Powerbook vs. Dell Mac OS X Boot

oh whatever. windows is a POS operating system and it always will be. Im a windows user, but im smart enough to know osX is shittons more efficient than windows

holy crap a stripped down version of OS X boots up faster than the full blown one with hundreds of applications installed?!??! SHOCKING!!

“OK, you want comparison that is even? I have a Dell Dimension 8400 3.4GHz P4 with 2GB of Ram. My buddy is a video editing geek, he has a dual 2.3GHz G5 with 4GB of ram and my Dell still boots to the desktop faster than his G5. And by a considerable amount of time I might add. In the tests we have run, my Dell is booting 12-16 seconds faster that his G5.”

What a BS comment of course it going to boot fast its got higher ghz. Try video edit on that then switching apps though, the dell will freeze the Mac will handel it much better. You would need hyperthreading support or even a better a new intel dual core proc.

A Mac is not meant to be switched off and rebooted. Never heard of “stop” mode?

I have read dual 2,3 ghz so in some manner thats 4,6 ghz in total against the dell 3,4 ghz, he he (i know you can’t add the ghz to obtain final power… but a dual 64 bits baby can’t get it against intel)

i understand all that stuff is gonna be a pain for long life mac lovers but reality is knocking to the door, IBM is spanked up by Intel.

Oh, and last comment, i can’t imagine a pentium M with OSX, even more power with less power consumption.

Interesting.
But what do you mean by: “I have Dreamweaver MX 2004, Adobe Create Suite”.

For Intel OS X?

I’ve missed some news, lately…

I’d say in this case the Mac won.

I agree, because they’re both Macs.

Hey Steven,

When Apple sues your ass in the middle of the night for stealing their OS, I’ll be listening for your “wah wah wah”.

U guyz R l@m3

Yeah. I love to see the video of you going to jail.

If your Powerbook takes that long to load the apple screen, it has some problems, mine boots to the desktop in like 5 seconds max.

Not to get even lamer, but the powerbook isn’t plugged in. If it has default energy saver settings, the processor is running at reduced speed. Not sure the ratios, but plugging in my Powerbook doubles my game frame rates.

I thought that was one of the beefs with Windows from the MAC perspective. MACheads always say how much cleaner & efficient MAC OS is than Win XP. It doesn’t get bogged down like XP does when you install lots of stuff (you know, Win XP’s registry). Now a DELL kicks the crap out of MACs hardware & the excuse is a clean install versus a loaded up install, give me a break. I had a good laugh at this demonstration & I am sure I will have many more as the APPLE continues to get eaten.

I use linux and am not partial really to either windows or apple, but I do have to say that this test is a bit unfair, for all of the various reasons that people have said. Every one picks out one reason why it’s unfair, and the next person will say why that one reason isn’t enough. However, if you put them all together, yes it’s enough to make that much of a difference. Personally however, I couldn’t give a damn about boot time as long as it is with in reason, and it works clean and fast while it is booted.

“Not to get even lamer, but the powerbook isn’t plugged in. If it has default energy saver settings, the processor is running at reduced speed. Not sure the ratios, but plugging in my Powerbook doubles my game frame rates.”

you can set to low automatic high my friend.

I can guarantee you that the Dell does not have all the device drivers loaded like the powerbook does. I have it running on a Dell 8400 and it has generic video drivers, sound doesn’t work… all of these devices would be working on a powerbook so yeah the powerbook is going to be slower.

WHO CARES? macs are supposed to be kept up and running anyway. for real. you shouldn’t turn off your mac unless you have to. macs run maintenance in the background in the wee hours. if you turn it off or put it to sleep then it can’t run said maintenance. just leave it on.
good lord. chill out.

“WHO CARES? macs are supposed to be kept up and running anyway. for real. you shouldn’t turn off your mac unless you have to. macs run maintenance in the background in the wee hours. if you turn it off or put it to sleep then it can’t run said maintenance. just leave it on.
good lord. chill out.”

Exactly. I never shut down my Imac G5 unless it needs to be restarted. its been up and running like this since I got it. which was when they first came out. and it still boots fast. never timed it becuase im not that anal to worry about boot times.

I’ve never turned off any Mac that I’ve owned. Seems like a pretty biased “test” if you ask me. Of course a desktop plugged into the wall is going to beat a laptop that has to boot everything running on a battery.

Even un-biased tests like XBench clearly show that jury-rigged installations of OS X86 with P4s clearly beat the pants off a similarly configured G5 system. All though a laptop versus a desktop is not a fair comparison, the PC just about always beats the mac, as far as raw performance.

OMG, the point is, its NOT a fair test, and you know why that is? BECAUSE APPLE HARDWARE SUCKS. You can’t get a fair test, BECAUSE APPLE HARDWARE IS BAD. So the question is, which would you rather have, a perfectly ordinary (non-stripped) version of OS X that runs GREAT on x86 machines, or the SAME version of OS X that runs slower on Apple hardware, with NO concievable advantage on that machine. You can get the BEST apple machine that they make, and i will get an AMD X2, 2x SLi 6800, as much 533 Mhz RAM as the mobo will hold, liquid cooling, and it will blow the CRAP out of it. The point is, that if you take the best mac, and the best x86, the mac is gonna suck.

You guys are totally missing everything. Its not the hard ware that makes it a Mac. Its the OS and all the sweet apps that come with it. Even depending on what IBM macs u start OSX up on it will load with different speeds. You guys that are fighting that this is a mac and pc battle are missing the point. this is an IBM vs Intel. And now yes Intel has way better chips.

“I thought that was one of the beefs with Windows from the MAC perspective. MACheads always say how much cleaner & efficient MAC OS is than Win XP. It doesn’t get bogged down like XP does when you install lots of stuff (you know, Win XP’s registry). Now a DELL kicks the crap out of MACs hardware & the excuse is a clean install versus a loaded up install, give me a break. I had a good laugh at this demonstration & I am sure I will have many more as the APPLE continues to get eaten.”

Theres more to it than that dumbass. A loaded up install will not slow down usage once it boots and you are using it. But during bootup, with extras installed, there’s going to be more that needs to be started, plus drivers that the Intel version most likley doesn’t have. Any moron should know that.

Oh, and don’t forget that the Dell’s specs are much better than the Macs. I guarantee you if you had an evenley matched Mac and x86 machine, both with fresh, clean installs, the Mac would win.

MAC nerds….always funny
if you say something bad about their computer they act like you said something bad about their mother…that computer aint your mother. its just some cables and stuff haha NERDS

I think the really funny thing about all the mac users whining, is that guess what, your mac will someday have the exact same hardware as that dell. the G family is going away, and will most likely never return, and unless you plan on hanging on to your old hardware like some lost civilization as the rest of the world and technology passes you by, you’ll be using this stuff to. its going to be an x86 world for a while, so why not enjoy the benefits of a much larger (more diversified) hardware base, and learn to think for yourselves for once.

I for one love the choices that the PC has always offered. (what, I get to CHOOSE what type of *insert any hardware here* I get to put in my mac, and it doesnt have to be apple certified, and wont cost me an extra leg???).

if all the people complaining here will take a second and get out of their narrow minded (mac) thinking, then you’ll start to see the benefits that this offers, mostly in the cheeper 3rd party hardware area.

Blah with all of the fighting , I think that this rocks I am not going to spend another red cent on Apple’s over- priced hardware just to get the best OS IMO, Can not wait until Apple will just throw in the towel and open the os for everyone.

it’s plain and simple: apple wouldn’t be switching to intel chips if they weren’t superior. I’m a mac guy and I have enough sense to tell you that. not to mention that my dual G5 1.8mhz is a piece of shite that can’t even play 30fps full screen video without totally droppiing frames while my bottom of the line dell plays the same file effortlessly with it’s stock video card. I mean, come on, that’s just pathetic…

I normally boot my Macs only when I install OSX software updates that require it (maybe once every few months). Otherwise, I just put ‘em to sleep when I’m not using them (making my effective boot time a couple of seconds). Even if I did do a full boot regularly, a few seconds over those months is laughably trivial.

So, it’s just silly to compare boot time statistics. If you want to compare the speed of the machines running OSX, then do so once they’re up and running. Stay in the OS (not running apps) and make it jump through some hoops. Which will be faster? Beats me–but this boot time fuss is hardly worth a mention.

the gcc compiler used to build os-x is generic with a ppc backend. the compiler doesn’t even begin to fully exploit the PPC’s 32 working registers.

gcc does optimize fully fot x86.

a really fair uP dragrace would have the PPC running an os built with a compiler optimized for it.

Thank you “another comment” guy! You have elevated the level of discourse in one fell swoop.

A very important part of what makes a Mac a Mac is the OS.

Another very important part is the hardware. With Apple, you get tight integration of software and hardware.

The Dell? At best it’s a pig that’s learned to sing.

Yep, that’ll do pig. That’ll do.

do you all realize you are having a pissing contest with the same dick?

pc with OSX vs apple with OSX

think about… it AAPL wins here no matter what.

Um, you might be misinterpreting boot times of a clean system vs. one that has “lots of programs and has been running for a while” if you’re coming from the windoze world. Applications aren’t allowed to screw with the operating system on the Mac, so it really doesn’t mater how full your hard disk is (provided you still have swap file space). The difference in load times between a generic and specific video driver would be trivial as would loading an additional mouse driver, etc. Keep in mind that Mac OS X comes loaded to the gills with additional fonts, languages, drivers, and kernal extensions already.

Since it takes root level access to a Mac to modify the system software, the integrity of the operating system does not degrade over time (baring hard disk failure). Because of its UNIX roots, most people don’t even shut down, they just put their Macs to sleep and regularly run for months between reboots; so most Mac users probably couldn’t even tell you how long it takes their Mac to boot.

The difference in boot time probably has to do with hard disk speed, bus speed/architecture, and system speed than processor speed.

right now, the windows version of OS X is ‘stripped down’, bare bones. Of course it’s going to load quickly. Duh.
I use windows machines often, unfortunately. Macs rule, it’s such a better experience.