Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > G4 Cube/tower compared to 1.33 GHz t'bird

G4 Cube/tower compared to 1.33 GHz t'bird (Page 3)
Thread Tools
pele
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NY,USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 12:31 AM
 
Originally posted by mav.rc:
Hmmm... Maya runs just fine even on my Dual Celeron 400 workstation (which, BTW, I built myself...) I let a friend of mine run it on my rig while hers was down, and it ran just fine. Even though it's painted burgundy and black and is overclocked. Go figure.
.
Yeah, try calling Alias tech support with that if something goes wrong. Why am I not surprised that an overclocker has painted their "box" in ugly colors?

     
mav.rc
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 01:34 AM
 
Originally posted by pele:
Yeah, try calling Alias tech support with that if something goes wrong. Why am I not surprised that an overclocker has painted their "box" in ugly colors?

Hey, we were just trying to get something working as an interim solution. You know, interim, what you do when everything else fails?

Color: As opposed to Flower Power? It may be 'ugly', but that's what I chose to make it. It's my computer, I can paint it chartreuse and vermillion if I'd like to.

I try to come here, to answer what could be a heated question in a thoughtful and courteous manner and you resort to personal insults. Thanks a lot.

     
weinc2001
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Detroit,MI. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 06:07 AM
 
Quote:
"Duplicate a CD: PC (the PC can dup PC, MAC, Linux, Unix and mixed CDs with no trouble and they run on their platform
just like the originals. I haven't found anything for the MAC that can do that. Neither had the guys at the Apple Data
Center when I worked there one year.)"

Dude you can do this with...Asarte CD Copy...or...Toast...or...Disc Copy...yes they will all do bit for bit copies of whatever is on the

original CD...where the fuk have you been...walkng around with your head in the clouds...it makes no sence at all.
     
MacMaven
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 06:39 AM
 
Dude you can do this with...Asarte CD Copy...or...Toast...or...Disc Copy...yes they will all do bit for bit copies of whatever is on the
original CD...where the fuk have you been...walkng around with your head in the clouds...it makes no sence at all.
He's talking about Clone CD I believe. It's an ugly little application that reads subchannel data off of CD's and then uses the image it creates to burn perfect 1 to 1 copies of it in RAW mode. It copies absolutely anything -- some CD's that you can trick other burning software into making proper copies of and some that none others can. Various CD's are meant not to be copied because of intentional errors on the surface or weird non-standard configurations of the data (usually for copy protection purposes). I've yet to see a similar application for the Mac (you need it to backup and burn many console games and certain applications), and if someone knows of one please post a link, I need it!


[This message has been edited by MacMaven (edited 05-02-2001).]
     
weinc2001
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Detroit,MI. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 06:49 AM
 
No dumbass...I am talking about Asarte CD copy, this is a Mac only app. It can copy anything is is a very simple interface and
is done with a very good interface, the app you are talking about is a different app that has nothing to do with the Asarte
(or you can copy or burn disc to disc with Toast).
     
weinc2001
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Detroit,MI. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 06:51 AM
 
Yes Asarte CD Copy will copy "bad " sectors. this is what you are looking for.It will copy any media bit for bit.
     
MacMaven
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 07:16 AM
 
No dumbass...I am talking about Asarte CD copy, this is a Mac only app. It can copy anything is is a very simple interface and
is done with a very good interface, the app you are talking about is a different app that has nothing to do with the Asarte
(or you can copy or burn disc to disc with Toast).
_Astarte_ CD-Copy reads subchannel data now (or any of the other applications you mentioned)??? Last time I researched all the apps I couldn't find one on the Mac that did it and CD-Copy failed to copy a a friends CloseCombat V game CD (which uses SafeDisc V2 protection) and I somewhat embarrassingly needed to use cloneCD on my roomates system instead. If this has changed and any of these applications have a new version that reads subchannel data please correct me, I need to update to whatever version supports it if it does... I think you're assuming bit-for-bit copying includes the ability to read sub-channel data (most CD copying applications can do bit-for-bit). The way to check is to look around in the options it gives you when burning for something along the lines of 'Read SubChannel Data from Data Tracks' and 'Read SubChannel Data from Audio Tracks' or maybe in the help files too. Seriously, if you have the latest version of CD-Copy and you see those options let me know, I'll need to update.
     
