For all those thinking about getting an iMac
Saturday, April 20, 2002 by Griffinme | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,51926,00.html
But you get that neat interface.
But you get that neat interface.
Griffinme
Reply #3 Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:18 PM
Reply #3 Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:18 PM
www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,51926,00.html
one more time....
one more time....
DavidK
Reply #4 Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:40 PM
Reply #4 Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:40 PM
That's a very interesting article. I would never have guessed that the Mac was so far behind a PC in web surfing speed.
_________________________ snipped from the article;
"I spent $1,800 on a computer that's slower than the $400 eMachine it replaced," one iMac user wrote in an e-mail
Several correspondents asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation by Mac zealots, who have been known to e-mail 1,000 or more harangues to the work addresses of those who criticize the huggable device.
...
Tests on other Apple platforms showed a similar performance gap between a $1,500 Dell notebook and a freshly unboxed, $3,000 PowerBook G4.
_________________________
The only reason I bought a Dell notebook instead of a Powerbook G4 is I couldn't afford to buy copies of all the software I needed to do my work. Since I already owned all the programs I need for Windows, it saved me about $3,000 to buy the Dell. Lucky me I was broke...
_________________________ snipped from the article;
"I spent $1,800 on a computer that's slower than the $400 eMachine it replaced," one iMac user wrote in an e-mail
Several correspondents asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation by Mac zealots, who have been known to e-mail 1,000 or more harangues to the work addresses of those who criticize the huggable device.
...
Tests on other Apple platforms showed a similar performance gap between a $1,500 Dell notebook and a freshly unboxed, $3,000 PowerBook G4.
_________________________
The only reason I bought a Dell notebook instead of a Powerbook G4 is I couldn't afford to buy copies of all the software I needed to do my work. Since I already owned all the programs I need for Windows, it saved me about $3,000 to buy the Dell. Lucky me I was broke...
paxx
Reply #5 Saturday, April 20, 2002 10:39 PM
Reply #5 Saturday, April 20, 2002 10:39 PM
Well, it depends what you benchmark it with.
I made some tests with a friend at work who has a dual 500 Mhz G3 (total one Gig) with 512 Megs of RAM, and we compared it with my new 1.3 Ghrz Pentium 4 with 512 Megs of RAM. We tested it with Photoshop.
Opening Photoshop (approx same plugins and fonts): 10 seconds on the Mac, about 25 seconds on the PC.
Opening a 600 Megs image: I don't remember the time exactly, but I remember that the Mac was twice as fast.
Applying a heavy filter (I think it was spiral blur or something) on that 800 Megs image: something like 35 seconds on the Mac, while I actually Control-Alt-Deleted on my PC after 6 minutes cause it was taking too long for my patience.
Maybe the new iMac is slow, but it certainly isn't true for all Apple computers. Generally speaking, they are faster that half the Intel processor speed. Their OS is crap and crashes all the time, but the machine is rock solid.
I made some tests with a friend at work who has a dual 500 Mhz G3 (total one Gig) with 512 Megs of RAM, and we compared it with my new 1.3 Ghrz Pentium 4 with 512 Megs of RAM. We tested it with Photoshop.
Opening Photoshop (approx same plugins and fonts): 10 seconds on the Mac, about 25 seconds on the PC.
Opening a 600 Megs image: I don't remember the time exactly, but I remember that the Mac was twice as fast.
Applying a heavy filter (I think it was spiral blur or something) on that 800 Megs image: something like 35 seconds on the Mac, while I actually Control-Alt-Deleted on my PC after 6 minutes cause it was taking too long for my patience.
Maybe the new iMac is slow, but it certainly isn't true for all Apple computers. Generally speaking, they are faster that half the Intel processor speed. Their OS is crap and crashes all the time, but the machine is rock solid.
migellito
Reply #6 Saturday, April 20, 2002 11:53 PM
Reply #6 Saturday, April 20, 2002 11:53 PM
as it says in the article, the only problem is web browsers on osx. it's not a big difference, but since i also have xp on another machine just upstairs i do notice it with some larger pages. it's an issue of not actually being x native. it's been -quite- a while since ms updated internet explorer for osx, and despite what ms says the next version of ie should correct it.
capn
Reply #7 Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:04 PM
Reply #7 Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:04 PM
If you've got the money and you've got a lot of intensive graphics shiznit to get done, there's absolutely nothing better than a silicon graphics box. But of course, its pricy. Viable alternatives also include building your own PC..... which is not only a good learning experience, but it general its cheaper and better, and you don't have to pay for expensive software stuff.
~Capn
~Capn
jtfolden
Reply #8 Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:22 PM
Reply #8 Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:22 PM
Ummm, Paxx, what OS is crap? Certainly not OS X, as I've been running it for over a year and haven't had a single crash in at least 10-11 months. Now, OS9 on the other hand isn't so stable but it's not really any worse than Win9x IME.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
Reply #1 Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:13 PM
hmmm... the link seems to be broken.