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: Eric Yang who wrote (16659)	8/14/1998 2:55:00 AM
From: put2rich	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 213177

Not an expert in computer hardware but I guess w/ the same cost Mac is faster than PC due to a top down new design, while PC hardware and software designs have to be backward compatible w/ original PCs. But the issue for Apple stock here is who are going to buy iMac (except some Macmaniacs) while most software are for PC's. Apple company was too stupid and greedy in the 80's and 90's, and can they make a coup w/ this machine? I guess not (spent 1.5K for a junk Apple IIC when I was dirt poor, hope to get some back but not by long)

To: Eric Yang who wrote (16659)	8/14/1998 9:46:00 AM
From: Roger A. Babb	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 213177

Eric, the speed comparison can easily be settled by taking any one of a number of industry standard benchmarks (such as Specmark) or just write a small C program that crunches some numbers in a loop and compare. This is not a subjective matter, the results can be quickly established. The PC makers will let Apple go out on the limb making these claims with the big advertising budget and then saw it off. The sad thing is that it is not necessary to make these suspect speed claims to sell the product. Most users on most applications could not tell the difference between a 100mhz machine and a 500mhz machine. There are many other reasons to buy an imac, it is stupid to focus the advertising on a bogus speed claim that would not have been an issue except for Apple making the claim. In reality the imac is about the same speed as a 233mhz MMX and that is fast enough for most users, so I just don't get the point of making bogus claims. If anyone really believes that a 233mhz imac with a 66mhz bus is 40% faster than a P2 400mhz with a 100mhz bus, let's get together a betting pool and hire an independant testing lab to make the comparison.