This time, DigitalVideoEditing is comparing the fastest (and cheaper) P4 released today, at 3.06 GHz, versus the fastest currently available Mac at 2×1.25 GHz. Has everyone noticed that Apple stoped using extensively the slogan “Mhz don’t matter” for months now?
Mac vs. PC, Part III: Mac Slaughtered Again
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
$306 – Dual Athlon MP 2000
$228 – GeForce4 TI46000 (128MB, DVI, Video Out)
$540 – 2GB DDR Memory (4×512)
$1630 – Maxtor 5x200GB (1 terrabyte) 7200 RPM
$220 – Motherboard
$290 – Pioneer DVRA04 DVD Burner
$118 – Plextor 48x24x48 CD-RW
$178 – Cool Looking Case
$59 – Logitech Cordless Mouse and Keyboard
$18 – 3-Port Firewire Card
$29 – Koutech Ultra ATA/133 RAID Card
$26 – NIC
$14 – 56K modem
$944 – Dual 17 inch flat panel Moniters
TOTAL = $4,550
-vs-
Dual 1.25GHz PowerPC G4
2GB PC2700 DDR SDRAM
120GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive & Combo drive
NVIDIA GeForce4 Titanium
56K internal modem
TOTAL = $4,599
There is no way the mac dual 1.25 compares to the above dual Athlon MP2000. I even included 2 flatpanel moniters (the mac comes with no display devices at all)
Look people if you dislike your macs so much well send’em to me. I know plenty of folks who would love to get a Mac
Still got 2 ports left on my router and plenty of room on the Airport Router.
x2
If I can edit and render video comfortably on a G3/350, why would I be concerned that a 3 GHz P4 is faster than 1.25 GHz PPC. Both are so much faster than any of the fast “slow” systems I use that they would be a breath of fresh air.
My choice comes from the simple comfort of environment.
If you like windows, then you’d use it even if it were “equal” in speed, maybe slower than a mac. And vise versa.
As a agnostic user, I always go back to macs–not because I don’t like windows, but I’m just more productive with the layout of the OS for the mac. Personally, I find it less confining.
As long as the environment allows comfort and productivity, it doesn’t need to be the fastest. It will be fast enough, and only get faster.
The speed wars are for marketing and luring customers who have not yet decided–but what machine will you pick for yourself, for the work of your dreams or business?
The underlying architecture is important–but it does not define what the user will be able to get out of it.
The Macs might be slower than the fastest Wintel’s, but theya are still fine machines, and worth the price.
Hi Dustin,
here is the link: http://www.apple.com/xserve/performance.html
“Much more reporting like this and I’ll have to give up OSNEWS for good.”
and
“Eugina seems to pick on the Macintosh especially bad. Either this is a result of the loss of BE that lead to the destruction of her computing fantasies several years ago, or she has MS stock.
I think Eugina is going for the ratings by the throat… at the expense of her site. Well here is one Mac user who has had it…”
First of all, with all my criticisms. I am a Mac user. For 7 years I have worked in education with Macintoshes. I use Macs everyday.
What I am attempting to bring to light, is the *insane* claims the Mac camp tend to spout off. If you dont like, *tough*. The truth hurts. Lets get something done. Get a helmet and get out there and say something, or keep paying out the nose for inferior shit. Simple.
I would like Apple to come clean and pull off something that is equal to what the competition has going for it. The things I am trying to point out is, Apple has no leg to stand on as long as they have a group of people who are not willing to stand up and say: Hey where are the fast machines. Where are the machines that can run this OS you have *well*?
I mean, I am a poweruser. I use OS X everyday. I have noted many times how pathetic it performs comapred to my linux system at home. The stuff I said from my boss today is another matter all together. I mean he is a user. he just spent $3500 on a computer, and he is finding OS X to be too slow for his average tasks. he has complained to me on 3 or 4 seperate occasions. What is Apple gonna do with that? Well, I am calling them tomorrow and I will find out. As a company, you cant go throwing around free OS X 10.2 to teachers, only to find they dont like it cos it interupts their work flow. Can you? I mean more people will jump ship. How does that help Apple?
I mean Apple needs to be critiqued, or else they will keep *screwing* their customers wityh lies. And thats whats going on.
If you dont believe that, and plan on leaving OS News, then whatever. Like most users, u are too sensetive to the truth, and ya cant handle it. It must be from being in Steves “reality distortion field” for too long. Dont let the door smack, yada yada yada..
Apple need *desperately* a group of people who say, gimmie something that works, instead of watching clean *white* ads that lie in order to prove a non existant point.
Today I have realized how slow apple’s browsing compared to PCs. The same lab with the same network speed. A dell with Windows XP seemed to me blazingly fast after I browsed the web using Apple. It was really a shock to me. Os X is extremely slow when it comes to internet browsing. This issue came up earlier, but I didn’t realize the difference until today.
“The Macs might be slower than the fastest Wintel’s, but theya are still fine machines, and worth the price.”
And I ask, How is 3000 dollars more for a slower machine worth the price? Plastic case? I got a cool plastic case too.
the article was nice. i would like to see similar results from another site. not that i dont believe the one presented, but just for confimation i guess.
the posts here are just plain sad.
calling all mac users. your system tested slow. admit it. relish in the fact that your desktop, ease of use, and painfully simple integration with hardware is well above any other system out there and shut your holes.
x86 boys and girls. you have screamer machines. congrats, you are winning the speed battle. the only people that care are anti-mac people. live in your world. the mac people will live in theirs.
all the comments sound like a middle school shouting match. my blah blah is better than your blah blah. then we all grew up and realized that each person has his/her own tastes and that is fine.
so shut up.
doesn’t someone moderate these things? they need to close this whole story down.
Good bye. I don’t think anybody will miss someone who threatens to go if he/she does not like what he/she hears.
I will not explain you why you are wrong, because it is pretty obvious that you are one of those last apple zealots who are extremely ignorant.
I gotta say, Fuel Injected Dreams is damn close to the truth. Ive only been reading OSNews for the past couple of weeks and ive noticed how more and more of the discussions are turning into bitch-fests!
Being a Mac/Wintel/Linux user, I can appreciate that all have their strengths and weaknesses, but why bitch?
Get back to some serious discussion…..pls.
I’m not sure what Apple lies you are talking about — they did in fact drop the megahertz myth some time ago. Did you miss that? Sorry if you did…
So, you look here. I picked up the platform as a developer 2 years ago August, and haven’t put it down since. It rocks. It is not as fast as a microwave emitting P4, but it is sufficient. I build on a 450MHz machine daily running Jaguar and 704MB RAM. The kernel is good — it’s not hacky. It has alot of very services, and is pretty straight forward in operation. I have an array of dual processor machines, and in daily use they are no slower than my 1.6GHz VAIO towers. Yes, I have quite an array of both types of boxes…
The reason Intel is releasing super-clocked processors is not because anyone _needs_ it. Power users and gamers don’t drive a market. They are doing it because the PC industry has fallen and it can’t get up. Intel believes that it carries the mail in the PC market, so they pull stunts like releasing a 100Watt chip. Meanwhile, Apple is maintaining a profit. Michael Dell and Gateway’s farmers are hating this and seeing red. This conglomeration is arrayed against Apple, and Apple still manages to thrive. Sure, Apple is not selling many machines currently, but no one else is either. If people need a box currently, they are going to buy the Yugo of the computing world, the 200 dollar beige box. When the economy comes back, there will that many more Windows-frustrated computer buyers waiting with saved cash to blow on a _something different_. And Steve jobs is going to be standing there with the pretty boxes with nice profit margins.
When Intel pulls its last GHz card out of its hat on x86, the only place left is I2. I2 is luckily alot faster than I1, but it’s selling like pet rocks nowadays. It doesn’t even seem to be garnering a hatchling developer market…
Plus, I have seen and work with Apple’s eMac. The machine is rock solid. Name your complaint. Is it because it doesn’t produce enough microwaves to warm a cup of tea? Students don’t need to run nuclear simulations in high school… if they do, I’m sure they could get a grant if they are that good. Meanwhile, my 600mhz iBook is alot more solid than my THINKPAD, which is the corner stone of solid mobile computing in the PC world. (DELL is a joke. One that is so expensive, I might get beat up if I laugh at it in front of owners.)
So for now the ubiquitous cheapo PC will rule the sales charts. When the cash taps begin to flow again, I think we’ll see the revival of Macdom to the levels seen only in the 80s. Until then, the core buyers for Mac will keep Apple comfy….
But finally, my main concern is Eugina. She has a responsibility to at least be unbiased in the report. Tired of hearing her opinion as the news. This is osnews, not osopinion. She can leave her opinion in the comment logs like everyone else. I f I wanted lame lopsided reporting, I’d go read osopinion, a site I got tired of some time ago for the guy’s obsession with Mac, constant bashing of MS, and just in general his terrible attitude. Oh yeah, and this is my opinion, but then it isn’t the front page news, so I _am_ allowed that.
You are clueless. If you can’t tell that OSNEWS has degraded into a flame war generator with it’s inflammatory wording of “news” reports, then go ahead, stick your head back in your Eugina woven paper bag, called OSNEWS (should be osopinion, but thats already taken by that Mac obsessed MS basher).
I am considering not coming back here because Eugina can’t be objective in her news reporting. She needs to keep the news on the front page and the opinion in comment log. If she wants to do editorials, then she needs to write some more site code and establish a _editorial section_.
