PC VS MAC speed test- The mac lost! [Archive]

Catfish_Man

Jul 19, 2002, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Macmaniac
You might want to read this http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/07_jul/features/cw_macvspc2.htm
Apple better release 1.4ghz in august or we are in big doo doo.
MWSF might be a good time for the G5 hint hint;) ;)

I don't know really what to say, if this is true then it looks like we have lost our speed advantage.
Help me regain faith!

Duh...Macs are, overall, slower than a fast PC. Once we get fast enough ram to feed our processors properly that situation may change. The G5 will definitely fix this, but I'm expecting an interim fix for the G4 (late August is my guess). 1.4GHz would do almost nothing without faster ram.

sphereboy

Jul 19, 2002, 08:13 PM

I must say, it's time Apple went ahead of 533mhz front side bus..and leave behind that SDRAM and get moving at least to DDR

Im a /switcher and I love the ease and free flow a mac brings to the table.

THat is what sets Macs apart.

I'm sure APple is cooking something very nice. And it should be coming soon.

Grokgod

Jul 19, 2002, 08:40 PM

Where have you been Macmaniac?

Apple lost the edge in CPU power AGES ago and then they lost the powerusers AGES ago, and you just getting wind of it!

WHy do you think APPLE went and asked Video editors what they want from a system.

I think that they answered " Something better then crappy antique, I mean where the hell is DDRam, oh yea, its in my DELL"

APPLE stepped in DOO DOO , AGES ago!

They are chasing the LAMEsumer now.
With iAPPZ galore and the lure of a simplified OS.

Most Prosumers love to tweak their Wintel boxes, I hate it, but there are others that swear by the process, a lot of others!

barkmonster

Jul 19, 2002, 08:46 PM

From all the benchmarks of G4s vs Athlons over the years, photoshop, Bryce and other non realtime applications seem to have always put a G4 on a par with an Athlon, regardless of what memory bandwidth each system had.

What I mean by this is, Mhz for Mhz speed, a 1Ghz G4 should match a 1Ghz Athlon because a 1.4Ghz Athlon is 40% faster than 1Ghz G4.

Add more cache and faster RAM to the G4 and maybe a 1.4Ghz G4 could compete with a 1.533Ghz or 1.6Ghz Athlon on a totally level playing field, regardless of dual CPUs or Altivec.

For example, judging by the barefeats photoshop scores and going off the results of the 933Mhz model so as to eliminate multiprocessor enhanced code from the equation, a 1.4Ghz Athlon with 266Mhz DDR is exactly 1.5 times the speed of the 933Mhz G4 or put it another way, a 1.4Ghz G4 would match the Athlon.

The bryce results that are neither dual CPU or Altivec aware also point to the G4 matching the Athlon if the clock speeds are equal aswell.

What this means is basically for overall performance the G4 could catch up in a big way with just the jump from 1Ghz to 1.4Ghz, add the DDR and improved cache scheme and it might catch up even further.

Macmaniac

Jul 19, 2002, 08:48 PM

I guess I have been living in my own little world;) Thx for clairfying things.
They should have included how many times the wintel machines crashed.
The iAppz make up the speed defict. Maybe I rant to much.

goldmember

Jul 19, 2002, 08:54 PM

Looks like it's time for the quad. Everyone wants it, and Moto isn't delivering any 2ghz g4/g5 anytime soon.

A quad g4 at 1.4 ghz would soundly beat today's high-end wintel offerings.

One question though--do you have to have software specifically written for quad processors for there to be any effect?

Mr. Anderson

Jul 19, 2002, 08:58 PM

That's all well and good, but that fact still remains that the only way Apple is able to even stay in the game is by using dual processors. Apple won't be able to hold its own, and I've said this more than enough before, until they have a single CPU that can go head to head with anything from Intel or AMD. We'll be playing catch up for a while - even when we have the G5 it might not be enough, especially if we have to wait months down the road...

D

MacMaster

Jul 19, 2002, 09:17 PM

Well of course the Mac lost. The dual 1ghz is only comparable up to a 2.2ghz p4. Remember that article on cnet? At least I think it was cnet...:o This is against a 2.53ghz p4 and a dual AMD 2000+ which is 1.7ghz. That is far too fast for the dual 1ghz Mac to contend with. This probably would be fixed by at least upping the mhz by at least .2ghz and adding ddr ram. A faster bus would help to:rolleyes: That's all we need! :D

-MacMaster

tjwett

Jul 19, 2002, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
i think "we" have lost our speed advantage already. certainly in things that aren't altivec enhanced and/or multi processor aware.

however, if one accounts for crash/troubleshooting time, the speed is not a problem.

i don't think anyone's in big doo doo if apple doesn't release 1.4 ghz. then again, i'd love to see it. and soon.

