Apple Marketshare on the Rise

[arn]

Apple's marketshare is creeping upward, according to this MacCentral article:

For the current quarter (Q1, 2002) IDC shows Apple as the number six computer maker with a 3.48 percent market share. This is an increase of 0.4 points over Q4 2001 and a 0.25 point increase year over year. Worldwide, Apple is in ninth place with a 2.4 percent market share.


As well, Apple is implementing a new "Mac Pack" service at Apple Stores which involves installing software, setting up your internet account as well as moving your files from your PC to the Mac.

 

[Ouroboros]

Well I guess every little bit helps huh?

 

[Johnny7896]

P4 verse Mac

HOT NEWS!!!!!!

I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.4 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....

Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!

 

[drastik]

that is cool about the processors, and your right, they should be required to label that on the advertising. There is a law about falsr claims in advertisig, though.

Anyway, good for apple, if this continues, things will be great. And the Mac pack seems good too, get people more interested.

 

[billiam0878]

I like the Mac Pack idea, perhaps with this and an updated iMac, Apple can add another .4% to its marketshare. One step at a time...

Bill

 

[TeraRWM]

Well Johnny7896 I certainly hope this is true, but wouldn't IBM and Moto do the same? If they didn't wouldn't they have already saturated the market with this information? Also in your story you said Intel added the two numbers (1.2Ghz clock speed and 1.0 Ghz co-processor) and said the two values together were 2.4Ghz.......how old are you?

 

[decimal]

Re: P4 verse Mac

Originally posted by Johnny7896
HOT NEWS!!!!!!

I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.2 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....

Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!

I must say that is most strange of Intel to do such a thing, especially the part of saying 1.2+1=2.4 I agree, definitely a wrong thing to do.

 

[alex_ant]

Re: P4 verse Mac

Originally posted by Johnny7896
HOT NEWS!!!!!!

I have been informed that the 2.4 Ghz P4’s don’t operate at 2.4 Ghz.
My electronics teacher informed me that a true and verifiable test was performed on the P4 to measure it’s operating speed. The University that did the study hooked up oscilloscopes to the P4 to find it’s Hertz reading. What they discovered was the main cpu runs at 1.2 Ghz and the co-processor (Internal Math) runs at 1.0 Ghz. Intel added the 2 speeds together to advertise a total additive speed of 2.4 Ghz. The P4 isn’t a true 2.4 Ghz and up processor. The P4 actual speed runs far less than the advertised speed. Intel can do this cause there isn’t any government regulation on processor speeds. This is very similar to the case of the monitors being sold by viewable and monitor size. The government started to require a “buyer beware” regulation stating the true viewable size verse the monitor’s physical size. Not many people know this fact cause the results have just been published. This also explains the huge difference in the Athlon 1.7Ghz kiling the P4 2.4Ghz. Come on guys do the math 1.7 greater than 2.4????? I’ll try to find a link soon and post it. This could really change the future of the computer industry. All you people thinking wintel is winning......surprise!! Bottom line stick with the MAC. Intel is pulling the wool over people’s eyes. Just like Microsoft. Like those apples....

Wake up people!!!!
Spread the real News!!!!
Knowledge is contagious!!!

In other news, did you know that Lisa Marie Presley is pregnant with Jesus' baby? I just read it in line at the supermarket today.

 

[Johnny7896]

P4

Sorry guys I meant 2.2 Ghz. You know what I mean. It would be a bad business partice, but it's legal. There is no legal definition of how to label processor speeds or bandwidth. Until someone gets busted (ie the monitor rip offs). Then things change. Apple can put 2 1Ghz in a computer and call it 2 Ghz. It's legal also. But it's easy to visually see 2 processors. Internaly, Intel can separate internal functions. From there they can call, lable or add speeds what ever way intel wants. Just remember it's not a crime untill your caught. Also why do you think the Itanium2 runs so slow at 1 ghz with 64 bits. G5 won't even come out that slow and it's 64 bits? Hertz is a good marketing tool, it sells. Even if it's not actual. Remember the Atrari Jaguar the said it was 64 bits. It had like 2 small 32 bit processors. Nobody stopped them. I'll find the article or link and post it on monday.

Peace

 

[ddtlm]

P4 clock speed.

Johnny7896:

The Pentium 4 2.4 runs at 1.2 ghz huh?

So lets pretend for a moment that you are in fact not WRONG.

Pretending that, do you feel bad that the P4 at 1.2ghz (or 1.0ghz or whatever you're claiming) kicks the crap out of the G4 at 1.0ghz? Oooh, gee, so much for "more work per clock." Now that we have that out of the way, lets move on to the impossibility of your wild claims.

Do you care to explain how you hooked up electrical leads to the P4? Did you shave/grind off the outer layer and get straight at the itty bitty transistors? Pretty steady hand! In fact, you'd need an electron microscope to even see them! Furthermore, even if you could expose them without destroying them, it is highly unlikely that you could attach your connectors to them, and if you could do that, its even more unlikely that you would fail to destroy them doing so!

Oh, the fun. Imagine trying to attach a heatsink to your dissected P4 to keep it cool while you are running it... but make sure that metal heatsink doesn't touch those exposed transistors.

Really, since this "test" is "verifiable" you should provide us with detailed instructions. No simple ones, mind you, since dissecting a CPU is no small task.

Are you a troll visiting from PC-land to make fun of the less-knowledgeable Mac users?

 

[Johnny7896]

P4

I'll post the link or article on monday. Judge for yourself. Second, my teacher stated that the P4 was tested at a state university. Their equipment is able to test at that small of size milli or micron. State universities create and inovate many milli, micron, and nano technologies. It wouldn't be a hard task for them to test any exisiting electrical technology. Bash me if you want, I'm right. I'll prove it. Real deal. Third, I've used apple products only for 18 years. I've never and will never own a PC.

Peace

 

[Eliot]

Re: P4 clock speed.

Originally posted by ddtlm
Johnny7896:

The Pentium 4 2.4 runs at 1.2 ghz huh?

So lets pretend for a moment that you are in fact not WRONG.

Pretending that, do you feel bad that the P4 at 1.2ghz (or 1.0ghz or whatever you're claiming) kicks the crap out of the G4 at 1.0ghz? Oooh, gee, so much for "more work per clock." Now that we have that out of the way, lets move on to the impossibility of your wild claims.

Do you care to explain how you hooked up electrical leads to the P4? Did you shave/grind off the outer layer and get straight at the itty bitty transistors? Pretty steady hand! In fact, you'd need an electron microscope to even see them! Furthermore, even if you could expose them without destroying them, it is highly unlikely that you could attach your connectors to them, and if you could do that, its even more unlikely that you would fail to destroy them doing so!

Oh, the fun. Imagine trying to attach a heatsink to your dissected P4 to keep it cool while you are running it... but make sure that metal heatsink doesn't touch those exposed transistors.

Really, since this "test" is "verifiable" you should provide us with detailed instructions. No simple ones, mind you, since dissecting a CPU is no small task.

Are you a troll visiting from PC-land to make fun of the less-knowledgeable Mac users?

:Let's wait and see what the guy means .......if it's not going to stand up, it'll all be revealed by analysis, not by your half-a***d
posturing. Trolls are those whose opinions and methods are ugly,
but your post displays the kind of attitude I personally have no time for. Matey boy NEVER claimed to have done the research himself and was only quoting.......................
Maybe he's misunderstood, maybe he's wrong........what's your mileage in dissing him to this degree?

By the way, flame all you like, being one of the oldest members here has given me the luxury of being gloriously indifferent to anything you infants can dish out.

 

[ddtlm]

Show me that proof!

Johnny7896:

Now I can see that you are in fact not a troll, so at least thats something. Ignorance is no crime, although...

[and let me say I'm tying this on my very own dual 800 G4]

...although this site's constant Mac-centric P4 bashing wears on my nerves. Face it, the P4 with it's 20 stages of pipe, massive transistor count, lame instruction set and quad-pumped 133mhz bus kicks the snot out of most any processor that exists today, including the G4. I don't want to hear any whining about it being a "unfair" victory, cause the point is to go fast, and that's exactly what it does. End of story.

The very-soon-to-be-realeased Itanium II, apparently also reviled here because it is made by Intel, appears to have by a large margin the best floating point performance ever seen on any processor, again including the G4, its nearest compeditor being the 1.3ghz Power4 from IBM. In fact it's integer performance (it's "weakness") appears to be only a little behind the fastest Athlon, and ahead of most processors, including the G4 (at the same clock speed, no less). I don't care if it is a low clock CPU, and I don't care if it has a zillion transistors and dissipates enough heat to cook with. It is possibly the fastest overall processor ever made, and thats the name of the game. End of story.

So here's the point: people can whine, people can cry, people can make crap up, people can spread misinformation, and people can tell themselves I'm wrong, but at the end of the day the P4 and the Itanium II are both very impressive processors, I'd say both are in the top 4 ever made. (Power4 and Alpha are also up there.)

[Edit: fixed some wierd line-wrapping.]
[Edit: went a little easier on John.]

