Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 122
  1. #81  
    Originally posted by Cerulean
    thanks for the links .. apparently no one else read them (from the posts on how they are instantly biased due to the fact they are on a Mac site..)
    I read them. I just haven't posted since then. This still does not invalidate my point, though. Going by the rough rule of thumb mentioned at one point in the article, a 400MHz Mac would perform on many tasks at roughly the same level as an Intel system with twice the clock speed (800MHz). This still makes the 1GHz machine about 25% faster (which is significant, IMO). Of course, this ignores the various utilizations of OSes on the Intel side. Performance is going to vary between Win95, 98, NT, 2K, Linux, etc. also. Of course, I consider that an advantage to the PC side due to flexibility. Macs just give you MacOS and certain flavors of *nix (only on some Macs) AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK. $YMMV$.

    -- they seem pretty dead on in explaining the different factors that go into how fast a system will perform.. now if they would just square file the G4 and Pentium line and everyone would just use AMD Athlons, then that would make life so much easier .. we could go back to looking at just the Mhz number .. heheh
    I second that emotion (although my main machine is still a K6-2/550).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  2. #82  
    Of course, I consider that an advantage to the PC side due to flexibility. Macs just give you MacOS and certain flavors of *nix (only on some Macs) AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK. $YMMV$.
    Well, this is an interesting argument FOR the use of Macs. Macs, natively, can run Mac OS and Linux. (you used to be able to run BeOS until Apple dropped the ball on that one).

    However, you can run Windows quite easily using Virtual PC. Of course, this is emulated, so you do take a bit performance hit...you are not going to run the latest 3-D video game an be as happy with that on your PC.

    The advantage of running Windows on a Mac is that you have an unlimited number of installs. You could install all releases of 95, 98, nt, 2K, etc. This makes the Mac a great testing platform for PC software. It sure beats having to partition your PC drive into 8+ partitions for every release of Windows.

    But, again, this point could be argued either way.

    P.S. joshieca: your comments are immature. A good debater sticks with the facts and builds upon those. Generalizations and personal accusations usually do more damage to one's argument than help. Just a thought.

    And, yes, a dual-processor G4 running Final Cut Pro is an incredible video editing suite...top of the line for out-of-the-box systems (pc OR Mac), but, alas, it doesn't quite add up to the power of an Avid system yet (which, BTW, are often built on Macs)
    Last edited by homer; 04/19/2001 at 11:54 AM.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  3.    #83  
    Originally posted by homer
    Well, this is an interesting argument FOR the use of Macs. Macs, natively, can run Mac OS and Linux. (you used to be able to run BeOS until Apple dropped the ball on that one).
    What flavor of Linux can I throw on a partition? That would make me happier than trying to make it work on my old Leading Edge POS. How would I throw up an option screen to choose between them when booting up?
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #84  
    Originally posted by homer
    Well, this is an interesting argument FOR the use of Macs. Macs, natively, can run Mac OS and Linux. (you used to be able to run BeOS until Apple dropped the ball on that one).
    *shrug* BeOS is kinda taking themselves out of the big tournament from what I've seen.

    However, you can run Windows quite easily using Virtual PC. Of course, this is emulated, so you do take a bit performance hit...you are not going to run the latest 3-D video game an be as happy with that on your PC.
    Undoubtedly.

    The advantage of running Windows on a Mac is that you have an unlimited number of installs. You could install all releases of 95, 98, nt, 2K, etc. This makes the Mac a great testing platform for PC software. It sure beats having to partition your PC drive into 8+ partitions for every release of Windows.
    There are several Virtual PC type emulators available for both Windows and Linux platforms which bring this back to deuce, though (VMWare and BOCHS to name two).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  5. #85  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    What flavor of Linux can I throw on a partition? That would make me happier than trying to make it work on my old Leading Edge POS. How would I throw up an option screen to choose between them when booting up?
    YellowDog comes to mind. You've a PowerPC iMac? Do a search on powerpc linux or do some reading at http://linuxppc.org/.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6. #86  
    If digital video editing is your cup of tea then Mac's can't be beat. Every single currently shipping Mac is ready to capture amd edit DV out of the box. On the PC side there are a few options, but more than likely you will suffer some headaches installing the FireWire PCI card, drivers, and getting the software package to work. Sure it is possible to edit DV on both platforms, but if you want reliability, compatibility and ease of use a Mac is a better choice.
    <A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>
  7. #87  
    What flavor of Linux can I throw on a partition? That would make me happier than trying to make it work on my old Leading Edge POS.
    I think the leading Linuxes for Mac are Yellow Dog and Maclinux. Or, of course, you could run other flavors via Virtual PC

    As for swapping between the to OSes, I'm not exactly sure how that works. I have Linux running on an old P133 right now and I'd like to get it running on my old Mac 7200 as well.

