New G% macs - "fastest PC"

[Jacques Cornell]

You still get a 2x price for a 0.5x speed machine

You know where I can get a dual Xeon or an Opteron machine with a 64-bit version of Windows for $1,500?

and very little software

Only 6,000+ native titles and growing, not to mention all the pre-OS X titles that run perfectly. And the UNIX ports.

and few peripherals

You mean, like almost every popular Firewire and USB 2.0 peripheral made?

and driver support problems

Such as? I don't even have to install drivers for any of my peripherals, including my Canon 10D. Plug it in, and iPhoto or iView will automatically download the images.

and very few user-serviceable parts inside.

You mean user-replaceable/upgradable, right? Aside from the motherboard, what? RAM? No. Hard drives? No. Video card? No. PCI expansion cards? Processors? No. All of these are readily accessible. Even on the G4 you could upgrade from single to dual processors simply by replacing the processor daughtercard. What else, pray tell, would you want to put your paw prints on?

And the thought of macheads
trying to do Unix has me ROTFLMAO.

Don't want to, don't have to. The move from a command-line to a GUI was what is known as progress to 99.9% of computer users out there. But, for gearheads, the command line is just a click away in OS X. Help yourself.

OS-X is a hackers paradise -
easy to get root, oblivious sysop.

I don't see many OS X viruses floating around.

Get yourself a desktop PC and a notebookfor the price of one mac.

Two low-end machines for the price of one workstation? No thanks. The high-end Wintel/WAMD options are no cheaper.

Maybe a little SAN to store your images, or do RAID to protect them.

RAID support is built into OS X - just plug in two ATA drives, choose the RAID option in Drive Utility, and, presto, instant RAID.

Since you clearly do not know much about the Mac platform, stop lobbing grenades in the hope that one of them will hit.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Fluorite]

Before I begin, I should say that I am a big fan of Apple Macs and have been using them for a long time.

Warren, keep your eyes and mind open to more information about the competition. If you have a look at http://www.spec.org you will see lots of really fast computers listed in the test results, many of them having a better or similar price/performance comparison to the Mac ...even the new G5. I know, we don't buy Macs because they're cheaper, but because we just like them.

Realise that Apple used tests which rely on the "Velocity Engine" or Vector Unit, which may not be realistic for your computer use.

In a related topic, I believe that Mac users are a little bit like Nikon users, they keep looking over at the competition (Wintel or Canon) with fear. They feel threatened by the pace of technology in the other camp. You should read some of the threads in the Nikon SLR forum, they have the same concerns as Apple users/consumers, which is that they fear extinction at the hands of their competitors.

I still enjoy my Mac and will probably buy more in the years to come.

I love my Canon cameras too.

--
fluorite

 

[Jacques Cornell]

Besides, I would never buy such a closed, proprietary system.

Huh? You mean industry-standard, user-upgradable RAM, hard drives, optical drives, interconnects (USB 2.0, FW), video cards, peripherals, and PCI expansion, as well as upgradable processors and doubling of processors with a single daughtercard swap are "closed, proprietary"? Dude, the only thing you can't replace is the motherboard. The "closed, proprietary" systems you're talking about are ancient history and totally irrelevant today.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Jacques Cornell]

the only applications that aren't available on the Mac are the ones
that let you pirate software and steal music and download free
porn. All PC users are also going to hell.

Actually, I can do all of that on my Mac, too.

Hardware/OS differences have become miniscule between Mac and PC.

However, the software availability is another matter entirely.

Depends on the needs of the user. For me, all of my software needs
are easily met on the Mac. Everything I need or want in the areas
of digital still imaging, digital video, digital music, etc. are
all available to me on the Mac. Heck, most of the cool apps are
included with the computer.

Now, if I was interested in creating a huge library of pirated
software and/or pirating a bunch of commercial DVDs, the Wintel
platform would be the way to go.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Jacques Cornell]

Puh-leeze people! If we use this reasoning, then bigger must always
be better? There are more developers for PC and there are waaay
more PCs out here than Macs. So apps get developed for PCs first
because of...MONEY. This does not make the Mac or any small mom-pop
shop or independent film studio,etc. inferior.

As to another poster who said there were over 6,000 Native OSX apps
available, check out this site

http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/news/pressreleases/2002/nov/asci_purple.html , which lists over 7,600. How many apps does a guy need before it's enough?

