PDA

View Full Version : Apple to switch to Intel...


chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 12:46 AM
Wow... this is quite a move for apple. Risky, yet potentially very rewarding. IBM has been making very slow progress with the G5 recently, so I guess it can't come as too big a surprise. I was about to buy a powerbook too, guess I'll have to wait this out. Why couldn't they switch to AMD? :mad:

http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM%2C+switch+to+Intel+chips/2100-1006_3-5731398.html?tag=ai

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 01:37 AM
Pretty interesting...I wonder how it will affect performance...I guess I'll just have to buy one when it comes out and compare it :)

Rausch
06-04-2005, 01:42 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo!

Another part of me has just died.... :sulk:

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 01:44 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooo!

Another part of me has just died.... :sulk:


why? WTF is the difference between IBM and Intel? (besides the obvious smartass)

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 02:08 AM
photoshop superiority down the tube, for one thing... unless of course intel starts manufacturing PowerPC chips specifically for Apple.

switching from the PPC to x86 is going to require all current software to be recompiled/optimized... it's gonna be a mess and take a good amount of time too, but at the rate IBM is developing the PPC, the switch will probably be worth it.

Miles
06-04-2005, 02:18 AM
why? WTF is the difference between IBM and Intel? (besides the obvious smartass)

If they use the same chip architecture as PC processors Mac, users will lose one of their strongest pro-mac arguments. Though it wouldnt be the case if Intel makes them an entirely different chip.

Logical
06-04-2005, 02:24 AM
If they use the same chip architecture as PC processors Mac, users will lose one of their strongest pro-mac arguments. Though it wouldnt be the case if Intel makes them an entirely different chip.

Not sure I understand this argument, I always thought the true discriminator was the operating system.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 02:26 AM
Not sure I understand this argument, I always thought the true discriminator was the operating system.


Me too...I love the mac cause I don't have to search for hidden files

Miles
06-04-2005, 02:35 AM
Not sure I understand this argument, I always thought the true discriminator was the operating system.

I agree with your point about the OS. Along with the OS, their processors are probably their second most significant selling point (at least on the higher end ones). They are supposedly better designed and more powerful than the AMD and Intel equivalents. Though I dont really know enough about them to know if thats really true.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 02:37 AM
Me too...I love the mac cause I don't have to search for hidden files

Huh?

svuba
06-04-2005, 02:43 AM
photoshop superiority down the tube, for one thing... unless of course intel starts manufacturing PowerPC chips specifically for Apple.

switching from the PPC to x86 is going to require all current software to be recompiled/optimized... it's gonna be a mess and take a good amount of time too, but at the rate IBM is developing the PPC, the switch will probably be worth it.
Mac Photoshop superioity was lost years ago:

Mac vs. PC III: Mac Slaughtered Again (http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/11_nov/reviews/cw_macvspciii.htm) ...Put succinctly, this is the fastest workstation we’ve tested, too, by a long shot. Wow. We ran our After Effects and Photoshop benchmarks on this machine, nine in all, and saw a speed improvement that was far beyond what we anticipated. Mac users will be disappointed to see that this new Dell machine, while priced $629 less than the Mac Dual G4 1.25 GHz machine, was nearly twice as fast on most of the nine benchmarks we ran.


Mac vs. PC 5: Power Mac G5 Dual 2.7GHz (http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32620-1)

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 02:44 AM
Not sure I understand this argument, I always thought the true discriminator was the operating system.

The OS has been the largest discriminator since it's more secure/stable/easy to use, however the PPC processor is responsible for a fairly large performance advantage in photoshop/video-editing tasks. Additionally, Apple has always marketed it's CPU as far superior to Intel's so that will come back and bite them in the ass to a degree.

I'm pretty sure Apple can make the transition smoothly, though it'll be difficult to generate much revenue with the old macs as I would expect most consumers to wait for the new architecture. I guess that's what iPod sales are for. :p

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 02:49 AM
Mac Photoshop superioity was lost years ago:

Mac vs. PC III: Mac Slaughtered Again (http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/11_nov/reviews/cw_macvspciii.htm) ...Put succinctly, this is the fastest workstation we’ve tested, too, by a long shot. Wow. We ran our After Effects and Photoshop benchmarks on this machine, nine in all, and saw a speed improvement that was far beyond what we anticipated. Mac users will be disappointed to see that this new Dell machine, while priced $629 less than the Mac Dual G4 1.25 GHz machine, was nearly twice as fast on most of the nine benchmarks we ran.


Mac vs. PC 5: Power Mac G5 Dual 2.7GHz (http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=32620-1)

ehhh... I guess it depends on what article you read... I recall many articles which state the opposite results. most serious videoeditors/photoshop gurus use macs, and if not for their speed, definitely for their stability.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 02:56 AM
Huh?

When yu install software on a PC files literally go EVERYWHERE on the harddrive....on a mac they go in one place in one folder

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:03 AM
When yu install software on a PC files literally go EVERYWHERE on the harddrive....on a mac they go in one place in one folder

You're a moron. When I install a program it goes in Program Files in it's own folder.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:05 AM
You're a moron. When I install a program it goes in Program Files in it's own folder.

I think he's talking about the registry.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:06 AM
You're a moron. When I install a program it goes in Program Files in it's own folder.

um yeah...you have no idea what you are talking about you know what a dll file is? It doesn't reside in the program folder...lets see when my microsoft money went down I had to search my registry for a file to delete so I could uninstall money...you sir are the moron

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:06 AM
um yeah...you have no idea what you are talking about you know what a dll file is? It doesn't reside in the program folder...lets see when my microsoft money went down I had to search my registry for a file to delete so I could uninstall money...you sir are the moron

Show me your photoshop folder.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:09 AM
you know what a dll file is? It doesn't reside in the program folder..

Holy shit! Look at all these .dll's in this program folder!

http://img216.echo.cx/img216/9559/dll9gr.jpg

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 03:12 AM
Holy shit! Look at all these .dll's in this program folder!

insert ugly windows image
Umm, not all of them do [reside in the program folder]. Don't jump all over people when you have no idea what you're talking about, mr. can i use different wep keys on the same network. :p

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:13 AM
Holy shit! Look at all these .dll's in this program folder!



wow genius why does a PC need a defrag then?

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:14 AM
Umm, not all of them do. Don't jump all over people when you have no idea what you're talking about, mr. can i use different wep keys on the same network. :p


apparently the desire to be right everytime overpowers any common sense the young one has

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:15 AM
I think he's talking about the registry.

It doesn't matter. I can install and uninstall programs and never even think about the registry. Saying you love a Mac because you don't have to mess with the registry is like saying you love your Monitor because you don't have to open it up and tinker with it.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:16 AM
apparently the desire to be right everytime overpowers any common sense the young one has

Listen dipshit, your point is retarded. I haven't touched my registry in months.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:17 AM
apparently the desire to be right everytime overpowers any common sense the young one has

you need to explain it in a language he'll understand.

the desire to be right=luke skwalker
common sense=darth vader

luke skywalker overpowers darth vader.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:18 AM
Listen dipshit, your point is retarded. I haven't touched my registry in months.

No it isn't. Just cause you haven't touched your registry in months doesn't make him wrong.

i

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:19 AM
I think he's talking about the registry.


amongst other things....I find it very cumbersome to spend hours sometimes looking for a folder to delete...with the mac I just delete one folder....so much easier...I musta spent two days trying to delete a music file that I had downloaded that was being used by another application....(there was no other application running) so I had to hunt down every part of that music file....I think it might have had some malcious properties but with the mac there is no fuss over these kinds of problems

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:19 AM
This is ridiculous. I'll just have to wait for the "respected" members of CP to come along and debunk DenverChief's ridiculous claims... :rolleyes:

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:19 AM
It doesn't matter. I can install and uninstall programs and never even think about the registry. Saying you love a Mac because you don't have to mess with the registry is like saying you love your Monitor because you don't have to open it up and tinker with it.

Um, you're not supposed to open up the monitor?


WHY DIDN'T I GET THIS MEMO, I don't actually have a monitor I am reading this with the force.

It is strong here.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:20 AM
. I haven't touched my registry in months.


AND???????????


Grow up already

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:20 AM
amongst other things....I find it very cumbersome to spend hours sometimes looking for a folder to delete...with the mac I just delete one folder....so much easier...I musta spent two days trying to delete a music file that I had downloaded that was being used by another application....(there was no other application running) so I had to hunt down every part of that music file....I think it might have had some malcious properties but with the mac there is no fuss over these kinds of problems

LOL WTF are you talking about? Every part of a music file? All my mp3s are sitting in one folder....the audio files for, say, MVP Baseball are all in the same folder. I don't have to "hunt" anything down.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:21 AM
Um, you're not supposed to open up the monitor?


WHY DIDN'T I GET THIS MEMO, I don't actually have a monitor I am reading this with the force.

It is strong here.


ROFL

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:21 AM
AND???????????


Grow up already

Your point is bullshit.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:22 AM
LOL WTF are you talking about? Every part of a music file? All my mp3s are sitting in one folder....the audio files for, say, MVP Baseball are all in the same folder. I don't have to "hunt" anything down.


damn you are dense re-read what I wrote...and you still haven't answered my question...what is the point of defraging if the files are neatly packed into one folder...hmmm?

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:22 AM
I truly don't understand what DenverChief is talking about...sounds to me like someone doesn't understand how to use their PC and requires a "dumbed down" Mac.

Logical
06-04-2005, 03:23 AM
Wow gochiefs you really do not know this subject, why are you arguing it. It has long been known that Mac OS and the way it handles files is superior to the PC. The PC has had the huge advantage in price and volume of software applications created first for it. There are trade offs with each system type.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:23 AM
Your point is bullshit.
:rolleyes: great argument einstein....just because you are 16 doesn't mean you are doogie howser of the computer world Mkay?

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:24 AM
damn you are dense re-read what I wrote...and you still haven't answered my question...what is the point of defraging if the files are neatly packed into one folder...hmmm?

I haven't defragged in months.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:24 AM
I truly don't understand what DenverChief is talking about...sounds to me like someone doesn't understand how to use their PC and requires a "dumbed down" Mac.


apparently I know more than you....defreg? gonna take a stab at that one or are ya afraid?

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:25 AM
Wow gochiefs you really do not know this subject, why are you arguing it. It has long been known that Mac OS and the way it handles files is superior to the PC. The PC has had the huge advantage in price and volume of software applications created first for it. There are trade offs with each system type.

C'mon, I bet you anythning DenverChief's Photoshop folder is almost identical to mine.

DC is insinuating that when I install photoshop it flings the contents of the CD all about the drive. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:25 AM
I haven't defragged in months.

that wasn't the question..the question is if all files on a PC are packed nicely in one folder then what is the point of the defrag on a PC?

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:26 AM
C'mon, I bet you anythning DenverChief's Photoshop folder is almost identical to mine.

DC is insinuating that when I install photoshop it flings the contents of the CD all about the drive. That couldn't be farther from the truth.


I don't have photoshop...and I'm posting from my Mac

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:27 AM
that wasn't the question..the question is if all files on a PC are packed nicely in one folder then what is the point of the defrag on a PC?

Beats the hell out of me, but I certainly don't need to defrag.

Look, it's real easy. Say there was a problem with my install of Photoshop. One of the files was corrupted or something. I'd know exactly where to go to repair or replace that file:

C:/Program Files/Adobe/Photoshop/

You are saying this is not so. You are full of shit.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:28 AM
This is ridiculous. I'll just have to wait for the "respected" members of CP to come along and debunk DenverChief's ridiculous claims... :rolleyes:


You throwing up "respected" is about like a prostitute calling a virgin a whore.

How many times they chase your ass off? How many times have you had to come back with a different name?

Don't talk respect to me punk.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:30 AM
You throwing up "respected" is about like a prostitute calling a virgin a whore.

How many times they chase your ass off? How many times have you had to come back with a different name?

Don't talk respect to me punk.

Eat me.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:30 AM
Microsoft defrag or disk defragmenter is a software utility designed to help chronologically order the data on the hard disk drive. The theory behind defrag is to place each program together instead of scattered throughout the hard disk drive allowing the read-write head to access the data faster on the hard disk drive. Windows 98 includes an improved version of defrag that is said to place the most commonly accessed data at the beginning of the drive allowing the read-write head a shorter distance to access the data making the computer faster. Generally unless the hard disk drive is seriously fragmented you will not notice a significant difference after defragging the hard disk drive.




http://www.computerhope.com/software/defrag.htm

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 03:31 AM
This entire argument is pretty stupid...

Macs do a much better job of localizing programs and not spreading them across multiple folders, ie. system32 dlls and filling the registry with references that usually aren't properly removed.

The registry should be cleaned every once in a while to get rid of bogus references that can result in anything from bad file assocations to systems hangs.

As far as defragging goes... it's helpful on both platforms, though it isn't as important on macs since there isn't quite as much shuffling of files across the disk. However, simply downloading music, deleting apps, moving files around, etc. contribute to fragmentation on both OS's.

Now will ya please shut up, gochiefs?

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:32 AM
Eat me.

Snappy comeback.



Why don't you go color on the wall or something?

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:32 AM
I will have to go now guys. Three of my photoshop DLLs have been misplaced. I think perhaps they are in my porn folder, or perhaps the Windows directory. Come to think of it I believe half of my windows directory has migrated into my mp3 folder. SHIT! ROFL :rolleyes:

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:33 AM
I will have to go now guys. Three of my photoshop DLLs have been misplaced. I think perhaps they are in my porn folder, or perhaps the Windows directory. Come to think of it I believe half of my windows directory has migrated into my mp3 folder. SHIT! ROFL :rolleyes:

Read below, cockmunch.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:34 AM
Beats the hell out of me, but I certainly don't need to defrag.



What is the purpose of a defragmentation program?

When a file is created, MS-DOS tries to store all of the data end to end in a contiguous location on the disk. As other files are created, they are placed immediately behind the previously created file. However, if a file is subsequently modified, it may need more disk space than it originally got. If MS-DOS cannot find enough contiguous space to hold the modified file, it stores the excess in a noncontiguous location. This separation of a file's parts, called fragmentation, is not a big problem because the FAT maintains a record of the location of each file's clusters. However, if a files individual clusters are noncontiguous (i.e., they are spread all over the disk surface and separated by the clusters of other files) the read/write heads have to spend extra time moving from track to track looking for all the bits and bytes needed to load the file into memory. The result is a degradation in disk operations.

Logical
06-04-2005, 03:35 AM
C'mon, I bet you anythning DenverChief's Photoshop folder is almost identical to mine.

DC is insinuating that when I install photoshop it flings the contents of the CD all about the drive. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

He is absolutely right. By the way you are completely wrong when you believe all related files to an application are in the same folder, that is just not true. There really are many articles that discuss this in detail. If you have an open mind and want to understand I suggest you Google on Mac PC operating system differences. Surely some of them have made it to the Net over the years.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:36 AM
He is absolutely right. By the way you are completely wrong when you believe all related files to an application are in the same folder, that is just not true. There really are many articles that discuss this in detail. If you have an open mind and want to understand I suggest you Google on Mac PC operating system differences. Surely some of them have made it to the Net over the years.


Finally one of those "respected" members show up

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:36 AM
Microsoft defrag or disk defragmenter is a software utility designed to help chronologically order the data on the hard disk drive. The theory behind defrag is to place each program together instead of scattered throughout the hard disk drive allowing the read-write head to access the data faster on the hard disk drive. Windows 98 includes an improved version of defrag that is said to place the most commonly accessed data at the beginning of the drive allowing the read-write head a shorter distance to access the data making the computer faster. Generally unless the hard disk drive is seriously fragmented you will not notice a significant difference after defragging the hard disk drive.




http://www.computerhope.com/software/defrag.htm

This entire argument is pretty stupid...

Macs do a much better job of localizing programs and not spreading them across multiple folders, ie. system32 dlls and filling the registry with references that usually aren't properly removed.

The registry should be cleaned every once in a while to get rid of bogus references that can result in anything from bad file assocations to systems hangs.

As far as defragging goes... it's helpful on both platforms, though it isn't as important on macs since there isn't quite as much shuffling of files across the disk. However, simply downloading music, deleting apps, moving files around, etc. contribute to fragmentation on both OS's.

Now will ya please shut up, gochiefs?

He is absolutely right. By the way you are completely wrong when you believe all related files to an application are in the same folder, that is just not true. There really are many articles that discuss this in detail. If you have an open mind and want to understand I suggest you Google on Mac PC operating system differences. Surely some of them have made it to the Net over the years.


Thank gawd some reputable posters showed up :p:D

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:37 AM
He is absolutely right. By the way you are completely wrong when you believe all related files to an application are in the same folder, that is just not true. There really are many articles that discuss this in detail. If you have an open mind and want to understand I suggest you Google on Mac PC operating system differences. Surely some of them have made it to the Net over the years.

It makes zero sense to me. I've never had trouble locating ANY file I needed to find in Windows.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:37 AM
This entire argument is pretty stupid...

Macs do a much better job of localizing programs and not spreading them across multiple folders, ie. system32 dlls and filling the registry with references that usually aren't properly removed.

The registry should be cleaned every once in a while to get rid of bogus references that can result in anything from bad file assocations to systems hangs.

As far as defragging goes... it's helpful on both platforms, though it isn't as important on macs since there isn't quite as much shuffling of files across the disk. However, simply downloading music, deleting apps, moving files around, etc. contribute to fragmentation on both OS's.

Now will ya please shut up, gochiefs?

It must be a software program I haven't seen cause I have never seen a defrag for my mac....

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:38 AM
It makes zero sense to me. I've never had trouble locating ANY file I needed to find in Windows.


So then it must be wrong.

:shake:

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 03:39 AM
It must be a software program I haven't seen cause I have never seen a defrag for my mac....

Yep, alot of mac users use norton to defrag, among other utilities.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:40 AM
Yep, alot of mac users use norton to defrag, among other utilities.


as soon as I read it the light went off in my head...I have seen it but just kinda laughed like I do at virus protection for macs :D :p

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:41 AM
So then it must be wrong.

:shake:

Seriously, I don't know WTF DC is going on about. If I needed to mod something in MVP Baseball, I go to the MVP Baseball folder. If I need to install a font I downloaded into Photoshop, I take the file I downloaded and put it in the appropriate folder within the Photoshop directory.

Maybe I misunderstood DC? :shrug:

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 03:41 AM
omg, four minutes and no posts by goat cheese, maybe he's given up. :p

edit: ****, i'm wrong

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:42 AM
omg, four minutes and no posts by goat cheese, maybe he's given up. :p

Maybe he took my advice and went and colored on the wall.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:43 AM
Seriously, I don't know WTF DC is going on about. If I needed to mod something in MVP Baseball, I go to the MVP Baseball folder. If I need to install a font I downloaded into Photoshop, I take the file I downloaded and put it in the appropriate folder within the Photoshop directory.

Maybe I misunderstood DC? :shrug:

It is possible, but you were being a shithead about it.

Thanks for neg repping me on that whole nolan ryan thing btw.


nlm

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 03:46 AM
Thanks for neg repping me on that whole nolan ryan thing btw.


You deserved it.

Taco John
06-04-2005, 03:47 AM
Very smart move by Apple. They're targeting people just like myself. I'd now consider buying an Apple, where as before they weren't even on the menu.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:47 AM
You deserved it.

Just like you did for "eat me"

Not that I really give a shit, I think I'm just gonna turn mine off anyway.

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:47 AM
Very smart move by Apple. They're targeting people just like myself. I'd now consider buying an Apple, where as before they weren't even on the menu.


An apple a day keeps the doctor away.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:48 AM
Just like you did for "eat me"

Not that I really give a shit, I think I'm just gonna turn mine off anyway.


nah leave it on :D

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:50 AM
nah leave it on :D

it kind of annoys me when someone uses it as their only defense and then they get a feeling of satisfaction out of it.

Who cares? I post on here because the words in the posts not the little green dots underneath them.

chiefsfan58
06-04-2005, 03:52 AM
Very smart move by Apple. They're targeting people just like myself. I'd now consider buying an Apple, where as before they weren't even on the menu.
Yeah, I agree, I've been considering my first mac for the last couple months and was wary of the slow mobile processors, but now I'm pretty positive I'll be exploring the dark side option. :p.

I'm willing to wait until all this gets straightened out. The details should start coming out next week.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 03:52 AM
it kind of annoys me when someone uses it as their only defense and then they get a feeling of satisfaction out of it.

Who cares? I post on here because the words in the posts not the little green dots underneath them.


:shrug: I just like givin ya rep...ya have helped me out a few times on here...OMG its almost 3 am...I hafta work at noon :eek:

J Diddy
06-04-2005, 03:54 AM
:shrug: I just like givin ya rep...ya have helped me out a few times on here...OMG its almost 3 am...I hafta work at noon :eek:

Cool have fun.

Maybe someday I could become a "respected" member of this board.

Logical
06-04-2005, 04:07 AM
It makes zero sense to me. I've never had trouble locating ANY file I needed to find in Windows.

Let me suggest you try to remove Microsoft Word without the unistall feature and see how well that works out for you. Better still after you do it try to reload it and see how many files are still loaded that you thought you eliminated by deleting the Program application folder. If you are not that adventurous (and I do advise against it unless you want to screw up your system) just do an uninstall and pay close attention to where it is deleting files from (if I remember right it not only tells you the shared files you might be about to delete but where they are located.

Taco John
06-04-2005, 04:15 AM
Let me suggest you try to remove Microsoft Word without the unistall feature and see how well that works out for you. Better still after you do it try to reload it and see how many files are still loaded that you thought you eliminated by deleting the Program application folder. If you are not that adventurous (and I do advise against it unless you want to screw up your system) just do an uninstall and pay close attention to where it is deleting files from (if I remember right it not only tells you the shared files you might be about to delete but where they are located.


Gochiefs is definitely, and painfully wrong on this one... I've felt the sting of the Microsoft yardsale, with crucial program files strewn all throughout the computer. I'd love to dump Windows for a better operating system, but Linux aint it.

I'm really perked up about this news. I think Apple is doing a hell of a thing here. I'm going to start leveraging in...

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 05:29 AM
it kind of annoys me when someone uses it as their only defense and then they get a feeling of satisfaction out of it.

Who cares? I post on here because the words in the posts not the little green dots underneath them.

What the hell are you talking about? I neg repped you because you were talking shit about one of the greatest ballplayers ever. That kind of thing is deserving of neg rep EVERY SINGLE TIME...

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 05:31 AM
Let me suggest you try to remove Microsoft Word without the unistall feature and see how well that works out for you. Better still after you do it try to reload it and see how many files are still loaded that you thought you eliminated by deleting the Program application folder. If you are not that adventurous (and I do advise against it unless you want to screw up your system) just do an uninstall and pay close attention to where it is deleting files from (if I remember right it not only tells you the shared files you might be about to delete but where they are located.

LOL!

Why would I ever uninstall something by deleting the folder? You ALWAYS use the uninstall feature.

Hilarious.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 05:44 AM
In conclusion...I love the PC. I don't have to search for hidden files!

Fire Me Boy!
06-04-2005, 05:48 AM
gochiefs, I really have not been one to rip on you, so take this as a sincere post... you're wrong. Windows installs files all over the place. As well, even using the uninstall program doesn't always get rid of everything... do your normal thing for a year, installing and uninstalling various programs -- then run a registry cleaner and see how screwed up your registry is. Eventually, these leftover registry tags and shared files will slow your system.

While I'm not a Mac fan, I will say its file organization is MUCH better. And networking a Mac is literally a plug and play situation... nice.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 05:51 AM
gochiefs, I really have not been one to rip on you, so take this as a sincere post... you're wrong. Windows installs files all over the place. As well, even using the uninstall program doesn't always get rid of everything... do your normal thing for a year, installing and uninstalling various programs -- then run a registry cleaner and see how screwed up your registry is. Eventually, these leftover registry tags and shared files will slow your system.

While I'm not a Mac fan, I will say its file organization is MUCH better. And networking a Mac is literally a plug and play situation... nice.

I don't have to search for hidden files on my PC. :shrug:

Fire Me Boy!
06-04-2005, 05:58 AM
I don't have to search for hidden files on my PC. :shrug:
I guarantee I could find a Photoshop file that you MUST HAVE to run PS that is NOT in the program files folder... guaranteed.

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 06:00 AM
I guarantee I could find a Photoshop file that you MUST HAVE to run PS that is NOT in the program files folder... guaranteed.

Oh sure, stuff gets thrown into the registry, but that's how Windows works. Don't **** with the registry, it won't **** with you.

Fire Me Boy!
06-04-2005, 06:08 AM
Oh sure, stuff gets thrown into the registry, but that's how Windows works. Don't **** with the registry, it won't **** with you.
How INCREDIBLY untrue! I don't screw with the registry and it's ****ed me more than once! And I'm no dummy... I've been gainfully employed as a computer tech. I screw with the registry only when absolutely necessary nowadays -- and that's not very damn often. But you're being INCREDIBLY naive to say, "Don't **** with the registry, it won't **** with you."

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 06:10 AM
How INCREDIBLY untrue! I don't screw with the registry and it's ****ed me more than once! And I'm no dummy... I've been gainfully employed as a computer tech. I screw with the registry only when absolutely necessary nowadays -- and that's not very damn often. But you're being INCREDIBLY naive to say, "Don't **** with the registry, it won't **** with you."

Eh, I've never had any problems.

I guess I can admit Macs not having a registry is a more convenient way of doing things, but I'm definitely not willing to admit that working on the PC means "searching for hidden files." It's simply not true.

Kerberos
06-04-2005, 06:13 AM
I was always under the impression that Apple/MAC used a much bigger BUS on thier boards than the intel/amd counterparts???

Thus having smaller rated chips moving data on buses twice the size made them seem really fast comparitivly?

Don't know if that is true but I was pretty sure that is what I remember being told.


:)



.

KILLER_CLOWN
06-04-2005, 09:48 AM
Another reason I will never own a mac, the Hated INTEL comes along to support em'. Now it will be Way overpriced.

Armyofme
06-04-2005, 09:49 AM
I was always under the impression that Apple/MAC used a much bigger BUS on thier boards than the intel/amd counterparts???

Thus having smaller rated chips moving data on buses twice the size made them seem really fast comparitivly?

Don't know if that is true but I was pretty sure that is what I remember being told.


:)

.

That's not quite right. The motherboards, in the past, were the weak link for the Mac for years. They were always a step behind in bus speeds... until the G5s. They finally took advantage of thier involvement in the Hypertransport alliance and leap-frogged the PCs bus speeds... but only for a short time.

The real speed advantage has been the chips themselves. They were/are able to push more data through more internal "pipelines" with a slower clocked processor. This is the point people were trying to get across for years, but the PC crowd didn't want to hear... a higher megahertz chip deosn't mean it is a faster chip. This is the very reason that AMD went to the "+" series (3000+, 3200+, etc.). Intel has finally seen the light as well and started the Centrino campaign (pretty sure this was the first series Intel switched gears).

Back to the original thread...

I think it would be suicide for Apple to switch. Apple is a hardware company first, software second. One of the advantages of the Mac platform is that Apple is able to control the hardware that the software is run on, leading to an ultra-stable working environment. Sure, Apple could sell Apple branded "Intel Inside" machines with a special ROM that is needed to run the OS, but it would take no time before a hacker was able to work around it. Then you would see cracked versions of the OS floating around with people wanting to install it on thier Frankenstien machines and having extremely poor results... Let the OS X bashing begin!

It is interesting to me to see some here ready to jump to OS X if they switched to Intel... Why does it really matter what processor is pushing the data around?

htismaqe
06-04-2005, 10:09 AM
Not sure I understand this argument, I always thought the true discriminator was the operating system.

OS and CPU are inseparable. You can't have MacOS without PPC.

Armyofme
06-04-2005, 10:16 AM
OS and CPU are inseparable. You can't have MacOS without PPC.

Sure you can. Apple has been building an Intel variant, internally, alongside the PPC version since the release of OS X. The core (called FreeBSD, or something like that) works with both chipsets, from what I understand.

htismaqe
06-04-2005, 10:26 AM
Sure you can. Apple has been building an Intel variant, internally, alongside the PPC version since the release of OS X. The core (called FreeBSD, or something like that) works with both chipsets, from what I understand.

Yes, they have an open source kernel (built on FreeBSD) but it's not "MacOS".

Just like HP Linux that can run on either Intel or HP chipsets is not HPUX.

Armyofme
06-04-2005, 10:37 AM
Yes, they have an open source kernel (built on FreeBSD) but it's not "MacOS".

Just like HP Linux that can run on either Intel or HP chipsets is not HPUX.

What I'm saying is that Apple has reportedly been building the Intel version of OS X internally for years. Not sure why, but they have. The FreeBSD point was just to show that the core/kernel is there and would prove it feesable for Apple to be doing just that.

htismaqe
06-04-2005, 10:47 AM
What I'm saying is that Apple has reportedly been building the Intel version of OS X internally for years. Not sure why, but they have. The FreeBSD point was just to show that the core/kernel is there and would prove it feesable for Apple to be doing just that.

And my point is that when you begin using open standards and/or an open architecture, you give up effeciency and performance in an effort to improve economies of scale.

My guess is Apple has finally decided that if you can't beat them, join them.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 11:38 AM
I'm definitely not willing to admit that working on the PC means "searching for hidden files." It's simply not true.
how long have you been using a computer?

Rausch
06-04-2005, 12:00 PM
It must be a software program I haven't seen cause I have never seen a defrag for my mac....

You don't have to. You reset the pram on your mac by holdilng down p+r+apple+option key while the computer resets, after you hear two "chimes" you let go.

It's reset, and takes about 30 seconds...

Rausch
06-04-2005, 12:01 PM
What I'm saying is that Apple has reportedly been building the Intel version of OS X internally for years. Not sure why, but they have. The FreeBSD point was just to show that the core/kernel is there and would prove it feesable for Apple to be doing just that.

Based on what Jobs said in the keynote it was going to be just in the servers and business models to make windows users more comfortable with switching.

Switching all macs is new to me. :mad:

Rausch
06-04-2005, 12:06 PM
OS and CPU are inseparable. You can't have MacOS without PPC.

You won't be running OS 9 or under on it, that's true. Due to the way Apple's OS tells the processors how and when to handle information that Motorola/IBM chipset is a must...

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 12:14 PM
After reading the hidden file debate, I'm left with a burning question. Why does anyone care if there are hidden files on their system? The reason common .dll files are located in say C:\Windows is because they are shared system .dlls. Admittedly I do not know a lot about MacOS, but I do know Linux and FreeBSD enough to know that they indeed use shared libraries, which is pretty similar. Using common .dlls is a GOOD thing.

Why would you want to uninstall a program by deleting it's directory instead of using an uninstaller program? The idea behind the uninstaller is that you shouldn't CARE where your program files are located. To me this is a moot point, if you delete a program's folder under Windows, then yeah, you are asking for trouble, but at the same time, it is not how you are supposed to remove it. Some uninstall scripts typically do not remove a user's settings or data when they are run, and this is why you will see the program directory sometimes under your program files directory. It is really up to the program developer to decide what is installed and where it is installed to, not a function of the OS itself.

Regarding the defrag matter, it sounds like there is some confusion in that matter. Just because files are fragmented throughout the hard drive does not mean their location in the directory structure has changed. When you install a program, the files may be scattered about physically on the disk platters, but they are logically organized in the same folder. From what I've read on Mac OS X Tiger, the defragmentation occurs behind the scenes whenever a file is accessed. This to me seems like it would incur a perfoemance penalty when reading the files, but once again, I don't pretend to know much about Macs.

I don't think Windows is evil because it uses a registry, in fact I like the idea of a central location for settings... anyone remember INI file hell in Windows 3.1? Just because some applications are poorly written doesn't mean the OS is flawed.

Just my $.02

patteeu
06-04-2005, 12:20 PM
You're a moron. When I install a program it goes in Program Files in it's own folder.

Macs don't have registry entries though unless things have changed in the last few years. That stuff is encoded in the file itself instead of having a OS-based database keeping track of it.

*edit* oops, I thought I was at the end of the thread when I was really only at the end of the first page. Please disregard if this has already been mentioned. */edit*

Rausch
06-04-2005, 12:28 PM
Macs don't have registry entries though unless things have changed in the last few years. That stuff is encoded in the file itself instead of having a OS-based database keeping track of it.

*edit* oops, I thought I was at the end of the thread when I was really only at the end of the first page. Please disregard if this has already been mentioned. */edit*

*following info found in the "Mac OSX Bible*

patteeu
06-04-2005, 12:31 PM
I'm going to start leveraging in...

Does that mean you are going to start borrowing money to invest in Apple?

Rausch
06-04-2005, 12:37 PM
Does that mean you are going to start borrowing money to invest in Apple?

It's a good idea, but the perfect time would have been about 2 years ago before the huge sales of iPod and the iTunes store. Current stock price is mostly due to the success of those two more than computer sales...

http://www.apple.com/investor/

KILLER_CLOWN
06-04-2005, 12:41 PM
Ipods are way overvalued....just listen to Bill "the hitman" Gates.

HC_Chief
06-04-2005, 12:47 PM
Good. Maybe they'll finally wise up to the fact that the $ is in the software licensing, not hardware.

Pack of f*cktards.
Start licensing that OS to compete with M$ on the x86 & NG platforms. Or, keep doing what you're doing: locking customers into overpriced hardware-dependant systems... and stay at 4% market share.

Simplex3
06-04-2005, 02:08 PM
This is ridiculous. I'll just have to wait for the "respected" members of CP to come along and debunk DenverChief's ridiculous claims... :rolleyes:
Take it from a guy that wrote software for Windows for over a decade: You're wrong. We dump shit all over the place, over-write shared library files with newer versions, dump crap in the registry, I've even had to delete files and re-write registry settings from other applications to get mine installed. Now, I do that all for you with the installer, but it sure the hell is being done.

Now, do you really think my installer puts the older versions of those replaced files back when you uninstall my app? Hell no it doens't.

Conclusion: YOU are the one that is full of s**t and doesn't know what they're talking about.

DenverChief: Defrag has nothing to do with programs installing files everywhere, it has everything to do with the various MS file systems scattering pieces of a given file all over the drive. Even this isn't necessarily bad, UFS2 (Unix File System 2) fragments files purposefully. It takes the speed of the disk rotation and drive latency into account and attempts to write the files across the disk with any necessary gaps so that the file can be read faster.

Simplex3
06-04-2005, 02:23 PM
Sure you can. Apple has been building an Intel variant, internally, alongside the PPC version since the release of OS X. The core (called FreeBSD, or something like that) works with both chipsets, from what I understand.
FreeBSD is an ass-kicking OS. Last I hear Apple uses a 3.x core, currently FreeBSD is v5.4. Learn more about it at http://www.freebsd.org/ . We use nothing but FreeBSD on our servers because it is ROCK solid.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 02:25 PM
FreeBSD is an ass-kicking OS. Last I hear Apple uses a 3.x core, currently FreeBSD is v5.4. Learn more about it at http://www.freebsd.org/ . We use nothing but FreeBSD on our servers because it is ROCK solid.

Good. I might finally have a guy to talk to when I get these terminal hacks...

Simplex3
06-04-2005, 02:28 PM
Good. Maybe they'll finally wise up to the fact that the $ is in the software licensing, not hardware.

Pack of f*cktards.
Start licensing that OS to compete with M$ on the x86 & NG platforms. Or, keep doing what you're doing: locking customers into overpriced hardware-dependant systems... and stay at 4% market share.
The reason their OS is rock solid is because they don't have to worry about any old POS add on board that some tool like goatcheese pulls off ebay. By having some control over what is going in the box they can do much better quality control. It makes a world of difference.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 02:33 PM
The reason their OS is rock solid is because they don't have to worry about any old POS add on board that some tool like goatcheese pulls off ebay. By having some control over what is going in the box they can do much better quality control. It makes a world of difference.

And customer service is grade A.

You have software, hardware, or firmware problem you call one company. They walk you through it. Almost all my DVD and hard drive questions (Maxtor and Pioneer) were answered my Mac's tech support. Same with the OS.

When a power surge fried my motherboard I didn't ship the thing off, 4 days later I had a guy in my house who cleaned the thing (TONS of smoke and dust) for free and installed the new board in about an hour (the iMacs are extremely compact and a pain in the azz for anything other than RAM.)

HC_Chief
06-04-2005, 03:36 PM
The reason their OS is rock solid is because they don't have to worry about any old POS add on board that some tool like goatcheese pulls off ebay. By having some control over what is going in the box they can do much better quality control. It makes a world of difference.

Add on board? Like a video card or sound card or SATA/HBA/IOA? That's what device drivers are for.

And I wouldn't call MAC OS "rock solid". It crashes, just as every other OS does.

Simplex3
06-04-2005, 03:53 PM
Add on board? Like a video card or sound card or SATA/HBA/IOA? That's what device drivers are for.

And I wouldn't call MAC OS "rock solid". It crashes, just as every other OS does.
You assume that every mfg. writes good drivers. I can assure you that is wrong. It was the cause of the majority of Windows crashes the last time I bothered to keep track (win2k). You also have mfg's who replace Windows device files so that their particular piece of hardware will work better, never mind the adverse affect if my have on the rest of the system. In any *nix based OS it isn't even possible for the mfg to do that unless I'm dumb enough to install stuff as root.

As for crashes, I haven't had a Linux or BSD based box crash that I can remember. I have one Linux server that has been running over two years, it's last down time was because the power in my house went off. I am VERY careful to pick hardware that is well supported by quality drivers, however. 99% of Windows users aren't that discriminating.

The "answer" to this point for MS has been various abstraction layers that try to protect the OS from mischeivious hardware and software. The issue there is speed. You're introducing extra layers of checks that you wouldn't need if people would agree to be good citizens on your box.

Not to say that either approach is "right", and both seem to be working for their own user community.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 03:56 PM
Add on board? Like a video card or sound card or SATA/HBA/IOA? That's what device drivers are for.

And I wouldn't call MAC OS "rock solid". It crashes, just as every other OS does.

I haven't had one crash in the last 4 years (OSX.)

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 04:04 PM
So with Linux/FreeBSD/Mac OS all these dependency problems go away, right? ROFL

I've had more dependency issues with Linux than I've ever had with Windows. Sure, compiling your applications from scratch is nice, but it usually takes several hours (or days) to get a complex Linux application setup and running. There is not a lot of commercially developed software for Linux as compared to Windows, so one typically has to resort to open source software to fill their needs. The problem with that is that programmers seem lazy for the smaller projects and the nice GUI setup tools are usually go missing. I think your average computer user wants an easy to use, easy to configure system, not something they want to work on day and night to get tweaked so that it will run right. This is where Linux & FreeBSD continue to fail in my opinion. They are getting a lot better in this regard, but they still aren't there yet. I think SUSE 9.2 (9.3 now) is a great example of a step in the right direction. I'm sure there are others, but that is the one I'm most familiar with. While I love Linux/BSD on my servers, I still wouldn't want it as my primary desktop OS.

It is interesting what someone suggested earlier about MacOS entering the x86 arena. I think as far as desktop use goes, MacOS has the most polished *nix desktop system around. If Apple were to release a version that worked on your typical PC, it would be interesting to see what would happen. Linux & Firefox have probably gotten people thinking about using Microsoft alternatives, so the market could be ripe for a Windows upset if a true desktop OS leader were to come along.

P.S. What were you doing overwriting another application's registry settings? I bet you didn't play nice with the other kids did you? :p


Take it from a guy that wrote software for Windows for over a decade: You're wrong. We dump shit all over the place, over-write shared library files with newer versions, dump crap in the registry, I've even had to delete files and re-write registry settings from other applications to get mine installed. Now, I do that all for you with the installer, but it sure the hell is being done.

Now, do you really think my installer puts the older versions of those replaced files back when you uninstall my app? Hell no it doens't.

Conclusion: YOU are the one that is full of s**t and doesn't know what they're talking about.

DenverChief: Defrag has nothing to do with programs installing files everywhere, it has everything to do with the various MS file systems scattering pieces of a given file all over the drive. Even this isn't necessarily bad, UFS2 (Unix File System 2) fragments files purposefully. It takes the speed of the disk rotation and drive latency into account and attempts to write the files across the disk with any necessary gaps so that the file can be read faster.

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 04:19 PM
I thought the typical install procedure was something like:

# ./configure
# make
# su root
# make install

How else can you install the drivers in the proper directories?

As for driver support, it's getting better, but it is still lacking. I wouldn't count on any new piece of hardware working in Linux unless it's at least a year old. If you like to use bleeding edge hardware, forget about it. This is the single most irritating thing about Linux for me. Why should the OS determine what hardware I should buy? Oh yeah and recompiling the kernel to support my new hardware is always the fun choice ;)

You big Linux hippie! :Peace:


You assume that every mfg. writes good drivers. I can assure you that is wrong. It was the cause of the majority of Windows crashes the last time I bothered to keep track (win2k). You also have mfg's who replace Windows device files so that their particular piece of hardware will work better, never mind the adverse affect if my have on the rest of the system. In any *nix based OS it isn't even possible for the mfg to do that unless I'm dumb enough to install stuff as root.

As for crashes, I haven't had a Linux or BSD based box crash that I can remember. I have one Linux server that has been running over two years, it's last down time was because the power in my house went off. I am VERY careful to pick hardware that is well supported by quality drivers, however. 99% of Windows users aren't that discriminating.

The "answer" to this point for MS has been various abstraction layers that try to protect the OS from mischeivious hardware and software. The issue there is speed. You're introducing extra layers of checks that you wouldn't need if people would agree to be good citizens on your box.

Not to say that either approach is "right", and both seem to be working for their own user community.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 04:30 PM
I thought the typical install procedure was something like:

# ./configure
# make
# su root
# make install

How else can you install the drivers in the proper directories?

As for driver support, it's getting better, but it is still lacking. I wouldn't count on any new piece of hardware working in Linux unless it's at least a year old. If you like to use bleeding edge hardware, forget about it. This is the single most irritating thing about Linux for me. Why should the OS determine what hardware I should buy? Oh yeah and recompiling the kernel to support my new hardware is always the fun choice ;)

You big Linux hippie! :Peace:

The only experience I have with Linux/Unix is the behind the scenes backbone of Mac's OS. And with the current chip sets Apple uses you can run windows, OS X, linux/unix etc. The problem is other PC's running Apple's OS.

If they switch processors and chipsets there won't be anything restricting a person from using Apple's OS.

And I wish they would have gone with AMD instead... :mad:

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 04:31 PM
I haven't had one crash in the last 4 years (OSX.)

We have a small army of iMacs, G4s and a few G5s where I work, along with x86 based Linux/Unix servers and Windows desktops. I would have to say that the x86 based *nix servers are the most stable followed by Macs, then Windows PCs. Of course with the Windows based PCs, everyone and their brother writes spyware and viruses to target them, so they are constantly crashing more for that simple reason alone. Factor in that there are far more Windows users, Windows applications, and bizarre hardware combinations and you can see where it comes from. The Macs at work have their fair share of problems too, just of a different variety.

All of that having been said, I'd really like to try a Mac sometime. It's not that I'm against Macs at all, I'm just tired of people that like to blame things without taking the time to look at the underlying cause. Windows isn't evil.. it works pretty good if you use it right. Most of the problems are related to lazy software developers and users that will gladly click on a flashing banner ad and install ANYTHING without questioning what it is that constitute the bulk of the problems.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 04:35 PM
We have a small army of iMacs, G4s and a few G5s where I work, along with x86 based Linux/Unix servers and Windows desktops. I would have to say that the x86 based *nix servers are the most stable followed by Macs, then Windows PCs. Of course with the Windows based PCs, everyone and their brother writes spyware and viruses to target them, so they are constantly crashing more for that simple reason alone. Factor in that there are far more Windows users, Windows applications, and bizarre hardware combinations and you can see where it comes from. The Macs at work have their fair share of problems too, just of a different variety.

All of that having been said, I'd really like to try a Mac sometime. It's not that I'm against Macs at all, I'm just tired of people that like to blame things without taking the time to look at the underlying cause. Windows isn't evil.. it works pretty good if you use it right. Most of the problems are related to lazy software developers and users that will gladly click on a flashing banner ad and install ANYTHING without questioning what it is that constitute the bulk of the problems.

I've had plenty of apps crash (mostly browsers and games) but never the os or whole system going down.

One of the reasons Mac's are so stable is because of what you mentioned, they aren't that widely used. It makes no sense to write a virus for OSX when only about 4-6% of users even have it. That defeats the whole point of writing a virus (to fug with as many people as possible.)

The only major issue I've had is with /log files and third party drivers (iShox game pad and webcams.)

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 04:37 PM
The only experience I have with Linux/Unix is the behind the scenes backbone of Mac's OS. And with the current chip sets Apple uses you can run windows, OS X, linux/unix etc. The problem is other PC's running Apple's OS.

If they switch processors and chipsets there won't be anything restricting a person from using Apple's OS.

And I wish they would have gone with AMD instead... :mad:


Yep.. that would be cool if they removed that last part and let me try MacOS on my PC. I'd love to try it without having to reinvest in Apple compatible hardware. I bet I'm not alone either. The Mac Mini is awfully tempting at $499, so I can just imagine if it was a software only product that a lot of people would take the plunge.

|Zach|
06-04-2005, 04:37 PM
It will prob be a while but I think I am gonna switch over the Mac for my enxt xomputer purchchase...I wanted to this last time around but money as such a big factor. I have great experiences with them at school so I am sold.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 04:41 PM
Yep.. that would be cool if they removed that last part and let me try MacOS on my PC. I'd love to try it without having to reinvest in Apple compatible hardware. I bet I'm not alone either. The Mac Mini is awfully tempting at $499, so I can just imagine if it was a software only product that a lot of people would take the plunge.

I know everyone disagrees but taking this step to switch processors might kill apple's PC/Desktop market.

If you can have the stability, OS, and virus-proof system without paying an extra $500-$700 for the apple hardware people won't. I think it might very well make Apple the Sega of the PC world...

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 04:56 PM
I know everyone disagrees but taking this step to switch processors might kill apple's PC/Desktop market.

If you can have the stability, OS, and virus-proof system without paying an extra $500-$700 for the apple hardware people won't. I think it might very well make Apple the Sega of the PC world...

I see your point, and it is a risk, but I think Apple would still gain a lot by having a larger market to offer their products to. Another way Apple could go would be to continue to offer their products as 'certified Apple OS compatible hardware' and still release OSX to PC users at a 'use at your own risk' level. This is sort of similar to the RedHat strategy of offering Fedora as a free OS, but still charging for the officially supported and tested RedHat OS.

Who knows.. I'm not an expert on marketing strategies by any means, but I would sure give it a whirl. For me, the current cost of entry to the Mac world is still too far above my level of curiousity.

Pitt Gorilla
06-04-2005, 05:00 PM
I think it might very well make Apple the Sega of the PC world...That would be aweful. The integration of the sofware and hardware are what make them great. I'd always owned PCs until I bought my ibook. For laptops, apple can't be beat. If they become software only...ugh...

stanleychief
06-04-2005, 06:02 PM
That would be aweful. The integration of the sofware and hardware are what make them great. I'd always owned PCs until I bought my ibook. For laptops, apple can't be beat. If they become software only...ugh...

This is puzzling to me. What does one have to do with the other? I'm not trying to be critical, just curious as to what make you think this way. Is it the convenience factor that you can get everything from one party, or that you think the integration has made them more robust?

I think the strength of the PC/Winodws combo is the fact that I have a choice in how much I want to spend on each. I also think it's the fact that there are so many hardware vendors out there for the PC market that keep the prices lower. I'd also tend to think this would be a good thing for everyone but maybe Apple themselves (lower hardware prices, more choices).

I certainly wouldn't want Apple to stop making hardware.. they put out some really cool stuff. I can't remember lusting after something as much as I have lusted after their 23" Cinema displays! I'd also venture a guess that it was the iMac that kicked off the whole idea that PCs didn't have to be beige. Look at all the case mods and neon now.. none of that was around before the iMac was it? I'm not a big fan of the neon stuff myself, but Apple does send ripples through the PC industry from time to time.

Logical
06-04-2005, 06:09 PM
OS and CPU are inseparable. You can't have MacOS without PPC.

Really, then this is an interesting development. 1000s of Mac owners will be going into mourning after they find this out. And rightfully so, if not for the superiorilty of the Mac OS there would be no reason at all to own one.

Vegas_Dave
06-04-2005, 06:15 PM
I have mixed feelings on this. I think that it will be a downfall for Apple. I do think that they should make sure that Mac OsX remains proprietary to their machines otherwise Mac loyalists will ONLY use the Mac software but completely build their own systems.

Personally, I feel that if they were to do this CPU switch, they should have just gone full bore and gone with an Athlon 64X2 dual core and designed their next software as a soley 64 bit system. This would make a huge number of MAC supporters want the New tech system.

Rausch
06-04-2005, 06:41 PM
Really, then this is an interesting development. 1000s of Mac owners will be going into mourning after they find this out. And rightfully so, if not for the superiorilty of the Mac OS there would be no reason at all to own one.

The three main advantages, in order, that Apple has:

1) OS
2) Reliablility
3) Nearly immune to viruses.

All but no 2 will be gone by this switch. If anyone can go Apple OS I'd guess that as much as 25% would be OS X within 5 years. Just the money saved on virus protection and lost production to them alone would justify the cost.

Not only that but OS X.2 and above can communicate and share files with windows machines without problem. Windows doesn't even work well with older versions of Windows.

Outside of a beautiful workstation and Mac-addicts most of the reason to buy the hardware will be gone...

Rausch
06-04-2005, 06:45 PM
I have mixed feelings on this. I think that it will be a downfall for Apple. I do think that they should make sure that Mac OsX remains proprietary to their machines otherwise Mac loyalists will ONLY use the Mac software but completely build their own systems.

