I’m 31 and an old school geek who started on computers with an Atari 800 as a kid. Growing up moved me into PC land until I became a “Switcher” before being a “Switcher” was cool. That’s right – I got an original iMac when they first came out and I never looked back. I write software, and I bought the iMac thinking it was time to expand my horizons and maybe make a few more dollars by selling software on both platforms.
I never planned on switching to the Mac. I really didn’t. I never thought it was a serious machine, but I did see it as a potential market – and I figured it would look good on the resume. The problem though was my little G3 powered plastic Mac was speedier than my PC at the time despite having less clock cycles to work in. Not only that, it didn’t crash and burn like Windows did. Long before hip OS X, the iMac had me sold on Apple.
Now, as I said, I do work for Macs and PCs. Still do. So, I have always had a PC around. So you might ask how that makes me a “Switcher.” Well, I only use my PC when a job requires it and I do anything and everything I can on my Macs. Much of a PC project can still be done on the Mac and I do anything I can to steer clear of Windows. I play my video games, e-mail and surf the net on a Mac.
My newest PC was a P3 650Mhz bought when that was as fast as the little Coppermine went. In terms of computer years, this thing is an antique. The itch started… the MHz sales pitch… bigger is better… buy more now! I was thinking of getting a new PC. That’s something that hadn’t crossed my mind in a long, long time.
I decided to give my father my old P3 (since my attempts to get him to buy an iMac have thus far proven unsuccessful) to replace his chisel and stone powered Pentium machine. I ordered all the goodies to build a new PC. Not that most of it is important other than the 2.4Ghz CPU (of the inside flavor) and a GeForce 4Ti 4600 128MB, the same card I have in my 800Mhz dual processor Power Mac G4.
This is the stuff people rant, and I mean RANT, about on the internet. The speed and video drivers that the Mac will never have. Graphics glory us PowerPC wanna be geeks dream about.
Well, I got it. So what do I think? Uhm, some more background first.
When I said I’m a geek, I really meant it. I’m a computer nerd. I love to play with new hardware and try out different operating systems. It’s one of the reasons why I keep an eye on OSNews so much. I loved BeOS. It was great. I’ve run many flavors of Linux and BSD. I’ve booted Darwin on x86 and played with Sun boxes. You name it, I like it. And I still have a mint Atari 800 running.
That said, I want to say – Unlike many Mac users, I’m not loyal to Apple in any way.
Is the new PC faster than my old P3? Yes. Is it almost four times as fast as the CPU clock speeds would make it seem? No. Does it blaze circles around my Mac like the PC guys swear it will? No way.
One of the first things I wanted to try out was my all time favorite game – Quake III. I have seen tons of benchmarks showing through-the-roof framerates on PCs running the demos. Numbers that make you think the PC does kill the Mac. I don’t play a demo so I just fired up a map and started playing with the framerate displayed in the corner. I figure that’s as close to actually playing the game as you can get.
I’ve got different sized LCDs so the PC was running at 1024×768 and the Mac at 1280×1024. Both in 32 bit color with maximum settings on all options. Running around and killing all the bots dishes out almost equal frame rates. They are so close there is no way to say one is better than the other, except for the fact that the Mac is running at a larger screen resolution so it does look better.
That’s two 800Mhz G4s pitted against the 2.4Ghz x86 (of the inside variety). That really makes me believe the Megahertz myth firsthand.
How about everything else? It’s good. That’s about all I can say. Surfing the Internet in Mozilla on both OSs gives nearly identical results. I use Photoshop daily and the dual processors just burn the x86. That’s not fake when Apple is showing that. That doesn’t mean everything is faster on the Mac because it isn’t.
If I had to choose which is more productive throughout an entire day of working on the computer, it would go to the Mac hands down. Things work better with less problems. I can run lots of applications at once without the machine slowing to a crawl or throwing up the blue screen of death. I can thank OS X for that. Steve Jobs wasn’t just scamming Apple when he sold them Next and the foundation for OS X.
So my flirting with the other side is still just that – flirting. I have a tool I will use when I need to and it will likely last me a long time but the PC just isn’t everything that the PC guys say it is. At least I own and use both, most people that tell me a PC is better than a Mac have never owned one. Come to think of it, everyone I know with a Mac thinks it’s better than a PC and most have both. That says something.
I praise Macs any time I get the chance. I do. But it’s not because of blind brand loyalty. They are making the best computers around. Period. I want the best and that’s why I use the Mac. That’s not coming from a Mac head since 1984 either. This is someone who uses both platforms and only wants to use the coolest toys. I’ll switch platforms again if something better comes along. But OS X is so far ahead of XP that’s not going to happen anytime soon with a product from Redmond.
As for hardware, there is the speed race that was supposedly over that really isn’t a speed race since a new 2.4Ghz isn’t killing my old 800Mhz G4s. In fact, I still feel like my Mac is the faster computer. The only speed race likely to happen is what looks to be Intel and AMD trying to catch up to the way cool stylin’ G5.
But that’s neither here nor there. I’m still a “Switcher” and look to be for some time. I think competition is good so bring on the new hardware and software. I’ll try it all out. But at the end of the day when it’s time to go home I’ll be playing on my Power Mac.
About the author:
Sean Rose (srose at cycline3.com) does programming, design and some unusual model rocketry products at Cycline3.com. He even sheds the nerd persona now and again for some hardcore mountain biking in the beautiful hills of West Virginia.
And yet because Apple can use AGP, it means that it is not a technology that is specific to PCs. Therefore, it is a “computer technology” not a PC technology.
FINE! THEN FIRE WIRE IS NOT APPLE TECHNOLOGY IT IS “COMPUTER TECHOOLOGY”.
>>>“Apple is very innovative. Name some other computer manufacturers that have as many innovations as Apple. The only that I can think of is IBM.”<<<
“NAME WHAT APPLE HAS INVENTED
NAME IT TROLL
WHAT APPE HAS INVENTED?”
I noticed that you haven’t responded to my question… posted several times… you you continue to pose this same question which I HAVE responded to several times.
Some technologies that Apple has invented are Firewire, Quartz Extreme, Rendezvous and Exposé.
Now its your turn. Name me some technologies that are specific to the PC… and only specific to the PC…
“THANKS TO INTEL! MAC IS USING PC PARTS.”
The Mac isn’t using PC parts. They aren’t using Windows or x86 chips… which are the only parts that are specific to the PC. Everything else is “computer parts”
“INTEL MADE ALL THE NEW INVATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR MAC TODAY.
They did not.
“NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED
I HAVE ASKD YOU THIS QUASTION AND YOU HAVE NEVER GIVEN ME ANY ASWERS.”
Are you kidding? I’ve answered it every single time and yet you have not answered me once. Apple invented Firewire, Quartz Extreme, Rendezvous and Exposé.
And yet because Apple can use AGP, it means that it is not a technology that is specific to PCs. Therefore, it is a “computer technology” not a PC technology
IT IS INTEL TECH NOT APPLE TECH
MADE FOR PC BY INTEL.
