PDA

View Full Version : Stupid PC journalists reviewing Macs



OziMac
13th November 2004, 01:02 PM
In this weekend's Australian Financial Review (to which I can't post a link because it's so hoity toity that even its web-based service is subscription-only) I read a review by John Davidson on the G5 2.5GHz dualie.

I won't go into the specifics but essentially, while he thought it was awesome, he said that he 'would never buy one' not because of the price tage, but because Virtual PC did not run fast enough on it.

To reach this conclusion he tried running Photoshop filters on it - he ran one on an AthLon that took 11 seconds, one on the Mac version of Photoshop that took 6 seconds, and then one on Virtual PC using the Windows version that took 40 seconds. That is his beef. Because the Mac running an emulator can't run as fast as his shitty PC using native software - not once in his review did he acknowledge the fact that to achieve the same results he didn't have to use Virtual PC but could far more wisely and efficiently do his work on the OS X Photoshop.

A few weeks ago I read a US review of the Powermac G5 that was similar - reviewed it entirely from the perspective of someone who would only buy it to use Virtual PC. And there was a Singaporean review of the iMac G5 recently that bagged it for only performing as well as a 'mid-range PC' - never acknowledging that it was a consumer-level PC and not a pro workstation.

This kind of one-sided crap written in 'reputable' media is what propagates all this stupid anti-Mac sentiment amongst the wider market. I'm willing to concede the fact that not all Windows programs have Mac versions, and as such Virtual PC is sometimes a necessary beast, the fact that these idiots feel themselves so chained to using Windows and Windows-based software (most of which is probably pirated at home, and over-expensively licensed in business) that they are not even willing to acknowledge the fact that OS X-based software exists and in many cases (Office, Adobe products etc) far outshines their Windows counterparts, really really irks me - not to mention that it is pathetic journalism.

Sorry, I had to vent - I'm sure others feel similarly here. :)

decryption
13th November 2004, 01:07 PM
Meh, let them continue in their Windows-esque fantasy. Let Microsoft take them for a ride. It's their own fault for not seeing the better option.

Let them enjoy Windows while they still can, because eventually, it will just turn into a greater lump of crap than what it already is :)

Phillip
13th November 2004, 01:11 PM
I feel like buying that guy a brain. He needs one.

Seriously I really really get annoyed when journalists get things really wrong. Mac Journalist SOMETIMES get things wrong about the PC. Theres even a particular site I really hate with Mac Users bashing Microsoft/PCs 24/7. But when it comes to PC users getting it wrong with Macs most of them can't be more wrong. Most of them I have read that are crap "review" the wrong things. eg. treating the iMac G5 as if it was a Top of the line machine.

Thats why its more interesting reading users who have used both Mac and PC to do reviews. Not switchers really, or stupid "journalists"

OziMac
13th November 2004, 01:15 PM
Also stupidly they list his email address and ask for feedback - jdavidson@afr.com.au. Unfortunately, I can't imagine him getting pelted by requests to do more research by Macheads is really going to do much to change his mind or fix what he writes/has written.

Danamania
13th November 2004, 01:25 PM
This makes sense looking at the position of someone who has a PC, has a vast library of software, and is looking to move to a mac.

A version of Photoshop from a decent spec windows machine, no matter which way it compares to a mac version, just plain isn't going to run faster on a mac, fullstop. The mac version can run quicker, yes, but when someone has a $2k computer and $15k worth of software, switching from the PC to the Mac really isn't viable without a long term upgrade plan, and that may very well need VPC to run as well as the PC.

Many people wouldn't have that investment - hell, many people can make do just fine with the mac apps that come with the machine, but not all. There are even sidegrade plans for some apps to move from the PC to the mac version at a minimal cost, but again not all. The issue of VPC speed there is very relevant.

dana

OziMac
13th November 2004, 02:13 PM
Dana, as I said - I'll give them enough space to consider proprietary Windows-only software. I don't think people such as this really should be considering a switch without a long term plan. But that's hardly what they were discissing in this article. The issue involved Photoshop - hardly a program foreign to Mac - being slowed down twice: once due to using VPC, and twive due to using the Windows version.

But let's look at a few assumptions being made there - not everyone has a 'huge library' of PC software, let alone software that has no Mac equivalent. People don't spend $15,000 on software unless they are computer freaks or a small business - and in the latter case, would still have to upgrade sporadically for prices in the same range as that too, so the price issue is a little overblown there.

The point is that of course there is a fractional portion of the market that may need to use VPC - and perhaps an even smaller, slightly nuttier one that needs to use Photoshop for Windows on VPC - but to analyse a machine that is capable of so much more for so many others solely from that perspective, without even lipservice to other modes of functionality, is misleading in the extreme.

Danamania
13th November 2004, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by OziMac@Nov 13 2004, 02:13 PM
But let's look at a few assumptions being made there - not everyone has a 'huge library' of PC software, let alone software that has no Mac equivalent.
That's why I said this bit :)

> Many people wouldn't have that investment - hell, many people can make do just fine with the
> mac apps that come with the machine, but not all.

adamjc
13th November 2004, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by danamania@Nov 13 2004, 03:24 PM
That's why I said this bit :)

> Many people wouldn't have that investment - hell, many people can make do just fine with the
> mac apps that come with the machine, but not all.
I know that i would get by with the many pre-installed Mac Apps for the start.

Then slowly move into other apps. On my Windows PC i only really use Microsoft Office and iTunes. The only two software packages i use the most. Bar my anti-virue and Internet Security Software. :o

I would however like to get into web design, so would buy a software package, but only for the Mac. B)


-Adam.

elvis
13th November 2004, 10:11 PM
You all know my opinion on people who think they *NEED* microsoft. My opinion of journalists is pretty much the same. Combine the two, and I could bicth for a year on the stupidity of it all.

So yeah, that's my comment without commenting. :)

zefi
14th November 2004, 12:05 AM
And who made Virtual PC?

Exactly. I rest my case.

elvis
14th November 2004, 05:54 AM
Originally posted by zefi@Nov 14 2004, 12:05 AM
And who made Virtual PC?
Connectix. They sold it to Microsoft early 2003. :)

zefi
14th November 2004, 10:11 AM
I should have said, who makes it now. But it's all a conspiracy!! :D

pipsqeek
14th November 2004, 12:08 PM
And that's only the things you hear and see.

pipsqeek