I got the 6,000 figure from Job's recent keynote speech. Looks like another 1,600 were developed this week.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Peter70]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/31405.html

http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/

http://news.com.com/2100-1042_3-1020631.html?tag=cd_mh

in reverse order

1.6GHz $1999 1.8GHz $2399 Dual 2GHz $2999
Enclosures! 9 fans!. but quieter,
System - G5 System Controller - dedicated bandwidth to each
subsystem. IBM is fabricating it. 6x faster than G4, 8GB
bandwidth, 1processor doesn't slow down the other one. 400mhz
DDR memory, AGP 8x Pro, 133mhz PCI-X slots. Hypertransport. Serial
ATA. 1.5GB/s bandwidth. independent interfaces to each drive. Rest
of the i/o - high performance. optical digital i/o and analog i/o,
fw800 ,usb 2.0
Single/Dual processors. Up to 8GB Memory. Can talk to mem @
6.4GB/s. 4x Superdrive in each. Geforce fx5200 in lower, radeon
9600 pro in higher mode.
Introduced Dr. Johnny Kelly the 3rd on stage.
This is a new generation architecture.
Massivly parallel. Up to 250 inflight instructions. -- can be
processed at the same time. The G4 can do 16. Floating point
"monster". Two fully symetric integer units. massive branch
prediction logic.
fastest front sidebus - ever. designed for dual processor systems.
We're calling it the G5. It is a 64-bit processor. The first first
64-bit desktop processor. Runs our existing 32-bit apps no
problems.
The Chip - we turned to IBM several years ago.
The Chip, the System, The Product
We are delivering today - the Worlds Fastest Personal Computer.

 

[Jacques Cornell]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/31405.html

From the Register article:

"To be fair, at least Apple and VeriTest tell you what they've done, which is more than can be said for the vendor-supplied figures on SPEC's web site."

http://news.com.com/2100-1042_3-1020631.html?tag=cd_mh

From the CNET article:

"Peter Glaskowsky, editor-in-chief of Microprocessor Report,...also noted that Intel's chips perform disproportionately well on SPEC's tests because Intel has optimized its compiler for such tests."

"The controversy highlights the notoriously thorny issue of computing benchmarks, which have long been criticized for not measuring typical performance and not providing an accurate basis for comparison."

"In addition to the benchmarks released by Apple, Jobs on Monday also showed demonstrations in which the new Power Macs outperformed the Dell by greater than 2-to-1 ratios on several programs, including Adobe's popular Photoshop image editing software."

"Reynolds says he has no reason to contest those claims. "In the absence of other information, the application benchmarks look quite credible," Reynolds said."

"Those usage tests may also be more important than synthetic benchmarks, he said. "The SPEC benchmarks aren't that relevant anymore. People now are looking for things like multimedia (performance) and content management.""

"Glaskowsky agreed, saying that in programs such as Photoshop, the G5 should routinely outperform the Pentium 4 and other processors because the chip has additional floating point units and other performance enhancements that Photoshop can take advantage of."

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Joe Wilson]

the only applications that aren't available on the Mac are the ones
that let you pirate software and steal music and download free
porn. All PC users are also going to hell.

Actually, I can do all of that on my Mac, too.

Hardware/OS differences have become miniscule between Mac and PC.

However, the software availability is another matter entirely.

Depends on the needs of the user. For me, all of my software needs
are easily met on the Mac. Everything I need or want in the areas
of digital still imaging, digital video, digital music, etc. are
all available to me on the Mac. Heck, most of the cool apps are
included with the computer.

Now, if I was interested in creating a huge library of pirated
software and/or pirating a bunch of commercial DVDs, the Wintel
platform would be the way to go.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

--
http://www.joesimages.com

 

[DavidP #28649]

So tell me, how do you like BreezeBrowser, YarcPlus, and CaptureOne?

Depends on the needs of the user. For me, all of my software needs
are easily met on the Mac. Everything I need or want in the areas
of digital still imaging, digital video, digital music, etc. are
all available to me on the Mac. Heck, most of the cool apps are
included with the computer.

--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

Yes, this is ON-TOPIC!

 

[Rune Moberg]

A dual Xeon is in the same price ballpark. The Dell Apple used was
$4,000, but I configured a comparable system on the Dell site for
$3,374. You're right about the disk subsystem.

Why not compare with a dual AMD Opteron system? As I recall they're faster than Xeons in quite a few benchmarks... (and cheaper)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Rune Moberg]

I have a disk that includes NT 4 for:

MS cut Alpha support near the end of the NT5 / Win2k beta program (summer '99?). I don't recall if they ever let anyone test a 64-bit version of Win2k for Alpha, but it wasn't far off.

As I recall; Compaq more or less initiated the plug pulling.

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Rune Moberg]

Intel bet the farm on the Itanium and that Opteron will by the
darling of PC owners? Isn't the Itanium only 800Mhz and 900Mhz and
the fairly new Itanium-2 only 900Mhz and 1GHz? (Hope I got that
right

1. Clock speed doesn't matter. It gives no meaningful indication of performance whatsoever when comparing with a slightly different CPU family (a 1.13GHz Pentium 3 would actually beat a 1.13GHz Pentium 4 in quite many benchmarks if not all...).

2. Intel probably have something up their sleave. They've been caught in an awkward moment once before when AMD launched the first generation Athlon (K7), but after some initial stumbling came back with a bang. They probably know what it takes.

3. Competition is always nice, however when you claim "the world's fastest PC!", you better have something truly unique at hand. All someone has to do is slap a quad-CPU rig on the table and say "No, this is even faster! Quake3 really flies along at 1000fps! Truly the only meaningful way of playing Quake!".

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Rune Moberg]

You know where I can get a dual Xeon or an Opteron machine with a
64-bit version of Windows for $1,500?

Here a motherboard + dual Opterons + 1GB memory would set you back 1380 USD. Add a case you like, a hard drive and peripherals (keyboard+mouse) and you have yourself a working computer. (granted, it will have a cheap embedded ATI graphics controller, but do you need more for Photoshop?)

I imagine you'll be able to find those components for less in the USA, so $1500 is not a bad budget.

Availability is a different question. I notice that the site I'm currently checking only have two Opterons in stock... (I better hurry! )

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Rune Moberg]

I had a colleague once who was unable to log on to the network. He patiently typed in his password over and over again, and access was denied every time. ...Until I turned off his laptop's Num Lock.

I also spent almost an hour on the phone with a customer who recently experienced some problems using our software; It suddenly didn't accept any numbers. "Have you turned off Num Lock?" was my first question. And he immediately ensured me that he wouldn't make such a silly mistake. Eventually, after trying everything, I asked him to enter a number in Notepad instead... He was slightly embarrassed to say the least. (I should probably mention that I don't do support normally, I only get the cases where support staff has already tried to assist and it has been determined that the question can only be answered by a software developer -- so this guy had already been through the mill)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[rwh]

Probably because they aren't generally available - I think IBM just announced their servers yesterday. Is there even a dual Opteron motherboad available yet except for whatever IBM has developed for their product line?

I also doubt that folks like Adobe and Wolfram have 64-bit Opteron versions of their apps yet so you'd get into arguments about how well the 32-bit mode works on the Opteron vs the Xeon.

There's also the issue of what OS you'd use. The 64-bit Windows for the Itanium has only been generally available for a couple of weeks, but that's a different architecture than the Opteron. MS is targeting a Q4 release date for the Opteron and Athlon-64 processors. And both of those are server OSs which are going to be tuned differently than if they were workstations.

--rick

A dual Xeon is in the same price ballpark. The Dell Apple used was
$4,000, but I configured a comparable system on the Dell site for
$3,374. You're right about the disk subsystem.

Why not compare with a dual AMD Opteron system? As I recall they're
faster than Xeons in quite a few benchmarks... (and cheaper)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Rune Moberg]

announced their servers yesterday. Is there even a dual Opteron
motherboad available yet except for whatever IBM has developed for
their product line?

"MSI K8D Master-FT Hovedkort Socket 940 AMD8131, Dual, DDR, ATA133, GbLAN, E-ATX"

Costs about USD 480 here (+vat) and my local dealer has seven in stock.

Granted, it's not all that many motherboards, but when you can get a full blown Opteron system here in Norway, you should be able to find something in the States.

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

 

[Jacques Cornell]

I would if I could find one. Checked the Dell site and didn't find any. Are complete Opteron systems even available yet?

A dual Xeon is in the same price ballpark. The Dell Apple used was
$4,000, but I configured a comparable system on the Dell site for
$3,374. You're right about the disk subsystem.

Why not compare with a dual AMD Opteron system? As I recall they're
faster than Xeons in quite a few benchmarks... (and cheaper)

--
Rune, http://runesbike.com/

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Sparkletron]

Mac people think that only Macs can do anything related to graphics
or video.

I think this perception exists, but not among Mac enthusiasts. We're fully aware of every GUI enhancement that Microsoft steals from us... The problem is that graphics on Windows is often an ersatz experience. Take XP, for example, which is essentially Windows 2000 + the illusion of Apple's Quartz rendering engine. XP tries to mimic it with simple animated buttons and backgrounds, but a demonstration of five translucent windows overlapping with my Open GL screensaver animating through all of them reaffirms Mac's graphics dominance.

The difference between Macs and PCs can be discerned from the difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple innovates; Microsoft does not. It's easy to forget that Apple has been driving the entire PC industry for years--not in terms of sales but in terms of setting the technological bar by which others follow. Long ago, Apple was first to offer 3.5-inch floppies as standard. Then they dumped floppies. PCs still use floppies. Computer won't start? Where's that boot floppy... Apple was then first to offer CD-ROMS as standard (they had to; no more floppies). Apple was first to offer ethernet (NIC) as standard. Even before ethernet, networking Macs was as easy as buying a phone cable. Apple had a built-in TCP/IP stack when Windows users had to use a third-party's (how sad). Enclosures that open and unfold like the petals of a flower? Apple was first. Trackpad on a laptop? Apple was first. Fanless computer with passive cooling ensconced in a Cube? Apple. First 22-inch LCD: Apple. DVD burner + all the software needed to burn video DVDs? Apple was first. Thinnest laptop? That would be Apple's. 17-inch screen laptop. Apple, again. The FireWire that is used on every mini-DV cam: invented by Apple. Those TrueType fonts that are standard on all PCs: invented by Apple. The list goes on and on.

In addition, Apple supports many popular standards. PDF, Java, Open GL, LDAP, and XML to name a few. Microsoft has copied nearly all of these standards and made them proprietary. When they're not reinventing someone else's wheel, Microsoft's response to competition is to either purchase the competing company outright or use unfair business practices to destroy them.

 

[Jacques Cornell]

So tell me, how do you like iTunes, eMagic, and FinalCut Pro?

Wiseguy. If Mark says he's got everything he needs, who are you to say he's wrong? And, why the snide attitude? He's happy. Let him be.

As for software availability, iView Media Pro, a great image cataloging app, started first on the Mac and was recently ported to Windows. Capture One, Neat Image, and Digital GEM will be available for the Mac this summer.

Point is, solutions are available on both platforms, even if they're not exactly the same at all times, and eventually most of the best apps end up on both.

Depends on the needs of the user. For me, all of my software needs
are easily met on the Mac. Everything I need or want in the areas
of digital still imaging, digital video, digital music, etc. are
all available to me on the Mac. Heck, most of the cool apps are
included with the computer.

--
'May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.' -
Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Joe Wilson]

that OSX is based off of FreeBSD, right? I'm not saying that is necessarily a bad thing, but I wouldn't put Apple in the innovation camp in this regard. The street goes both ways.

Mac people think that only Macs can do anything related to graphics
or video.

I think this perception exists, but not among Mac enthusiasts.
We're fully aware of every GUI enhancement that Microsoft steals
from us... The problem is that graphics on Windows is often an
ersatz experience. Take XP, for example, which is essentially
Windows 2000 + the illusion of Apple's Quartz rendering engine. XP
tries to mimic it with simple animated buttons and backgrounds, but
a demonstration of five translucent windows overlapping with my
Open GL screensaver animating through all of them reaffirms Mac's
graphics dominance.

The difference between Macs and PCs can be discerned from the
difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple innovates; Microsoft
does not. It's easy to forget that Apple has been driving the
entire PC industry for years--not in terms of sales but in terms of
setting the technological bar by which others follow. Long ago,
Apple was first to offer 3.5-inch floppies as standard. Then they
dumped floppies. PCs still use floppies. Computer won't start?
Where's that boot floppy... Apple was then first to offer CD-ROMS
as standard (they had to; no more floppies). Apple was first to
offer ethernet (NIC) as standard. Even before ethernet, networking
Macs was as easy as buying a phone cable. Apple had a built-in
TCP/IP stack when Windows users had to use a third-party's (how
sad). Enclosures that open and unfold like the petals of a flower?
Apple was first. Trackpad on a laptop? Apple was first. Fanless
computer with passive cooling ensconced in a Cube? Apple. First
22-inch LCD: Apple. DVD burner + all the software needed to burn
video DVDs? Apple was first. Thinnest laptop? That would be
Apple's. 17-inch screen laptop. Apple, again. The FireWire that is
used on every mini-DV cam: invented by Apple. Those TrueType fonts
that are standard on all PCs: invented by Apple. The list goes on
and on.

In addition, Apple supports many popular standards. PDF, Java, Open
GL, LDAP, and XML to name a few. Microsoft has copied nearly all of
these standards and made them proprietary. When they're not
reinventing someone else's wheel, Microsoft's response to
competition is to either purchase the competing company outright or
use unfair business practices to destroy them.

--
http://www.joesimages.com