Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Intel developing next-generation Power Mac
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61943 is a reply to message #61942] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 07:55   |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
else does,
>> or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>> point of
>> Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>> end,
>> and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money for
>> a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>> unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>> use it.
>> Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it be
>> to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>> people?
>> I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>> playing
>> by the rules.
>>
>> TCB
>>Since people are looking at Apple/Intel, there's a story on Tomshardware about
the new 65 nm multi-core Pentiums. Intel has been having their monopolist
booty handed to them for over a year now by AMD, and it looks like they'll
at least pull even with these chips. Also if the fabs work well they'll get
more chips per wafer so higher margins.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/28/intels_65_nm_process_ breathes_fire_into_double_core_extreme_edition/
Without overclocking the top flight Intel and AMD processors look to be about
a dead heat now. The Intel seems to have more overclocking headroom though.
TCBAs far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same logic
I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you living.
I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm a computer
tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles I'm
still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent. By this
logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's where
they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is, or
of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now he's
out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look like
they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car manufacturers.
Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for the
loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far as I'm
concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of profits
(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
division.
But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer some
possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than on
PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that the
compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed code
it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior is
the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world either.
In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I buy a
laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me so I
can put Yellow Dog on it?
TCB
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>
>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>you really want is a Linux box.
>
>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>
> From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>
>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run as
>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as a
>native binary because the translation process itself incurs
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61944 is a reply to message #61943] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 08:00 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
a processing
>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>
>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>Intel OSX?
>
> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>interesting:
>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>
>
>TCB wrote:
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>
>>
>> Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
after
>> a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>> manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>> market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>> The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their hardware
>> costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off of
a
>> laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon to
be
>> delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly dubious
>> is
>>
>> ######################################
>> The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
between
>> Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies may
>> be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
>> only in Apple systems.
>> #####################################
>>
>> It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that
it
>> uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
does,
>> or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
of
>> Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
end,
>> and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
for
>> a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>> unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>> use it.
>>
>> Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
be
>> to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
people?
>> I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been playing
>> by the rules.
>>
>> TCB
>>Nice!
I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase LE,
so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have to
update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
Tony
"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
> logic pro 7.1
>
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
> <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>
>>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got any
>>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three i5's
>>and
>>a D6! Yahoo!
>>
>>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>>
>>Tony
>>
>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
their thing.
Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Inte
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61946 is a reply to message #61943] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 10:09 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s, or
> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now he's
> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look like
> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>
> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car manufacturers.
> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for the
> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far as I'm
> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of profits
> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
> division.
>
> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer some
> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than on
> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that the
> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed code
> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior is
> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world either.
>
>
> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>
>
> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I buy a
> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me so I
> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>
> TCB
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>
>
>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>
>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>
>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>
>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>
>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run as
>
>
>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>
>
>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as a
>
>
>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>
>
>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>
>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>Intel OSX?
>>
>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>interesting:
>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>
>>
>>TCB wrote:
>>
>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>
>>>
>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>
> after
>
>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their hardware
>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off of
>
> a
>
>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon to
>
> be
>
>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly dubious
>>>is
>>>
>>>######################################
>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>
> between
>
>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies may
>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>#####################################
>>>
>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that
>
> it
>
>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
>
> does,
>
>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>
> of
>
>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>
> end,
>
>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>
> for
>
>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>>>use it.
>>>
>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61948 is a reply to message #61946] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 10:05 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s. The "read me"
files tell you what mics are what.
Anyway, I'm sure Deej will agree that the SE would be a very good choice.
They're certainly on my list.
Tony
"Mark McDermott" <mark@stateofwail.com> wrote in message
news:43b2d7e3$1@linux...
>
> Hello all,
>
> Hope you all had or are having a great holiday!
>
> I am considering purchasing a Rode K2 tube mic but am also looking at the
> SE Electronics Z5600A. I've used the K2 before but not the SE product. The
> intent is primarily male vocals and acoustic guitar.
>
> Any experience with these? Your advice is VERY much appreciated.
>
> Mappy New Year!
>
> MarkHey everybody!! Question:
Is anyone running ProTools LE on their Paris machine? I think I just resolved
a PAris conflict by un-installing PT LE..Any advice.ThanksIf you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you a
machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about it.
Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or another
which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi company
they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes tires
I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to get
my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do exactly
that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on my
list of battles to fight.
However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so I'll
get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
TCB
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>their thing.
>
>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>Should be an interesting month.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>TCB wrote:
>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same logic
>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you living.
>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
a computer
>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
I'm
>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent. By
this
>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's where
>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
or
>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now he's
>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look like
>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>
>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car manufacturers.
