[tvfollower]

Hmm, I was just wondering what you all have to say about:

http://www.iunknown.com/000174.html
http://www.wininformant.com/Articles...rticleID=39381

Personally, I don't know what to think. I thought Macs were faster...I'm confused now...

I had convinced myself to buy a PowerBook next year, but I'm having second thoughts.

[DeathMan]

Browse the powermac forum for about the past 2 years. PC's have had the hardware edge in most apps for quite some time.

There are things Macs excell at. Mutitasking is one of them. Downloading files, Printing, scanning, burning CD at the same time. Macs do very well here. Windows 2000 couldn't even print and surf the intenet at the same time last time I tried.

There are things PCs excell at. Gaming is one of them. Macs framerates are disheartening to say the least.

Both of these are very important functions for computers.

HOWEVER. That was then. Now we have the G5, which is faster in the dual configuration, than any other PC you can buy in the personal computer arena. Faster than dual 3.0 Xeons. Fast fast.

I know your article says G5 specs are lies, but those issues have been addressed, and I'll believe a 3rd party testing firm over Wininformant. We'll just have to wait and see for real world performance, won't we.

Will Macs be the fastest forever? Probably not. Will they be the most productive and most fun to use for a long time to come? Absolutely.

[Westfoto]

Originally posted by tvfollower:
Hmm, I was just wondering what you all have to say about:

http://www.iunknown.com/000174.html
http://www.wininformant.com/Articles...rticleID=39381

Personally, I don't know what to think. I thought Macs were faster...I'm confused now...

I had convinced myself to buy a PowerBook next year, but I'm having second thoughts.

Look at the source.
The second one that you have above is a PC centric mag. Who's side are they on - do you think they might be bias?

What do YOU want to do with the computer that you will have?

I find that the Mac OS is not faultless but it is in my view the best for ME.

This is a disscussion that could go on forever.

West

[tvfollower]

I need a computer for:

-Web design
-Web programming
-Web browsing
-Programming in odd languages (college computer science courses use odd languages...and I'm going into college next year)...which might be a problem
-Word processing
-Chatting with friends
-Absolutely no gaming

I want my computre to:

-Look amazing
-Be highly configurable
-Allow me to use an alternative AIM client (Trillian sucks, and Gaim is error prone at times)...i.e. Adium or iChat
-Be very portable, so I can carry it from class to class
-Not crash
-Be fast
-Be responsive
-Run Linux applications

So...should I get a Mac? Do I have enough reasons to?

[idyll]

Yes.

[MindFad]

I was still more impressed with the on-stage real world performance testing they did with a dual Xeon and dual G5 than I am with people bickering over SPEC tests. And things will only get better from here on out -- and this is a great start for Apple to have to some kick-ass hardware.

[blackwind]

About the articles from www.iunknown.com and www.winformant.com, there are several things that must be noted.

Firstly, www.iunknown.com was fairly accurate. The Power Mac G4 was somewhat slower than the fastest PC's available; however, we now have the Power Mac G5, which at the very least closes the speed gap.

The article from www.winformant.com is fairly dated and was written during the initial skepticism toward Apple's (and for SPEC CPU2000, VeriTest's) benchmarks.

I cannot vouch for Apple's benchmarks, but I am willing to vouch for VeriTest's benchmark. After reading through it, it seems fair enough. The malloc library setup was odd, but the PC did have more RAM than the Mac... so there is one advantage per side. Also, SSE2 was enabled, and SPEC does not support Altivec. (Of course, others argue that synthetic benchmarks like SPEC and Xbench are totally useless, but that is a topic for another debate...)

Ultimately, I think that comparing just the hardware, VeriTest's SPEC numbers are just fine. Of course, PC's have faster compilers than GCC 3.3, but that is topic for another debate.

Some other benchmarks have leaked out from various sources. Unfortunately, they are far from consistent (due to the heavy optimization for the G4 and little for the G5... G4 optimizations actually slow down the G5 except for Altivec ones).

At www.xlr8yourmac.com, there is an Adobe After Effects benchmark between a Dual 2-GHz G5 and a Dual 2.66-GHz Pentium 4 Xeon (without Hyperthreading). The G5 was nearly twice as fast, which is very impressive.

Xbench 1.0 benchmarks between the G4 and the G5 are somewhat disappointing. The Dual 1.42-GHz G4 scored 177, and the Dual 2-GHz G5 scored 245.

Speedtest scores from www.mactechnews.de/software/speedtest.sit show the same G5 scoring 670 and the same G4 scoring 326, an impressive gain.

Java Linpack scores from www.netlib.org/benchmark/linpackjava show the G5 at 236 Mflops and a Dual 1.42-GHz G4 at 93.2 Mflops. The G5 scores near the top of the list as well, although some PC's score better. Then again, this benchmark is somewhat unreliable, as there are 2.4-GHz Pentium 4's beating 3.06-GHz Pentium 4's and such.

In the "Finding Nemo" Renderman benchmark, the 2-GHz G5 (multiprocessing not enabled) finishes in 3 minutes and 36 seconds. A 2.8-GHz Pentium 4 Xeon finishes in 4 minutes and 6 seconds. That is fairly good.

In a Noble Ape thought emulator at www.NobleApe.com, a Dual 2-GHz G5 does up to 16140 thoughts/second, while the Dual 1.42-GHz G4 scores up to only 5700 thoughts/second. That is very impressive. (Both used optimized Altivec code.)

In contrast, the Altivec Fractal Carbon shows a Dual 1.42-GHz G4 beating a Dual 2-GHz G5 (10.8 Gflops versus 10.5 Gflops).

Finally, from Apple's own SkidMarks benchmark, a 2-GHz G5 is equal to a 1.7-GHz G4 in integer, 2.7-GHz G4 in floating point, and a 2.08-GHz G4 in Altivec.

Good luck drawing any conclusions.

As you can tell, benchmarks tell you nothing until:

1) Benchmarks are optimized for all platforms to the best of their programmers' abilities.
2) Machines actually start to ship and people can verify early benchmarks.

From the above list of early benchmarks, basically each benchmark contradicts with at least one another.

Since the G5 starts to ship today, we can expect some benchmarks of the single processor machines to start trickling out soon. Of course, the G5's performance will actually improve over time because of increasing optimization for the G5 processor (as was the case for the G4).

Oh, and yes, you should buy a Mac if that suits your needs the best. I would suggest that you go to a retailer or an Apple store and ask for a tryout of what you want to do.

[businezguy]

Yes, you do. If you didn't, I would have said so.

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by tvfollower:
I need a computer for:

-Web design
-Web programming
-Web browsing
-Programming in odd languages (college computer science courses use odd languages...and I'm going into college next year)...which might be a problem
-Word processing
-Chatting with friends
-Absolutely no gaming

I want my computre to:

-Look amazing
-Be highly configurable
-Allow me to use an alternative AIM client (Trillian sucks, and Gaim is error prone at times)...i.e. Adium or iChat
-Be very portable, so I can carry it from class to class
-Not crash
-Be fast
-Be responsive
-Run Linux applications

So...should I get a Mac? Do I have enough reasons to?

Sounds like a Mac to me.

[Thinine]

I have only one thing to throw in. You say you'll be programming at your university. Well, many (most) of the free compilers universities give out are Windows only, so you'll have to look around for compilers, or use a lab or remote computer. Other than that, a Mac should meet all you criteria.

[Superchicken]

There's always VPC, and it should actually be useable on a G5

[saru boy]

Originally posted by tvfollower:
So...should I get a Mac? Do I have enough reasons to?

You didn't state what type of budget you're on. Unless of course, price isn't an issue for you.

Unfortunately, price is the one biggest selling point for many (I would tend to say *most*) people, and that's where, no matter how fast it is, a Mac system would fall behind. And don't go into the whole cost of use over the long run thing, since Joe Schmuck on the street isn't thinking about that at all...he's just looking at some crap Dell system with monitor for $800 vs a G5 at $2k (and no monitor), and thinking to himself, "I've heard Macs are faster and easier to use, but damn...is it worth twice the price?".

[S.SubZero]

Cost *is* a big factor, and given the cost difference between a G5 and a Xeon, it's something to consider. You could build a dual Xeon 3.0 system with comparable specs to a dual G5 and still have a considerable amount of cash left over. Heck, for the $2999 of the top G5, you could build TWO Xeon dual 2.8's, each with the same loadout as a G5.

[Xaaron Swiftblade]

dual systems are pricey to build, mac or not. Problem is, wintel machines don't need dual processors to seem fast. Up until recently their single processors are double the Ghz, which atleast sounds fast. They've had much higher FSBs which definetly has put them ahead (until the g5 of course), and they have hyperthreading which allows their faster processors to act as two. So building a dual chip wintel box isn't nearly as necessary, and their single processor machines can be very fast.

BUT, they don't run OSX, they don't run FCP, they crash a helluvalot more, and they aren't nearly as exciting to work on. Is that worth the cash? I might be stubborn and obsessive, but I want my G5.

*battlecry*

[klinux]

Originally posted by Westfoto:
Look at the source.
The second one that you have above is a PC centric mag. Who's side are they on - do you think they might be bias?

What do YOU want to do with the computer that you will have?

I find that the Mac OS is not faultless but it is in my view the best for ME.

This is a disscussion that could go on forever.

West

Yes, I agree with you that this is a discussion that can go on forever.

However, the fact that second article is published on Winformant is irrelevant. If it is, this would make any information published on a Mac site and any discussions heres irrelevant as well solely because of its location and not its content.

However, I think one discussion that is ending with the release of G5, and a position that I have always maintained, is that G4/Motorola sucked. They are absolutely responsible, IMO, of Apple losing its marketshare. G3 was on par with its x86 counterparts. So is G5. G4 - I don't think so.

Whenever I hear fanatics argue 1.25 Ghz G4 is just as fast as a 3 ghz HT P4 I just want to throw my hands up - this is the reason why rest of the world think some of us are blind fanatics! Thank God the debate is over for now for G4 v P4.

[Hydra]

Originally posted by S.SubZero:
Cost *is* a big factor, and given the cost difference between a G5 and a Xeon, it's something to consider. You could build a dual Xeon 3.0 system with comparable specs to a dual G5 and still have a considerable amount of cash left over. Heck, for the $2999 of the top G5, you could build TWO Xeon dual 2.8's, each with the same loadout as a G5.

Very bad argument. Personally, I would like to see a comparable home-built Dual Xeon for all that much under $3000. A dual Xeon is a pro class workstation. We are not talking about building a game PC w/ a P4 and nice graphics card for $600 (we all know Apple can't compete in that class - why would they even want too?). For the most part this class of computer is for getting work done and most people shelling out the big bucks want a real name on the box to back up the investment.

If cost is all that matters Dell must never sell even a single solitary box because you could always build a cheaper one. Oh wait a minute Dell is the largest PC maker in the world. I guess there is more to it than the lowest cost. I'm not ridiculing you or anything but bringing in the home-built option is not exactly fair to the argument against Apple (or Dell, HP, or Sony for that matter).

-Jerry C.

[Link]

actually home brew PCs aren't $600 unless you buy from 10 different stores and through rebate offers.

A decent homebrew that even compares to a mac costs $1200.. that's considering you use a mid class case.

That includes radeon 9800, 2.4ghz p4, 1gb ram, decent abit or asus board.

And then gigabit/fw800 to make up for whta the pc doesn't have

[andreas_g4]

Originally posted by S.SubZero:
Cost *is* a big factor, and given the cost difference between a G5 and a Xeon, it's something to consider. You could build a dual Xeon 3.0 system with comparable specs to a dual G5 and still have a considerable amount of cash left over. Heck, for the $2999 of the top G5, you could build TWO Xeon dual 2.8's, each with the same loadout as a G5.

Proof?

[Xaaron Swiftblade]

It still is about cost. Low end Dells are generally less expensive then low end home built machines- and get this, you don't have to build them. Not everyone is a computer nut who wants to live computers, they just wanna get on the net.
Only when you start getting into nicer components is it cheaper to build one then to buy.

[Hi I'm Ben]

Make this thread go away. It's annoying to look at.

[Gee4orce]

Originally posted by tvfollower:
I need a computer for:

-Web design
-Web programming
-Web browsing
-Programming in odd languages (college computer science courses use odd languages...and I'm going into college next year)...which might be a problem
-Word processing
-Chatting with friends
-Absolutely no gaming

I want my computre to:

-Look amazing
-Be highly configurable
-Allow me to use an alternative AIM client (Trillian sucks, and Gaim is error prone at times)...i.e. Adium or iChat
-Be very portable, so I can carry it from class to class
-Not crash
-Be fast
-Be responsive
-Run Linux applications

So...should I get a Mac? Do I have enough reasons to?

That's pretty much exactly what I use my Macs for.

The Mac is now one of the best programming environments around - you can easily earn great money and make a career as a programmer without ever having to spend a single $ to buy a development environment or a compiler. Try that on Windows.

I work as a Perl programmer and a web developer. I also do PHP, and I could just as easily be doing Java or C. Yes, all on my Powerbook

Apart from C, C++, Objective-C, Perl, Python, Ruby, Java and PHP - which all come with Mac OS X - you can find compilers for COBOL, Pascal, ADA, etc, etc. That should pretty much cover you for most Uni courses !

The only thing your not going to be able to do, AFAIK, is .Net programming. Which, if you ask me, is a good thing (Actually, if you really needed to you could use Virtual PC to do this).

[CubeBoy]

Originally posted by Hydra:
Very bad argument. Personally, I would like to see a comparable home-built Dual Xeon for all that much under $3000. A dual Xeon is a pro class workstation. We are not talking about building a game PC w/ a P4 and nice graphics card for $600 (we all know Apple can't compete in that class - why would they even want too?). For the most part this class of computer is for getting work done and most people shelling out the big bucks want a real name on the box to back up the investment.

If cost is all that matters Dell must never sell even a single solitary box because you could always build a cheaper one. Oh wait a minute Dell is the largest PC maker in the world. I guess there is more to it than the lowest cost. I'm not ridiculing you or anything but bringing in the home-built option is not exactly fair to the argument against Apple (or Dell, HP, or Sony for that matter).

-Jerry C.

Actually it's a very good argument, perhaps you should browse around for some Dual Xeon systems (retailer or home built) before jumping the gun. You can get some very well equipped Xeons (Dual 2.8 GHz, 1 GB DDR RAM, QuadroFX 500 video card, 120 GB HD with Databurst Cache, etc) from Dell for under $3000. Strictly speaking, the G5 with it's gaming graphics card cannot be considered a pro class workstation either. Apple DID market the G5 as the world's first 64 bit desktop after all. That claim simply wouldn't hold water if the G5 was marketed as a workstation

Considering building a PC is a very viable option for some, I would say the comparison is worth noting although I agree with you that a fair comparison should be between retailers. Barring that, top of the line PCs from retailers are still noticeably cheaper than most Powermacs.

Dell Precision Workstation 450
Dual Xeon 2.8 GHz with HT
1 GB Dual Channel DDR-266
Nvidia Quadro FX 500
Harman Kardon 206 Speakers
48X/24X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator
120GB 7200RPM IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache
Windows XP Professional with Media
PS/2 Keyboard and Mouse

Total Price: $2896 ($2696 with mail in rebate)

The homebuilt workstations you are referring to are significantly cheaper than the one I just configured by the way.

[saru boy]

Originally posted by Link:
actually home brew PCs aren't $600 unless you buy from 10 different stores and through rebate offers.

A decent homebrew that even compares to a mac costs $1200.. that's considering you use a mid class case.

That includes radeon 9800, 2.4ghz p4, 1gb ram, decent abit or asus board.

And then gigabit/fw800 to make up for whta the pc doesn't have

How does a Radeon 9800 "compare" to the GeForceFX 5200 that's standard on the G5? That Radeon 9800 will add $300-$350 to a G5. If you want a comparable machine, you have to go with the standard video cards on the G5, the GeForceFX 5200 and the Radeon 9600 Pro, the PC versions of which are $60 and $120, respectively.

Plus many "decent" Abit or Asus motherboards already have gigabit standard. FW800 will add about $80.

Basically, it's pointless to argue on price because PC are so much cheaper.

[Hydra]

Originally posted by CubeBoy:

Dell Precision Workstation 450
Dual Xeon 2.8 GHz with HT
1 GB Dual Channel DDR-266
Nvidia Quadro FX 500
Harman Kardon 206 Speakers
48X/24X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator
120GB 7200RPM IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache
Windows XP Professional with Media
PS/2 Keyboard and Mouse

Total Price: $2896 ($2696 with mail in rebate)

The homebuilt workstations you are referring to are significantly cheaper than the one I just configured by the way.

Hmmm. No superdrive and a smaller 120 GB Drive - A little more RAM. Only DDR-266 (G5 has DDR-400) dual CPU's on a shared bus unlike the separate buses in the G5. I don't see firewire 400/800. I'd say the G5 is still cheaper and as to the "non-pro" graphics. The line between Pro and Game card is becoming increasingly blurred. The certified drivers are the biggest difference and the way that Apple holds a tight grip on the dev of drivers for its own OS I'd say its a little different than the Windows world. I do expect to see pro cards relatively shortly anyway.

As far as not being considered a Pro workstation I think Pixar seems OK with it as far as Renderman goes. I think they qualify as graphics pros. I think the new definition of a Pro workstation may have just started to include having 64 bit processors

I totally agree with you on the fact that PC's have a cost edge in many ways but the DELL you showed above is not a top of the line and all top of the lines have a bit of a premium attached. The Fact that the top G5 is even ballpark with a midlevel DELL is very impressive to me. I still want to see the G5 in the hands of end-users and see what they really can do. If they are only equal to Top of the line dual Xeons - then they are still very competitive on price. If they turn out to really be monsters then they may be consider much cheaper in comparison. I guess at this point it really is too early to give a definitive answer.

I make no bones I'm hoping they are monsters ( I have a dual G5 on order with a 9800 BTO) ) so I am biased. To me more important than raw theoretical power is getting the fastest mac I can get and this time it just may be one of the fastest PC's too.

-Jerry C.

[jcadam]

If your primary use for a computer is for gaming, you would be an idiot to buy a Macintosh.

If your primary use for a computer is for anything other than gaming, you would be an idiot to buy a Windows Box.

Assuming you're not a hard-core 12 year old gamer who never gets laid:

First Choice: Mac

Second Choice: If you are a cheap bastard, build an x86 box and put linux on it.

Third Choice: hey, If I had extra $$ sitting around, I might enjoy putting together a G4 AmigaOS Box. A great OS with almost no decent (modern) apps.

[saru boy]

Originally posted by jcadam:
Second Choice: If you are a cheap bastard, build an x86 box and put linux on it.

Yeah, the nerve of these people who don't want to spend $2K+ for a new G5!!!

[Link]

Originally posted by saru boy:
How does a Radeon 9800 "compare" to the GeForceFX 5200 that's standard on the G5? That Radeon 9800 will add $300-$350 to a G5. If you want a comparable machine, you have to go with the standard video cards on the G5, the GeForceFX 5200 and the Radeon 9600 Pro, the PC versions of which are $60 and $120, respectively.

Plus many "decent" Abit or Asus motherboards already have gigabit standard. FW800 will add about $80.

Basically, it's pointless to argue on price because PC are so much cheaper.

That they are. But it really irks me when someone says "I can build this awesome PC for $300" because that's fuller of BS then george W's inaugural speech.

$300 gets you a celeron or >xp 2400 athlon, radeon 9000 and ok motherboard.. really depends on the case I guess

If you can stomach an ugly antec then you can get one of those. Sadly their power supplies are much better

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by tvfollower:
I need a computer for:

-Web design
-Web programming
-Web browsing
-Programming in odd languages (college computer science courses use odd languages...and I'm going into college next year)...which might be a problem
-Word processing
-Chatting with friends
-Absolutely no gaming

I want my computre to:

-Look amazing
-Be highly configurable
-Allow me to use an alternative AIM client (Trillian sucks, and Gaim is error prone at times)...i.e. Adium or iChat
-Be very portable, so I can carry it from class to class
-Not crash
-Be fast
-Be responsive
-Run Linux applications

So...should I get a Mac? Do I have enough reasons to?

ugh.

you're the perfect candidate for mac. i look at you and wonder why you need to even ask. i think apple needs to do a better job of getting the message out about what macs offer.

[lessthandmb]

First post here and i dont want to come off as being a pc lover cause im far from it ...but i just set up a brand new pc for my buddy this is what he got
-------------------
3.0ghz P4/800mhz FSB
1gig of kingston 3200 ddr
(2)80 gig ata133 8mb cache maxtor Hd's
MSI Neo-FIS2R motherboard
ATI All-In-Wonder RADEON 9700 PRO 128MB DDR 8X AGP
The Antec Sonata case (SILENT.small.and has a cool shiny black finish)
Sony DVD-/+RW Recorder Drive Model DRU510A
Sony CDRW 52x Write, 24x Re-write, 52x Read
Microsoft Wireless Optical Desktop for Bluetooth (keyboard, mouse, and the bluetooth Wireless Transceiver)
Dell UltraSharp 1901FP (19inch lcd)
microsoft XP pro
$2507
---------------------------------
That system can beat I think any G4 right now. G5's i dont see how the pc cant compete...this rig just flys. Of course I had to build it and install all his software which took 10 hours. The video card not only can handle any game with ease, its an all-in-wonder and he could watch tv hook up his video game system or dvd player or anything that has the right connections. The case is just as silent as the apple g5 could be....(havnt heard it yet but the antec is dead silent) And I know apples have great multitasking, but I was running sonar 2 (pro audio) musicmatch (playback of .wav) kazaa downloading, .shn converting to wav in SHN tool.....all pretty smoothly. Well it impressed me...enough to make me 2nd guess whethor or not to pay over 3000 for a g5 when I could get great performance with a pc, not BETTER but still very good. Does anyone else feel this way?

[krassy]

Originally posted by lessthandmb:
------------------
3.0ghz P4/800mhz FSB
1gig of kingston 3200 ddr
(2)80 gig ata133 8mb cache maxtor Hd's
MSI Neo-FIS2R motherboard
ATI All-In-Wonder RADEON 9700 PRO 128MB DDR 8X AGP
The Antec Sonata case (SILENT.small.and has a cool shiny black finish)
Sony DVD-/+RW Recorder Drive Model DRU510A
Sony CDRW 52x Write, 24x Re-write, 52x Read
Microsoft Wireless Optical Desktop for Bluetooth (keyboard, mouse, and the bluetooth Wireless Transceiver)
Dell UltraSharp 1901FP (19inch lcd)
microsoft XP pro
$2507
---------------------------------
Well it impressed me...enough to make me 2nd guess whethor or not to pay over 3000 for a g5 when I could get great performance with a pc, not BETTER but still very good. Does anyone else feel this way?

is this a joke?

Unix based OS
iTunes
iMovie
Safari
iChat AV
Webserver Apache included
Development Tools
Network Tools
Rendezvous
Look and Feel
X11
... i could go on forever

Bubble Trouble X !!!!

and the PC side?

W32/Sobig.F-mm
W32/Mimail.A-mm
W32/Klez.H-mm
... i could go on forever

*lol*

[lessthandmb]

its for audio use only though...hes got a home studio...i dont think he has much need for those programs. But stability alone is crucial in recording thats why i think mac might be the way to go...even if its alomst $1000 more.

[BZ]

10 hours to build?

Now, personally 10 hours is worth... $500 to me, but others, that might be more like $1,000.

Time = Money...and all the time you spend finding, ordering, building that machine are something. Besides, if it didn't all "just work", well, it could have been 20 hours (I have done it).

BZ

Originally posted by lessthandmb:

That system can beat I think any G4 right now. G5's i dont see how the pc cant compete...this rig just flys. Of course I had to build it and install all his software which took 10 hours. The video card not only can handle any game with ease, its an all-in-wonder and he could watch tv hook up his video game system or dvd player or anything that has the right connections. The case is just as silent as the apple g5 could be....(havnt heard it yet but the antec is dead silent) And I know apples have great multitasking, but I was running sonar 2 (pro audio) musicmatch (playback of .wav) kazaa downloading, .shn converting to wav in SHN tool.....all pretty smoothly. Well it impressed me...enough to make me 2nd guess whethor or not to pay over 3000 for a g5 when I could get great performance with a pc, not BETTER but still very good. Does anyone else feel this way?

[lessthandmb]

Im saying 1000 because that $2500 included a very nice 19inch LCD. The apple 20in. is over $1000 and the 17in is $699. So a dual 2ghz g5 with 1 gig of ram and a studio display is going to be over 3500...id take that 10 hrs of installing drivers and windows over giving up $1000...im only in highschool (not quite a "verteran" when it comes to macs) so I dont have a good job where $1000 is easy for me to get hold of.

edit-
he did pay me $150 and his gen 2 20 gig ipod for the job

[krassy]

Originally posted by lessthandmb:
its for audio use only though...hes got a home studio...i dont think he has much need for those programs. But stability alone is crucial in recording thats why i think mac might be the way to go...even if its alomst $1000 more.

yeah i forgot to complete my list:

Emagic Logic Audio Platinum optimized for G5
ProTools
Soundtrack
LogicControl

i myself am a user of Logic Audio since v2.0 on the Atari Falcon 030 and later all versions (until v6.2 now) on mac... i saw some "audio-win-pcs" which tried to be as stable but they can't .... mac is the only way - os x with it's Audio Units has got ultimately low latency when it comes to recording/effects/sampling/software-synthetics...

!!! > mac < !!!


http://www.emagic.de/

[istallion]

Originally posted by BZ:
10 hours to build?

Now, personally 10 hours is worth... $500 to me, but others, that might be more like $1,000.

Time = Money...and all the time you spend finding, ordering, building that machine are something. Besides, if it didn't all "just work", well, it could have been 20 hours (I have done it).

BZ

First, 10 hours is a generous time to assemble the system, install the OS, and a few apps. That would result in a comparable OEM system with a few of their bundled apps. I'm assuming he installed a lot of third party apps and did some troubleshooting to get 10 hours.

Second, not everybody makes $100k+ like you. Around 1999, it was uneconomical for B. Gates to bend over and pick up a $20(or was it a $50?) off the ground if he was at work. So could he make the argument that everyone should have 2 chauffers, 3 maids, 4 personal assistants, and a nanny, else they're just wasting their time?

It's not viable for some, but for many it is. Enough to keep hundreds of computer parts stores in business with thin margins. Either they enjoy doing it or it's saving them money.

is this a joke?

Unix based OS
iTunes
iMovie
Safari
iChat AV
Webserver Apache included
Development Tools
Network Tools
Rendezvous
Look and Feel
X11

Well, aside from this being a complete red herring to lessthandumb's post, you seem to be implying that nothing even close (or the same thing) is available for that p4 system. OSX is nice and some people like itunes, but the vast majority of people aren't going to look twice at the others.

[krassy]

Originally posted by istallion:
Well, aside from this being a complete red herring to lessthandumb's post, you seem to be implying that nothing even close (or the same thing) is available for that p4 system. OSX is nice and some people like itunes, but the vast majority of people aren't going to look twice at the others.

you're right. as soon as i look at a windows desktop i'm braindead... so i buy a mac just for having the opportunity to think about what apps i'm going to use



no problem - just kidding (a little)

[hadocon]

Originally posted by Thinine:
I have only one thing to throw in. You say you'll be programming at your university. Well, many (most) of the free compilers universities give out are Windows only, so you'll have to look around for compilers, or use a lab or remote computer. Other than that, a Mac should meet all you criteria.

