One question about Apple computers now....

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
seems you added a link after i posted. all though i wouldnt dream of playing a game in anything under 1920x1200 i dont see any real information in those benchmarks. Seriously though i can get better then those frames in 1920x1200 at max cranked quality settings. I would love to see how in the world they made a a PC perform so horridly.
 
Enforcer22 is the one with the point here - now that Macs use the same hardware as PCs, there is LESS differentation between Macs and PCs, so why the hell would anyone get excited about it? And as I already pointed out, there are a tiny amount of benchmarks that you can compare anyway, so it's of academic interest anyway.

Of more interest is that I hear that Office 2007 for Mac is going to be crippled in the next release - Microsoft aren't going to port the VBA code apparently. Now that could have quite an impact.
 
The problem for Mac that is happening is the same thing that happened to Netscape that landed Microsoft in the governments doghouse a few years back. Netscape was beginning to compete and had to be neutered before this threat fully materialized.

Apple has begun to become a threat to Microsoft's empire, mostly in the digital media segment. Now that that is happening, Microsoft is trying to cut off legs on a new threat. The new version of Office for Mac '07 is being said to be slow to release because it is being "de-tuned" with many corporate features from Windows Office '07 being removed, so you will be "stuck" with a Windows system. This is simply "not cricket." If you have true confidence in the product that you issue you don't remove things to force someone to go another route, particularly "your" route. :evil:
 
Well that's the way Microsoft does things. And the efforts to reign them in by governmental anti-monopoly organisations have been pathetic. Take the EU for example - they made Microsoft offer a version of Vista without Media Player. Big deal - as if that version is going to sell well!

Although I understand that there are actually very strong technical reasons for not porting VBA to Office for Mac 2007, so I don't think it is necessarily a marketing ploy. It might actually work against Microsoft, as it will leave a gap in their product coverage for someone else to exploit.
 
Mabye so, but you still have to look at this. Microsoft claims to have the best programmers and designers in the world, why cn they not make something work in a Macintosh environment, which they have always been able to do in the past?

That is how Microsoft does things when something begins to become threatening, like Netscape in the past and now Mac OS X. Instead of continuing to embrace this part of the market, which they have done with Office for Mac for the past several years, they are going to try to kill it, slowly at first so it doesn't look deliberate and they will come up with all kinds of excuses to make it SOUND legitimate. They learned a lesson from attacking Netscape like they did: Do not be overly aggressive and say you are deliberately killing a competitor to protect your Operating System, (when it did not allow manufacturers the right to pre-install Netscape Navigator on Windows machines at the factory.)

Microsoft is attempting maintain a monopoly on the market, a bit Apple has been chewing at for a little time now. Notice how Microsoft continues to mimic Apple and Sony innovation, with the release of the Xbox, (response to Playstation,) and their new portable MP3 player, (a response to iPod.) Windows Vista is a direct rip-off of many features of OS X, many things that could not come up with themselves.

Go here for info:

http://www.lifehacker.com/software/top/windows-vista-beta-a-lot-like-mac-os-x-179909.php
 
Yeah, but that's what they've always done with Windows and a lot of their other products. They copy other people's ideas (or buy the company) and build an excellent product, adding their own ideas and innovation into it. And make no mistake - Microsoft products are good. Look at SQL server - up to 6.5 it was looked down upon from a big height, but it's a damn good piece of software now. Look at NT - it was totally unscaleable until they brought in AD (copied from Novell's NDS) - but now who uses Netware?

There's no point getting hot under the collar about it - you just have to keep ahead, or as Google has done with their web-based Office package, redefine the product.
 
Mabye so, but you still have to look at this. Microsoft claims to have the best programmers and designers in the world, why cn they not make something work in a Macintosh environment, which they have always been able to do in the past?

That is how Microsoft does things when something begins to become threatening, like Netscape in the past and now Mac OS X. Instead of continuing to embrace this part of the market, which they have done with Office for Mac for the past several years, they are going to try to kill it, slowly at first so it doesn't look deliberate and they will come up with all kinds of excuses to make it SOUND legitimate. They learned a lesson from attacking Netscape like they did: Do not be overly aggressive and say you are deliberately killing a competitor to protect your Operating System, (when it did not allow manufacturers the right to pre-install Netscape Navigator on Windows machines at the factory.)

Microsoft is attempting maintain a monopoly on the market, a bit Apple has been chewing at for a little time now. Notice how Microsoft continues to mimic Apple and Sony innovation, with the release of the Xbox, (response to Playstation,) and their new portable MP3 player, (a response to iPod.) Windows Vista is a direct rip-off of many features of OS X, many things that could not come up with themselves.

Go here for info:

http://www.lifehacker.com/software/top/windows-vista-beta-a-lot-like-mac-os-x-179909.php
Click to expand...

You have been able to download styles like that for XP since it came out almost. I think they are both ripping off good ideas from the comunity of people who designed this because mac nore ms designed any of it. They are both thieves because i doubt they paid for that.
 
... and the stupidest post of the day goes to...


IcBlUsCrn!!!!!
Click to expand...

dude you were born an idiot......will live the rest of your life as an idiot and die as an idiot . tell how does it feel fanboy?

sorry dean7 he just topped it.
With shitty grammar? "tell how does it feel fanboy?". Right.
 
Macworld used the quadro to get the ABSOLUTE best frame rate that they possibly could with their new Mac Pro to just say that since Mac has moved to the Intel architecture that frame rates between Mac and PC's will completely vanish. No longer does code for Windows benchmarking have to be emulated and converted on a Mac an visa versa. Now that they both use the EXACT same processors, AMD and INTEL, (PowerPC is no longer a factor,) you benchmark using optimizations for a single processor and get the same benchmark numbers.

I know that people are not going to go out and buy a Quadro for over a grand, but will purchase a high end graphics card tuned for games instead, not rendering 3d movies like toy story. (This is where the Quadro is strong.)

I know that you were not judging me by my number of posts, you were trying to judge me by saying that the Quadro card is a game card, which I did not. I didn't even imply it. The numbers speak for themselves. A Nvidia Quadro FX 5500 WILL outperform a comparable game card. (Unless you start going SLI or SLI x 4(4 video cards.)) Not to mention a Mac Pro starts out as a workstation in the first place.
Click to expand...

You've obviously never used a Quadro card. I had Quadro in my Dell Precision workstation and it sucks for games. Check this out:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/print/quadrofx-vs-firegl.html

(note the 3dmark score)
 
I agree with you one why not to get a mac, but to tell you the truth, the old iBooks are eye candy....and the only reason i would get anything apple would be becuase it looks nice...otherwise, its all overpriced....
 
God i hope not.
Click to expand...

Apple sucks. I hope Steve dies. Anyone ever seen Pirates oif Silicon Valley???

Apple is the enemy!111

Apple is the monopoly!!11

Down with the IPOD!

Down with Stupid Parents who make me work on their shitty macs!

Fuck Steve!
 
I've worked with both as far as maintenance and everyday usage are concerned. Mac's are easier to deal with in both respects. Even with that being said, I never will buy one... other than maybe one of those monster LCD panels in a few years.
 
What I would like to see is this website get past a public bias against Apple Computer. Apple is issuing true, fast, and above all else, of high quality.

All I am asking is that Apple Computers be compared like everyone else' in true, balanced testing. Simple frame rate counts, time in seconds, as is the norm on this site when systems are benchmarked, (with the exception of specialized scoring programs such as 3d Mark and PC Mark,) don't rely on an operating system. Frames per second is FRAMES PER SECOND, no matter if it OS X or Windows, and seconds to convert and compile files doesn't either.

People in the PC community might be surprised by the results. I certainly was. Now that they share the same hardware, the only difference is the effectiveness of the coding in OS X and Windows. The better OS will win overall. If Windows is so great, why not show some head-to-head competition like when Intel is compared to AMD on a regular basis. This is no different. OS X vs. Windows.
 
comparing intel to amd though is almost apples to apples they both run all the same thing all the same software all the same os's

mac os to windows is apples to oranges where the former doesnt really apply.

I wouldnt be surprised if the apple was faster i also wasnt surprised that linux was faster. Speed isnt everything in a computer.
 
As I've said already, no-one cares about this. You linked us to a website that compares the two OS's and they perform pretty much the same - so let's move on?

There is no 'public bias' against Apple on Toms Hardware - just indifference.
 
The main reason that I want THIS website to do the benchmarking is that I can trust them to do a more balanced job than let's say, MACWORLD. Of course they are going to have a signifcant bias towards Apple, and Pc World is going to support PC's without question.

Not to mention that the website that compared the Apple OS X to Windows XP ran them both on the SAME machine, a Mac Pro. What I would like to see are two, professionally built systems, the best that people can put out today, one running OS X Tiger, (with some improved aftermarket hardware of course, such as top of the line video, ram, HDD, etc,) vs the best PC you can find, which Tom's has adequite access too. Like I said, the main difference is now just OS code, so the more efficient system will come out on top, and I would really like to see that.

I am not anti-Windows, in any way. Windows has many, good virtues to it. (I LOVE Windows Media player much more than iTunes. (More functionality and will group my albums better together and is easier to browse through my media content.) Not to mention the BEST games are on Windows as well. I would just like to see some head to head competitions between the two so that we can see some shortcomings or progress from both OS's.
 
I just started, last year August, working with macs. Be it older iMacs and eMacs. There are some things that are easier on the macs and somethings that are easier on a Windows pc. The biggest problem with the macs that I have seen is the cost to repair them. The system fan goes out on an iMac, $369 bucks to fix. Had to replace a whole board. I could of fixed it on a pc for 10 bucks. Airport card goes out on an iBook. $200 bucks becuase Apple doesnt make the one that works with that iBook anymore and would have to get from 3rd party. PC laptop, buy a pcmia card for like 60 bucks. Power switch went out on an iBook, looking at 300 bucks or more to replace a KNOWN problem with a motherboard.

Macs never took off because they were so expensive to buy, expensive to fix, lack of software, hard if not impossible to network with windows pc years ago, all propretary hardware, and that damn one button mouse!

We still have compatibility problems with documents made on a mac not looking the same on a pc, but thats probably more MS fault as its MS Word.
 
That is perfectly understandable, but what I am talking about comparing here are two, completely custom systems. Not one that is built by Dell and one by Apple. Since super expensive hardware isn't a problem anymore, why not compare the two. You can build a system this way:

2x Athlon 64 processors
250 Gig Hard Drive
2 Gigs of Ram
Nvidia Geforece fx 8800
Matching Motherboards

Make them identicle systems in everyway, just one difference. On one system install OSX Tiger and the other Windows XP, or Vista. (Vista, if you can get everything to work! :) ) Anyway, this will give a fair comparison between the two OS's. The system that has the better CODE will run more efficiently, and I would like to honestly see which one does. I may have to end up doing it myself and sending it to Tom's to get their input.
 
Ugh... Macs...

This is the only thing I need to say about Macbook Pro's... shoddy ass computers...

http://www.macbookrandomshutdown.com/

OS wise, I never get virus's, spyware, not anything of the sort. Windows offers better games, and better software support. Not to mention finding Mac stuff to pirate is damn annoying.

And compare laptops not from custom game builders, say, HP, Dell, and then Apple... then compare them with the sales each one offers. I've seen coupons for 20% off new Inspiron laptops from Dell... never seen anything like that from Apple...

And lastly, the general holier than thou attitude of Apple... I hate stuck-up people more than anything else.

/Die-Hard Apple hater
//Wouldn't go near a Mac with a M1 Tank
///Slashies FTW
 
I wish people would listen to me. I am not caring one bit about a Apple BUILT system or an HP, Dell, or anything else system or price. Not one bit. I want a system that is built at home, much like you people do everyday with your own systems. You can just install OS X on them now and have it run like it is supposed to on an Apple built system.

If you build a system from 3rd party sources, such as AMD, Gigabyte, Nvidia and others you can run a benchmarking system on them both (OSX and Windows) and get measurement numbers from it. I am just curious as to which one will run better.

On games, you can get most of the major titles out there, like Battlefield 1942, Halo, and others on Mac as well. Believe it or not, I have them.
 
You can get HALO for MAC???

SERIOUSLY?!?!??!?

This I have to see... MS's flagship game for Mac, that has got to be a damn ironic picture. Wonder if Halo 2 will come out for Mac also =P

And uh, I mention the HP, Dell thing because someone was earlier quoting prices about how much "cheaper" Mac's were than comparatively priced PC's...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom