“The Mac cult, er, I mean, community seems to be of two minds about the fact the Apple has switched to Intel processors for its computers: One group seems to believe that this is tantamount to sacrilege and Apple has forever sullied its good name. The other group thinks that this is just the right move to motivate all those poor Windows suckers (the meager other 89 percent of all computer users) to finally move over to the Mac platform–also known to some as ‘the light side of the force,'” Daniel A. Begun blogs for CNET in a post headlined with “Heresy: Windows XP performance on a Mac.”
Begun writes, “While my vastly oversimplified exaggerations might incur the wrath of die-hard Mac fanatics, the truth is that the rest of us can easily enjoy the best of both the Mac and Windows XP worlds on a single system–as long as that system is an Intel Mac.”
MacDailyNews Take: Best of both worlds? What exactly is best about the Windows XP world? More applications. That’s it. Some developers make Windows-only applications. Of course, if they’re good and/or popular apps, they are usually found on both platforms, but there are some exceptions (AutoCAD, custom apps for businesses, etc.). Mac OS X has tens of thousands of applications available, but, still, WIndows does have more. Everything else however, from UI to stability to security to attention to detail, is “best” in Mac OS X. So the only thing Windows offers that Mac doesn’t is that it’s more “popular,” therefore it has more applications. And Fords have more aftermarket cup holders available for them than BMWs do, too. So, ironically, the only reason for the use of the word “best” in “best of both worlds” in regard to Windows is based on quantity, not quality.
Begun continues, “CNET Labs ran a few of its home-brewed benchmarks on a MacBook Pro with the Mac OS, Boot Camp, and Parallels Desktop to see how application performance stacks up between the three.
For our tests we used a 17-inch Apple MacBook Pro , running Mac OS X Version 10.4.6, with a 2.16GHz Intel Core Duo processor, 2GB of DDR2 SDRAM, a 100GB 7,200rpm hard drive, and an ATI Radeon X1600 graphics chip. Boot Camp was set up with a 10GB partition for Windows XP; while the Windows XP virtual machine in Parallels was set up with a 20GB virtual disk.”
Full article and benchmarks here.
[UPDATE: 12:54pm EDT: Changed “Honda” to “Ford.” Honda was too good for the analogy.]
Advertisements:
• Introducing the super-fast, blogging, podcasting, do-everything-out-of-the-box MacBook. Starting at just $1099.
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
It’s not a “cult”, it’s severe brand loyalty and it didn’t get that way by accident either.
Anyone else sick of bloggers and the whole “blogosphere” phenomenon?
Apple switched to Intel because IBM has no interest in producing chips that will run cool enough in a desktop or laptop. They are going after the server market (where loud fans don’t matter as much) and the consumer electronics market (with chips that are too specialized and underpowered for desktop/laptop use). They have even said so in their press releases. The real question should be “Why did Apple go with Intel and not AMD?”
Let the speculation begin…..
Of course it could be argued that good things taste all the sweeter when your palette has been sullied with shit. Or something.
Let them (Windows users) install Windows on their Intel Mac’s if they want – it’ll still show up as a Mac sale in the market share numbers.
It’s is the same way that a PC user, (who, on buying a new Windows PC, erases Windows and installs Linux, or gets Linux installed when it’s bought) their purchase shows up as a PC (and therefore WIndows) on the market share numbers.
Apple then will find it a lot easier to switch that Windows user (who is running Windows on an Intel Mac) to the Mac, than before because they won’t have to purchase a new computer to do so.
He, Static Mesh – excellent quip. I’m using it from now on. Good stuff.
Anybody else scratching their heads over the choice of tasks used for “benchmarks?”
Utterly trivial and meaningless. Why do we keep on trying to convert them?Why??
cnet = shite
“It’s not a “cult”, it’s severe brand loyalty and it didn’t get that way by accident either.”
Tom Cruise
Scientology member
Oh yeah, I forgot…I am now revealing the truth behind my favorite cult – S-tology:
Stop by here
http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/fishman/ot3.html
Tom Cruise
Scientology member, famous movie star, dad
SBL2APL
An excellent add-on to one’s life description…
The author didn’t speculate why WInXP booted so much faster in Parallels. My last reboot was incredibly fast in Parallels. I cannot explain it either.
Yeah this article was a bit short on, well everything.
You Bastard T Cruise!
I went to the link and read all of that text.
Did anyone else notice how in the Photoshop benchmark test it says next to “Mac OX 10.4.6” that it’s Native. Yet under it, it says that is was an unfar test because the application isn’t Native yet. They try to make it seem that Macs suck at everything no matter what…… and that the only reason you should get a Mac is to run windows and have a fast PC box. God i hate CNet they always try to make it look like the Mac is the runner up compared to there lovely Winblows running Dull boxes…….. always with the unfair accusations.
I’ve been a Mac user since about 1988 (an SE/30) and I bought my first Mac in 1991 (Mac Classic). But, I use Chief Architect CAD software so I was happy to be able to install Windows on my 20″ iMac. I’ve tried the various CAD programs for the Mac but none have met my needs the way Chief Architect does.
It feels strange to boot into Windows on a Mac but I’m able to do my work without the need for a POS PC cluttering my office.
Watch that talk about Hondas….
You guys are like addicts – a big chip on your shoulder and you think the rest of the world is wrong and your right. That’s one of many accurate descriptoins of an addict; like you always know how they will act, what they will say, etc. Another characteristic of an addict.
Speaking from experience…
Typical CNET BS, their bias is almost beyond belief. Anyone who is stupid enough to believe what they print and uses that info to justify buying Windows or wintel hardware deserves what they get.
Look! Some of us don’t really have a choose, when we want to buy a Mac, but our school only allows WinXP…
Therefore it is the “Best of both worlds”!!!!!!!!!
I didn’t think that the article was all that bad. It would be nice to see how Parallels ranks with real PCs. I know it isn’t competition for the newest stuff but it seems to be on par with my Gateway PIII. (Now gathering dust in the corner.) As far as “Best of Both Worlds” goes I would say it’s the fact that you can access just about any document or media with a Parallels setup. I find it most useful when I’m web surfing and come across a media file that does not have Mac support. I simply copy the URL to Firefox in Windows and open it right up. That’s what I call “Best of Both Worlds”.
What’s best about both worlds? Getting your Windows-only company to pay for your MacBook by saying you’ll be running Windows. Isn’t it obvious?
So the Mac Restaurant has 20,000 items on its menu and the Windows menu has 100,000 items. I would still go where the food tastes better.
Nice analogy Davidlow. Did anyone notice something odd about the testing? They didn’t show how the MacBook Pro running Windows stacked-up against a traditional Windows box. Could it be the Mac runs Windows faster? Just wondering.
“The Mac cult, er, I mean, community seems to be of two minds about the fact the Apple has switched to Intel processors for its computers: One group seems to believe that this is tantamount to sacrilege and Apple has forever sullied its good name.”
This quote is bull. I don’t believe there is anyone who might still believe that Apple made a mistake switching from PowerPC to Intel. This is a lie propagated by quasi-reporters in order to stir controversy. There were some posts/articles when the Intel transition was first announced, but I think people have realized the potential of Intel’s chips with universal binaries, and people can’t wait to see universal binaries of their programs. These kind of reporters that try to pass off personal opinions as universal truths need to be chided.
Mac OX… Who doesn’t remember Mac OX?
Surprisingly, a search for “Mac OX” on google yields more than 3 millions results!
http://www.google.com/search?q="mac+ox"