homeaboutarchives + tagsshopmembership!
aboutarchivesshopmembership!
aboutarchivesmembers!

Apple accused of manipulating G5 benchmarks

posted by Andy Baio   Jun 24, 2003

Apple accused of manipulating G5 benchmarks.

Reader comments

Tim SwanJun 24, 2003 at 11:16AM

This article has been linked to by many sites and is a good reason to avoid being too geeky. It doesn’t matter *at all* what the benchmarks show — do you really think that Apple is the only computer manufacturer to shade the truth in it’s marketing? What matters is that Apple now has a computer that competes favorably with the very fastest Windows machine, so if you love OS X you can continue using it. This article is rapidly turning into a pissing match between what appear to be 15 year olds — I’m used to higher quality remaindered links.

Phillip WinnJun 24, 2003 at 11:42AM

Not to mention that as I skimmed the article, I noted weird statements that say more about the author than about anything else. Like accusing Apple of being dishonest for selling their computers for $2999 instead of $3000. Huh?

Or accusing Apple of dishonesty for comparing themselves to a Dell 3.06GHz machine when a 3.2GHz machine is available even though the 3.2GHz chip was just announced yesterda!

Weird. I know this: The new computer is more than five times as fast as the one I’ve got now. The rest is just details.

Andy BaioJun 24, 2003 at 12:35PM

The original article was poorly written, so I changed the link to this Register article.

StanJun 24, 2003 at 1:11PM

To all Apple fanboys that read kottke.org: just because an article is linked from kottke.org doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s endorsed by kottke.org.

And since when does a page have to be written by a group of PhDs in order to be interesting or worthwhile? If you find a link that’s not up to your high standards, please don’t bother the rest of us by complaining about it. Remaindered links are usually great! Entertaining! Fascinating! If you insult the editors, they will start to think twice before posting, and before you know it, there wont be any links remaindered at all.

MikeJun 24, 2003 at 3:46PM

It’s really not interesting. It’s just some geek who hates to admit that a Marketing ploy is being used. It all (the original) reads like a rant from some virginal star wars geek, mad that his eMachines “workstation” isn’t as good as a G5.

GregJun 24, 2003 at 4:53PM

Sounds to me like he’s the computer geek equivalent of the Star Wars Kid.

typo? TYPO!Jun 24, 2003 at 5:22PM

the mac business model is so weird. it seems to boil down to buy what you think is cool. nothing to do with ‘what works’ or ‘what is a good value’ or ‘what is reliable’. they lost me at the dual comparison. why get a dual 4ghz when i can get a single cpu that will do it and not have to worry about a new OS and applications. just the time investment in installing that crap would seem cost enough to deter most reasonable people.

……..btw: akb jason needs a preview mode for the comment areas…….

MikeJun 24, 2003 at 9:17PM

I use a Mac, out of a company with 2500+ PCs and my one Mac, simply because I send most of my work out to graphics shops who also use Macs. It’s just easier to work with the same kind of files. Photoshop also tends to run a little smoother on a Mac too. I really could care less if it looked cool or not, it’s what works for me. BTW, I hated Macs until the B&W Macs and used Photoshop and all of that stuff on NT before moving to OS X last year.

BobAug 12, 2003 at 10:04PM

My brother has a dual processor G4. I have dual processor PIII. I want to build a Beowulf cluster. It is easy to produce a meaningful computational task that puts things in proper prespective. I hope to live long enough to see something that takes us to the next level. Just look at the ratios. Apple/Intel. Who can really get excited? You need at least a factor of two to kick start the heart. What an exciting time to be young.

This thread is closed to new comments. Thanks to everyone who responded.