To those that absolutely need the fastest computer possible, or that want to play games with 150 FPS instead of 115, I think you probably should just go buy a PC.
I'm not an Apple apologist, but my love of Apple doesn't have anything to do with the speed of their machines. It's more than that. It's like an automobile. I don't need the fastest car available, there is more to it than that. From the quality of the parts to the philosophy of the company. Apple is a company I can identify with, and not just because the GX is X times faster than the PX.
So, I'm disappointed with the current machines because I'm hoping to see Apple return to the "top of the heap". Not because I need to digitize my video in 2 hours instead of 3, but because I think it's important of the long term health of the company. The long term health of Apple is good for a lot more than just the fastest PC in the world.
It doesn't matter how ugly Key Lime iBooks or Flower Power iMacs are, what matters is that there's a company willing to make them. Call me crazy but I still believe in the 1984 commercial. It will be a really sad day when I can no longer believe in that vision.
<strong>It's because everything we do generally makes us takes sides. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican or prefer the AFC vs the NFC the prevailing drive is to pick a favorite and Defend your choice with all your might. This causes people turn a blind eye to reality. Apple Apologists will exist as long as Apple is around. I think as we get older in life we tend to balance our views better...we may still have strong preferences but we probably are more objective later on in life.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, I don't know. We have a nice 1.6ghz Pentium IV Sony machine in our office running Windows XP -- the performance isn't all that great for the day to day work we do with it. Not significantly better than some of our much older 500mhz G4's. I'm sure it does better on the benchmarks than the 500mhz G4s, but using it day to day, the difference isn't anything I notice much.
I really do think Apple's offerings are competitive at least, if not faster than the competition. The total package, with Mac OS X, and the bundled iMovie, iTunes, iDVD, and iPhoto are pretty compelling -- I have my choice of what to work on, and I prefer to use our Macs.
I don't think I'm being an Apple apologist, though I'm sure some of my preference has to do with my long history of working with Macs.
Moki, you're not crazy. My 733 MHZ Dell at work running Windows 2000 is so much slower than my 667 MHZ TiBook. The Dell only has 128 MB of ram, but it's RDRAM. The Ti has 512. This is a big difference, BUT, 512 MB of RDRAM is $900. So, to make it an equal machine I'd have to spend a hell of a lot more money.
So to me Macs are still more usable even running 'slower'.
Tigerwoods99 - these posts are boring. You tried spicing them up by giving us insider information - "The G5s are coming" - and now you have the delusion that only you can provide the truth. When I was a teenager I dreamed of having the fastest car in school so I can relate to your desire for the fastest PC. But look at yourself - do you really have the experience to judge the truth? My Porsche is not the fastest car, but I wouldn't trade it for a Corvette - even at 1/10th the price. But when I was a teenager, I probably would have chosen the ''vette.
Go get a PC, and just buy a new one (or have your Dad buy you one) every year and you'll stay up on the Mhz. Just realize you'll never have the fastest one for more than a moment. For me, I'll take my Porsche and Mac, and believe me, when the Corvette gets by me, or the fps is beating my Mac, I won't mind. I'll still have a smile on my face. Because they are without a doubt the best.
Post your boring topics someplace else. Keep posting new hardware related topics - like your video card topic.
bunge - I didn't see your post until after I posted this. I see we have some things in common.
moki - I <sarcasm> love </sarcasm> my 1.7Ghz PC at work - it reboots so fast when I get the blue screen of death.
It is very simple. You come on and complain about Apple in comparison to PCs. You have two choices. Either buy what Apple is offering or go buy a PC. Why is that so hard to understand. If Apple sucks as much as some of you complain, then your choice is obvious. Go buy a PC. Complaining on a bulleting board is not gonna make things change. If you need the power that the PC is offering, then go get it. Be a man, make your decision and go for it.
Nevermind all these Applezombies raggin' on you...they are just insecure about their computer choice, so they have to constantly rationalize it to themselves. Fu[k all that. I'm happy with my Powermac G4 400, it's plenty fast for me, BUT, everything you say is true. And even though my current Mac is good enough, I still wouldn't mind a Powermac that was competitive with the fast Pentiums and Athlons.
I predict the following: If the G4 or G5 processor does not close the performance gap between Macs and Wintels THIS YEAR, then Apple will begin to lose significant market share in their core markets: graphics, audio, video. The performance gap is a serious issue that more and more people are beginning to take notice of, and no amount of RDF will make it go away. It doesn't matter how great OS X is, or how many iApps Apple bundles with Macs, when professionals see that they can save considerable time by using a Wintel, they will do it. When Pros see that they can things with a Wintel that can't be done on a Mac, because of the performance gap, then they will switch over. It's no longer a question of if but when...unless Apple can close the performance gap soon.
It was to my knowledge that the G5 was coming between now and March, this per someone at Motorola. he isn't directly in PPC, but he got me information about the G4s last time. I don't make things up.
Say something different? Well, I'd like to discuss where Apple is going with their future machines. The technology is there, but it's not being implemented.
Anywayz, I'm tired. Go read my video cards thread.
The thing that's embarassing about this right now, is the fact that there were a bunch of people here that truly expected the G5 to come out this week. There were also a bunch of people who expected that the G4 Apollo would come out this week. Neither occurred, and despite warning from members on the boards who were thought of as 'pessimistic', these same people did not believe the writing on the wall that neither the Apollo, nor the G5 were ready.
Now you have these same people coming back to Future Hardware after seeing the new Power Mac's specs, and you start complaining. How many people here (besides KidRed) can say that they have used the new DP/1 GHZ Power Mac? How many people have seen detailed benchmarks from these new machines?
In other words, how can you criticize a machine you've never used as being 'too slow'? How do you know it's too slow? Do you just know?
What have we seen a benchmark of? 115 FPS in what we can assume is Quake 3 beta in Mac OS X. Quake 3 BETA. Whoop de doo. If it was taken in Mac OS 9, how much do you want to bet the thing is optomized for Mac OS X and not Mac OS 9?
Face it. You don't know how good the new G4s are. I don't know how good the new G4s are either. I haven't had the opportunity to use one. I will try and get to an Apple Store tomorrow to try one. But I can say that I've used the 2.2 GHz Northwood Intel. I would be very surprised if this new Power Mac G4 with two 1 GHz processors couldn't compete well with this machine.
Let's see some benchmarks and some actual real world tests. Then we'll be in a better position to see how these machines stack up.
(But I can guarantee you this: Buying one of these machines would be a MAJOR step up from your G3 or iMac.)
[quote]It is very simple. You come on and complain about Apple in comparison to PCs. You have two choices. Either buy what Apple is offering or go buy a PC. Why is that so hard to understand. If Apple sucks as much as some of you complain, then your choice is obvious. Go buy a PC. Complaining on a bulleting board is not gonna make things change. If you need the power that the PC is offering, then go get it. Be a man, make your decision and go for it.
<hr></blockquote>
No, it isn't so simple. Maybe Tigerwoods likes the Mac OS, but not the hardware? What then? What if I hate Windows and M$ and what the company stands for, and I love OS X, but I hate Apple's overpriced hardware? What then? Is that so simple? You tell me...how does someone decide what to do in such an instance? Is there some special formula you've devised that can give me an answer?
[quote] What have we seen a benchmark of? 115 FPS in what we can assume is Quake 3 beta in Mac OS X. Quake 3 BETA. Whoop de doo. If it was taken in Mac OS 9, how much do you want to bet the thing is optomized for Mac OS X and not Mac OS 9?
<hr></blockquote>
Quake 3 is faster in OS 9 than in OS X, unless it is a DP Mac, in which case Quake 3 is maybe a bit faster in OS X.
I'd be interested to see how Quake 3 performs on a dual 1 GHz powermac w/GeForce 4mx, but I know without seeing the benchmarks that q3 is faster on a Wintel.
Realistically, the new Powermacs are not competitive with the fast athlons or pentiums. Nobody needs any benchmarks to know that a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 is going to bitch-slap a powermac at everything save a few photoshop filters.
Maybe if these Powermacs had a faster bus and memory, you'd have a point, but on the same mobo, these CPUs aren't going to make much of a difference.
<strong>There were also a bunch of people who expected that the G4 Apollo would come out this week.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It did come out this week. It just wasn't 1.6Ghz or whatever it was that people were hoping.
TigerWoods - Everyone is frustrated with the G4. Its first 2 1/2 years were a complete fiasco. And the current G4s don't support DDR - that's why Apple hasn't implemented it, not out of malice or stupidity.
Now, in the past 12 months, the G4 has increased clock speed by 100%, from 500Mhz-1Ghz. I hope that trend continues and accelerates over the next year with a G5. What else can you say? Go have a cookie, it'll make you feel better.
Ah but you cant put a price on the Apple community, always fun to watch em go at it. Well worth the "non-earth shattering" performance. Oh and if any of you junor Benedict Arnolds want to slide your mac in this <----- direction, I would be happy to take it.
I agree with those of you who say that Apple's should be competitive with PC's on speed, performance, etc. I also agree that PowerMacs are a bit too expensive for their features.
HOWEVER, I also feel like it's unfair to say that a Mac is slow, simply because it's not *as fast* as the fastest PC's that are out. The truth be told, the dualie 1Ghz's are probably pretty f*cking fast. Are they AS FAST as a 2.2Ghz P4? Probably not, but by no means are they slow.
I want a Volkswagen Jetta. I also want a Dualie 1Ghz. Now I'd like to compare the two:
1) Both cost too much.
2) Both are not the fastest of their type of machine.
3) Both can be fast in their own rite.
4) Both are quite stylish, and have great engineering.
5) Both are going to give me much less hassle than their industry counterparts.
6) I'd be VERY happy with both in the long run.
Come on everybody. The personal computer business is a game of "Our industry has no ceiling, so play or get out." Microsoft and PC makers are the Yankees, and Apple is every other team in MLB. Apple isn't the fastest simply because they don't shamelessly prostitute themselves to wipe everyone else out. But they still compete, and compete well.
No, it isn't so simple. Maybe Tigerwoods likes the Mac OS, but not the hardware? What then? What if I hate Windows and M$ and what the company stands for, and I love OS X, but I hate Apple's overpriced hardware? What then? Is that so simple? You tell me...how does someone decide what to do in such an instance? Is there some special formula you've devised that can give me an answer?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, it is that simple. If he desires to use the MacOS more than he desires to have the fast hardware on the PC side, then he sticks with the Mac. If you want the fast hardware of the PC more than you want to use the MacOS, then you buy the PC. Really, that seems like a simple formula to me. The hard part is deciding what you want. No one on this forum can make the decision for you. Like I said, make your decision, be a man, move on.
I think Moki said this earlier, but just doing day to day work on a 1.6 GHz P4 system can feel slower than a 500 MHz G4 at times. I can vouch for this personally with my TiBook compared to my friend's 1.1 GHz Dell Inspiron. I've also used the 2.2 GHz P4 and i Dont understand the hoopla. It doesn't feel any faster to me, and I have used a fairly wide variety of apps with it. I think the Dual GHz G4 will be able to handle it and seem faster in day to day things like Moki stated earlier. Sure some benchmarks would place the 2.2 P4 above it, but in others the Dual GHz G4 would smoke it. Just face it, it's not as bad as it sounds and YOU'VE NEVER USED THE THING.
Just wait til the G5s. I honestly think that is what it's going to take to really turn most people around here on the whole speed issue.
A quick question: What do people require so much power for?
I run a record label/pro audio studio, all Mac based. We were PC based for years and changed to Mac three years a go, and have never looked back.
Two years a go we added an AV (running AVID) arm that creates film clips for bands plus the odd TV ad. Again all Mac.
We have never had a problem with any of the machines. Beside the reliablity factor,which has been unquestionable, all Macs have performed their tasks quickly and effortlessly. The only one which needs to be upgraded is our first one (G4 400) which is finally beginning to struggle under its load.
So to recap: we produce broadcast quality audio and video. We don't do any animation, but often the film clips are effect ladened. We run Macs from 400-800Mhz and they are all fine.
Frankly, a 1Ghz Mac is going to be beyond any current power needs.
So what does every need a 2Ghz G5, 2.5Gig RDRAM rarara etc. for? What do you all do? This is not a sarcastic note but one of true interest (it should most probably be in general).
Comments
<strong>Macintosh still swears he saw Steve Jobs in the Bible. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea, he was the one breathing fire right?
I'm not an Apple apologist, but my love of Apple doesn't have anything to do with the speed of their machines. It's more than that. It's like an automobile. I don't need the fastest car available, there is more to it than that. From the quality of the parts to the philosophy of the company. Apple is a company I can identify with, and not just because the GX is X times faster than the PX.
So, I'm disappointed with the current machines because I'm hoping to see Apple return to the "top of the heap". Not because I need to digitize my video in 2 hours instead of 3, but because I think it's important of the long term health of the company. The long term health of Apple is good for a lot more than just the fastest PC in the world.