I am a CISC student. In my 3 years of class I have never had a programming problem on my Mac.

What do you need other than:

Java
C
C++
Pascal
Prolog
Haskell
TCL/TK
ObjectC

It's UNIX man... Name me a programming language that is not available on UNIX?

all classes that use imperative languages can mix & match languages.

Any functional programming class will have you using Haskell, Prolog or Lisp... all of which were invented on UNIX.

[lessthandmb]

Originally posted by krassy:
yeah i forgot to complete my list:

Emagic Logic Audio Platinum optimized for G5
ProTools
Soundtrack
LogicControl

i myself am a user of Logic Audio since v2.0 on the Atari Falcon 030 and later all versions (until v6.2 now) on mac... i saw some "audio-win-pcs" which tried to be as stable but they can't .... mac is the only way - os x with it's Audio Units has got ultimately low latency when it comes to recording/effects/sampling/software-synthetics...

!!! > mac < !!!


http://www.emagic.de/

I also do some recording with my tascam us-428...you think ill be able to use it with a G5? Or even Logic for that matter?

[krassy]

Originally posted by lessthandmb:
I also do some recording with my tascam us-428...you think ill be able to use it with a G5? Or even Logic for that matter?

yep - look here for the latest os x driver.

[juanpacolopez]

Originally posted by BZ:
10 hours to build?

Now, personally 10 hours is worth... $500 to me, but others, that might be more like $1,000.

Time = Money...and all the time you spend finding, ordering, building that machine are something. Besides, if it didn't all "just work", well, it could have been 20 hours (I have done it).

BZ

10 hour for hardware install/troublshooting outsourced from my office:

$750

If there was ANY coding involved (which I can't imagine there was, but just for reference), that would jump to:

$1,250

So yeah, it's definitely worth something

However, it shouldn't take 10 hours to build/configure a machine. If it DOES, it's a testament to poor hardware choices (bad/unsupported drivers, etc. take FOREVER to track down/debug).

The last server we built (we buy the workstations premade, but I build the servers by hand to save some cash and ensure a certain level of quality) took about 5 hours, including the OS install. That was w/ a RAID-5 cabinet and DLT too... we got one of the file clerks to sit there screwing drives into mounting brackets for like 2 hours

[lessthandmb]

Originally posted by juanpacolopez:
10 hour for hardware install/troublshooting outsourced from my office:

$750

If there was ANY coding involved (which I can't imagine there was, but just for reference), that would jump to:

$1,250

So yeah, it's definitely worth something

However, it shouldn't take 10 hours to build/configure a machine. If it DOES, it's a testament to poor hardware choices (bad/unsupported drivers, etc. take FOREVER to track down/debug).

The last server we built (we buy the workstations premade, but I build the servers by hand to save some cash and ensure a certain level of quality) took about 5 hours, including the OS install. That was w/ a RAID-5 cabinet and DLT too... we got one of the file clerks to sit there screwing drives into mounting brackets for like 2 hours

10 hrs included the lunch break and hooking up the mixers and cables,

[docholiday]

Originally posted by CubeBoy:
Actually it's a very good argument, perhaps (...)

Dell Precision Workstation 450
Dual Xeon 2.8 GHz with HT
1 GB Dual Channel DDR-266
Nvidia Quadro FX 500
Harman Kardon 206 Speakers
48X/24X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator
120GB 7200RPM IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache
Windows XP Professional with Media
PS/2 Keyboard and Mouse

Total Price: $2896 ($2696 with mail in rebate)

It's still a bad argument because...

1) Your price is off. Go to the link (http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...p;oc=WS450DPAD) and put the two processors in: The price goes up to $3533.

Here are the specs for the setup I created:

Dell Precision™ Workstation 450 Desktop
- Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.80GHz, 512K Cache
- 2ND PROCESSOR: Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.80GHz, 512K Cache
- 512MB,DDR266 SDRAM Memory,ECC (2 DIMMS)
- No Monitor Option
- ATI, FIRE GL™ X1,128MB,1-2 VGA/DVI, (dual monitor capable)
- 120GB 7200RPM IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache™
- 1.44MB Floppy
- Microsoft®Windows® 2000 Professional (SP3) with Media using NTFS
- 56K,v.92 data/fax modem,PCI
- 4X DVD+RW/+R with Roxio® Easy CD Creator and DVD decode
- 3 Year Limited Warranty
- No Installation
- 1394 Controller Card
- Standard Keyboard and Mouse

If you can show me the config that gave you that incredible price, then please do so. Oh, and Dell shipping on these babies will cost ya another $100+.

2) When looking at the Dell's specs, you see that a few things are "missing" that are includend in the G5: Firewire 800, AirPort, Bluetooth, and Gigabit Ethernet. Also, the Dell comes with a slightly smaller HD. On the other hand, the Dell has a way better graphics card on it.


Looking at both machines and their prices, you see how a dual 3.06Ghz Xeon machine would be far more expensive than a Dual 2Ghz G5.
Even a "home-made" one is very expensive: A dual 2.4Ghz Xeon with 2GB RAM, a 360GB HD, a Firewire card, ATI Radeon 9000, and a few more bells and whistles cost us CD$4300 up here in Vancouver.

[CubeBoy]

Originally posted by docholiday:
It's still a bad argument because...

1) Your price is off. Go to the link (http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...p;oc=WS450DPAD) and put the two processors in: The price goes up to $3533.

