What is Digg?89 Comments
- Misos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Now let's try comparing a Powermac G5 to a Dell laptop.
- Polymira, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4it's also a pc, not a laptop...
- yensed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well Said Misos! That guy have 1GB of RAM And a 3.??GHz P4.. Its kinda obvious the dell is more powerfull... But still, thats awesome.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Seems that folks are getting pretty confused as to what a Powerbook is and how it's different from an iBook. THAT was a Powerbook. Powerbooks are that silvery color of Aluminium while iBooks are milky white, usually smaller unless you've got a 12" Powerbook, and more importantly, slow.
I'm fairly unimpressed by this given that the powerbook looks like it has a BUNCH of software and who knows how many StartupItems. For all that, it started up in a second or maybe three later than a clean PC? Not that somebody benchmarking x86 to PPC should pay attention to things like that. And of course the drive speed is a huge issue as well. Given those nice juicy bits of info, the PB seems damn impressive for having half the MHz and nowhere near the HDD speed. That could even be one of the older 4200RPM drives in there!
Sry folks, go PBook. - Heathen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At the risk of being redundant...
A desktop PC beat a laptop computer to booting up its OS? This is me, shocked and amazed... not.
Seriously, laptops take forever compared to their desktop counterparts, get real. - dickrichie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Im glad to see most of the people who have posted realize the crucial error in this test being that the computers are not similar in power. Why dont we just test that poor little Dell against the Virginia Tech cluster. Thats just one display a keyboard and mouse. right?
- Aidan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but that Dell is running at 3 GHz versus the PowerBook's, what, 1.67?
- psin2005, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well GHz is not really the issue. Its the other "bottlenecks" like the hard drive. the dell probably had a 7200rpm 8mb sata drive while the ibook a 5400 rpm (not sure about this as i dont use macs) w/ a smaller cache (prollie around 2mb). Ram is also another factor both size wise and speed wise. I'm actually impressed that the ibook wasnt that far behind a 3ghz full desktop. As Heathen said it'll only be fair if osx was booted on another laptop w/ similar specs. Its videos like this that create frenzies and brainwash people who dont look at 'benchmarks' thoroughly.
- poet_will, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree with the whole "desktop vs. laptop" argument. But, after watching the video I could swear my Inspiron can boot X faster than that desktop. I will check it out.
- shimmyt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That is kind of lame, that guy had all of that software on that powerbook, and not to mention how many partitions. On a 5400 rpm hard drive (standard in the laptop line). Hell he probably only had 512mb of ram in the laptop. Now a clean install of OS X on a G5 iMac with 1gb of ram would be a better guage of how much faster it is.
- gizram84, on 05/30/2009, -0/+1everyone needs to stop bitching about what an unfair competition it is. the fact of the matter is, the copy of osx that booted on the dell was a *hacked* version of an *unreleased* operating system that ran on a computer that it *wasnt* designed for. the copy of osx on the power book was a legit operating system running on the exact hardware it was intended for. just the fact that the dell was able to boot osx at all is amazing, let alone the fact that it hosed the powerbook. GREAT DIGG!!
- TheDecn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't think this is supposed to be a test, per-se. Just an interesting comparison between the two. For the record, the Dell is a Dimension 8250 with a P4 3.02Ghz and 1GB of RDRAM. Talk about obsolete tech...but OS X still boots! By the way, that was the third boot of the Powerbook...the first time it took at least 20 seconds longer than the Dell, even after giving it a head start. And indeed, the Powerbook has only a 1Ghz G4 with 512MB of RAM. So like I said, I don't think this is supposed to be a benchmark, just a cool video.
- Crackermack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, a lot of Apple-haters are desperately excited about finally being able to run a MacOS...
On a side note: APPLE, YOU CAN MAKE MONEY SELLING OS's AND NOT JUST HARDWARE.... seems to me a Pacific Northwest company with the initials MS led by some guy names Bill had a bit of success doing this... - mpeters13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0woot triple moot points for triple posting trash and typing in engrish. I spend too much time on 4chan
- mpeters13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0moot points for me for quote ezkiel instead of fatrandy
- g-rams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hey can sombody post a link up to download the torrent file for the mac on a pc because really ***** wanna try it.
- cvrefugee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nobody has mentioned that the link is dead.
- sarasweet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dum de dum dum dumbbbb!
- scorwitz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hmmm, Let me think... an OS made for an Apple boots faster on an Apple than it does on a PC...?? Genius! What will they think of next? Duh
- mpeters13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Here's a question. If you load a 98 bmw series with 500 pounds of walmart clerk fatass, and drag race against it with a nice 05 Ford Taurus with a spoiler a magnaflow. Socially, magnaflow doesn't belong on the taurus (as os x currently "shouldn't" be running on public pc's) (yes... i know nice and ford don't belong together, but for the sake of this example work with me...) The taurus is going to win.
My mac doesn't sit in pure black as long as that one did, so there are serious disk permissions to fix or something~.
But to agree with ezkiel, it is impressive to see this os x beta booting quickly on a dell. It's amazing to see ANYTHING boot fast on a dell. But I don't think that necessarily labels anyone clinically retarded. Insults over something as cliche as osx x86 has become is a waste of time. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0" if you are going to compare wintel and Mac machines, please refer to some of the comparisons here...
http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/
and comparing a powerbook and a desktop just doesnt do justice,'
wtf? you are going to listen to apple when it comes to performance? thats like going to car manufacturer and asking them which car is fastest? of course they are going to say their own, and not the fair truth. all this video proves is that osx86 is coming along quite nicely, thats all. if you really want to compare apples to whatever, put ur pricey powermac against an amd athlon fx-57, in 3dgaming not in boot up time. - TheDecn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Everyone is missing the point here. I don't think anybody would argue that the Dell is a more powerful machine and thus it's an "Apple's to Oranges" comparsion. The cool thing here is seeing a machine that nobody would ever imagine a month ago would be running OS X...running OS X natively! The fact that it's along side an Apple machine just makes it cooler.
- clubgus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The Video is Flawed, the Laptop we don't know what model it is and what speed and what RAM inside the laptop, they should of show us the specs of the laptop, they should of tested the intel version on a intel equivalent laptop, a laptop vs a Desktop there is no competition, if it were a Dual Desktop G5 up a against the Intel version with the same RAM and HDD speed then the speed would not be no different, the boot up process is also affected by how much ***** installed or services you got installed on your computer so this video comparison whilst it seems amazing, it means NOTHING at all, it's like comparing Apples with Bananas the video is flawed because the comparison systems are both flawed, a laptop HDD is slower than a desktop HDD, the laptop RAM could be less than the Intel's version and maybe the was some sort of foul play in terms showing the Mac Intel hackers out there that intel is faster, they could of faked the Mac startup sound on another system (hidden from camera) because we didn't see the laptop screen light up quickly at the beginning and they could of muted the shown laptop and actually started it up (secretly) after turning on the Dell PC, so DO NOT believe this video its giving a false impressions of the established PPC systems thats my 2 cents worth.
- Banukab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This test is seriously flawed and completely useless.
- b.askew, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Its actually kinda sad that the Dell didnt beat the PB by more than a few seconds considering the hardware differences. I think I can wait 4 extra seconds to carry around a beautiful mac with me. Ill take a G4 over a Dell/any PC anyday.
- TheDecn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Where did this story go? Why has it disappeared from the listings?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Owned.
- generalleoff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Well GHz is not really the issue. Its the other "bottlenecks" like the hard drive. the dell probably had a 7200rpm 8mb sata drive while the ibook a 5400 rpm (not sure about this as i dont use macs) w/ a smaller cache (prollie around 2mb). Ram is also another factor both size wise and speed wise. I'm actually impressed that the ibook wasnt that far behind a 3ghz full desktop. As Heathen said it'll only be fair if osx was booted on another laptop w/ similar specs. Its videos like this that create frenzies and brainwash people who dont look at 'benchmarks' thoroughly."
Also it's very clear the two machines don't have the same settings. The laptop had clear changes to desktop settings and had to load more icons onto the desktop. Who knows what other programs are running in the background that we couldn't see cuz of the resolution.
If someone wants to really test this they need to grab a Pentium M laptop and run them side by side. - mfarley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree--pointless performance wise but +1digg for one more step closer to my dream--multiboot OSX, XP Pro and SuSE 9.3.
Yummy. - Hexxagonal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've decided to do a video of my dual proc p4 vs my p4 1.3ghz booting windows, let's see how that does. everyone dig that.
- HCJfilms, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I would love to be able to run OS X on my PC
- blhack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Comparing a top of the line powerbook to a top of the line Dell would be stuid. They're differant companies and they offer products with differant degrees of quality. THis would be like saying something to the effect of "lets compare a top of the line Kia and a top of the line Ferrari, CLEARLY the ferrari wins....FERRARI IS A BETTER COMPANY!!! Teheheheh now let me go post about it in 500 blogs everday and declare that the owner of the kia is the anti-christ" If your pc runs slowly it is your own for being an idiot. Need i remind you that Mac OS = A window manager called aqua. The OPERATING system is actually BSD, why have people forgotten this and now declare mac to be a kickass development firm?
- sapiqkue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Uh, one, laptop vs. desktop? Great example. Two, that startup on the laptop was unusually long...normally it doesn't take 28 seconds for the apple to appear at the beginning of the startup.
- Hexxagonal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is LAME as everyone else has said, take a look at system stats. Get a G5 up there with compareable RAM and we'll see what happens.
And I don't even like Apple (due to Jobs no less). - pingsmoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That video doesn't show much of anything. It's a desktop vs. a laptop, for one. And the Dell is using a fairly stock configuration of OSX--no customization or, from what it looks like, nothing else installed. Of course it's going to boot faster than a Mac with a bunch of stuff installed (look at the dock).
- T-DOT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Oh no, a stipped down OSX on a better computer beat a full-featured version on a laptop....lame
- Tullamore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That powerbook doesn't even have a clean install on it. LAME.
- deanau, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I did this at college.. verses a powerbook and a iBook
I won. - Scharf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This test is usless....lame azz peecees
- Neuromancer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree, lame. Who the hell cares.
- gorkon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Let's be fair. My earlier comment was not becasue I was bissed because it runs...better. I would only like to see a FAIR comparison. It's hard to get this as alot of PC's have updates that have not yet trickled down to the Mac's yet. You can come close...much closer then this stupid test. Put a top of the line mac and a top of the line dell side by side and run the RELEASE version of both....oh wait...you can't do that since it's NOT RELEASED YET....I reserve any judgement on performance until I see real x86 based Mac hardware. I will likely buy a new Mac once the new Intel based hardware hits. I will run OSX no matter what machine I need to have to run it. I am not one of the Mac people who detest the switch. I look forward to it. The switch will finally let Apple compete with and against Microsoft....I just hope the switch does not kill Apple (which it can).
- ZeroQuest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OSX is faster than XP. The hardware is irrelevant. Jobs wouldn't be switching if this wasn't the case. Apple fanboys have nothing to be pissed about, you're seeing a pre-release in action. A year from now you'll all be saying how much faster OSX is than XP and the hardware behind the OS will be completely irrelevant. The only reason Apple fanboys are pissed right now is because they can't get an Apple branded Intel box.
- beg513, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0screw this he may have a totajacked up pc and a powwer book with 256 ram
- jeffsiler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow that laptop got owned by a desktop :| Huge surprise. I'd like to see a comparison between a 700m and the Powerbook G4.
Seriously though, OSX coming to the PC hardware market is such a great thing for apple. They have the best OS and software suite of anyone, and it would be great to have that on more machines.
The diehard mac users will still buy apple hardware for the coolness factor. I just bought an ibook g4 12" and am loving it. I like it so much better thant the 700m that I compared it too. - TheDecn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0fatrandy13, thanks so much...finally somebody who GETS IT!!
- lollerskates, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is so obvious. If the Dell were slower, then Apple wouldn't have wanted to make the switch. I wouldn't be surprised if a high end PC could beat a PowerMac G5.
- agent_smith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Laptop for laptop I have my PB 1.33 G4 and a 2Ghz P4 booting OSX up and the P4 cains the PB all day long and twice on Sundays.
- FlatLine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0easy buddy...eaaaaaasy
digg is not going downhill, just because we have trolls that love to start flame wars doesnt mean a site is going "downhill" - cliffosj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think this is totally irrelevant, everyone knows Apple wouldn't have switched unless intels chips were considerably faster, and there need to update there seriously flagging notebook line. It's not really a fair test, though at the same time it's good to see it running well on a hardware system it hasn't had years of optimisation for. I think we will see serious speed increases as Apple get's its code base sorted out for x86.
http://spl.haxial.net/apple-powermac-G5/
http://spl.haxial.net/apple-powermac-G5/banned-in-uk.html - gizram84, on 05/30/2009, -0/+0***** you ezkiel, i didnt make any comments about you, i pointed out a simple obervation...you're just too ***** ignorant to continue the discussion becuase you probably own one of these outdated pieces of equipment (the mac). people need to stop personally attacking someone on a forum for what they say, and just continue the actual discussion on hand. grow up you *****.
-
Show 51 - 87 of 87 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is