Personally, I feel that if they were to do this CPU switch, they should have just gone full bore and gone with an Athlon 64X2 dual core and designed their next software as a soley 64 bit system. This would make a huge number of MAC supporters want the New tech system.

Couldn't agree more.

Apple's new machines (G5's on OS X.3) are 64x2 and 64 bit processing.

The only legit argument for going intel is that Apple machines have always been accused of running slower due to slower mghz speeds. What people don't realize is that they run much cooler, much more stable, and are able to process much more information at slower speeds due to their chipset and firmware.

But unless you're already mac-friendly you don't know that, and the perception that Apple is losing the processor speed war is a big PR problem...

Count Alex's Wins
06-04-2005, 08:01 PM
how long have you been using a computer?

A long f*cking time. I'm no n00b. I've built two of my own and performed countless upgrades.

htismaqe
06-04-2005, 09:45 PM
The three main advantages, in order, that Apple has:

1) OS
2) Reliablility
3) Nearly immune to viruses.

All but no 2 will be gone by this switch. If anyone can go Apple OS I'd guess that as much as 25% would be OS X within 5 years. Just the money saved on virus protection and lost production to them alone would justify the cost.

Not only that but OS X.2 and above can communicate and share files with windows machines without problem. Windows doesn't even work well with older versions of Windows.

Outside of a beautiful workstation and Mac-addicts most of the reason to buy the hardware will be gone...

Yep, it's a double-edged sword.

If you create a Mac that many people will use, it's popularity increases. If more people start using them, they become a target for malware coders.

Pretty soon, the "virus-free" MacOS is gone.

DenverChief
06-04-2005, 10:43 PM
A long f*cking time. I'm no n00b. I've built two of my own and performed countless upgrades.


yay that doesn't answer my question...how long?

Armyofme
06-04-2005, 10:45 PM
The three main advantages, in order, that Apple has:

1) OS
2) Reliablility
3) Nearly immune to viruses.

All but no 2 will be gone by this switch. If anyone can go Apple OS I'd guess that as much as 25% would be OS X within 5 years. Just the money saved on virus protection and lost production to them alone would justify the cost.

Not only that but OS X.2 and above can communicate and share files with windows machines without problem. Windows doesn't even work well with older versions of Windows.

Outside of a beautiful workstation and Mac-addicts most of the reason to buy the hardware will be gone...

I would add to that list...

4) Software bundle

The applications that come free on a Mac would cost a PC user a good chunk of dough to "try" to perform the same tasks.

I've already said it, but I will say it again. Apple moving to Intel would be suicide... for the hardware part of Apple. Maybe they feel like the software they have created in the past few years have given them enough of a push to morph into a software company? That way they can focus on "digital hub" hardware... where it seems they have an edge right now.

Count Alex's Wins
06-05-2005, 12:18 AM
yay that doesn't answer my question...how long?

I dunno, ten years?

Count Alex's Wins
06-05-2005, 12:19 AM
The applications that come free on a Mac would cost a PC user a good chunk of dough to "try" to perform the same tasks.


http://thepiratebay.org

Rausch
06-05-2005, 12:22 AM
I would add to that list...

4) Software bundle

The applications that come free on a Mac would cost a PC user a good chunk of dough to "try" to perform the same tasks.

I've already said it, but I will say it again. Apple moving to Intel would be suicide... for the hardware part of Apple. Maybe they feel like the software they have created in the past few years have given them enough of a push to morph into a software company? That way they can focus on "digital hub" hardware... where it seems they have an edge right now.

It's the dumbest move Apple has made since canning Jobs...

Armyofme
06-06-2005, 12:38 PM
It's Official...

Apple moving to Intel chips :/

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 12:54 PM
I'll LMAO if Apple is the first OS to truly embrace the Itanium chip. FTR, the Itanium is 'next gen' all the way. It is a complete departure from the x86 architecture... and because of that, it really hasn't been widely accepted (yet). Prior to the Itanium one had to buy a supercomputer (Crey) to come close to that bad-boy's architecture. Hell, I'd even consider buying a Mac if that were to happen ;)

BTW, I just bought an iPod shuffle. 120 songs, recharging base & armbad for ~$160... pretty good deal.

morphius
06-06-2005, 01:02 PM
I'll LMAO if Apple is the first OS to truly embrace the Itanium chip. FTR, the Itanium is 'next gen' all the way. It is a complete departure from the x86 architecture... and because of that, it really hasn't been widely accepted (yet). Prior to the Itanium one had to buy a supercomputer (Crey) to come close to that bad-boy's architecture. Hell, I'd even consider buying a Mac if that were to happen ;)

BTW, I just bought an iPod shuffle. 120 songs, recharging base & armbad for ~$160... pretty good deal.
Well, other then HP-UX of course...

I thought I read that Intel was pretty much dropping the Itanium line, so I doubt Apple would go that route.

If I could build a machine that would run OSX I would seriously have to take a look at it, just for some of the software tools alone.

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 01:10 PM
Well, other then HP-UX of course...

I thought I read that Intel was pretty much dropping the Itanium line, so I doubt Apple would go that route.

If I could build a machine that would run OSX I would seriously have to take a look at it, just for some of the software tools alone.

HP-UX is running on a significant % of Itaniums? I thought they ran HP UX on RISC-based systems?

I performed extensive R&D for a large KC telecommunications company on a couple HP 9x (4x Itanium2 servers, 32xG RAM). Let me tell you, those mofos SCREAMED. I had an unnamed RMDBS executing in excess of 40k tps. A single cluster of those two servers coupld easily handle the worklod of what used to take dozens of distributed systems.

Simplex3
06-06-2005, 01:17 PM
So with Linux/FreeBSD/Mac OS all these dependency problems go away, right? ROFL

I've had more dependency issues with Linux than I've ever had with Windows. Sure, compiling your applications from scratch is nice, but it usually takes several hours (or days) to get a complex Linux application setup and running.
This is where you screwed up. If you would stick to the vendor rpms you'd be fine. Also, only a complete tool buys the latest hardware. You overpay by a mile.

Besides, who the f**k is going to listen to you on this, Micro-softy? The company you work for has a fat MS contract, you're probably required to spend a couple of hours every week giving them positive spin.

:D

As an FYI for everyone here, stanleychief and I were actually roommates years ago and have known eachother for a decade. 3 years ago I was the big MS guy that though open source was s**t, he was all over Linux. The roles have reversed to a degree, now I won't touch Windows and he works in it all day.

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 01:22 PM
HP-UX is running on a significant % of Itaniums? I thought they ran HP UX on RISC-based systems?

Nevermind... I looked it up. Man, HP has really embraced the IA-64 architecture! :thumb:

FTR the servers they gave me to play with were IIRC 9620. Funny thing is I can't find them on their site... I saw 8620s and 9000 Series, but no 9620. Not that it really matters, just thought it interesting. And, again, those bad-boys were screaming!!!

htismaqe
06-06-2005, 01:24 PM
HP-UX is running on a significant % of Itaniums? I thought they ran HP UX on RISC-based systems?

I performed extensive R&D for a large KC telecommunications company on a couple HP 9x (4x Itanium2 servers, 32xG RAM). Let me tell you, those mofos SCREAMED. I had an unnamed RMDBS executing in excess of 40k tps. A single cluster of those two servers coupld easily handle the worklod of what used to take dozens of distributed systems.

HP servers are the shit.

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:24 PM
It doesn't matter. I can install and uninstall programs and never even think about the registry. Saying you love a Mac because you don't have to mess with the registry is like saying you love your Monitor because you don't have to open it up and tinker with it.How about this argument then. I don't want my Photoshop toreside where it was installed. On my Mac I can just move th efolder wherever I want it and t will run without any problems. Try that on your Windows box.

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 01:25 PM
HP servers are the shit.

Yep. :thumb:
The servers they gave me to play with were $450k each :D

Sure wish I could have kept one (or both) hehe

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 01:26 PM
How about this argument then. I don't want my Photoshop toreside where it was installed. On my Mac I can just move th efolder wherever I want it and t will run without any problems. Try that on your Windows box.

Wow, what a spectacular trick. :rolleyes:

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:30 PM
Well, other then HP-UX of course...

I thought I read that Intel was pretty much dropping the Itanium line, so I doubt Apple would go that route.

If I could build a machine that would run OSX I would seriously have to take a look at it, just for some of the software tools alone.They are not using Itaniums. They are using the x86 architecture. The demo was done on a 3.6GHz P4 and the developers kit will ship with the same chip.

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:31 PM
Wow, what a spectacular trick. :rolleyes:
you have a problem?

Simplex3
06-06-2005, 01:31 PM
Wow, what a spectacular trick. :rolleyes:
I hear the 7 o'clock show is completely different from the 5 o'clock, too.

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 01:35 PM
you have a problem?

Excuse me if I don't find the ability to randomly move application working folders as a big selling point. You present it as some sort of wicked neat-o feature when it isn't. There are how many practical applications for it? Only one comes to mind: addition of another drive (space concerns).

morphius
06-06-2005, 01:42 PM
Nevermind... I looked it up. Man, HP has really embraced the IA-64 architecture! :thumb:

FTR the servers they gave me to play with were IIRC 9620. Funny thing is I can't find them on their site... I saw 8620s and 9000 Series, but no 9620. Not that it really matters, just thought it interesting. And, again, those bad-boys were screaming!!!
We just got our first one, it isn't in production yet but I think it is a 16 way Itanium, should bloody scream. Of course the issue well be is how badly can the programers F it up.

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:42 PM
Excuse me if I don't find the ability to randomly move application working folders as a big selling point. You present it as some sort of wicked neat-o feature when it isn't. There are how many practical applications for it? Only one comes to mind: addition of another drive (space concerns).This is what happens when you read just the post and not what it was posted towards. :rolleyes: I was not stating it as a neat trick. But it does show one of the inadequacies of the Windows OS.

morphius
06-06-2005, 01:44 PM
HP servers are the shit.
I believe the new ones are actually supposed to boot faster as well, no more 40 minutes for a reboot.

Simplex3
06-06-2005, 01:46 PM
We just got our first one, it isn't in production yet but I think it is a 16 way Itanium, should bloody scream. Of course the issue well be is how badly can the programers F it up.
We programmers only f**k up the box when you systems guys don't get them set up right.

