Apple PowerBook G4 questions...

[mountainman 0]

Hey there guys.
This is for all of you Apple users or those who know about them.
Laura and I went into the Apple store yesterday and, WOW, those computers are awesome.
No longer will I be putting down that company. (Besides the ridiculous prices.)
Anyway, I was checking on their website store and am coming up with some of their system specs and they do NOT look very impressive:
PowerBook G4
Summary
• 667MHz PowerPC G4 @ 133MHz
• 1GB SDRAM - 2 SO DIMMs
• 48GB Ultra ATA drive
• AirPort Card
• Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
• Extra Battery - PowerBook
• Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X
• DVD-ROM/CD-RW Combo
Subtotal $3,828.00
Here is my real question: How does this compare with a PC with, say, 2Ghz Pentium 4 processor.
It seems that the best of Apple is only 1/3 the speed of PCs.
Is there something that I don't know/understand here about the performance of the Apple?
I am starting to look at laptops for work and future video editing and those Apples (with Final Cut Pro) are looking pretty sweet.
Thanks!
JumpinDuo.com...come and sign the guestbook.

[quade 4]

The way that data is processed on an Apple machine, especially a G4, is very different and much more efficient than on the Intel boxes.
Try going HERE for more information about the dual processor "Tower" machines.
HERE for information specific to the PowerBook G4s.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[indyz 1]

Like Quade said, PowerPC and Intel architectures are an apples-and-oranges kind of thing. I'd suggest heading back to the Apple store and playing some more. You will probably notice that the processor is quite responsive. There is no real accurate way to say that a PowerPC at X MHz performs like a Pentium at Y MHz.
Try running a copy of Microsoft Office and Photoshop on a demo unit if the have them installed. Both programs are fairly resource intensive and should give you a good idea of the power of the system, especially if you have experience with those programs back in Intel-Land.
--
Brian

[imdskydiver 0]

Check out the Megahertz myth at ,
http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/

[james1010 0]

As far as desktop publishing and video editing is concerned, Apple has pretty much cornered the market. The prices seem ridiculous until you use one. The internal structure of the Apple allows for very fast image and editing work. The MHz myth site is an excellent explanation. I work on Apples all day for a prepress shop, and wouldn't think of purchasing anything but.

[mountainman 0]

Wow!!! Thank you guys very much for the useful information and the websites.
I assumed there had to be an efficiency issue here between Intel and Apple processors.
I was playing with them quite a lot using iMovie and it seems to run VERY fast.
Do you know if, while using a PowerBook G4, do you have to "render" the workspace for EVERYTHING like when using Premire on a PC (without the $1000 card)?
Seemed like it was doing everything on the fly.
Thanks a million!!
(God, I can't wait to start editing my own videos.)
JumpinDuo.com...come and sign the guestbook.

[quade 4]

iMovie renders everything, but renders fairly quickly and depending on the G4 you have it could be pretty dang quick.
Final Cut Pro renders according to how fast the processor is. If you have dual G4 processors on a "Tower" most of the effects render in real time. I can't say specifically which would be turned on for real time in the PowerBook G4, but I'd think you'd at least get dissolves in real time.
My suggestion would be to go down to a store and try it out running Final Cut Pro.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[mountainman 0]

Awesome, Quade.
Thanks a lot! I was hoping you would see my thread here and pipe in.
It still boggles my mind that Intel and AMD are pushing 2.5 mHz and still can't get it as good as Apple.
Oh well. On my next trip to Columbus, I'm going to have to start playing some more with them.
Thanks again and blue skies,
Brandon
JumpinDuo.com...come and sign the guestbook.

[gale 0]

Yup, definately try running the actual software you want to use before you buy. I do think that if you're going to mostly be working with graphics (video) then a Mac is probably your best bet. Mac's, while more expensive, do have their place. (I'm a PC gal myself, but I'm not predjudiced.)
Gale
Life's not worth living if you can't feel alive

[gale 0]

Well, I don't want to get too technical (I'm a comp sci major) but the way the two processors process instructions is completely different. In fact, the instructions themselves differ drastically. Macs have a RISC architecture (Reduced Instruction Set) whereas intel has a CISC architecture (complex instruction set). Basically, Macs have a smaller group of hard wired instructions that run very fast while intel has a larger group of instructions that don't run quite as fast. So programming to take advantage of these differences makes the difference. It just gets more confusing from there. (Hence why half a course at school is devoted to such things.) Whomever said it's like comparing apples and oranges got it right. It's two completely different implementations of technology.
I think the main diffference for the price differential is due to the lack of Mac popularity. Enjoy the Mac for what it is good at! Gale
Life's not worth living if you can't feel alive

[mountainman 0]

Thanks for the quick explaination, Gale.
I just need to go to that store and ask for them to show me some of the programs.
Also, one of my buddies who is graduating this year in communications has a PowerBook with Final Cut Pro.
Also, he just bought a new $5000 digital camera.
Hopefully he can show me a couple of things on that. Thanks again!
Brandon
JumpinDuo.com...come and sign the guestbook.