Excuse me?

Did you not read what I posted?

Honestly, why should a Mac be faster than a PC?

Is it the logo?

Huh?? No, it’s not the logo. It’s the irony. Yes, I know that inside that shiny MacBook Pro are industry-standard components. But, I don’t know, it’s just ironic. That’s all.

Is it more ironic that Apple, a company that many have said make great hardware, made a rather poor laptop when using the same parts as everyone else.

Other than the nice keyboard the MBP falls short.  Short battery life, low-res screen, weak wireless, heat problems, expensive, and average to poor performance (under OS X compared to Windows), speaker problems, no modem or S-video out, weak gaming performance (due to OS X’s horrible OpenGL implementation), only 2 USB’s, low res camera, non-upgradable processor, no 7200rpm hard drive option, no surround sound (although Intel provides it for free in their chipsets), and still shipping with a one button trackpad.

Informer, you keep pressing the code button. Next time, try pressing the button to the left of code.

weak gaming performance due to OS X’s horrible OpenGL implementation

I’m not so sure about that.

modo does really, really well on OS X.

There’s more to a game’s performance than you are leading us to believe.

why won’t the standard ATI drivers work?

Because they are a piece of crap.

There’s more to a game’s performance than you are leading us to believe.

LOL!  They’re using the same chips now so there should be no more excuses.

Even the Cinebench OpenGL scores are still horrible.

Not only do games run faster under Windows OpenGL but under Linux with OpenGL as well.

Don’t try to fake the funk.

Don’t try to fake the funk…

...an a nasty dunk - Shaq O’Neal.

So the only aspect of a computer game’s performance is OpenGL and the hardware?

Sooooo, drivers have nothing to do with the performance?

The application itself has nothing to do with the performance?

The fact that a game is done in DirectX first and then ported to the Mac into OpenGL has nothing to do with it?

Kuaidang, I know you aren’t this ignorant about computer science, so I have to believe that you are being disingenuous.

modo was created from scratch on OS X and the code base is almost identical with Windows. It uses OpenGL and it is really, really fast in OS X. I think one of the founders of the company says it’s faster on the Mac, IIRC.

And what do you think is one of the new features of the latest version of Lightwave? Improved OpenGL performance.

And what do you think the latest update to Doom III for the Mac does? Improves performance.

Why don’t you stop pulling stuff out of your ass just to slam Apple and just be honest and objective in your opinions? I’m quite sure that if the tables were turned, you would be telling me everything I’m telling you now—that OpenGL and hardware are not the only things that affect an application or game’s performance. I mean, that’s just absurd.

Sooooo, drivers have nothing to do with the performance?

The drivers are part of Apple’s “OpenGL implementation”.  Apple maintains extremely strict control over their video drivers.

The fact that a game is done in DirectX first and then ported to the Mac into OpenGL has nothing to do with it?

And what about games that are programmed in OpenGL on both platforms?  Again, nearly all games run faster in Linux than they do on the Mac.

And what do you think the latest update to Doom III for the Mac does? Improves performance.

Interestingly enough, it doesn’t improve performance enough to compete with Windows systems.

Why don’t you stop pulling stuff out of your ass just to slam Apple and just be honest and objective in your opinions? I’m quite sure that if the tables were turned, you would be telling me everything I’m telling you now—that OpenGL and hardware are not the only things that affect an application or game’s performance. I mean, that’s just absurd.

I didn’t say they were the only things to affect performance.  But there OpenGL implementation still sucks, particularly for gaming.

Even the creators of Doom III noted the massive performance differences between Windows and Mac were a result of Apple’s OpenGL.  They said it could get better overtime but it would probably never be as fast as on Windows.

Is that not an honest and objective (from the Doom programmers)?
How many OpenGL apps and games can you name that run as fast on the Mac as they do on either Windows or Linux (X86)?  A couple.  How many can we find on Widnows and Linux that absolutely destroy the performance on the Mac?  A ton.

Nuff said.

http://www.macologist.org/showthread.php?t=1370

The drivers are part of Apple’s “OpenGL implementation�.

No, OpenGL is an API that the drivers call to.

Apple maintains extremely strict control over their video drivers.

Yeah, no kidding, but that has nothing to do with the fact that video card drivers are separate from the OpenGL API and driver updates (on Windows and Mac) can affect performance.

And what about games that are programmed in OpenGL on both platforms?

So all OpenGL games have the same performance on the same platform?

Interestingly enough, it doesn’t improve performance enough to compete with Windows systems.

Red herring.

I didn’t say they were the only things to affect performance.

Yeah, that’s what you are arguing. Once again, you are trying to change what you were arguing because you are losing the debate.

Your whole argument in this thread is OpenGL on the Mac sucks and that’s the reason games are slower on the Mac with the same “chips”.

Nuff said.

http://www.macologist.org/showthread.php?t=1370

Your link only proves what I said, which is that there is more to it than just OpenGL.

“The biggest remaining optimization is below the surface of OpenGL, between the framework/drivers and hardware. This is where the PC gains the most advantage.

So that quote from your own link says that the biggest advantage the PC has has nothing to do with OpenGL at all.

The good news on all of these fronts… is that Doom 3 is such a highly visible benchmarking application, Apple/ATI/NVIDIA/Aspyr are all going to be continuing to work on increasing performance over the coming months/years. Just like what happened with Quake 3, the Mac OS matured, video card drivers got more optimized, and the game was tweaked so that eventually Mac performance is now as good or better than comparable PC hardware…â€?

Quake III is as good or better performing on the Mac than PC...with Apple’s OpenGL. Well gee, that goes against everything you are saying, doesn’t it?

Other than the nice keyboard the MBP falls short.  Short battery life, low-res screen, weak wireless, heat problems, expensive, and average to poor performance (under OS X compared to Windows), speaker problems, no modem or S-video out, weak gaming performance (due to OS X’s horrible OpenGL implementation), only 2 USB’s, low res camera, non-upgradable processor, no 7200rpm hard drive option, no surround sound (although Intel provides it for free in their chipsets), and still shipping with a one button trackpad.

I wouldn’t call 3 and a half hours short. There are many PC laptops that don’t even have that listed at their battery life by the manufacturer (which is always 1-2 hours longer than the real world battery life). Also, where did you hear the wireless thing? Because I heard that the wireless in the MBP is actually extremely good because they’ve put the antennae behind rubber bits on the hinge.

The expensiveness can be argued against. Absolutely, yes it is more expensive. Relatively though, when you consider the value of the likes of MagSafe, the back lit keyboard, the sudden motion sensor, iLife etc. then you realise that while it does cost more than most laptops it does offer more than most. Still.. I still went for the 17” iMac, extra gig of ram, 800MHz TiBook instead of a 1.83Ghz MBP

The upgradable chip and surround sound aren’t that big issues because it’s a laptop. Laptops are generally things you don’t upgrade the chip on and that you don’t use the speakers in for listening to music, DVDs etc that often. Though I will say that the loss of S video is really bad (the modem not so as I haven’t used a modem since.... 2002? Maybe longer).

It’s a good thing photoshop is fast in XP on the MacBook, because there is no natively compiled OSX version.  Then you can’t use the touch pad, but touch pads are kinda useless for photoshop anyways.

3.5 hours is not short, but if that is the best a MB can do with all the new technology and a superior CPU chipset, then more work needs to be done.  I get over 5 hours on mine and its a 15.4 gaming notebook.

Someone mentioned Quake3 as running better on the Mac than PC, what a f#@$#@* joke seriously and I’m a Q3 player.  I should tell the competition that I have an advantage with a Mac hahah.  Well we’re not playing Q3 much these days since Quake4 is out and about, so how does Q4 runs on a Mac?  Damn this guy is funny.

Whatever, Macs sucks for games no matter what they have or do.

Someone mentioned Quake3 as running better on the Mac than PC

Yeah, Kuaidang’s link said that it ran as well or better on comparable hardware.

http://www.barefeats.com/image06/mvp-kak.gif

Whatever, Macs sucks for games no matter what they have or do.

If you say so.

Yeah, Kuaidang’s link said that it ran as well or better on comparable hardware.

Yeah, after over 5 years of optimising. 

Remember, it was Jobs who was desperate to push Quake3 to run on the first iMacs but hasn’t done anything since then.  Even he thinks gaming on a Mac sucks.

Yeah, after over 5 years of optimising.

Which proves my point about Apple’s OpenGL. I don’t expect you to get that, though. I don’t even think you read these things. I think you just skim them and then see something somebody says and you respond to it with no context to the entire thread.

Remember, it was Jobs who was desperate to push Quake3 to run on the first iMacs but hasn’t done anything since then.

I didn’t realize Quake 3 shipped in 1998.

But, again, what you are saying has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

Which proves my point about Apple’s OpenGL. I don’t expect you to get that, though. I don’t even think you read these things. I think you just skim them and then see something somebody says and you respond to it with no context to the entire thread.

Apple commits no development in openGL/gaming!  Just looking at their slow ACD monitors should clue you in on how slow and cumbersome Apple is for fast paced gaming.  Its no wonder Apple zealots keeps talking about console gaming.  Heck I know one of zealot who not only hates the XBOX because its from MS, he hates even the PS2, a Sony product.  His platform of choice is the Nintendo DS *rollseyes*
They just don’t know what gaming on a computer is like.

And besides, you seem to know what is right for everybody so I leave it at that like always.

I didn’t realize Quake 3 shipped in 1998.

Well some people are slow to catch on than others, that’s nobody’s fault and certainly not yours I’m sure.  Carmack also demonstrated Doom3 on the Macs but later stated that even the newer Macs are no good for the latest gaming technology.  I brought this up just in case you haven’t heard of Doom3.

But, again, what you are saying has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

Guess it started from here :

I dunno man, what do you say?  Did you see the Doom3 benchmark comparing the top systems? 

For gaming I know what’s going on, do you???

Apple commits no development in openGL/gaming!

You are wrong because you lump OpenGL into gaming. I’d argue that the majority of OpenGL applications on PC and Mac are not games (most games are DirectX). Correct me if I’m wrong.

But you still aren’t following the topic here and you are just throwing in bombs that bash Apple.

Carmack also demonstrated Doom3 on the Macs but later stated that even the newer Macs are no good for the latest gaming technology.  I brought this up just in case you haven’t heard of Doom3.

We are discussing OpenGL, not gaming.

Doom 3 shipped for the Mac at the same time as the PC, IIRC. I solved it, on my Mac.

But again, that has nothing to do with the quality of Apple’s OpenGL implementation.

Guess it started from here :

Which only proves my point that you don’t follow threads, you only scan and then argue a point that is out of context or irrelevant.

Let me type this really slowly so you can possibly get it this time:

1. Kuaidang said Apple’s implementation of OpenGL sucks.
2. He said that with Intel Macs using the same chips, Apple’s OpenGL is the reason games are slower on the Mac. (paraphrasing).
3. I said that there is more to a game’s performance than just OpenGL and the hardware.
4. He laughed.
5. I proved that there is more to a game’s performance than just OpenGL and the hardware, and with Kuaidang’s own link too.

Now, I don’t care what you think about gaming on the Mac. It’s irrelevant to the discussion.

But you still aren’t following the topic here and you are just throwing in bombs that bash Apple.

Am I?

Guess all OpenGL discussion leads to gaming so I guess I am on topic.

Doom 3 shipped for the Mac at the same time as the PC, IIRC. I solved it, on my Mac.
But again, that has nothing to do with the quality of Apple’s OpenGL implementation.

Congrats.  What was your score and post a screenshot of the ending (with the Mac in it).

But again, that has nothing to do with the quality of Apple’s OpenGL implementation.

Hahahahahahahahaha.  Check out Doom3 benchmark on barefeats.

Now, I don’t care what you think about gaming on the Mac. It’s irrelevant to the discussion.

Same “industry standard components” but “weaker performance” and “higher price”.

Sums up everything doesn’t it?

Guess all OpenGL discussion leads to gaming

You aren’t paying attention.

Check out Doom3 benchmark on barefeats

And you still aren’t grasping it at all.

If Quake 3 does really well on the Mac, which it does, that means OpenGL is not the reason Doom 3 doesn’t do as well. It’s the same OpenGL. You can’t say that OpenGL sucks on the Mac while looking at the Quake 3 benchmarks and it’s the same OpenGL Doom 3 is using.

blah blah blah.

You’re grasping at straws.

I order you to stay away from the computer and ‘ave a good day!

informer,

What’s the URL of your site? You said this site sucks and the coding sucks (paraphrasing a typic informer post) and that your site was much better, blah blah blah.

What’s the URL to your site?