Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
So show us some benchmarks done by Steve Jobs himself then for all we care. Anything to substantiate your claims other than "my computer is faster than my friend's PC". :roll:
If you want some technical reasoning as to why the PC is faster, you could start by investigating the integrated memory controller on the A64, along with its highly efficient design and massive FPU power.
If an A64 can beat two G5s, I'd love to see what it can do to Thin Lizzy's single G4.
So you want to see some benchmarks? Here you go. And I know what you are going to say. "Those are BS." So are the ones on that PC site. Also, why dont you prove that the A64 is faster. You seem to think they are, but you havent provided any evidence. What is your evidence going to be? A benchmark you found on the internet?
As I always say, every site shows something different. You cant possibly believe everything you read can you?
No, your benchmark (not plural) isn't BS, but it is comparing a DUAL G5 to a SINGLE A64. Two Opterons would dust two G5s in Photoshop. This has been repeatedly proven by numerous publications. The A64 is KNOWN to be the fastest CPU for Photoshop, gaming, and databases. The P4 has been repeatedly proven to be the fastest processor for video. All of these facts are widely accepted within the IT industry. This is why I feel you're being foolish making these claims that the Mac is faster. It's widely substantiated fact that they're not. They even had to pull their ads claiming to have the "world's fastest personal computer" because it's simply not true. Name a single task where the Mac is faster. I'm interested in finding out, because I'm not aware of a single processing task that runs faster on a Mac than on a custom PC (for less money I might add).
And that benchmark kshaw provided was comparing a SINGLE A64 to a DUAL G5, isnt it? And how was the A64 known to be the fastest CPU for those Apps? Did you find that on the internet? I have not claimed that the Mac is faster, at all. Perhaps you should quote me on this. Trying to make the Mac look bad and spreading misleading information about it is BS. First off, kshaw doesnt even use todays Macs at all to be making idiotic comments like this. And how do you know that the Dual Opterons would dust a G5 in photoshop? Have you tested this out? Or are you just reading crap on the internet, believe what you read.
If you don't believe anything you read on the internet, WTF are you doing here? Go read a book or something. :roll:
There are numerous reputable sources of hardware benchmarks on the internet. Anandtech is considered by many to be the most trusted hardware review site out there. I've run benchmarks on my own system, and they consistantly come very close to the numbers I read on the internet.
I would trust an AT review over your nonsense opinion any day of the week. :thumbsdown:
What am I doing here? I am here to try to help people out. Thats why I am here. My nonsense opinion? What nonsense opinion? Your whole arguments, including kshaws were all opinionated. All of your posts.
At least I believe in scientific testing. Look at you, running around trying to justify your $3,000 Mac purchase to everyone. I'm glad you're happy with your purchase. But seriously, you need to face the reality that you could have bought a PC of equivalent speed for far less money. The only person you're helping with your nonsense is yourself. You obviously can't deal with your buyer's remorse. You remind me of Rollo when he bought his FX5800U graphics card.
You've gone from innocent poster to infamous fanboi in this thread. For that I salute you. You're gonna need an excellent flamesuit though. :evil:
Hear Hear! The IBM PowerPC 970 "G5" has been powering Apple's desktop minitowers for 18 months now, and yet some people still think the G4 is the powerhouse? I don't get it either.
There will always be a fastest platform. There will always be a cheapest platform. There will always be a most supported platform. Once large numbers are achieved, it's easy to snag and keep many or all of these titles. That doesn't mean the second-best is a ripoff or worthless. Sun's Unix workstations haven't been faster than dual processor PCs for over 4 years, yet companies like GE Medical and Siemens still use Sun Blade workstations to power their CT Scanners. And most new GE MRI scanners use SGI Fuel workstations, even though it's price-to-performance ratio is worse yet!
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
So show us some benchmarks done by Steve Jobs himself then for all we care. Anything to substantiate your claims other than "my computer is faster than my friend's PC". :roll:
If you want some technical reasoning as to why the PC is faster, you could start by investigating the integrated memory controller on the A64, along with its highly efficient design and massive FPU power.
If an A64 can beat two G5s, I'd love to see what it can do to Thin Lizzy's single G4.
