there's even one guy on the Apple forums who just posted who is content using it on his 12" AlBook!!! Granted that's just for review until he gets the projects transferred back to his desktop version of Aperture but it runs well for just compaison even on wimpier computers.

With Aperture you can use an older G5 even for editing, as long as your video card is good.

I agree with what you are saying that all the new Macs going forward will have real oomph and probably be able to run Aperture pretty well (well, possibly not the new Mac mini) but it can run on a lot wider range of computers than you are making out.

aerotheque said:

D. Thus, incredibly fast Universal Binary versions of Photoshop
Camera RAW and Aperture will be available at that point for
relatively low total monetary cost. Perhaps around $2000 for the
Powermac plus $50 or so for the Universal Binary versions of PS and
Aperture.

Click to expand...

Aperture UB is free now, just thought I'd mention that. From the Apple aperture website:

"A Universal version of Aperture, which will run natively on both PowerPC- and Intel-based Mac computers, will be available before the end of March 2006. New and existing owners of Aperture will be able to crossgrade to the Universal version at no additional charge via Software Update."

Interestingly this would imply you could install Aperture on the new iMacs, as otherwise how could you use Software Update to upgrade? Waiting to hear if that is the case.

aerotheque said:

E. Finally, Aperture may become viable on Macbooks as soon as it
becomes available in Universal Binary form (03/31/06). Currently,
the Macbook dual-core 1.83GHz outperforms dual-2Ghz G5 Powermacs at
most native tasks... so as soon as Aperture runs natively on Intel,
traveling photographers will be able to run Aperture-based
operations on-the-go.

Click to expand...

Now that I agree with... as noted you can use it for review today on slower computers, but on the Macbook pro you should have a usable portable studio.

aerotheque said:

I'm on a dual-1.8GHz Powermac G5 right now and Aperture doesn't cut
it speed wise and I can't afford a quad-core G5 right now, so I
guess I'll be waiting until

Click to expand...

Until you buy a video card? Get an x800XT and you'll be singing a different tune.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
http://www.kigiphoto.com/Gallery

aerotheque said:

(continued)

...I'll be purchasing either a $2500 Macbook with Aperture (and a
fast external FW800 drive) for mobile developing or the baseline
$2000 Intel Powermac that will most likely run Aperture better than
the fastest current G5 Powermac.

Click to expand...

Just to warn you the Macbook Pro does not have FIrewire 800.

You'll have to wait for either a cardbus FW 800 card, or even better a cardbus SATA port so you can use an external SATA drive. Much faster.

I still think you'd be better off getting an x800XT now and seeing if you could wait a bit to have the full range of new Intel computers to choose among.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
http://www.kigiphoto.com/Gallery

Let's face it, the MacIntel was not really ready for prime-time, but Apple needed something big to announce at MacWorld, so they announced them anyway. If it were not for the Intel-Mac, what would be the big computing announcement at the show... some improvements to iLife???

For 99% of Mac users, the Intel switch is almost 100% hype, since they don't NEED the new hardware to continue puttering along happily in their computing lives. Power users already have power machines (the G5 duals and quads). The other 1% that can really benefit from the hardware switch would be wisest to just kick back and wait for the application that needs the performance boost to actually get a performance boost by recompiling to the new hardware, and then getting the new hardware. The software you need to run determines the hardware that you need to buy.

In other words, with no 'power' software that actually benefits from the new hardware, early purchasers are just getting shiny new first-generation machines to show off to their friends, but no real gains. They will be 'ready', but six months from now, when the MacIntel system is really ready, there will be a slew of better hardware choices than the two little teaser releases that we saw at MacWorld.

As with moth things Mac, it's a case of perception -vs- reality. Just a year ago the G5 was supposed to make Intel look like a snail by comparison... remember the ads? Now the Mac community is again being made to feel that they must change over because their computers are inadequate, when in most cases they exceed thir current needs.

My advice... ignore the MacIntel for at least 6 months.

...get an x800XT video card and you will see a big difference. I'm using a dual 2gig (PCI-X) with 2.5GB Ram and the x800XT and find Aperture to be as fast in displaying photos from a typical wedding (1000+) as Photoshop and C1 Pro. In all I think it cuts my work time at least in half, considering the work flow improvements.

Edward

http://www.edwardcrim.com

unbound said:

Let's face it, the MacIntel was not really ready for prime-time,
but Apple needed something big to announce at MacWorld, so they
announced them anyway. If it were not for the Intel-Mac, what would
be the big computing announcement at the show... some improvements
to iLife???

For 99% of Mac users, the Intel switch is almost 100% hype, since
they don't NEED the new hardware to continue puttering along
happily in their computing lives. Power users already have power
machines (the G5 duals and quads). The other 1% that can really
benefit from the hardware switch would be wisest to just kick back
and wait for the application that needs the performance boost to
actually get a performance boost by recompiling to the new
hardware, and then getting the new hardware. The software you need
to run determines the hardware that you need to buy.

Click to expand...

I would agree that not a lot of iMac users really "need" the intel iMac. Although the iLife apps are actually pretty powerful so it's not really like they are lacking in software.

However I would say that laptop users have much more of a reason to cheer, the Macbook pro is a nice laptop with a fast processor and a great video card. Even just using it for iLife apps now and limping along with other apps for the next few months is worthwhile.

Don't forget that all the Apple pro apps get updated in March, so a serious photographer could be using Aperture at full speed very shortly. It will be interesting to see how long it takes to update Photoshop, though if you use in infrequently enough and mostly not for things that consume a lot of processor time, then you could get by with Rosetta Photoshop for quite a while.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/user_home
http://www.kigiphoto.com/Gallery

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

However I would say that laptop users have much more of a reason to
cheer, the Macbook pro is a nice laptop with a fast processor and a
great video card.

Click to expand...

Is the new video card "recommanded" by Aperture? Will Aperture run with this video card?

Or is it better to update on the x800XT?