Mac Vs. PC

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Very true. If you're into gaming, the A64 is for you. For encoding, possibly a G5 or P4. But I think that most scientific number crunching is left to 4-way+ Opteron systems or SPARCS.

Well, if you can afford a 4-way Opteron then great, but those are $$$$$. Two-way machines are sufficient for a lot of people, and much less costly.

True, but serious scientific simulations are not done on Macs, that's for sure. And a high-end Mac is roughly $4,000. If I were doing simulations all day, I'd put that money toward an Opteron system instead.

SPARCs don't typically do calculations. That isn't even close to their strong point. The 8-way processors might help, but it's still not their specialty.

Alphas were the proc to do with, but they're dead. Thanks Intel!

Opterons and POWER processors are the way to go for crunching server. Macs are also popular choices for workstations. Virginia Tech has some neat ideas though...

Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

Run Mac OS X faster. Give me a mainstream, major brand system, with a supported unix-like system installed by default.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

Run Mac OS X faster. Give me a mainstream, major brand system, with a supported unix-like system installed by default.

Amen. LoL. Or, possibly Linux. I am able to play quite of few of my OpenGL based games on Linux with no problems. And then do a little programming later, of course.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

Run Mac OS X faster. Give me a mainstream, major brand system, with a supported unix-like system installed by default.

Amen. LoL. Or, possibly Linux. I am able to play quite of few of my OpenGL based games on Linux with no problems. And then do a little programming later, of course.

But Linux is supported by the manufacturer on how many mainstream consumer products? AFAICT, none.

I get support for Mac OS X on my Powerbook. I like that.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I hate linux. I'd rather kick myself in the nuts.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
LoL. Because...the case it comes in is "purdy."

Thats pretty much it. The marketing and packaging are way more important for a business than a quality product. Thats why a Dual Processor 2.5 GHz system is soooo much faster than everything else.
Along those lines, did anyone see the AT benchmark where a 1.8Ghz Athlon 64 stomped the crap out of a 3.6GHz Pentium 4. Thats how I see the power macs.
On paper they should be faster. In the real world they get beat like little girls.

If I want a pretty case I'll buy an Alienware.

 

[Yossairian]

Can we have a script added to the site? When someone types "Mac vs. PC" in a subject line the thread gets immediatly locked and the OP gets a 1 week ban automatically. Feel free to expand this to AMD vs Intel, and "Should I get an X800XL or 6800GT" as well.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

Run Mac OS X faster. Give me a mainstream, major brand system, with a supported unix-like system installed by default.

Amen. LoL. Or, possibly Linux. I am able to play quite of few of my OpenGL based games on Linux with no problems. And then do a little programming later, of course.

But Linux is supported by the manufacturer on how many mainstream consumer products? AFAICT, none.

I get support for Mac OS X on my Powerbook. I like that.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I hate linux. I'd rather kick myself in the nuts.

Then you go kick yourself in the nuts...j/k. Why do you hate Linux? I'd rather have control over what my system is doing than rely on some piece of junk widget in OSx do it for me. It's like blending a Unix shell with Windows ME -> which gives you OSx. That's a slight exageration of course.

Oh, and Linux is supported on main stream consumer products. You can buy many types of workstations and servers that ship only with Linux. But if you're knowledgable about Linux, chances are you build your own box anyway.

Apple is no different than Intel and M$. They force you to buy their crap and stick with, while putting a positive spin on it, I guess to make them look better than they are.

 

[Yossairian]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
? I'd rather have control over what my system is doing than rely on some piece of junk widget in OSx do it for me. It's like blending a Unix shell with Windows ME -> which gives you OSx. That's a slight exageration of course.

Have you ever used OSX ? Are you familiar with Terminal ? If so, what exactly is it you would like control over that OSX will not allow ? Is it possible the feature is there, you just dont know how to use it ?

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
LoL. Because...the case it comes in is "purdy."

Thats pretty much it. The marketing and packaging are way more important for a business than a quality product. Thats why a Dual Processor 2.5 GHz system is soooo much faster than everything else.
Along those lines, did anyone see the AT benchmark where a 1.8Ghz Athlon 64 stomped the crap out of a 3.6GHz Pentium 4. Thats how I see the power macs.
On paper they should be faster. In the real world they get beat like little girls.

If I want a pretty case I'll buy an Alienware.

Thank you! I am tired of Mac fanboys claiming that their machines are so great. I work with graphics people, so I all day I hear...but your AMD/Linux box can't this. Uh, yeah, it can actually. And it can do it either better and/or faster too. LoL

Ever notice how Apple picked certain sythetic benchmarks that are optimized for the G5 to display on the performance sections of their website?

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Apple is no different than Intel and M$. They force you to buy their crap and stick with, while putting a positive spin on it, I guess to make them look better than they are

That is just stupid. No one forced me to buy Apple hardware. I chose to. Neither Apple, Microsoft or Intel forces you to purchase their products.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: Yossairian

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
? I'd rather have control over what my system is doing than rely on some piece of junk widget in OSx do it for me. It's like blending a Unix shell with Windows ME -> which gives you OSx. That's a slight exageration of course.

Have you ever used OSX ? Are you familiar with Terminal ? If so, what exactly is it you would like control over that OSX will not allow ? Is it possible the feature is there, you just dont know how to use it ?

As a matter of fact, I have. Like I have mentioned before, I have graphics artists here at work, and of course, they can't use anything other than Macs, and I have to be their admin because they can't figure out anything. But Terminal is not the same as, say using BASH on Linux. Try setting up user accounts with permissions and an FTP account using Terminal. Very easy and streamlined on Linux.

 

[shortylickens]

I just realized why the world of x86 is best for me.
I have the choices mac lovers dont. I'm not stuck with what they want me to have.

I can go:
AMD or Intel
NForce or Via or Sis
Dual or Single Channel
Opteron or A64
Xeon or P4
AGP or PCI-E
Nvidia or ATI
PATA or SATA or even SCSI.
Analog or SPDIF
Windows or Linux

and the best part is they are ALL x86 compatible.
I can even mix and match if I like. I can use my Audigy or onboard and change them right in the control panel. I can boot with many versions of Windows and Linux, all on one hard drive. I can have several each of PATA and SATA devices.

But in the world of Apples you only have one choice: Macintosh.
And its always an expensive choice.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
LoL. Because...the case it comes in is "purdy."

Thats pretty much it. The marketing and packaging are way more important for a business than a quality product. Thats why a Dual Processor 2.5 GHz system is soooo much faster than everything else.
Along those lines, did anyone see the AT benchmark where a 1.8Ghz Athlon 64 stomped the crap out of a 3.6GHz Pentium 4. Thats how I see the power macs.
On paper they should be faster. In the real world they get beat like little girls.

If I want a pretty case I'll buy an Alienware.

Thank you! I am tired of Mac fanboys claiming that their machines are so great. I work with graphics people, so I all day I hear...but your AMD/Linux box can't this. Uh, yeah, it can actually. And it can do it either better and/or faster too. LoL

Ever notice how Apple picked certain sythetic benchmarks that are optimized for the G5 to display on the performance sections of their website?

Why are you tired of Mac fanboys claiming their machines are great? There are a lot of PC users out there that say the exact same thing.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Actually, SPARCs are wonderful for massive multithreaded simulations, they offer far better performance than other similar machines. Nearly all complex engineering and physics simulations are run on SPARCs. Of course, try running a single threaded app on a SPARC, and it would be slower than molasses in January.

SPARC Comp Link

As for Macs, the only people who need them are those who either can't operate a PC or have special software needs.

For $3.5k, I can build one heck of a dual Opteron system that would beat any Mac hands down, even running apps that used to favor Macs, e.g. Photoshop. So why spend $3-4k for Mac when there is clearly a better alternative.