So you want to see some benchmarks? Here you go. And I know what you are going to say. "Those are BS." So are the ones on that PC site. Also, why dont you prove that the A64 is faster. You seem to think they are, but you havent provided any evidence. What is your evidence going to be? A benchmark you found on the internet?
As I always say, every site shows something different. You cant possibly believe everything you read can you?
No, your benchmark (not plural) isn't BS, but it is comparing a DUAL G5 to a SINGLE A64. Two Opterons would dust two G5s in Photoshop. This has been repeatedly proven by numerous publications. The A64 is KNOWN to be the fastest CPU for Photoshop, gaming, and databases. The P4 has been repeatedly proven to be the fastest processor for video. All of these facts are widely accepted within the IT industry. This is why I feel you're being foolish making these claims that the Mac is faster. It's widely substantiated fact that they're not. They even had to pull their ads claiming to have the "world's fastest personal computer" because it's simply not true. Name a single task where the Mac is faster. I'm interested in finding out, because I'm not aware of a single processing task that runs faster on a Mac than on a custom PC (for less money I might add).
And that benchmark kshaw provided was comparing a SINGLE A64 to a DUAL G5, isnt it? And how was the A64 known to be the fastest CPU for those Apps? Did you find that on the internet? I have not claimed that the Mac is faster, at all. Perhaps you should quote me on this. Trying to make the Mac look bad and spreading misleading information about it is BS. First off, kshaw doesnt even use todays Macs at all to be making idiotic comments like this. And how do you know that the Dual Opterons would dust a G5 in photoshop? Have you tested this out? Or are you just reading crap on the internet, believe what you read.
If you don't believe anything you read on the internet, WTF are you doing here? Go read a book or something. :roll:
There are numerous reputable sources of hardware benchmarks on the internet. Anandtech is considered by many to be the most trusted hardware review site out there. I've run benchmarks on my own system, and they consistantly come very close to the numbers I read on the internet.
I would trust an AT review over your nonsense opinion any day of the week. :thumbsdown:
What am I doing here? I am here to try to help people out. Thats why I am here. My nonsense opinion? What nonsense opinion? Your whole arguments, including kshaws were all opinionated. All of your posts.
At least I believe in scientific testing. Look at you, running around trying to justify your $3,000 Mac purchase to everyone. I'm glad you're happy with your purchase. But seriously, you need to face the reality that you could have bought a PC of equivalent speed for far less money. The only person you're helping with your nonsense is yourself. You obviously can't deal with your buyer's remorse. You remind me of Rollo when he bought his FX5800U graphics card.
You've gone from innocent poster to infamous fanboi in this thread. For that I salute you. You're gonna need an excellent flamesuit though. :evil:
How do you know that I paid 3000 dollars for my Mac? Did I tell you? Can you prove this? I have turned into a fan boy? Because I came in here trying to correct kshaws misleading information, I am a fan boy? Because I tried correcting kshaws misleading information for trying to make a platform he does not use look bad? Well, look at the way you both are acting. Both of you are being fan boys by attacking a platform you dont use, spreading misleading information and saying the PC is superior to Mac. Re read your posts. I guess you die hard PC users are some kind of Cult too.
Whats wrong with the G4? I wasnt here to prove the Mac was superior to the PC at all, but some people like to read my posts the way they want to see them.
As I said before, I was here to correct kshaws misleading information.
Uh...G4 technology is over 4 years old. Do you know how long that is in processor terms? Even the latest G4 in the 17" PowerBook is 15 months old. There was nothing wrong with it 4 years ago when it was cutting-edge. Since the G5 was released it's been yesterday's news. I don't know why Apple puts them in their laptops, aside from corporate greed.
Pointless link because you probably don't believe me. Wait...you don't believe anything you read on the internet.
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Uh...G4 technology is over 4 years old. Do you know how long that is in processor terms? Even the latest G4 in the 17" PowerBook is 15 months old. There was nothing wrong with it 4 years ago when it was cutting-edge. Since the G5 was released it's been yesterday's news. I don't know why Apple puts them in their laptops, aside from corporate greed.
Pointless link because you probably don't believe me. Wait...you don't believe anything you read on the internet.
Like I said, quote me on when I said I dont believe anything on the internet. I said I dont believe everything I read on the internet. I will ask you again. Would you like me to explain the difference? I dont mind.
Even though the G4 is old, I still think its a great processor. Just because its old doesnt mean I have to go buy a G5. There are still many people who rely on their older computers. My cousin is still using a 475mhz K6-2 Toshiba laptop. It aint too bad either. I dont even know why Dell and HP still put Celerons in their computers, aside from corporate greed. :roll:
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
So show us some benchmarks done by Steve Jobs himself then for all we care. Anything to substantiate your claims other than "my computer is faster than my friend's PC". :roll:
If you want some technical reasoning as to why the PC is faster, you could start by investigating the integrated memory controller on the A64, along with its highly efficient design and massive FPU power.
If an A64 can beat two G5s, I'd love to see what it can do to Thin Lizzy's single G4.
So you want to see some benchmarks? Here you go. And I know what you are going to say. "Those are BS." So are the ones on that PC site. Also, why dont you prove that the A64 is faster. You seem to think they are, but you havent provided any evidence. What is your evidence going to be? A benchmark you found on the internet?
As I always say, every site shows something different. You cant possibly believe everything you read can you?
No, your benchmark (not plural) isn't BS, but it is comparing a DUAL G5 to a SINGLE A64. Two Opterons would dust two G5s in Photoshop. This has been repeatedly proven by numerous publications. The A64 is KNOWN to be the fastest CPU for Photoshop, gaming, and databases. The P4 has been repeatedly proven to be the fastest processor for video. All of these facts are widely accepted within the IT industry. This is why I feel you're being foolish making these claims that the Mac is faster. It's widely substantiated fact that they're not. They even had to pull their ads claiming to have the "world's fastest personal computer" because it's simply not true. Name a single task where the Mac is faster. I'm interested in finding out, because I'm not aware of a single processing task that runs faster on a Mac than on a custom PC (for less money I might add).
And that benchmark kshaw provided was comparing a SINGLE A64 to a DUAL G5, isnt it? And how was the A64 known to be the fastest CPU for those Apps? Did you find that on the internet? I have not claimed that the Mac is faster, at all. Perhaps you should quote me on this. Trying to make the Mac look bad and spreading misleading information about it is BS. First off, kshaw doesnt even use todays Macs at all to be making idiotic comments like this. And how do you know that the Dual Opterons would dust a G5 in photoshop? Have you tested this out? Or are you just reading crap on the internet, believe what you read.
If you don't believe anything you read on the internet, WTF are you doing here? Go read a book or something. :roll:
There are numerous reputable sources of hardware benchmarks on the internet. Anandtech is considered by many to be the most trusted hardware review site out there. I've run benchmarks on my own system, and they consistantly come very close to the numbers I read on the internet.
I would trust an AT review over your nonsense opinion any day of the week. :thumbsdown:
What am I doing here? I am here to try to help people out. Thats why I am here. My nonsense opinion? What nonsense opinion? Your whole arguments, including kshaws were all opinionated. All of your posts.
At least I believe in scientific testing. Look at you, running around trying to justify your $3,000 Mac purchase to everyone. I'm glad you're happy with your purchase. But seriously, you need to face the reality that you could have bought a PC of equivalent speed for far less money. The only person you're helping with your nonsense is yourself. You obviously can't deal with your buyer's remorse. You remind me of Rollo when he bought his FX5800U graphics card.
You've gone from innocent poster to infamous fanboi in this thread. For that I salute you. You're gonna need an excellent flamesuit though. :evil:
How do you know that I paid 3000 dollars for my Mac? Did I tell you? Can you prove this? I have turned into a fan boy? Because I came in here trying to correct kshaws misleading information, I am a fan boy? Because I tried correcting kshaws misleading information for trying to make a platform he does not use look bad? Well, look at the way you both are acting. Both of you are being fan boys by attacking a platform you dont use, spreading misleading information and saying the PC is superior to Mac. Re read your posts. I guess you die hard PC users are some kind of Cult too.
Actually I do use a Mac for certain things. I freely admit that they're overpriced and underperforming though. That's where your fanboy nature shines through, Thin Lizzy. Here's a definition to broaden your horizons.
Good luck. My offer for the flamesuit still stands. You're gonna need it in here. :lips:
I wouldn't want to be Apple. On one hand, they're profiting plenty of money and they have extensive hardware and software design resources... but on the other hand, they still could tank at any moment due to issues out of their control.
Apple makes their own boards and support chipsets, but they don't make the PowerPC CPU itself. Those are made by Motorola/FreeScale and IBM. The G4's front side bus was stuck at 100 and 133 MHz for years and only recently hit 167 MHz. This was due to Motorola and was out of Apple's control. The G5 was late to market and was stuck at 2 GHz for a year. Now the G5 is 2.5 GHz (not the 3.0 GHz Apple promised) due to production problems at IBM. This is also out of Apple's control.
In the PC world, if Intel tanked one day, Dell could easily switch to AMD processors. If both Intel and AMD had performance problems and their CPUs hit a performance wall for 2 years, then the whole PC industry would be there together... not just Dell. And besides, the average home PC user doesn't really care about performance as long as they can surf the web and play some MP3s. Why else would the majority of systems sold today use integrated chipset graphics, in all of their CPU and RAM-bandwidth stealing glory? Especially if said machine only cost $400 to begin with.
Then there's the whole issue of software vendors. Apple only has about 1% of the personal computer marketshare. A lot of pro video/audio/print people use Macs, so the pro software marketshare for Apple is, maybe, 4% at best. Why would Adobe spend any more than 4% of their engineering efforts to optimize their software for the PowerPC processor and Mac OS X? In fact, wouldn't it be far more sane for Adobe to just ditch Macintosh all together? It's pretty easy to see why Apple wants to get into the game itself with applications like Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Shake, Motion, and Logic.
And finally, there's Apple's bane since 1987... it's user base. I'm not talking about the zealots, I'm talking about Apple's mix of uers. A significant number of Apple's users are newbies or those who just want simplicty. Another significant number of Apple's user are pros that want pro features, but they want stability and reliability above anything else. And the final significant number of Apple's users are the strange breed of Unix users that came over from the NeXT and SGI world. They're not traditional Linux or Solaris users, these folks are a different breed. Now how in the hell can Apple please these 3 very diverse groups? I wonder how many nights Steve Jobs sits sleepless in his bed wondering if he should just stick to running Pixar?
Yet, to me, this diverisity and difference, this is what brought me to buying a PowerBook. Over the past year I've really grown my respect for Apple's hardware and software engineers. They're not second string designers at all, they are among the best in the industry and have put together some impressive products. They're different, that's for sure, but they're impressive. I love my PCs and I like Windows XP. I enjoy being able to buy games with my buddies at Wal-Mart at 3AM. I enjoy being able to replace *any* part in my PC for less than $250. I love to tinker and I love the PC hobbyist lifestyle. I'm a gadget guru, I love these things. And I love my PowerBook. It's been a fun experience working with two OSes and two very different hardware platforms. I've learned a lot and sort of wish that Apple and Microsoft could "learn" more from each other as well.
My next machine will be another desktop PC. After that, probably a tablet PC. But I will eventually replace my PowerBook with a newer Mac, I'm just not sure which model yet. I continue to be a PC fan and I usually recommend PCs to my friends and family, but there are now cases where I recommend Macs, such as the iBook. Still, you can't beat a $350 PC for bang-for-the-buck. And if you don't like Windows, there are good friendly Linux distros now too.
And to finally end my comments on this thread: Just about any semi-modern PC can edit video just fine. You don't need a Mac to do video any more than you need a Saab to go buy groceries. There's nothing wrong with the Macintosh platform, and in fact it is a good video platform with several great applications available for it. Apple pretty much sells everything you'd need, except for the camera itself and some DVD blanks. If you're not interested in a Mac, or don't want to shell out the money for a Mac, then there are many excellent applications for Windows that are just as good or maybe even better than those available on the Mac. For those who are just editing videos at home, Avid Free DV will be just about as good as iMovie (it's even better in some ways). I have not yet found anything as slick as iDVD for authoring home movie DVDs, but I'm sure there's something out there that fills that niche.
Edit: A quick look at the Apple store shows that Apple does sell DVD blanks, cameras, and multi-button mice!
Apple makes their own boards and support chipsets, but they don't make the PowerPC CPU itself. Those are made by Motorola/FreeScale and IBM. The G4's front side bus was stuck at 100 and 133 MHz for years and only recently hit 167 MHz. This was due to Motorola and was out of Apple's control. The G5 was late to market and was stuck at 2 GHz for a year. Now the G5 is 2.5 GHz (not the 3.0 GHz Apple promised) due to production problems at IBM. This is also out of Apple's control.
In the PC world, if Intel tanked one day, Dell could easily switch to AMD processors. If both Intel and AMD had performance problems and their CPUs hit a performance wall for 2 years, then the whole PC industry would be there together... not just Dell. And besides, the average home PC user doesn't really care about performance as long as they can surf the web and play some MP3s. Why else would the majority of systems sold today use integrated chipset graphics, in all of their CPU and RAM-bandwidth stealing glory? Especially if said machine only cost $400 to begin with.
Then there's the whole issue of software vendors. Apple only has about 1% of the personal computer marketshare. A lot of pro video/audio/print people use Macs, so the pro software marketshare for Apple is, maybe, 4% at best. Why would Adobe spend any more than 4% of their engineering efforts to optimize their software for the PowerPC processor and Mac OS X? In fact, wouldn't it be far more sane for Adobe to just ditch Macintosh all together? It's pretty easy to see why Apple wants to get into the game itself with applications like Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Shake, Motion, and Logic.
And finally, there's Apple's bane since 1987... it's user base. I'm not talking about the zealots, I'm talking about Apple's mix of uers. A significant number of Apple's users are newbies or those who just want simplicty. Another significant number of Apple's user are pros that want pro features, but they want stability and reliability above anything else. And the final significant number of Apple's users are the strange breed of Unix users that came over from the NeXT and SGI world. They're not traditional Linux or Solaris users, these folks are a different breed. Now how in the hell can Apple please these 3 very diverse groups? I wonder how many nights Steve Jobs sits sleepless in his bed wondering if he should just stick to running Pixar?
Yet, to me, this diverisity and difference, this is what brought me to buying a PowerBook. Over the past year I've really grown my respect for Apple's hardware and software engineers. They're not second string designers at all, they are among the best in the industry and have put together some impressive products. They're different, that's for sure, but they're impressive. I love my PCs and I like Windows XP. I enjoy being able to buy games with my buddies at Wal-Mart at 3AM. I enjoy being able to replace *any* part in my PC for less than $250. I love to tinker and I love the PC hobbyist lifestyle. I'm a gadget guru, I love these things. And I love my PowerBook. It's been a fun experience working with two OSes and two very different hardware platforms. I've learned a lot and sort of wish that Apple and Microsoft could "learn" more from each other as well.
My next machine will be another desktop PC. After that, probably a tablet PC. But I will eventually replace my PowerBook with a newer Mac, I'm just not sure which model yet. I continue to be a PC fan and I usually recommend PCs to my friends and family, but there are now cases where I recommend Macs, such as the iBook. Still, you can't beat a $350 PC for bang-for-the-buck. And if you don't like Windows, there are good friendly Linux distros now too.
And to finally end my comments on this thread: Just about any semi-modern PC can edit video just fine. You don't need a Mac to do video any more than you need a Saab to go buy groceries. There's nothing wrong with the Macintosh platform, and in fact it is a good video platform with several great applications available for it. Apple pretty much sells everything you'd need, except for the camera itself and some DVD blanks. If you're not interested in a Mac, or don't want to shell out the money for a Mac, then there are many excellent applications for Windows that are just as good or maybe even better than those available on the Mac. For those who are just editing videos at home, Avid Free DV will be just about as good as iMovie (it's even better in some ways). I have not yet found anything as slick as iDVD for authoring home movie DVDs, but I'm sure there's something out there that fills that niche.
Edit: A quick look at the Apple store shows that Apple does sell DVD blanks, cameras, and multi-button mice!
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Uh...G4 technology is over 4 years old. Do you know how long that is in processor terms? Even the latest G4 in the 17" PowerBook is 15 months old. There was nothing wrong with it 4 years ago when it was cutting-edge. Since the G5 was released it's been yesterday's news. I don't know why Apple puts them in their laptops, aside from corporate greed.
Pointless link because you probably don't believe me. Wait...you don't believe anything you read on the internet.
Like I said, quote me on when I said I dont believe anything on the internet. I said I dont believe everything I read on the internet. I will ask you again. Would you like me to explain the difference? I dont mind.
Even though the G4 is old, I still think its a great processor. Just because its old doesnt mean I have to go buy a G5. There are still many people who rely on their older computers. My cousin is still using a 475mhz K6-2 Toshiba laptop. It aint too bad either. I dont even know why Dell and HP still put Celerons in their computers, aside from corporate greed. :roll:
You said you don't believe in benchmarks, twice in this thread I might add. I figured technical information might fall into the same realm for you seeing as it's also scientific.
It's nice to see you finally admit that the G4 is old tech. You shouldn't compare it to current high-end hardware.
Your comments on the Celeron are telling. The way you look at the price/performance ratio of a Celeron is the same way that I look at the price/performance ratio of a Mac. In fact, I would suggest that the new Celeron-D would have a far better P/P ratio than any Mac on the market. :Q
And your fanboy nature shines through too, Sickbeast. Here is a defintition to broaden your horizons Sickbeast.
Have a nice day.
Have a nice day.
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Originally posted by: SickBeast
Uh...G4 technology is over 4 years old. Do you know how long that is in processor terms? Even the latest G4 in the 17" PowerBook is 15 months old. There was nothing wrong with it 4 years ago when it was cutting-edge. Since the G5 was released it's been yesterday's news. I don't know why Apple puts them in their laptops, aside from corporate greed.
Pointless link because you probably don't believe me. Wait...you don't believe anything you read on the internet.
Like I said, quote me on when I said I dont believe anything on the internet. I said I dont believe everything I read on the internet. I will ask you again. Would you like me to explain the difference? I dont mind.
Even though the G4 is old, I still think its a great processor. Just because its old doesnt mean I have to go buy a G5. There are still many people who rely on their older computers. My cousin is still using a 475mhz K6-2 Toshiba laptop. It aint too bad either. I dont even know why Dell and HP still put Celerons in their computers, aside from corporate greed. :roll:
You said you don't believe in benchmarks, twice in this thread I might add. I figured technical information might fall into the same realm for you seeing as it's also scientific.
It's nice to see you finally admit that the G4 is old tech. You shouldn't compare it to current high-end hardware.
Your comments on the Celeron are telling. The way you look at the price/performance ratio of a Celeron is the same way that I look at the price/performance ratio of a Mac. In fact, I would suggest that the new Celeron-D would have a far better P/P ratio than any Mac on the market. :Q
So, since I said I dont believe benchmarks, means I dont believe anything on the internet? I am not comparing the G4 to high end hardware. If you put it this way, you shouldnt compare old tech to high end hardware, as you were in your posts. And where was I comparing the G4 to high end PC's? Quote me on this.
Ok, first of all, I am not comparing the G4 to a high end PC. I am saying that kshaw thinks that the clock speed is the only important thing of the processor. And when I said "You never put the fastest G4 agianst a higher end PC." I told him this because this is when he was trying to make the Mac look like a bad machine, saying the G4 is a slow processor. He never put them side by side to assume the G4 is a slow processor.
Okay, it sounds like it's time to wind this down. I've said more than once that I think Apple has some good video editing products, but I think it's also useful to point out areas where PCs have advantages in this area--since that was the basic point of this whole thread. I particularly suggested that PCs are well ahead of Macs in terms of laptop technology, and I also mentioned that the PC platform has more practical and complete solutions for HDV editing. Some people obviously doubt these statements and are welcome to test them for themselves, but I'm confident that any impartial assessment would reach the same conclusions. I'll apologize again for laying it on a little thick in making my comparisons, but sometimes it's tempting to do that to cut through the equally thick Apple hype. Apple has done a good job of building a mystique around their video editing tools, which are apparently quite good, but they aren't the end-all and be-all of video editing. A competent person can make good videos with either Macs or PCs, and it sounds like we pretty much all agree on that. Cheers.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter