Gregory Ruiz-Ade wrote: > On Tuesday 24 May 2005 03:44 pm, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > > > Unless you want to back up the word ``inferior'' with hard, fast numbers > > then please leave the derisive language out. > > And yet you seem to imply that PPC hardware is itself inferior.
Nope. Just overpriced. I contend that x86 has a better price/ performance, especially in the form of AMD chips. > > http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3997 > > However, there are no price/performace comparisons. Only performance. > > And yet all the latest supercomputers seem to be built around Apple Xserves. > Interesting. Did you look at those price tags? Remember: performance is half of price/performance. If you ignore price, then we can all drive Ferraris! (/me notes the Toyota Corolla sitting in the parking lot) > > If anyone has any reference to a benchmark between similarly priced and > > equipped PPC and x86 systems, that would be great. > > If someone provides me with a Dell laptop... :) > > > I would feel a lot > > better knowing that PPC's price/performance was on par with x86, however > > looking at prices between Apple PowerBooks and Dells, I see that Dell > > has Apple beat: > > > > Apple: 15" LCD, 1.5GHz G4, 80GB drive for 1,999$. > > Dell: 15" LCD, 1.5 GHz Intel Pentium M 715, 8o GB Drive for $1,187 > > See, I got a slightly different price. I purposefully sought out the > Inspiron line, which has always been Dell's slimmer notebook, and found > that the Inspiron 6000 was the closest match to what a PowerBook has. With > that in mind, I configured one to be as close as possible in stature as the > 15" PowerBook, as offered in its default configuration by Apple. > > Apple 15" PowerBook: $1,999 > 1.5GHz, 512MB, 80GB HD @5400RPM, DVD-ROM/CD-RW, > Mac OS X 10.4, 802.11b/g, BlueTooth, etc. > http://unnerving.org/~gkade/misc/apple15inpb.pdf > > Dell Inspiron 6000 (15" display): $1,670 > 2GHz Pentium-M, 512MB, 80GB HD @4200RPM, DVD-ROM/CD-RW, > XP Pro, 802.11b/g, no BlueTooth AFAIK > http://unnerving.org/~gkade/misc/dellinspiron6000.pdf > > Overall, remarkably similar systems, though I suspect the performance of the > Dell might suffer a bit with a slightly slower hard drive, and there's a > few goodies that aren't on the Dell that you just get gratis on the > PowerBook. That was the problem I was having, which is why I went for similar. I think I looked at an Inspiron also. I closed the window, so I don't know. I see you picked a higher MHz Intel CPU, which is probably a fairer comparison. In your configuration, which I will accept as the fairer comparison, the Dell is 16% less expensive. If the reduced performace of the drive is less than ov overall performance, the Dell is still winning the price/performace contest. The big question would be is a 2GHz Pentium-M CPU comparable to a 1.5GHz G4? I don't know, but I assume it is close enough for armchair hypothesising! > > This was with similar RAM, similar wireless and similar video card. I > > do not know if the Dell had the DVI & S-Video out, Analog audio in/out, > > FireWire 400 & 800 or Gigabit Ethernet. > > Still haven't really sussed out the details on those goodies. > > Overall, I ended up spending about $3k on my powerbook once I optioned it up > the way I wanted. I also priced out a Dell notebook and ended up around > $3k as well for what would make me happy. At those prices, would the Dell have performed better? And were they similarly configured? > > > Since the Intel is a CISC, it can do more per clock cycle than the RISC > > PPC can. This makes the Dell a raw faster system by the numbers. A real > > benchmark would provide better data. > > CISC v. RISC is outdated as an argument. Modern PPC hardware can arguably > do more per clock cycle than x86 CPUs in real-world tests. In terms of > generic usability, my 1.5GHz Powerbook is often more responsive than my > 2.4GHz P4 Linux machine at work. Did you add pre-emptive kernel patched to the Linux system? That adds a lot in apparent responsiveness. > > > People _like_ Apple because most of the time, It Just Works. > > > > This is because of control of the OS and the hardware. Solaris SPARC > > Just Works, but is not aimed at the consumer, unlike WIntel and Apple. > > And your point is...? Not much of one, obviously. > > > Why upset that apple (ha!) cart? > > > > Why stagnate? > > Demonstrate, to me, stagnation. Apple keeps a very narrow view of supported harware and architectures. This is a limited menu mentality, and it works great in a lot of cases (In N Out has a limited menu, and what they do is most excellent. Just don't go there for Lobster Newburgh). Similarly, for what Apple does they do excellently. I am just of the impression that they are overpriced. It may also be because they package their computers with good stuff, so you don;t end up getting a crappy system. They are not trying to lure you in with cheap prices, then charge you as you build it to be usefull. I did see that Dell did do that with their ``starting at!'' prices. Perhaps Apple is not as overpriced as I am thinking. I know that I think they do produce wonderful hardware. Except that to buy one, one would have to buy one with the supported Airport card. I can't even find those in the Refurb section. Try your luck with EBay or Craigs List? > I have an operating system from Apple that lets me run all the > "expected" office and productivity apps, while at the same time > letting me get as geeky as I want under the hood in the BSD layer. Which leaves MS Windows as the only major non-UNIX based system left. And Intel as the only ``pure'' CISC chip maker left. Hmm... -john -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
