Police to Apple: The Gig is Up, The benchmarks are out

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-23 08:43pm

Looks like Apple has been defrauding the public by claiming its computers were faster than standard PC's.
As this benchmark
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002 ... cvspc2.htm
clearly points out, that buying a $4000 mac is like buying a $500 Emachine. This is rediculous. Apple is done for if it doesn;t port to x86. Bye bye apple.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-23 08:52pm

A bit of a clue in Apple has always been defrauding its customers, Its benchmarks are biased, its set-ups twisted and every single little thing they can do to squese higher numbers out they do

Only idiots though the Meghtz don't matter at all statment was true

Sure the Apple Proccesrs is tecnincaly about 15% more efficant, but when your at 800mhtz and I'm pusing 3.2Ghtz does that matter?

Apple has always been the Computer for the odd and the deranged..

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-07-23 09:02pm

My biggest objection to Apple right now is those stupid apple.com/switch commercials.

You know, Apples are not terrible machines, but they are not the joyride they are portrayed to be. Whats so intuitive about Apples GUI vs. Windows 2000?

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2002-07-23 09:07pm

In defense of Apple, I'd imagine their OS is many times more stable than that of Winblows.

LordChaos · Post by **LordChaos** » 2002-07-23 09:14pm

USAF Ace wrote:In defense of Apple, I'd imagine their OS is many times more stable than that of Winblows.

A epliletic seizure is moire stable then windows.... OS-X is so far past windows in terms of stability that they can't be measured without using astronomical distances.

Also in defense of apple, processor speed isn't worth squat if the rest of the system's hardware is dragging it down. Apple has/uses high end hardware. Yes, a top of the line P IV correctly configured and optimized may be faster then a top of the line G4 mac... but the difference will depend on just what you are trying to do, and the G4 isn't going to puke on you 2 weeks down the road when you install a new game.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2002-07-23 09:28pm

LordChaos wrote:A epliletic seizure is moire stable then windows....

It's WINBLOWS goddamnit! Get it right!

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-07-23 09:30pm

I think its pretty hard to come up with relevant benchmarks for two different platforms.

I have not worked with OS X yet, but its based on unix so stability is not surprising.

Windows 2000 is actually a pretty stable product. Ive got about 50 Win2k boxes in my company and they dont pose any troubles. Win9x is another story.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-23 09:36pm

Lord Choas,

Aplle is just now moving to 133 Mhz sdram, PCs are about exclusively on DDR and Rambus. Apple wtill uses ATA 66 while pcs use 100 or 133 ATA. The hardware for an apple is roundly inferioir. The OS is not more stable than XP or win2k. I have run win2k without stop for almost a year at a time, thats better perfomrance than my linux box where xwindows is prone to crash. Might I add that os-9 was less stable than windows 98. Though peopel who don't know macs haven't a clue about that.

thier hardware is a full generation to a gnereation and a half behind PC's. thats that, and nothing is going to change that. BSD is fine, but its still behind windows in some ways.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-23 09:43pm

Windows 9x yes, Windows XP maybe but don't diss 2k

Why?

At my place I have three computeres, One my Foot-rest is a Dual 600mhtz P3 512 Meg o Ram Linux file/sharing web server that would exist if I had the bandwidth to run it anymore
My secondary, an AMD K6-433 128meg Gefore 2 Sporting *Guest machine I use when others are around or I need to back-somthing up

my main(for now!...) a 800mthz TBIRD humming at 1.2Gigs thanks to some home built water-cooling 512megs O Ram, Gefore 3 and SB card with a measly but good enough 1.1meg Cable connectinon

My secondary runs win98/linux dual boot my main runs Win2k
Since I have installed Win2k my computer has crashed exactly twice
Once when I kindly fliped the switch on the power supply to my modem sending it into an infinite loop that I end-tasked but then fliped off the computer by accidnet(I now have coverings over that blasted power-strip) and the second when I got spammed with pop ups and my task bar looked like bars not programs as I determed from the frooze screen over 63 pop up windows had opened

Besides that I'm 31 months crash free. This from somone who regards Reg Hacking as a fun and cool think to do in his off time, And likes deleting files at random to test the resuts

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-07-23 09:50pm

Mr Bean's response is another issue Id like to bring up.

With PC's there is an incredible variety of options. Want a new mobo? Just a few of the many to choose from include ABIT, ASUS, INTEL, SOYO.

Want to run SCSI ? IDE-RAID ? - Promise technology, high point, etc.

You can run the whole gamut from really cheap to really expensive.

With Apple you are getting a proprietary box. This may suit many people fine, but for games, computer hobbyists, and corporations on a budget its important.

Now, to be fair there are some good things about apples. I had to replace ram on a G4 once, and the case opened up like an orange peel making it very easy to work in. Good idea. Ive noticed the latest Dell Dimensions open in a similar fashion.

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2002-07-23 10:04pm

iMacs on the other hand are worthless pieces of cum covered digested bloody tapon shit.

I had to work off of one for two years till a few months ago. I had another IBM but I kinda opened up the box did some things I shouldn't have and didn't want to repair it. It had a 28.8k modem in it and ran faster than my mac on 56.6k. It's internal dvd-rom drive tore the fuck out of my brood wars cd. If I put a norton cd into it it would lock up. The great minds a mac didn't put a fan inside the damn thing, and it's nearly impossible to open up.

Oh and if you hit them with sledge hammers they JUST WON'T DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Luckly now it's my moms, a computer super retard.

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2002-07-23 10:14pm

I love the OS X gui, it is very easy to use and most likely one of the best Unix GUIs on the market. 10.2 looks awesome.

In the iMacs defense, the old iMacs, yes they were not so good. The new ones are a decent value for the flat screen and the DVD-burn. Very easy to use for the end users.

About the G-4 yes it is slower than a pentium IV. Do not forget though when apple advertises it they talk about the PROCESSOR not the other hardware in the machine (which slows it down). Granted its misleading, but most ads are.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-23 10:27pm

I'm not going to bash Macs the way some people have been, but I definitely prefer the open platform.

Mind you, it should be noted that Intel has been systematically pushing technologies intended to centralize all activity through the processor and eliminate sub-processors, which is a worrisome trend. USB, AC97 sound, etc. all reuire processor intervention to work. Similarly, USB 2.0 is intended to destroy Firewire, and USB 2.0 eats CPU power while Firewire uses an independent processor. Is there any question why Intel is pushing this?

The thing is, it's not a good trend for overall performance. But it helps sell fast CPU's, so it will be widely deployed and people will buy it without a second thought. This is how open platforms become somewhat closed in a sense; the big vendors decide what you will choose by controlling availability.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-23 10:55pm

Yes they push it wong but you notice they still leave the Firewire with built in support and as they say
Theres always AMD

Apple is the only true Monoploy on the Market
thanks to the closed system

Also VIA and Sis have annoced plans to build thier own Proccesers and VIA's latest 1gthz chip is woe-fuly underpowered it does consume extremly little juice and requires no active cooling

Somthing P4 and AMD anything can't say

As for the rest Mr Bean Sort List

RAID is nice for Back-up Striping is not worth the cost/preforamance comprasion unless you already have two of the same drive skip it, ASUS, ABIT
Look to them for your motheroboards and go no futher, Prehaps Soyo but stray no further
Duron is cheap as hell and decently fast and runs cool(For AMD) remeber any AMD system requires more cooling than normal so if you choose to go that route I have a varity of special web-sites, AMD is the CPU of the twinker and the cost conusius

P4 on the other hand does fine with stock cooling but I don't recomned it, Heck unless your getting a precustom case with built in watercool you'll need to drop twenty bucks on a decent fan 3dfxcool.com(No relation to 3dfx) is a excenlt web-site and contains just about anything your could need.

Your Motherboard and CPU type choice are the two big ones then we get into memory amounts and the rest is no-brainer, A decent case(unless you have one) if you go P4 it has to be a p4 Approve Case and supply, no worries but that adds another $100
Go pre-built if you must but go Dell, In my experance, Gate-way's cases are bad with thier customer service decent while Dell is decent in both areas
God forbid you buy HP/Compack
IF you do so help me I'll come down there and kick the beguius out of you

Last note a good web-site to get the UPPER limit on items is www.gamepc.com whos build your own computer section has nearly everything under the sun but first if you want to know what the avrage price is going to be, make sure to take 20% off the cost of each item as they do add a markup on everything

Graeme Dice · Post by **Graeme Dice** » 2002-07-23 11:05pm

LordChaos wrote:but the difference will depend on just what you are trying to do, and the G4 isn't going to puke on you 2 weeks down the road when you install a new game.

That would most likely be because you _can't_ install the game, as it is for windows only.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-07-24 12:40am

Those benchmarks have been around for a while. After Effects gains little to no performance when run on a dual processor Mac vs. a single processor one. Adobe just did a shitty job of it. It's amazing that a G4 can actually keep pace with a Pentium 4 in Photoshop despite the large discrepancy in technology between the two systems.

It's no secret that the x86 world has been blowing the doors off the PowerPC platform for a while now because Motorola has been laying people off left and right and producing subpar chips with no support for modern technologies (DDR memory and bus, HyperTransport). MHz for MHz, the G4 has x86 beat (as well as in raw computational power; the dual G4 murders virtually anything else in RC5 encoding), but it can't scale for shit, and it's expensive as all Hell. So, the x86 world gets more MHz to make up the deficit, but they also get cheaper. Price/performance-wise, x86 massacres the G4.

And, no, Apple has been at PC133 for some time now, but they've just stayed there with their desktop machines. The XServe has DDR266 memory and destroys comparably-equipped Dell servers in terms of price/performance (Dell servers still use PC133 and cost thousands more due to the Winblows 2000 Server licensing). The next PowerMacs should have DDR memory.

However, you've got to remember that most rendering in an editing house takes overnight. Unless the Athlon can do the render in 5 minutes vs. the G4's 2 hours, no one is going to care. Why? Editors don't want to put up with all the bullshit that comes with Windows and custom-built PC's. Apple offers editors an all-in-one package with software that's guaranteed to work flawlessly with the hardware, and they can get all their support from one source. You just can't get that on the x86 side. There's driver conflicts and hardware compatibility to worry about. An all-in-one editing solution is the dream of editors and video professionals, and Apple knows it. Why do you think they bought up Shake? Being able to do your editing (Final Cut Pro), compositing (Shake) and 3D (Maya - Granted, Apple hasn't bought Alias|Wavefront, but I wouldn't at all be surprised if it happened) on one platform without having to worry about whether the camera will work with the software is worth a lot. It saves time, headaches and tech support calls.

As to stability, XP and 2000 are very solid OS's. XP has a number of features I'd like to see in OS X, but it doesn't support open standards at all, whereas X embraces them. X also has much better preference and user account management. And for security, X is just the obvious choice. There are no virii for it, and Apple plugs security holes up very quickly. Consider that a week ago or so, a security hole in Apple's software updater was discovered that would allow someone to masquerade as an Apple software update to get unsuspecting users to download their software, because Apple's software updater didn't verify that the update was from Apple. Two days later, Apple issued a security update downloadable through the software updater or HTTP, that plugged the hole. That kind of attention to security is utterly absent at Redmond's end.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-24 12:41am

Mr Bean wrote:Windows 9x yes, Windows XP maybe but don't diss 2k

Why?

At my place I have three computeres, One my Foot-rest is a Dual 600mhtz P3 512 Meg o Ram Linux file/sharing web server that would exist if I had the bandwidth to run it anymore
My secondary, an AMD K6-433 128meg Gefore 2 Sporting *Guest machine I use when others are around or I need to back-somthing up

my main(for now!...) a 800mthz TBIRD humming at 1.2Gigs thanks to some home built water-cooling 512megs O Ram, Gefore 3 and SB card with a measly but good enough 1.1meg Cable connectinon

My secondary runs win98/linux dual boot my main runs Win2k
Since I have installed Win2k my computer has crashed exactly twice
Once when I kindly fliped the switch on the power supply to my modem sending it into an infinite loop that I end-tasked but then fliped off the computer by accidnet(I now have coverings over that blasted power-strip) and the second when I got spammed with pop ups and my task bar looked like bars not programs as I determed from the frooze screen over 63 pop up windows had opened

Besides that I'm 31 months crash free. This from somone who regards Reg Hacking as a fun and cool think to do in his off time, And likes deleting files at random to test the resuts

Get all three of those running and you won't need a heater during the winter.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-24 10:19am

ohh God, uoi think that adding DDR support to a comparibly underpowered proccessor is going to make a difference. The Best G4's are note going to benefit from rambus or DDR, becasue they don't need the bandwidth, cause they don't proccess info fast enough. Then you have to dealk with apples hack, the l3 cache, which bottlenecks all large data proccessing operations in the attempt to speed up small ones. Apple has got allot to go before it can engineer its way out of this one. I really don't want to see the apple die, I was going to buy one recently becasue I wanted to add an apple to myu wintel/slorais/lintel network, (mostly for expreiemtnation in cross platform configuartion, and I am not happy about hiow they implemented the smb protocol). Anyways after hearing about they have been lieing their asses off all this time and rigging test, even thouhg I may like thier operating system, I am not going to bother with them even though I really want to try out some cocca programing in objective c.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-07-24 03:28pm

ohh God, uoi think that adding DDR support to a comparibly underpowered proccessor is going to make a difference.

Yes, it will. It'll make a much bigger difference than simply pumping up the MHz. The G4 is a decent processor, and it is very efficient, but it's data-starved. It sits there on a 133MHz system bus just waiting for data to crunch. When you talk about simple raw computational power, the G4 is impressive (see the RC5 benchmarks here: http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/archives/jan02/013002.html).

The Best G4's are note going to benefit from rambus or DDR, becasue they don't need the bandwidth, cause they don't proccess info fast enough.

See above. The problem with Apple's machines in the exact opposite. The chip has no information to process.

Then you have to dealk with apples hack, the l3 cache, which bottlenecks all large data proccessing operations in the attempt to speed up small ones.

The L3 cache makes a large difference between equally clocked G4 chips. It takes small, frequently-used instructions and shoots them directly into the processor.

Apple has got allot to go before it can engineer its way out of this one.

It's Motorola's fault, primarily, but Apple has blame because they were stupid enough to marry themselves to AltiVec, which IBM doesn't have, and IBM is in a far better position to supply chips to Apple than Motorola is. Hell, IBM is pushing the G3 to 2GHz with vector processing and multiple cores on their roadmap, and they took the G3 to 1GHz at about the same time Motorola was pissing around with the 500MHz bug in the original G4's.

I really don't want to see the apple die, I was going to buy one recently becasue I wanted to add an apple to myu wintel/slorais/lintel network, (mostly for expreiemtnation in cross platform configuartion, and I am not happy about hiow they implemented the smb protocol).

The SMB implementation in 10.1 blows royally, that much is for sure, but 10.2 plays very nicely with SMB and Windows networks.

Anyways after hearing about they have been lieing their asses off all this time and rigging test, even thouhg I may like thier operating system, I am not going to bother with them even though I really want to try out some cocca programing in objective c.

I don't see why you're so angry. Apple doesn't advertise their machines for multimedia based solely on speed. They do so for the reasons I outlined before. Why don't you get equally pissed at Intel for advertising a 2GHz chip that gets soundly hammered by AMD's Athlon XP, or how about the 1.8GHz Mobile Pentium 4, which is slower than a 1GHz Pentium III? It's called marketing.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-24 04:00pm

The L3 cache is a problem becasue on large memory operations the L3 chache is queried every time it needs a memory block, and after not finiding it thier goes to the main memory. On a PC the request just heads stright to the memory.

I personally think they should have used the l3 cahce to coordinate vitrual cmemory blocks and regular ram blocks, to speed up retrivial on big blocks of data.

Why am I ticked off at them. They stick a big sign on the dual G4 $3500 (which i was going to buy) that said "300x faster on digital editing" and it turns out that its on par with a year/year and a half old PC. I can forigve operating systems claims, but such utter disrespect for the truth is lame. I can;t ever remember such a gross distortion from intel, and the fact that Apple is always crowing about the higher moral ground and caring about its customers.

As for Clock speed differences between AMD and P4, might I add, that AMD is hitting the Hz wall on thier design, and can't keep up the proccssing parraell they have in the past. They need a new core like the P4 has that can better handle the higher ghz. IN the next month, intel is going to release a 2.8ghz chipand a month after that a 3 ghz chip. AMD can't match that anytime soon. And I will conceed that thier chips are about 20% faster per hz.

BTW Do you know if Apple has introduced Winbind for the Unified Widnows Login?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-24 04:40pm

Durandal wrote:However, you've got to remember that most rendering in an editing house takes overnight.

Not to change topics or anything, but inexpensive x86-based renderfarms running on Linux are becoming very popular. Most of the big rendering software packages are being ported to Linux, and big operations such as ILM are using it very heavily. The combination of power, freedom from vendor lock-in, standards support, cheap hardware, no OS licensing costs, and total customizability is driving the change from the older prioprietary vendors such as SGI (or Apple). Of course, Microsoft probably isn't too happy about this, but then again, I'm no fan of Microsoft

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-07-24 04:53pm

Not to change topics or anything, but inexpensive x86-based renderfarms running on Linux are becoming very popular. Most of the big rendering software packages are being ported to Linux, and big operations such as ILM are using it very heavily. The combination of power, freedom from vendor lock-in, standards support, cheap hardware, no OS licensing costs, and total customizability is driving the change from the older prioprietary vendors such as SGI (or Apple). Of course, Microsoft probably isn't too happy about this, but then again, I'm no fan of Microsoft

I dont think this is changing the subject. It just adds weight to the idea that you get more for your money with a PC. Slapping together a PC with Linux for a cheap file server makes it an attractive options for business in hard times such as these.

I dont have much experience with Linux, but Id like to try and install it on my Thinkpad 600E. Any suggestions? Ive installed Red Hat 6.0 before, but would like to try something new.

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2002-07-24 05:03pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:I dont think this is changing the subject. It just adds weight to the idea that you get more for your money with a PC. Slapping together a PC with Linux for a cheap file server makes it an attractive options for business in hard times such as these.

I have deployed several Linux servers. Invariably, accountants and business don't trust Linux because it doesn't come with a big corporate name attached. But since Linux is free, you just install it somewhere without asking them, and then you tell them "it's already up and running, and it works" and then demonstrate, finishing with "but if you really want to fork out thousands of dollars for another Windows2k Server license and all of the client licenses, be my guest". They might do just that anyway, but it's a compelling way to make the point.

I dont have much experience with Linux, but Id like to try and install it on my Thinkpad 600E. Any suggestions? Ive installed Red Hat 6.0 before, but would like to try something new.

Mandrake 8.2 has a great install. SuSE and RedHat also have their fans, but I am convinced that Windows users will have the best time with Mandrake's latest release.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-24 05:16pm

I aggree Mandrake is the way to go, but I think you might want to try 8,1 whcih is little less buggy instead.

I don;t think linux is the problem, its more like personnel cost, wintel admins cost allot less than a good unix admin.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-07-24 05:27pm

Wintel admins are cheaper I agree. But there are more jobs for us out there. My Unix buddies that have been laid off are in world o hurt.

Thanks for the tip. I'll go check out Mandrake.