MacUpdate Weekend Sale :This weekend MacUpdate has slashed prices on Painter 12 and Painter Lite. Painter 12 retails for $429, but has been reduced by 54% to $199. Painter Lite has seen a 58% price cut from $69 to $29. Hurry, because these deals are only available until May 19th 2013.      
toggle

AAPL Stock: 433.26 ( -1.32 )

http://www.macnn.com/articles/01/08/08/tech.report/

Tech Report downs Apple, speed claims

updated 07:15 am EDT, Wed August 8, 2001

 
", 0, 0);


An article at the Tech Report attempts to debunk the claims of Apple and other web outlets regarding the quality and speed of Power Mac G4s. "Steve Jobs has come back on the scene to parody himself, making wild claims for the performance and utility of the fruity computer company's decidedly behind-the-curve products."


by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

 industry

Related Articles

Recent Articles

toggle

Comments

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 08:18am | report spam | Reply | delete

    Stay Away from this one

    Don't even bother dialing it up; its a waste of your time - someone lashing out at someone elses article, with no reasonable foundation - passion doesn't count.

    The Net is getting bloated on this kind of nonsense. Your blood pressure doesn't need to be poked with a stick. The followup comments to the article are even more senseless than the actual article.

    Instead, look at sites that do research and make indepth studies like www.arstechnica.com, www.barefeats.com, www.macspeedzone.com.

    -peter

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 08:23am | report spam | Reply | delete

    Whatever...

    Whatever his claims, the only problem with the article is that he doesn't bother to run tests of his own. It's sure easy to point out how wrong everyone else is when you don’t back it up. It adds nothing to the discussion of G4 performance articles. Why is this even a link?

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 08:30am | report spam | Reply | delete

    Don't bother reading

    Ahh. I'm sick of sites posting to that link! Don't give the trolls what they want!

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 08:31am | report spam | Reply | delete

    myth debunked?

    browsing through the thread beneath the article, it occurred to me that the mhz difference isn't played up by the pc side - they talk about real world performance and photoshop/quake tests, not mhz.

    good news, or bad, if you believe what's on macosrumors right now...

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 08:32am | report spam | Reply | delete

    boring

    just another rant. Why is this news!

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 09:17am | report spam | Reply | delete

    Sensationalism

    The editorial (don't call it an article) does raise a few good points, namely that Photoshop performance is not a good measure of overall performance, and that the author of the now infamous chart, may be biased due to the fact that he is an Apple owner and shareholder.

    Beyond that, though, Wasson is guilty of the sensationalism of which he accusses the chart's author. His claim that low frequencies is a "badge of honor" is a complete, groundless farce. He fails to defend how keeping an anachronistic piece of equipment, the floppy disk, is a good idea (of course, if your OS is depended on things like boot disks, perhaps it is necessary).

    He attempts to put down the Mac and the G4 by pointing out that it "can't execute x86 binary code" without, apparently, realizing that the G4 never aimed to run x86 code, and that the inability to do so is not a curse.

    His most sensationalistic comment, though, is "...the ability to run four or five of the world's most popular software packages (just don't run them at once)." First, his numbers (four or five) is much too long. But his advice to not run them at once is completely groundless, and as such, utterly ridiculous.

    Then, in Wasson's closing argument, where he mentions that Intel chips are racing towards 2 GHz, shows that he has himself fallen for the "MHz Myth." You'll see PC enthusiast after PC enthusiast readily admit that the current Pentium 4s don't match up to Pentium 3s clock-for-clock, yet when it's convenient for him, the "MHz Myth" suddenly becomes true.

    What is disturbing about this editorial is that Wasson aims to debuke another author's work, work he claims is biased and unfactual, but his argument is even more sensationalized and factless than the original.

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 09:37am | report spam | Reply | delete

    I never go there

    Being both a Mac and PC person, I was at one time a regular visitor to his site (as well as amdzone.com). No longer. They both lash out at the Mac with little reasoning behind their tirades. While ArsTechnica.com may bash the Mac sometimes, they try to provide balanced technical coverage. Cheers to Ars Technica and a great big raspberry to The Tech Report and AMD Zone. Just avoid the later two as I do.

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 10:06am | report spam | Reply | delete

    re:Sensationalism

    I couldn't agree more.

    And I should have called it an editorial, not an article. Ooops.

    But this is the "price" we pay for the freedom of the internet. But in THAT sense, its not right to call it a price; its just a fact that this is the nature of the internet. I'd rather this "price" than to have everything censored.

    Everyone has a voice; so how do they reach an audience? Thru sites like MacNN. Can MacNN cover ALL the voices wanting to be heard? No.

    Its at THIS point in the argument, where MacNN's guidelines for how they chose news items to point us to, comes into question. Not to say that they have to reconsider their guidelines - I LOVE MacNN.

    MacNN points to many articles/editorials/etc. We have to take the good with the bad. And use our own discretion. And MacNN has even provided a great mechanism for dealing with these guidelines - their Comments Section accompaning each news post, like the one we're on now! It allows readers to check out the feedback from readers like themselves before even viewing the article itself.

    -peter

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 11:45am | report spam | Reply | delete

    Run More than one App?

    The article says Macs have "the ability to run four or five of the world's most popular software packages (just don't run them at once)"

    I, like many Mac users 6-8 apps running at the same time. Now not all are doing 3-D rendering, but I e-mail in the background, process PDF files, load web pages, copy files to another Mac, print, etc. I'm not even sure if the ability to run multiple processors would make my multitasking more efficient.

    And a good reason Photoshop is used as a benchmark is because hardly any other application is as important for fast machines (except non-business apps like games). Who cares if you spreadsheet scrolls a tenth of a second faster? Applications like Cinema 4D already take advantage of multiple processors in a Mac if you need that power.

    The megahertz myth isn't always in reference to actual speed differences, it's sometimes due to the fact that megahertz isn't so important to 80% of what a computer user does.

  1. 0

    Joined:

    0
    08/08, 12:16pm | report spam | Reply | delete

    Just don't...

    ...give coverage to such "reputed" sites, please!!

Show More Comments

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Brother HL-3170CDW LED Printer

We've mentioned before that we are far from a paperless society. For now, at least, there are tasks that require a piece of paper for ...

HTC One

It is hard to overstate just how critically important the HTC One is to the Taiwanese company’s fortunes. Despite its alarming decline ...

Samsung Galaxy S 4

Samsung's new flagship Android smartphone, the Galaxy S 4, faces even stiffer competition than its popular predecessor. With a five-in ...

toggle

Most Commented

 

Popular News