iBooks... Why are their processors so slow?

Above all, remember that you cannot directly compare a RISC processor with a CISC processor. They work in completely different ways. It's like comparing RPM on a diesel powered car and a jet engined aeroplane. It's just not appropriate to compare them. Some think that you should multiply a G3 processor's clock speed by 1.5 or even 2 to compare it with a Wintel processor, but even this is unsatisfactory.

The iBooks are slow, if you want to do high end video editing, or gaming, but for most uses they are plenty fast enough, and they save huge amounts of time because the Mac OS is intuitive, making complex tasks on the PC much simpler and quicker on a Mac. There's also the issue of stability - iBooks just don't bluescreen and crash.

In my experience, RAM makes more difference than MHz anyway. My old 500 MHz iBook (now Mrs JN's!) with 256 MB of RAM is quicker than a friend's 600 MHz iBook with 128. That's why my new 900 MHz will soon have 640 MB!

Then you have the quality of the machine, and the quality of the experience it gives you the user. A hot Subaru might be faster on paper, in a straight line than a Lotus Elise or a Rolls Royce, but which is the better car? Which will give you the most pleasant experience?

As an iPodder, you simply need an iBook. With iTunes it's simply the best complement to your 'Pod. And if you buy an Apple refurb (fully tested, full one year guarantee, able to buy Apple Care) you can get a 900 MHz iBook for about ?750. Bargain!

What are you waiting for?

And Bob, many many many thanks, my oriental friend.....

It's because a apple computer has more instructions that he can do at 1 cyclus.

Examples:
Even I could make a processor with transistors of 10GHz maybe 100GHz. But with only 3 instructions at 1 cyclus.
So in totaly I make 10GHz x 3 instructions is 30G intructions.

an apple has 1 GHz at 300 instuctions at a cyclus.
so 1GHz x 300 = 300 G instructions

an intel has 3 GHz at 50 instructions at a cyclus.
so 3GHz x 50 = 150 G instructions

!! I don't know the instructions anymore. intel has near 50, but apple I don't know where it was near.

So you could see that the speed does only depend of the GHz and the ram-memory.

That's also why a apple program don't work on a microsoft-machine and otherwise. They can't get the right instuctions from the processor.

I hope it's a little bit clear

and that doesn't take account of the streamlined and intuitive UI, the stable 'never bluescreens' OS and all the rest which makes real world tasks faster on a Mac.

Why? (the cynical anser)

Because Apple are way too busy designing their products and advertising them so much, that there is little time left in actually making the product.

Sure, you can pull out the advertisements from Apple stating that a 1GHz Motorola CPU will out-do a 3GHz P4, but of course you'd know absolutely squat then.

I'm drunk, bugger off mac lover.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

enough said

Jacko,

My apologies, it was not my intention to criticise. My reply was meant for the enitre thread, basically my mac is better than your PC or my PC is better thatn your Mac. In my replay I guess I forgot to quote from 4 posts ago. Again my aplogies Jacko.

Everytime a good thread is started, where a good debate can take place, someone always has to ruin it with slamming other people for their opinions. In some ways I guess it can be a blessing to be uneducated and ignorant.