Christopher Tew
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 04:25 PM
 
Originally posted by nana2:
If it take you "several days" to put a computer together then you don't know what you are doing, and certainly should have bought a pre-fab one.
I'm talking about doing the proper research, parts assembly, and OS installation and configuration. The latter can be extremely hard with any version of Windows unless you know someone with the exact same hardware configuration and a copy of Ghost. There is a very good reason why clone makers take months to start preinstalling new versions of Windows on their machines.

Someone who is really good and lucky will spend an aggregate of a weekend on this stuff, although subsequent projects with identical or very similar hardware and OS will be faster. I've been building PCs since 1992, and I'm pretty sure that I know what I'm doing.


So the T-bird destroys the G4 in Postscript and databases and your defense is that he should be using a Sun machine? LOL
Uh, no. My point is that the 1.3 Athlon is better than the .73 G4 for the job, and that a Sun would obliterate them both. The G4 is a better chip than the Athlon, clock for clock (although I agree that if the Athlon were running in native RISC mode, it'd stomp a mudhole in the G4), but the Athlon's far higher clock makes up for the architectural difference. Get it now?
     
Nimisys
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 04:31 PM
 
Originally posted by Christopher Tew:
I'm talking about doing the proper research, parts assembly, and OS installation and configuration. The latter can be extremely hard with any version of Windows unless you know someone with the exact same hardware configuration and a copy of Ghost. There is a very good reason why clone makers take months to start preinstalling new versions of Windows on their machines
and the time it takes someone to find the right pre-built PC is longer still. but i understand your point. without proper research DIY can be a nightmare, but when done correctly it is smooth as hell.
     
weinc2001
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Detroit,MI. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 08:51 PM
 
Asarte CD Copy will copy playstation games and PC games (Toast will also do this, as well as ISSO 9660, UDF, Mac).
     
weinc2001
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Detroit,MI. USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2001, 09:29 PM
 
Try this version of Asarte CD Copy, it is version 2.0.3e it will allow you to ignore read errors and copy all inforamtion from a game or software disc.
Also have you tried doing a Disc Copy using Toast? It will copy bit for bit but sometimes is has problems with Playstation Games.
Apple Disc Copy 6.3.3 will copy PC disc's, I used it to make a copy of A vs. P game and then burned it in Toast using ISSO 9660.
     
MacMaven
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2001, 04:42 AM
 
Try this version of Asarte CD Copy, it is version 2.0.3e it will allow you to ignore read errors and copy all inforamtion from a game or software disc.
Thanks, I'll give that version a shot (my roomate still has his copy CC V around here somewhere). Does anyone know if Astarte has an english language version of their website? It would be cool to see a feature list to check if they've added sub channel data reading and writing... Just to be clear the last time I tried this with Cd-Copy it had no problem actually copying the game to a new CD but it failed the CD check after installation. Where as clone-cd made a copy that worked with the CD-Check. The copy protection scheme is Safe Disc V2 and from what I read the the usenet at the time it requires subchannel data reading to be copied. I assumed that's why astarte cd-copy failed. But I'll try again.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2001, 03:15 PM
 

Anyone else find it ironic when someone claims a WindowsPC is more crossplatform compatible than a Macintosh?

Anyway, you don't even need a computer to do CD duplication. You can pick up a 2x CD-Duplicator for $250 which doesn't even need a computer to work.

Seeing how this has turned into a flamewar, I would like to point out something about the original topic header. A Dual 533 G4 is, infact, faster than a 1.33GHz Tunderbird when using AltiVec enhanced applications.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Nimisys
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2001, 04:01 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:

Anyone else find it ironic when someone claims a WindowsPC is more crossplatform compatible than a Macintosh?

Anyway, you don't even need a computer to do CD duplication. You can pick up a 2x CD-Duplicator for $250 which doesn't even need a computer to work.

Seeing how this has turned into a flamewar, I would like to point out something about the original topic header. A Dual 533 G4 is, infact, faster than a 1.33GHz Tunderbird when using AltiVec enhanced applications.
umm i find it ironic that you say the MacOS is more platform compatible...

windows box have been sharing partiton space with linux distros for years... furthermore thier formatting can be read by any computer operatind system. thats not compatibility? with mandrake and the LINUX2WIN program, linux will istall on fat32 partitions, theirfore allowing windows and linux to share the same partion. suddenly, Windows can read, all it's formats, and all linux formats. and yet you call it less crossplatform captible, even though it is readable by all computers. kinda of ironic yes?

as for your claim of dual g4 533 being faster than a 1.44ghx t-bird, show some linkage as proof. i think you'll find that it is only the case on some select photoshop filters.
     
