Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC and Mac OEs (was Re: 1 Thing Windows can do but OS/2 can't.)
From: stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Stuart Woolford)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:52:09 GMT
 <29JUL199216292433@utrcv1> <-!pm+vn@lynx.unm.edu> <30JUL199208450917@utrcv1>
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

kac@utrcv1 (Kenneth Dreitlein Jr.) writes:

>In article <-!pm+vn@lynx.unm.edu>, jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes...
>>In article <29JUL199216292433@utrcv1> kac@utrcv1 (Kenneth Dreitlein Jr.) writes:
>>>windows, buttons, etc.  But who cares.  I care about performance.  And although
>>>your IBM-compatible might go faster(at times) through DOS, the performance 
>>>through Windows is horrible.  I use the Mac predominantly, but I occasionally
>>>do need to do work on Windows 3.1(not my own choice).  Just compare the
>>>performance of the two.  My SE/30(16MHz 68030), which is apparently equivalent
>>>to a 25MHz 386, runs at least twice as fast as the 33MHz 386(w/Windows) I have
>>>at work.  And that is assuming that the Windows program doesn't crash, which
>>>happens quite frequently.  
>> 
>> 
>>If you're so worried about performance, why are you on a mac?  I have run
>>a few simple "benchmarking" tasks on a 386sx/20MHz with 4MB and an 80 MB HD
>>and the same tasks on a mac iisi ('030/20) and found that the windows machine
>>was significantly faster.  While the tests weren't comprehensive, they do
>>contain much of the features that the average user would incorporate and need
>>to do.  I ran only one app at once, so there were no delays due to multi-
>>tasking (well, actually, I had the Clock program running on the real computer
>>as well).
>> 
>>I created a 52 by 300 cell worksheet with all cells linked to cell A1
>>(in Excel).  I then transferred that same spreadsheet to the mac.  I then
>>entered the same number into cell a1 on both machines.  I pressed enter
>>at the same time.  The windows machine (with 3.1 and excel 3.0) finished 
>>in about half the time that it took for the mac.  I then decided that it
>>might be due to bad coding on M.S.'s part on the mac, so I tried another
>>Mac spreadsheet (Wingz, unknown version # and Claris works' spreadsheet).
>>I changed the number to the same value on both, and found that the mac was
>>closer to the time required by the pc, but was still slower.  Finally, I
>>tried 1-2-3 for DOS and that was still even faster than any of the others.
>> 
>>I also created a document in Ami Pro 2.0 that was 25 pages long.  I saved
>>that as an ascii file, and imported into both WP for Mac (2.something) and
>>word for mac (5.something).  I also imported it into Ami Pro.  I then did
>>a search and replace of all The's in the document with the word _dog_
>>(OK, so this isn't done all the time, but it still tests the speed of
>>search and replace).  The pc was faster running Ami Pro than the Mac running
>>either word processor.  I then tried out W.P. 5.1 for DOS and found that faster
>>still.
>> 
>>So, in conclusion, even though these weren't the most comprehensive of tests,
>>they are proof positive that mac's lack the speed and power of a machine
>>that cost less than one-third the mac's price.  The '030/20MHz is definately
>>a slower chip than the 386SX/20MHz.
>> 

>I'm not claiming to be a genius on microprocessor architecture, but I've even
>heard die-hard IBM users claim that equivalent Motorola chips(e.g. '030<>386)
>run faster than their Intel counterparts.  Then why is the IIsi going slower?
>Are you sure there is a math coprocessor in it.  None of the IIsi's come with
>a 68882 installed.  The SE/30 does.  And with something like Excel, numerical
>operations can be up to 100 times faster with the coprocessor(according to 
>a Mac benchmark).

no..Motorola chips are MUCH slower in a MAC, as, price for price, a '486 is
the equivalent of an '030, and SEVERAL TIMES FASTER!!!! ( not motorola's
fault, but blame apple... )
US$ prices for Cyrix 80376DX33's seem to be around 80, so who cares ( what
DO apple charge these days?? )

remember, price is important in comparisons, as a SGI Crimson would blow
any of these machines out of the water ( and don't say Quadra, they are a JOKE )
but also costs MUCH !!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz


			>>>>In VI Where Available<<<<
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy