has it ever occurred to you that people don't use macs just for games? there are plenty of us who use it for word processing and internet and other tasks....
macs are slower than pcs in most tasks. get used to it. .</strong><hr></blockquote>
I suppose you never heard of eating your cake and having it too. Or is it having your cake and eating it too?
It is the second time this link have been around. I was first and I thought this was getting old then, now I know its old <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
If you can predict the future you will see that in one year all mac users will have the choice between: iBook G3 @ 1000 Mhz with a 200 Mhz mobo, iMac G4 @ 1200 with a 166 Mhz mobo, PowerMac G5 and maybe PowerBook G5 & Xserve G5. This is SURE ! And if you look in software... Shake there is + Pixar stuffs (do you really think that hollywood's people want a consumer G4 mac ?)...
Remember steve said that at the end of the year they will be faster than the other guys. I don't think that it will be in Mhz but in bandwith architecture... like SGI.
i'm not a blind apple believer....the towers should atleast have DDR, but apple can't do sh!t about the chip....moto makes them...start egging them
has it ever occurred to you that people don't use macs just for games? there are plenty of us who use it for word processing and internet and other tasks....i'm sorry the mac doesn't meet your expectations for gaming...apple is focusing on consumers and video professionals...a pc or gaming console would meet all your gaming needs
there's no need to focus on gamers....let the consoles have 'em...if microsoft can't compete in the gaming business, what makes you think apple can?
gamers aren't the only group out there....there are plenty of people who seem to overlook the fact that macs 'suck' at gaming...they do plenty of other things well...
macs are slower than pcs in most tasks. get used to it. if a mac doesn't meet your needs, find something else....coming to this site and b!tching doesn't do anything...
i'm sorry you had a bad day...go and play quake to let off a little tension...</strong><hr></blockquote>
So, I do a good deal of video editing, sound work, web design, etc, everything that qualifies me as a "creative professional". And their performance problems are definately NOT just limited to gaming. I love doing my editing on Final Cut Pro, but I am stuck on an iMac 450 because they do not offer anything for a good enough price at the speed I need. If I bought a 3,000 dollar tower, it would be fast enough, but it would not be feasible as I could build an equivelent speed PC with monitor spanning etc for 1/3 the price.
Not a third. But you have a point. "Built yourself" you could do it with decent quality components for about half. Built by a shop that knows what they're doing, you could get it for about 2/3rds. They really need to do something about the prices.
I'm glad to see that so many people are starting to see the hardware performance picture for what it is. It's not that the hardware is so horrible, but for price? jeez... Competitive to PC pricing (not cheaper, just in the ballpark) would erase a lot of complaint.
I hope you're reading this Stevie, have your market research lackies take note: you have achieved an unprecedented level of mac (hardware/pricing) dissatisfaction. So much so that even the most ardent fan-boys cannot stem the tide.
[quote] if you wanna play games, get a console <hr></blockquote>
This is something I don't really understand. On the face of it, it doesn't seem right that cheap game consoles can play games faster than grown-up personal computers.
For instance, the GameCube has a throughput at least three times that of a top of the line Mac. What gives?
I understand that the specialisation of the game consoles allows them to optimise their respective systems, but this seems ridiculous.
i know the hardware isn't where it should be/want it to be....i'm just saying that apple is not trying to get the most fps in quake...they're TRYING to get photoshop, final cut pro, etc. to perform as best as possible....
that's why if you wanna play games, get a console where they focus on games, trying to max out performance. or go to a pc vendor that configure's decent gaming computers...
i figure apple will almost never focus on gaming. if the microsoft xbox fails, i truly don't think apple could do much better....the current contenders are dug into that market pretty well, and if microsoft, with its' money and influence, can't do well enough, apple surely won't...
The Clawhammer trouncing an intel is actually good for Apple. Now more people will believe what Apple has shown for a long time: Mhz alone is no yardstick for performance.
The Clawhammer, btw, is a 64-bit chip, or an X86-64 chip to be precise: it's loaded with extentions to support 32-bit apps. When Apple ships its own 64-bit chip (would that be the g5?) we can expect it to work faster.
Oh: And those benchmarks .. weren't they made with a 32-bit app on a 32-bit os (xp)? Clawhammer is prolly faster than this benchmark in 64-bit mode.
Bump up the ram by another 256, throw in a CD burner, and it would cost about $900 CANADIAN! Thats ~$600us (being generous), so your right, its not 1/3, its more like 1/5th
Now of course you could argue that the macs parts are better, but it wouldnt cost much to upgrade those parts to higher end version (the fan might cost $50, im actually not sure what the 3D card is, but it would fit in the $400 range).
If you custom build then everything is cheap. When you start going to people like Dell, thats when the prices rise.
This is something I don't really understand. On the face of it, it doesn't seem right that cheap game consoles can play games faster than grown-up personal computers.
For instance, the GameCube has a throughput at least three times that of a top of the line Mac. What gives?
I understand that the specialisation of the game consoles allows them to optimise their respective systems, but this seems ridiculous.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Consoles are dumped at a loss. Hard to pirate games at $50 and up are where the money is made. The video game market is larger than the movie industry.
The video game market is larger than the movie industry.</strong><hr></blockquote>
For those interested in facts over hype: the combined worldwide revenue from both PC and console games (that's games and console units) is around $8 billion. While that's more than the annual average US box office, it does not include video/DVD rentals, video/DVD retail purchases, international box office (y'know ... the rest of the world), and television and cable/satellite licensing. (Let alone hardware sales of DVD players and VCRs.) And people accuse Apple of playing fast and loose with the figures.
<strong>i know the hardware isn't where it should be/want it to be....i'm just saying that apple is not trying to get the most fps in quake...they're TRYING to get photoshop, final cut pro, etc. to perform as best as possible....
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually its Adobe doing this not Apple. You're gamers argument is laughable. You're an idiot.
I'll have my console, and eat it to. Just who do you think has been driving the graphic/memory market forward??? :eek:
Toolboi, I hate to defend any Apple hardware during these time of inequity, but... OMG! that just makes the picture look even worse. :eek: :eek: Maybe there's nothing left to defend?
Two things though. In fairness to Apple, I think we have to confine ourselves to prices from other large manufacturers, who, if nothing else, pay the licencing fees for the OS they install on your machine, and the office software they included.
It's kind of funny how here in Toronto (and I suspect Vancouver is the same) just about every small computer assembler has a line on some form of pirated OS. The bigger (local/regional) outlets have taken to pricing their computers WITHOUT an OS probably because they're big enough to get inspected/investigated. Just about any smaller shop will build you the PC and through the software in, literally, for free.
could you please stop to compare Apple, or to be precise the PowerMac, to Wintel or Winthlon... First these are normally "CREATIVE" workstations. So what do yo do with them ? DTP, Videos, Movies, 3D, Webdesign...
If we look at what target Apple goes with the xserve and Mac Os Xand some apps like Final Cut, Cinema Tools, Shake... I think we can say they goes after SGI and SUN. Do you know the price of a SUN workstation ? It's USD 15.000,-
a SGI ? 11.000,- for a Fuel system.
All they need is a little more power like a Dual G4 @ 1.4 Ghz but MORE bandwidth !!!
I read somewhere that if we have the xserve hack in the summertime, it's is not as bad as some of us think. There is room for Quartz Extreme, faster disk access, etc.
So the 1GB bus from FSB to ram will be like a sunday highway... not like today, it's more like a monday morning highway.
<strong> I think we can say they goes after SGI and SUN. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That is the most ridiculous things I've heard of these boards for a long time. Apple targets the PowerMacs are no one particular group, but instead aims in general for professionals and prosumers. And are the essense of mediocrity for most people in these groups compared to PC offerings.
This chart is from Apple's own site and illustrates that even Apple considers Quake 3 benchmarks meaningful.
Oh, by the way, a 2.5GHz Pentium 4 on a 533MHz bus gets over 290 frames per second using very similar game settings. And it's cheaper than a "Power"Mac G4.
If you really want, you can think Apple is competing with SGI. If one dead company competing with another dead company is the only way you can justify Apple's prices and subpar performance, fine with me.
Comments
<strong>if you wanna play games, get a console
has it ever occurred to you that people don't use macs just for games? there are plenty of us who use it for word processing and internet and other tasks....
macs are slower than pcs in most tasks. get used to it. .</strong><hr></blockquote>
I suppose you never heard of eating your cake and having it too. Or is it having your cake and eating it too?
If you can predict the future
Remember steve said that at the end of the year they will be faster than the other guys. I don't think that it will be in Mhz but in bandwith architecture... like SGI.
Just look at the FSB of this and tell...