WaR-ped
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
May 21, 2001, 01:19 AM
 
I'm, as many have you so elequently put, a "PeeCee" user. I am not a "Mak" user, and do not have tons of experience with "Apell" computers. about 12 years ago, my parents had an Apple IIe and i thought it was great. put in the games, turn on the computer, and you were ready to go. Then I had the experience of Macs at the school computer labs. I didnt really like the feel, but that isnt the point of this thread that has been started. Here is what i know about the PCs i work with:

Bootup time from pushing the button to the moment the "start" button appears: under 20 seconds
shutdown time from clicking "ok" to having the comptuer shutoff: 5 seconds

This is based on the system i just built for my brother that is running at AMD Duron processor running at 6.5x143, or 930Mhz. I have installed Windows Millenium and he is using a Radeon VE with 2x128mb VC133 memmory. The entire system costed me about 500bucks, and its a real screamer for what he plans to use it for, which is mainly games. everything else, like internet and MS office stuff wont stress the components enough to worry about how that performs.

Word and Excel load up time: 1 second at most.

This is on my own personal system. 2x800Mhz Pentium III, with 4x128mb VC166 SDRAM.

I noticed a few other items that were touched on in this heated arguements:

easy of use
cd copying
reliability

i also have something that id like to add... which is upgradibility.

easy of use. this is 100% preference as i have come to understand. I dont care for the setup that MacOS(hehe... no offense, but it sounds like a derivative of spaghetti O's now that i think about it). Im sure it works fine, but my main issue with it, is that it doesnt look professional or serious. it looks too happy and unprofessional(which is one of the many issues i have with WindowsXP).

CD copying on my computer takes all but 3 clicks so im sorry that some of you are having a crappy time finding cd copying an issue.

reliability. Honestly, im sure Mac people have an edge since the only manufacturer that Apple has to go to if they have a problem with compatibility is themselves(as far as system integration goes). with so many manufacturers in the PC market, its almost gaurunteed that more issues may arise. On a personal level, my system rarely crashes. in fact, presently, its been running plum dandy without a hitch for two months. no reboots. my AIM screen name proves that(online time, 53 days).

As far as who is the performance king Athlon or G4? I dont own either, so I cant give a biased opinion, but I think it probably depends on what you want to do. Macs are, from what ive heard, known for their great video streaming and multimedia stuff like that. I dont need any of that though. I use CAD, and the PC market seems to be much more in favor of CAD than the Mac market. Im sure in certain things my 2x800mhz system would eat a lot of Macs on the market when it came to multitasking(as i type this ive got about 15 things running without any slowdown) and CAD, but then again, im sure in certain multimedia programs, the Mac would really shine.

I just like the fact that if i ever want to change my setup, i can just add a few cards and what not. So many more choices in the PC market than in the Mac market. if i want a gaming machine.. no problem.. 128mb of ram, some nvidia card, and im set. wanna go cad because ive decided im sick of games? double the ram, and switch out the video card. easy as pie.

and yes, PC users, do tend to act a little more ruffled when in discussion about Macs. Thats mainly because for PC users, Macs are useless. the strong point of mulimedia stuff isnt seen as a big deal because most PC users are gamers.

additionally... the case and peripheral options for PCs look waaaaaayyy better IMHO. just like the OS, all mac cases, and stuff look way to happy and silly. no offense, but very yuppy'esque.

lastly, noise doesnt have to be an issue. My own system runs more quietly than any "cube" Mac and cools much better due to my own cooling designs and ideas.

very lastly, i think the PC market will always have an appeal just like the people that like to hotrod their cars. to get the most out of a PC, it takes some tinkering, tweaking and a bit of creativity, and the desire to want something totally unique, that i know cant be found in any Apple computer.

theres my $1.50. keep the change.
     
mfyeung
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 25, 2001, 11:34 AM
 
scotell wrote: Hello MR. iPad. I'm back. I did not mean to make you mad. I did not say you or anyone else was stupid. I said "THATS THE STUPIDEST THING I EVER HEARD". But you did call me an Idiot. That I am not. Like I said before. I work at the Los Angeles Air Force Base Space and Missile Systems Center. I am A Graphic Designer/3D Animator/Website Designer. I create 3D Animations for Satellites Missiles and Top Secret Aircraft�s and Space Based Lasers. They give me specs and blueprints. I build them in 3D. Then they build the real thing from my models. I do this all ON MACS NOT PCs. I have seen top secret technology that will scare the crap out of you and make you scream and run like a little b**ch. such as organic processors and micro robotic technology to name just a couple. I play a roll in helping create GPS satilites, to aid with sell phone technology, car navigation systems and space based laser satellites that will protect your ass from enemy missile attacks. These all aid in you and everybody else�s life in the US and some in other allied countries in the world. What the hell do you do for a living?!!!

Is this guy for real. Though I may not be an expert on the "military and top secret projects", I highly doubt that they use Macs or PCs. Aren't all high powered apps, 3d programs made using a UNIX workstation. ??? If not, I apologize for questioning your credentials.

Now to the real topic at hand, what is faster a G4 or t-Bird. Like many readers who have read previous threads and postings. The answer is: it all depends. I won't go into detail about which apps actually run faster. I personally would go for a PC because it is a better bang for the buck, but if you want something to impress your friends and neighbours buy a G4 and get OS X. OS X is probarly the most impressive operating system I have ever seen. (I am a diehard PC user!) OS X will just knock the socks off of everything, albeit the support and software isn't readily available as it is for its windows counterpart.

For all you, who say that Mac's operating system(not withstanding OS X) is far more user friendly than windows 98/NT, I would have to reply where do you get that information from? Has there really been a study to prove the "user friendliness" environments of either system. If the Mac were so user friendly and superior, how come most of the world don't use them?

If Mac OS 9 is so darn good, Why has OS X adapted all the virtues of the Windows environment? It is funny how things go in a circle, back when Windows 3.1 came out, it completely copied the Mac gui. And now 17 years later, the Mac OS X has copied, and improved on what is good with Windows.

I would love to own a Mac right now, but to pay that kind of money for a machine that is marginal to a PC would be economically unjustifiable. The G4 is simply too expensive for the average user. It seems as though Apple is always 2 steps behind the world. Every aspect on the computer hardware side has dramatically declined in price, yet Steve Jobs insist on charging ridiculous amounts of money for his computers. Sure you can buy a freaking iMac(that is what I am using at work doing programming in RealBasic), but they simply don't offer the flexibility of a PowerPC or a conventionaly PC. These iMacs aren't that cheap either for what they are offering. You could easily build a better PC for the same price.

So the ageless question of what you system you get? has a simple answer, it all depends.
     
Pollux
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 27, 2001, 06:08 PM
 
You don't need to short the L1 bridges (unlocking) on a 1.33Ghz Thunderbird, because it's already set at 133x10. Unlocking (through the pencil trick) is mostly used with the 100 FSB processors.
Wrong. Nobody will buy a 1.33 Tbird and put it on a 100Mhz Mobo. Nobody.
     
zverushka
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: There
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 27, 2001, 06:58 PM
 
My advise, get a good motherboard and processor.
I have a shitty motherboard and a K6-2, and Win2K freezes most of the time, average time loading win2k with 512 sdram is about 2mins if you count the freezes and crashes.
MWNY here I come!
*insert snappy sig line here*
     
Versanick
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
May 30, 2001, 05:17 PM
 
At first I began to wonder if Nimisys was the only one who had a clue of what he was talking about. Now I'm sure of it.

To pay attention to the original comparison of the "1300mhz" t-bird with a g4, you have to get a F&CKING CLUE.

Before you go ranting, at all, about a PC having any advantage over a G4, in any way, at any time, do some damn research. Know about the problems and differences with x86 and x87 architecture versus a PPC based RISC architecture...

nevermind that... learn how a computer WORKS. People who are buying their first computer ever go and buy gateway trash and are stuck forever clueless and never learning.

They don't know how computers (at all) work, they don't know how a CRT display works, and they don't have a clue, even at the most basic level, why things go wrong with their system.

Let's first learn about processor architecture. http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/2q99/benchmarking-1.html

there is a link to an article written by an atleast somewhat educated writer, and it can help you think about what you're talking about,
as about every one of you have NO clue.

So go get one. Then I'd love to join a real argument... not an argument where some loser tries to bash people who are talking about a G4 cube system....

get a clue
or get lost.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:13 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,