[Kamikaze]

Originally posted by Kosh



Apple would have gone bankrupt years ago, but M$ came in and bailed them out. Why else is Apple not porting OSX to PC (which is superior to Windows, except that it only works with Mac)?

Because there's no way Mac OS on PC would make money. One of the factors that makes Mac OS nice is that there're few hardware issues. That's because there's very little variety in core hardware. So Mac OS on PC would not be as dependable.

Then there's the factor that Mac OS users would no longer need to buy Mac computers to run Mac OS. So why would they buy Mac hardware anymore? That means that Apple would have to make enough money on new software sales to recoup for its losses on hardware. That seems pretty unlikely since software is cheaper than hardware and MS has a firm grip on the market.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Deepblue
But I don't think its in reference to peak performance, I believe it's in reference to the lack of the real processor and the lack of the actual graphics card, especially since none of the G5 run games had any AA which will be always on at 4x in the final package.

Any console or PC stats will always be quoted as peak performance; any performance assessment of the devkits would be based off of that (insofar as public announcements go).  You wouldn't come up with a precise percentage value otherwise.

Incidentally, apparently Gears of War is making it onto PC; which should make for a nice PC vs console comparison (particularly as the Unreal 3 engine runs across all of them bar - maybe - the Revolution).  Surprising that MS didn't insist on GoW exclusivity, though; one of the reasons I'm not particularly interested in the Xbox360 is the lack of - for me - any particularly enticing exclusive games.

[Deepblue]

Keep in mind that one Gears of War is released, its bound to look better on the XB360 due to the simiple fact that, at least for now, the hardware is better. I'm interested in the Xbox360 'cause it won't cost me a bundle whereas buying a PC with good enough specs to run these games would.

You could very well be right about the performance, however, the numbers haven't exactly been precise. They range from 20% up to 35%.

[aldo_14]

Look better on Xbox360 (etc) only in the short term, though.... and my PC's well due for an upgrade.  Plus Pc games are inherently cheaper to buy than console games...... the other thing is that, really, I've stopped caring all that much over graphics.  Even if Sony were to release Killzone 2 with the same graphics (for an example) as the trailer/demo/whatever, it wouldn't make me want to buy the PS3 all that much.

[Setekh]

True dat. Gameplay's where it's at. *hides back in his basement with his Commodore 64*

[Deepblue]

*Starts up C&C Red Alert*

Ahhh... Good memories...