Run Mac OS X faster. Give me a mainstream, major brand system, with a supported unix-like system installed by default.

Amen. LoL. Or, possibly Linux. I am able to play quite of few of my OpenGL based games on Linux with no problems. And then do a little programming later, of course.

But Linux is supported by the manufacturer on how many mainstream consumer products? AFAICT, none.

I get support for Mac OS X on my Powerbook. I like that.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I hate linux. I'd rather kick myself in the nuts.

Then you go kick yourself in the nuts...j/k. Why do you hate Linux? I'd rather have control over what my system is doing than rely on some piece of junk widget in OSx do it for me. It's like blending a Unix shell with Windows ME -> which gives you OSx. That's a slight exageration of course.

The core of OS X is open source (see: darwin). I prefer BSD based software over Linux. It generally makes more sense to me.

Oh, and Linux is supported on main stream consumer products. You can buy many types of workstations and servers that ship only with Linux. But if you're knowledgable about Linux, chances are you build your own box anyway.

Those aren't consumer products.

Apple is no different than Intel and M$. They force you to buy their crap and stick with, while putting a positive spin on it, I guess to make them look better than they are.

I'm not forced into their stuff and I'm not stuck with it. I like it for some things.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Apple is no different than Intel and M$. They force you to buy their crap and stick with, while putting a positive spin on it, I guess to make them look better than they are

That is just stupid. No one forced me to buy Apple hardware. I chose to. Neither Apple, Microsoft or Intel forces you to purchase their products.

You took that out of context. What I meant is, you spend maybe $2-3 or 4k on a Mac. Now what is your upgrade path? Not much there. What about switching to a non-prop OS that isn't so tightly conforming to Apple hw. Not gonna happen. In that sense, you are stuck. Much like how Intel makes everyone think that they were the first to come up with some new technology and then you're stuck with an Intel.

Alternative: buy AMD. Better performance, less cost, and best of all, you have lot's options for OS and software. So from this standpoint, why would you buy a Mac?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Why are you tired of Mac fanboys claiming their machines are great? There are a lot of PC users out there that say the exact same thing.

Maybe because PC users can actually back it up?

And I'm not talking about the usual Photoshop benchies either. "Dual G5 beats Dual Xeon by 98% in Photoshop filters!" ... Seems Apple has had that as their marketing slogan for how many years now?

The truth is that slowly but surely even those areas where Macs have traditionally dominated are coming around to PC land.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
LoL. Because...the case it comes in is "purdy."

Thats pretty much it. The marketing and packaging are way more important for a business than a quality product. Thats why a Dual Processor 2.5 GHz system is soooo much faster than everything else.
Along those lines, did anyone see the AT benchmark where a 1.8Ghz Athlon 64 stomped the crap out of a 3.6GHz Pentium 4. Thats how I see the power macs.
On paper they should be faster. In the real world they get beat like little girls.

If I want a pretty case I'll buy an Alienware.

not really. business cares about reliability and ease of transition blah blah. downtime = cost money..trouble shooting cost money. the g5's do have a sweet cooling system, its controlled by the os and anticipates heat in advance

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I just realized why the world of x86 is best for me.
I have the choices mac lovers dont. I'm not stuck with what they want me to have.

I can go:
AMD or Intel
NForce or Via or Sis
Dual or Single Channel
Opteron or A64
Xeon or P4
AGP or PCI-E
Nvidia or ATI
PATA or SATA or even SCSI.
Analog or SPDIF
Windows or Linux

and the best part is they are ALL x86 compatible.
I can even mix and match if I like. I can use my Audigy or onboard and change them right in the control panel. I can boot with many versions of Windows and Linux, all on one hard drive. I can have several each of PATA and SATA devices.

But in the world of Apples you only have one choice: Macintosh.
And its always an expensive choice.

