I am so excited!
- Thread starter andydude117
- Start date
- Status
Sorry about the previous two posts. I just had to post both of them. Now, getting back on topic, I would like to congradulate Virgin_Techie for the purchase. That computer will last you for years, and years to come. Not to mention if you upgrade the ram time to time till you read 8GB, which is completely bizzare. I wish I had parents that were nice as yours. Are you rich or something? You got the top of the line Mac with a kick-ass monitor, and a complete package of a really nice Mac set up. Congrats!
OIDanTheManIO
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 1,847
So all your parents asked you to do is to save up just $500 of the $5,000 it costs for that thing?! WOW :amazed: Pretty cool parental units if you ask me!
-Dan The Man
-Dan The Man
OIDanTheManIO
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 1,847
Re: "Tell Me who's inviiiited...."
Who cares if he's getting ripped off? He is only paying $500 for the whole package! I say it's a GREAT deal!
-Dan The Man
ATIRAGEPRO said:You just got Ripped off!!! The Apple 20" HD desplay woudn't cost anymore than $1500. And the PowerMac It's self would only be roughley about: $2500 All together.I don't understand what the extra $1000 dollars came from, but i think sou should just get one of the regular CRT displays instead. One for at least: $500 would be good.
Who cares if he's getting ripped off? He is only paying $500 for the whole package! I say it's a GREAT deal!
-Dan The Man
waynejkruse10
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,782
That article compared Macs to Dell, now, basicly everyone on this forum will agree that Dell are bad:
http://www.techist.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=35543
Many bad comments for Dell shown in that thread.
What Apple Should Compare to is the companies that use Motherboards from Asus, Abit, Gigabyte rather than the companies like Dell, which use there own generic crap. That article says that all macs come with 10/100 Ethernet, Firewire, and Wireless Networking as Defult. I had a look at the Emac on Apples website, and the only way for you to get Wireless Networking is to pay a extra $120 for a card. Newer motherboards come with 1000/100/10mbit ethernet, Firewire 400/800, and ive seen some new boards from Abit and Asus that has onboard Wireless. Also on that article, even though Apple was compared to crappy Dell, Apple was also compared to older Dell systems, and also the models of computers were not good comparison.
Also did you know, that a while ago, Apple did a benchmark comparing the G5 with a Dell. Now, the G5 clearly won, but in the test they used outdated models, disabled hyperthreading, and used a 533mhz FSB P4 rather than the newer 800mhz FSB P4 and just labeling it as a "P4". And ofcoarse, Dell is crap.
Wayne
It would suck to get 1.5GB of RAM in a G5. That would mean that youd have to have 512-512, 256-256, which is annoying if you want to upgrade later, especially if you want to get to that top 8GB, youd have to ditch a nice pair of 256MB DDR400 sticks.
Every recent Mac has firewire, 10/100 ethernet and the space for a wifi card. I would expect nothing less from an x86 motherboard.
On the Emac point, the emac is Apple's "budget line". While you may look at its price tag and wonder how this can be, its the truth, so it will obviously be lacking in some things. Looking at it this way, many of the same budget PC's lack many of the same features (regardless of price point) and thus using the Emac as an example is a moot point.
On the testing point, Apple used Dells because they are, without as doubt, one of the most well known PC makers and they are the biggest computer maker in the country. Apple did use some things to their advantages in the tests, but I believe that because most of the margins on the tests were not small, those would have slimmed, but not ultimately killed the leading margins. As for Hyperthreading, it would have done nothing to help increase the speed of most of these tests. Hyperthreading works in such a way that it uses idle CPU power and allocates it to other processes, simulating dual processors in a way that allows the processing of more than one thread at a time using the processor's unused power as a kind of dynamic second processor. I dont believe that the inclusion of hyperthreading would have helped the test scores in the SPEC because the tests run tested only one element at a time for the most part (floating point test for example). The front side bus issue is beyond my explanation, though I know the Xeon processors at the time did not have anything above a 533MHz bus.
waynejkruse10 said:
Every recent Mac has firewire, 10/100 ethernet and the space for a wifi card. I would expect nothing less from an x86 motherboard.
On the Emac point, the emac is Apple's "budget line". While you may look at its price tag and wonder how this can be, its the truth, so it will obviously be lacking in some things. Looking at it this way, many of the same budget PC's lack many of the same features (regardless of price point) and thus using the Emac as an example is a moot point.
On the testing point, Apple used Dells because they are, without as doubt, one of the most well known PC makers and they are the biggest computer maker in the country. Apple did use some things to their advantages in the tests, but I believe that because most of the margins on the tests were not small, those would have slimmed, but not ultimately killed the leading margins. As for Hyperthreading, it would have done nothing to help increase the speed of most of these tests. Hyperthreading works in such a way that it uses idle CPU power and allocates it to other processes, simulating dual processors in a way that allows the processing of more than one thread at a time using the processor's unused power as a kind of dynamic second processor. I dont believe that the inclusion of hyperthreading would have helped the test scores in the SPEC because the tests run tested only one element at a time for the most part (floating point test for example). The front side bus issue is beyond my explanation, though I know the Xeon processors at the time did not have anything above a 533MHz bus.
waynejkruse10
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,782
i never implied that macs do not have these features, i was just saying that pc's do have them and the article that Lasha posted sayd that they did not. About Hyperthreading, with it enabled, the P4's would have only gained a few percent, but disabling it still its a dishonest and sneaky thing to do, especially without making it clear that they did so. Some of the newer Xeon processes still have a 533mhz FSB but they are good for servers is there large about of Cache. I believe that Apple should Test against dells but also test against custom built machines to make a more of a acurate figure of performance of X86 machines. Dells do not support some features that the g5 does, like SATA and Raid and possibly Dual Channel which proprietory motherboards do support and can utilise for higher performance.
waynejkruse10 said:
I agree with you. Apple should have left everything as is (I think use of a special version of GCC was the shadiest of all) and let things rip.
Well, obviously, one could take advantage of every cutting edge technology in the PC world and it could handedly beat a G5. The point Apple was making at the time was that the G5 could beat similarly priced and more expensive PC's. I think they could have let them go on standard footing (meaning no special conditions, etc.) and released the findings that way. Even if the G5 trailed by a small margin or tied in some areas (it would most definitely beat PCs in some areas, so it would definitely not be a one sided fight), most people would still be content because that would dispel many of the prevailing sentiments that Macs are slower than PCs by a wide margin.
If you check out Dell, it does support everything youve mentioned that it does not. It even includes dual channel DDR SDRAM on some of its midrange systems, something Apple does not do.
Apple also ran some of its tests against Athlon FX-53 chips in Alienware boxes. Not quite custom, but more so than a Dell, with its more performance-centric view of computer operation.
waynejkruse10
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,782
wow, i didnt know Dell was that up to the latest technology like dual channel, but in australia, Dell is about a month or two behind Dell in other contries. Its good apple compared against Alienware, thats more realistic than dell. In no way i hate macintosh, i would buy a G5 if i had the money, it might be not as fast as a Custom build Fx57 with SLI but the build quality is great! And ofcoarse the great OS
waynejkruse10 said:
Yes, the new SLI technology will set Apple back from the competition. Apple is just lucky SLI can only be done with the rare (and of ordered from a builder like Alienware prebuilt, very expensive) dual PCI Express x16 slotted boards. Apple will have to think of something quickly in order to maintain the performance curve.
That sucks that Dell is not the same everywhere.
- Status
Similar threads