I HAVE NAILED YOU HARD YOU CAN PROOVE ME WRONG
APPLE IS USING INTEL INSIDE WITHOUT INTEL APPLE IS USLESS.
THE OLY THING YOU DO IS TWISTING YOUR OWN STATMENTS.
APPLE IS PC
APPLE IS USING PC PARTS
APPLE HAS NO INOVATIONS
APPLE IS SLOWER THE PC
“APPLE JUST PUT THER ENAME IN THE MIX THEY DID NOT INVET HT “
Apple can’t “just put their name in the mix. The Hypertransport consortium put their name there.. and has regarded them as one of the 7 key developers of the technology.
“Just type PCI in the serch engine you will fined that INTEL
DEVELOPED IT TO REPLACE VLV IN 486
MAN YOU APPLE PEOPLE ARE SO CONFUSED WHEN IT COME TO COPUTER HARDWARE.”
Nobody ever said that Apple invented HyperTransport. What we have continually said is that Apple is a major contributor to the technology.
“Does it say developed for intel by intel PCS?
DEVELOPED BY INTEL in 1993
Can’t you read.
Just type PCI in the serch engine you will fined that INTEL
DEVELOPED IT TO REPLACE VLV IN 486
MAN YOU APPLE PEOPLE ARE SO CONFUSED WHEN IT COME TO COPUTER HARDWARE.
NOW I KNOW WHY BUY APPLE. ”
I can read but you have proved you can’t. The PCI-SIG was formed in 1992 and you claim PCI was invented by intel in 1993 for intel PC. It might as well have been but it is now a standard and intel is now one member of the 900 member standards body.
I gave you the official PCI resource for all things PCI. I even attended the PCI-SIG third annual developers conference. Intel had one booth with a a mother board demonstrating thier PCI-EXPRESS solution just like did xylinx, vmetro and other member companies intel was nowhere near ahead of the others.
You gave me some stupid online magazine that lacks any credibility in the field. PCI-SIG is the official source. So is the hypertransprot consortium for hypertransport.
Oh I am not a Mac person. I don’t even own a Mac. I own two PCs one athlon built by myslef and a toshiba laptop. I will buy a mac soon.
The link that Nail keeps referring to:
http://spl.haxial.com/apple-powermac-G5/“ http://spl.haxial.com/apple-powermac-G5/
is just some guys personal site, that at the top level says are just his opinions. Give us a solid IT reporting site…not some dude’s personal opinion site. For all we know, that site is yours and you’re trying to
A) Increase traffic to your site
B) Spread more FUD by constantly linking us to it.
You haven’t sent something that is confirmable, reliable, and possibly not valid
Note, I say “possibly”. Yes, it is possible the site is truthful…but as far as can be told it is just a biased site.
Some technologies that Apple has invented are Firewire
IF AGP IS NOT PC TECH THEN FIREWIRE IS COMPUTER TECHOLOGY NOT APPLE TECH.
“INTEL MADE ALL THE NEW INVATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR MAC TODAY.
They did not.
WELL YES THYE DID.
YOUR MAC HAS AGP? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.
YOUR MAC HAS PCI? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.
YOUR MAC HAS PPC970? WELL IT BELONS TO IBM NOT APPLE.
NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.
NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.
WHAT?
WHAT EXACTLY THE INVENT HA?
WHAT?
YOU HAVE NO PROOF ALL YOU SAY THEY INVENT STUFF AND MANY OTHER THINGS, LIKE WHAT.
WHAT APPLE HAS IN VENTED IN G5
ALL PARTS CAME FROM AMD,IBM, INTEl.
“FINE! THEN FIRE WIRE IS NOT APPLE TECHNOLOGY IT IS “COMPUTER TECHOOLOGY”.”
Yes! You are correct. It is a computer technology… One that Apple invented. (You asked if Apple invented anything.. I said yes a gave FireWire as an example)
In conclusion, Firewire is a “computer technology” that was developed by Apple. (I never said that the technologies you mentioned were not invented by those companies… I said that they were not PC innovations)
In the same way, Firewire is not a Mac innovation, but it is an Apple innovation.
is just some guys personal site, that at the top level says are just his opinions. Give us a solid IT reporting site…not some dude’s personal opinion site. For all we know, that site is yours and you’re trying to
A) Increase traffic to your site
B) Spread more FUD by constantly linking us to it.
You haven’t sent something that is confirmable, reliable, and possibly not valid
Note, I say “possibly”. Yes, it is possible the site is truthful…but as far as can be told it is just a biased site.
THE site is not mine
I hate APPLE
WILL NEVER BUY A OVERPRICED PC PARTS.
FINE READ THIS THEN
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296
It has been repeatedly pointed out to you.
The things you are saying are PC parts that were made for PC parts that Apple just opted to use is a total falsehood.
Several Apple inventions have been brought up. Further your claims of “PC parts” – whatever that really is – have been co-developed in some degree by Apple.
Do you actually read the replies?
Aren’t you adult enough to admit that you may have been in error…I did earlier…why can’t you?
“>>>And yet because Apple can use AGP, it means that it is not a technology that is specific to PCs. Therefore, it is a “computer technology” not a PC technology<<<
“IT IS INTEL TECH NOT APPLE TECH”
It is Intel technology made as a computer technology… Not a PC technology in the sense that it is a “PC innovation” (which means that it is specific to the PC)
“MADE FOR PC BY INTEL.
If that is the case, then why is it that AGP can also be made available for Macintosh? It is not a “PC innovation” if it can be had elsewhere. When a technology can be utilized elsewhere, it is a computer innovation.
“I HAVE NAILED YOU HARD YOU CAN PROOVE ME WRONG”
No you didn’t.
“APPLE IS USING INTEL INSIDE WITHOUT INTEL APPLE IS USLESS.”
Apple is using Intel technology but that does not mean that Apple is useless. Your assumption would suggest that because Apple creates Firewire and because Firewire can be used in PCs… the PC is useless without Apple. Both are false statements.
“THE OLY THING YOU DO IS TWISTING YOUR OWN STATMENTS.”
Heh, it is you that is doing this… and continue to fall into the traps that you continually set for yourself.
“APPLE IS PC”
Not True. Apple is a company. Apple creates a computer called a Mac which certainly is not a PC. Although it does you many technologies that can also be found in a PC, and are not specific to a PC.
“APPLE IS USING PC PARTS”
The only parts that are specific to PCs are x86 chips and Windows. Apple uses neither of these in their computers. Your statement is false.
“APPLE HAS NO INOVATIONS”
Apple has many innovations.
“APPLE IS SLOWER THE PC”
First, Apple is not a PC so it can’t be the slower PC.
Second, the Mac is not the slower desktop computer (according to published benchmarks comparing Macs to P4s and XEONs. (We have yet to see how that Mac compares against the AMD chip.
Can anyone see statements in the blurb of FUD by Nail that contradict one another?:
APPLE IS PC
APPLE IS USING PC PARTS
APPLE HAS NO INOVATIONS
APPLE IS SLOWER THE PC
If Apple is a PC, how can it be slower than a PC? That would mean that a Mac would have to be slower than itself.