 

[Johnny7896]

Thanks for the help

I understand it's a hard lump to swallow. I should have asked my teacher after class for the website or news article. I was just done for the day and happy to leave. My teachers knows his stuff. He explained it to me just like I told you. I'll get physical and documented truth to you all. This isn't court, but I'll prove it. Relax, I'm right on this and not misunderstood. Look back in computer/electronics history. Remember the error math bug inside the P1. The Dan-0411 bug, another math bug, in the P2 and P-Pro Who found it????? Not intel. Colleges and other sources. A company will not admit to error in production until it is verified by an outside source. Companies will mislead consumers on abilities of products and errors in production (Like windows also). It's a fact of life. It's called business. It's called profit. It continues until, someone sues in civil court, the government cracks down, or the company fixes the problems. Once again there is no legal definition on how to measure Hertz in electronics. You can slice and dice Hertz any way you see fit. You can add hertz together or split them up for a total. The individual companies dictate how to total the measurements. Things aren't always as they seem.

 

[alex_ant]

Re: Re: P4 clock speed.

Originally posted by Eliot


:Let's wait and see what the guy means .......if it's not going to stand up, it'll all be revealed by analysis, not by your half-a***d
posturing. Trolls are those whose opinions and methods are ugly,
but your post displays the kind of attitude I personally have no time for. Matey boy NEVER claimed to have done the research himself and was only quoting.......................
Maybe he's misunderstood, maybe he's wrong........what's your mileage in dissing him to this degree?

By the way, flame all you like, being one of the oldest members here has given me then luxury of being gloriously indifferent to anything you infants can dish out.

Well, hey mate, let me tell you a few things:

1) Cold fusion will become a viable energy source within the next two years. Don't believe me? I've got an article, and I'll link to it later. It was written by these two guys at a state university who are really smart. And because they're from a state university, they're obviously right. Fleischmann and Pons were full of it, but these researchers aren't - you'll see.

2) JFK was assassinated by separatist gypsies upset over American gruyere cheese tariffs. There was a huge long article I read about this in a magazine, and it was formatted into triple columns and was by a guy who had "Dr." in front of his name. Don't believe me? I've got proof, and I'll show it to you later. Monday.

3) I just caught wind of an amazing medical discovery - we've been waiting for the cure for AIDS and it looks like we finally have it! There's apparently this chemical called hydrocholoroisomethasupercalifragilisicexpialadocious-ene that has been proven by prestigious researchers from a state university to cure the AIDS virus, and also stop hair loss and grow the ***** (the male sexual organ so obscene that Macrumors automatically censors it) to 8"-10" as well. Everyone said it would be impossible, and I have no idea how it works, but I heard from this one guy that it does - he heard it from an important researcher in his email.

Knowledge is indeed contagious, but so is idiocy. If you don't want to get flamed, don't post bull****. That's the way it's always been and that's the way it should be.

Alex

 

[ddtlm]

Johnny7896:

Yeah, I shouldn't have been so hard on you so quickly. But keep in mind: big claims need big proof.

alex_ant:

I vote for controlling the flamage now.

 

[Eliot]

Alex_Ant.............. And your point would be........?

 

[D0ct0rteeth]

Re: Re: Re: P4 clock speed.

Originally posted by alex_ant
There's apparently this chemical called hydrocholoroisomethasupercalifragilisicexpialadocious-ene that has been proven by prestigious researchers from a state university to... grow... the male sexual organ... to 8"-10" as well.

I've been taking it for years.. it works

C-

 

[Johnny7896]

I agree but....

I agree the P4 is redesigned, true! I agree the P4 is fast, true! I don't see the P4 2.4 blowing away the Athlon at 1.7 Ghz, true. Something is wrong there. 2.4-1.7=700MHz Where's the big speed gain? Truth there is none over 1.7 Athlon. The P4 should slaughter the Athlon at +700 MHz. But they don't , what's wrong??? It's like I stated before the Hertz increase in the P4 are additive and not actual. I don't agree with misrepresenting a product in hertz.
If the G4 had a 700Mhz gain at MWNY, it would compare or beat both X86 products. The P4 true applied speed gains are minimal at best. That doesn't equate to a 700Mhz gain. That's my point, there's something wrong in the way Intel measures hertz. I want Mac users to better understand the real world speed gains provided by the PowerPC increases and over all bandwidth technologies. Which Intel doesn't provide, but advertises in theory.

I'm right on this...I do enjoy talking about this topic and other people's thoughts. It's just very apparent to me what is really going on.

 

[alex_ant]

Re: Thanks for the help

Originally posted by Johnny7896
My teachers knows his stuff. He explained it to me just like I told you.

Your teacher is either an idiot or you didn't understand him correctly.

I'll get physical and documented truth to you all. This isn't court, but I'll prove it. Relax, I'm right on this and not misunderstood.

Can I ask why you didn't just wait until Monday to drop such a bombshell with no shred of evidence to back yourself up?

Look back in computer/electronics history. Remember the error math bug inside the P1. The Dan-0411 bug, another math bug, in the P2 and P-Pro Who found it????? Not intel. Colleges and other sources.
So let me get this straight: "colleges and other sources" found bugs in the Pentium, Pentium Pro, and Pentium II, and therefore, the P4 is clocked at half its advertised speed.

A company will not admit to error in production until it is verified by an outside source. Companies will mislead consumers on abilities of products and errors in production (Like windows also). It's a fact of life. It's called business. It's called profit. It continues until, someone sues in civil court, the government cracks down, or the company fixes the problems.

I'll tell you what, I heard from this one guy (who really knows his stuff) that this one state researcher discovered that the P4's core is manufactured out of Play-Doh and evaporated pickle juice. Unfortunately, the reporting of materials used to manufacture processor cores is not legally regulated, so the processor companies can say whatever they want.

Once again there is no legal definition on how to measure Hertz in electronics. You can slice and dice Hertz any way you see fit. You can add hertz together or split them up for a total. The individual companies dictate how to total the measurements. Things aren't always as they seem.

This doesn't prove your point. On this list of logical fallacies, you are guilty of at least number 12, and possibly 13 as well.

Alex

 

[alex_ant]

Re: I agree but....

Originally posted by Johnny7896
I agree the P4 is redesigned, true! I agree the P4 is fast, true! I don't see the P4 2.4 blowing away the Athlon at 1.7 Ghz, true. Something is wrong there. 2.4-1.7=700MHz Where's the big speed gain? Truth there is none over 1.7 Athlon. The P4 should slaughter the Athlon at +700 MHz. But they don't , what's wrong???

What's wrong is that the P4's architecture is less efficient. It does less work per clock cycle and thus needs to be clocked higher than the Athlon to achieve the same performance. It would be possible to engineer a 10GHz processor that performs no better than a 66MHz 486. There is no megahertz conspiracy.

It's like I stated before the Hertz increase in the P4 are additive and not actual. I don't agree with misrepresenting a product in hertz.

No worries then, because there is none. Go take a CE class or something.

 

[Eliot]

You're a VERY angry little guy, aren't you?
You may be a very CORRECT angry little guy, but the size comment still applies

 

[alex_ant]

Knobbers who spout nonsense make me angry. And for the record I'm 5'9", which I think is pretty average.

Back on topic: Good to hear about the rising market share.

 

[ddtlm]

Misthruths.

Johnny7896:

You need to do your processor homework; much of what you are saying is the same kind of silly fluff that's floating around pro-Mac sites all the time. It really doesn't hold all that much truth.

It is true that clock-for-clock a P4 is not usually as fast as an Athlon (1.8ghz), but it is also true that it runs at a higher clock speed (2.53ghz). This is a design tradeoff, the lower work-per-clock is in many ways *because* it is clocked higher. The Itanium II on the other hand has MASSIVE work-per-clock, and is clocked much lower (only 1.0ghz). I want to emphisize that these things are related! It is very very hard to design a processor that is high-clock and powerful-per-clock. Arguably, AMD has managed to do a better job of it than Intel with it's Athlon, but Intel also has a very high speed memory system (that 533mhz or 400mhz FSB) and very fast RAM (dual channel RDRAM or DDR-333). In the end, Intel's Pentium 4 is a faster processor than the Athlon, even if it took more clock cycles to make that happen! Like I say, the only thing that matters is what processor ends up the fastest.

"If the G4 had a 700Mhz gain at MWNY, it would compare or beat both X86 products."

Debateable. The G4 is a pretty good chip, it's real bonus is the AltiVec unit, but everything else in it is pretty marginal. Even with 700mhz more clock and DDR-266 like the Athlon has, I am confident that the Athlon would still be faster at many things, although slower at many as well.

"I'm right on this...I do enjoy talking about this topic and other people's thoughts. It's just very apparent to me what is really going on."

Sadly, I don't think you do. You need to read more PC technology reviews rather than these rumor forums. www.tech-report.com and www.anandtech.com are good PC sites I read often.

 

[Eliot]

Originally posted by alex_ant
Knobbers who spout nonsense make me angry. And for the record I'm 5'9", which I think is pretty average.

Actually, to my eternal embarrasment, we may be exactly the same height
My point was give the guy a chance to barbecue himself and he may not need your help.
On the other hand, he may have something, however badly or misleadingly stated and it'll all come clear in the morning.
Clarity is not always the fellow-traveller of revelation(or words to that effect- ask my wife, who is Russian).
Oh, yes and she's a Mac user too, so blame me for all this, not her.