1. Motorola has been hog tieing Apple for years now with their painfully slow dev porcess on 603-605 chips sets for a long time now. Consider though the next gen g4 from IBM, with true 64 bit architecture, and low power consumption and smaller overall design. If they can get a 2ghz chip to be as efficient with less breaks in the data chain, than all is not lost.
2. CPU sales have plateued and MHZ is the only sales pitch box makers have right now. When exactly did word processing, spreadsheets and internet require such beefy requirements?
3. Relaibility on the PC side has sprialed down and all that power is a moot point if the machine isn’t operable.
4. Apple needs to boost the bus speeds, incorporate faster ram, and more efficient i/o control. If the whole box is faster, than a slower chip ultimately means less.
5. I’m still trying to figure out why intel was so quick to dump thr P3, which was not a bad chipset. Sadly, the orphaned chipset never realized its full potential. Sad case of marketing wags having the say over engineers.
The PIII architecture (not chipset, which is a different part of the computer) is a Pentium Pro with MMX and SSE. The PPro was released in 1995, nearly 8 years ago. During that time period, the P6 architecture was scaled to nearly 6x the clockspeed (200Mhz to 1.2GHz). No, the PIII’s time had definately come. It just couldn’t keep up with AMD’s K7 architecture, either in terms of clockspeed or instructions per cycle. The P4 was a great replacement. While I’m sure marketing had something to do with it, the P4’s architecture *is* a very sound design. Wide-slow architectures just aren’t terribly practical for today’s code. There’s not much more to say about it. Intel realized that upping the clock-speed was the best way to up performance. And the P4 is definately the fastest consumer-level CPU out there, and single-CPU to single-CPU (without taking into account multiprocessor architecture) a P4 plays in the same league (within 30% or so) of a Power4, a much more expensive processor. I just don’t see you anyone can justify calling that level of success “a triumph of marketing over engineering.”
This all very predictable. Take a look at the g4 at 1ghz spec cpu2000 scores http://www.heise.de/ct/english/02/05/182/. Thats just a little better than 1/2 the 3ghz P4s (taking into account the dual processors) spec which should be north of 1100 (3ghz ins’t on SPEC’s site). That’s about the same speed ratios it’s getting on the video benchmarks.
Again, not at all surprising. A switch to dual PPC 970’s should hopefully get the mac back up to par. The main queston is, when are we going to be able to do that?
That all the Mac babies all cry Eugenia is not objectivly reporting when she posts a story from a freaking digital video site (I thought Macs *ruled* digital video) that says that the Mac platform got smoked by the Intel competition?
Is it cos it short circuts the Apple computer FUD you have been feed in such a steady diet you will actually plunk down the cash you do for outdated hardware?
I mean.. If anything, I am to blame for spouting the crap, not Eugenia. How is it not fair of her to post *news*. Oh, maybe cos it threatens your investment?
Much like trying to talk sense into the average Hari Krishna on the street (or better yet, a Jehovah Witness), trying to talk *shop* with a Macintosh user turns into either weird ungrounded techno mumbo jumbo or a whine fest about how everyone is mean to them.
Why not address my last post. How Macintosh users need to complain to Apple about being shortchanged.
Maybe you dont need Megahertz, but you sure need something to comptete. It would be sad to see Apple bite the dust. Despite the cash flow, it could happen. Of course unless you all keep paying huge amounts of cash for machines years behind.
How long do we have to keep up this one sided arg?
Not one Macintosh user has addressed anything brought up.
All anyone says is: Intel is fast yes, but one day we will rule. If only in our own imaginations…
Apple needs help. Admit it. We can all repent.
Its like this:
Say bullshit
say truth
more bullshit
truth
biased truth
bullshit
truth
flame
My god man, a 100watt 3g9hz p4 outperforms a 18watt per cpu dual 1.25ghz system. Jesus if it didnt I would be amazed. And it didnt outperform it by much at that.
Did anyone mention the free $600~ imaging/video software (forgot name, its in another os x thread here tho) that comes with the g4 towers?
I love my ibook, most productive machine Ive ever used. I love my pc, fastest machine I ever owned, great for gaming.
And too all those apple needs to get their shit together arguements… Yes they should be like gateway and lose money.
Its EXTREMELY hard to compare apple systems to any of the windows pc sellers, they are effectively just resellers. Sun/SGI/DEC/etc did complete systems, and eventually reseller commodity hardware got faster then them and stayed amazingly cheaper.
Do you guys not remember 5000 dollar 386s and such? Hell, im 17 and I do. Just get over yourselves and count your blessings that you can get 100 times the power for less then a tenth the cost now.
If you wanna feel that your right, just beleive the saying “there’s a sucker born every minute”, if you want to know the truth… Apple would be out of business if there wasnt a demand for their product.
“And too all those apple needs to get their shit together arguements… ”
Yeah keep making excuses. You dont help a damn thing. All you Apple people make excuse after excuse. Its so boring.
“Apple would be out of business if there wasnt a demand for their product.”
The demand gets less and less each day. Wow. You guys are so cool.
people who have no business sense.
Fuel, how long have you been reading this forum – a couple of days? Eugenia gets this from every side – she favors Linux, she hates Linux, she hates OS X, she loves OS X…it goes on and on. She is accused of everything. And it’s all baloney.
Apple has a wonderful product, except for one thing – they need a processor solution. That’s it, one problem, but a big one. Mac users like myself, we don’t have to outmatch PC’s in raw speed, that is not the goal. I like Macs because of the OS, the iApps and any number of reasons. But, I don’t like the spinning beach ball and I don’t like sluggishness. They don’t have to beat Intel speed, they just have to do one thing – speed things up some. I don’t buy Macs thinking they’re going to be as fast as a P4, I buy them because I like them, I like the user experience…except for that one little (big) thing …they have to get the system to be somewhat faster and more responsive and they have to do it soon.
My new PowerMac top-of-the-line workstation:
comes with ancient ATA66 chips
comes with old ATA100 chips
comes with old USB 1.1
comes with a consumer class video card
comes with a crippled front side bus
comes with a giant price tag
comes with a loud fan noise
comes with no front connections other than headphones
comes with a non-standard video connector
does not come with ATA133 (so doesn’t support big IDE drives)
does not come with USB2 (because Apple hates it)
does not come with a workstation class video card
does not come with an IDE drive that has 8Mb cache
does not come with a two-button (or more) mouse
does not come with reasonably priced displays
The more time passes, the more painfully obvious it is that Macs are made for brain damaged people. People with more dollars than sense.
With Apple, you get old spare-parts bin hardware. You get the slowest available mainstream computers. You pay up the wazoo.
It is basically over unless Apple ditches their lame PowerPC platform and moves to a modern computing platform.
And I have to say, including an ATA66 chipset on a ‘supercomputer’ is Apple saying “bend over and take it” to their user base. An ATA100 chipset… cost how much extra? At the most $0.50. Thanks, Steve. I hope you use the money you stole from me to fly somewhere interesting in your $90 million aeroplane.
I am damn tired of getting ripped off, Steve. Get a clue before it is too late.
(shiny white)
My Girlfriend is not technically minded at all and she owns a mac. A tangerine ibook with OSX installed.
I don’t understand how this happened but when she was at the PC she would constantly ask me how to do things. She sat down at OSX and after a quick explanation of finder and the dock she was doing things on her own for the first time.
I asked her what it was she liked about her mac over windows XP. She said she liked the interface, she hated trying to find stuff on the start menu (which always gets clogged up with apps putting their own icons in there) and it was ‘friendlier’.
I didn’t understand what she meant because the first OS I ever learned to use fully was MSDOS 5 way-back-when. Everything is easier to me.
OSX goes very slow on her machine but she doesn’t notice, or care! She is not interested in video editing or 3D games, she is interested in getting her work done, browsing the net and sending e-mail. Her mac does this for her, brilliently.
“OSX goes very slow on her machine but she doesn’t notice, or care! She is not interested in video editing or 3D games, she is interested in getting her work done, browsing the net and sending e-mail. Her mac does this for her, brilliently.”
Maybe she could get a machine a lot cheaper if all she does is office work and internet …
This topic comes up again and again. As a current Mac owner, I am in the market for a second machine as kind of a processing workhorse. I could either buy a new iMac of some kind and retire my Cube to that task, buy a way too expensive PowerMac or buy a Dell. The Dell with more than the power of that iMac or the tower would be somewhere on the order of $500.
Apple users generally want to complain about a media bias or everyone missing the point. They want to talk about all the free video software that is unmatched on the current machines or how hard it is to use WindowsXP. Here’s the reality check
1. Most of the computer illiterate people I know who have bought a new computer for the first time have all bought Windows machines, and none of them have complained about not knowing how to do things.
2. All this free software is irrelevant to the conversation for two reasons. If we are talking about consumer machines you get comparable (nearly as good) software installed on equivalent PC’s by major vendors. If we are talking about professionals, they can’t use it anyway, and I going to have their own multi-thousand dollar packages on those machines.
3. Apple hardware is pretty much half a generation ahead of where it was this time last year, which was already one to two generations behind x86 offerings. That puts it nearly three generations behind in memory technology and bus technology. The only thing they are now on par with is video card technology and FireWire technology. That’s appalling!
Apple is asking people to pay twice as much for equivalent hardware, some of which can no longer be bought in a new PC, because of industrial design. This is an outrage. Apple publishes BS benchmarks which hyper inflate their performance numbers. They never show any truly high-end processes for their 21 GFLOPS benchmarks because they can’t sustain that rate for low precision math and never reach it for double precision math that all reputable engineering and science code uses. Their photoshop benchmarks are also somewhat contrived because they only list benchmarks which the G4 crunches better than x86 (which isn’t all of them) and they put it up against much less expensive and not top of the line PC’s.
To the Apple zealots out there, don’t shoot the messenger. Shoot the company that has put us Apple users in danger once again. It surely isn’t Apples fault that Motorola completely dropped the PowerPC ball. Apple’s fault lies in realizing Motorola was dead-ending their high performance processors due to their own incompetence three years ago and continuing to pray and chant for their next super processor. At this point even the POWER4-lite from IBM won’t save the day because it will just be on par with the Intel/AMD offerings of the day when it is in mass production this time next year.
I love OS X. I hate the fact that my cube isn’t much slower than present day Macs even though it is already over 2 years old. I hate Microsoft (even more after their anti-trust debacle) but realize Apple is the exact same company in miniature. All I can hope for is that Apple gets their hardware act together to continue to offer another choice than Windows. Otherwise, “dude I’m gettin’ a Dell”.
> x86 has…<P>
> Only 8 not-really-GP 32-bit registers (PPC has 32 really GP registers)
> Only 8 FP regs (PPC has 32)
> Only 8 64-bit MMX and…
> Only 8 128-bit SSE registers (PPC has 32 registers @ 128 bits each for vector
> integer, vector float, and vector permute).
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/01q4/p4andg4e2/p4andg4e2-1.html
1. The G4 has a relatively weak FPU, so it relies on programmers using its VPU to do the work.
2. The G4 is hobbled by its low clock speed; a 5-cycle instruction takes almost three times longer in the real world on a 1.25 GHz CPU than on a 3.06 GHz CPU.
3. The G4 is hobbled by a slow memory bus.
Multimedia is all about SIMD efficiency and bandwidth. Did you really think that a dual 1.25 GHz box with a 166 MHz bus speed would perform even on par with a cheaper 1.53 GHz box with a 533 MHz bus speed on a bandwidth-intensive test?
> That’s what I mean by “out-classed.” 32 visible registers versus 96.
Wow, I am like, so impressed over the beauty of the of the ISA that I can overlook the significantly higher price/performance ratio of the Mac.
> Evidently x86 emits dense particles called “morons.”
You mean morons who are interested in prettiness of AltiVec code that 95% of Mac users will never see?
> Because Apple has the strongest brand in the computer industry. Zealotry is amok.
> Apple could make their machines slower, and they would still find customers. Maybe
> not switchers, but their faithful are loyal to the death. It’s about being part of
> the Mac Clique.
Perhaps, but that will only last so long. You can’t expect that to sustain Apple forever.
> In fact, only Quartz stays high in my books. It is fast, efficient. But for a nice
> hardware architecture, not only is the processor is slow, the bandwidth limit is
> low, it uses consumer cards for professional systems (GeForce instead of Quaddro,
> Radeon instead of Fire), and heck, even the built-in sound card fairs worser than
> the average C-Media built in sound card.
http://www.htgk.com.sg/jeuda/articles/perimods/quadro/
Interesting, isn’t it? 🙂
> The above poster was 100% correct. Apple has no more control over the chip
> manufacturer than any other PC manufacturer.
Apple is the third largest selling computer brand, and they have no control over which processor is found in their boxes? Sheesh.
> Look people if you dislike your macs so much well send’em to me. I know plenty of
> folks who would love to get a Mac
Yeah, for free. 😉
> The Macs might be slower than the fastest Wintel’s, but theya are still fine
> machines, and worth the price.
Nope.
> What I am attempting to bring to light, is the *insane* claims the Mac camp tend
> to spout off. If you dont like, *tough*. The truth hurts. Lets get something done.
> Get a helmet and get out there and say something, or keep paying out the nose for
> inferior shit. Simple.
Bravo!
> x86 boys and girls. you have screamer machines. congrats, you are winning the speed
> battle. the only people that care are anti-mac people. live in your world. the mac
> people will live in theirs.
>
> all the comments sound like a middle school shouting match. my blah blah is better
> than your blah blah. then we all grew up and realized that each person has his/her
> own tastes and that is fine.
>
> so shut up.
>
> doesn’t someone moderate these things? they need to close this whole story down.
Nice try, but it won’t work here. The only people saying that the Macs are slower are the ones defending “wintel” from the outrageous claims made by Mac fanatics.
> I am considering not coming back here because Eugina can’t be objective in her news
> reporting. She needs to keep the news on the front page and the opinion in comment
> log. If she wants to do editorials, then she needs to write some more site code and
> establish a _editorial section_.
If you are determined to behave that way, please go.
This site belongs to Eugenia and the other OSNews staff who work to make it into a cool site. They post news on the front pages, not opinions. The opinions go into editorials and in the comments section. They are people, and they are entitled to have opinions. If you do not like what they say, debunk it; don’t just start hurling insults.
> CPU sales have plateued and MHZ is the only sales pitch box makers have right now.
> When exactly did word processing, spreadsheets and internet require such beefy
> requirements?
Since application developers want to add more features.
Since people want to do more than one thing at a time.
Since MHz determines how powerful a chip is in comparison to its predecessors of the same design.
> Relaibility on the PC side has sprialed down and all that power is a moot point if
> the machine isn’t operable.
Reliability has spiraled up and all that power is being harnessed better than before. Compare Windows XP to Windows 3.1 and tell me that 3.1 is more stable. Or Windows 95, for that matter. Being able to leave my computer on all day and work without rebooting is *nice*.
> Apple needs to boost the bus speeds, incorporate faster ram, and more efficient i/o
> control. If the whole box is faster, than a slower chip ultimately means less.
Partially correct. No matter how fast the rest of the box is, a slow processor can cripple it. Try putting together a box with the following components:
a GeForce 4 Ti4600
a fast SCSI RAID
a VIA C3 650 MHz CPU
How will it perform? That chip will kill it in nearly every benchmark one can think up. The problem is that while Apple is improving the bus speed, progress is not going to stand still. Apple needs a faster CPU in addition to the other improvements you mentioned.
> I’m still trying to figure out why intel was so quick to dump thr P3, which was not
> a bad chipset. Sadly, the orphaned chipset never realized its full potential. Sad
> case of marketing wags having the say over engineers.
The P3 isn’t a chipset. A chipset is the set of chips that complement the CPU by attaching the memory bus and peripheral buses so that the CPU can do its work.
The P3’s life was over when the Intel engineers realized that its design put a huge limitation on its clock speed.
This biggest bottleneck of any computersystem isn’t the processor, ram, harddrive, networkcard, or anything like that. It’s the user.
Relatively speaking it takes ages till a user presses a key on his keyboard, and it takes centuries till the user has found his mouse and navigated to a button.
This huge bottleneck can only be reduced through a good designed user interface, and the ability to automatise your tasks. This is something that Apple handles very well.
Your statements are only partially true. Certainly it takes infinitely longer for the user to hit a key than for one single task to be executed at the processor level. However the reality is that even when the user is doing absolutely nothing, the system is crunching away on thousands of operations. When that user clicks one key or seleects one menu, that initiates millions or billions of operations. Regardless of how long it took to initiate the instruction, we can still see that it takes longer to finish on a G4 than on a pentium
Speed improvement?!?
3.06GHz system -and the damn cursor STILL stutters across the screen like a jitterbug! Sheesh!
One would have thought that after all these years, the PC manufacturers would have been able to figure out the cursor-placement-during-vertical-blanking-thing. (Which the Mac has had since day one, btw.)
But Nooo-ooo! Moving the cursor on a PC STILL looks like you’re using a washboard mouse pad! -which is esp. annoying on laptops (cursor magnifier, anyone?)
I could care less about the GHz rating on a computer as long as the system is responsive, the OS doesn’t fight me every inch of the way (don’t get me going) -and the display text & graphics are pleasing to the eye.
Being whipsawed back and forth during the course of a 10 hour day between a new headache-inducing, IS-pampered PC running XP -and a year old Mac running OS X –has me wanting to pitch the PC out the window. The experience is that stark.
Oh well, now that our IT team is fuming over the new MS licensing scheme -and tittering over the OS X unix stuff, maybe we can dump the things…
I’ve been in non linear editing and post-production for years now. Ours is a dual platform house, so I have MUCH experience on macs and pcs.
The problems we’ve had(starting w/NT on avids)with the pc is the OS. Yes, there is some great hardware on the PC side–fast quality hardware. Yes win2k was a big improvement. But still, we find that because our Macs have a tightly controlled integration between hardware and software, we tend to have A LOT less trouble from them. Are they as fast? Nope. But not having to worry about the OS getting flaky in our NLE setups is nice. We have been more productive on the macs. We’ve used a couple of different turn-key pc systems and still went back to the mac. For us, they’ve just been easier to deal with.
And FCP 3 on X has made things even better.
Like I said, I have no problems with PCs, or PC hardware. The hardware is fast and cutting edge. It rocks. We just had a hell of a time with NT and 2k. And as far as XP goes, we’ll have to wait until we buy another PC.
Blah Blah Blah Blah….
We all know that X86 hardware kicks the snot out of anything that Apple can put out. Period.
We all know that the PowerPC 970 wont save the day. It will just keep Apple in the same ballpark (well parking lot).
We all know this. You can bring out all of the pie charts, benchmarks, or whatever you want, but Apple will be slower for quite some time.
Now, with that said…
I still plan on buying a new PowerMac and TiBook. I’m getting the 1 ghz TiBook before Dec. and the PowerMac in Feb.
WHY? Simple. The program that I primarily use is mac only. Final Cut Pro 3. The other reason. The ease of networking, clustering, and it’s plug and play. I own a production house of 7 people and. I don’t have money for an IT person and need to do my own web hosting, filesharing, clustering, and e-mail. Apple offers the best of all these at a realatively cheap price. I know I could use Linux, but I have no idea on how to use Unix or the CLI. I don’t want to spend a whole day or even days getting everything up and running. I also didn’t want to spend months learning Unix so I could use Apache.
This was a hard decision for me. I really was about to go the Dell workstation route with Win2K. It would have been cheaper for the hardware, but after I added in the windows license it was a lot more expensive. That and the network is not as easy to set up and trouble shoot. Also, once I started using isync, bluetooth, iCal, and rendevous I was hook. It maybe slower, but the total user experience is so much better.
Duh! Mac’s are more expensive the PC’s… Duh!
I knew both of these back in July when I bought my DP PowerMac. So why did I buy it? Because I needed a robust unix workstation that would cover my professional and personal tasks. Neither Windows nor Linux meet my needs (I had been using both, together for many years and still do while at work). Sun and SGI were not viable options, for mostly the same reasons as linux (plus a few others).
To me, and to many others, this is the value proposition.
For those that like car analogies, a mustang is much faster and much cheaper then a subaru outback, but the mustang won’t meet the needs of my family. Guess which one I’m going to buy.
Yes, time is money, but benchmarks are not the only measure of time-saved or TCO. User interface ease-of-use, platform support cost and downtime all factor in. Most creative professionals know, use, and prefer the Mac, and the cost of training those professionals in the use of a new platform is not minor, and that is assuming they would be willing to switch. Many small shops cannot afford the full-time IT staff that Wintel PCs typically demand just to keep up and running. Finally, how fast does Final Cut Pro run on those fancy new P4’s? What, no Final Cut Pro for PC… that’s too bad. Because that is where the industry is going. I am a consultant with many clients in video production, all of them use Final Cut Pro and none of them are considering a switch to PC.
PC’s are cheaper, and that allows me to pick one up just for gaming. I love WinXP and the variety of games I can pick up for the system. There’s a great variety of hardware at decent prices to power these games. And I dig those new Shuttle cubes, finally some style to go along with the substance.
But for me, I still use a Mac most of the time when I do other things. Speed really matters, and Apple needs to license AMD’s chips pronto (or IBM needs to get Apple their new Power 4 chips much sooner than I’ve heard rumored). But there’s no comparison for the software I use. Final Cut Pro is a really outstanding program, it beats down Adobe Premiere and I greatly prefer it to the Avid software line (for home use). Pro Tools (audio editing) is my software of choice also, and while it definitely can run on Win NT based machines, the people I know who have tried had a large number of headaches. These programs both work very well on my dual 1 gig G4. The system was expensive, I can’t argue that, and it’s probably more sluggish than if I had to x86 chips in there, but I can’t get that so there’s no point in arguing those angles.
Just to make everyone happy, I’ll be the Mac user that says it. Macs need a better chip pronto. Macs are overpriced for the hardware (although that’s what allows the company to survive so the prices can’t really change). My Mac is more of a tool than simply a computer. It was the right tool for my particular jobs and I wouldn’t undo my decision to buy one if I had the chance. It dented my wallet severely, but I get the things done that I want to get done in a way that can’t be equaled on the PC. That’s the bottom line.
Both OSes are fine, both are stable, both are bloated (WinXP and OS X). I know some tech stuff about hardware, but I don’t care if I can’t use the software I want. The G4 was the right system for me for work, and while I can’t jack off to my system specs with some of you, I get what I want done with ease. The numbers really are superfluous.
Now when I get my new p4 gaming systems for a really good price, I’ll jump back into system specs porn.
I really enjoy coming back and reading all the new posts. This is really funny.
If you stop, and look, isn’t it amazing how two environments, basically boiled down Microsoft and Apple can garner such enthusiasm for their two products.
This is regardless of how they run, perform, or do anything. It’s just that much loyalty or something drives you to go to flaming each other over a product.
There are things some people ‘just like’ and nothing you tell them can make them change. It can cost less money, it can run three times as fast for 1/3rd the cash, it can be even free and people won’t want it if they like what they have.
This topic has just got to agree to disagree. Personally, I like OS X, and I like my cheap Powerbook I got off eBay for $1200. It runs fine, i can surf the web & send email from it and I can tinker a bit at the CLI better than I could with Linux. But then, I flip over to my Athlon machine and play UT2003, Warcraft 3, Battlefield 1943, and Everquest.
When I look at the prices for a new Powermac with a monitor, I cringe. $4500 – $7000 depending on the monitor? For what? A cool looking computer with an expensive ass motherboard in it that doesn’t perform to what I’m used too. Sure it has two CPUs, but come on, you gotta admit that’s a lot of cash.
“For those that like car analogies, a mustang is much faster and much cheaper then a subaru outback, but the mustang won’t meet the needs of my family. Guess which one I’m going to buy.”
Hurrah! Someone has finally made the only point worth making about this issue. While it’s great to be able to buy an incredibly powerful computer for a pittance if it doesn’t do what you need/want, what use is it to you?
If you want the fastest processor speeds go x86, if you need seamless hardware/software integration go Mac., and if you need a hardcore workstation go Solaris, SGI, etc.*
Really what it all comes down to is remembering that while your choice of hardware and OS seems ideal, it is your choice and your opinion; other people’s choices and opinions may/will differ on what’s best for them, regardless of factors like processor speed and, especially, regardless of how much you shout at them, taunt them, etc.
* btw, this is purely my opinion of which category each system fits into, it’s not meant to start a whole new argument about what system can be used for what purpose; remember, ymmv!
[sarcasm]
If they charge $100 an hour, and their hardware is slower, think of all the extra profits from billable hours that can be made.
[/sarcasm]
You know, I think most people yapping in this forum would probably agree that if Apple went with a proprietary x86-based platform, they’d be in a lot better shape in the performance race.
Personally, I think they should drop their hardware R&D budget and build around commodity x86 hardware. Few people dispute the quality of OS-X. And given the success Linux has had with hardware recognition, I’d rather see Apple spend their R&D dollars on drivers, not hardware that will be performance inferior by the time they hit the market.
If Apple sold an “open x86” based Mac, I’d actually consider buying it, because the quality of their industrial design is usually worth the premium.
There is a business case to going x86, but I’m sure the Mac-heads aren’t very interested in hearing it. I think Apple’s profits would go through the roof with people switching their x86 boxes to OS-X. They’d have Linux and Win32 people switching. That’s huge. Of course, to a die hard Mac fan, hell would have frozen over to see OS-X running on “ghetto” beige boxes.
Of course, all of this is moot, since it’s an unlikely vision of the near future.
if people really cared about processor speed all that much
then you would have seen an increase in sales that would have corresponded to intel’s massive processor speeds gains over the last two years. Instead, sales of pcs dipped in 2001 and are apparently set to grow a whopping 1% in 2002.
Those figures demonstrate quite clearly that processor speed increases just don’t matter that much to buying cycles anymore. Nor did Xp for that matter. Moreover, apples sales are not dipping becuase of the MHz (GHz) gap. Economics 101: sales of high ticket price items (like apples) more negatively impacted by a recession (which we are in) than lower cost devices (such as PCs).
If you don’t beleive the latter check out car sales during recessions. luxury cars allows falter by a much higher percentate then say honda accords or other low cost devices.
Bottom Line……………….MHz don’t matter much anymore at least not to sales figures. not enough people care and that won’t change when intel comes out with 5 ghz or 10 GHz processor either. The sales figures tell the story.
Leaving the Pentium 4 in the dust
Apple’s famous Photoshop 7 benchmarks, consisting of nine commonly used rendering operations, were extremely close. The slower Mac delivered the goods in 30 seconds, and the dual 1.25Ghz model was just three seconds faster.
Either way, performance is mighty impressive. I recently tested some PC hardware with “Intel Inside.” A Sony VAIO with 2.2Ghz Pentium 4 consumed 50.1 seconds to handle the same tasks. The so-called “iMac killer,” the Gateway Profile 4XL, equipped with the optional 2.8Ghz Pentium 4, took 44.7 seconds to process these filters. In all fairness to the 17-inch flat-panel iMac that I also tested, which only contains a single 800Mhz G4, it only took five seconds longer.
Here on Fantasy Island, all Macs mysteriously browse the web slower. Funny how this never ever came up until some unsubstianciated article came up on a PC web site this past summer. Anyway, believe what you want, but on my home network connected to cable modem, there is absolutely no difference (as long as you don’t use that dog Microsoft Internet Explorer as your Mac browser.
The would solve the speed issue, but what about MS? Do you think that MS would allow Apple to gain foothold on the X86 market? Apple wouldn’t stand a chance against MS and Linux. Even if it was easier and on cheaper hardware. That’s to much competition.
I think Apple is doing the right thing. they are waiting on the 970 and I’m sure preparing all of their apps to take advantage of 64 bit properties of the 970. They might even have a quad system in the works.
Utterly childish rant. Ever heard of FIREWIRE? Another in the “I’d buy a Mac if they just weren’t SO expensive. Well, get over it. You get what you pay for in this world, and the Mac is an original. You’re not going to get one for $599.00. Just quit trying to act like a disgruntled customer. No one is buying it. Not ever tne PC users.
I don’t think you really get it. It’s about how long it takes the user to find out which button to press. It’s about making sure that the user doesn’t spend his time searching for a certain function deeply burried in menus or weird looking toolbars.