With Apple, there isn't only one choice. You obviously don't know that there are many companies out there that make Apple hardware. OWC being one. And you can have SCSI, PATA and SATA devices on a Mac. My Powermac G4 has SCSI, for internal and external devices. Apple's older hardware uses SCSI too. And Mac's have AGP too. G5's use PCI-X and AGP 8x.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
Thank you! I am tired of Mac fanboys claiming that their machines are so great. I work with graphics people, so I all day I hear...but your AMD/Linux box can't this. Uh, yeah, it can actually. And it can do it either better and/or faster too. LoL

_yawn_

I think the fact that I own Mac, AMD, Intel, SUN, DEC (RIP ) products keeps me from "fanboy" status.

As a matter of fact, I have. Like I have mentioned before, I have graphics artists here at work, and of course, they can't use anything other than Macs, and I have to be their admin because they can't figure out anything. But Terminal is not the same as, say using BASH on Linux. Try setting up user accounts with permissions and an FTP account using Terminal. Very easy and streamlined on Linux./q]

Using terminal is like using bash on Darwin instead of bash on Linux. Either way it's still a horrible shell.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
LoL. Because...the case it comes in is "purdy."

Thats pretty much it. The marketing and packaging are way more important for a business than a quality product. Thats why a Dual Processor 2.5 GHz system is soooo much faster than everything else.
Along those lines, did anyone see the AT benchmark where a 1.8Ghz Athlon 64 stomped the crap out of a 3.6GHz Pentium 4. Thats how I see the power macs.
On paper they should be faster. In the real world they get beat like little girls.

If I want a pretty case I'll buy an Alienware.

Thank you! I am tired of Mac fanboys claiming that their machines are so great. I work with graphics people, so I all day I hear...but your AMD/Linux box can't this. Uh, yeah, it can actually. And it can do it either better and/or faster too. LoL

Ever notice how Apple picked certain sythetic benchmarks that are optimized for the G5 to display on the performance sections of their website?

Why are you tired of Mac fanboys claiming their machines are great? There are a lot of PC users out there that say the exact same thing.

Because I work with them (Mac fanboys) LoL. I'm a developer. I'm also an e&c engineer. Hence, I get fed up with "Mac this and Mac that" in a hurry.

Those that say their PC is great, generally speaking, are closer to the truth than Mac users.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Why are you tired of Mac fanboys claiming their machines are great? There are a lot of PC users out there that say the exact same thing.

Maybe because PC users can actually back it up?

And I'm not talking about the usual Photoshop benchies either. "Dual G5 beats Dual Xeon by 98% in Photoshop filters!" ... Seems Apple has had that as their marketing slogan for how many years now?

The truth is that slowly but surely even those areas where Macs have traditionally dominated are coming around to PC land.

Back what up? I claim my Powermac G4 is great, and I can sure as hell back it up.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Apple is no different than Intel and M$. They force you to buy their crap and stick with, while putting a positive spin on it, I guess to make them look better than they are

That is just stupid. No one forced me to buy Apple hardware. I chose to. Neither Apple, Microsoft or Intel forces you to purchase their products.

You took that out of context. What I meant is, you spend maybe $2-3 or 4k on a Mac. Now what is your upgrade path? Not much there. What about switching to a non-prop OS that isn't so tightly conforming to Apple hw. Not gonna happen. In that sense, you are stuck. Much like how Intel makes everyone think that they were the first to come up with some new technology and then you're stuck with an Intel.

Alternative: buy AMD. Better performance, less cost, and best of all, you have lot's options for OS and software. So from this standpoint, why would you buy a Mac?

I can upgrade everything in my Powermac G4.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat
You took that out of context. What I meant is, you spend maybe $2-3 or 4k on a Mac. Now what is your upgrade path? Not much there.

Hard drive, memory, video, and sound. What more do I need? If I want to upgrade the procs I'll sell the machine for 80% of what I paid for it and get a new one.

What about switching to a non-prop OS that isn't so tightly conforming to Apple hw. Not gonna happen. In that sense, you are stuck.

Unless you want to use Linux. I'm sure NetBSD is working on G5 support, and OpenBSD too.

Alternative: buy AMD. Better performance, less cost, and best of all, you have lot's options for OS and software. So from this standpoint, why would you buy a Mac?

I haven't found a decent AMD64 laptop (and I've been looking).
Small laptops are expensive in x86 land.
I have the same software on my Powerbook as I would on anything else.
I have the same options for OSes on my powerbook as I would on anything else. The choices are slightly smaller with a G5, but not too bad really.

 

[ksuWildcat]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I just realized why the world of x86 is best for me.
I have the choices mac lovers dont. I'm not stuck with what they want me to have.

I can go:
AMD or Intel
NForce or Via or Sis
Dual or Single Channel
Opteron or A64
Xeon or P4
AGP or PCI-E
Nvidia or ATI
PATA or SATA or even SCSI.
Analog or SPDIF
Windows or Linux

and the best part is they are ALL x86 compatible.
I can even mix and match if I like. I can use my Audigy or onboard and change them right in the control panel. I can boot with many versions of Windows and Linux, all on one hard drive. I can have several each of PATA and SATA devices.

But in the world of Apples you only have one choice: Macintosh.
And its always an expensive choice.

With Apple, there isn't only one choice. You obviously don't know that there are many companies out there that mac Apple hardware. OWC being one. And you can have SCSI, PATA and SATA devices on a Mac. My Powermac G4 has SCSI, for internal and external devices. Apple's older hardware uses SCSI too. And Mac's have AGP too. G5's use PCI-X and AGP 8x.

Apple still doesn't offer x86 compatability, hence you're stuck with a processor. Apple doesn't support native PCIe graphics solutions. Apple doesn't support other new technologies either. Apple doesn't provide as much flexability as taking an x86 route. So yes, once you go Mac, you're stuck with that and a limited upgrade path. Not so if you build a PC.

And Macs do not perform as well on real world benchmarks. Someone earlier posted a link to an independent review that confirms this. The G5 lost everytime. Case closed.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ksuWildcat

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: shortylickens
I just realized why the world of x86 is best for me.
I have the choices mac lovers dont. I'm not stuck with what they want me to have.

I can go:
AMD or Intel
NForce or Via or Sis
Dual or Single Channel
Opteron or A64
Xeon or P4
AGP or PCI-E
Nvidia or ATI
PATA or SATA or even SCSI.
Analog or SPDIF
Windows or Linux

and the best part is they are ALL x86 compatible.
I can even mix and match if I like. I can use my Audigy or onboard and change them right in the control panel. I can boot with many versions of Windows and Linux, all on one hard drive. I can have several each of PATA and SATA devices.

But in the world of Apples you only have one choice: Macintosh.
And its always an expensive choice.

With Apple, there isn't only one choice. You obviously don't know that there are many companies out there that mac Apple hardware. OWC being one. And you can have SCSI, PATA and SATA devices on a Mac. My Powermac G4 has SCSI, for internal and external devices. Apple's older hardware uses SCSI too. And Mac's have AGP too. G5's use PCI-X and AGP 8x.

Apple still doesn't offer x86 compatability, hence you're stuck with a processor. Apple doesn't support native PCIe graphics solutions. Apple doesn't support other new technologies either. Apple doesn't provide as much flexability as taking an x86 route. So yes, once you go Mac, you're stuck with that and a limited upgrade path. Not so if you build a PC.

And Macs do not perform as well on real world benchmarks. Someone earlier posted a link to an independent review that confirms this. The G5 lost everytime. Case closed.

Apple supports plenty of new technologies. Where are the x86 motherboards supporting Firewire800?

Intel doesn't offer PPC compatibility, hence you're stuck.