Please think for a minute before posting.
it’s obovious Nail is a teenager and really doesn’t care to have an adult conversation. I have repeatedly given him highly precise and techincal rebuttals to his claims but he chose to ignore me or call me names and question my credibility.
Discussions with such people are not possible.We are wasting our time. Well it was obivous, iwas, but I can’t seem to keepaway from a good flamewar:)
“IF AGP IS NOT PC TECH THEN FIREWIRE IS COMPUTER TECHOLOGY NOT APPLE TECH.”
You got this partially right. AGP is NOT PC tech because it is not specific to the PC. Firewire is not Macintosh technology because it is available for other platforms. That does not negate the fact that Firewire was solely developed by Apple.
>>>“INTEL MADE ALL THE NEW INVATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR MAC TODAY.”<<<
>>“They did not.”<<<
“WELL YES THYE DID.”
No… They didn’t
“YOUR MAC HAS AGP? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.”
“YOUR MAC HAS PCI? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.”
Are these all the new innovations in my Mac today?
“YOUR MAC HAS PPC970? WELL IT BELONS TO IBM NOT APPLE.”
This not only isn’t Intel technology (which you said is the company that creates all the new innovations in my Mac today… You’re contradicting yourself again… but this along with the other two technologies you mentioned are not the only innovations in my Mac. So you are wrong on both counts!
“NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.”
Firewire.
“NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.
WHAT?”
Firewire
“WHAT EXACTLY THE INVENT HA?
WHAT?”
Firewire
“YOU HAVE NO PROOF ALL YOU SAY THEY INVENT STUFF AND MANY OTHER THINGS, LIKE WHAT.”
What kind of proof do you need?
“WHAT APPLE HAS IN VENTED IN G5”
Firewire
“ALL PARTS CAME FROM AMD,IBM, INTEl.”
Not true
FINE!
YOU LIKE MAC? THAT’S FINE! I LIKE MY OPTERONS.
YOU BELIFE APPLE IS FASTER AND BETTER. FINE TOO.
I BELIFE MY OPTERONS ARE WAY FASTER and BETTER THEN G5.
I like MY OPTERONS. You LIKE MAC.
THIS ARGUMENT WILL NEVER EVER END. I KNOW I’M RIGHT AND YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE RIGHT. THERE IS NO POINT ON WASTING TIME ON THIS CRAP.
I HAVE MODELING PROJECTS TO PHINISH AND I LOVE TO WORK IN LIGHTWAVE 3D. I’M SURE THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING BETTER TO DO AS WELL.
SO LETS JUST LEVE THIS ARGUMENT ALONG CAUSE IT WILL NEVER END.
“THE site is not mine
I hate APPLE”
Is that why you insist on spreading so much Apple Fud?
“WILL NEVER BUY A OVERPRICED PC PARTS.”
Then don’t. Apple doesn’t sell you overpriced PC parts… (or overpriced Mac parts for that matter)
I hate APPLE
Why?
You really haven’t given us a reasonable explanation as to why you hate Apple.
You hate Apple. Fine. Go ahead. Hate them. Does that mean you have to be rude to people who have different opinions?
So what…you hate Apple. The reasons you have been giving have been easily countered.
I used to be like you once…I hated Macs…back in the Mac Classic days…
Times change…particularly in computers. OS X is fantastic and so is Apple’s hardware…regardless of who invented the pieces of technology that comprise a Mac. It is, no matter how much you say you hate it, a great package for a lot of people. That seems to be something you aren’t quite getting. Macs are not just hardware. Macs are not just software. It is the combination of the two which yeilds great user experiences.
You hate Macs. I say go ahead…keep hating them. Use a PC.
Would anyone here likely care about you using a PC? No.
Do people care about you ignoring replies to quesions you pose? Yes.
Do people here tend to get pissed by blind rage filled hatred of a platform without any real thought behind what your statements are? Yes.
All in all…please just calm down. I am starting to think you are about to have a heart attack.
Bottom line…computers are computers regardless of who makes them and what software they run…they all use the same basic technologies to get the same basic tasks done.
“FINE!
YOU LIKE MAC? THAT’S FINE! I LIKE MY OPTERONS.
YOU BELIFE APPLE IS FASTER AND BETTER. FINE TOO.
I BELIFE MY OPTERONS ARE WAY FASTER and BETTER THEN G5.
I like MY OPTERONS. You LIKE MAC.
THIS ARGUMENT WILL NEVER EVER END. I KNOW I’M RIGHT AND YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE RIGHT. THERE IS NO POINT ON WASTING TIME ON THIS CRAP.
I HAVE MODELING PROJECTS TO PHINISH AND I LOVE TO WORK IN LIGHTWAVE 3D. I’M SURE THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING BETTER TO DO AS WELL.
SO LETS JUST LEVE THIS ARGUMENT ALONG CAUSE IT WILL NEVER END.”
We’re not trying to convince you to use a Mac… rather, we’d just prefer that you stop spreading Apple FUD.
Aside from being a raving lunatic, Nail does not understand how the industry works today. Open standards are the name of the game. All the technologies he points to are industry standards.
You can’t create a technology without getting other companies on board. AGP was invented by Intel, but wouldn’t be much good if other mobo makers (including Apple) and video card makers didn’t support it. HyperTransport would simply be replaced by a competing technology if it didn’t gain widespread support.
That’s the same reason Firewire is an industry standard and not an Apple specific technology. Yes, there’s a little PC in every Mac and a little Mac in every PC. BFD. What the hell is wrong with you? You keep pointing to all these technologies that Apple uses but didn’t invent. WOW, Apple is not more innovative (by itself) than the entire computer industry! What an insight! I’m sure Apple could design every single component in its system, but what on earth for? Are you upset that you can’t complain about how proprietary Apple is now?
NAME WHAT APPLE HAS INVENTED
Firewire (with Sony)
Rondezvous (by Stuart Cheshire, an Apple engineer who wanted to make IP as easy to use as AppleTalk)
Quartz Extreme (coming to a PC near you in 2005/2006)
INTEL MADE ALL THE NEW INVATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR MAC TODAY. All of these Intel “innovations” are simply solutions to engineering problems all computers faced (e.g. push more data). They are well designed, but not really innovative.
I HAVE ASKD YOU THIS QUASTION AND YOU HAVE NEVER GIVEN ME ANY ASWERS.
Several others have answered you several times. For whatever reason you prefer to go on ranting like a loon saying the same thing post after post.
Innovation isn’t just making some new tech standard. Apples 1 Ghz FSB isn’t innovative. Neither is Intel’s 800 Mhz FSB. It can also be a combination of existing technologies that allow users to do new things.
iTunes Music Store is innovative because it allows users to legally purchase music with limited restrictions. The technology is nothing new, but the usage is. Using Rendezvous to speed up compile times by distributing the work to other machines without any configuration is innovative. Writing a slightly faster compiler is not.
IF AGP IS NOT PC TECH THEN FIREWIRE IS COMPUTER TECHOLOGY NOT APPLE TECH.
“INTEL MADE ALL THE NEW INVATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR MAC TODAY.
They did not.
WELL YES THYE DID.
YOUR MAC HAS AGP? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.
YOUR MAC HAS PCI? WELL IT BELONS TO INTEL NOT APPLE.
YOUR MAC HAS PPC970? WELL IT BELONS TO IBM NOT APPLE.
NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.
NAME ONE THING THAT APPLE HAS INVENTED.
WHAT?
WHAT EXACTLY THE INVENT HA?
WHAT?
YOU HAVE NO PROOF ALL YOU SAY THEY INVENT STUFF AND MANY OTHER THINGS, LIKE WHAT.
WHAT APPLE HAS IN VENTED IN G5
ALL PARTS CAME FROM AMD,IBM, INTEl.
Apparently, the Caps Lock key is also “PC Tech”
That link is just Apples own benchmarks.. which has been proven to be false over and over again.. *sigh* Have YOU even read the other links posted??? If you had you wouldnt had posted that useless link.
Sofar you havent debunked ANYthing at ALL.
Come one.. do you really believe that I spelled “Max ppl” on purpose?? *sigh right back atya* Take a look at EU keyboards.
Still waiting for a good answer
Lets compare Mac and PC
More speed for less money, PC is clear winner
Fastest, PC is the CLEAR winner.
Usability: personal taste.
Compatability: PC is winner just because its way bigger.
Stability: Havent seen any scientific comparisons.(science doesnt mean perfectly objectivity)
More innovative: Mac IS very innovative, a fact that no PC fan can ignore. Then again Mac is much more easy to come up with smart stuff since its only one company and one standard instead of the myriad of companys and hardware makers in the PC world.
So the basic fact is that as far as I have seen Mac is more user friendly but that comes to the cost of freedom. PCs are simply more fun to tinker with
I read that so a socalled independent organization did the benchmarks for the Apple propaganda document. Well that has been debunked so many times now its ridicilus. The Macs were tweaked and the PCs werent. Strange of a “independed” org can have so vastly different benchmarks compared to what everyone else gets.. Hmmmm
“That link is just Apples own benchmarks.. which has been proven to be false over and over again.. *sigh*”
No, the allegations suggesting that the benchmarks were false were later themselves proven false when this article was posted:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thre…
“Have YOU even read the other links posted??? If you had you wouldnt had posted that useless link.”
We’ve all read it, and know that the allegations aren’t true. Read the link I listed above. it will explain everything.
“Sofar you havent debunked ANYthing at ALL.”
Every incorrect remark that has been made since the discussion got real hot has been refuted… many times.
“Come one.. do you really believe that I spelled “Max ppl” on purpose?? *sigh right back atya* Take a look at EU keyboards.”
I don’t know if you can blame it on the keyboard. The comment was in tune with many other trollish comments made in the thread both before and after it.
“Still waiting for a good answer
“
You’ve been given several already.
“Lets compare Mac and PC
More speed for less money, PC is clear winner”
Less PC for less money. The PC is the winner?
“Fastest, PC is the CLEAR winner.”
If you’re going to make comparisons, make sure to spec the hardware the same. Speed isn’t everything… this despite the fact that an Apple machine can boast the fastest processor
“Usability: personal taste.”
Not at all. A computer can definitely be more usable than the other regardless of personal preference.
“So the basic fact is that as far as I have seen Mac is more user friendly but that comes to the cost of freedom.”
Assuming you mean configurability when you say freedom.
“PCs are simply more fun to tinker with”
This is an example where personal taste can truly come into play.
“I read that so a socalled independent organization did the benchmarks for the Apple propaganda document. Well that has been debunked so many times now its ridicilus.”
It was never debunked unless you consider the fact that Apple paid for the research being “debunked”. (That is not a worthy argument)
“The Macs were tweaked and the PCs werent.”
Not at all. Both systems were configured as equally as possible. The only point you might be able to content with is that they both used the GCC compiler… (An Intel compiler would have provided faster results for the PC) This article refutes that argument: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thre…
“Strange of a “independed” org can have so vastly different benchmarks compared to what everyone else gets.. Hmmmm”
Every one elses benchmarks were using Intel’s compiler. Intel doesn;t make a compiler for PPC, so that wouldn’t be fair to compare with different compilers. A more accurate comparison is one where the compilers are the same. Yes, the Intel compiler would have given faster specs… but then, so would a different compiler built solely for PPC. That point is moot.
I know that some of you will be lazy and not read the article… so I’m listing it here:
“Joswiak went over the points in turn, but first said that they set out from the beginning to do a fair and even comparison, which is why they used an independent lab and provided full disclosure of the methods used in the tests, which would be “a silly way to do things” if Apple were intending to be deceptive.
He said Veritest used gcc for both platforms, instead of Intel’s compiler, simply because the benchmarks measure two things at the same time: compiler, and hardware. To test the hardware alone, you must normalize the compiler out of the equation — using the same version and similar settings — and, if anything, Joswiak said, gcc has been available on the Intel platform for a lot longer and is more optimized for Intel than for PowerPC.
He conceded readily that the Dell numbers would be higher with the Intel compiler, but that the Apple numbers could be higher with a different compiler too.
Joswiak added that in the Intel modifications for the tests, they chose the option that provided higher scores for the Intel machine, not lower. The scores were higher under Linux than under Windows, and in the rate test, the scores were higher with hyperthreading disabled than enabled. He also said they would be happy to do the tests on Windows and with hyperthreading enabled, if people wanted it, as it would only make the G5 look better.
In the G5 modifications, they were made because shipping systems will have those options available. For example, memory read bypass was turned on, for even though it is not on by default in the tested prototypes, it will be on by default for the shipping systems. Software-based prefetching was turned off and a high-performance malloc was used because those options will be available on the shipping systems (Joswiak did not know whether this malloc, which is faster but less memory efficient, will be the default in the shipping systems).
As to not using SSE2, Joswiak said they enabled the correct flags for it, as documented on the gcc web site, so that SSE2 was enabled (the Veritest report lists the options used for each test, which appears to include the appropriate flags).”
Apple creates a computer called a Mac which certainly is not a PC. Although it does you many technologies that can also be found in a PC, and are not specific to a PC.
The only parts that are specific to PCs are x86 chips and Windows. Apple uses neither of these in their computers. Your statement is false.
Uh ??!?! Let’s get back to the basic.
PC = Personnal Computer.
Mac = Personnal Computer.
hence,
Mac = PC.
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296&page=2
nuff said
and there are probably 10x more articles which proves the same thing: Apple is afraid to post real benchmarks.
Seriously, I have read that article. Is there any comparison where each processor have its best compiler? That IMO is a more realworld scenario. Lets say for that Mac IS faster(which it is not) the PC is still clear winner when it comes to speed for money.
I think I can blame it on the keyboard, I dont read my posts 10 times before I post to be sure that they are correct.
I have been given answers, just not GOOD answers.
I will never get good answers from the maX Zeal0ts here since they only care for their maX computarz and not the fact. Be my guest and stay ignorant.
bottom line: PC is winner when it comes to most speed for money and it its still the speedking.
