Is this a joke

thies

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
202
0
Its actually quite simple. Over the last days alone I saw three real life "benchmakrks" being released that simply gauged the speed for a specific task at hand taking a Mac and a PC into account. The outcome was that the Macs are dogslow.
What else do we have? a lot of customers who only recently switched to Macs. Will they remain there seeing that they are stuck on slow hardware with Apple seemingly unable to release anything on par with x86? Even if they could push 1,6GHz chips out of the door in the next months it would be dated compared to x86.
I'm interested in getting a job done fast. Blinky shiny GUIs I don't care about.
 

voicegy

macrumors 65816
"Blinky shiny GUIs I don't care about."

That's ok. There's plenty of customers out there who DO care about such stuff. When my mom goes into the Apple store and is attracted to the pretty, blinky, cute iMac, believe me, the first words out of her mouth won't be "What's the benchmark bus speed on these?"

Who is Apple trying to sell their computers to these days, folks?! Think about it...sheesh!!!
 

thies

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
202
0
if I think about their marketing hype about "its based on UNIX!" and the "MHz myth" campaign, your grandma is surely not the only targeted customer.
 

macktheknife

macrumors 6502a
Jan 24, 2002
639
0
Re: Whining

Originally posted by Kethoticus
Disclaimer: I'm not a Mac-basher, just someone who's slowly finding more and more reasons to look elsewhere for his computing needs.
Exactly. I like Macs as much as the next Macuser, but I am not going to pay an obscene amount of money for something that is slower than a beige box.

Look, if Macs were twice as expensive but twice as fast, then the Porche vs. Chevy analogy would make sense. While OS X is inherently more stable than XP, the truth is that Macs *are* slower than comparable PCs. My old Dell laptop running on XP with a 800 MHz P3 processor and 256 MB of RAM was faster than my current 550 MHz TiBook with 516 MB of RAM. I'm sure that those nice Dual G4s are pretty fast, but I can buy a complete 2 GHz Dell system for about $1,200. Yes, it'll probably crash more often, but it's almost a third of the price of a Dual G4.

I *really* would love to buy another Mac in the future, but I simply cannot fork over almost another $3k for a slower-than-average machine.

Again, don't mean to start a flame war. I'm just telling it like it is.
 

Rower_CPU

Moderator emeritus
Oct 5, 2001
11,219
0
San Diego, CA
Speed vs Dependability

Sure, I could get my tasks done quicker using a PC...in between crashes, IRQ conflicts and driver issues.

For me it's worthwhile to have an uninterrupted workflow where I don't worry about the machine not doing what it's supposed to.

I think most Mac users feel this way, otherwise they would have gone PC a while ago. The thing is that the current performance delta has just gotten ridiculously large...and with no signs from Apple or Motorola that that's going to change anytim soon.

Customers get impatient if they feel they are not given the service they deserve, and we have a lot of impatient Mac customers these days.

For me OS X is reason enough to stay with Macs...despite the slower performance. Jaguar will improve things a lot for many people, but it's not the shiny new hardware that everyone craves.
 

thies

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
202
0
which is mostly an issue if you run Windows and there are more OSes out there than that ;)
 

rice_web

macrumors 6502a
Oct 25, 2001
584
0
Minot, North Dakota
Do any of you even understand why DDR isn't being used? Well...

(1) With the current batch of G4s, the performance gain is marginal... at best. The Apollo doesn't support DDR, so DDR helps only in disk access, etc. (and don't tell me that the XServe benefits from DDR tremendously, servers are disk intensive and need that extra bandwidth; there is no extra bandwidth to the processor)

(2) Only the G3 currently supports DDR. However, Apple has marketed the G4 to such an extent, that moving back to IBMs G3s would seem like a step backwards. The funny thing is, the Sahara is running at about 1.2GHz, supports 200MHz system buses, and also supports DDR memory. I'd like to see benchmarks with a system of the above mentioned configuration versus the 933MHz G4 configuration. It wouldn't even be close; the hands down winner would be the Sahara (except in a couple of Altivec-enhanced programs)

Oh, and yes, the P4 kills the G4 as it currently stands. If not from a raw horsepower standpoint, from a performance-value standpoint for certain (although, it's my opinion that it wins in both)
 

tcmcam

macrumors member
Jun 14, 2002
54
0
Jaguar still too slow.

OK, I went to the Apple store today. They had the new iMac 17" (800 mhz G4) there with 512MB RAM. It was running the latest beta of Jaguar.

Yes, some of the "UI gizmos" with the dock, moving, resizing, etc were faster. Other than that. This is a VERY underpowered machine for $2000.

My wife uses a P4 1.8 ghz machine with 512MB ram running Windows XP (with 19" LCD flat panel, DVR-A04 drive, $1900). It absolutely screams versus the iMac. I really, really, REALLY, want Apple to succeed, but they are close to hopelessly behind in terms of processor power.

I think too many seasoned Mac users have become "used to" Apple's definition of performance. I know many Mac users hate Windows XP, fine, but they should at least "surf the net" using IE or Mozilla on Windows XP and see how much faster it is. Not even close, Windows XP is blowing it away. And Windows XP is the 3rd release of a "fully protected, pre-emptive OS". First was NT, then 2000, now XP. Yes, NT and 95 and 98 were full of blue screens, but XP is pretty darn solid.

Grant you, there is nothing as nice as iMovie or iDVD on a PC. But they take so long to launch, even in Jaguar.

I am just praying that the new PowerMac's are simply awesome. As Mossberg from WSJ said the other day: "mhz is not a true benchmark of performance, but the gap has gotten so wide between Pentium4 and G4 that it is creating a gap that Apple cannot ignore."

Don't be afraid to demand a lot of Apple. We're the friendly people. If we don't, those Linux and Windows folks will be even tougher on Apple.

Remember, Apple may be getting switchers, but they are getting the easy ones. They are getting the people that have used Windows 3.1 for eight years and never upgraded their PC. I want Apple to blow away Windows XP in EVERY benchmark (or at least be on par).
 

Rower_CPU

Moderator emeritus
Oct 5, 2001
11,219
0
San Diego, CA
I'm quite surprised that the Apple Store you went to had a new iMac and Jaguar installed on it.

Neither one ships for weeks...which store did you visit and which build of Jaguar was it?

One thing about your assessment: the word "beta" screams out that this is not a final product and as such can't be used to make any kind of fair comparison.
 

tcmcam

macrumors member
Jun 14, 2002
54
0
I was at the Apple store in Tampa, FL. It had a 17" iMac and Jaguar on it. I'm not sure what build, but the sales rep said they updated it over the weekend.

Yes, I agree that Jaguar is still beta and maybe it will be faster in final release, but it is not going to magically get 200% faster.

Please understand, I want Apple to succeed, but they are just being killed by Motorola's incompetence with the G4.

Don't be a sucker for Apple's marketting.
 

mr.w

macrumors regular
May 17, 2002
175
0
Colorado
Originally posted by voicegy

That's ok. There's plenty of customers out there who DO care about such stuff. When my mom goes into the Apple store and is attracted to the pretty, blinky, cute iMac, believe me, the first words out of her mouth won't be "What's the benchmark bus speed on these?"

Who is Apple trying to sell their computers to these days, folks?! Think about it...sheesh!!!
EXACTLY...

as for the porche thing -
here is my take on it........

Okay an apple computer is like a porche (it's elegant, stylish, reliable, etc.) it's also wanted by a lot of people... but you have to pay a lot for it. It's zippy (granted I guess the latest Powermacs are more like circa 1995 porche's due to the lack of new technology in them) Porche's, like Apple computers, are also built for specific tasks -> porche for pure speed and performance, and Apple computers for Digital Video, Graphic design, and User friendly interface. Porche's stand out, as do apple's (you get a lot of ooo's and ahhhh's) The owners of both these machines are, for the most part, extremely "close" to their machines... they care about them and take good care of them, and they both retain their value fairly well.

A PC is boaring... like a honda civic. Some Honda civics have a lot of upgrades making them a lot faster -> like those japanese street racing cars... (the're equiped with cutting edge technology) Some PC's are more highly equiped aswell. For the most part, PC's have more Mhz' (if that really matters) DDR ram (at least) higher cache and bus speeds, and mroe storage space. PC's like honda racing cars, are always in the shop getting fixed or upgraded, and can only retain top quality performance for short time spans. (((Porche's and Apple's are built for the long haul, and can keep pluggin' away for long periods of time)))

Overall, most people would rather have a porche for the looks, and reliability as aposed to a honda civic that has really high performance for short periods of time.

The same goes for the Apple computer.

__________________________
So to get back on topic... the new iMac, while costly and relitively slow compared to a top of the line PC, is reliable, elegant, and user friendly. You really do get what you pay for.

If apple computers were such a rip off then why has the market share risen??? Why would people even stay with them if they were a sound investment? Why have so many people stayed with apple computers for such long times??? (many their entire life)
 

Chryx

macrumors regular
Jul 8, 2002
248
0
(1) With the current batch of G4s, the performance gain is marginal... at best. The Apollo doesn't support DDR, so DDR helps only in disk access, etc. (and don't tell me that the XServe benefits from DDR tremendously, servers are disk intensive and need that extra bandwidth; there is no extra bandwidth to the processor)

There's something you aren't taking into account there, contention.

I'm sure I've seen a few benchmarks of the single processor Xserve doing EXTREMELY well in processor bound stuff (right up there with a DP Quicksilver)

and the obvious answer is, the bandwidth for IO isn't _reducing_ the bandwidth available for the processor, such a thing shouldn't be ignored :)
 

thies

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
202
0
well, its Porsche, not Porche. And a G4 would be a Porsche with a Ford Model T engine installed. All the tasks you describe are CPU intensive ones, whoever has a little bit of sense would use whichever platform provides the highest CPU performance.
Wasn't it that Pixar does not use Apple computers? What more do you need o hear to realize that Apples are crap performace wise and are actually the Honda Civic out there?
 

terramax

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
10
0
London, England
My 2 cents worth

Ok...ok... now, I started this discussion, and I've browsed through the replies. Firstly thanks guys for giving me such a varied and intuitive opinion on my remark about Mac bus speeds.

Looking back at everything I think it's fair to say:
-Mac case design RULES, they just look fabulous
-Hardware design is also good, DVD-R, intergrated flat panels, networking, wireless networking, USB, Firewire all in the box
-The OS is brilliant

The only BUT would be that no matter how you look at it, some of the hardware Apple currently employs is out of date.

That is they only problem.

Now let's just sit back, sip a martini and wait for that new G4 Tower/TiBook/ to FRY those Wintel machines... :)
 

voicegy

macrumors 65816
Re: My 2 cents worth

Originally posted by terramax
Now let's just sit back, sip a martini and wait for that new G4 Tower/TiBook/ to FRY those Wintel machines... :)
Well, after all of us gettin' all hot under the collar and posting all over the place about all things Apple for the past couple of days, that sound like a GREAT idea!

I'll have a Lemon Drop, please.:)
 

aussiesteve

macrumors newbie
Jul 24, 2002
14
0
Brisbane
Absolutely correct! 100mhz bus speed is a complete joke. Even the crappiest pc’s have a 133mhz bus. Ram is PC133. Premium prices = premium product!
 

D*I*S_Frontman

macrumors 6502
May 20, 2002
450
17
Appleton,WI
This is something I posted on another thread, but it seems appropriate for this discussion as well. Forgive the self-plagarism. I did amend it a bit...

----------------------------------

Apple looks to me like a company treading water, waiting for the next huge wave of hardware to be ready for release. Jobs already knows he can't ride on this current hardware platform much longer and is just trying to milk the last remaining unit sales out of this depressed economic environment before the big bombs hit--new PowerMac designs with beefier processors/mobos.

Marketing has little to do with real-world performance. To successfully sell a high-end item you have to create an aura, a perception of clear superiority people are willing to pay extra for, a great user experience, a chic/hip factor, an us-vs.-the-world mindset, and a perceived user identity people want to identify with. Once you have succeeded on all of these fronts you can name your price and people will pay it.

The Porsche vs. Honda comparison falls apart. I would offer instead the Harley vs. Japanese motorcycle analogy, with Apple being Harley.

Harley Davidson marketing:
AURA--toughness, dangerous, free-spirited
SUPERIORITY--over-engineered, ruggedly built, unchanging design, "the good ol' days"
USER EXPERIENCE--loud exhaust note, low torque mean pull to the engine
CHIC/HIP--instant access to the "Easy Rider" mystique of the cool, free, rootless drifter
US VS THEM--"American Made"..."no rice burner"... etc.
USER IDENTITY--tough, freedom-loving unconventional rebel who doesn't follow the crowd.

Apple marketing:
AURA--creativity, free-spirited, "Think Different"
SUPERIORITY--UNIX-based OS for the masses, user friendliness, AltiVec, rugged machines that have a relatively long life and low TCO
USER EXPERIENCE--ease of set-up/usage/peripheral additions, intuitive and consistent interface
CHIC/HIP--Cool trend-setting cases, Hollywood darlings
US VS THEM--anti M$/Intel
USER IDENTITY--creativity-loving non-hacker who doesn't follow the crowd

BTW--just how old and out-of-date is Harley's technology? Several decades? Why do people buy them? SUCCESSFUL BRANDING. People pay $10K+ for a bike with two air-cooled coffee-can-sized pistons that idles like a sputtering lawnmower. Japanese manufacturers make sophisticated bikes that run like Rolexes, purr like kittens, never leak oil, and can smoke any Harley ever made 0-60 without leaving 2nd gear. Does anyone here think Harley gives a tinker's damn about market share when people will preorder a tricked-out Softtail for $50 Gs sight unseen?

Where even this illustration breaks down, however, it that Apple is KNOWN for innovation and it is part of their claims of superiority. During this time of hardware challenges, Apple is dramatically losing this perception. Apple is also known for being the "creative professional's computer," the "content authoring machine," but a few more months with our current PM lineup and more of those professionals are going to be buying Athlons to remain competitive as far as their production turnarounds go.

Steve Jobs knows all of this. He is probably screaming daily at his production teams to get the new PMs online so the company's image is not further tarnished in the professional community. Steve know that in this market, image is everything--if Apple becomes "the slow computer with the glitzy OS, funky case, and is 3x more expensive than a faster PC," they're dead.

You are watching a company fighting against timing glitches. OSX 10.2 done early but PMs running behind. Shake ready but no monster platform to run it on. If we would have had some big iron come out when Jaguar did, we would not be paying $129 for it now--it would be shipping with all new machines or $19.99 online as an upgrade (or free @ CompUSA). But Apple needs income, so we must suffer for the delay. Same with iTools. It was a crappy PR move to start charging us, necessitated by the lack of new innovative PowerMacs to sell. I can't even imagine what the PM unit sales look like now--anyone who knows ANYTHING about this company or the technology of their current lineup is not buying. Waiting. I bet there is a virtual boycott of high-end Macs right now, or at least there should be.

When Steve Jobs unveils the new line of PowerMacs, I predict that his upbeat pitch will have a note of relief--".. ahh... we've made it!" Once another industry-leading hardware platform for the amazing potential of the OS is released, Apple will command respect again. Market perception will be bolstered and this perception will filter down to consumer lines. Apple ads will have teeth again. And, without dropping profit percentages at all on any of the product lines, Apple will make sizable market share gains.

Oh, and Microsoft will be afraid... very afraid... especially if AppleWorks goes on steriods and becomes a real competitor to Office and Apple develops it's own OS-native browser.

But if this takes another year to happen, Apple will be marginalized. Marketshare will dwindle to nothing. A $40 billion war chest can disappear quite quickly when no one is buying.

To answer the original question: yes, a new $2k system, even a consumer one, with a 100mhz system bus is absurd. Not that the price is wrong--for everything you're getting it is a value. But the fact that they have the technology (DDR RAM) and are deliberately holding out on new buyers is detestable.
 

Rower_CPU

Moderator emeritus
Oct 5, 2001
11,219
0
San Diego, CA
Excellent post!

Now here's the question for Apple supporters. Do we "help" Apple by buying machines and subscribing to .mac...or do we send them a message to get on the ball?
 

job

macrumors 68040
Jan 25, 2002
3,794
3
in transit
Just wait till Alpha gets wind of the Harley comments in the above post. :D

I think he even has a Softtail....:)
 

groovebuster

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,215
39
3rd rock from the sun...
Originally posted by mr.w
EXACTLY...

as for the porche thing -
here is my take on it........
:eek:

Sorry, but if you start to elaborate about cars as a comparison for computers, then at least finally spell the brand names right!

It is P - O - R - S - C - H - E !!!!!

OK?? You experts...! ;) You probably never saw one from close so far anyway...

Jesus! :D

And now go on with Apoll/Windoughs flame-war! ;)

groovebuster
 

DidotCicero

macrumors newbie
Jul 13, 2002
15
0
Netherlands
Stupid processor discussions

Listen you people, I'm getting a bit pissed off when I'm hearing you constantly complaining about Apple's 'slow' computers. It is really sad and even silly.

Most of the complainers are probably consumer users, not professional users. What kind of programmes are you running that need that kind of speed??? Word? PowerPoint? Does it make you type faster? Games? Are you stupid enough to pay $2000 for a games computer? Why don't you buy youselves a Nintendo or something? Keep it real! Personally I think it is an insult for your mac to let him run just games!

Let me tell you, I'm a professional graphic designer. At work I'm using a G4 450 mHz DP with 1,5 Gb RAM.
How come this is enough for me to work with, even if 'm editing high rez. images? Sure, sometimes I wish it was faster but still I get my jobs done, within my deadlines. My Mac is my realiable buddy and collegue.

Yes, there are Athlon-machines that have a faster processor. So what? Most of the times (yes, I know there's a Athlon currently faster) a mac is twice as fast as a peecee, of course in certain applications (most of the times these are the applications that count, like Photoshop etc.).

You want to buy a peecee because " it's cheaper and faster" then buy one, for gods sake! Stop telling everybody that you are going to buy one.
Hell, hust buy one and STOP COMPLAINING! You might even like it... ... until the first error...

Yes, MacOSX is probably a bit slow now. Slower than one might expect from a new OS. But with OSX.2 things will eventually change.

No, I'm not using OSX yet. Simply because all my applications are OS9 based, so there's no need for me to upgrade. But I will, maybe in half a year or so. When I buy upgrades for Illustrator and Photoshop.

> DidotCicero
 

Megaquad

macrumors 6502a
Jul 12, 2001
817
0
You are running OS 9? Then you might consider that some people need power of multitasking and protected memory,OS 9 is relatively fast even on my crappy G3. But then again..look at speed of OSX..even dual 1 ghz crawls in it.
There is no excuse for poor performance in games for 2000$ computer,and FYI,games aren't main problem,problem is that simply surfing the web in OS X is slow,applications take too much time to launch and interface is also slow.
And don't ever again underestimate the power of consumer user,especially switched power-users from pc platform.They have high expectations and needs,unfortunately they are surprised how slower things are.
 

groovebuster

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,215
39
3rd rock from the sun...
Re: Stupid processor discussions

Originally posted by DidotCicero
Let me tell you, I'm a professional graphic designer. At work I'm using a G4 450 mHz DP with 1,5 Gb RAM.
How come this is enough for me to work with, even if 'm editing high rez. images? Sure, sometimes I wish it was faster but still I get my jobs done, within my deadlines. My Mac is my realiable buddy and collegue.
It's nice for you, when you don't need faster gear, nobody forces you to buy a faster machine. :)

BUT... there ARE people who want to do more with their computers than just using Photoshop and Illutsrator.

Video and Audio apps need a LOT of power to work with at an acceptable speed or to meet the demands for a project. Don't be pissed, it is just like that.

Also it is always the question if the hardware is worth the price... A QS 800MHz is definetely a joke considering the specs, not less the two bigger models. I see a relation between the price and the performance of a computer. And the performance is always in relation to the competition on the market. And like it or not... the competition is the Windows platform.

MacOS (X) is one thing, the hardware it is running on another. If Apple would double the price of the OS and as a result change the pricing of their computers to something that is oriented at the current prices for the components, I wouldn't mind at all. It is just that the hardware they sell these days isn't worth the money by far. The OS instead is a fine piece of software (Jaguar I am talking about).

Ask yourself what a pro Mac like the QS 800 would cost, when you brake it down to the components built in. You will see that the price is far too high.

So let's see what August will bring for the pro users. I am anxious but also worried that the new PowerMacs could be another disappointment...

groovebuster
 

beez7777

macrumors 6502a
Aug 5, 2002
757
0
Notre Dame
Originally posted by iH8Quark
That's the most rediculous comment i've ever read on these forums. :rolleyes:
Before you start bitching about how bad macs are because of their low bus speed, why don't you learn how to spell? Until then stick with your pee-cee and dont complain