Why do these damn Dell PC's keep getting faster?!

[BlingBling 3k12]

For a top-o-the-line Dell.... it comes with...

Pentium® 4 processor 2.53GHz w/ 533MHz system bus & 512K L2 Cache

don't give me anything about the G4 being faster and all that because I am quite aware of that.... I just get annoyed every time I see theirs getting "faster" while Apple just stays the same.

Please... Steve... Release G5's at 1.5 GHz at MWNY! Light a fire up under the ass of Motorola and make them make the G5!!!!!!!!!!

[Nummi_G4]

Bling... do not expect a G5 anytime soon. Things are going to keep getting worse. Sorry to tell you that. Life is a bi_ch isnt it?

[BlingBling 3k12]

yes, it is

[Koelling]

I was going to ignore this thread because there is so many others (hint hint, we don't need more). We would all like to see faster computers even if it was just higher numbers with as much power as now just so we can appease our inferiority complex. The ones who whine the most have the most insecurity of their manlihood but the rest of us will just be content with their 266 P3 crushing iMacs.

I'm sure this invites all sorts of flames and I am sorry if I offended anyone. Nobody is forcing you to use a Macintosh. M$ uses mind control but so does Apple so think for yourself and get what is best for you.

[bubbajim]

If Apple went the same route as Dell and other PC vendors you would quickly find out that Apple would fail.


A couple of articles that I have seen around indicate that Intel and AMD continue to boost their chip speeds, they do not put as much effort in I/O speeds and overall speed improvement. As long as that crank out a faster MHZ that is all the public cares about.

I think Motorola has been doing a better job at creating a better well-rounded chip. From benchmarks, heat tests, and other various debates/comparisions, I have seen that though Apple does not lead the pack, they are still in the game with good solid hardware.

I am still amazed at the power of my Dual 450mhz G4, and while I have built many PCs, each one of them have fell victim to becoming painfully slow in other aspects beyond the speed alone and have continually had to upgrade them to keep up with my mac.

I would just like everyone to keep focus on the stability and quality of Apple and just because someone else claims their faster does not always mean it's better.

That all said.... I would love to see Apple get a boost up to 1.5 ghz... just so that we can capture more market share with the other players involved...

[RacerX]

You know, it's funny, I just can take PC speed as being real for me. An x86 based processor system running at 2.5 GHz or 25 GHz doesn't represent anything to me because it doesn't run any of the software I use. Even on a 25 GHz Pentium IX system OmniWeb 4.1, TIFFany 3.5, Create, or even Mac OS X won't run, so why would I care?

Actually, my current system is running a G3 at 350 MHz, and I can't really justify getting a faster system at this point. It does everything that I ask it to do, so I don't even feel the need to envy those who are getting the dual G4s at 1 GHz (which I have worked on and they are quite nice). My needs just have not exceeded the abilities of my system yet.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for PC users. Quake III running at 2,600 frames per second would just make all the difference in the world (your average theatre film runs at 32 frames per second, just for reference). And I can see where the 2.5 GHz would really make Word and Excel so much nicer to use. I even bet that you could read you e-mail faster in Outlook Express on that type of system. It is like envying your neighbor who has a sports car that can go 300+ kph when the speed limit is 100 kph. Sure he has the ability to go really fast, but in real world driving (like rush-hour traffic), it isn't going to help him that much.

Lets face it, these speeds are not going to effect the average users real needs. People are productive on what ever system they know how to work with. If Cray ever came out with one of their super computers for under $1000, 30+ times faster than the fastest desktop system today (Mac or Windows), do you really think anyone would be very productive on it? Worrying about speed when you just don't have a real use for it is strange. And in the case of Mac users, worrying about the speed of non-Mac systems beyond wanting the implementation of new technology is pointless. My apps don't run on the newest-fastest PCs any more than they would on the newest-fastest super computer, and I don't even feel the need for the newest-fastest Mac at this point.

If you need something with the highest MHz rating just for having the highest MHz rating, you should get a PC. If you are more productive with a PC than a Mac, you should get a PC. If you are more productive with a Mac than another system, then get a Mac. It is that simple.

[iscaro]

Same as RacerX

Higher Mhz is only needed for the latest games...

I play a few games on Mac and PC... but I have a PS2... and I still love to play PSOne titles too!

I'll get a GameCube someday... when Zelda and other great games will be out... casue right now my PS2 is still grate for gaming!


CiAo

[vanguard]

Maybe I think macs are so weak because MY mac is so weak. I've heard that they latest 700 mhz iBook is twice as fast as my 500 mhz version because of the other enhancements they've made to the system.

I haven't been to the apple store long enough to really check out what apple offers today. My guess is that they are getting close to the stage where more CPU speed isn't getting much.

When x86 CPUs arrive they are greated with a yawn. Nobody seems to need that much speed. Let's hope that Apple/Motorola gets there soon.