<opinion>but that's the problem i think. nothing is altivec enhanced anymore. the software developers seem to be having a hard enough time giving us Carbonised versions of everything, they don't even bother with altivec anymore. and when we finally get them they are buggy as hell. the Adobe line for OSX is so bug-infested it's insane(Illustrator10 is the WORST). i've got some of the very few audio apps that are OSX ready(the audio stuff is taking a VERY long time because of the wait for Jaguar)and although they seem to be pretty stable, they do not take advantage of altivec and in a few cases the developers have said that they have no plans of doing it in the future, even though the OS9 versions were. i'm a Logic Audio user and i can't wait for the X version but i have a real hunch that it will not be altivec enhanced like the OS9 version was. it will probably be another Carbon piece of crapware like everything else we have been seeing lately. think how bad it was in OS9 just waiting those few extra months for a certain game or app to get ported to the Mac. now Apple has a whole new operating system. they expect the software companies to not only put out an app for 3% of the market share, on a completely new OS, AND write it so it takes advantage of stupid old AltiVec? Please. it would be great but they don't even bother anymore. and most of them probably don't have the time or resources. for software companies to develop OSX AltiVec aware apps would be a waste of time and money for them. Mac users make up such a tiny portion of the customer base it's not even worth it to them. as a retail example, look at a store like Babbages, for instance. they decided over a year ago to not even bother carrying Mac software at all anymore. to them it's not even worth the couple extra bucks they would get from Mac customers. they'd rather not waste the shelf space. i think that's how a lot of software companies feel about the Mac and AltiVec.</opinion>

jelloshotsrule

Jul 19, 2002, 09:43 PM

response to tjwett.

sure, you're right on... but that is the software developers fault (for the most part) and not apple's. of course, if apple were to have faster chips which wouldn't rely on altivec, then this would be "solved"... but as it is, i've had no major problems with apps... granted, i don't run combustion, smoke, etc.. but i do run photoshop, fcp, dvdsp, after effects, etc. and i'm not seeing the big problem.

but yes, of course, it'd be great if software co's got off their arses and made altivec enhanced, cocoa apps. but that can only be controlled so much by apple.

word up.

Sun Baked

Jul 19, 2002, 10:00 PM

They're also comparing an SDRAM Macs to P4s and Athlons running RDRAM and DDR.

For those large files that fit in memory and are way to big for the cache, the Mac is already handicapped - the other machines IO alone is at least twice as fast. And it's getting real hard to find SDRAM in PCs right now, except in some of the bargain machines.

Would have been interesting to see the XServe comparison to see how much the DDR memory alone affects the head-to-head results.

Amazing to see that the Dual processor PC really doesn't stomp the single processor machine, almost seems like theres something wrong there. ;)

tjwett

Jul 19, 2002, 10:03 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
response to tjwett.

sure, you're right on... but that is the software developers fault (for the most part) and not apple's. of course, if apple were to have faster chips which wouldn't rely on altivec, then this would be "solved"... but as it is, i've had no major problems with apps... granted, i don't run combustion, smoke, etc.. but i do run photoshop, fcp, dvdsp, after effects, etc. and i'm not seeing the big problem.

but yes, of course, it'd be great if software co's got off their arses and made altivec enhanced, cocoa apps. but that can only be controlled so much by apple.

word up.

<opinion>i agree with you but the only people that feel the effect of all of this is us, the consumers, and eventually Apple, as people realise the fancy velocity engine they invested in by buying a G4 is just a "paperweight". since the birth of OSX, the G4 is almost totally useless outside the OS and in the real world apps. i understand that Apple can't put pressure on big software companies. there are just too many. and for alot of apps, like games, Apple doesn't even have the power to threaten to pull the plug. their response to Apple would most likely be "go ahead, we don't make any money off you anyway". i think it's Apple's duty, to a degree, to make these machines perform the best they can. and not just in scientific benchmarks. in everyday, real world computing. if that means they need to ditch AltiVec and change chips then i think that's what they should do. they should do EVERYTHING in their power to make these machines competitive in performance, with minimal fuss for software developers. because trying to get developers to "switch" their ways for such a tiny market is not realistic and would never happen. </opinion> jello, hopefully this rain will finally come and cool things off here in NYC. today was just NASTY.

jelloshotsrule

Jul 19, 2002, 10:13 PM

tj:

i must admit, your comments in that other thread (some of them) got me to think you were just being a jerk, but now that we've had a reasonable discussion, i see that you were just fired up, understandably...