<a href="http://www.sgi.com/workstations/fuel/"; target="_blank">http://www.sgi.com/workstations/fuel/</a>;
Direct info:
SGI Fuel
Single 600 Mhz with 4MB L2 cache
200 MHz front side bus
3.2 GB per second memory bandwith !!!
1.6 GB per second system-to-graphics interconnect
Compares to the Dual Gig:
133 MHz front side bus
4 GB per second data access
1 GB per second memory bandwith
2.1 GB per second memory bandwith for xserve
[ 06-07-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
<strong>if you wanna play games, get a console
i'm not a blind apple believer....the towers should atleast have DDR, but apple can't do sh!t about the chip....moto makes them...start egging them
has it ever occurred to you that people don't use macs just for games? there are plenty of us who use it for word processing and internet and other tasks....i'm sorry the mac doesn't meet your expectations for gaming...apple is focusing on consumers and video professionals...a pc or gaming console would meet all your gaming needs
there's no need to focus on gamers....let the consoles have 'em...if microsoft can't compete in the gaming business, what makes you think apple can?
gamers aren't the only group out there....there are plenty of people who seem to overlook the fact that macs 'suck' at gaming...they do plenty of other things well...
macs are slower than pcs in most tasks. get used to it. if a mac doesn't meet your needs, find something else....coming to this site and b!tching doesn't do anything...
i'm sorry you had a bad day...go and play quake to let off a little tension...</strong><hr></blockquote>
So, I do a good deal of video editing, sound work, web design, etc, everything that qualifies me as a "creative professional". And their performance problems are definately NOT just limited to gaming. I love doing my editing on Final Cut Pro, but I am stuck on an iMac 450 because they do not offer anything for a good enough price at the speed I need. If I bought a 3,000 dollar tower, it would be fast enough, but it would not be feasible as I could build an equivelent speed PC with monitor spanning etc for 1/3 the price.
I'm glad to see that so many people are starting to see the hardware performance picture for what it is. It's not that the hardware is so horrible, but for price? jeez... Competitive to PC pricing (not cheaper, just in the ballpark) would erase a lot of complaint.
I hope you're reading this Stevie, have your market research lackies take note: you have achieved an unprecedented level of mac (hardware/pricing) dissatisfaction. So much so that even the most ardent fan-boys cannot stem the tide.
Seems like the MHz gap is putting a cloud over all the good things Apple does. Notthat I expect anyone to admit that Apple has its upside.
Geez, people lighten up. This is the home of the emotionally crippled, tying their emotions to a company, to a spec, to a number.
This is something I don't really understand. On the face of it, it doesn't seem right that cheap game consoles can play games faster than grown-up personal computers.
For instance, the GameCube has a throughput at least three times that of a top of the line Mac. What gives?
I understand that the specialisation of the game consoles allows them to optimise their respective systems, but this seems ridiculous.
that's why if you wanna play games, get a console where they focus on games, trying to max out performance. or go to a pc vendor that configure's decent gaming computers...
i figure apple will almost never focus on gaming. if the microsoft xbox fails, i truly don't think apple could do much better....the current contenders are dug into that market pretty well, and if microsoft, with its' money and influence, can't do well enough, apple surely won't...
<strong>if you wanna play games, get a console
i'm sorry you had a bad day...go and play quake to let off a little tension...</strong><hr></blockquote>
You guys never get it do you?
Quake is not just a game benchmark, it IS AN OPENGL application for crying out loud. It measures how your processor performs with OpenGL.
Maya is also an application that uses OpenGL, and so are LightWave and Cinema 4D. Last I checked, those weren't games...
The Clawhammer trouncing an intel is actually good for Apple. Now more people will believe what Apple has shown for a long time: Mhz alone is no yardstick for performance.
The Clawhammer, btw, is a 64-bit chip, or an X86-64 chip to be precise: it's loaded with extentions to support 32-bit apps. When Apple ships its own 64-bit chip (would that be the g5?) we can expect it to work faster.
Oh: And those benchmarks .. weren't they made with a 32-bit app on a 32-bit os (xp)? Clawhammer is prolly faster than this benchmark in 64-bit mode.
is photoshop?
Bah, the nay sayers always say this, and Apple always endures. Face it, its more or less immortal unless some REALLY screwy leadership comes along.
Not a third. But you have a point
from <a href="http://www.ATIC.ca"; target="_blank">http://www.ATIC.ca</a>; (a local computer shop):
iHomer K7 1.1ghz ...$655
K7 DDR ATA100, AGP4x
AMD K7 CPU and fan
256M DDR, 40G HD, 1.44
DVD 16x , ATX tower
AGP 32M, speakers
Lan10/100, 3D Sound
Keyboard, mouse w/ wheel
K7 -XP1800 .............$715
Bump up the ram by another 256, throw in a CD burner, and it would cost about $900 CANADIAN! Thats ~$600us (being generous), so your right, its not 1/3, its more like 1/5th
Now of course you could argue that the macs parts are better, but it wouldnt cost much to upgrade those parts to higher end version (the fan might cost $50, im actually not sure what the 3D card is, but it would fit in the $400 range).
If you custom build then everything is cheap. When you start going to people like Dell, thats when the prices rise.
<strong>
This is something I don't really understand. On the face of it, it doesn't seem right that cheap game consoles can play games faster than grown-up personal computers.
For instance, the GameCube has a throughput at least three times that of a top of the line Mac. What gives?
I understand that the specialisation of the game consoles allows them to optimise their respective systems, but this seems ridiculous.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Consoles are dumped at a loss. Hard to pirate games at $50 and up are where the money is made. The video game market is larger than the movie industry.
<strong>
The video game market is larger than the movie industry.</strong><hr></blockquote>
For those interested in facts over hype: the combined worldwide revenue from both PC and console games (that's games and console units) is around $8 billion. While that's more than the annual average US box office, it does not include video/DVD rentals, video/DVD retail purchases, international box office (y'know ... the rest of the world), and television and cable/satellite licensing. (Let alone hardware sales of DVD players and VCRs.) And people accuse Apple of playing fast and loose with the figures.
Read more <a href="http://www.avault.com/developer/getarticle.asp?name=bwardell4"; target="_blank">here</a>.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled chest-thumping/useless whingeing.
<strong>i know the hardware isn't where it should be/want it to be....i'm just saying that apple is not trying to get the most fps in quake...they're TRYING to get photoshop, final cut pro, etc. to perform as best as possible....
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually its Adobe doing this not Apple. You're gamers argument is laughable. You're an idiot.
I'll have my console, and eat it to. Just who do you think has been driving the graphic/memory market forward??? :eek:
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: moki ]</p>
Two things though. In fairness to Apple, I think we have to confine ourselves to prices from other large manufacturers, who, if nothing else, pay the licencing fees for the OS they install on your machine, and the office software they included.
It's kind of funny how here in Toronto (and I suspect Vancouver is the same) just about every small computer assembler has a line on some form of pirated OS. The bigger (local/regional) outlets have taken to pricing their computers WITHOUT an OS probably because they're big enough to get inspected/investigated. Just about any smaller shop will build you the PC and through the software in, literally, for free.
If we look at what target Apple goes with the xserve and Mac Os Xand some apps like Final Cut, Cinema Tools, Shake... I think we can say they goes after SGI and SUN. Do you know the price of a SUN workstation ? It's USD 15.000,-
a SGI ? 11.000,- for a Fuel system.
All they need is a little more power like a Dual G4 @ 1.4 Ghz but MORE bandwidth !!!
I read somewhere that if we have the xserve hack in the summertime, it's is not as bad as some of us think. There is room for Quartz Extreme, faster disk access, etc.
So the 1GB bus from FSB to ram will be like a sunday highway... not like today, it's more like a monday morning highway.
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: jeromba ]</p>
<strong> I think we can say they goes after SGI and SUN. </strong><hr></blockquote>
That is the most ridiculous things I've heard of these boards for a long time. Apple targets the PowerMacs are no one particular group, but instead aims in general for professionals and prosumers. And are the essense of mediocrity for most people in these groups compared to PC offerings.
This chart is from Apple's own site and illustrates that even Apple considers Quake 3 benchmarks meaningful.
<a href="http://www.apple.com/powermac/images/graphics_graph01222002.gif"; target="_blank">Click hear to view the chart.</a>
Oh, by the way, a 2.5GHz Pentium 4 on a 533MHz bus gets over 290 frames per second using very similar game settings. And it's cheaper than a "Power"Mac G4.
If you really want, you can think Apple is competing with SGI. If one dead company competing with another dead company is the only way you can justify Apple's prices and subpar performance, fine with me.
[ 06-08-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>