It doesn't matter how ugly Key Lime iBooks or Flower Power iMacs are, what matters is that there's a company willing to make them. Call me crazy but I still believe in the 1984 commercial. It will be a really sad day when I can no longer believe in that vision.
<strong>It's because everything we do generally makes us takes sides. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican or prefer the AFC vs the NFC the prevailing drive is to pick a favorite and Defend your choice with all your might. This causes people turn a blind eye to reality. Apple Apologists will exist as long as Apple is around. I think as we get older in life we tend to balance our views better...we may still have strong preferences but we probably are more objective later on in life.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, I don't know. We have a nice 1.6ghz Pentium IV Sony machine in our office running Windows XP -- the performance isn't all that great for the day to day work we do with it. Not significantly better than some of our much older 500mhz G4's. I'm sure it does better on the benchmarks than the 500mhz G4s, but using it day to day, the difference isn't anything I notice much.
I really do think Apple's offerings are competitive at least, if not faster than the competition. The total package, with Mac OS X, and the bundled iMovie, iTunes, iDVD, and iPhoto are pretty compelling -- I have my choice of what to work on, and I prefer to use our Macs.
I don't think I'm being an Apple apologist, though I'm sure some of my preference has to do with my long history of working with Macs.
So to me Macs are still more usable even running 'slower'.
Go get a PC, and just buy a new one (or have your Dad buy you one) every year and you'll stay up on the Mhz. Just realize you'll never have the fastest one for more than a moment. For me, I'll take my Porsche and Mac, and believe me, when the Corvette gets by me, or the fps is beating my Mac, I won't mind. I'll still have a smile on my face. Because they are without a doubt the best.
Post your boring topics someplace else. Keep posting new hardware related topics - like your video card topic.
bunge - I didn't see your post until after I posted this. I see we have some things in common.
moki - I <sarcasm> love </sarcasm> my 1.7Ghz PC at work - it reboots so fast when I get the blue screen of death.
[ 01-28-2002: Message edited by: jwdawso ]</p>
Nevermind all these Applezombies raggin' on you...they are just insecure about their computer choice, so they have to constantly rationalize it to themselves. Fu[k all that. I'm happy with my Powermac G4 400, it's plenty fast for me, BUT, everything you say is true. And even though my current Mac is good enough, I still wouldn't mind a Powermac that was competitive with the fast Pentiums and Athlons.
I predict the following: If the G4 or G5 processor does not close the performance gap between Macs and Wintels THIS YEAR, then Apple will begin to lose significant market share in their core markets: graphics, audio, video. The performance gap is a serious issue that more and more people are beginning to take notice of, and no amount of RDF will make it go away. It doesn't matter how great OS X is, or how many iApps Apple bundles with Macs, when professionals see that they can save considerable time by using a Wintel, they will do it. When Pros see that they can things with a Wintel that can't be done on a Mac, because of the performance gap, then they will switch over. It's no longer a question of if but when...unless Apple can close the performance gap soon.
Say something different? Well, I'd like to discuss where Apple is going with their future machines. The technology is there, but it's not being implemented.
Anywayz, I'm tired. Go read my video cards thread.
Now you have these same people coming back to Future Hardware after seeing the new Power Mac's specs, and you start complaining. How many people here (besides KidRed) can say that they have used the new DP/1 GHZ Power Mac? How many people have seen detailed benchmarks from these new machines?
In other words, how can you criticize a machine you've never used as being 'too slow'? How do you know it's too slow? Do you just know?
What have we seen a benchmark of? 115 FPS in what we can assume is Quake 3 beta in Mac OS X. Quake 3 BETA. Whoop de doo. If it was taken in Mac OS 9, how much do you want to bet the thing is optomized for Mac OS X and not Mac OS 9?
Face it. You don't know how good the new G4s are. I don't know how good the new G4s are either. I haven't had the opportunity to use one. I will try and get to an Apple Store tomorrow to try one. But I can say that I've used the 2.2 GHz Northwood Intel. I would be very surprised if this new Power Mac G4 with two 1 GHz processors couldn't compete well with this machine.
Let's see some benchmarks and some actual real world tests. Then we'll be in a better position to see how these machines stack up.
(But I can guarantee you this: Buying one of these machines would be a MAJOR step up from your G3 or iMac.)
<hr></blockquote>
No, it isn't so simple. Maybe Tigerwoods likes the Mac OS, but not the hardware? What then? What if I hate Windows and M$ and what the company stands for, and I love OS X, but I hate Apple's overpriced hardware? What then? Is that so simple? You tell me...how does someone decide what to do in such an instance? Is there some special formula you've devised that can give me an answer?
<hr></blockquote>
Quake 3 is faster in OS 9 than in OS X, unless it is a DP Mac, in which case Quake 3 is maybe a bit faster in OS X.
I'd be interested to see how Quake 3 performs on a dual 1 GHz powermac w/GeForce 4mx, but I know without seeing the benchmarks that q3 is faster on a Wintel.
Realistically, the new Powermacs are not competitive with the fast athlons or pentiums. Nobody needs any benchmarks to know that a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 is going to bitch-slap a powermac at everything save a few photoshop filters.
Maybe if these Powermacs had a faster bus and memory, you'd have a point, but on the same mobo, these CPUs aren't going to make much of a difference.
GIVE THEM A BREAK. THEY'D LOVE TO BRING OUT THE G5, BUT IT OBVIOUSLY ISN'T READY YET. GIVE THINGS TIME. THEY'RE WORKING AS FAST AS THEY CAN.
GIVE IT TIME
[ 01-28-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</p>
<strong>There were also a bunch of people who expected that the G4 Apollo would come out this week.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It did come out this week. It just wasn't 1.6Ghz or whatever it was that people were hoping.
TigerWoods - Everyone is frustrated with the G4. Its first 2 1/2 years were a complete fiasco. And the current G4s don't support DDR - that's why Apple hasn't implemented it, not out of malice or stupidity.
Now, in the past 12 months, the G4 has increased clock speed by 100%, from 500Mhz-1Ghz. I hope that trend continues and accelerates over the next year with a G5. What else can you say? Go have a cookie, it'll make you feel better.
HOWEVER, I also feel like it's unfair to say that a Mac is slow, simply because it's not *as fast* as the fastest PC's that are out. The truth be told, the dualie 1Ghz's are probably pretty f*cking fast. Are they AS FAST as a 2.2Ghz P4? Probably not, but by no means are they slow.
I want a Volkswagen Jetta. I also want a Dualie 1Ghz. Now I'd like to compare the two:
1) Both cost too much.
2) Both are not the fastest of their type of machine.
3) Both can be fast in their own rite.
4) Both are quite stylish, and have great engineering.
5) Both are going to give me much less hassle than their industry counterparts.
6) I'd be VERY happy with both in the long run.
Come on everybody. The personal computer business is a game of "Our industry has no ceiling, so play or get out." Microsoft and PC makers are the Yankees, and Apple is every other team in MLB. Apple isn't the fastest simply because they don't shamelessly prostitute themselves to wipe everyone else out. But they still compete, and compete well.
[ 01-28-2002: Message edited by: CosmoNut ]</p>
<strong>
No, it isn't so simple. Maybe Tigerwoods likes the Mac OS, but not the hardware? What then? What if I hate Windows and M$ and what the company stands for, and I love OS X, but I hate Apple's overpriced hardware? What then? Is that so simple? You tell me...how does someone decide what to do in such an instance? Is there some special formula you've devised that can give me an answer?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, it is that simple. If he desires to use the MacOS more than he desires to have the fast hardware on the PC side, then he sticks with the Mac. If you want the fast hardware of the PC more than you want to use the MacOS, then you buy the PC. Really, that seems like a simple formula to me. The hard part is deciding what you want. No one on this forum can make the decision for you. Like I said, make your decision, be a man, move on.
Just wait til the G5s. I honestly think that is what it's going to take to really turn most people around here on the whole speed issue.
I run a record label/pro audio studio, all Mac based. We were PC based for years and changed to Mac three years a go, and have never looked back.
Two years a go we added an AV (running AVID) arm that creates film clips for bands plus the odd TV ad. Again all Mac.
We have never had a problem with any of the machines. Beside the reliablity factor,which has been unquestionable, all Macs have performed their tasks quickly and effortlessly. The only one which needs to be upgraded is our first one (G4 400) which is finally beginning to struggle under its load.
So to recap: we produce broadcast quality audio and video. We don't do any animation, but often the film clips are effect ladened. We run Macs from 400-800Mhz and they are all fine.
Frankly, a 1Ghz Mac is going to be beyond any current power needs.
So what does every need a 2Ghz G5, 2.5Gig RDRAM rarara etc. for? What do you all do? This is not a sarcastic note but one of true interest (it should most probably be in general).
Regards,
MarkL