“PC = Personnal Computer.
Mac = Personnal Computer.
hence,
Mac = PC.”
In that context you are correct, but in the context it was being referred to was that PC = x86 PC.
In that regard, my statement is correct, “the only parts that are specific to PCs are x86 chips and Windows. Apple uses neither of these in their computers. Your (his) statement is (was) false.
“nuff said
and there are probably 10x more articles which proves the same thing: Apple is afraid to post real benchmarks.”
Apple is not afraid to post real benchmarks as in fact they did/are doing.
In response to your link, read this:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/2154256&mode=thre…
“I have read that article. Is there any comparison where each processor have its best compiler?”
No, not yet… Now should it be as it would not be an accurate way to compare systems. Instead, the only way to make logical comparisons is to use the same compilers.
“That IMO is a more realworld scenario.”
Of course its not. Its like comparing how one track horse runs in mud as compared to another which runs on dry dirt. The results are meaningless… and not because I’m afraid the PPC would loose… but that its simply not an accurate way to make a comparison.
“Lets say for that Mac IS faster(which it is not) the PC is still clear winner when it comes to speed for money.”
As displayed in the tests, the Mac IS the clear winner, and the PC only wins in the area of configurability. It allows you to buy less and therefore pay less. That does not mean that the PC is less expensive. Rather, just more configurable.
“I have been given answers, just not GOOD answers.”
You have been given several good answers… whether or not you recognise them as such is irrelevant.
“I will never get good answers from the maX Zeal0ts here since they only care for their maX computarz and not the fact.”
You have been getting good answers from Mac enthusiasts and professionals (not zealots) because we car about facts.
“Be my guest and stay ignorant.
Look in the mirror when you make that statement
“bottom line: PC is winner when it comes to most speed for money and it its still the speedking.”
The PC allows you to buy less and therefore pay less. In this regard it is the winner… and no the PC is not the speed king
You maX zealots can argue and refute all you like. Its till comes down to that PCs are more priceworhy, IS STILL THE KINGS OF SPEED, much more software, much more configable and not being run by a dope like Jobs.
“blabla thhe bencmarks was correct blabla” Noes it wasnt since the test didnt use the best compiler for each platform. And I still havent gotten a good answer to that, wanna know why? Cause the maX zealots doesnt like to admit that maX are still slower.
IMO(thats right InMyOpinion something that you would know since you have posted opinions and not facts from the beginning.) is that each platform should use its best tools available. That is common sense IMO.
And wtf are you talking about PCs “buy less, pay less” THAT is PURE BS, even your non-fact twisted mind could go to any online store and just see how overpriced Macs are.
“You maX zealots can argue and refute all you like.”
Which Mac zealots are you referring to. There have been none thus far that I have seen in this thread.
“Its till comes down to that PCs are more priceworhy”
You mean my configurable… They allow you to buy less and pay less.
“IS STILL THE KINGS OF SPEED”
Except that they are not.
“much more software”
Most of which has an equivalent or better alternative on the Mac side… or is simply not worthy getting at all.
“much more configable”
Thats really your only major selling point.
“and not being run by a dope like Jobs.”
This “dope” not only did what everyone said was impossible… (repair Apple) but also make it a leading technology force again.
“”blabla thhe bencmarks was correct blabla””</i.
Take out the Blablas and you have a point.
[i]”Noes it wasnt since the test didnt use the best compiler for each platform.”
it was fair because it used the same compiler for each platform.
“And I still havent gotten a good answer to that, wanna know why? Cause the maX zealots doesnt like to admit that maX are still slower.”
They are not slower… hence you will never get the answer you crave
Fine, fine. However, I DO miss something very important: Why didn’t they benchmark against a Dual Opteron but Intel only? — My guess is they did do that themselves because they are not that st00pid either… and then it was clear to have the Lab test against Intel only. Weak, weak, weak…. If you are bolstering about your new G5, which is the 2nd Dual 64bit CPU-not-yet-to-market-system, then PRETTY PLEASE benchmark it against that other Dual 64-bit-box, which is the first to market. ( I hope Apple PR-monkeys have gotten that straight by now…)
“IMO(thats right InMyOpinion something that you would know since you have posted opinions and not facts from the beginning.)
All my most definitive points have all been facts.
“each platform should use its best tools available. That is common sense IMO.”
Okay, then by that standard, we should use two equally biased individuals to fudge the benchmarks… as that is the best tool for the job.
Of course thats ridiculous… and that an equal… balanced individual should amke the comparison to test the hardware equally… the same way that a compiler which tests both platforms equally should be utilized.
“And wtf are you talking about PCs “buy less, pay less” THAT is PURE BS
No its not.
“even your non-fact twisted mind could go to any online store and just see how overpriced Macs are.”
They are not overpriced at all. When you compare both systems exactly (or as close as possible) the Mac will either be only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive
“Fine, fine. However, I DO miss something very important: Why didn’t they benchmark against a Dual Opteron but Intel only?”
Probably because it wasn’t available
“My guess is they did do that themselves because they are not that st00pid either… and then it was clear to have the Lab test against Intel only.”
it seems more likely that they didn’t compare it against the AMD chip because it wasn’t available. However… maybe they did… who knows.
“Weak, weak, weak…. If you are bolstering about your new G5, which is the 2nd Dual 64bit CPU-not-yet-to-market-system, then PRETTY PLEASE benchmark it against that other Dual 64-bit-box, which is the first to market.”
Considering the fact that it isn’t available, (or only available from an obscure computer manufacturer… BOXX) it seems that the reason that the comparison was made the way it was, was because people are familair with the speeds of XEON. Very few are familiar with the speeds of the AMD chip.
Long live Apple! I cannot wait for my Dual G5/2GHz! All you Wintel/Amd droids can BS around as much as you like! G5+Panther owns your bottoms…
Bottoms up ladies and gentlemen! :p
Apple rules!
“”Fine, fine. However, I DO miss something very important: Why didn’t they benchmark against a Dual Opteron but Intel only?”
Probably because it wasn’t available ”
You can have Dual Opterons since early June. Everybody can have them. Don’t talk yourself into things, please. Apple is about to release/announce the single most important product in a decade and you think they are too st00pid to shop for a Dual Opteron for this very occasion? **LOL**
They know they are not up to par, plain and simple.
Apple is obscure. Obscure leader Jobs. Obscure gay design. Obscure prices. Obscure upgradeability…
Read in this recent article who the customers of BOXX are — it’s the people of which Apple wishes they had them:
“BOXX Technologies is a worldwide supplier of high-end workstations and pedestal/rackmount servers for the motion picture industry as well as for game development and otherwise resource intensive and mission critical tasks.”
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10853
Apple on the other hand is big in the low-end entertainment devices (iPod). The high end is long lost and the field where their profits are lacking.
Now that the troll battles have ruined this thread, I figure it is time to add my thoughts. ;o)
With all the benchmarking discussions and accusations going on, I thought there might be a way to compare the processors using figures from http://www.spec.org as they are the ones that are official (and comfirmed…)
The 3rd quarter submissions don’t have any G5 processors, but there are numbers for Power4+ workstations from IBM itself.
Considering that the G5 is the “little brother” of the Power4+ it would be reasonable to assume that the results of these CPU dependant test results would be anywhere from a little to a lot higher that the G5 will achieve at a comparable Mhz speed.
The results:
IBM Corporation
IBM IntelliStation POWER 275 Workstation (1450 MHz, 1 CPU)
1.5 meg L2 cache, 8 meg L3 cache, 8 gig ram.
SPECfp_base2000 = 1129
SPECint_base2000 = 883
Intel Corporation
Intel D875PBZ motherboard (3.2 GHz, Pentium 4 processor with HT Technology)
1/2 meg L2 cache, no L3 cache, 512 meg ram.
SPECfp_base2000 = 1252
SPECint_base2000 = 1221
(The Power4+ was about on par with a Dell P4 2.4GHz box)
Hmm… these are a lot different numbers than have been posted and defended by Apple. It seems that the Power4, running at 70% of the top G5 (1.45GHz – 2.0GHz) is almost equal to a P4 running at 70% of the top P4 (2.4GHz – 3.2GHz). This doesn’t take into account the Power4 having large L3 cache and much more ram than the P4 boxes.
So, as the G5 can be considered to be the “Celeron” of the Power4 family, it is hard figure that the machine will be anything but a way to narrow the preformance gap that Apple has had for some time.
Check them out for the figures…
http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/
Oh, and for all the frequent posters here – Yes it is! No it’s not! (that way you can just copy and paste in your replies) heh heh…
Why do all MAC users find/say MACs are better because of some thing trivial as “it looks better, it feels better then windows, no more BSODs” for one you still get BSOD? You must be using 98 or have problematic HARDWARE, for shame on you! Use windows 2000 or XP and a good setup then tell me you have BSOD still.
I hardly ever see side by side comparisons of the two platforms that look at things that can be tested with a benchmark or proper controlled tests as apposed to personal views and opinions. It’s all ways got some thing to do with how they feel using the OS or what it looks like.
I like the look of OS X but it’s going to take more then eye candy to get me to flock out more money for a whole new pc (again) when 99.9% things I’m interested in are ever only done or are far more supported on the pc. For example the in thing for me right now is emulation. There are more emulators for a verity of different systems that have heaps more support then on the Mac.
Now if apple made OS X for the pc I would give it a GOOD go. And if it even ran windows apps OUT OF THE BOX (witch we all know wouldn’t happen due to it been UNIX based with out extra support).
all ao don’t thick telling me your NOT an apple loyalist is going to provoke sympathy for you, because it’s not. And what is with MAC users needing a label them self? “I’m a switcher”? You are? Good for you, your still a “user” in my eyes. let me just finish by saying “Hyper threading”, that’s I all I got to say… for now.
Nail go get Nailed.
You have way too much time and it looks like you understand very little about English, grammer or computers in general. You sure can cut and paste though.
Do you have some perverted fixation with Macs because you have posted MORE than anyone else on a Mac related articles yet you have nothing to say and have failed to convince anyone of anything except of the fact that you are filled with HATE.
I can also tell that you really like the G5 but its burns you that Apple makes it. Its actually funny how much it burns you and you make it so apparent.
You wouldn’t last long in a real argument or debate because you are always yelling. Don’t let your mouth write checks your body can’t cash. It doesn’t matter cause the moderators will fix you soon enough.
On Topic…
I’ve seen a lot of people switch with the same results, they like the Mac even if isn’t a speed demon. The number one apps on ALL computers is web and email so a P4 3.2 with HT is not gonna feel any different than an eMac G4 at 700MHZ. I’m not saying they are same, far from it but the majority of people will not be able to tell the difference.
So MHZ DOES matter but its not everything.
I’d love to get my hands on a G5, but there’s just no way I’ll pay $3000 for it when I can get an excellent x86 box for less than half the price.
To be completely honest, the only thing I got from the article was that some guy that who used to have an atari loves Macs and (quote) “praises them any time he gets the chance.” That pretty much sums up the whole story. Though it did start a nice bonfire…
Mind you, the replies the so-called macusers have written here and at http://spl.haxial.com/apple-powermac-G5/ certainly haven’t made me feel any more positive about Macs… lol.
“Why do all MAC users find/say MACs are better because of some thing trivial as “it looks better, it feels better then windows, no more BSODs” for one you still get BSOD? You must be using 98 or have problematic HARDWARE, for shame on you! Use windows 2000 or XP and a good setup then tell me you have BSOD still. ”
I use Windows 2000 on good hardware(toshiba laptop and Athlon PC soyo MB, mushkin ram, ATI radeon) and I still get occasional BSODs. Win2k service pack 4 kills my network subsytem on my laptop even after a clean install.
I know exactly what I am doing. I debug obscure hardware bugs with PCI, IDE, SCSI logic analysers and write device drivers for UNIX for a living. I spent 2 years maintaining windows and linux boxes for my engineering department. Not to mention the years playing with different OSes.
I still am going to buy a powerbook once panther is released. Why? Because I like what apple is doing. And all the peoples rants on osnews about PCs being better in performance isn’t going to change that.
Let me give you an anlogy. A 5.0 v8 mustang has a more powerful engine(260+ hp) than a BMW 330i( 220 HP). I would still drive a BMW becuase I think it is better put together and more fun to drive. The mustang might be faster but I just don’t enjoy driving it. No, I don’t own either of the cars but have driven them. You can arfue all you want about speed but in the end it is the pleasure of experiencing the drive that is the differentiating factor.
Same can be said about an apple product. The ipod is just a pleasure to use simple, functional and elegant. I don’t own one either. Same can be said about powerbooks. IA32 based PC vendors just want to keep costs low and put out functional but leave out elegance and don’t pay attention to details that apple does. Some of us find that apealing in a product. Other don’t.
That’s why arguing here about how the pc is cheaper and fater is only going to make people who value other things more, defensive. To each his own.
“Other don’t.
That’s why arguing here about how the pc is cheaper and fater is only going to make people who value other things more, defensive. To each his own. ”
that should be other’s don’t.
and faster not fater.
I do think my toshiba laptop(800 Mhz celeron, 256 MB ram, shared memory graphics) is a good machine for the money $1000 2 years no problems runs win2k and linux pretty well.
I just like OS X and love apple’s powerbooks. Would I run OS X on x86? maybe. But would dell make laptops as beautiful as apple? probably and they would cost just as much.
i am a Mac user but a couple of months ago I decided to try something different, so I installed YDL on my iMac. I loved it. It worked beatiful but my wife didn’t like it. She was a Windows XP user but when she tried OS X, she decided to swich.
Personally , I liked the Bluecurve desktop theme but my wife didn’t agree. She loves iPhoto, Print Explosion and iMovie. She could not do what she wanted with Linux.
I think it is a matter of taste. I like Linux but I think it needs to be more user friendly if it wants to make it in
the desktop market. I use Linux and Solaris at work and
I think LInux is the best for networking. The NTs are always crashing.
My wife is regular user. She told me that LInux needs a better installation program instead of using tar or rpm commands and more intuitive((more user frindly I guess)). I responded that it is just a matter of time. I guess in someway she is right. OS X is more easy to use and more intuitive.
And finally she was asking me about the mainstream software for Linux. That something that the Linux community needs to work on if they want to get more users.
Now she wants to keep my iMac and wants me to buy another Mac(a powerbook if I want) . well, that is fine with me. i will be getting a new 12″ powerbook!!!!
-2501
ps: also i would like to try Zeta BeOS when it comes out!!!!
BULL SHIT!
APPLE HAS NOT INVENTED NEW TECHNLOGY FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS
THE only thing that they have invented is FIREWIRE that’s about it.
THANKS TO INTEL YOUR BELOVED MACINTRASH NOW HAS AGP & PCI.
LIKE IT OR NOT, APPLE IS USING PC PARTS. THAT IS THE FACT. SHOWING ME BENCHMARKS FROM Apple.com OR SOME BIASED WEB IS NOTHING MORE THEN A JOKE.
APPLE.COM IS THE VERY SOURS OF BULL SHIT. JUST LIKE nVIDIA.COM, ATI.COM or EVEN INTEL.COM.
NO COMMPANY IN THE WORLD WILL SAY THAT “WE SUCK”
REAL WORLD PERFORMACE IS WHAT COUNT’S. NOT SOME GREAT LOOKING ADD OR THE “WHITE PAPERS”.
YOUR WORDS ARE PISS IN THE WIND.
YOU MACIDEOTS ARE USING INTEL, IBM & AMD TECHNOLOGY,
APPLE HAS NO CABABILITY TO INVENT OR MANUFACTURE CPU’s. OR ARCITECHURE.
YOUR BELOVED MACINTRASH IS BASICALY A PC ARHITECTUER. YOU CAN’T PROVIDE ANYTHING TO BACK YOUR “INOVATION CLAIM”.
YES IN THE OLD DAYS APPLE WAS REVOLUTINORY LIKE APPLE II
OR APPLE 1, BUT THOUS DAYS ARE LONG GONE!
THE MHZ MYTH!
APPLE CAN’T EVEN GET THE OWN STORY STRAIT.
FIRST THEY TELL YOU THAT MHZ DOT COUNT, THAT THE SHORTER PIPE LINE IS THE WAY TO GO, AND YET LATER G4 CAME OUT WITH UP TO 9 STAGE PIPE LINE. ALL YOU CAND DO NOW IS TO SAY “YOU DID UNERSTAD WHAT HE WAS SAYING.” WHAT’S TO UNDERSTAD?
THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE SAD OVER NAD OVER.
WITH THE MUCH SHORTER ONLY 4 STAGE PIPLE LINE YOU CAN ACHIVE RESULTS FASTER. WAIT, THEN WHY IN THE HELL DID MOTOROLA INCRECED IT to 9. SO GOING BY APPLE WARDS G4 500MHZ (4 STAGE PIPE) IS FASTER THEN G4 1.2 MHz (9 STAGE PIPE) WHY? THE MHZ MYTH!!!
HERE IS THE REAL DEAL!
SHORT=LOW MHZ
LONG =HIGH MHZ
APPLE=BULL SHIT LIE.
I AGREE THAT MHZ IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO MESURE THE POWER OF THE CPU. ATHLON VS P4 WOULD BE THE GOOD EXAMPLE.
HOWEVER: EVEN THE LATEST ATHLON CAN’T KEEP UP WITH THE HIGHER CLOKED P4.
MHZ DOUS METTER!
HIGHR=FASTER.
DUEL FSB
WHEN INTEL HAS ITRODUSED 800MHZ FSB YOU MACIDEOTS DID’T CARE AT ALL. MOUST OF YOU DID’T EVEN HEARD THE TURM “FSB”,
UNTILE THE G5. EVEN NOW APPLE CLAMES THAT THEY HAVE THE FASTEST FSB IN THE WORLD! WRONG! AMD K8 CODE NAME SLAGEHAMMER HAS INTERNAL MEMMORY CONTROLLER.
THAT MEANS IT RUNS AT THE SPEED OF THE PORSESOR. MUCH LIKE THE L2 CASH.
SO IF OPTERON IS RUNNING AT 1.8GHZ=1.8GHZ FSB.
UNLIKE IN G5 INFORMATION HAS TO TRAVEL TO THE NORTH BRIDG FIRST. ONLY THEN IT CAN FINELLY GET TO THE MAIN MEMMORY.
ENOTHER WORDS: G5 HAS INDEPENTENDT DUEL FSB’s THAT ARE CONNECTED TO THE SINGLE MEMMORY CONTROLLER.
BASICALY THE MORE CPU’s YOU HAVE, THE MORE BOTTLE NECKS YOU ARE CREATING.
OPTERON ON THE OTHER HAND IS A TOTTALY NEW BEAST.
WITH EACH MEMMORY CONTROLLER HANDELING ITS OWN INFO THE BANDTWITH IS ACUALLY INCREASES. EACH CPU CAN TALK TO THE
IT’S OWN MEMMORY BANK DERCETLY VIA AMD’S HYPERTRANSPORT.
AS YOU CAN SEE APPLE IS NOT THE WORLDS MOST ADVANCED FSB.
ALSO THE FSB IS NOT THE ALTIMATE MUSURE OF THE PERFORMANCE.
DUEL CHANNEL DDR
WITH THE INTRODACTION OF THE FASTER AND FASTER CPU’S MEMMORY IS BECOMING MORE OF A BOTTLE NECK.
SO NVIDIA HAS INTRODUST THE BRAND NEW CONCEPT CALLED
DUEL CHANELL MEMMORY IN THE FORM OF THE NFORCE CHIP SET
IN ENGLISH: TWO 64 BIT MEMMORY STICKS ARE COMBINED TO CREAT ONE 128BIT CHANNEL. http://www6.tomshardware.com/motherboard/200106041/nforce-02.html
MARKIT
IF APPLE IS SO GOOD, THEN WHY ALMOST NO ONE IS USING IT?
1.9% OF THE TOTAL COMPUTER MARKIT. WOW THAT IS SOO “HIGH” FOR A COMPUTER “LEADER” & “INOVATOR”!
YOU ARE DRIVEN BY A DREAM THAT DOUES NOT EXIST.
YOU SAY MAC IS FASTER AND BETTER. IN WHAT WAY?
FROOTY MENU? SURE, IF YOU LIKE RAINBOW COLORS. FEEL? AND HOW DO FEELYOUR MAC, OR SHOULD I SAY WITH WHAT YOU ARE FEELING YOUR MAC? MORE LIKE MASTRUBATING WITH THE MAC?
MOST PEOPLE BUY THERE COMPUTERS TO PLAY GAMES OR INTERNET OR 3D LIKE MY SELF.
SPEED!
INTEL IS WAY FASTER IN ANY PROFESIONAL 3D PACKAGE.
XEONS SIMPLY RAPE YOUR APPLE IN HALF WHEN IT COMES TO
OVERALL PERFORMANCE AND RENDERING TIME.
THAT IS WHY MOST 3D HOUSES ARE USING INTEL AND SGI AND NOT MACINTRASH.
LIGHTWAVE AND MAYA SIMPLY SCREAMS ON THE PC
GAMES? WRONG AGAIN! PC IS WAY FASTER IN GAMING ALSO
http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/pentium4-3.2/index.x?pg=8
CASE!
NOW LET’S TALK ABOUT THE CASE OF G5.
LOOKS GOOD ON THE INSIDE AND THE OUTSIDE,
BUT WAIT, WHAT IF I WANNA HAVE SCSI RAID SETUP WITH UP TO
6 OR MORE HARD DRIVES. OOPS, NO SPACE, THERE ARE 3 PCI+X SLOTS, BUT WHERE YOU GOING TO STICK THE DRIVES? THER IS NO MORE ROOM. COMPLITELY USLESS DISIGN.
SO HERE YOU HAVE 3 PCI-X SLOTS, BUT YOU CAN’T EVEN USE THEM FOR INTERNAL SCSI RAID SETUP.
HOWEVER: UNLIKE THE STANDART CASE THAT COMES WITH EVRY G5.
WE AT PC SIDE HAVE THE CHOISES, WAY MORE CHOISES.
I HAVE NO TROBLE AT ALL RUNNING MY INTERNAL SCSI RAID.
“INOVATORS”!
WHAT APPLE HAS INVENTED SO FAR?
LET’S JUST SEE WHO IS THE REAL INVETOR HERE SHELL WE.
PC SIDE
AGP=INTEL 1997 440LX CHIP SET FOR P2
PCI=Intel 1993 TO REPLASE VLB IN THE 486
PCI-X
FUTURE AGP replacement PCI EXPRESS=INTEL DON’T WORRY THAT TECHNOLOGY WILL NOT BE TO APPLE FIRST.
YOU WILL HAVE TO WAIT YOUR TURN.
HYPERTRASPORT=AMD http://www.alsc.com/htfaq.pdf
DUEL FSB=DEC EV6
DUEL CHANNEL DDR=NVIDIA
http://www.smartcomputing.com/articles/archive/c0206/37c06/37.pdf?g…
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1296
FIREWIRE=APPLE
WOW SOME INVETORS. ONE THING IN 5 YEARS.
WAY TO GO MACINTRASH.
BTW I HAVE NAILED YOU ALL ON THE SOFT SPOT. CONDERDICTING YOUR OWN STATEMENTS JUST SHOWS ME HOW LITTLE INTELEGENS YOU REALY HAVE. POINTING TO MY SPELING CRAP AND MAKING FUN OF MY NATIONALITY REALLY SHOWS HOW LITTLE BRAIN POWER YOU REALY HAVE!
OTHER THEN THAT, YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR.
CHEERS! AND WELCOM TO THE DARK SIDE!
YOU HAVE SERTANLY SWITHCED FORM MAC TO PC.
COMPONENTS IN THE PC G5 IS THE PROOF.
Nail got you all Nailed.
You have very little much time and it looks like you understand very little about computers in general. You are a RASIST.
Do you have some perverted fixation with PC’s because you have posted LES than anyone else on a PC related articles yet you have nothing to say and have failed to convince anyone of anything except of the fact that you are filled with HATE.
I can also tell that you really like the PC but its burns you that Apple can’t makes it. Its actually funny how much it burns you and you make it so apparent.
You wouldn’t last long in a real argument or debate because you are always crying.
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU CRAMMER SUCKED AS WELL! I HAD TO FIX IT FOR YOU!
EVER HEARD THE TURM “FREEDOM OF SPEECH”?
LIITLE DO YOU KNOW ABOUT ME.
I HAVE MORE UNDERSTADNIG ABOUT COMPUTERS THEN YOU ARE.
ALL YOU CAN SAY IS THAT MY SPELLING IS BAD.
WHO THE CARES!
DON’T LIKE MY POST’s THEN DON’T READ THEM. GO SOME PLACE QUAIT AND STROKE FOR A WHILE, THAT MIGHT ClEAR UP YOUR BRAIN A BIT.
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE THE ONE WHO CAN’t HANLDE THE NORMAL CONVERSTATION, POINTING TO MY GRAMMER AND LAPHING AT MY NATIONALITY SHOWS HOW STUPID YOU REALLY ARE.
YOU SURE KNOW HOW TO BE A RASIST AND IT SHOWS.
Intel and AMD make computer components while Apple make computers. Most of the components and technologies that Apple use in their computers are made by other companies are invented and often further developed by other companies, such as Intel and AMD.
However, other computer manufacturers do the same thing, whether it’s DELL, HP, Gateway… There are good reasons for this, connected to the cost and time that is needed to invent everything themself (and there would be much more incompability).
The most innovative thing that Apple has done, IMHO, is to create their own path for the future. While most other companies ship their computer’s with Windows or some form of Linux, Apple has created their own OS based on Unix and lot of other open standards.
Anyone could have done the same thing, but Apple is one of the few companies that are innovative enough to do is. And the g5 and OS X are examples that prove that this is true! Instead of reinventing the wheel they use their innovative force to influence the makers of computer components by co-operation and partnerships with companies and also organisations that work towards common standards.
What Apple is doing it is doing very well, and there is no reason to ignore them just they use some of the same parts other computer manufacturers also use. It’s how and what they are used for that make Apple innovative.
BTW, I wonder if Windows ever was an innovative product? Or Linux?
Can’t tell !
I’m using BeOS and i have no problems ! Internet and lan with DHCP works (really like OS X, and really not like Xp !), it can be installed on every plateforms (not like OS X nor Windows), it’s not a copy of something else (like OS X is a UNIX adaptation), it’s totally free (not like Xp or OS X), softwares are free too (having lots, don’t ennoying me this way) …. and it never frozes (not like windows, Xp included ! ), having 0 virus (not like Windows and now OS X), we can choose between lots of releases (2 availables and 4 others in developpement…and only one not free), ….. ,
AND IT’S FAST AND RESPONSFULL ON A PII 333 Mhz WITH 256 Mo SDRAM 100 !!!
so, if you want to spend 4000 € just because ‘mac is better’, go on dude ! Me, i keep my money for Zeta (www.yellowtab.com) !
Have fun !
http://www.1394ta.org/Technology/
Nail, please educate yourself.
Removed the framerate limit on BOTH machines as it is on by default on both. Framerates improved dramatically on both platforms. Running both machines at 1024×768, same map, etc… framerates are still almost identical. The whole processor argument is silly – both machines are really fast. UT 2003 runs awesome on the Mac at 1280×1024 all settings on maximum. That wouldn’t happen if the Mac was a lousy game platform. Something of real value to point out is this – this new PC with clean install of XP has crashed apps, locked up and required a reboot three times in 12 days. My Mac has been running for a month plus. I think I rebooted then to use CandyBar. Reliability is king and the Mac has the PC beat hands down. Have a great day cybersurfers!