Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by JesseJames, Dec 6, 2003.
and to think we have people crying about how great a G4 imac is and the G5 is getting spanked by Intel. This just goes to show how far back Apples hardware has fallen. The roadmap is in place and the G5 will be gaining ground this next year, but apple has a ways to go before being equal with Intel/Amd. i dont care what apple says about meghertz myth . there is nothing like more clock cycles and Intel has proven it. one more thing the G5 is still in 32 bit mode on this stuff, when the 64 bit os hits all these numbers will change. Anyways we still have the best software.
I think that the fact that companies that Alienware, who special in high-performance pc's, are even acknowledging the G5 as competition says a ton. Before the g5 nobody in the pc world ever said anything about macs. By saying they are better they are acknowledging that they feel like they have to compete. Big props to Apple and IBM!
I am certain that we have seen these tests before, and every single test is in someway heavily biased towards the PC.
MS Word, yeah, that's a wonderfully written Mac app.
and I love that they used Adobe Premiere, Adobe stopped developing the Mac version how many years ago??
I'm not going to blindly say that if the test were unbiased that the Mac would have won, or even necessarily done any better.
But these test would be like cutting off a persons legs and then laughing "Ha, ha, I can run faster than you!!"
of course all the test are biased towards PCs, yet when the Mac wins?
I like using Macs. But as for the work I do I need to have some serious hardware power. Saves time and keeps money coming in.
Apple makes some fantastic stuff. No doubt. But I can't ignore what those PC guys are making. I'd be a fool to do that.
And I'm sure a well-tuned PC could run just as well as any top-of-the-line Mac.
Yup, whenever the Mac loses, the test must be biased!
Did you even read the article?
"We tested the last version common to both platformsPremiere 6.5."
"Given the results of our tests, is it any wonder that users of Premiere for the Mac switched either to Final Cut Pro or to Premiere for Windows? Although both of the apps we ran were called Premiere 6.5, they were quite different programs. In this case, testing the same application doesnt necessarily show which system is faster; rather, our test demonstrates which version of the program better takes advantage of its platform. Premiere simply runs better on Windows than it does on OS X. So good riddance to this poor-performing Mac version."
Please read the entire article next time.
So we have an MS word test even though Word for the Mac is visible slower than its PC version. We have a Premiere 6.5 test that Alienware even says is not indicitive<sp?> of the faster machine, but of the better written version of Premiere. And then we have a Musicmatch vs iTunes test (which surprised me). I wonder if they would update the test w/iTunes vs iTunes? The Q3 results don't surprise me.
I don't discount every test that doesn't have the G5 as the winner, but some of the choices for benchmarking just surprise me. Instead of using Premiere to test conversion/export of video why don't they use an up to date, cross platform program like Soreson Squeeze or Avid XpressDV? And this is the 2nd or third "showdown" that's used Word and I'm just at a loss. MS's port of Word is obviously slower so why even both using it as a test?
Also keep in mind that this only part of the article on Alienware's site. If I can find it, there is an AMD/Intel/G5 showdown in the Dec issue of Maximum PC. AMD won 3 test, Intel won 6, and the G5 won 4. I'll try and find that link and post it (I saw it at another forum).
Speaking in generalities a "well tuned", self built PC can offer close to Mac stability and performance (not just speed but total system performance). But you have to actively keep the PC "in-tune" where as the Mac comes that way out of the box and, for the most part, stays that way.
I did not say that the Mac would win if the test was unbiased, did you read my entire post?
I said that the test was very biased, and therefore does not even merit consideration regardless of the winner.
please don't feed the trolls...
Does it really matter?
When the early PowerMacs were available and the PPC601, 604, and 604e processors were speedier than the Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium MMX, Pentium II, and Pentium III, MS Word and Adobe Premiere still lagged on Mac.
Why worry about it?
Is it going to make your machine less effective suddenly? No!
All those people using a 2.5 GHz or faster computer doing e-mail and surfing the web really have an advantage, don't they? Their machines are spending 99 percent of their time idle, instead of 89 percent. I make up my time with the ease of use Mac OS X and compatible software give me.
I think I can say that, while they've saved milliseconds, I've saved hours.
Please contribute to the discussion.
This article was in macworld... I read it, I wasn't very surprised.
this is OLD news. Look, for all but a few people, this doesn't matter. It's fast enough.
why didn't they show photoshop tests? The macs videocards are underpowered here, I've seen better framerates on quake 3 on a dual 2 g5 than they showed. A mirosoft word test is just plain silly. WHY NOT PUT FINAL UT PRO AGAINST (oops) premiere, or preview up against acrobat reader. And Finally, I'd like to see those tests again, with each machine's ram maxed out, and with IDENTICAL video cards. (or as lose to identical as possible.) I could pull better tests out my ass, and really the point is moot until, I'd say, the end of january. thats when a recount of the numbers will really matter.
my Powerbook just turned into a Pumpkin, and it is not even midnight yet !
DAMN those PC comparison tests, damn them...(waving fist)
hmmm, these test are always pretty pointless.
Sure the Word test isn't fair but as plain old Joe if I mainly used my machine to write word docs I would choose the machine that let me do the job the fastest. I don't care if it's been optimised or not, I just want what does the best job for me.
I agree if you're going to do benchmarks try to do them on comparible software but personally I don't think you can do a direct comparison...lets face it the OS's are different and the way you interact with them are different so you can never compare an app directly.
For those who say benchmarks are important because they can afford the latest machine I think it's silly, either PC or Mac will do an outstanding job and the real choice comes down to preference of the OS. The Mac might be faster but if you're more comfortable with a PC you'll work faster on that and vice versa.
At the end of the day if I was selling a computer I'd use the tests that worked in my favour and helped me sell more machines...it's only business at the end of the day! Only rich people or fools spend $3000 on a machine and don't investigate the market!!!
All that is is a copy/paste of part of MacWorld's comparison, spun by Alienware to make themselves look good. However, they conveniently left out the Photoshop section, and tested Premiere and Word. I would have liked to see Premiere AND Final Cut Pro tested on the Mac, to see the comparison there.
Sometimes you're ahed, sometimes you're behind.
Having actually read the Macworld article Mac users have little to worry about. First of all, Word is Word, a Microsoft App. The PC beat the Mac by 5 or so seconds oh boo hoo. The gaming test simply shows what we already know and is promising if anything showing that Macs are finally starting to catch up with PCs in that category. Finally, Premiere, as Macworld said, is an outdated app on the Mac and poorly optimized. Final Cut Pro is the weapon of choice in that category for Mac people. Alienware also conviently left out the categories in which the Powermac outperformed her equivalent competitors. I agree with others in saying that it is good that performance PC makers are finally identifying Apple as competition.
You missed the point I was trying to make.
Now isn't that ironic? You call me the troll yet you are the one attempting to antagonize me. Nice try, but I won't fall into your trap.
I also agree. Apple is back on track with the G5. Good things can't be too far off now.
I like that Alienware acknowledged that the mac had made strides in gaming but using un-optimized apps and not including photoshop is just blatant admission, but who cares these tests are old and any way who uses 14000 page word documents??? The Dual 2.6 will be an even bigger improvement.
Agreed. Very few people who are in the market for an Alienware PC are looking at the G5, and even fewer people who are in the market for the G5 would ever consider an Alienware PC. I'm sure the people are Alienware aren't stupid, and they know that they aren't competing with Apple (they're competing with Boxx and other "extreme PC" type manufacturers, and to a lesser extent the Dells and Compaqs). So the only reason they could be running this ad (other than the possibility that they are stupid and want to waste their advertising budget...we'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this one) is that they think the G5 is the performance standard that everyone wants to compare to now, and they want to try to show they are competitive with it.
As for the tests themselves, yeah, of course a PC is going to win in MS Word or Premiere. That's like saying the Mac is going to win in iTunes or Logic (where the PC isn't even developed for anymore, just like Premiere is not developed for the Mac). Duh. Now tell us something we don't know.
Can the Alienware run Mac OS X?
Quake? Man, if Mac users were hardcore gamers, they would either:
a. buy a console
b. build their own PC.
My computer is so freakin' problem free, it is getting boring. Of course I worked on some NT 4 PC's last month and jeez, they sucked.
This is a bit hard to put in words, but if they are going to do "real world" tests, then they're gonna have to use "real world" programs. ie. what's the point of comparing the speed of Internet Explorer on Mac vs PC if 99% (just an example) of the Mac users use Safari?
I mean, how would u feel if Apple did a test on the speed of Safari and gave a score of 0 to PCs because (obviously) Safari doesn't run on Windows? It's just as stupid!
I do give credit to Alienware for using Musicmatch against iTunes (I've only made one of my PC friends download iTunes, and he doesn't particularly like it...).
I also noted that Alienware was a company that sold "High-performing gaming systems"... wouldn't this have an effect on the Q3 tests?
I agree that the Premiere test was a bit unfair... if so many PC users used Premiere and so many Mac users used Final Cut Pro, the why compare Premiere on the two platforms when no Mac users uses Premiere? It's useless information, tweaked to give Alienware an advantage and a sales boost (yes... it is like an ad, isn't it?)
All in all, i think the test was a bit ~yawn...
It is interesting, tho, that the G5 suddenly becomes a competition...
This is great. This is clearly a business decision for Alienware. They must be feeling the hurt from the G5's. This took away from labor dollars for them to create this site. The G5 is impressive and taking away sales from alienware.