A good user interface can give you speedbenefits of hours, and it keeps the user happy. Do you work faster when you’re happy, or when everything goes wrong?
Having a nice consistent and thoroughly studied user interface, can give you alot more speed than a faster processor. A faster processor can give you a couple of minutes. A good userinterface can give you multiple hours.
Fuel Injected Dreams: I’m not sure what Apple lies you are talking about — they did in fact drop the megahertz myth some time ago. Did you miss that? Sorry if you did…
“Some time ago” meaning a couple or more months ago? Only recently when Apple updated the PowerMac & iMac line, as well as even more recently updating the PowerBook line has Apple dropped the claim.
The reason Intel is releasing super-clocked processors is not because anyone _needs_ it. Power users and gamers don’t drive a market.
Believe it or not, they do. Even without any major OEM backing, and being a less known brand name, AMD manage to bite off a huge chunk of Intel’s market share with… guess what? Power users and gamers.
When a power user or a extreme gamer buys a new PC, he buys the best performance money can buy.
Meanwhile, Apple is maintaining a profit. Michael Dell and Gateway’s farmers are hating this and seeing red.
Apple is profitable only because it had manage to secure niches it can charge a premium for. And the whole point of us “trollers” is to point out that niche is under attack.
Besides, Dell is in the black, while Gateway would to if they had better management when the economy started to drop.
If people need a box currently, they are going to buy the Yugo of the computing world, the 200 dollar beige box. When the economy comes back, there will that many more Windows-frustrated computer buyers waiting with saved cash to blow on a _something different_.
Another misconception. Most PC buyers today in the world buy machines around the $800 price tag, and that’s only because of China. China, unless you are living under a rock, isn’t having a economic depression.
Another misconception is that many Windows users are frustated with Windows. Many people are actually happy with it. Many people won’t be able to do their work on Macs (or Linux). They have to do it on Windows. Others are able to do their work on Mac or Linux, but can do it best on Windows.
They may be frustated in certain things, certain things that Apple doesn’t fix.
When Intel pulls its last GHz card out of its hat on x86, the only place left is I2. I2 is luckily alot faster than I1, but it’s selling like pet rocks nowadays.
Intel isn’t planning to discontinue IA32 line of processors any time soon. Besides, Itanium had gather unlikely supporters, including SGI. It got some major software players, especially Oracle, to make their software IA64 compliant.
Plus, I have seen and work with Apple’s eMac. The machine is rock solid. Name your complaint.
Really?
1) The 17″ screen is flat, and there’s no option to change for a flat screen CRT monitor which aren’t all too expensive these days.
2) If you feel underneat the machine, it is hot.
3) The modem rarely works.
4) It is too underpowered to run OS X properly. You would need a RAM upgrade.
I could go on and on, but there is a character limit.
Is it because it doesn’t produce enough microwaves to warm a cup of tea?
If you are willing enough to buy a quality PC instead of a PC which is 1/2 the price on that iMac, this wouldn’t even be close to a problem.
Meanwhile, my 600mhz iBook is alot more solid than my THINKPAD, which is the corner stone of solid mobile computing in the PC world.
Okay, I wonder how much older that Thinkpad really is, and the model number (and if possible the specs). I can say my HP laptop is better than the first generation of PowerBooks.
When the cash taps begin to flow again, I think we’ll see the revival of Macdom to the levels seen only in the 80s.
I highly doubt that. Unless Apple quickly places focus on many other niches, which is what its business is based on, Mac would be a minority. Why would I buy a machine $1000 more expensive when I probably can’t do my work on it?
But finally, my main concern is Eugina. She has a responsibility to at least be unbiased in the report. Tired of hearing her opinion as the news.
Unbias != ignorant. Eugenia thinks Macs are grossly overpriced and expensive and slow, and you from your post indirectly agreed with her.
She can leave her opinion in the comment logs like everyone else.
Which she did. The comment above wasn’t her opinion. First was the link to the article and what the article was about. The next sentence was a fact that 1/3 was trying to prove.
I f I wanted lame lopsided reporting, I’d go read osopinion, a site I got tired of some time ago for the guy’s obsession with Mac, constant bashing of MS, and just in general his terrible attitude.
osOpinion is very different from OSNews. The problem was that osOpinion was a place where people can post their own written article, and Kelly M could pick what article to post. OSNews articles are mostly not written by OSNews writers. Plus, OSNews post articles that are revelant. How many times had Eugenia posted links to articles that in essence disagreed with her opinion? I lost count.
I would place you in the same category as Kelly M. (Besides, Kelly doesn’t run the place anymore. NewsFactor does. Kelly has a huge amount of share in that site, and he is using it for profit nowadays).
Besides, mind you, OSNews isn’t a project for profit. The banner ads you see is to fund the site (it cost money). Eugenia doesn’t make this her job. It is her hobby. If she makes money out of this, it wouldn’t be much. osOpinion on the other hand is purely profit based. Remember once for a whole week we had annoying flying Pentium 4-m stickers flying around when you first enter the forums?
The above poster was 100% correct. Apple has no more control over the chip manufacturer than any other PC manufacturer.
However, if Intel starts to screw up like Motorola, Gateway and Dell and everyone else could easily use AMD processors, or who knows Transmeta’s or VIA’s processors. The same goes for Apple, they could move. But they can’t move to anything compatible that is better. But the situation Apple’s in was caused by Apple itself.
It formed a alliance with Motorola, IBM and Apple, successfully keeping out competitors against IBM, Motorola’s processors, and competitors against Apple’s computers. It worked. For awhile. This now becomes a supply and demand case. Because of the lack of demand, IBM and Moto has less incentive to spend millions or even billions on R&D to keep up.
Ronald: Look people if you dislike your macs so much well send’em to me. I know plenty of folks who would love to get a Mac
Hmmmm, people who hate (or rather dislike its performance (or lack of thereof) and/or price) most likely aren’t Mac users. And those who are would continue using their Macs till they buy their next computer 🙂
Ted: If I can edit and render video comfortably on a G3/350, why would I be concerned that a 3 GHz P4 is faster than 1.25 GHz PPC.
I was wondering what app you use to render video. So tell me, your next computer; a PC or a Mac. You would save a lot of time on the PC with extra performance.
Ted: As a agnostic user, I always go back to macs–not because I don’t like windows, but I’m just more productive with the layout of the OS for the mac.
Personally, I think you are just too used to one layout that it is hard to move to something so different. Trust me, it happens to everyone. I can go switching between Mac OS, Windows and Linux because I never stick to one UI for any long period of time. I find KDE the most productive of them all, while Windows come in second. While yes, Mac OS is the easiest of the lot, after you get used to it, does it matter?
Besides, unless you are using Final Cut Pro, you probably won’t see a big difference. You, if you are sane, would probably spend a bulk of your time in your application. The big difference here between Windows and Mac OS would be that the menu bar is under the title bar, when maximized.
Sergio: It was really a shock to me. Os X is extremely slow when it comes to internet browsing.
It can be much faster if you didn’t use Internet Explorer for Mac. While it was a nice browser, but since the OS X version, not in it’s usual glory. Right now, I would push Mozilla for Mac OS X. Amazingly, the last I checked, it seemed the fastest.
Charles Brandon: I am considering not coming back here because Eugina can’t be objective in her news reporting. She needs to keep the news on the front page and the opinion in comment log. If she wants to do editorials, then she needs to write some more site code and establish a _editorial section_.
I have got a better suggestion for you. Leave. Many people here from Jay to Sergio to Rayiner to myself all like this site because of its lack of bias. And mind you, we all have different idelogies, different product preferences, different opinions to Eugenia. What you think is biasness is actually your zealotry. I’m was and probably still am a Linux zealot. My blood preassure rises when a bad story condemning Linux is mentioned. When I view it objectively.
You on the other hand didn’t bother with that.
Charles Brandon: 2. CPU sales have plateued and MHZ is the only sales pitch box makers have right now. When exactly did word processing, spreadsheets and internet require such beefy requirements?
Ironically, once upon a time, word processing, spreadsheets and internet drove CPU sales. Now, just like before, Intel and AMD is pushing for multimedia usages where more speed is better.
Charles Brandon: 3. Relaibility on the PC side has sprialed down and all that power is a moot point if the machine isn’t operable.
Reliablity of a watered down, low cost, low end, 1/2 the price of the cheapest Mac, PC isn’t realiable. But don’t dare say something that cost as much as a Mac isn’t realiable.
Besides, Dell has the best support (at least in this region of mine). They provide replacement parts the next business day. Their call support is the best I have ever used. Apple on the other hand has no call support in the only region where there is a growth in the computer market, takes 4 weeks to replace a modem, etc.
Dave: I don’t understand how this happened but when she was at the PC she would constantly ask me how to do things. She sat down at OSX and after a quick explanation of finder and the dock she was doing things on her own for the first time.
Same old, same old. I heard similar stories about grandmas moving to Debian with Window Maker, or personal friends moving to Lindows.
Besides, tell your girlfriend there is a feature called Quick Launch. You can put your applications icons there. You don’t have to go through the start menu everytime. The start menu is much more easier, by the way, then accessing applications you rarely use via the Finder.
bert: This biggest bottleneck of any computersystem isn’t the processor, ram, harddrive, networkcard, or anything like that. It’s the user.
Yeah, when you are typing a document. Not processing a 3 hour DTV-quality video.
Ralph: 3.06GHz system -and the damn cursor STILL stutters across the screen like a jitterbug! Sheesh!
