One question about Apple computers now....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
The reason people do not write viruses for Mac computers, is because of the low market share. What would you write it for? An OS that is very widley used? OR one that isn't? Answer is obvious.... OSX is not bullet proof like many think.

wes
 
Mac's are very over priced.
Mini-mac is the only one worth buying imo.
Click to expand...


Lucky its only your opinion wrong that it may be ever since mac went over to intel there price's have dropped to below what other pc suppliers offer for alot of there comps.

Back on topic i have a mac pro with the 2x 2.66 5150's and would like to see some reviews , its not to big an issue cause i just go to macrumors for the info .
I understand not being reviewed here because .......jeez look at the fanboi nations we have already (there are only a few people with open minds here im not one of them im a mac fan) if you throw in a another it turn out worse then revelations.
 
Problem is people who come here are bleeding edge power house computer freaks. Macs are worth nothing to either of those types of people. Has nothing to do with being a fanboy we just like super charged powerfull computers tha can play games at bleeding edge frame rates. Not look at a stupid looking gui to go along with the equaly stupid looking computer. Personaly mac reviews on this site would be a waste of time.

Btw i just remembered tomsething concerning bugs in the OS. i was looking around in the net and i remember staying up all night one time reading on all the bugs in mac OS i never actualy finished but it reminded me of trying to read all the bugs in windows. all software is flawed just there arent as many people to complain about it in all software. Windows just has alot of users to complain.
 
apple is horrible the only thing they have on anyone is the ipod (i dont like it at all i sold mine a day after i got it) i want a zune and will get one.

i just called apple tech for i tunes and i got im sorry you purchased the audio book for 19$ but since the download was interrupted you will have to re-purchase the song. i hate apple

i call dell my problem allways get solved (laptop)


stay away from apple!
 
YET SO TRUE! i mean they already removed usefull buttons on the mouse!

MACINTRASH FOREVER!!! or was that crapintach?

Either way i think making revirews on hardware... i mean a OS since its obviouse they have totaly decided to do away with mac aside the name. Hell even the OS isnt mac anymore. mac has become a name like dell only not bundling microsoft OS. i think mac died 😱 at least the idea is long dead.
 
I spose Apple's could find thier place in mobility guru, not being compared to other laptops cause at the moment i think thier uncomparable to PC's but I'd definetly be interested in what tom's has to say about one of the laptops.
 
You can't say that Mac's don't compare to PC's when it comes to performance and frame rates. I have been reading articles in Macworld about the new Mac Pro that has 4 gigs of Ram installed and high end graphics cards such as the Nvidia Quadro card with insane frame rates that match and beat many pcs. (Refer to Macworld August 2006 issue "Mac Pro completes Intel Lineup."

Not too mention price of the Macs is considerably more competitive. Go to these websites and compare : Apple.com, Falcon-NW.com, and Alienware.com for custom systems built to match as closely as possible. Here is what I found:

17 in laptop
~ 2.66 or equivalent Processor
~64 bit computing
~2 gigs ram
~200 gig Hard Drive
~ATI Radeon class GPU or Nvidia or higher

Alienware Area 51 mm7700 :$3,209
Falcon NW Fragbook DR6800 : $4,695.49
Apple Macbook Pro : $3,148

So, price doesn't work really as an argument anymore in the laptop market. Neither in the desktop arena now that you can install OS X on a homebuilt PC system and upgrade it with the best hardware the market has to offer. Can someone give me an argument as to why Apple systems should not be tested here NOT based on insulting Apple users, or Tech Support, (which had NOTHING to do with this question,) or simple market share. Things get reviewed here that have minute market share, like the Xbox, which holds only about 5%. Apple's market share is around 7% in the US.

I simply asked, since Apple has made a move to Intel and AMD based systems, will it be possible to compare PC's to Mac's when it comes to performance NUMBERS, not personal opinion. Now that Mac is away from IBM's PowerPC architecture, PC's and Mac now share common performance ground. I say, let the numbers speak for themselves.
 
I know that this was a workstation video card, I am not as new as you may think. Macworld just decided to use the absolute best card Nvidia had to offer to make a comparison of the Mac Pro vs a PC system.

This is the last PC I built, and it will have OS X installed, (as many of the games that come out for PC are available in a Mac format as well, you just have to know where to look.)

AMD Athlon 64 FX
2 Gigs of DDR RAM
2 x 250 Western Digital HDD
Nvidia Geforce FX 7600 GS

3D Mark '06 Score 1976

I am no noob, I am just a recent convert to the OS X operating system, not hardware. Get a clue.
 
I did, and intentionally so. 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.
 
One problem is going to be the lack of common software between the two platforms - you aren't going to be able to compare benchmarks for any DirectX-based game for example, only OpenGL games.

I also don't see what real purpose it would serve to compare the speed of software on the two platforms anyway - I mean if you have a PC, you aren't really going to buy a Mac if ran 5% faster - if it was 100% faster maybe it would be a possibility, but that isn't going to happen.

Another issue would be that a lot of the information that is on Toms isn't really relevant to Mac users even though Macs are basically PCs - for example if you buy a Mac you get whichever mobo, make of RAM, make of hard drive, etc that Apple decide - so what use are the hard disk charts or the reviews comparing 6 different mobos?

And of course there's the geek side of it. Most PC users who frequent Toms are techies. There are few Mac users like that - most people who use Macs use them because they are simpler to use and require less setting up and fiddling with. So Macs may be 7% of the market, but only a tiny fraction of those people are going to care about the hardware that is in them.
 
Yeah, macs suck. I worked one year on a mac in architecture office and it sucked! Then I got tired of macsht and changed office. Never ever a mac again.

mapaid
 
... 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.

Now to go on. They should have used a different video card if they wanted the absolute best and btw frame rates are only a fraction of the picture when it comes to gaming.

Can you even tell me one reason to even consider a mac over a calculator? cuz it doesnt do anything that my windows based pc cant do and it sure as hell will limit me on things.

Mac os for gaming is about as good as linux os for gaming sure it can do some of it but i want to do it all so the argument there is dead.

emulation software normaly has alot to do with the software its being run on also. the cpu emulation might have to be gone but mac is still emulating a windows environment.

your right i wont buy a quatro for over a grand cuz i can get a beter card for half that at least.

no one gets judge by thier number of posts only quality of them unless the person judging is that much of a idiot but i doubt he was also juding you on what you think.

numbers as we all know can be vary missleading high frame rates and poor quality picture can go hand and hand.

looking at a site from the manufacturer is normaly a good one to get fluffed up numbers btw which would be the only reason a bias third party should do them but to what end i dont know since mac isnt designed to do what most people do here.

last time i checked (could have been fixed since they now use intel chips) mac couldnt correctly use 4 gigs of ram which is why most the movie undustry converted to opeteron and windows xp pro 64 bit to get much faster performance from thier computers.

If people truely cared about prices they wouldnt be buying bleeding edge computers for games the price of a mac isnt really the issue its the quality of it when it comes to gaming and other direct x functions.

what exactly do you maen xbox has 5%? if your comparing it to a console and not computers as a whole your nuts. it has alot more in the console market which is what it is. If you mean the computer market your really grasping at straws here.

serioualy though the idea of mac is dead. it started when they moved away from thier own OS and incorperated breebsd then when they moved away from thier architecture. mac now is basicly just a pc with a different OS on it. Not a good one IMO at that.
 
ethel said:
One problem is going to be the lack of common software between the two platforms - you aren't going to be able to compare benchmarks for any DirectX-based game for example, only OpenGL games.

The problem that existed that caused this was the fact that Macs ran on a different architecture. (This presented code problems that could not be easily resolved from PowerPC to x86.) In Macworld they used a Mac Pro with an Intel Processor and got frame rates from games such as Quake III Arena, Unreal Tournament 2004, (which came in around 115 fps.) That is EXACTLY on par with Windows machines.

Now that they have common hardware, i.e. cpu's, this coding problem can now be EASILY solved, and thus will eventually happen. It, imo, is only a matter of time before people start matching system for system, Mac vs PC in large scale comparisons that will make sense. Right now the common benchmark between the two is iTunes encoding, but soon there will be more. I am just wondering when this happens, will Tom's be the site that leads in this area?
Click to expand...
 
duece1981 said:
The problem that existed that caused this was the fact that Macs ran on a different architecture. (This presented code problems that could not be easily resolved from PowerPC to x86.) In Macworld they used a Mac Pro with an Intel Processor and got frame rates from games such as Quake III Arena, Unreal Tournament 2004, (which came in around 115 fps.) That is EXACTLY on par with Windows machines.

quote]

Im assuming this was a long time ago cuz even in half life 2 i can get up to and over 300frames 😱 in those games probly close to 1000 XD
Click to expand...
 
Here is a page that keeps updated information about Mac's and their fps.

http://www.barefeats.com/

Hopefully this page will be of use to some of you.
 
The problem that existed that caused this was the fact that Macs ran on a different architecture. (This presented code problems that could not be easily resolved from PowerPC to x86.) In Macworld they used a Mac Pro with an Intel Processor and got frame rates from games such as Quake III Arena, Unreal Tournament 2004, (which came in around 115 fps.) That is EXACTLY on par with Windows machines.

Now that they have common hardware, i.e. cpu's, this coding problem can now be EASILY solved, and thus will eventually happen. It, imo, is only a matter of time before people start matching system for system, Mac vs PC in large scale comparisons that will make sense. Right now the common benchmark between the two is iTunes encoding, but soon there will be more. I am just wondering when this happens, will Tom's be the site that leads in this area?
Click to expand...

I don't think Microsoft are going to write DirectX10 for the Mac, somehow. Sure you have the hardware layer, but you also have the OS to think about - it's not a trivial problem.

And as you yourself say (and I have already said), Macs and PCs are going to be pretty similar in performance as they share the same hardware now - so who's going to give a sh*t about speed comparisons?
 
Personally, I thought that was what a large part about Tom's was about. I see a lot about hardware times, fps, how quickly a system completes tasks, scores on varying tests. Now, if I am not mistaken, what would be the problem here, now that many games, software applications, and now HARDWARE are shared between the two makers?

I believe that it is now time for people to make serious comparisons between the two, not base them simply on personal OPINION. I had this problem myself. I used to believe that Macs simply didn't compare to PC's in any arena, especially when it came to being universal with your neighbor. I got over myself and gave it a shot, now I like what I see.

Hopefully serious comparisons can be made and people can judge for themselves what they see in the numbers and hopefully will make more informed decisions than what Bill tells them to think.
 
There are plenty of mac os vs windows os on the web.

other then that they arent really different anymore. as far as im concerned there is absolutly no reason to get a mac anymore since the whole idea based around it aside the stupid way it looks is dead.

Missed it in your post. Bill doesnt tell me anything. Software i want to run (like games) tells me what im going to use not bill or jabs,jobs, steve whatever is name is or whoever is out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom