Another dig at Apple - this time, heat!

2008-02-13 11:36:33

#1

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

So many people love Macs and go on and on about them, unfortunately, few of them bother to actually find out anything about how the hardware they are using is running. Macs are built to an EXTREMELY low standard. I don't just mean low, I mean abysmal. One thing that has persistently frustrated me with them is the obscene heat the systems run at because of this poor design and low build quality.

Here's a little test, Mac users, get this tool and use it to measure your system temps under prolonged load (there is a system load tool that you can get to do this more easily). Most Macs I work on have CPU core temps of 70-90C when under prolonged (over 1 hr) full load. See what you get. The lowest I saw all day today was a 68C, the highest was 92C (I also had an MBP that claimed it was way hotter than that, but that was due to malfunctioning sensors - it was not 49C ambient temp, that probably would've killed me).

The CPU cores most commonly used in Macs are Merom, Santa Rosa, Conroe and Cloverfield. All of these architectures will be damaged by prolonged usage at these temperatures (anything past 65C is going to reduce your CPU lifespan and may result in slowdowns - though Intel rate the CPUs to 100C). One of the main reasons for this is the terrible quality of thermal paste that Apple provides with parts and the way in which Apple recommend applying it. Of course if you wish to change this you will invalidate your warranty (unless you are an Apple Certified Mac Technician).

What do you guys think about this complete disregard for the consumer by Apple?

2008-02-13 11:39:08

#2

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|6900|London, England

But they make everything look Shiny

2008-02-13 11:39:50

#3

Mitch92uK: aka [DBS]Mitch92uK; +192|6514|United Kingdom

Never had one myself but I guess I always assumed that the build quality was high because of the pretty exterior and high price tags, how wrong I am

2008-02-13 11:43:15

#4

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|6932

inb4 excuses and lies

2008-02-13 11:46:22

#5

xGj: Official lame Crysis fanboy.; +84|6650|Netherlands tbh

Mac's are all about the appearance, built generally speaking for people with lots of money and little knowledge about computers. A shame, a waste, and Mac's are incompatible too (games anyone?). I still can hardly believe such a lot of people buy them.

2008-02-13 11:46:37

#6

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6801|...

I think they take this in account when designing them for a predetermined lifespan. It is also a counter effect of trying to make a quiet system.
I think they they probably have a good feeling that if it fails, their loyal customers will go buy a new one or pay whatever it takes to get it repaired.

Good info though, i never realized it was that bad +1.

Last edited by jsnipy (2008-02-13 11:48:07)

2008-02-13 11:47:16

#7

Zimmer: Un Moderador; +1,688|7035|Scotland

Wow. Seriously disturbing.

2008-02-13 11:52:08

#8

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6846|NYC / Hamburg

I'm not surprised tbh. The macs at uni (1-2 years old max) are constantly broken, while the win 98 machines purr along nicely.

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2008-02-13 11:55:56

#9

avman633: Member; +116|6643

Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC

2008-02-13 11:58:08

#10

Zimmer: Un Moderador; +1,688|7035|Scotland

avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC

The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.

2008-02-13 11:59:21

#11

avman633: Member; +116|6643

Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.

But I would rather have problems with my software than my hardware

2008-02-13 12:01:46

#12

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6801|...

Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.

That's a subjective statement. But there is no arguing its the best looking (that's also a subject statement).

2008-02-13 12:02:57

#13

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6923

inb4 Bern

Seriously, Macs look nice and they do have some nice software, but I haven't know a single person who owned a Mac and didn't have hardware issues, especially related to overheating.

2008-02-13 12:03:28

#14

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6928

Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.

Linus Torvalds disagrees. And Mac's are loved in the same way that Scientology and other cults are loved; only by nutjobs.

2008-02-13 12:07:48

#15

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6846|NYC / Hamburg

jsnipy wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.
That's a subjective statement. But there is no arguing its the best looking (that's also a subject statement).

linux can look very fancy. Also the back aero > macs IMO

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2008-02-13 12:08:02

#16

some_random_panda: Flamesuit essential; +454|6669

avman633 wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.
But I would rather have problems with my software than my hardware

QFE

Software you can reinstall. Hardware's a tad trickier, and more expensive.

2008-02-13 12:09:15

#17

Brasso: member; +1,549|6909

Bertster7 wrote:
The CPU cores most commonly used in Macs are Merom, Santa Rosa, Conroe and Cloverfield.

!

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2008-02-13 12:11:23

#18

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6816|Long Island, New York

Mek-Izzle wrote:
But they make everything look Shiny

That's exactly why people are suckers for them. There is absolutely no reason to get a Mac unless you want a "nicer" looking PC. Although, the Dell XPS's are really, really nice looking.

You could get an amazing laptop for 2000 dollars with awesome specs, or spend $3000 on the Macbook Air that has horrid specs.

2008-02-13 12:13:51

#19

some_random_panda: Flamesuit essential; +454|6669

haffeysucks wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
The CPU cores most commonly used in Macs are Merom, Santa Rosa, Conroe and Cloverfield.
!

Yeah, I was wondering at that.

2008-02-13 12:16:45

#20

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

avman633 wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Wow, I hate the spoiled brats in my school that want to waste their parents money on a Mac when they could get a much better PC
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.
But I would rather have problems with my software than my hardware

Ditto. Especially when the hardware you are having problems with is Apple hardware - which costs £$£$£$£! Logic board, approx £400, 1GB DDR2 ~£120, 160GB HDD ~£120 + labour. You see the problem.

OSX is pretty nice, though 10.5 is bugged to fuck (seen countless issues with it and read all the service source known issues), worse even than Vista upon launch. It is pretty decent, but the networking and security implementations are pretty pathetic - massive potential exploitability of the extended permissions (10.5 moves away from the traditional 3 level UNIX permissions and adds another layer of permissions on top - 2 permissions schemes running side by side, what's all that about 'eh). The lack of in depth functionality (except through a command prompt) that OSX provides means it is still a non-option for me, as does the lack of software support.

They are pretty and the OS is simple. That's Macs in a nutshell - it's also where the good points stop. Everything else about them is negative.

2008-02-13 12:18:57

#21

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

some_random_panda wrote:
haffeysucks wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
The CPU cores most commonly used in Macs are Merom, Santa Rosa, Conroe and Cloverfield.
!
Yeah, I was wondering at that.

Xeon implementations of Kentsfield. Newer Penryn based models use Woodcrest CPUs, some have 2 for a total of 8 cores - but they cost a pretty penny.

2008-02-13 12:25:08

#22

avman633: Member; +116|6643

Bertster7 wrote:
avman633 wrote:
Zimmer wrote:

The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.
But I would rather have problems with my software than my hardware
Ditto. Especially when the hardware you are having problems with is Apple hardware - which costs £$£$£$£! Logic board, approx £400, 1GB DDR2 ~£120, 160GB HDD ~£120 + labour. You see the problem.

OSX is pretty nice, though 10.5 is bugged to fuck (seen countless issues with it and read all the service source known issues), worse even than Vista upon launch. It is pretty decent, but the networking and security implementations are pretty pathetic - massive potential exploitability of the extended permissions (10.5 moves away from the traditional 3 level UNIX permissions and adds another layer of permissions on top - 2 permissions schemes running side by side, what's all that about 'eh). The lack of in depth functionality (except through a command prompt) that OSX provides means it is still a non-option for me, as does the lack of software support.

They are pretty and the OS is simple. That's Macs in a nutshell - it's also where the good points stop. Everything else about them is negative.

Shit, thats expensive!

2008-02-13 12:54:20

#23

pndragon26: Member; +23|6965

Well, that all my be true. But my mac never breaks down is always reliable, is easy to use and makes me my money at home and at work (graphic designer). My massive PC built by alienware (yes I bought my over priced rig because I make that much off my "inferior" mac) is always in need of updates and reformatting not to mention new "improved" hardware software. And bloated with crap-ware that I would never use but causes problems when I delete it (thanks Microsoft).
Do I want to learn how to fix it or what is under the hood? No, I don't care. I plug in a scanner, printer whatever, no drivers or stupid programs- the shit just works. I'm a designer not a computer guy. I want to do my designs, cash my check and go home. Not deal with the reformats and the other crap you guys seem to take for granted.
Bottom line if you like a PC great. If you like a mac great. Both are perfect for certain jobs, in mine its mac for gaming I still prefer a PC. And I like it that way, so post what you wish, enjoy reformatting your computer this weekend or re-installing Vista, I'll be out screwing your girlfriend.

2008-02-13 12:57:34

#24

FloppY_: +1,010|6565|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

max wrote:
jsnipy wrote:
Zimmer wrote:
The truth of it is, though, that OSX > All other operating systems.

That is why Macs are loved. Their software is excellent.
That's a subjective statement. But there is no arguing its the best looking (that's also a subject statement).
linux can look very fancy. Also the back aero > macs IMO

Ubuntu + Beryl = Best looking OS EVER !

(i'm a PC user, so no.... not a fanboy comment)

and i hate macs

Last edited by FloppY_ (2008-02-13 12:57:58)

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2008-02-13 13:04:26

#25

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

pndragon26 wrote:
Well, that all my be true. But my mac never breaks down is always reliable, is easy to use and makes me my money at home and at work (graphic designer). My massive PC built by alienware (yes I bought my over priced rig because I make that much off my "inferior" mac) is always in need of updates and reformatting not to mention new "improved" hardware software. And bloated with crap-ware that I would never use but causes problems when I delete it (thanks Microsoft).
Do I want to learn how to fix it or what is under the hood? No, I don't care. I plug in a scanner, printer whatever, no drivers or stupid programs- the shit just works. I'm a designer not a computer guy. I want to do my designs, cash my check and go home. Not deal with the reformats and the other crap you guys seem to take for granted.
Bottom line if you like a PC great. If you like a mac great. Both are perfect for certain jobs, in mine its mac for gaming I still prefer a PC. And I like it that way, so post what you wish, enjoy reformatting your computer this weekend or re-installing Vista, I'll be out screwing your girlfriend.

Well, if you don't like countless reinstalls and horrific software issues, that can develop into costly hardware faults - don't install 10.5, or you run the very real risk of having to go through all that.

People who need to reinstall Windows all the time simply don't manage their PC properly. That is the big difference between Macs and PCs, PCs require quite intensive configuration to get them just the way you want them so they will run well for a long time, Macs do all of that out of the box - but I put that in the same bracket as simple OS, all of which is achievable on PC hardware using OSX86 running at higher speeds for substantially less money.

BF2S Forums Another dig at Apple - this time, heat!

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

avman633 wrote:

some_random_panda wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

avman633 wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

max wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

pndragon26 wrote:

Board footer