It is a wonder how you manage to check out a machine when most vendors don’t have it in the stores, or haven’t even began shipping it. (Besides, the cursor doesn’t stutters accross the screen as you describe on my P111, I find it hard to believe you).
Ralph: I could care less about the GHz rating on a computer as long as the system is responsive
LOL, Windows is way more responsive than Mac OS X. Blame that on Apple’s excessive need for mandatory animation.
Well, fact: Mac is easier to learn. Myth: Macs are more productive. You are most productive with something you are used to. Personally, OS X is a step back in terms of UI productivity compared to OS 9.
KDE is not the simplest UI to master. Yet I can accomplish more in it than any other UI from other WMs or OS.
But did I forget to mention when I first became a geek, I was using Linux with KDE? So naturally, I’m more used to KDE. I’m more used to Kicker. I’m more used to single clicking. Stuff like that.
The only thing that could beat it, in my books, is OpenStep. Unfortunately, it is long dead. Completely useless now.
“Here on Fantasy Island, all Macs mysteriously browse the web slower. Funny how this never ever came up until some unsubstianciated article came up on a PC web site this past summer. Anyway, believe what you want, but on my home network connected to cable modem, there is absolutely no difference (as long as you don’t use that dog Microsoft Internet Explorer as your Mac browser. ”
Yeah well, here on liars mountain you Macintosh defenders over look reality in favor of jargon and clean sterile looking white backgrounds.
Here in the real world, my longtime macintosh using boss came to me and said his brand spanking new TiBook, which he plunked down $3500 for IS SLOWER than the MUCH older machine it replaced.
He said: I lose my cursor to the spinning beachball (known as the spinning beach ball of death– gooogle it, its a BIG problem), I lose interface elements, and things I attempt to open pop up a few minutes later. Its really frustrating.
Of course it is. Only on liars mountain do people say “I spent close to four grand on a computer, it might not be fast, but it just is a nice solid robust UNIX workstation”.
If I spent 4K on a computer. Well wait. I wouldnt spend 4K on a computer.
So back to the boss. So whats the problem? Well its inferior hardware for one (did you know on the TiBook the nice designy titanium actually reduces the airport range greatly? No? Well google that puppy, its true!)
Its also OS X.
So read of citizens of Liars Island the great story called “Sour Apples”, about one plague called “The spinning beach ball of death”.
Its like how before OS X was out and people who plunked down 4K for Macintoshes back then, and where doing ‘professional’ stuff on thse OS 8.1 boxes and they froze and crashed and generally were victims of an operating system disaster, they made up all sorts of excuses about how ‘productive’ they were.
How can you be productive while rebooting every 10 minutes?
I’ve had a mac since 1984… however my most recent Mac I bought 6 years ago (PM 7600). I’m more into my Ultrasparc now adays… and a PIII I put together a couple of years ago.
Oh, my point: I was at Futureshop (my Mom bought a 16′ Sony VAIO… wow!) and took a look at at an iMac with the 17″ LCD. Anyway… it seemed awfully slow. I didn’t do anything real with it… but (having used next stuff 10 years ago)… typed cmd-F and searched for “Terminal”. I just typed a few lines (things like uname -a, etc.) while waiting for Mom’s laptop to come from the back room… anyway… it was felt slow.
Question: what was I doing wrong?
(note: this is not a troll, I swear)
Apple is profitable only because it had manage to secure niches it can charge a premium for. And the whole point of us “trollers” is to point out that niche is under attack.
I think this was true a few years ago, but not now. At least i see many people interested in macs now, while just a few years ago most of them would say ewww.
I only know a handful of persons who actually like windows, though i will admit that many of them can’t switch away from it.
That said, i myself used to be a huge anti mac person, and i still won’t touch macos 9 or older unless im forced to do it. Yet now i’m going to buy an ibook. Why? Because of the hardware. The size, the weight, the battery life, the feel. I still have to see a PC laptop that felt as nice without costing twice as much as the ibook. Ironically people complain that macs are expensive, yet i find the ibook to be very cheap compared to the pc platform. Sure it might not be as fast, but it is fast enough for what i need from a laptop. And i know it will run linux nicely, and i dont need games on a laptop, which means i have no reason to have windows installed. Will i use MacOS X? I don’t know yet. I am also going to buy an ipod.
So, im actually going to buy a mac because i couldnt find a pc that i both liked and could afford.
Well, fact: Mac is easier to learn. Myth: Macs are more productive. You are most productive with something you are used to.
That is bollocks. Sure you are most productive NOW with whatever you are used to, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t be much faster as soon as you get used to something else.
Personally, OS X is a step back in terms of UI productivity compared to OS 9.
That depends on what you do. We are going to upgrade a mac from os 9 to os x at my workplace because doing file operations through a graphical file manager is too bloody slow. If only windows could be redone on top of unix, i might actually be able to work with it.
And no, it is not because im more used to unix. Well, yes it is
But i used to be a lot more used to windows, but it didnt take long for my productivity to go way up when i switched to linux.
If you are wondering what im doing, then im doing basically what most basic users do: browse the web, read email, some office work, etc. I also do software development, which was the first reason that i switched, but now i can’t even imagine reading mail on windows.
Yet im lazy as hell, and just want things to work*. And the only system i have ever experienced that was close to this, is the mac. (even old macs, which i wouldnt want to work with, but i still have to admit that they just work, only not the way that i want them to 🙂
This is why OS X has me fairly excited. It just works, and it has things like iTunes, and iPhoto which might not be all too powerful, but they are dead simple to use. Yet just beneath the pretty** gui i have a full unix system that i can use to get my work done with. Thats my problem with windows, it only has a dos system underneath it, and installing cygwin helps, but is not enough. But the end result could be that i switch back to linux as i can get it to almost “just work” after spending quite a while configering it. (usually after recompiling most of the software that i use frequently)
*) That is, when im being a normal user and do normal user things, then i just want things to work. At other times i might install a linux from scratch system just for the fun of it.
**) Actually i hate the aqua look. I hate the old look too, but at least it as flashy. I hate Luna even more than aqua though. I think both apple and microsoft could use a new design team
For those of you interested in some fairly detailed feature comparisons at various PC/Mac price points, check out:
http://www.macobserver.com/shootouts/
Although not perfect (what is?), I was frankly surprised at how much bang for the buck one actually does get in standard Mac configuration. (Esp. the laptops)
And while I suppose one could save a bundle with a ‘roll yer own’ PC configuration (known in PC-support circles as an FPE (finger pointing exercise), the price deltas weren’t significant (even after spending a few bucks to up the stock RAM configuration.)
rajan r: I didn’t say I owned one, you silly! I attended a demo last week at Dell and got a chance to fiddle. And yes, the cursor STILL stutters when the mouse is moved rapidly -a function of PCs still not being able to sense and redraw during the blanking interval. Yours does too -you’re just choosing to ignore it.
The Mac laptops are definitely more competitively priced that the Mac desktops. In fact, the top end laptops from Apple are pretty capable.
Apologies to everyone else in advance…
Trooth-Teller,
Let’s talk truth…
“… Only on liars mountain do people say “I spent close to four grand on a computer, it might not be fast, but it just is a nice solid robust UNIX workstation”.
How do you know what my requirements are? What my background is? What my skill sets are? What type of person I am? Bottom line YOU DON’t! Where is the basis of truth in calling me a liar?
I do know your background however…. you’re a pc tech at a school, pulling in $35K at best. You have no budgetary responsibilities, you have no strategic input to purchasing decisions, and you have no architectural input. Basically in the technology food chain you are one step above the help desk ticket dispatcher (and I’m giving you the benifit of the doubt that you aren’t first level help desk).
“If I spent 4K on a computer. Well wait. I wouldnt spend 4K on a computer.”
The “truthful” way to phrase this is, YOU CAN’T!
The reason is that most 1u rack servers use the P3. The P4 dissapates way to much heat for such a small form factor.
But in all actuality, I am the technology *administrator* for a school. I used to be at Network and systems admin for an entire district. In both cases I am/was responsible for budgets and purchasing as well as achitectural design.
So frankly, your assumptions were just plain wrong. Truth is, you havent a clue.
So like a typical Mac Zealot, you do the same thing they all do when the marketing jargon fails to address the questions iterated over and over in this thread (and others).
You stoop so low as to address income and the ability to afford a Macintosh. Playing into the great *white* washed demographic of the Macintosh user base. Expensive computers for people who just *love* driving that non-fuel efficiant SUV around. The iMac matches the decor, the kids and the couch.
You last statement makes it all too clear: Your Macintosh isnt about usage, speed, technology or any of those things. Its a lifestyle choice. But thats what Apple markets now isnt it?
Bert, you can have your lifestyle, your OS, your expensive machines, and your stupid ass asumptions. You know where you can put them.
Meanwhilem I will constinue to toil with these Apple products, try and make them *just work* and continue to recommend noty buying them anymore in favor of cheaper more robust solutions.
Thanks Bert.
and just lost any amount of credibility you could have had.
As far as racism, where the hell do you get that? I find Apples marketing campaign very sterile, cold, and white washed.
You may be the racist for trying to read into it otherwise.
How easy it is for you to side step the issues and call someone racist.
Man, you are frightening.
Don’t like it do you? Well, being generous, it makes us even considering you assume: me to be a liar, to know the motivation for my purchase, to know how I use my system and the motivation of my posts (try reading them again).
