Apple G5, same song, same rip-off

[Doobie]

Apple is preparing to release G5 PowerMacs. They claim these are the fastest PCs in the world. They're like Bush on WMDs, no credibility. Everytime Apple releases a new PC, Applel claims it to be the world's fastest, no matter how slow and expensive it is.

Steve Jobs says they're "the world's fastest personal computer." Jobs showed both benchmarks and Photoshop tests that illustrate the new dual 2GHz PowerMac outperforming a dual 3GHz Xeon machine.

Photoshop? Why don't they just call Mac "Photoshop Toasters"? How about Divx encoding speed? Or, Doom III benchmarks? Guess what, a non-photoshop test would show what a DOG the PowerMac G5 is.

And, what's up with running a 64-bit G5 up against an old 32-bit Xeon? Why not against an AMD Opteron or an Intel Itanium? You know why not.

That duel PowerMac is $3000. For $2000 you get a single 1.6GHz system with a Nvidia GeForce FX5200 dog. And, a $1000 PC will leave Apple's $2000 system in the dust.

[TactX]

Everytime Apple releases a new PC, Applel claims it to be the world's fastest, no matter how slow and expensive it is.
- AMD sells CPUs by their performance-ratings, instead of its real clockrate.
- Intel has made the P4 pipelines extralong so they can achieve higher clockrates without actually improving performance.

Anyone is cheating somehow :rolleyes:
That's why you have to do your own tests.

Photoshop? Why don't they just call Mac "Photoshop Toasters"? How about Divx encoding speed? Or, Doom III benchmarks? Guess what, a non-photoshop test would show what a DOG the PowerMac G5 is.
Why Photoshop? Propably much more Apple users are using it for Photoshop instead of gaming?

Do you really think that anyone would buy an Apple G5 because of its Doom3 or video encoding performance?
Some people do really work with their computers, and I would'nt call encoding or playing FPS "real work". Would you?

That duel PowerMac is $3000. For $2000 you get a single 1.6GHz system with a Nvidia GeForce FX5200 dog. And, a $1000 PC will leave Apple's $2000 system in the dust.
Yeah! With its 7200 rpm fans, the $1000 PC will definetely "blow" away the Apple :D

What you write is a bit too subjective for me. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But you need to make yourself clear that other users have other needs, that may differ quite a bit from yours.

[bilu]

Worth reading:

Apple's G5 Speeds Challenged
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/03/06/24/1232237.shtml?tid=126&tid=181


Bilu

[chainsaw135]

@doobie i'm not fan of bush, really i'm not but i dont appreciate you bashing the presiden't of my country in a forum that has nothing to do with BUSH or USA.. 'gets old you american haters really it does' And to make my point....

I have been a member for a long long time not once did I bring up the french or any other country, with that said I will leave it at that. Hope you get the point...

[The Edge]

@bilu
Very good. Read the messages posted by Apple users at the bottom of article:)


Bren

[bilu]

@The Edge

I just read a few. To me the most interesting comments were like this:

Mac User: "Who cares? As long as it is faster than G4 I'll be happy. They risked a bad press for nothing"

PC User:"You're right, benchmarks don't matter anymore, only for hardcore hardware fans. Since the PII-500 it gets the job done"


These were my words, not the real comments. But I agree with them mostly.

Speed now is for:

- 3D
- A/V encoding
- Speech recognition (hasn't grown so well as Intel was expecting though)

It's not that hard to get W2K + Office2K in a PII-500 w/128 MB RAM and 20 GB disk or less fitting most users needs and running fast and stable enough. :rolleyes:


But the industry has got to keep selling :D


Bilu

[Doobie]

Yes, AMD and Intel cheat to impress, but they're still faster than PowerMacs and they're much less expensive.

The trouble is that Apple tries to sell their Photoshop Toasters to the general market. Sorry, most Apple buyers are not photo professionals. And, even someone who is a professional graphics user can find platforms much faster than the PowerMac.

I wish the ancient Intel platform had some real competition, but the Mac isn't it.

BTW, Chainsaw135, I love America! But, some analogies fit so well that they cannot be resisted.

[smiller667]

So who IS the "average Apple user", then? Personally, I always thought it is either the average user who prefers the Apple GUI for whatever reason (more intuitive? easier to use? known from school/college/uni? I really don't know) or yes, simply the "professional graphics user". As for A/V use, wasn't Apple the first to include dvd-r drives in their standard configurations? How about Firewire?

I have been using both macs and wintels at work (at home, I stick with wintels) and while I fail to see a fundamental superiority of either platform, I believe there are uses for both platforms and it probably boils down to personal preference. If you are into FPS, you probably want to burn your money buying the latest nvidia for your intel platform, if you do DTP & graphics for a living and have been using Macs for ages, why change if the mac platform offers more than adequate performance?

I am always surprised at the degree of messianism shown by both Intel and Macintosh devotees ... if they are so convinced and never long for some of the other platform's advantages, why do they have to be so belligerent, essentially wasting their time on proclaiming essentially theirs is bigger, longer, faster or whatever? Can't people simply pick whatever they prefer?

[bilu]

More news :D

Apple Hardware VP Defends Benchmarks
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/03/06/24/2154256.shtml?tid=126&tid=181

Bilu

[chainsaw135]

@doobie look you can side step all you want, but just a few lines up in a sticky doom9 has posted about this very thing so keep such political comments to yourself next time funny guy....

btw I have analogies for the french goverment as well, but this is not the place and regardless you need to understand that!!!!

[midiguy]

yeah.. I've been tempted a lot of times to make political cracks (especially considering that we are such a diverse group of people from so many different countries), but I control myself in respect of the rules...

[auenf]

Originally posted by Doobie
That duel PowerMac is $3000. For $2000 you get a single 1.6GHz system with a Nvidia GeForce FX5200 dog. And, a $1000 PC will leave Apple's $2000 system in the dust.

but a x86 wont run OS X

which i will require soon for DVD Studio Pro 2.0 (which is really DVDMaestro 3).

we wont get a G5 to run DVDSP, the dual 450mhz G4 crashes fast enough as it is (on OS 9.2.2).

OS 10.3 wont be out till september, and thats when the G5 will really stretch its legs with full 64-bit support, till then it will be restricted.

maybe when 10.3 is out, it will be benched properly with an athlon64 at similar speed with 64-bit windows (will 64-bit windows be out by 2010?

on the software side of things, apple is on a winner, if only the hardware was cheaper, altho the Apple Cinema Display HD is fairly good value.

Enf...

[Doobie]

Apple Hardware VP Defends Benchmarks

The Apple Hardware VP is right on some counts. Intel's hyperthreading is a joke. It has little effect on software and is as likely to harm performance as help, in spite of having the bios report a duel-processor system. Still, Intel is working on improving hyptherthreading and programs written for hyperthreading will show a significant improvement in the next generation.

But, I don't buy his compiler argument or some of his other remarks.

The Defense misses my real objections. Apple is comparing a new 64-bit CPU against old 32-bit CPUs while ignoring the 64-bit CPUs Intel and AMD offer. Apple is also ignoring benchmarks that would be meaningful to most Mac buyers from business apps to games. For example, I would like to know how fast it does Xvid, or even MP3, encodes. And, most of all, when you control for dollars, Apple is blown totally out of the race.

I don't know anything about how easy the new Mac OS is to use. But, My Windows XP is plenty easy to use and for business or schools, the user shouldn't be messing with the OS anyway. Windows XP can boot-up to a program or even just the desktop and then ease-of-use is just a matter of the software running on top of the OS.

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

Chainsaw135, your messages about me and my post indicate an insecurity. Move on and stop spamming this thread.

[bilu]

I think you can compare 32-bit and 64-bit CPUs in this case because Apple is proposing a desktop, not a server. And it's proposing a 64-bit desktop now.

Let's wait for their servers to include G5 or AMD releasing a 64-bit backward compatible CPU and then make a more fair test.

About OSX: only a Mac user can tell how great it is to use. You and I haven't got a clue ;)

Bilu