Apple CPUs falling below Intel in power

[David Simmons]

It seems that Apple is not stepping up to the plate as to CPU performance. When I switched over to Apple's about two years ago Apple looked as they were going to lead the market. But if they are intending to lead by .XX increases every 10 months or so they will get run over by the Microsoft/Intel Market. Just as they start to get software vendors to move to MAC OSX they start to losing vendors by the inability to keep up with the Intel hardware. Where is the G5 or something in the 3Ghz or better CPU speeds.

And now there are rumors that Adobe is going to make the Intel the major platform. What an opportunity lose as far as Apple. I hope Apple does not let their users down and again by falling behind in the market as far as hardware which starts the software vendors moving to Microsoft/Intel platforms. I love the MAC OSX system and hope Apple starts paying attention to there users and the market. They are priced to high not be the leaders.

[satanicpoptart]

i would take a dual G4 1.42 over a HT3.06 P4 anyday, with the 970 coming apple will make a major leap back at the pc market, its just takes time

[sheepguy42]

2 responses:
1.) Mhz (or Ghz) don't matter. What matters is the actual performance, and since Macs are better at multitasking, they actually perform better. And soon Intel has to do the "Mhz Myth" marketing for their new chips, which don't have rediculously high, power-hungry, stability-destroying clock speeds.
2.) Apple has been close to the brink many times in the last decade. And every time they pull something wonderful out from up their sleeve. Don't doubt them... if you look at the whole picture, all the pieces are coming together perfectly; you can be sure that Apple sees this too, and intends to take full advantage of it.

[fryke]

There are tons of posts in other threads on this very forum that discuss the same thing. Please look them all up. ;-)

[binaryDigit]

Originally posted by sheepguy42
2 responses:
1.) Mhz (or Ghz) don't matter. What matters is the actual performance, and since Macs are better at multitasking, they actually perform better. And soon Intel has to do the "Mhz Myth" marketing for their new chips, which don't have rediculously high, power-hungry, stability-destroying clock speeds.
2.) Apple has been close to the brink many times in the last decade. And every time they pull something wonderful out from up their sleeve. Don't doubt them... if you look at the whole picture, all the pieces are coming together perfectly; you can be sure that Apple sees this too, and intends to take full advantage of it.

Oh boy here we go again. Other than a few photoshop benchmarks that happen to favour dual processor configurations, the mhz myth is not completely myth. Show me one independent benchmark that compares something other than a few photoshop filters that show that the Mac outperforms a pc. The ones that I've seen, even from the likes of MacWorld and CreativeMac have reviews where the pc wins on most of the realworld (well at least more real world than things like SPEC). Go ahead and do a search on google and see what you turn up. GHz don't matter, sure when you're only 15% behind, but when your 50% behind, then it matters A LOT. We're not even talking someone throwing together a nice (and cheap) dual Athlon MP system.

Anyway, this x86/Wintel vs PPC/Mac debate is being "discussed" in other threads, so the original poster may want to look around.

[Jack Hammer]

you guys need to go to the comments:

http://www.apple.com/contact/feedback.html

and scream at them how much the G4 sucks and how they must use a 970

otherwise you're jst wasting words on a message board

[binaryDigit]

Originally posted by Jack Hammer
you guys need to go to the comments:

http://www.apple.com/contact/feedback.html

and scream at them how much the G4 sucks and how they must use a 970

otherwise you're jst wasting words on a message board

Feedback always helps, but I think that in this particular case, Apple is MORE than well enough aware of the problem And more than enough aware of users opinions (switching to x86 and all).

[Jack Hammer]

indeed

But NOTHING LIKE overwhelming backlash to make them debut at 2.2 ghz rather than 1.8

constant pressure