    There are several Virtual PC type emulators available for both Windows and Linux platforms which bring this back to deuce, though
    Can you tell me more about the one for Windows? Right now, to test our software, we have a partitioned PC with 4 or 5 clean installs of windows. This works OK, but usually at least one of the installs gets corrupted about once a month. That's why I've been doing more of this type of testing on the Mac, as it is so much easier to add another Windows install to VPC than to have to add another drive partition. If there is a product as nice as VPC for the PC, I'd certainly like to try it out.

    *shrug* BeOS is kinda taking themselves out of the big tournament from what I've seen.
    Well, that's true...though it's a bit of a bummer...it is a nice OS. However they came out just before apple released OS X (rumour has it that BeOS was one of the options that Apple was looking at when they were looking for a new OS...they, of course, settled on NeXT), and just before Linux sort of took off in a big way.

    I think they are trying to turn BeOS into a netpliance OS. I wish them luck...they do have a good product. (but, then again, so did IBM with OS/2)
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  8. #88  
    Originally posted by homer
    I think the leading Linuxes for Mac are Yellow Dog and Maclinux. Or, of course, you could run other flavors via Virtual PC
    I vaguely remember Maximum Linux (R.I.P.) having an article about this exact scenario running RedHat 6.x.

    Can you tell me more about the one for Windows?
    VMWare runs on both Windows and Linux. Personally, I've only worked with the Linux version (to run an NT partition), but they're supposedly the same.

    Right now, to test our software, we have a partitioned PC with 4 or 5 clean installs of windows. This works OK, but usually at least one of the installs gets corrupted about once a month. That's why I've been doing more of this type of testing on the Mac, as it is so much easier to add another Windows install to VPC than to have to add another drive partition. If there is a product as nice as VPC for the PC, I'd certainly like to try it out.
    VMWare should be right up your alley then. It basically sets up a virtual x86 machine with an emulated partition (really just a big file on your hard drive) and user-configurable options for memory usage, etc. It only runs on NT/2000, but the virtual pcs can be whatever OS you'd like. You can download a 30-day trial at http://www.vmware.com/download/.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #89  
    Toby:

    Thanks for the info!
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  10. #90  
    Blah blah blah.

    Boring.

    I think the whole argument is dull. Just as you can make any point you wish using statistics...you can also make any point you wish with value. You can't measure cost in just cash alone...and this whole PC/Mac thing is soooo old. I've been having this argument for about 10 years now...owning Macs for 20 and PCs for 5.

    But since we got a little off topic...let me answer a previous comment made earlier...

    Mac does have some great out-of-the-box video editing...however...


    when you start to get into video and animation...even interactive...you are talking to an old dog (mFactory anyone?). Many people don't even remember what an AB Roll is. I owned Avid and Media 100 systems when they ran in the $100k range. Let me tell you...the reason you buy a $18,000 editing system for a Mac now instead of just using a Mac off the shelf is because professional video editors have certain imaging standards that are not built into the motherboard of a regular or even enhanced computer. For one thing, you can't just edit video on a Mac. Color on a computer screen and the way it displays that information is different than TV. So you need a special type of NTSC or PAL monitor for playback. You never master something without playback on one of these. And...Macs don't have the ability for playback on these out of the box in real-time. Even if you plan to burn DVDs on a Mac, you MUST ensure the color is correct. I have never seen a regular Mac do this type of real-time rendering for preview at full screen. Then there is the issue of output to a deck...the Mac output cannot compare to digital output to a digital deck. These systems have all sorts of output choices you don't see in a Mac...because not everyone needs it. I have yet to see a Mac off the shelf be able to control a digital deck without a third party solution.


    Next is time. These editing systems have special codecs and their own processors to allow people to digitize and render at certain quality levels and speeds. I'd like to see you render a 30 second transition on a Media 100 or Avid system on a Mac...and compare it to a transition rendered on a Mac using only it's own CPU. Hope you have some time. In order to do real-time effects at the highest quality, you need a system like Avid or Media 100. An old AB roll system had very little image loss...and video people are very sensitive of loss...since when it is broadcast it must meet certain standards. A Mac off the shelf cannot handle loss-less editing with its own hardware and a single hard drive.

    When digitizing...these Avid and Media 100 systems won't drop one single frame and can capture at even a 1:1 compression ratio. Unlike a regular Mac they run on drive arrays that have no speed imparements like regular drives. Any professional who wants real-time editing and loss-less quality knows he needs a system like this. I will admit, that the Mac today can do more than these systems did 7 years ago...but you cannot replace a Mac with a good editing system for output, input, rendering, and editing. They will chew any off-the-shelf Mac up and spit it out. On last thing to keep in mind, when doing video animation...if you render animation for a 30 second spot...at video quality (30fps)...you have to render two frames each second (interlacing) which means that you have about 1800 frames to render...any idea how much time that can take? Depending on the transition or the polygons (3d)...if you don't have some type of acceleration...you are gonna be sorry.

    Macs are great...PCs are great...I used to be a rabid Mac defender...and I love Apple...I won't go back to PCs again...but that is preference...and perceived value...and it just doesn't matter to anyone else what I want. PC people think Apple people are snobs...Apple people get ticked and fight back and think PC people are also snobs...well I've been on both discussion boards...and they're both nuts. People are very passionate about their technology...and that is fine...but at the end of the day...it just doesn't matter one bit.

    Without civility and respect in a debate...both sides look like morons. We might as well run for Congress.
    I saw that everyone else had a signature and I felt left out, so here is mine.
  11. #91  
    agraham999,

    I realize your post was directed at multiple others, but regarding mine:

    I wasn't talking about making broadcast quality video for an important client. I'm talking about things like home video use, educational purposes and really any kind of computer distributed video (games, internet video, tutorials etc.).

    I am well aware of the advantages of an AVID system, I've used them to a limited extent and they serve a purpose. The average consumer wouldn't need them though, and I don't think anyone buys a personal computer with the intent of replacing a room of high end video editing systems.

    Having said that I still think the quality of video created using a Mac and FCP is very good. Color might not be 100% perfect, transitions take a while to render and my only form of output is back to my DV camcorder (and then to VHS), but things look pretty damn good to me.

    To an amateur most of the stuff you mentioned doesn't matter.
    <A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>
  12. #92  
    In the video lab at school, the G4's have something called Blue Ice.

    Excuse my ignorance, I think it is called Blue Ice and it is to render video at speeds the processor couldn't ever come close. I have since left the major since they implemented this equipment so I don't know the exact specs.
  13. #93  
    Originally posted by agraham999
    Blah blah blah.

    Boring.

    I think the whole argument is dull. {...}
    You know, Alan, this is a bit hypocritical considering your closing:

    Without civility and respect in a debate...both sides look like morons. We might as well run for Congress.
    Chiding people on being more civil and respectful is one thing, but starting off as you did and then doing it is a bit off, unless of course you were starting your campaign now.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  14. #94  
    This thread is 7 pages long, however, on the first page, it only shows 6 in the menu. I have to go to page 6 and THEN I see the link to page 7.

    Just thought I'd point that out in case it was a bug.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  15. #95  
    I just click on "last page" and it brings me right to page 7. I noticed the limit on the number of pages displayed in other longer threads too. Annoying, but seems to be part of the BB software.
    <A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>
  16. #96  
    Go to prefs and increase the number of posts per page. This thread is only 3 pages long for me. That should keep you from hitting the page limit.
  17. #97  
    Can you point to a link? I haven't heard of Klipsch. Living in the boonies is getting to be a pain
    Good God man!!! Klipsch make the best PC speakers...can you say 400 watts of power?

    Go to www.maximumpc.com and EVERYONE there is crazy about them.

    http://206.57.19.206/FMPro?-db=maxpc...d=33507&-find=

    It received a "Kick *** 10"

    That review was made in January of 2000 when they first came out. Klipsch has recently redone the speakers...adding a headphone jack, tweaked the internal wiring, upgraded the sound by adding a new decoder, and MaximumPC reviewed them again...

    Another "Kick *** 10"

    Klipsch make GREAT if not THE BEST speakers for PC and Stereos....

    www.klipsch.com

    You need to get up to speed!
    <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" id="all" leftmargin="10" topmargin="10" marginwidth="10" marginheight="10" link="#000000" vlink="#000000" alink="#000000">

    <img src="http://www.msnbc.com/d/v/130x100/n_bush_accept_001213.jpg">

    <br><b><font color="#0000FF" size="2">Proudly led by "Dubya"</font></b></center>

    </body>
  18. #98  
    New Windows XP copy screen
    Attached Images Attached Images
  19. #99  
    Originally posted by yaz320
    Klipsch make GREAT if not THE BEST speakers for PC and Stereos....

    www.klipsch.com
    Oops...thanks for noticing that and posting a reply. I missed it for some reason.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  20. #100  
    Klipsch can apparently make great speakers, but they can't seem to make a usable web site.

    Damn Java navigation.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions