Why Are Macs So Behind?

[howard54321]

PCs are quicker in general, but who wants to look at that crappy windows all day. Just get a Mac, and think of the beauty as a pay off for loss of performance. Besides, if you make a flash application on a Mac that keeps up with it's intended frame rate, it'll run like a dream on anyones machine.

[CDP-Design]

ok youve either got a really old mac or you just dont understand the power of a mac youseen thebenchmarks lately a mac is always faster than a pc FACT.





so in turn a mac is not behind in speed graphics cpu ram hdd just software no one seems to want to develop on it.

[howard54321]

your talking about a g5 you fool! and those results are from the mac site, of course they will be infavour of Macs. Do a little more research, and maybe try both out yourself. I have PC and Mac and i can tell you for fact that pc's generally out perform macs.

[CDP-Design]

no need for insults. did i insult you? I have a mac and a pc my mac never crashes and runs more programs loading saving and opening faster than on a pc my mac is 7 years old my pc is 3 years old and my mac is better I have a 1.3ghz pc I have a 400mhz mac my pc has 512 ram my mac has 32 you getting my point yet? The topic of this thread is why macs are behind in software they are not behind in hardware the ibm processors heavily out perform intel and amd.

[howard54321]

well it takes a dual g5 processor to slightly out perform a pc based single processor, and it's taken long enough for mac to reach the performance of pc's. I think you may need to take your pc to get repaired if it can out perform and old 500 mhz g4. Mac's are great, it's all i use now, but it's okay to be critical of them. why is there constantly disscusion of slow flash and shockwave performance on macs?

[howard54321]

can't that not can.

sorry about that

[CDP-Design]

Originally posted by howard54321
well it takes a dual g5 processor to slightly out perform a pc based single processor, and it's taken long enough for mac to reach the performance of

if you look at the benchmark its double the power of an intel 3ghz and outperforms the dual intel xeon 3ghz processor im tlaking form a designing point of view i dont use my mac to surf the net jsut use freehand mostly so im working form experience of hwo freehand perfroms on the mac and pc. About flash player i guess it might have to do wiht most shockwave files are made on pcs and so that might have some effect i dont know thats one good point youve raised, hopefully it is something whihc will be rectified with flash player 7 and new osx.2

[howard54321]

http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2..._macvspc23.htm

here are some independant benchmark test of adobe products.

[CDP-Design]

wahooo i win the mac beats the pcs *ok enough of being childish* good link prooves my point thouigh doesnt it? I think the flash player problem must be somehting to do with pc published projectors playing on macs or mayb macs just hate flash I dont know I'm sure one day the problem will be rectified but for now just use pcs for viewing and macs for designing, its the best way.

[CNew]

First off,

CDP: well said. I'm glad to finally find someone who understands how wrong the public perception of macs is.

I've used PCs at school since Windows 3.1. I've had macs at home since my dad bought a Quadra 650 with OS7. My mac has ALWAYS outoerformed any school PC they deal out. And don't say "Well that's because schools are cheap and buy bargain computers..." That's not the case. I am referring to the computers in the graphic arts lab at my highschool. 2.3 Ghz Dells, that were out performed by my 800Mhz eMac. In almost every arena. Apps load faster on my mac, it crashes FAR less often, has WAY fewer errors, most of the errors fix themselves, and the interface is much easier on the eyes.

I wish Gates would be exposed for the greedy, idea-stealing sleazeball that he is. All he's done to update Windows over the years is copy any new aspect added to Apple OS. It pisses me off every time.

I'm hopeful for Apple's new ad campaign and plans for convert PC users. Launching a PC compatible iPod and the release of a Windows version of iTunes will certainly luer more than a few teenage PC'ers to the mac side. And the more the better.

[howard54321]

actually they both stole the graphic interface idea from xerox. the yare bith money grabbing thiefs, get over it. Mac has more of a monopoly over apple computers do than bill gates has over pcs. really?

[howard54321]

wahooo i win the mac beats the pcs *ok enough of being childish*

you imbecile! Did you read the article or get all confused when you saw that the mac had a bigger bar in the chart. You do understand this is a bad thing. It is relative to time, the bigger the bar, the longer the rendering time. read the conclusion. really, slow down, you don't do yourself any favours. silly boy

[CDP-Design]

*LOL o* ah well by the way it was dos which gates stole of xerox not windows dos lead to windows and so on macintosh dont have dos whihc is basicaly the difference between a mac and a pc i supposeif a mac had dos u could put a boot disk in format and instal windows giving you a very fast pc. Anyways i aint here to argue peopel will have different opions i suppose its all on what you use it for and how you use it. I remember the best thing out of the IT book i read the biggest problem with a computer is the user garbagein = garbage out meaning the computers fine its the way your using it whihc is making it crash either way i liek pc (i can play games surf the net on my adsl) i like the mac (easier os, quicker app load times) thats my view of the two.

Peace!

[howard54321]

Last relply, and that's it.

http://www.cdc.net/~gildrnew/comp/comp.html

check this link out, in brief:

Graphical User Interface, is the correct term for a Desktop. Apple computers, a company who claims to be different. Well how differant are they. They marketed the first GUI. Were did they get it. As it turns out Steve Jobs (Apples Cretor) stole the GUI concept and code from Xerox. Yes that is right Xerox. Xerox labs invented the first GUI. Stever Jobs used to work for Xerox as a secretary he was wondering around and came across two lab employes who were having fun. He took the idea and ran with it. That is how we got Apples OS and Windows. That is not all that Steve got from Xerox, he also got Apples logo (the apple) from Xerox. It was going to be Xerox's new logo but go turned down. For a company that claims to be so different and original they sure have done their share of borrowing and copying.

We both love macs anyway.

Cheers.

[CDP-Design]

interesting as what bill gates actually stole was dos and xerorx never brought anything forward into the arena of operating systems so if it was jsut some technicians having fun wheres the crime didnt knick the papers he saw something which he coudl exploit. Bill Gates stole the coding for dos thats a theift but an alteration of 90 % to get round copyright *wot a ***** eh?* ah well im sure there are lots of other shady back staby theft and spying which goes on between large companies, Its a bent world we live in so the fact is the law doesnt really care. Also this threads now gone way off topic which means either start posting about the topic or ill go get a mod to shut down the thread.

[Eyenovation]

You're both wrong.
1. Apple didn't steal ANYTHING from Xerox, it was given to them. The Xerox PARC (Palo Alto Research Center) created the Alto. It was the first computer to really implement the GUI technology. A smart man by the named of Alan Kay was monumental in object oriented programming. (such as visually moving files into folders, etc.), which revolutionized the way we all compute.



The computer and idea was rejected by the geniuses at Xerox, and subsequently offered to Apple. After adopting the ideas, Apple hired MANY of the PARC employees to implement the ideas at Apple. This was welcomed by the folks at PARC who were pissed that Xerox simply wanted to focus on copiers.

2. Bill Gates' Microsoft company purchased DOS, they did not steal it. I believe it was purchased for $50,000 by Paul Allen and Steve Ballmer and was really the work of Tim Patterson (he later helped MS create MS-DOS v.1)

3. Steve never worked at Xerox you silly kid. Research your facts better. In 1974, he worked for Atari, before traveling to India. Upon his return, he teamed with Stephen Wozniak to create Apple.

4. The logo was not stolen from Xerox, nor was the name. The term APPLE was a take on a 'Byte' which was very familiar computing talk at the time.

[Eyenovation]

I am a computing professional and have extensive experience on both platforms. I can tell you with confidence that the majority of the differences you see speedwise are NOT computing hardware, but rather software.

The Flash payer in Mac (one which has caused concern) is not as stable or efficient as the PC counterpart, but that hardly makes one computer faster than the other.

In truth the fastest computer will vary greatly w. what you're doing and how you use it. In my humble opinion, Windows is a faster operating system compared to OSX, in that windows, files, and folders open quicker and with more ease. I think this will change with the new release of Panther, however.

Mac's OS9 was just as fast as any Windows version I've used and it's only a matter of time before the two are equal again.

As for programs, I would say the two each excel in their respective areas. I've seen things that take twice as long on both platforms that the other whizzed through. It's really all pretty relative.

The bottom line is that any person should use the tool which helps them to be most efficient, whatever that may be.

[SJT]

I'm backing Eyenovation on this one...and you two other fellas need to calm down and stop semi-flaming each other.

One point I would make; Alto was an early prototype, the actual computer was the Xerox Star. Xerox did actually release the Star and later the ViewPoint (based on the same OS). They flopped for several reasons; extremely expensive, no-one understood them or their worth, they were percieved as slow, etc.

The reason the Macintosh did so well is it had already had the trail blazed for it by firstly the Xerox Star and then the Lisa.

Notice I said percieved speed; all the computers we use today are completely underused. Approximately speaking we probably use roughly 10% of their computing power 90% of the time. Very occasionally this will peak, but very occasionally (if you're in Mac OS X, open Terminal and type top; then look for the line that says "idle thread" near the bottom, more than likely it will be over 70%). Speed is in reality about percieved reaction times in your interface.

[howard54321]

poor old strangelife2k, is still waiting for the awnser to his thread. I hope you have all had as much fun as I did. I'll miss CDP-Design, and myself's stray facts, Eyenovation with his fancy professional computer job, and his creative use of the BOLD function. And of course not forgetting the very agreeable middle of the road perspective of SJT. Thanks again, for a lovely thread.

Cheers Howard.

[CNew]

What I mean to say is, don't be so pedantic.