Slashdot Mirror
Better Business Bureau Targets Apple's G5 Ads
deathazre writes "The Council of Better Business Bureaus has suggested Apple Computer withdraw its claims of the world's fastest, and first 64-bit, PC after a complaint by Dell. However, even having one of their ads banned in the U.K. didn't stop them here in the States."
Now, to be fair, Apple's ads said that the G5 was the fastest and first 64-bit PC that wasn't made by a company that isn't Apple.
Or maybe I'm remembering it wrong.
Where'd I put my darn bong?
Oh, here it is, hidden behind my G5.
Hey, when did I get a G5?
Who am I, again?
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
Apple has already stated the ad has run its course and it will be 'mindful' of the request in the future. Meaning we've already made out on that one, better luck next time :)
Now whay would Dell of all people make this claim? Dell doesn't even offer a 64 bit PC??
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
Yeah, because Intel's new chips really speed up your internet downloads...
Kip Hawley is an idiot.
My silly Alpha workstation from 1992 must not be 64 bit!
Maybe you can say it's a workstation and not a PC but later Alphas ran Windows NT which in my mind makes it a PC for sure.
Everyone that disagrees with me is a paid shill
While we're on the subject, how in the world did McDonald's get to have "America's Favorite Fries"?
America's Fries that Will Most Likely Give You a Coronary, more like it...
Hmmm... In the UK, TV regulators banned the ad. In the US, the Better Business Bureau could ban the ad. Apple should take their business to Russia. In Soviet Russia, the ad bans you.
Fastest at what? (No, seriously...)
Fastest selling? TRUE!
Fastest falling? Maybe (Looks aerodynamic...)
Fastest obsolescence?
Fastest at one particular kind of mathematical operation?
Fastest mobo latency?
Fastest design and fab process?
Fastest repairs? (Easy access panel...)
Heh. Who the hells knows what any ads are REALLY about these days. Lies, Damn Lies, and Advertising. I'm not a Mac-hater, writing this from my lovely 12" iBook G4.
While truthfulness in advertising is important, this is one of those times where an advertiser made a claim that is kind of hard to prove. A computer that is faster at one thing is not necessarily faster at another. Besides, when you hear "world's best hamburger," you don't automatically believe them solely based on the ads, do you?
I have never understood.....when companies lie (or make questionable claims) about "fastest" or "first" people get all up-in-arms. But when companies lie about quality or other things people don't care.
Case in point: I didn't see Apple (or anyone else) complaining that Dell was lying in ads where they implied that the night call center workers were actually in the US.
And Dell directly implies in their ads that if you're running Unix there are all sorts of negative things that will happen to you that are pretty much not true.
Whatever. The BBB is just another piece of the marketing machine I guess.
I was wondering how Apple gets reprimanded for these claims, yet MS goes unheeded with all of its comparative TCO mumbo jumbo, and the fact that "exagerated advertising" is, well, normal. My only guess is that Apple was just too straightforward with its claims (gee, what a novel concept!), and didn't throw in enough technical buzzwords and marketing FUD to confuse everybody.
Apple's current stance: Our G5's are damn fast, faster than Wintel stuff, and we'll stand by that claim.
Average Consumer: Really? Wow.
Dell: Crap.
Apple's new stance: Our G5's have multi-threaded double buffered optimized 256 bit parallel pipelined 64 bit x-streaming architecture!
Average consumer:
Dell: much better.
ce n'est pas un Sig.
Do average consumers really care about the speed of a computer? most of them are more likely to be looking at the cost of a computer and what they can do with it.
Now a business is more likely to consider a fast computer if it increases productivity, but then a business is more likely to be clued up about hardware and not be believing the claims of an advert.
Ultimately the selection of a computer will be based on if it can do what you want for the right price, there are certain pieces of software that aren't available for non-Windows systems and so speed counts for nothing if you need that software.
Take 1100 dell'ss at 64 bits and make them into a "super computer" (quotes because the super part is arguable)
Take 1100 apple g5's and make them into a super computer.
Which one will be in the top 5?
Apple, the most powerful, lowest priced 64bit based PC available. That is true.
A company making misleading claims? That's never happened before.
For every karma whore there are four more people with mod points to kill.
As the Apple Turns has an insightful take on the whole thing. I had never heard of the Dell cluster in Buffalo. Bummer for Buffalo.
Boom Shanka
I have never ever seen a benchmark that can truly give a consistent, unbiased speed comparison between 2 different architectures. Many benchmarks wil run at different speeds if run twice on the same system, and it's always possible to bias a benchmark towards a certain processor simply by choosing the operations that can be performed efficiently by that processor.
Given this, I tend to consider speed to be opinion rather than factual information. The fact that a factoid looks like a fact, doesn't make it one. Because of this, I don't see it as a great crime to make semi-substantiated claims iabout speed in the advertising.
And these the same bunch of no-hopers that gave SCO a clean bill of health? Why are we even taking any notice of what they have to say?
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
...is have a "Apple challenge" with the G5 and a P4. Show people both computers, have them use them, and see which one is faster, has the nicer interface, looks cooler, etc. (It would also be a good way for Apple to prove that there really is software on the Mac.) See what people would say is faster - I know what I'd say. Then they could say G5 is the fastest or whatever.
;-)
I'd be the first to admit that Apple was really lagging behind with the G4, but the G5 changed all that. Especcially since, come summer, I'll be able to buy a Dual 3 GHz (crosses fingers).
Actually, I'm waiting for a G5 Powerbook. No suprise there, but holy crap that'd be fast. (And hot...and big...but fast.)
If you want very specialized fast floating point performance for certain scientific applications, Itanium is where it's at.
If you want business performance, a multi-processor Opteron trumps them all.
If you want super fast video and audio encoding, a dual Xeon with hyperthreading will probably kill all of these.
If you want the fastest mobile processor with good battery life, Centrino is the way to go.
If you want the fastest computing cluster, you'd probably have to go with UVA's Mac cluster.
All of the above are probably temporarily in those positions and subject to considerable debate. I hate these "fastest computer ever" statements. Computing is far too dynamic and varied to put all-encompassing labels on. No one platform is ideally suited for all tasks. You make compromises and go from there.
Whatever gain/loss there was from the ad is water under the bridge. It's too late now, since it can't be taken back. Surely we don't have to remind...
:)
"Any publicity is good and good publicity is even better"
This news is just more publicity...and they didn't have to pay a dime to get it in front of you today. I'd call that making out
I find false marketing to be one of the more upsetting things that companies can do, and I find it a little disturbing that so many Slashdotters seem to feel that it's all right because *it's Apple*. Were it Dell or Compaq or God knows who, people would be up in arms.
It's pretty obvious that Apple's "fastest computer" claims aren't true and were intended to mislead consumers (even the most generous of readings would admit that they were valid for a very, very limited subset of carefully chosen tests for about a month, far less time than the compaign ran for, and only applied to single-processor computers). There may not be all that much damage caused (heck, the net effect may be positive), but there's little doubt in my mind that Apple was trying to implant fairly bogus information in people's heads.
The way I see it, even if someone's taking on Microsoft and we want them very much to do well, holding them to a lower standard of integrity (or anything else) is ultimately a losing strategy. Those people will ultimately take advantage of that leeway, and end up producing a worse product/service. If Red Hat puts out a crummy program or makes a decision that negatively impacts me, I will happily complain vocally and publically. Apple deserves to be held to no lesser of a standard.
May we never see th
Everytime I see their ad where the guy says, "Dude! You're getting a Dell!" I wait patiently by my door for the FedEx guy. He hasn't showed up yet! I'm awfully disappointed by their lack of honesty in their advertisements.
My favorite completely ridiculous advertising claim these days is Pentax' claim as the Official Digital Camera of the Internet.
These companies have gone completely nuts.
Apple makes excellent computers.
It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
I moderate therefore I rule!
--
Tim
As far as claims about 'Fastest'... people... please please please learn what marketing is. "Fastest" is a subjective term, becuase no reference is made to the scale of measurement. If I strap a TI-80 to the fuselage of the X-43 being tested today, then that TI-80 would be the worlds fastest computer.
Marketeers twist the english language more than any lawyer, and can say one thing, but cause you to think something entirely different. Need an example? You probably know someone who collects Beanie Babies as an "investment".Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy
Trying to see whether an ad campaign has succeeded or failed based on the number of sales versus what was predicted in a given quarter is kind of like trying to infer causal effects for a graph showing correlation between two independently measured variables with no other data--a big mistake.
Whether an ad succeeds or fails often cannot be measured based on sales in a fluctuating economy with a variable product interest. The critical question is would they have sold 206k G5 computers if they had not run the ad campaign? There is also the corollary question of would they could have sold more with a different ad campaign?
The first of these questions is nontrivial to answer and requires good, well researched data on why your customers are buying the product. Apple may have that data--you most certainly do not. The latter is almost impossible to infer even with good data on people's purchasing.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
It's pretty funny to me how a computer maker with only 3% of the total computer market can garner so much attention over one little statement.
As others have pointed out there have been just as many other biased, false, and outright ridiculus claims such as faster inernet thanks to a processor, dancing flourescant colored clean room suits, and all sorts of stuff.
yet intel's marketing arm, er, Dell decides they need to file a complaint with the BBB over it and they hold the #1 spot for desktops?
Things that make you go hmmm.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Microsoft: Windows is the best operating system!
Microsoft: MS-Office is the best Office program!
Dell: We have the best deals on our computers!
Apple: We have the fastest computer!
BBB: Apple, you're not allowed to say that...
Fair?
Come on, why does everyone pick on Apple...
I'm sure that's it. That concern for the consumers' well-being would be why Dell advertises the Celeron 2.4GHz as only suitable for word processing and e-mail. ``Ooh, ma'am, if you're going to be surfing the 'web, you're going to need top-notch power for that kinda number-crunching!''
A number of years ago a friend of mine got ripped off renting a RV from a rather shady firm. The license tabs had expired, sticking her dad with a ticket. The RV was so poorly maintained, it broke down twice on their trip. Last but not least, the firm promised to take care of the ticket for the tabs and didn't, so the state threatened to take away her dad's license. A competitor confirmed to me that the firm had a long reputation for shoddy business practices.
Just the sort of thing the Better Business Bureau handles right? Think again. When I called the BBB to complain and see if others had similar problems I was told that my friend HAD TO PAY THE BBB to make a complaint. Pay to complain? That was adding insult to injury.
My conclusion at the time: The BBB isn't about better business. It's about collecting fees for services provided. Dell paid; Dell got the sort of "service" the BBB provides. End of story.
There's perhaps a reason for the long delay between the ads and this bit of publicity. Dell spends virtually nothing on research or innovation. It's almost totally dependent on what Microsoft and Intel do. With OS X and IBM's marvelous new chips, in the past few months it's becoming increasingly clear that Apple is a growing threat to Dell's core businesses, somewhat in schools and very definitely in the profitable server market.
You saw the extent of the challenge when Apple G5s beat out almost twice as many Intel boxes to become the world's third faster computer. And if I remember that story right, the Virginia team that built that computer concluded that Macs gave them more bang for the buck than Dell.
Someone might want to watch Dell and, when they have advertising that's dubious, complain to the BBB and see what happens. Then let us know.
The claim that they were the first however, well that is neither here nor there. It is all a matter of perspective I guess. I sure as shit wouldn't have considered anything that was available prior to the G5 (in the 64 bit PC market) a consumer product. But some would.
That really is my homepage, no kidding.
I have a G5.
For my code, it's faster clock-for clock than a Xeon, and (usually) slower clock-for-clock than an opteron. Benchmarks can be made to say just about anything, but I bet the G5 is the fastest thing around for some people running their software.
To date, Apple has not released a 64-bit OS for the G5, and not only has not announced any intention to do so, but simply avoids admitting this to be the case. Think what you like, but even if you think "64-bit" doesn't mean "a single application can access more than 4 GB of RAM", you certainly have to be perplexed by the sense in which Apple claims to have "broken the 4 GB barrier", given that their latest OS provides your app access to the RAM just the way an Intel-based 32-bit system can.
Since there is not 64-bit OS for this machine (although Linux is very close), I cannot prove that my G5 has 64-bit hardware, tho I guess I believe it.
I will now accept my troll-mod, since I have posted this atrocity in an apple.stlashdot.org story.
Just for fun I installed Panther on a beige G3 300 box and it still boots faster than my faster 700 Mhz XP system. So... What about the GUI is slow?
.deviatefromtheabsolute.
I regard the display of a BBB plaque in a place of business as a warning label similar to the Trust-E seal.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
I believe a stronger truth-in-advertising law is in order in the US. There are a disturbing number of adverts that tell you shockingly little about the product they're advertising. There is far too much emphasis on image.
We should disallow companies from advertising based on knowingly bogus research (read: research sponsored by THAT company), and force them to stick to the facts. There should be penalties for lying to people in order to sell a product. I also think political campaigns should be held most strictly to this policy.
Too many advertisements simply say "use X, and the Y in your life will become that much better!" or "X is the BEST Z product--EVER!" with absolutely no evidence. It's ridiculous.
And yet Americans don't have a problem with it. They're either too used to being lied to or just don't care. It has to stop. If the G5 isn't the first/fastest 64 bit CPU, well, Apple shouldn't be allowed to say that it is. Isn't there a law against lying to people for money? Don't they call that a SCAM?
Just wait until the BBB finds out that using a G5 will not blow you right through the wall onto your lawn.
At the time Apple started selling the G5, was anyone selling a 64 bit PC, and if so, was it faster than the G5?
There were plenty of 64 bit computers available.. but not really on the PC market...
I don't know about you but is there bigger fish to fry out there when it comes to truth in advertising. If the BB wants to make a statement, why not go after all those diet pill advertisers who claim to help you lose wieght in 30 days without diet or exercise. Or make thousands of dollars working from home in 30 days. To my knowledge, the BB said nothing when movie studios put out raving reviews of their movie by non-existent movie critics.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
"performed the multi-processor "Rate" benchmarks with hyperthreading DISABLED" because the PC ran faster with them disabled. You're just trolling.
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
Dell disables hyperthreading for its own SPEC tests as it slows they machine down. (reference: http://www.specbench.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q2 /cpu2000-20030404-02023.asc )
This person has also made a number of other mistakes in his ranting that have been disproven before, at which point he the "miraculously" finds another "problem" which he not only missed before, but takes the place of one of his earlier errors. This means that he's been wrong twice everytime he does this. This is also ignoring everything which has been disproven on his site which is still up (such as the hyperthreading fallacy).
You're an idiot who doesn't know enough to understand what was going on and what the real issues are. You need to know the correct arguments before you can attack them, and you sir, do not have the slightest inkling.
He's also mad becuase HP went with Apple and not them and now HP will have it's own branded iPod.
They are now working to get 2 terabytes of IS.
This is about honesty. Just because you can cite examples of other people being dishonest doesn't mean Apple should be allowed to be dishonest as well. That's like saying that since your dad speeds and gets away with it, the police should have no right to pull you over. That's not a justification, that's an excuse. And as Trump says on his show, "I don't. like. excuses."
If Apple is dishonest, they should not be defended. You're not defending Apple, you're defending lying. If you are an Apple Zealot, you're not unbiased. Take a step back, find someone who is and let them look at the facts without your propaganda slipping in. If you're an Apple zealot, you're not acting in the best interests of society (or even yourself), you're acting in the best interests of Apple. The Better Business Bureau IS unbiased. If Microsoft makes claims like this, they will be censured as well. Overall, the system works. You have no problem when our enemies are caught and punished, but when we are caught and punished, we attack the system. That's what's happening here.
Everybody here is trying to defend Apple based on technicalities: they said "desktop", not "workstation"; other people lie too; the BBB is a corporate shill; this wouldn't happen if Clinton was in office; there's an anti-Apple conspiracy!
No matter how much you love Apple Corporation and want to promote their products, it is unethical and irresponsible to break the rules our society is based on. If you actively promote false advertising for your own selfish interests now, you have NO RIGHT to complain about others doing the same thing. What this means is that everybody will race to be the most dishonest, so that the right to complain about others' dishonesty will not matter, because you gain more from your dishonesty than you lose by allowing others' dishonesty. This is NOT where we want society to go.