i agree they need to do something. but, who is to say they aren't? i mean, that is hopeful thinking of course, but with the software acquisitions, they have to know that they need better hardware, and not just 1.2 ghz g4 with sdram... the thing is, such a change will take some time. i'd say, if we don't see something big in the next few months up to mwsf, then it's been too long... but i'm willing to be patient for a bit longer

as for nyc, ahhh, i'm actually home in pa now. nyc just for school... but yeah, it was hot as crap here today. however, the rain did come, so it might hit you guys.... actually, it came just in time to ruin my chances of getting in 18 holes of golf.... uggh.

bousozoku

Jul 19, 2002, 11:10 PM

From what I've seen, I would not expect Mac desktops to be the fastest at video editing. Adobe has found it much easier to use SSE2 on Pentiums and Athlons that AltiVec on G4s. If the compilers for Mac OS X did automatic vectorization, this wouldn't be as big an issue. There would still be some setup for the developer though.

I would like to see a test of laptop computers...PowerBook 800 MHz vs. Pentium 4 1.7 GHz or whatever. I think it would at least be more interesting. From what I've read, more people like using Final Cut Pro and since it's able to maximize the PowerBook...

Catfish_Man

Jul 19, 2002, 11:24 PM

...what makes you guys think that nothing uses Altivec? In OSX all programs use Altivec. The APIs are altivec aware (Quartz, for example, uses it extensively), so any program that uses them automatically gets some benefit. Basically, as far as I can tell, you're saying "I think it's too slow, so Altivec must not be doing anything". For something like a game, or a movie, or anything else that requires moving a lot of data around, the Mac is going to lose. Its memory is, at best, half as fast. At worst it's 1/4 as fast. The fact that it manages to get anywhere close to keeping up is almost entirely due to Altivec and good use of cache.

billiam0878

Jul 19, 2002, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Grokgod
They are chasing the LAMEsumer now.
With iAPPZ galore and the lure of a simplified OS.

Most Prosumers love to tweak their Wintel boxes, I hate it, but there are others that swear by the process, a lot of others!

However, I would consider video editors prosumers and Apple's market share is growing rapidly (I think it's somewhere around 50% right now) in this niche market. Why? Software. CinemaTools, Final Cut Pro and DVD Studio Pro are all excellent Apps that work the way they are supposed to. Now with Avid and Maya have migrated to (the rock solid) OS X I would argue their market share will continue to grow. It is not all about hardware, and even though I'd love for Apple to crank up their hardware, I do not agree that Apple is merely "chasing the LAMEsumer." Just my 2 cents,

Bill

tjwett

Jul 20, 2002, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
tj:

i must admit, your comments in that other thread (some of them) got me to think you were just being a jerk, but now that we've had a reasonable discussion, i see that you were just fired up, understandably...

i agree they need to do something. but, who is to say they aren't? i mean, that is hopeful thinking of course, but with the software acquisitions, they have to know that they need better hardware, and not just 1.2 ghz g4 with sdram... the thing is, such a change will take some time. i'd say, if we don't see something big in the next few months up to mwsf, then it's been too long... but i'm willing to be patient for a bit longer

as for nyc, ahhh, i'm actually home in pa now. nyc just for school... but yeah, it was hot as crap here today. however, the rain did come, so it might hit you guys.... actually, it came just in time to ruin my chances of getting in 18 holes of golf.... uggh.

lol! i know, i was getting a few people really annoyed. you're right though, i was just initially fumed and if you notice my posts became mellower towards the end. i really don't want to ditch the Mac as an OS and working planform. after some good advice from some others i think i'll try a few things. someone suggested setting up a little rendering cluster with the Wintels, which would still allow me to work in the Mac environment while the PCs crunched the numbers. if i can make that happen i'll be psyched and it will get me by until the G5 ; ) thanks for the positive feedback and try to keep cool in this heat. we just got a little rain and it already feels better. cheers.

tjwett

Jul 20, 2002, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Catfish_Man
...what makes you guys think that nothing uses Altivec? In OSX all programs use Altivec. The APIs are altivec aware (Quartz, for example, uses it extensively), so any program that uses them automatically gets some benefit. Basically, as far as I can tell, you're saying "I think it's too slow, so Altivec must not be doing anything". For something like a game, or a movie, or anything else that requires moving a lot of data around, the Mac is going to lose. Its memory is, at best, half as fast. At worst it's 1/4 as fast. The fact that it manages to get anywhere close to keeping up is almost entirely due to Altivec and good use of cache.

maybe i just don't understand. i know alot of the OS's functions use AltiVec so it makes sense that any running app is being touched by it. but correct me if i'm wrong, wasn't it very different in OS9? i mean wasn't AltiVec capability something that was actually embeded in the app and if you had a G4 it would recognize it and kick into gear? would the OSX apps get the same type of advantage just by running in OSX? from what i can see just with my own use, when i run an AltiVec enabled app it performs better in OS9 on the same machine. most likely these are Carbonized and not Cocoa so could that be part of it? Also, is it even possible for Cocoa or Carbonized apps to use the Velocity Engine in the same way as OS9? Obviously they are two different OSs but i just mean having AltiVec as a part of the app that only a G4 would recognize. like i said earlier? am i making any sense? i don't know enough about chips and super tech stuff to put it into proper words.

Grokgod

Jul 20, 2002, 12:55 AM

In answer to JELLO's posting.. "Who's to say they're not" doing something?

I would think that MWNY would be obvious evidence that they are NOT doing anything. Remember that its been a LONG time, that we have been waiting for PowerMacs with the right kind of power!

Waiting another month in the computer world is equal to much longer and as TJ has stated many CANNOT wait anymore!

APPLE's focus hasnt been on the machines for a long time.
Its on the software and apps.

Its the only thing that is keeping the APPLE alive. FCP3 would be a good example.
We have all been waiting patiently for the proper hardware.

Yet APPLE has taken a course of action that is to obviously stall the arrival of new hardware which they obviously have in the wings!

When you realize that they HAVE this hardware.
You can see APPLE true strategy.

That is to milk their loyal users for AS much as they can with antique hardware.
To stall them with distractions of useless iAPPz and half written OS's
Lets not forget that APPLE has millions in the bank made with incredibly POOR tech! What PC company would be in business still with that kind of tactic.

ANswer = NONE!

These are tactics delivered by a company that has a death wish.
How many times in the past has APPLE been on the edge of true success only to destroy themselves in strange ways which dumbfounds everyone?

tjwett

Jul 20, 2002, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by Grokgod
In answer to JELLO's posting.. "Who's to say they're not" doing something?

I would think that MWNY would be obvious evidence that they are NOT doing anything. Remember that its been a LONG time, that we have been waiting for PowerMacs with the right kind of power!

Waiting another month in the computer world is equal to much longer and as TJ has stated many CANNOT wait anymore!

APPLE's focus hasnt been on the machines for a long time.
Its on the software and apps.

Its the only thing that is keeping the APPLE alive. FCP3 would be a good example.
We have all been waiting patiently for the proper hardware.

Yet APPLE has taken a course of action that is to obviously stall the arrival of new hardware which they obviously have in the wings!

When you realize that they HAVE this hardware.
You can see APPLE true strategy.

That is to milk their loyal users for AS much as they can with antique hardware.
To stall them with distractions of useless iAPPz and half written OS's
Lets not forget that APPLE has millions in the bank made with incredibly POOR tech! What PC company would be in business still with that kind of tactic.

ANswer = NONE!

These are tactics delivered by a company that has a death wish.
How many times in the past has APPLE been on the edge of true success only to destroy themselves in strange ways which dumbfounds everyone?

Grok ain't havin' it! damn. lol! i'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but i'd be lying if i didn't agree with you on the whole hidden hardware thing. i can't see how the company that gave the common man FireWire, USB, and a ton of other innovations has simply run out of juice suddenly. the DDR thing is what really makes me suspicious. did they not see it coming or something? the G4 could not "do" DDR and now it suddenly can, sort of. it's just weird that such innovators would let such industry standards just pass by. they obviously must have new hardware that they are holding back or we would have seen it on the 18th. the question is : how much? do they just have a surplus of Quicksilvers that they need to unload or do they actually have the Quicksilvers, then the DDR/1.2s, THEN the G5 all ready to go in that order? i have no idea but i wouldn't be shocked. it's like what i mentioned with the records, tapes, CDs thing. if Apple already have a G5 or whatever supermachine completed and they are doing the old "trickle down" thing then ofcourse it sucks but who knows? i know for certain that i definitely do not have a G5. do you think they would purposely stay behind to stay alive? it happens alot in niche markets where the customer base is mainly enthusiests who buy whatever is released. is Apple doing it? it's a mystery to me but it's fun to think about. shhh...do hear that? i think it's Robert Stack ; )

LethalWolfe

Jul 20, 2002, 02:20 AM

Errr... editors and post houses are turning away from Apple...??? If anything FCP and DVD SP have sparked a new love for Apple. Mac hardware is already the standard, now Apple software is starting to join it.

Speed is important, but it's not on the top of many/any editor's lists. Editing software is one, system stability (both hardware and software) is two, storage would be three, and speed is probably number 4.

How often do you think post houses upgrade their computer hardware? Maybe every 5 or 6 years. IMO the problems w/OS X (both on Apples part and on 3rd party software makers being slow) are holding back people from upgrading more than slow hardware ('cause the current G4's are a helluva lot faster than the pre-G3 machines that many/most places are still using). There are so many things that can bring down an editing workstation that stability (or at least being aware of all the known problems) is almost always valued more than speed.

Does Apple need to overhaul (upgrade is too small a step) their hardware, yes. I mean, we're hopping for DDR, and PC users are waiting for DDR 2 to come out. Not to mention the FSB and proc speed issues. And I'm talking relative speed increase here, not comparitive. How much faster have Intel and AMD chips gotten in the past 2 years, and how much faster have Mac chips gotten?

Lethal

tjwett

Jul 20, 2002, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by LethalWolfe

...How often do you think post houses upgrade their computer hardware? Maybe every 5 or 6 years. IMO the problems w/OS X (both on Apples part and on 3rd party software makers being slow) are holding back people from upgrading more than slow hardware ('cause the current G4's are a helluva lot faster than the pre-G3 machines that many/most places are still using). There are so many things that can bring down an editing workstation that stability (or at least being aware of all the known problems) is almost always valued more than speed...
Lethal
you are right about lack of software holding people back from OSX. every studio i work with is still forced to stay in OS9 because of those 1 or 2 apps that STILL have not made it. the audio side in the worst. we have almost nothing yet. but this one is partly Apple's fault in a way. all the big apps(Logic, Cubase, DP, etc.) are all forced to wait for the release of 10.2 so that Core Audio is up to snuff for multiple ins/outs/etc. alot of the stuff has been ready for a while and they can't put it out. i've even heard that some of them are going to have 10.2 as a minimum requirement. we'll see. oh, and i've been inside some of the bigger post houses in NYC and i haven't seen anyone running a pre-G3 machine. not even a pre-G4 ; )

Grokgod

Jul 20, 2002, 02:53 AM

I agree that stability is a major issue.

But when you look at the many video houses that have turned to Pcheeses.
You can see that there are other issues that or perhaps more importance.

Stability is of little value it seems if the OS is so slow that you think its crashed!

Take the example of when JOBs was trying to get his computer to do something at MW this week. Something happened and after making a comment he switched to a backup computer!

Well , mac rarely crash and he wasnt doing anything that would have pushed the system into a crash yet he did switch to backup.

Perhaps it was going SO slow that he had thought it crashed ..LOL

I think its self evident that many graphic and video houses have long ago SWITCHED from MAC to WINTEL.

And when I talk to these guys in the work that I do.
They honestly cannot understand why I use a MAC.
WHen I do bring up why, and stability is one of the reasons.

I tell them that I hate to screw with drivers and all that Windoze crap.
They laugh, they enjoy it! Its like a guy that tweaks his car all the time.
its not a problem to them its an asset and a joy!

That is the Pcheese mentality.
It gives them the illusion of control, pure and simple.

I would also like to say that there is NO doubt that better hardware is merely sitting in the wings!

As APPLE drains the pocketbooks of all that dare come close.

Companys of this size always know LONG in advance the course or sales path that product will take. They have plans to DRAG this cash cow of selling incredible old tech at high premium prices ON, as long as the users ALLOW it!

Remember that ultimately WE are the ones prolonging this situation!

APPLE obviously thinks that we are unable to make rational decisions.
That we will follow whatever path they set for us, WHY~

Because the loyal APPLE user always HAS.

I believe that will SOON end.
And when it does, SUDDENLY you will see the most incredible hardware.

APPLE will say, it wasnt easy but we DID it, for you!

Its wasnt easy to use 2 year old technology?
Every half wit from COWS to DUDES have managed to incorporate this tech.

But APPLE the great innovator is NOT able to?

Oh Puhlease~
Give me a break, how stupid do I look?

ADDED~ oh dont get me started about the AUDIO problems in OSX..
We were sold an OS with NO sound or midi and now they want more money for what was missing! jesus!

LethalWolfe

Jul 20, 2002, 03:27 AM

But Grokgod, we have a bigger iPod! Rejoice! That's new hardware... right? ;)

I can see way GFX guys would jump ship to PCs (I probably would if I did GFX) but all of the post houses I'm familiar w/have Mac editing workstations (w/the exception of a local TV station, but they are running AVID DS which is more of an editing/finishing hybred than a straight up editor). But I'm more in the film/entertainment side so we just might be viewing seperate niche's in this niche market.

I think you just came up w/a new hook for OS X... "So slow you think it crashed." :D

Lethal

nuckinfutz

Jul 20, 2002, 03:48 AM

There are different reasons why some houses move to PC's. However I think you'll see that any company with a bottomline isn't fooled by the hype that get's the attention of the typical PC fan. They make decisions based on workflow because any problems that require an IT guy to come fix just blew whatever advantage you had over a slower system. Notice that benchmarked computers tend to finish within seconds of each other. Would you destabalize your Network and go through a platform migration just to pick up a few secs here and there? That's a very risky proposition.

tjwett

Jul 20, 2002, 04:25 AM

Originally posted by Grokgod

I would also like to say that there is NO doubt that better hardware is merely sitting in the wings!
As APPLE drains the pocketbooks of all that dare come close.
Companys of this size always know LONG in advance the course or sales path that product will take. They have plans to DRAG this cash cow of selling incredible old tech at high premium prices ON, as long as the users ALLOW it!
Remember that ultimately WE are the ones prolonging this situation!
APPLE obviously thinks that we are unable to make rational decisions.
That we will follow whatever path they set for us, WHY~
Because the loyal APPLE user always HAS.
I believe that will SOON end.
And when it does, SUDDENLY you will see the most incredible hardware.
APPLE will say, it wasnt easy but we DID it, for you!
Its wasnt easy to use 2 year old technology?

What would the implications be to Apple if something like this was uncovered? I don't think it's illegal. I wonder what would happen. Do you think they would go under? Again, the DDR thing weirds me out big time. This tech is already so old it's going to be gone soon. And we still don't have it. Apple knows that it is somewhat of a "club" in that it has a small but extremely loyal following. This following also generally tends to be financially well off. As any business, Apple knows who it's users are. No proper business can run without a target demographic. And no company that wanted to survive would price their product out of reach of it's target audience. To generalize, Apple's core users are Mac loyals with a fair amount of money. The recent MSNBC survey touched on this too. Perhaps Apple's business model is to simply stay behind technologically on purpose. It may be better for them financially. Think how much money they save by just doing little speed bumps and case tweaks. Everyone runs out and buys em up. Then instead of moving forward they do another little speedbump and those same exact people run out to get the latest Mac, again. They may be able to make more money doing this than actually releasing the heavy stuff because everyone would go buy it once and then we'd be at the same level as the competition and people would no longer get exited about old news technology like 200mhz speedbumps and DDR memory. If they stay just far enough behind the loyal Mac users will get exited about everything they dish out. I think it's obvious that Apple makes more money off of repeat customers than new. Do you think the stuff is actually geared towards everyone? It's geared towards people who buy a new Mac every 6 months and hang around rumor sites ; ) How many PC users do you think were at MWNY because they were so moved by the "switch" campaign? Very few would be my guess. It would make sense for Apple to wait till the bitter end to bleed the well dry but could they really keep it secret? Maybe. Macs are basically a single unit designed by a single group. There are way less parties involved than in the PC world. I think it's really possible and I'm getting really into it. Maybe I am a conspiracy theorist after all.

iGav

Jul 20, 2002, 06:05 AM

Fu*k me....... some of you guys have "issues"....... :p :p :p

Grokgod

Jul 20, 2002, 12:48 PM

SAdly there isnt anything to uncover its all evident.

Its the business model that is used by many other corporations.

its called built in obselesence.

APPLE has HAD DDRam for a lONG time now.

It IS in the Xserve, isnt it.
This DOES mean that they have it!

So they are holding the OLD tech <DDRam isnt new, lets get that straight>
back from us, why? well its simple, yet sad.

They have a timeline with all the speedbumps and upgrades.
They have allocated certain moneys to each quarter and each TECH bump for a span of time.

WHat they say to each other is this.

OK, How much longer can we get away with selling the $5 dollar SDRAM for triple the price of RDam! How much longer will these half witted moronic MAcusers continue to pay these prices until they get NUTS.

Well, we can bump here and then there and then WHEN we think they are going to freak out we can bring out DDRam in a server.
Very few will buy it for a replacement PowerMac.

This will keep their hopes up, and they will think that DDRam is coming cause its in the Xserve.

Then we STALL AGAIN!
Sell out the giger stock, maybe stretch out with another speed bump, depending on the uproar.

If sales go down we can increase revenue by charging for items we promised would be free or were going to be free and that will cover us, if we have drawn it out TOO far.

MacUsers needs to understand that this is a REALITY not a theory.

ANd that UNTIL, the loyal begin to realize after SO many years that APPLE is not the SAVIOUR of decency in american business, that it is a business.
ANd that they see loyality as something to exploit NOT to cherish.

We will always be on the recieving end of this manipulation!

I am NOT buying a single fuhreaking item, NOTHING, NADA, noway, nohow!

TILL, this game somes to a stop and APPLE realizes that I and others are NOT stupid cows to be abused, mistreated and manipulated with half truths, lies and ommisions.

How long would it take for you to realize that your girlfriend doesnt love you anymore. How many years of lies and freakish behavior?

This is one relationship that is SOUR, and unless APPLE gets some sweet goat milk and a lot brown sugar and changes the flavor of this fiasco.

APPLE can go and screw itself. Which it is already doing.
You know sometimes you have to let a loved one that is self destructive, go out and get its A$$ kicked so that they realize what they are doing is wrong.

We made APPLE great, WE held it together in the bad times and feed it when it was SICK and poor! Now APPLE needs a LESSON, are we MEN enough to stand by the convictions that lead us to stand by APPLE all these years?

I know I am.
ARE YOU?
Well, are you, punk! :)
<little dirtyharry there!>

LethalWolfe

Jul 20, 2002, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by iGAV
Fu*k me....... some of you guys have "issues"....... :p :p :p

Only Grokgod ;)

Lethal

machagheid

Jul 20, 2002, 05:03 PM

My Sharpie is faster than your Tria. I get my 'ideas' pretty damn quick too.
Paintings now available from $2/sq.ft @ hyperspeed kreatifz
Egg boiled in 2 secs......can now be eaten quicker.

jelloshotsrule

Jul 20, 2002, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by LethalWolfe

Only Grokgod ;)

yeah, no kidding...

iGav

Jul 21, 2002, 06:06 AM

Originally posted by LethalWolfe

Only Grokgod ;)

Lethal

Judging by that last post... I think you could be right..... :p

mozez

Jul 21, 2002, 11:27 AM

guys, hate to tell you this, but alot of time in video editing, pcs are alot more stable than the mac. i work for a post production editing house. we use custom built pcs, they are cheaper to build and if you know how to build them, they are faster.

the problem with this thread, is that all of you are now changing what was supposed to be the benifit of risc processing and why we have been buying apple for so many years. if i was to look at the mac and see only a 1:1 ratio on speed, 1ghz g4 = 1ghz amd, then why the hell would i ever buy a mac that costs 4 times the amount and doesn't run half the speed. business people, we don't need flashy graphics or neat looking icons, we need rendering speeds and stability. osx is not there, and neither is jaguar. os9, forget it. we compared our dual athlons boards, and we went dollar for dollar, cause that's how you compare, not box for box, cause what a dual 1ghz g4 would cost me, i can rack out a system that goes so far beyond it in terms of technology it's not even funny. tyan dual board 760 mp, 1800's, at the time the price per clock was not worth it to go any higher, and we were buying quite a few machines. 1.5 gig ddr 333 ecc ram!!!! people keep talking about ddr, but in the real world, you need ecc, error correction code, it stops crashes, all computers get ram leaks and errors, this helps to fix the numbers passing through the ram, costs more, alot more... but oh god is it worth it in production.
scsi!!!! for the same price i can add in all the scsi320 i want, and please somebody tell me scsi320 raid doesn't kill ata 100 that apple has.

i was always told, whatever the mac speed is, double it and you have it's pc equivilent. if you can't say that anymore, macs are more personal and worthless in business, maybe give a imac to the receptionist to look qute when clients walk in, but nothing more than that.

most people, like me, can say well, it's an apple and i just like it better, i'm one of them, i love my powerbook, i love osx, but realistically in business and production, the mac is just worhtless when you look at cost, production time, considering that our macs crash more than our pcs, our pcs running win2k are extremely stable, in full production it can stay up for weeks without a hitch, we to try to restart all machines nightly, but sometimes renders are going. so personal, mac, business, forget it, but really, personal sells more, so maybe they should be looking that way, especially if you can't keep up, and even so, i don't think a dual 1.5 ghz g5 with ddr would change things, at least not for price/perfomance.

Grokgod

Jul 21, 2002, 12:26 PM

I think that the guys here that think I have issues havent noticed that they are a lot of members agreeing with me!

My so called issues are actually a part of my debate and if you want to call that an issue, so be it.

Yet if you want continue pointing it out and complaining about my posts, merely because you don't agree without any actually reasoning then I would say you guys have ISSUES.

TElling me or anyone to STOP whining or complaining, is really foolish.
This is a forum where people post their opinions and perspectives.
These are mine, stated in a manner that I express myself for the sake of entertainment and clarity.

I will stop when either my ISSUES are over, or someone has changed my mind with a compelling reason.

Merely whining about my SO-CALLED whining isnt going to do a damn thing except make you look like whiners.

Say THAT 3 times fast! :)

iPat

Jul 21, 2002, 12:34 PM

I am a PC user who really is interested in switching to a Mac. My biggest problem with the Mac is the price to performance ratio. I currently use a Dell 4100 with a 933 P-III, 512 MB of ram, an 80G HD and a GeForce-3. The original box cost me ~$900.00 a little over 18 months ago and I added the GeForce3 and 80 Gig HD after that. My problem is now, 18 months later, SJ is trying to sell me the same technology for $1400.00 more that what I paid for my PC (and w/o a monitor). We can argue all day about the differences between PPC and x86 and all that, but I still have the perception that I'm getting screwed! If we look at the total cost of a me (and I would say an average PC user) to switch, roughly, just for the basics, $2300.00 more for the same technology w/o a monitor, another $460.00 for MS Office, $600.00 for Adobe Photoshop7, $70.00 for Norton’s anti-virus). My total cost to migrate would be $ 4830.00. For that kind of money, myself and most PC users who are interested in switching to a Mac either can't afford to, or, just don't see the value. Why not an iMac? I'm a gamer and for the same price performace reasons they are not appealing either. I am starting to hate MS, but the truth is that WinXP is extremely stable (never had a problem yet - although WinMe was a disaster!). I think for apple to pull more PC users over to Mac, they are going to have to, even if it's at a more expensive price (but not double!!), sell computers that are roughly equivalent to an "average" PC in both performance and options. Apples biggest problem I think is that they have made switching so unappealing that PC users who WANT to switch still just can't do it. We can argue about quality and this an that, but like I said, my PC is very stable, pretty quick and hasn't given me a single problem yet! I'm looking forward to a PowerMac update as long as they're not trying to sell me a 1.2 G4 for $2200.00 without a monitor (maybe I would pay that for G5 after seeing some benchmarks).

Remember, I'm a PC user who WANTS to switch, basically looking for any reason to switch, but still can't with the state of Mac processors!

Grokgod

Jul 21, 2002, 07:35 PM

uhh is iPAT a new APPLE, iAPP?

I think that you have stated a fact that exists for many people.

In the Pcheese world and the APPLE world.

We all want to get what we are being asked to pay for and need to feel as though its a fair purchase, without the air of manipulation.

Your concerns are VALID and fair.
And they echo the sentiment of many others, I am certain.
As do my concerns.

My greatest worry is that APPLE is not taking advantage of a situation that they themselves have worked so hard to create.

The climate created by APPLE which invites Pcheese users to SWITCH.
Should NOT coincide with the hardware situation thats making MAC users angry and think of switching, many are, if you read some of the threads.

Wether or not you agree with those people is NOT the issue.
The issue is what effect the current situation is having on possible new users and the MAC faithful.

And WHY is APPLE allowing these adverse conditions to continue?

Perhaps If APPLE came clean with their users as to the TRUE reasons for this ODD situation there would be less discontented people.

ALas it seems that subterfuge is the newest iAPP..LOL

Grokgod

Jul 21, 2002, 08:03 PM

nuckinfutz

Jul 21, 2002, 08:23 PM

Fact

We know that Apple has new machines right around the corner. comparing todays machines to PC's is of course not going to bode well for Apple

Xserve shows that even an "incomplete" hack using DDR memory and Subsystem tweaks results in an appreciable gain in speed.

Xserve Benchmarks (http://www.apple.com/xserve/performance.html)

XP is stable and that indeed will be hard for Apple to overcome but it is still a breeding ground of Virus and Trojans. This will not change. Also Microsofts vision of Palladium and DRM will affect your user experience drastically. Cheaper or not once that hits I'm out of the PC building arena. OSX currently offers too much potential with Quartz Extreme, and a cohesive and well thought out gameplan that is coming. I don't see Apple jumping into bed with the Entertainment Industry just yet and that keeps me happy.

Last but not least the Premium that you pay for Apple will come back to you upon resale. Much to my chagrin I'm still shocked that first gen G4 PowerMacs still fetch $400 and above on ebay. Had this been a PC it would be worth less than $100

machagheid

Jul 21, 2002, 08:37 PM

Reading in the Forum that there is 'widespread' dissatisfaction with Apples' current offerings, I wonder who else (non-'POWER' users) out there feels a desperate need to upgrade what they have already bought?
Does any normal user regularly need anything more than a $600 imac?
You remember them? they are available to those of us who should'nt really be using computers!!
I hardly feel the urge to replace anything that I have far less 'convert' to PC usage.
This leads me to wonder roughly how many Spielbergs are out there?

How is a rumoured catchup Mega G5+++ machine going to sell to the professionals, never mind the masses?- when & if it appears, it will (going on past experience) be very, perhaps prohibitively expensive & it has been suggested that it will again lag well behind the competition.
If I was earning a living in AV & I was losing work due to My Macs not being up to it; with 'far superior' custom built PCs readily available for a cheap price, I think I would be using them, not shouting @ thunder.