On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 12:35:06PM -0500, Linux Rocks! wrote: > : On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 11:25:03PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote: > : > > When Havoc is done with Gnome 2.6, it will have only one button > : > > labelled "Do stuff". > : > > : > You say that like it's a bad thing. Why exactly did you buy a Mac, > : > again? > well... a person should use whatever computer they like best... If I wasnt > paying for it, Id probably have a titanium 15" (or 17")
Yeah, but the Ti 15 is getting a bit dated now and did feel a little flimsy. The Al 15 and 17 are very nice machines, but if you wanted to run Linux on them, the Albooks (all three sizes) contain stuff for which no open source driver exists. The first thing you'd notice is the lack of support for 802.11g. There also isn't a traditional PCMCIA slot (because you already have everything you'd put into PCMCIA onboard anyway), so you would have to try to find a way to physically get an Airport Card into the port designed for the smaller Airport Extreme card. If you are going to run it as a mac, it's good to leave it like it is. > Although the performance difference between the fastest pc, and fastest > mac is really neglegable (either will do the same things just about as > fast... ) the mac claiming the g5 is the fastest computer on the planet > seemd pretty lame... Heres PC mag's benchmarks... > http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1274637,00.asp Note that "fastest computer on the planet" wasn't in my list. =) The very day the G5 test results came back and showed the dual G5 to be faster than anything the competition had which wasn't classified as a server machine, immediately some midrange dual processor servers began to get reclassified as "ultra-high-end desktop" machines to rival the G5's speed (at higher than G5 costs, I note..) The November issue of Macworld even shows that these ultra-high end desktop PCs are notably faster than the G5 for Microsoft Office (you're surprised that Office runs better under Windows right?) and the same with Adobe Premiere. (They didn't test against Final Cut Pro, and they cited that indeed it is widely accepted that Final Cut Pro is a much better program - but there's no equivalent on the PC..) There were some places that the G5 did not do so well, which surprised the reviewers. Didn't surprise me because the software is pre-G5 and still ran well enough. Recompile it with a G5 target and it'll smoke Windows in benchmarks.. ;) Of course, we know that there are lies, damned lies, and benchmarks. Apple's fastest desktop claim was made based on a test performed in August (later tests have not been made because it would no longer be quite true..) The only thing that is true is that you're not likely to notice 20ms difference for some of the big tasks, and for the things which require several seconds or even minutes (complex rendering and the like), a few extra seconds either way won't matter PC or Mac. > Looks to me it kind of depends on what your doing... I also read (but cannot > confirm) that apples benchmarking was simular to the benchmarking linux/NT a > few years back... The testers documented exactly how they tested. The claims that the testing was skewed are: 1. Apple used a malloc they don't use in MacOS X normally that trades RAM efficiency for speed. - True, and they shipped the G5 with a "MacOS X 10.2.7" designed only for the G5. The malloc tested was the malloc shipped. (This is the reason why I feel like the machine is not as fast as it should be when I really push it - too easily starts swapping..) Wasting RAM for speed is a common speed optimization - ask any game programmer today how much RAM they could save if they game didn't have to run at 60 FPS on their hardware target. 2. Hyperthreading was disabled on the fastest Intel box - True again. Turns out that Hyperthreading was skewing the results AGAINST Intel (ie, slowing the Intel box down), so they turned it off, according to Apple. Apple offered the Hyperthreading scores but I do not know if they have been independently verified. 3. All of the code that mattered was compiled for the 64 bit G5 itself using an optimizing compiler. The Intel boxes weren't subject to the same optimizing. - The compiler was gcc which _is_ good, but it's not THAT good. And yeah, the tests were compiled for the G5 using a G5 target. I do not know what compiler was used in Windows, probably VC++. gcc comes with every G5 sold, VC++ is a seperate (expensive) add-on. VC++ is, though, the standard Win32 compiler. Comparing gcc's generated code (normal on the G5) to VC++'s (normal in Windows) is indeed a fair comparison IMO. You can get better optimized Win32 compilers, but they're far from standard issue. 4. As soon as the benchmarks were published, they were obsolete. The claims made by Apple based on those benchmarks are a PR move and nothing more. - Well duh. This differs from any other benchmark how? ;) > I see PC's having a much more robust hardware market, and much lower prices > (aprox 1/2 the cost of the comparable mac). Really? Let's see what Dell has to say. Dimension 8300 desktop 3GHz Pentium 4 w/ 800MHz FSB (comparable 900MHz FSB not available) Windows XP Pro 120 GB Serial ATA drive (comparable 160GB SATA not available) Floppy drive (Dell recommended, but not included by default) 4x DVD+RW (Macs use -RW or +-RW drives, always burn -R(W) though) Dell recommended CD/DVD software Standard keyboard Optical mouse Productivity Pack (WordPerfect and MS Money, not removable, "free") 20.1" flat panel GeForceFX 5200 Ultra (perfect match!) SB Audigy2 card (digital sound capability) MS Plus! Digital Media Edition (equivalent of part of iLife) Dell Picture Studio (not removable) RealOne Player (not removable ;) sorry) Dell Movie Studio Essentials (another part of iLife) 56k Telephony modem Gigabit ethernet card $2824 I think I was reasonably fair in my selections. I chose not to select the additionally priced options unless it was to try and match the G5's specs (ie, the Audigy2, the various softwares, Gigabit ethernet) though I did take a wild guess about the CPU. I don't know if the 3.0GHz or 3.2GHz is more appropriate for comparison the G5 1.8GHz, so I went with the cheaper option. When the exact feature on the G5 was not available, I opted for the next peg down which Dell did offer (120GB drive instead of 160..) Some things I do not know about and am simply assuming are present on the Dell (like USB 2.0). Other features you just can't get from Dell (PCI-X). Matching specs with the G5 more closely (which would mean upgrading both systems significantly) would have been a far more even price. One caveat: This price is Dell's only price for home, small business, and education. Apple cuts their prices by a couple hundred for students and schools. The comparable Apple would probably be a few hundred more in a retail pricing comparison between Apple and Dell, but we're starting to see discounts and bundles on G5s. A comparable PC is NOT 1/2 the price. However, it's not really possible to get an expandable mac with the basic featureset you can get from the average PC. - Do you need SATA, really? No? Cut the price by .. lots - Do you need Firewire and video editing? About $40 off - Do you need a 20.1" LCD? (Optional in either case, but Dell's LCD is a lot cheaper than Apple's even if it's not widescreen and it's almost as nice in terms of screen quality - I refuse to go back to CRTs!) - Do you need the iLife equivalents? (You'd be surprised how easy they are to use and how useful they are once you've seen them, but they aren't free on a PC..) - Cheap analog sound works fine for most people, 24 bit digital isn't really _required_, so save a little money.. - Can _any_ version of Windows really be equated with a unix-based OS? As standard, the Dell costs slightly less than half of how I configured it, but I was matching features. If you don't have to do that, you can get a cheaper PC. You can get a similarly priced eMac or iMac, but you know, those machines just aren't very tinkerable. The commodity hardware edge definitely goes to the PC since it'll be January before upgrades to the G5 are even likely to be announced. Those upgrades will be bad-ass. but the G5 price point will be maintained most likely. So it really does matter what you want. _______________________________________________ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