Being fair, I won’t assume that since you work in the education industry you are infact educated. I’ll re-iterate my point:
Price and spead are only 2 components of value, the 3rd is functionality. I am willing to pay a premium and sacrafice speed to have the functionality I REQUIRE. By functionality, I’m not talking about a pretty gui or system intuitiveness, I’m talking about completing tasks. Beyond OSX, there is no single platform that allows me to complete the tasks I need to. This is the value proposition that I refer to.
I do know your background however…. you’re a pc tech at a school, pulling in $35K at best. You have no budgetary responsibilities, you have no strategic input to purchasing decisions, and you have no architectural input. Basically in the technology food chain you are one step above the help desk ticket dispatcher (and I’m giving you the benifit of the doubt that you aren’t first level help desk).
This is a good sign that, you are bullshiting here. Trying to discredit the other side by claiming that he/she doesn’t have the perfect job position to make a statement is totally stupid. It automatically discredits yourself. You don’t even know what kind of a job position he/she has, and you just make it up. Instead of speaking the real issue, you distort everything.
“Price and spead are only 2 components of value, the 3rd is functionality. I am willing to pay a premium and sacrafice speed to have the functionality I REQUIRE. By functionality, I’m not talking about a pretty gui or system intuitiveness, I’m talking about completing tasks. Beyond OSX, there is no single platform that allows me to complete the tasks I need to. This is the value proposition that I refer to. ”
Bert, of course you are entitled to that. These personal choices are great to have. What floats your boat and where you find productive are the core of the experience. I would hate it if Apple were to go away, because in my mind, if we lose Apple, we have one less choice.
When you have one vendor controlling the computing experience of 92-94% of the computing userbase, it is quite obvious we need these choices.
Its amazing to me how in 150 odd posts, aside from a few people who have the heart to criticize Apple are the only people getting what I am saying. What I am saying Bert , would benefit you and the others who decide to make that choice. But whats INSANE to me, is that through the smokescreen of the zealotry, you cant even see that (maybe not u in particular).
Apple is shafting people (we have been over and over this a million times). They overcharge their users for old hardware. I mean COME ON. The same Nvidia card that costs Macintosh users (because it is being called ‘new’ by Apple) is actually on the downswing in the PC world, and costs 1/2 to 1/3 as much in that PC world. Its the same damn card.
So my compalint with Apple is they can/could be “Insanely Great”, but they have a lifelong history of shitting on their users. What is astounding, is how the users keep coming back for more, apologizing for Apples behavior, and begging for more abuse.
I mean its one thing to put up with it because its your chosen platform. I mean, if Apple would put out a non castrated machine that wasnt absurdly priced (yes they are) and OS X was optimized and had the full support of the dev community, I would grab one in a second. Running Illustrator and Photoshop in a UNIX environment would be the bomb.
But Apple doesnt do that. They are not working to make a better faster machine to run their slick OS without having to use 1gig of RAM. They keep selling old hardware as new to the psudeo cultists that worship every move they make.
All I say is, you Apple users who have made the choice to stick with them, speak up or you will keep getting screwed (READ: Print system in OS X)
That said: The iBook is a damn good value.
Again that said: WTF Bert, you like 10 years old? Insulting income, then education. Nice one.
And BTW: You should read. Welcome to Liars mountain was in response to the post “Welcome to Fantasy Island” Might wanna read back a few posts, and stop thinking the whole world revolves around you. Its dangerous to the planet.
Sergio,
You are correct. My post was retalitory under the same context to which I was attacked.
My apologies to all…
Ahh, what an entertaining thread. My prediction is for more market share erosion in future. Then some serious trouble. Anyone else want to speculate?
Wow. I’m consistenly amazed by the vitriol this lame cpu debate brings out. Who cares? Buy what you want….its a free market, and everyone should be able sell what they want and buy what they want. But to erupt in childish antics over a damned plastic box (whether tis mac or pc) is simply sad. I peruse these forums to possibly learn something, not to read through scads of flames from people who have nothing better to than posture.
I offer the following only to explain my current cpu choice.
We run a video and multimedia house specializing in digital editing and content production. Originally we used SGI workstations and AVID editing suites. Unfortunately the SGI units began to falter and the upgrade cycle grew more cumbersome and expensive.
Following the advice of a technology consultant we switched to HPs running NT. We spent in excess of 700 K and got more downtime and headaches. Within six months we spent over a 100k on tech support and emergency IT visits. Our network was down so much, we ended up subcontracting much of our work.
Our editors and content creators were balking at the software packages and our clients started to complain about the delays.
We fired our CTO and brought in a new guy from Los Angeles.
He laid out his idea – we’d dump the entire set up, and swtiched to xserves, g4 towers, and iMacs. The towers served asc editing bays, and the imacs went to front of house, reception, and admin.
It;s now been 4 months since we’ve deployed to new technology.The servers have been crash free. The editors have been happy with FCP and CineLook, and the FOH staff is happy with the idiot proof OSX.
So there you go, with my slow, antiquated crap I got piece of mind and saved a bundle on seat licenses. So go on flame me – I finally can come home at 5 instead of babysitting our system.
I guess I must be the worlds biggest idiot – but at least I get to see my kids more.,
Finally, someone who makes the perfect argument for Apple computers… it was right for me and my situation. Apples are pricey for the average joe, but when time really does equal money, getting the right tool for your specific job can be a lifesaver. I’ve used different versions of FCP and each one was significantly better than other software packages at the time. I would never dream of doing that type of work on a PC.
That being said, I would never dream of gaming on a Mac. For cutting edge games, every bit of speed counts. I have a gaming PC and an XBox for games, my Mac for when I want to do work.
Unfortunately, PC’s vs. Mac’s seems to have become one of those topics that just isn’t worth discussing anymore. You will never convince the other side to change their minds, so you just rattle off personal beliefs at each other until everyone gets offended. Statements of fact are established here and there, but they’re almost always irrelevant (such as PC’s are faster/cheaper or in this one photoshop test, OSX RULEZ!!).
There’s no point to this debate since there really isn’t a common ground to debate over.
Troels: I think this was true a few years ago, but not now. At least i see many people interested in macs now, while just a few years ago most of them would say ewww.
It is still true today. Notice how much Mac OS X market shares went up as soon Photoshop was ported? They survive on niches. They are able to charge a premium for their machines knowing that there would be people buying them.
Troels: I only know a handful of persons who actually like windows, though i will admit that many of them can’t switch away from it.
I don’t know anyone in person who likes Windows (or any other OS). They all have their problems. But I notice people prefer Windows than Mac OS and Linux because they are more productive on it. Blame this on Microsoft so-call anti-competitive business ethic, that’s besides the point.
Just say Person A uses AutoCAD. He can’t use any other CAD software except this one. Guess what? He wouldn’t for more than a second consider a Mac or Linux. Why? AutoCAD is only available on Windows.
Troels: So, im actually going to buy a mac because i couldnt find a pc that i both liked and could afford.
One bad thing about PCs is that there is a lot of models you don’t like. Spend more time finding something that suits you instead on browsing that 4-page Dell catalog and saying “Nothing suits me here”. Besides, there is a PC version of the iPod (and I want one).
Troels: That is bollocks. Sure you are most productive NOW with whatever you are used to, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t be much faster as soon as you get used to something else.
No, it isn’t. It may be true in some cases, but right now, KDE, Windows and Mac OS X is the same thing, with a rearangment of things. Once you get used to the new arrangements, you are just as productive as you were in the prior OS.
For example, Mac OS X. Their menu bar in on top. Would it increase productivity? Unlikely. Would it decrease it? Unlikely too. The big problem is that everyone is making something that is easy to learn, but not as productive as possible.
Sure, for some OS, especially Amiga and OpenStep, I could be more productive, provided the apps, but are they around today?
Troels: That depends on what you do. We are going to upgrade a mac from os 9 to os x at my workplace because doing file operations through a graphical file manager is too bloody slow.
Yes, the Terminal is a feature. But not part of the overall UI. A lot of things, including the new Finder layout, Mail.app’s UI, the iApps’ UI… I disagree with. Plus the Dock and the desktop… *sigh*.
Troels: If only windows could be redone on top of unix, i might actually be able to work with it. […]
I think it is much more easier (and better) for Microsoft and its customers to build a new shell (imitating bash, bourne, korn, whatever), some UNIX-like tools, UNIX-like commands. Much better than thowing 1 billion dollars in collective investment.
Troels: But i used to be a lot more used to windows, but it didnt take long for my productivity to go way up when i switched to linux.
Which doesn’t suprise me, considering what app you use.
Troels: **) Actually i hate the aqua look. I hate the old look too, but at least it as flashy. I hate Luna even more than aqua though. I think both apple and microsoft could use a new design team
I much prefer Luna with the Silver colour scheme than Aqua anyday. Of course, Photon from QNX to me looks the best, after that comes Bluecurve.
Ralph: Although not perfect (what is?), I was frankly surprised at how much bang for the buck one actually does get in standard Mac configuration. (Esp. the laptops)
Mac laptops (esp. iBook) have a big bang for the buck, especially now since it is updated. Comparing laptops is much harder than desktops. But before the iBook and TiBook line was updated, I would buy a Thinkpad or a Vaoi. Now, either a TiBook or a iBook. But unfortunately, I don’t have enough money.
rajan r: I didn’t say I owned one, you silly! I attended a demo last week at Dell and got a chance to fiddle. And yes, the cursor STILL stutters when the mouse is moved rapidly -a function of PCs still not being able to sense and redraw during the blanking interval. Yours does too -you’re just choosing to ignore it.
