Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DiViT who wrote (34147)	7/23/2002 1:20:16 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 213182

No, I wasn't claiming that the Photoshop tests were manipulated. But given how extremely (and apparently deliberately) biased the digital video tests are, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he had had to try very hard in order to come up with a benchmark suite that supported his prejudgment (and previous biased comparison that had gotten slammed by independent readers) that Windows machines are not slower than Macs after all. Dave

To: DiViT who wrote (34147)	7/23/2002 8:26:32 PM
From: jonkai	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213182

Are you also claiming that the Photoshop tests are manipulated? any test can be manipulated.... course then there are those who actually just want to find out which is the better machine by buying two off the shelf, and installing photoshop off the shelf..... macnightowl.com azcentral.com now, i'm sure a 3 gig chip might finally be faster than a 1 gig Risc chip..... but isn't kind of silly that it took them that long to finally come up with a chip that really is faster than a little ole 1 gig Risc chip.... in the mean time, apple will release 1.5 ghz chips even 1.7 ghz chips in five or so weeks.... guess what happens again to these REAL benchmarks.... and that's before the 3 gig intc chips are scheduled to debute..... so is it really smarter to go with an energy hog toaster oven that cost more, just so you can be slower than the better and even cheaper chip? not likely apple will choose this course... that being said, IBM and apple better get off their duffs and get that 2.5 Ghz chip out the door, IBM already has it done, Apple and IBM just need to sit down and discuss it..... and how to make it work with altivec and a desktop computer.... (by the way that is the equivalent of 5 ghz intel chip) are you really going to be excited about going to a hot running energy hog X86 chip when there is a 5 Ghz equivalent out there that is cheaper and doesn't run as hot and uses less power? lets see if IBM and Apple can coperate..... jon.