Here are the specs for the setup I created:

Dell Precision™ Workstation 450 Desktop
- Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.80GHz, 512K Cache
- 2ND PROCESSOR: Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.80GHz, 512K Cache
- 512MB,DDR266 SDRAM Memory,ECC (2 DIMMS)
- No Monitor Option
- ATI, FIRE GL™ X1,128MB,1-2 VGA/DVI, (dual monitor capable)
- 120GB 7200RPM IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache™
- 1.44MB Floppy
- Microsoft®Windows® 2000 Professional (SP3) with Media using NTFS
- 56K,v.92 data/fax modem,PCI
- 4X DVD+RW/+R with Roxio® Easy CD Creator and DVD decode
- 3 Year Limited Warranty
- No Installation
- 1394 Controller Card
- Standard Keyboard and Mouse

If you can show me the config that gave you that incredible price, then please do so. Oh, and Dell shipping on these babies will cost ya another $100+.

2) When looking at the Dell's specs, you see that a few things are "missing" that are includend in the G5: Firewire 800, AirPort, Bluetooth, and Gigabit Ethernet. Also, the Dell comes with a slightly smaller HD. On the other hand, the Dell has a way better graphics card on it.

Looking at both machines and their prices, you see how a dual 3.06Ghz Xeon machine would be far more expensive than a Dual 2Ghz G5.
Even a "home-made" one is very expensive: A dual 2.4Ghz Xeon with 2GB RAM, a 360GB HD, a Firewire card, ATI Radeon 9000, and a few more bells and whistles cost us CD$4300 up here in Vancouver.

First off, the link you showed me only gives me a baseline system, this is because Dell's website, for some faulty reason resets the configurations when you link to it. If the site actually showed the updated price, we wouldn't be having this pointless argument in the first place as I would have already given the link in my original post. The price isn't "incredible", lots of people use this configuration actually, you simply refused to configure a machine by the standards that I set.

Secondly, your configuration is going to be significantly more expensive than mine due to your selective picking of only items that come with a premium (Windows 2000 professional with SP3, FireGL X1, DVD drive). I don't know who exactly your trying to fool here nor do I care but I can tell you that it's pretty pointless trying when the evidence is right in front of you.

A baseline system with a 2.8 GHz Xeon costs, Windows XP professional, and Dell Precision software costs $1898 US as this link would show: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...n&amp;kc=6W463

Another 2.8 GHz Xeon would add $649, 512 MB memory would adds another $119, note that the 1 GB ram on my previous system was available as a free upgrade. QuadroFX 500 adds $101, speakers adds
29$, and the 120 GB hard drive adds $140. There is also a $250 rebate and the cd drive can be upgraded for free.

So doing the math:
Base Price: $1898
Second Xeon: $649
512 MB RAM: $119
QuadroFX 500: $101
HK Speakers: $29
48/24/48 CDRW: $0 (free upgrade)
120GB Hard Drive: $140
$250 Rebate: -$250
Total Price: $2686

Is it the same as before? No, incidently, you just happened to post after Dell ended it's free 1 GB DDR266 upgrade. Does it cost $3000+? Not even close and if you considered following my configuration, that would have become readily obvious.

I think it would be even more obvious that a "home made" Xeon workstation is going to be significantly cheaper than one from the retailers, look up the prices for all the components listed above on Newegg or pricewatch and why don't you tell me how much the equivalent home built system will cost.

[sniffer]

Lemme ask.. Tell me one firm that actually afford to build their own machines with cheap parts from 3-10 different shops!

I can't come up with any. G5 is a pro machine for a pro marked.

[ngrundy]

-Web design
Adobe suite, macromedia suite, TextEdit if you're hardcore?

-Web programming
I do all my advanced web work (uni unit) on my mac, php, mysql, perl, html all that stuff

-Web browsing
Safari, Camino, Mozilla, iCab, OmniWeb, the list goes on.

-Programming in odd languages (college computer science courses use odd languages...and I'm going into college next year)...which might be a problem
they may be 'odd' languages now but belive me when i say they are pretty mainstream. Even quake as prolog segments in it's AI.

the apple developer tools are free and just got a major overhaul in the shape of XCode. Apple uses gcc as it's primary compiler.

some of the langauges i've worked with on my powerbook include:
- C
- C++
- Prolog
- J
- Java
- PHP
- Perl
- Python
- ObjectiveC

-Word processing
Office v.X It could be better, like a hell of a lot more responsive but it works well and I perfer it over the windows versions of Office.

-Chatting with friends
for me Proteus http://www.indigofield.com/ is the be all and end all of IM clients. I also use iChatAV for voice chats from time to time.

-Absolutely no gaming
I play Q3A against my friend who has a dual amd 2000+ box and still whoop his butt

I want my computre to:

-Look amazing
sorta goes with the teritory.

-Be highly configurable
Software wise there are a hell of a lot of haxies out there for OSX but as always the standard disclaimer applies, if it breaks it's your problem. As for hardware you can't just go and drop another cpu in the box tommorow or go cutting blowholes in the side of the case.

-Allow me to use an alternative AIM client (Trillian sucks, and Gaim is error prone at times)...i.e. Adium or iChat
I'll say it again, Proteus

-Be very portable, so I can carry it from class to class
15" Powerbook, 1" 'thin' 2.4kg, I stick it in my backpack and have to check the dammed thing is still there some days it's that light.

-Not crash
in the past 8 months i've had about 6 crashes. two were un explained. the other 4 are from having the KisMAC driver attached to an external wireless card and having the machine wake up without the card inserted. it sorta goes "argh where's the card, boom"

-Be fast
does me better than my old dual 866 desktop, speed is all subjective, my laptop spends it's days at 667mhz at uni instead of the 1ghz which it's rated at. i get home and 4 hours later go "hmmm, the laptop seems a bit sluggish'

-Be responsive
finder could do with a hell of a lot of work, Panther looks like it makes it better.

-Run Linux applications
http://fink.sourceforge.net
there is a project called darwin ports as well.
and i've compiled a few programs from scratch for later use. OSX has X11 frameworks for using stuff like GTK and QT.

[docholiday]

Originally posted by CubeBoy:
First off, the link you showed me only gives me a baseline system, this is because Dell's website, for some faulty reason resets the configurations when you link to it. If the site actually showed the updated price, we wouldn't be having this pointless argument in the first place as I would have already given the link in my original post. The price isn't "incredible", lots of people use this configuration actually, you simply refused to configure a machine by the standards that I set.

Secondly, your configuration is going to be significantly more expensive than mine due to your selective picking of only items that come with a premium (Windows 2000 professional with SP3, FireGL X1, DVD drive). I don't know who exactly your trying to fool here nor do I care but I can tell you that it's pretty pointless trying when the evidence is right in front of you.

A baseline system with a 2.8 GHz Xeon costs, Windows XP professional, and Dell Precision software costs $1898 US as this link would show: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...n&amp;kc=6W463

Another 2.8 GHz Xeon would add $649, 512 MB memory would adds another $119, note that the 1 GB ram on my previous system was available as a free upgrade. QuadroFX 500 adds $101, speakers adds
29$, and the 120 GB hard drive adds $140. There is also a $250 rebate and the cd drive can be upgraded for free.

So doing the math:
Base Price: $1898
Second Xeon: $649
512 MB RAM: $119
QuadroFX 500: $101
HK Speakers: $29
48/24/48 CDRW: $0 (free upgrade)
120GB Hard Drive: $140
$250 Rebate: -$250
Total Price: $2686

Is it the same as before? No, incidently, you just happened to post after Dell ended it's free 1 GB DDR266 upgrade. Does it cost $3000+? Not even close and if you considered following my configuration, that would have become readily obvious.

I think it would be even more obvious that a "home made" Xeon workstation is going to be significantly cheaper than one from the retailers, look up the prices for all the components listed above on Newegg or pricewatch and why don't you tell me how much the equivalent home built system will cost.

Hold on... where do you get the $250 rebate? Explanation/Link please.
Also, other than the graphics card (I cannot find anything comparable to the lower end G5 offerings and I mentioned in my post that the card was way beyond that of the G5), the system that I explained will cost the amount shown once you configure it on the Dell website.

You accuse me of wrongdoing, but I merely set up a machine that's fairly equal/slightly inferior to the dual G5 machine (graphics card not considered). Please set the specs to the values I had in my previous post and see for yourself.

Doc Holiday

[istallion]

Originally posted by docholiday:
It's still a bad argument because...

2) When looking at the Dell's specs, you see that a few things are "missing" that are includend in the G5: Firewire 800, AirPort, Bluetooth, and Gigabit Ethernet. Also, the Dell comes with a slightly smaller HD. On the other hand, the Dell has a way better graphics card on it.

Well, airport and bluetooth aren't included unless you add them. Even if you configure the Dell like Docholiday, we seem to be playing the "make the Dell match the Powermac specs". Just as easily a customer could flip it around.

• Remote Desktop - $299 from apple (free if you don't mind slower 3rd party apps)
• Enterprise class application server - $699 for Webobjects, oracle and IBM offer nice solutions too.
• filesystem with builtin compression & encryption - not possible
• Case with >1 external drive bays - not possible
• parallel & serial ports(a lot of companies and individuals have old or proprietary hardware) - $?? third party
• Mouse with 2 btns + scroll wheel - $39
• 4 hour on-site support - not possible

There's not going to be complete feature parity but adding things like firewire 800 to the Dell isn't practical(except for people itching for external RAID 5 arrays).

[docholiday]

Originally posted by istallion:
Well, airport and bluetooth aren't included unless you add them.

My bad, totally forgot about that. That's a $150 value.

Enterprise class application server - $699 for Webobjects, oracle and IBM offer nice solutions too.

What is the Dell offering that's equivalent to this?

parallel & serial ports(a lot of companies and individuals have old or proprietary hardware)

Fairly unlikely.

You're right about the expandability of optical drives (bad design idea by Apple). Also, I always purchase a separate decent 2-5 button mouse, so you're right about this point too. You're also right about the warranty, a category in which Apple has never fared well.

Thanks for pointing those things out, istallion.

Doc Holiday

[kikosxl]

Price comparisons often fail to take into account the fact that Dell regularly has excellent discounts on their products. An individual who knows this and wants to save money will wait for these deals.

For example yesterday I took advantage of three combinable coupons (10% off, 10% off, $35 off) to shave $125 off the cost of an lcd monitor. There was free shipping on orders over $99 and no tax.

If I used that deal on a $3000 Dell machine, that would have been a savings of several hundred dollars.

The debate of PC v. Mac hardware prices is uneccessary. I believe that as long as AMD and Intel compete fiercly in the CPU market, PCs will continue to out perform Macs.

Furthermore the price debate focuses on hardware value. I, and many others, switched to Mac not for the hardware, but for OS X. If OS X were available for x86 systems, I would not have bought a mac.

[MindFad]

Originally posted by kikosxl:
The debate of PC v. Mac hardware prices is uneccessary. I believe that as long as AMD and Intel compete fiercly in the CPU market, PCs will continue to out perform Macs.

The performance gap pretty much isn't there anymore, and has changed hands in many cases. Now that the G5 is here, and in capable and apt hands for production and continuous performance increases (i.e., not Motorola), this should increase the competition quite well. The next few years should be great for Mac users -- as long as IBM doesn't pull a Motorola like with the G4.