Ahh. I set my mouse to a slow speed, and normall use to the keyboard to navigate myself around (I’m one of the few Opera users that don’t use mouse gestures). But this isn’t a problem of the processor. It is a problem of Windows. It may not be pretty, but I don’t see how it would limit one’s productivity compared to OS X’s backbuffered cursor.
Blame GDI. Not P4.
The reason is that most 1u rack servers use the P3. The P4 dissapates way to much heat for such a small form factor.
Funny, P4 Xeon emmits less heat than a P3 Xeon. How about showing some proof on your part? If there is anything good coming from P4 is their heat dissipation, which is used by Intel zealots against AMD zealots.
Evan: and you sir are a racist…
You mean OSist? Well, unlike humans where all races are equal, OSes aren’t.
Is it just me or is everyone here under the assumption that the poor bandwidth and clockspeed in Apples systems is their fault, and not Motorolas? Because it is a false assumption.
I doubt Apple is happy right now, but they really cant do anything about it for the time being. I know for a fact that Steve Jobs pushed for Apple to sue Motorola over the unfulfilled promises they made about the G4 to Apple before it went into mass production. Apparently however, other forces inside Apple advised against the move, most likely because of Apples very long relationship with Motorola.
Things will change eventually, everybody knows that, it is just a matter of when (Apple was winning the MHz war not to long back, dont forget that…). For the time being, most Mac users must concede that PC hardware has advance further, and in less time, it’s the truth.
So, until the harwdare outlook warms up, the Mac community will continue to tout the one thing that we value most, the one thing we will always value most… We dont use Windows.
you’ve gotta remember than when Apple decided to kill the clone Mac market, they hurt Motorola too, who were making the machines. It’s not hard to see Moto not caring about Apple and their eroding market share when there are clearly bigger fish to fry.
I’m running the new Dual 1.25Ghz PowerMac…
Maybe ‘walking’ would be more appropriate… as in ‘walking the dog’.
This machine is SLOW. I’m used to Windows… where the cursor actually advances at the same speed that I type. And the mouse doesn’t lag. The screen draws are all slow. And this is with ‘Quartz Extreme’. Scrolling in IE is dog meat. I can actually watch the screen draw with most apps in OS X.
Now I am running with ‘only’ 512MB.
Maybe OS X doesn’t work right unless it has 1GB+
I really hope Steve ports OS X to a fast platform. PowerPC and all the other ancient crap hardware Apple sells just doesn’t do it.
If BeOS were running on Dual 1.25Ghz it would at least be as responsive as Windows, if not better.
Maybe I’ll get another job and I can get a real machine…
(shiny white)
By killing the clone market, it hurt Motorola, because they made money out of those Macs. PowerPC wouldn’t be at this point if weren’t for Apple. If there is any company more deserving to blame, it is Apple.
Motorola has other problems to fix besides their processors. They are loosing marketshare and customers in their main market (the cell phone one) in the bucket-fulls. They had many failed ventures. If Motorola spends its money releasing a 3GHz G4 today, would it matter? It is not like it would cover the cost of R&D.
Apple has a small market. It is a niche player. As long Apple stays that way, this would continue. Sure, next year they may use the 970. But how long would that last? How long did the G3 last?
Apple is way better off in this case using a commodity processor, which would be from the x86, or transitioning themselves into a software maker.
from http://www.macosrumors.com
It turns out Apple puts crap components in their high-end laptop as well, not just their ‘supercomputer’ workstation.
And they LIE about performance with the laptop, just like they LIE about performance on the PowerMac.
No wonder the world is deserting them. Apple’s dishonesty and anti-customer mentality are responsible for driving their marketshare down. No one likes being LIED to.
(shiny white)
From: Johan Dierinck [email protected]
Date: Fri Nov 8, 2002 5:26:11 PM US/Eastern
To: [email protected]
Subject: Comments on PB drive performance
Dear rumormongers,
So Apple didn’t include 5,400 rpm drives in the new PowerBooks because there was no performance gain, right? Well, I disagree.
I recently replaced my stock 20GB Toshiba drive (4,200 rpm, 1,024 KB Buffer) in my PB G4 500 MHz (768M RAM) with a new IBM 40 GNX (40 GB, 5,400 rpm, 8 MB Buffer). I did a little testing. These are the results:
TOSHIBA MK2016GAP / IBM 40GNX / Performance gain
1. Duplicate 1 large doc / 1’54” / 1’09” / +40%
2. Duplicate folder of docs / 44″ / 26″ / +41%
3. Startup time / 1’18” / 1’07” / +15%
5. Photoshop startup time / 23″ / 19″ / +18%
6. QuickBench stats 35,37 / 56,98 / +61%
Judging from these figures a performance gain of 35% is quite impressive, don’t you think? In everyday use you will notice faster startup times, faster copying, faster opening of windows in list or column view etc. That’s exactly what was lacking in Mac OS X. So I think it’s a shame Apple didn’t include 5,400 rpm drives in the new models. Faster hard drives seem even more important than processor speed. Before this upgrade, my humble iMac G3 350 MHz (withe a 6GB 5,400 rpm drive) even outperformed my PB G4 500 in terms of startup time etc!
Regards,
Johan Dierinck
@ Shiny White Elephant
This machine is SLOW. I’m used to Windows… where the cursor actually advances at the same speed that I type. And the mouse doesn’t lag. The screen draws are all slow. And this is with ‘Quartz Extreme’. Scrolling in IE is dog meat. I can actually watch the screen draw with most apps in OS X.
The only slow thing in OS X is the mouse cursor. ALL mac user are used to slow as molass cursor. It used to annoy me alot. Come on little fella git to that OK button, you can do it! Then I remembered, USE THE KEYBOARD SILLY!
Maybe I’ll get another job and I can get a real machine…
I can end your nightmare right here and now: I’ve got a P4 1.7 with 512 RDRAM care to trade??
I only use linux lightly… in fact I only use it on my zaurus(although it stipped down it has all the command line stuff you may want). Anyway I know you can update the kernel and other various system software from source code pretty easily off web/ftp. What I want to know is, can OS X do the same with this Darwin code? If so why can’t someone compile a more responsive system?
Shiny, you should not be having any of those problems on that Mac. We have a DP 1GHz Quicksilver with none of those problems. Your post sounds trollish due to that, unless you are experiencing these things due to some reason that is not obvious and are totally exasperated.
You are absolutely correct about the new PB hard drives. What a dumb move by Apple.
I understand what you are saying, but Apples market share was being eaten into by the clones (Not expanded by), and, Apple did wait for Motorolas Mac OS license to expire. In addition, Motorolas clones did not sell very well. Regardless, it would have been stupid for Motorola to hold a grude against Apple because of the clones since Apple has always been a huge source of revenue for Moto… Why shoot yourself in the foot because you are angry at someone?
Ed: I understand what you are saying, but Apples market share was being eaten into by the clones (Not expanded by), and, Apple did wait for Motorolas Mac OS license to expire.
The reason for that was because Apple was acting the same way. They weren’t quick enough to be competitive. Look at Palm, it has competitors using Palm OS, Handspring, Sony, IBM, etc. Yet it is still the top.
Tell me why people rather buy clones than the real ones? From the Usenet posts I have read from that period of time in the Mac threads, it is because it is a) faster, b) reliable, c) cheaper.
Ed: Regardless, it would have been stupid for Motorola to hold a grude against Apple because of the clones since Apple has always been a huge source of revenue for Moto…
I extremely doubt they are having a grudge against Apple. Apple hasn’t been a huge source of income for Motorola. In fact, IIRC, they are making a lost out of it. Most of their PPC sales goes to networking routers. There they don’t really demand for 3GHz, no?
I have a friend who has finally given up on his numerous Intel/AMD based systems (and these things have been FAST!). After many wasted hours dealing w/ software and hardware conflicts, miscellaneous errors with Adobe Premiere, etc., he broke down and bought one of those new Powermacs. For a week before he bought the new Mac, he was unable to complete a video project that he had been working on due to the fact that he could not export his work back out to a DV tape for submission. So my question is this: There’s no doubt that the Intel and AMD based systems are rocket fast, but what good is this performance if it puts you out of work for weeks at a time?
I don’t use a Mac that is paying my bills doing video work, but everyone I know who is doing that — well, they never complain about their systems keeping them from doing their work. Frankly, EVERY SINGLE PERSON I know who is editing on a PC based system has complaints all the time. So is it all worth it?
Good looking, cheap, or fast. And if you are choosing for the mac side, you can only choose 1 and not the last 2
.
I was playing around with a windows xp sp1 laptop at 1.7 ghz last night and I really disagree with many of you about web browsing. IE was browsing at the same speed on that as it is on my iMac 400 on 10.1. No differences in line speed (cable modems used both times) and no other major processes running. Now, mozilla 0.6 is actually beating the windows laptop. It really is very subjective I think. Also, i really didn’t notice xp being any snappier on it either. I’ve been using os x for over a year now, so i suppose i’d notice a difference. The only area where it’s greater speed became apparent (hardware, not os) was doing some 3ds max rendering and <code>openssl speed</code>.
As an os, windows is slow. Looking at the spec benchmarks (http://www.heise.de/ct/english/02/05/182/) I put in my post above I realized something. In linux, it scores over 50 higher than windows on the same machine. Furthermore, mac os x also scores more than 50 higher at the same clock (1ghz). For a final question, those of you on 1 ghz p3’s find your machines unresponsive?
Of course no REAL world software programmers use macs…
http://x-plane.com/weapon.html
(btw, this is the only sw you can buy for the desktop that is certified for ATP training)