:)

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:47 PM
HP was a big part of pushing Apple to make the move to Intel. They have wanted to be able to sell OS X computers for quite some time. They already have a good relationship with Apple in that they are the only vendor that is allowed to repackage the iPod as their own.

morphius
06-06-2005, 01:53 PM
We programmers only f**k up the box when you systems guys don't get them set up right.

:)
You have not met our programmers obviously, LOL!

penguinz
06-06-2005, 01:56 PM
Programmers should not even be allowed to touch a computer! :)

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 02:25 PM
We just got our first one, it isn't in production yet but I think it is a 16 way Itanium, should bloody scream. Of course the issue well be is how badly can the programers F it up.

Heh, just make sure they know that any 32-bit code will run like total horseshit. The emulator is complete garbage... 32b code will run at about 40% efficiency. 16b&- will not work, period.

morphius
06-06-2005, 02:27 PM
Heh, just make sure they know that any 32-bit code will run like total horseshit. The emulator is complete garbage... 32b code will run at about 40% efficiency. 16b+- will not work, period.
This machine is pretty much just running Oracle, the app is over on another box, I just had to make the remark because they are finally starting to look into the application maybe being an issue.

HC_Chief
06-06-2005, 02:29 PM
This machine is pretty much just running Oracle, the app is over on another box, I just had to make the remark because they are finally starting to look into the application maybe being an issue.

Excellent use for the box :D
(being a DTA, I always prefer to have a beefy RDBMS in a dedicated environment)

Rausch
06-06-2005, 03:53 PM
I found this on another forum (no, not the star) but have no idea how accurate it may be:

Apple and Intel will use Transitive Technologies' emulator to port OSX to x86.

This will begin with replacement of the G4 processor which is at the end of it's competitive cycle.

http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,67749,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

Apple is looking at using WiMax chip for it's laptops.

Intel has agreed to fab a new CPU designed to Apple's specifications.

Intel has finally convinced SJ that they will fully support OSX as the next world class OS and do what ever it takes to make it work.

This last theory based on the fact that Microsoft essentially slapped
Intel in the face going to PPC for the Xbox 360.

We have also heard Paul Otellini's comment that implied strongly that they are considering another OS facing the continued plague of Microsoft security issues.

So Jobs is going Intel and Gates is going PowerPC?

WTF!?!


:Lin:

Rausch
06-06-2005, 03:59 PM
Not sure if this was posted or not...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/06/technology/06apple.html?hp&ex=1118116800&en=1f0ec8d398375f0c&ei=5094&partner=homepage

htismaqe
06-06-2005, 04:36 PM
I found this on another forum (no, not the star) but have no idea how accurate it may be:



So Jobs is going Intel and Gates is going PowerPC?

WTF!?!


:Lin:

It's interesting. If Intel is looking at this move as MacOS INSTEAD of Windows, rather than IN ADDITION TO Windows, it might make sense. Apple + Intel could make some headway versus Microsoft.

However, I can't see Intel biting the hand that feeds them.

Rausch
06-06-2005, 05:18 PM
It's interesting. If Intel is looking at this move as MacOS INSTEAD of Windows, rather than IN ADDITION TO Windows, it might make sense. Apple + Intel could make some headway versus Microsoft.

I'd love to believe that.

But I don't. It's like Cuba trying to invade America.

However, I can't see Intel biting the hand that feeds them.

From the article Gates bit the Intel hand first by going with PPC chips instead for the 360.

And if Apple was going to try something moronic like taking on Microsoft head on they should have paired up with Athlon or Sony. Jobs has been bad mouthing Intel for years pointing out how Apple's PPC chips were far superior. Most of the world might not have bought it but it became Mac-addict scripture.

Intel might end up making better chips but that doesn't change the PR nightmare this will be with long time Apple users...

Dinny Blues
06-06-2005, 08:00 PM
We programmers only f**k up the box when you systems guys don't get them set up right.

:)

Answers this question for me.

P.S. What were you doing overwriting another application's registry settings? I bet you didn't play nice with the other kids did you?

You go, Simp.

Dinny

Simplex3
06-06-2005, 08:08 PM
Answers this question for me.

P.S. What were you doing overwriting another application's registry settings? I bet you didn't play nice with the other kids did you?

You go, Simp.

Dinny
I never reached into another app's sub-keys, but a lot of them would overwrite standard Windows settings. This typically would occur in mime types, little crap like that. I'd say 80% of the software I've written was server-side, the rest were business apps. That other crap wasn't supposed to be there anyway. One thing about stompping on contraband apps; the users don't often bitch to their support department about it. :)

And no, I never did play nice with the other kids. You know when you were in your HS computer or word processing class and all your work got lost? I was the guy that wrote that virus.

Dinny Blues
06-06-2005, 08:16 PM
I never reached into another app's sub-keys, but a lot of them would overwrite standard Windows settings. This typically would occur in mime types, little crap like that. I'd say 80% of the software I've written was server-side, the rest were business apps. That other crap wasn't supposed to be there anyway. One thing about stompping on contraband apps; the users don't often bitch to their support department about it. :)

And no, I never did play nice with the other kids. You know when you were in your HS computer or word processing class and all your work got lost? I was the guy that wrote that virus.

I have only my twisted sense of humor to blame for finding that question the funniest thing I've read in this thread.

My skills are definitely more in the box/cables layer. I've always envied you programmers while harboring an overwhelming fear of attempting to join you.

Dinny

Rausch
06-07-2005, 11:43 PM
Wow.

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf05/

Just finished listening to monday's Apple Expo Keynote.

Jobs is either the sneakiest motherfugger or the best bull$#itter around...

- Apparently EVERY OS release for the past five years has been compiled for both PowerPC and Intel. Since OSX started Jobs had people writing for both, with something similar in mind for a while.

As of right now, it's already working on Intel machines with the same OS X install CD I have for my Mac. Very sneaky bastage...

The same can't be said for Apps. Big challenge for developers.

-Apple has released a new version/app in their os called Rosetta. That allows someone to run existing powerPC apps on Intel. It's transparent, and runs nothing like classic.

In short it's backwards compatable. (All 5 Mac users on the BB can now exhale.)

- Apple is releasing a 3.2 ghz Intel machine to developers for $999. That's faster than any current Mac, IIRC. At ONE THIRD the price of the current fastest mac.

Of course developers will damned near get these free, but that looks to me like the beginning of a huge price drop.

- The Microsoft rep who talked about their products looked mildly retarded. Serious facial tics. It was hard to tell what she was yammering on about but obviously the Microsft/Apple relationship is in marriage counseling...

- The Adobe rep had a very "about ****ing time" attitude about the switch. Apparently they've known about it and are very glad he made the move. (For those who don't know Adobe products are a huge part of Apple's ability to compete and push their hardware.)

-The CEO of Intel spoke. Apparently Intel and Apple were founded 5 years and only 5 miles apart from each other.

He is obviously going out of his way to endear himself to the average Macaddict. He seems to REALLY want this marriage to work. Based on his and Jobs comments they seem absolutely ****ing insane enough to take on Microsoft.

They better have a damned good slingshot.

- You can tell Jobs is up to something.

He's either built the titanic or the atom bomb. With what they're doing Apple will do one of two things: 1) Fail, and go under. They put all their eggs in the intel basket and if it doesn't work....they're done.

2) You might see Apple take 25% of the market share.

As a betting man I know which I'd be more likely to lay my money on...

Rausch
06-08-2005, 12:54 PM
Bump for people who work for a living...

HC_Chief
06-08-2005, 01:12 PM
Like I said, smartest thing Apple could do would be to open up the hardware to other vendors. The Mac will become much more price friendly and will gain wider acceptance in the business community.

Parker mentioned something that piqued my interest a bit: Apple + Sony, versus Apple + Intel. The New Sony cell processor is a BAD MOFO. Sony, Toshiba and IBM sunk $billions into its development... it is a screaming CPU. If Apple were to pair with them, they could crank out world-class servers to compete with M$. Of course that would mean tweaking the Mac OS a bit... but the foundation is there w/ BSD.

htismaqe
06-08-2005, 01:22 PM
Wow.

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf05/

Just finished listening to monday's Apple Expo Keynote.

Jobs is either the sneakiest motherfugger or the best bull$#itter around...

- Apparently EVERY OS release for the past five years has been compiled for both PowerPC and Intel. Since OSX started Jobs had people writing for both, with something similar in mind for a while.

As of right now, it's already working on Intel machines with the same OS X install CD I have for my Mac. Very sneaky bastage...

The same can't be said for Apps. Big challenge for developers.

-Apple has released a new version/app in their os called Rosetta. That allows someone to run existing powerPC apps on Intel. It's transparent, and runs nothing like classic.

In short it's backwards compatable. (All 5 Mac users on the BB can now exhale.)

- Apple is releasing a 3.2 ghz Intel machine to developers for $999. That's faster than any current Mac, IIRC. At ONE THIRD the price of the current fastest mac.

Of course developers will damned near get these free, but that looks to me like the beginning of a huge price drop.

- The Microsoft rep who talked about their products looked mildly retarded. Serious facial tics. It was hard to tell what she was yammering on about but obviously the Microsft/Apple relationship is in marriage counseling...

- The Adobe rep had a very "about ****ing time" attitude about the switch. Apparently they've known about it and are very glad he made the move. (For those who don't know Adobe products are a huge part of Apple's ability to compete and push their hardware.)

-The CEO of Intel spoke. Apparently Intel and Apple were founded 5 years and only 5 miles apart from each other.

He is obviously going out of his way to endear himself to the average Macaddict. He seems to REALLY want this marriage to work. Based on his and Jobs comments they seem absolutely ****ing insane enough to take on Microsoft.

They better have a damned good slingshot.

- You can tell Jobs is up to something.

He's either built the titanic or the atom bomb. With what they're doing Apple will do one of two things: 1) Fail, and go under. They put all their eggs in the intel basket and if it doesn't work....they're done.

2) You might see Apple take 25% of the market share.

As a betting man I know which I'd be more likely to lay my money on...

FYI, a 3.2Ghz x86 processor is not faster than a 2.0Ghz RISC in most cases.

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3997

htismaqe
06-08-2005, 01:26 PM
I'd love to believe that.

But I don't. It's like Cuba trying to invade America.



From the article Gates bit the Intel hand first by going with PPC chips instead for the 360.

And if Apple was going to try something moronic like taking on Microsoft head on they should have paired up with Athlon or Sony. Jobs has been bad mouthing Intel for years pointing out how Apple's PPC chips were far superior. Most of the world might not have bought it but it became Mac-addict scripture.

Intel might end up making better chips but that doesn't change the PR nightmare this will be with long time Apple users...

"Biting the hand that feeds them" probably wasn't the right choice of words.

It's more like this -- why would Intel want to risk the status quo, upon which they've become quite successful? The situation is very similar to Apple, IMO. Both companies could continue on, as is, for quite sometime. No they wouldn't gain market share, but they wouldn't necessarily lose it either. Now both risk alienating their install base to forge this kind of a partnership. I think it's because both companies are thinking BIG, like taking on Microsoft head-on.

As for the XBox 360, I can't see for the life of me why Intel would care. The XBox is a VERY SMALL piece of the pie, when you consider how many millions of WinTel machines there are out there.

HC_Chief
06-08-2005, 01:28 PM
FYI, a 3.2Ghz x86 processor is not faster than a 2.0Ghz RISC in most cases.

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3997

Hertz rating is misleading anyway. It is simply a measure electromagnetic frequency. A better measure (one I'd prefer to see adopted) = SPEC CPU metrics.

morphius
06-08-2005, 01:40 PM
"Biting the hand that feeds them" probably wasn't the right choice of words.

It's more like this -- why would Intel want to risk the status quo, upon which they've become quite successful? The situation is very similar to Apple, IMO. Both companies could continue on, as is, for quite sometime. No they wouldn't gain market share, but they wouldn't necessarily lose it either. Now both risk alienating their install base to forge this kind of a partnership. I think it's because both companies are thinking BIG, like taking on Microsoft head-on.

As for the XBox 360, I can't see for the life of me why Intel would care. The XBox is a VERY SMALL piece of the pie, when you consider how many millions of WinTel machines there are out there.
I think they would care about the Xbox 360 just for the way that it is being designed. If you look at the features it is a multimedia machine with web access and plays games. A lot of families could look to that instead of buying their kids a new computer, which in turn hurts Intel.

htismaqe
06-08-2005, 02:30 PM
Hertz rating is misleading anyway. It is simply a measure electromagnetic frequency. A better measure (one I'd prefer to see adopted) = SPEC CPU metrics.

Yep. That's why I posted that link. It does a good job of explaining the "megahertz myth".

htismaqe
06-08-2005, 02:33 PM
I think they would care about the Xbox 360 just for the way that it is being designed. If you look at the features it is a multimedia machine with web access and plays games. A lot of families could look to that instead of buying their kids a new computer, which in turn hurts Intel.

Maybe. There's really no reason, based on the past performance of such devices, to think the XBox 360 is going to make a significant dent in PC sales. For one thing, every corporate desk in America has a PC on it that will NEVER be replaced by a home entertainment console.

I still maintain that there's only one reason that Apple and Intel take this risk -- they see a real opportunity to take market share away from Microsoft. If you're making $10M a year, you don't risk throwing that away for $11M a year or $15M a year. But you might for $100M a year, and you definitely would for $1B a year.

HC_Chief
06-08-2005, 03:52 PM
Kudos to Apple: got my iPod today. That was FAST!! :thumb:
I love this little thing (iPod Shuffle)

morphius
06-08-2005, 04:01 PM
Maybe. There's really no reason, based on the past performance of such devices, to think the XBox 360 is going to make a significant dent in PC sales. For one thing, every corporate desk in America has a PC on it that will NEVER be replaced by a home entertainment console.

I still maintain that there's only one reason that Apple and Intel take this risk -- they see a real opportunity to take market share away from Microsoft. If you're making $10M a year, you don't risk throwing that away for $11M a year or $15M a year. But you might for $100M a year, and you definitely would for $1B a year.
Oh, as far as taking on MS, I sure hope so. After they make the switch to Intel, it should be interesting to see if any Mother Boards well be compatible with their OS. If so, most the other hardware already is. I know I would have to take a serious look into using it as my next OS if that is the case.

Pitt Gorilla
06-08-2005, 04:31 PM
Oh, as far as taking on MS, I sure hope so. After they make the switch to Intel, it should be interesting to see if any Mother Boards well be compatible with their OS. If so, most the other hardware already is. I know I would have to take a serious look into using it as my next OS if that is the case.
From the blogs that I've read (which probably don't mean much), I doubt that the Mac OS will work on anything but Macs. The idea would be that Macs could run Windows/Windows software AND OSX software while the opposite would not be the case. Mac still needs to be able to market their hardware to support the development of their OS. By making only the Macs cross-platform, they increase the sales of their hardware (in theory). Intel supposedly has the technology to make the OS run on only the Mac Intel machines; we'll have to see if that indeed is that case.

morphius
06-08-2005, 04:35 PM
From the blogs that I've read (which probably don't mean much), I doubt that the Mac OS will work on anything but Macs. The idea would be that Macs could run Windows/Windows software AND OSX software while the opposite would not be the case. Mac still needs to be able to market their hardware to support the development of their OS. By making only the Macs cross-platform, they increase the sales of their hardware (in theory). Intel supposedly has the technology to make the OS run on only the Mac Intel machines; we'll have to see if that indeed is that case.
Yeah, I figured Apple would find a way to make it a non story. We will have to see how it plays out though.

penguinz
06-08-2005, 05:12 PM
This new agreement wil help Intel more than it helps Apple. Apple is a member of the Hypertransport consortium along with AMD, Intel and some others. Intel is not a member. Apple can share this technology with Intel. Hypertransport is a big reason why the AMD counterparts outperform the Intel chips.

Rausch
06-09-2005, 12:08 AM
From the blogs that I've read (which probably don't mean much), I doubt that the Mac OS will work on anything but Macs. The idea would be that Macs could run Windows/Windows software AND OSX software while the opposite would not be the case.

That has been true for years already. Without Intel.

Mac still needs to be able to market their hardware to support the development of their OS. By making only the Macs cross-platform, they increase the sales of their hardware (in theory). Intel supposedly has the technology to make the OS run on only the Mac Intel machines; we'll have to see if that indeed is that case.

To any non-mac fan Jobs keynote will bore you to death (I'd say any comp user would be smart to watch about 15 minutes of it, starting about 15 minutes in, then just close it after that.)

Apple has been programming their OS and Apple apps to run on Intel machines for 5 years now. Apparently this has been a long term strategy they have wanted to implement. Only now did the opportunity present itself.

The comp Jobs uses during the whole Keynote (an hour I believe) is running on an Intel board, but he doesn't tell you that until about 1/2 hour in... :)

Rausch
06-09-2005, 12:12 AM
This new agreement wil help Intel more than it helps Apple. Apple is a member of the Hypertransport consortium along with AMD, Intel and some others. Intel is not a member. Apple can share this technology with Intel. Hypertransport is a big reason why the AMD counterparts outperform the Intel chips.

I wasn't aware of that.

But I did notice that the CEO of Intel said something similar to "we'll be working hard with Apple to develop chips for THEIR machines..."

I think the idea is for Intel to come up with a PPC similar, or competitor, chip. Not simply putting existing Intel chips into a Mac...

Pitt Gorilla
06-09-2005, 12:18 AM
BTW, Rausch, I am now running Tiger with a ton of widgets, "borrowed" iLife 05 and IWork (which includes Keynote 2 and Pages), and now need more memory. I'm sure you really feel for me...

Come see me sometime and we can talk Firewire "target".

Rausch
06-09-2005, 12:21 AM
BTW, Rausch, I am now running Tiger with a ton of widgets, "borrowed" iLife 05 and IWork (which includes Keynote 2 and Pages), and now need more memory. I'm sure you really feel for me...

Come see me sometime and we can talk Firewire "target".

I think "sharing ideas" might be a good idea.

You'd be surprised what I could contribute.

http://www.macserialjunkie.com

:)

Armyofme
06-09-2005, 09:19 AM
Apple does plan to make OS X only run on Apple hardware. That same hardware will have the ability to also run Windows... it won't be supported by Apple, but they won't do anything to keep the user from doing so.

This could effect PC makers more than Microsoft.

We all know that Apple builds quality equipment and the Apple brand is as strong as ever. Users in the market for a new high end PC may take a look at an Apple... look at the advantages... You have the ability to run not only Windows, but if something cool is out on the Mac, they can run it natively as well. These new Macs will be able to run any mainstream OS and on top-notch equipment. I would bet that most would pay a little more for the quality and versatility of the Apple option.

My thoughts of doom have shifted to thinking this may be a very cunning move. Steve Jobs is no idiot. It was pure brilliance to develop an x86 version of OS X along side the PPC, just in case. It is that forward thinking that has me convinced that they have more up their sleeve than we can know... they always do ;)

Something to ponder anyway.

Gaz
06-09-2005, 09:24 AM
Would I be able to dual boot with both the Apple and Windows OS on the same machine?

xoxo~
Gaz
Intrigued by the possibilities.

Armyofme
06-09-2005, 09:36 AM
Would I be able to dual boot with both the Apple and Windows OS on the same machine?

xoxo~
Gaz
Intrigued by the possibilities.


Yup. That is what I am hearing. Apple won't support the Windows boot, but they won't keep you from doing it.

My friend thought what would be even more intriguing is if you could work it like a fast user switching... as long as you had enough RAM to allocate to each system, you could switch back and forth quickly. I'll bet there is a company out there already pursuing the creation of an app that would do just that :)

HC_Chief
06-09-2005, 09:37 AM
Yup. That is what I am hearing. Apple won't support the Windows boot, but they won't keep you from doing it.

My friend thought what would be even more intriguing is if you could work it like a fast user switching... as long as you had enough RAM to allocate to each system, you could switch back and forth quickly. I'll bet there is a company out there already pursuing the creation of an app that would do just that :)

Already exists: VMWare