If others are dishonest, call the BBB, don't join them in dishonesty. Apple loves their PR. They spend nearly as much on ads and promotions as on R&D. Lying should hurt their reputation. They should be punished for deceit. But there are people here acting as damage control to help Apple lie without being hurt by it. This is evil.
Dell are the good guys here. Apple is often right on the edge of deception with their ads; this time they went a bit too far and had their wrists slapped for it. I don't care about Dell computers, but I care about honesty in advertising. If Apple noticed Dell blatantly lying and called the BBB, we'd claim it as another example of Apple's glorious belief in truth and goodness. Because that's what we choose to believe. But the sword cuts both ways. It has to. If Apple lies, they should face consequences, just as Dell should when they lie. Someone's mom will see these ads and possibly get scammed into buying the wrong computer based on a lie. That's not good. Apple will lose in the long run, and the customer will lose as well. The best customer service I've ever seen is when an Apple sales guy told me to buy Windows XP because a Mac wouldn't work as well for what I wanted it to do. He was right, and he was honest. And it made me love Apple because they gave a damn about their customers and didn't want to screw me over just to make a quick sale. There are people on this board without that ethic; who cannot see the long-term problem of millions of angry customers who feel they've been lied to, badmouthing Apple to 20 people each and costing Apple many potential future sales. If the Apple guy had pushed me into the wrong solution just because he'd make a commission, I wouldn't have gone on to buy a half-dozen Macs, iPod, software, etc. and helping out on forums doing technical support for Mac newbies. Apple would have lost ME by lying.
And because they're lying now, they're losing someone else. Someone who cares about the truth is the best salesman you can have on your side. He will push you to be the best you can be when y
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
I've found that cheap RAM can often adversely affect the stability of Apple's computers. In two instances I've used non-Apple RAM and found the system to crash randomly, and behave inconsistently on the whole, until the non-Apple RAM was removed and replaced with higher quality RAM.
In one instance, I just picked the wrong RAM, even though it said it was compatible with my computer, it wasn't. I got the manufacturer to send me a more expensive, higher quality chip instead. In the second instance (which was a 2 GHz G5, by the way), the retailer included a free GB of RAM with the purchase, but the RAM was cheap. In that case, they offered to exchange the RAM for the cost of the new RAM minus retail of what they gave us (which was a decent deal).
So, this may have nothing to do with your problem, since a lot of people have perfectly decent RAM. However, if you have purchased RAM from someone else, or had it included with your purchase, take it out and see if the problems disappear. The hardware test disk will not find problems in cheap RAM; it didn't in either of the cases above.
The complain by Dell and others is more a matter of semantics (as is the add itself).
Dell claims that the term PC can apply to a workstation as well, rather than simply being used (as in the Apple add) to indicate a personal computer.
I never hear the word PC and think workstation, so I don't find Apple's ads misleading.
It's like a color printer add from a couple of years ago that said, "somewhere between black and white is silver, which is just one of the colors between the colors that the color printer can print." Note that they never claim they can print silver, just that it's between two colors they CAN print. Misleading? Not if you actually pay attention to what they're saying.
That's what marketing is all about.
* As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
And again...
Just to exercise my fingers a little more I'll repeat myself. No individual customers complained to the BBB about Apple. Dell did. This is comparable to Ford making a tip to the BBB about Chevy's claim that their mid-sized SUV gets the best overall mileage of all other currently available mid-sized SUVs.
If we're talking about desktops here, not servers, what exactly does the average user crave all this speed for? Is it just for games? Most of my thirty-something friends use PCs primarily for playing games or net-surfing with crappy-non-standards-compliant Explorer.
With 15 years of print design under my belt, my G4s seem plenty fast for high-end Photoshop work and anything else I throw at it. How fast does the average "business" machine need to be? I'm all for speed increases, but the PC vs. Mac speed debate is so OLD! Dell must be a huge crybaby to call shenanigans on an ad that's already played out.
Mac users know our Macs aren't the fastest, and most of us (I'll wager) were skeptical about Apple's G5 claim. Fact is, we don't really care. I'm making a living with these so-called "slow" computers, not playing Jedi Academy. I'd never trade a slow G4 for a fast Dell, unless I really needed a better gaming machine.
BTW, I do play Jedi Academy, and it rocks! Don't tell my wife...
Apple's SPEC scores for the DELLs were just as valid as the ones DELL gave, they just used a different compiler than DELL. The claim was true that using the same compiler on both computers the G5 was faster. DELL with it.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
...Dell claiming that they were the first to ship integrated wireless and antennas in a laptop, even though Apple in fact did it more than a year earlier?
Maybe someone should "act on behalf of consumers" to notify them of these "inaccuracies".
How do you measure the speed of a computer?
Is a 3 GHz P4 with 4 MB RAM faster than a 1.6 GHz G5 with 16 GB RAM? Not likely. So it's not [only] the clock frequency of the CPU that matters.
A fast computer is, IMHO, one which allows me to perform a certain task in a short time. Think about it - isn't this what _really_ matters? Can I write my essays in a shorter time on a 2 GHz G5 than an old iMac? Not really.
Comparing Macs and Windows machines, I'd say Macs have always been faster, and will likely be for quite some time. Since the G5 is the fastest Mac, I'd say it's the fastest computer.
My two cents.
Sig Nature
Slashdot | Apple Hardware VP Defends Benchmarks
spl is an idiot and known Mac community troll. Proof for the idiot part can be found here.
Oh, and here is what Luxology had to say benchmarkwise ...
"Dude, you're getting a cell!"
Men believe what they want. - Caesar
The "world's fastest" thing is just marketing hype. Who can't see that? It may or may not be true, but who really cares one way or the other? I never have. Is it really so hard to figure that out? Has there been a rash of people rushing out to get G5s only to find out they were sorely duped? This is such a non-issue.
Clearly, Dell is run by a bunch of whiners who would rather gripe and complain than come up with their own attention-grabbing ad campaigns. And it's so nice to see CNet letting themselves be used as Dell's little bitch--no surprise there given CNet's notorious history of Apple bashing.
I'd love to see how many folks at CNet have Dell and/or Microsoft stock. That would probably explain a few things.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
I think that it'd be a nice waste of time to take some of Dell's claims under consideration and report any false information. After all, they've been "first" in so many things Apple actually beat them to, that it shouldn't be too hard to find something to report.
... Maybe we should be pleased that there's at least some regulation in place.
;-)
I'm not especially vexed by Dell's move, Apple's claim is dubious, although I personally think they make their point: they've got the fastest personal computer you can buy off the shelve. OK, maybe not anymore, next month maybe again, etc etc, who cares, they still make the most pleasing computer afaic, and I don't mind it being fast.
I am however surprised America reacts to this type of hyperbole. Your presidents get elected on this, all the goods you buy are sold on this, your news is full of it
Me, I'm still waiting for the "I can't believe it's not Windows" campaign for Linux
I think, therefore I am...I think.
I could be wrong, but haven't Sun, SGI and DEC all been making 64 bit workstations for like ... 10 or more years? That was my complaint with those Apple ads.
... compared to the standards based circa 1980. Moore tells us that you'd have to have 256 of those G3s to have a modern super computer in 1999 when those ads were run. Which incedently would have gotten them in the Top 500 in 1999.
The other ad I really hated was the original G3 ad that claimed, "Own a SuperComputer". Yeah, it's a super computer
(:
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
It's been posted over and over again, things like "PC" vs. "Workstation" classifications, processor speeds, etc.
But I bet one of the big things that make the G5 faster isn't the hardware, but the software. Which do you think would be a more efficient OS - bloated Windows XP, or OSX, based on BSD? And another thing, regarding the UI itself - isn't OSX's GUI fully 3D-accellerated? So the processor isn't having to spend near as much time handling the drawing of the GUI compared to either Windows or X11, leaving it free to work on other tasks.
Plus, a lot of it has to do with the UI design. Most slashdotters can probably accomplish most file-related tasks (copying, moving, deleting, etc.) faster using a CLI than GUI. And among different GUIs, some allow you to perform tasks quicker than others.
So I'm sure that if you ran a full set of benchmarks on a G5, it likely would rank lower than other top-of-the-line PCs. But as far as real usage instead of similated benchmarks, I'm certain the G5 is on top.
Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.