Operating Systems > macOS
What the fuck is this shit???
billy_gates:
quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
Why is it that you only take the Photoshop tests in consideration? What about the other tests? The G5 beat the PC hands down at the audio software test. The G5 was reportedly 3-5 times faster than the PC at the scientific/genoma/DNA software test, confirmed by the CEO's testimonial. It even beats the PC at Quake III. How many tests do you need to see that the G5 is much faster than today's Pentium or Xeon?
--- End quote ---
well to be able to see if one system is significantly faster than another system. I need to use them both. I know Apple is, not full of shit, but stretching the truth... just as any other company would.
And again, I recall the 867 G4 vs 1.8P4. I have a 733 and a 1.7Athlon. Jobs said the 867 is 80% faster at Photoshop. I would say the PC is probably 80% faster than my Mac, no matter what I do, no matter how I reformat it, etc. Because of that blatant lie from Apple I do not trust these results and will never trust any of their results or any other company's results. I do agree that the G5 is one fast Puppy. But I doubt it is as fast as they say. Again, I will just have to wait until I can use one in an Apple Store.
bossesjoe:
quote:Originally posted by jeffberg: Mac Capitalist:
And again, I recall the 867 G4 vs 1.8P4. I have a 733 and a 1.7Athlon.
--- End quote ---
Athlons have shorter piplelines then a Pentium 4, by far. This would definitally affect the outcome. Doesn't everyone and their cat know that mghz does not equal power?
[ June 29, 2003: Message edited by: bossesjoe: too lazy to post much ]
Laukev7:
Apple claimed to be 80% faster than the Pentium IV, not the Athlon. As Bossesjoe said, there is quite a difference between a 1.8 GHz P4 and a 1.7 Athlon (assuming 1.7 is the actual speed of the processor, not AMD's approximate P4 equivalent, but even then it's still an approximation).
billy_gates:
quote:Originally posted by bossesjoe: too lazy to post much:
Athlons have shorter piplelines then a Pentium 4, by far. This would definitally affect the outcome. Doesn't everyone and their cat know that mghz does not equal power?
[ June 29, 2003: Message edited by: bossesjoe: too lazy to post much ]
--- End quote ---
yes, but AMD rates it a 2100+ as fast a 2.1P4. That would not equal an increase from 80% slower to 80% faster. I just don't understand why you guys believe every word that comes out of corporation mouths? All they want to do is sell stuff, make money. Whether the product is good or not is company specific. But the bottom line is that they will do anything to sell you their product. Lying is in that list of anything. I don't trust any corporate comparisons, they will always favor themselves. Just like I wouldn't call (that one auto insurance company with the Ford Explorers on their commericals that say they will give u the rates of their competitors, can't fucking remember their name) I wouldn't call them and ask for others rates and expect to find any one elses rates that are better than theirs. Why would you expect Apple not to stretch the truth. Why wouldn't the CEO's lie along with Apple, I'm sure most of the products they sell are for Macintosh. If they can get people to think the Mac is better they will sell more Software.
I just don't see any reason to believe Apple... so I don't
Laukev7:
In any case, most of the articles that attempt to debunk the G5 so far have little credibility, and most of them fall in the same pitfalls as the ones I pointed out for this one. Whether the G5 is faster or not (which I believe it is), no one can deny that Apple is in a far better position, and their Powermac G5 is very competitive.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version