>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
the
>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far as
I'm
>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of
profits
>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
>> division.
>>
>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer some
>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than
on
>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that the
>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
code
>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
is
>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world either.
>>
>>
>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>>
>>
>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I buy
a
>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me so
I
>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>
>>
>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>
>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>
>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>
>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>
>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
as
>>
>>
>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>
>>
>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as
a
>>
>>
>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>>
>>
>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>
>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>Intel OSX?
>>>
>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>>interesting:
>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>
>>>
>>>TCB wrote:
>>>
>>>>"James McCloskey" <Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61952 is a reply to message #61948] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 12:20 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
>>
>> does,
>>
>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>>
>> of
>>
>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>
>> end,
>>
>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>
>> for
>>
>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>>>>use it.
>>>>
>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
>>
>> be
>>
>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>
>> people?
>>
>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been playing
>>>>by the rules.
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>
>>The Microsoft OEM agreement makes no sense from a consumer or legal
standpoint, true. To have an OS manufacturer controlling what separate
computer hardware companies charge for is not right.
Apple is a different animal because they supply the whole box, hardware
and software. We can disagree with their choice, but it is their choice
to make.
I don't know of any operating system that couldn't be attacked as
"performance robbing," since every design is a compromise on some level.
None are perfect. Some are better than others, though. Certainly for
media production you cannot legitimately claim that OSX is mediocre,
it's not. Nor could you say Linux is mediocre for server software.
However you can say both could be better in their strong areas and in
their weak areas, because they always can be. And with every release
they have been.
Congrats on the new laptop.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
TCB wrote:
> If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you a
> machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
> Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
> wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about it.
> Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or another
> which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>
> Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi company
> they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
> performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes tires
> I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to get
> my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do exactly
> that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on my
> list of battles to fight.
>
> However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so I'll
> get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>
> TCB
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
>
>
>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>
>
>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>their thing.
>>
>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>Should be an interesting month.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>TCB wrote:
>>
>>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same logic
>>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you living.
>>>I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
>
> a computer
>
>>>tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>
> I'm
>
>>>still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent. By
>
> this
>
>>>logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's where
>>>they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
>
> or
>
>>>of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now he's
>>>out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
>>>could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look like
>>>they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>
>>>As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car manufacturers.
>>>Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>
> the
>
>>>loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far as
>
> I'm
>
>>>concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of
>
> profits
>
>>>(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
>>>division.
>>>
>>>But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer some
>>>possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than
>
> on
>
>>>PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
>>>against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that the
>>>compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
>>>wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>
> code
>
>>>it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>
> is
>
>>>the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world either.
>>>
>>>
>>>In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
>>>the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>>>
>>>
>>>And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I buy
>
> a
>
>>>laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me so
>
> I
>
>>>can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>
>>>
>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>
>
>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>
>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>
>
>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>
>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>
>>>
>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>
>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>
> as
>
>>>
>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as
>
> a
>
>>>
>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>>>
>>>
>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>
>
>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>
>
>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>
>
>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>
>
>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>
>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>
>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>-Jamie
>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>
>
>>>>interesting:
>>>>Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61953 is a reply to message #61952] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 11:59 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hp" target="_blank">http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>>>
>>>after
>>>
>>>
>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their hardware
>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off of
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>
>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>
> to
>
>>>be
>>>
>>>
>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>
> dubious
>
>>>>>is
>>>>>
>>>>>######################################
>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>
>>>between
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>
> may
>
>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>
>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that
>>>
>>>it
>>>
>>>
>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
>>>
>>>does,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>>>
>>>of
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>
>>>end,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>
>>>for
>>>
>>>
>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>>>>>use it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
>>>
>>>be
>>>
>>>
>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>
>>>people?
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been playing
>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>+ vs -
What's the difference?
Is there a better format?
What about burners....suggested brands?
Thanks
DonI haven't tried the SE 5600, but I think there is a comparison of it with
the Neumann U47 in the info that Morgan has posted to this site. To my ears
it sounds very close to the Gemini which I have here, which sounds very
close to the U47. When I get back into mic buying mode, I'm seriously
considering the following:
1 x Gemini (which I already have here) for all around vocal and instrument
duties.
2 x Titans (I have one here now) for solid state, multipattern use with
stereo micing capabilities.
2 x 5600's (if I like them) for multipattern tube mixs/stereo capabilities
2 x SE3's for SDC instrument mic'ing
2 x SE ribbons (hven't heard them yet, but given my experiences with the
Gemini, titan and SE3's, I'm thinking that they deserve a serious look)
If the 5600's and the ribbons are of the same sonic quality as the Gemini,
SE3 and Titan, I could see outfitting an entire studio with these mics for
less than the cost of one *vintage LDC*
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
news:43b2d965@linux...
> Mark,
>
> I have a Rode NTK tube mic that I like very much, but from what I've heard
> from DJ and Morgan, the SE mics are phenomenal performers. You can hear
some
> mp3 recording examples by going to:
>
> http://www.mercysakes.com/paris/Doug%20Joyce/
>
> and listening to some of the mic shootouts and other examples. The "read
me"
> files tell you what mics are what.
>
> Anyway, I'm sure Deej will agree that the SE would be a very good choice.
> They're certainly on my list.
>
> Tony
>
>
> "Mark McDermott" <mark@stateofwail.com> wrote in message
> news:43b2d7e3$1@linux...
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Hope you all had or are having a great holiday!
> >
> > I am considering purchasing a Rode K2 tube mic but am also looking at
the
> > SE Electronics Z5600A. I've used the K2 before but not the SE product.
The
> > intent is primarily male vocals and acoustic guitar.
> >
> > Any experience with these? Your advice is VERY much appreciated.
> >
> > Mappy New Year!
> >
> > Mark
>
>You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and a very
good one I might add.
;o)
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
news:43b2cc67@linux...
> Nice!
>
> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase
LE,
> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have to
> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>
> Tony
>
> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
> > logic pro 7.1
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got
any
> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three i5's
> >>and
> >>a D6! Yahoo!
> >>
> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
> >>
> >>Tony
> >>
> >
>
>I was just joshin' ya Deej (wow, say that three times fast). Cubase LE looks
to be pretty simple compared to Digital Performer so I shouldn't have much
trouble. If I gradgiate up to SX, I'll look into Thad's book. Even though he
is a Mac hater! ;>) See the little emoticon Thad? That's mean's I'm joshin'
with you also.
Tony
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43b306c4@linux...
> You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and a very
> good one I might add.
>
> ;o)
>
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
> news:43b2cc67@linux...
>> Nice!
>>
>> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase
> LE,
>> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have to
>> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>> > logic pro 7.1
>> >
>> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got
> any
>> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three
>> >>i5's
>> >>and
>> >>a D6! Yahoo!
>> >>
>> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>> >>
>> >>Tony
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>Cubase SX3 is pertty cool. Let me know if you decide to go with it and I'll
be glad to impart what knowledge I have gleaned.thus far.
;o)
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
news:43b308aa$1@linux...
> I was just joshin' ya Deej (wow, say that three times fast). Cubase LE
looks
> to be pretty simple compared to Digital Performer so I shouldn't have much
> trouble. If I gradgiate up to SX, I'll look into Thad's book. Even though
he
> is a Mac hater! ;>) See the little emoticon Thad? That's mean's I'm
joshin'
> with you also.
>
> Tony
>
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> news:43b306c4@linux...
> > You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and a
very
> > good one I might add.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> > "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
> > news:43b2cc67@linux...
> >> Nice!
> >>
> >> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with
Cubase
> > LE,
> >> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have
to
> >> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
> >> > logic pro 7.1
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
> >> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got
> > any
> >> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
> >> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three
> >> >>i5's
> >> >>and
> >> >>a D6! Yahoo!
> >> >>
> >> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61959 is a reply to message #61952] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:54 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hat need to repeatedly compute
>
>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>
>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>
>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>
>>>>interesting:
>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>>>
>>> after
>>>
>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
hardware
>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
of
>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>to
>>>
>>> be
>>>
>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>dubious
>>>>>is
>>>>>
>>>>>######################################
>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>
>>> between
>>>
>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>may
>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>
>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that
>>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
>>>
>>> does,
>>>
>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>
>>> end,
>>>
>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>
>>> for
>>>
>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
sense
>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
geeks
>>>>>use it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
>>>
>>> be
>>>
>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>
>>> people?
>>>
>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
playing
>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>TCB wrote...
"and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public."
I don't think that's quite accurate any more...Apple are under investigation
here, (Oz), for faulty ipods, Broken screens, DOA etc, and not honouring the
warranties.
I'm sure they have the same problem in the US.
Also the sound quality is inferior to many of it's competitors, (cheaper
ones at that.)
They just happen to have major marketing hype.
it must work, iPods were the Xmas gift of choice here.
There's going to be a lot of disappointed kids out there.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43b2a21b$1@linux...
>
> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>
> Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
> after
> a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
> manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
> market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
> The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
> hardware
> costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off of a
> laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon to be
> delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
> dubious
> is
>
> ######################################
> The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
> between
> Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies may
> be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
> only in Apple systems.
> #####################################
>
> It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that it
> uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
> does,
> or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point of
> Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
> end,
> and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money for
> a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
> unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
> use it.
>
> Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it be
> to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
> people?
> I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
> playing
> by the rules.
>
> TCB
>James wrote..
>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
Apple, a computer company. <<
Is that true?
Would've thought there were more iPods than Macs.
BTW, lets keep this thread civil, huh?
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43b317ba$1@linux...
>
> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
> a
>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
> it.
>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
> another
>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>
>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>company
>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
> tires
>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to get
>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
>>exactly
>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on my
>>list of battles to fight.
>>
>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
>>I'll
>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>
>>TCB
>
>
> That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not. I'll
> bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
> washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
> really
> know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
> try
> using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the Mac
> guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and how
> inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
> bashing
> and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
> the
> Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
> Computer,
> so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting our
> intellect.
>
> Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in the
> personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
> credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
> decisions.
> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the good
> decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
> using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
> Apple, a computer company.
>
> Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
> efficient
> and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
> Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say Mac
> OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
> You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
> what???
> It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
> that where the computing world is going???
>
> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the best
> OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive, user
> friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
> systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
> your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
> Dog/Linux
> will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
> media
> production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
> friendly
> for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>
> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
> regardless of what people like you say.
>
> It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
> opinion.
>
> It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>
>
>>
>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
>>
>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>
>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>their thing.
>>>
>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>TCB wrote:
>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
> logic
>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
> living.
>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
>>a computer
>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>>I'm
>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent. By
>>this
>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61960 is a reply to message #61942] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:02 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>
>>>> where
>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
>>or
>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>>> he's
>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>>>> (M$oft
>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>>> like
>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>
>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
> manufacturers.
>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>>the
>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
> as
>>I'm
>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of
>>profits
>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>> electronics
>>>> division.
>>>>
>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>>> some
>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than
>>on
>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>>>> argue
>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
> the
>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>>>> Apple
>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>code
>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>is
>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>> either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>> through
>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>> environment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I buy
>>a
>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me so
>>I
>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>
>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>
>>>>>two lines that seems to be he
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61961 is a reply to message #61959] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:08 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
lping both.
>>>>>
>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>
>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>
>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>
>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>
>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>as
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as
>>a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>processing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>
>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>
>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>
>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>
>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>
>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>
>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>
>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>
>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>>>>>years
>>>>
>>>> after
>>>>
>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
> hardware
>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
> of
>>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>to
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>dubious
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>
>>>> between
>>>>
>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>may
>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
>>>>>>that
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>
>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>>>>else
>>>>
>>>> does,
>>>>
>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>>>>>point
>>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>
>>>> end,
>>>>
>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
> sense
>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
> geeks
>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>
>>>> people?
>>>>
>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
> playing
>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>Cool beans DJ.
Tony
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43b3155e$1@linux...
> Cubase SX3 is pertty cool. Let me know if you decide to go with it and
> I'll
> be glad to impart what knowledge I have gleaned.thus far.
>
> ;o)
>
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
> news:43b308aa$1@linux...
>> I was just joshin' ya Deej (wow, say that three times fast). Cubase LE
> looks
>> to be pretty simple compared to Digital Performer so I shouldn't have
>> much
>> trouble. If I gradgiate up to SX, I'll look into Thad's book. Even though
> he
>> is a Mac hater! ;>) See the little emoticon Thad? That's mean's I'm
> joshin'
>> with you also.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> news:43b306c4@linux...
>> > You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and a
> very
>> > good one I might add.
>> >
>> > ;o)
>> >
>> > "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
>> > news:43b2cc67@linux...
>> >> Nice!
>> >>
>> >> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with
> Cubase
>> > LE,
>> >> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have
> to
>> >> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>> >>
>> >> Tony
>> >>
>> >> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>> >> > logic pro 7.1
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>> >> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone
>> >> >>got
>> > any
>> >> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a
>> >> >>Focusrite
>> >> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three
>> >> >>i5's
>> >> >>and
>> >> >>a D6! Yahoo!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Tony
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>Thanks guys!
btw, snow is still falling... Well, few more days and
there will be "crisis in Croatia" hedline at CNN... ;-)
Suad
"Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
news:6g43r1tlqvpkb7ql1cj58pbl8qbns0mgmd@4ax.com...
>
>
> Thanks for that view of your part of the world... Best wishes for a
> great New Year -- Chas (on the mild Central California coast)
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:51:33 +0100, "Suad" <suad@sail.hr> wrote:
>
> >Hello guys !!
> >
> >I wish you bunch of joy, happiness, health, love and
> >of course, good job and bucks!!!
> >
> >And, less bugs, charshed projects, assertion fails,
> >bad music, computers and microsoft...
> >...and I wish a Paris V4.0 becomes a reality!!!
> >
> >Cheers!
> >
> >Suad Cokljat
> >
>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>James wrote..
>
>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>Apple, a computer company. <<
>
>Is that true?
>Would've thought there were more iPods than Macs.
>
>BTW, lets keep this thread civil, huh?
>--
>Martin Harrington
>www.lendanear-sound.com
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Every time there is any post about Apple or
Mac OSX the bashing starts from people that don't use Macs. It's getting
uncivil. Some of the people here have chosen Macs as there platform of choice.
Mac bashing is down right insulting to some of us, and it's getting old!
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:43b317ba$1@linux...
>>
>> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
>> a
>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>> it.
>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
>> another
>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>
>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>>company
>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>> tires
>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
get
>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
>>>exactly
>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
my
>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>
>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
>>>I'll
>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>
>>
>> That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
I'll
>> bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>> washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>> really
>> know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>> try
>> using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
Mac
>> guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
how
>> inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>> bashing
>> and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>> the
>> Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>> Computer,
>> so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
our
>> intellect.
>>
>> Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
the
>> personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>> credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>> decisions.
>> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the good
>> decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
>> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>> using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>> Apple, a computer company.
>>
>> Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>> efficient
>> and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
>> Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
Mac
>> OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>> You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
>> what???
>> It's not as usab
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61964 is a reply to message #61961] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 16:26 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>>> either.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>> through
>>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>> environment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
buy
>>>a
>>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
so
>>>I
>>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
a
>>
>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>>
>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>>
>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
as
>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>processing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>
>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>
>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>>
>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>
>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>
>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>
>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>>
>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>>>>>>years
>>>>>
>>>>> after
>>>>>
>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>> hardware
>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>> of
>>>>>
>>>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>to
>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>dubious
>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>>
>>>>> between
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>may
>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
>>>>>>>that
>>>>>
>>>>> it
>>>>>
>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>>>>>else
>>>>>
>>>>> does,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>>>>>>point
>>>>>
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>>
>>>>> end,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>> sense
>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>> geeks
>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
it
>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>>
>>>>> people?
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>> playing
>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>Treated myself to a new Taylor 355ce. It is awesome! I must say, however,
that I played a couple of them and there was definitely a sonic difference
between each. I've course, I got the best one - and at $250 lower than Musician's
Friend!
Now, about that tube microphone...
Mark
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got any
>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three i5's
and
>a D6! Yahoo!
>
>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>
>Tony
>
>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>TCB wrote...
>
> "and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public."
>
>I don't think that's quite accurate any more...Apple are under investigation
>here, (Oz), for faulty ipods, Broken screens, DOA etc, and not honouring
the
>warranties.
>I'm sure they have the same problem in the US.
>Also the sound quality is inferior to many of it's competitors, (cheaper
>ones at that.)
>They just happen to have major marketing hype.
>it must work, iPods were the Xmas gift of choice here.
>There's going to be a lot of disappointed kids out there.
>--
>Martin Harrington
>www.lendanear-sound.com
First, that is old news! The first shipments were bad. Apple is a good
company, I'm sure they will resolve any issues with iPod that are under warranty.
All electronics manufactures have some defective products, it's news because
Apple is in the lime light right now. As far as the sound quality I don't
know, did you try all the iPod models and compare them to all the other mp3
players? Or did you just read this some where! I'm sure something out their
sounds better. That is a cheap shot. I would have had more respect if you
had said the damned thing is too expensive.
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43b2a21b$1@linux...
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>
>> Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>> after
>> a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>> manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>> market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>> The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>> hardware
>> costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off of
a
>> laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon to
be
>> delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>> dubious
>> is
>>
>> ######################################
>> The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>> between
>> Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies may
>> be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would appear
>> only in Apple systems.
>> #####################################
>>
>> It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in that
it
>> uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing else
>> does,
>> or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
of
>> Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>> end,
>> and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
for
>> a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make sense
>> unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we geeks
>> use it.
>>
>> Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will it
be
>> to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>> people?
>> I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>> playing
>> by the rules.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>
>Careful Tony - the newsgroup server might need a serious disk upgrade if Deej
decides to do an SX brain dump!
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Cubase SX3 is pertty cool. Let me know if you decide to go with it and I'll
>be glad to impart what knowledge I have gleaned.thus far.
>
>;o)
>
>"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
>news:43b308aa$1@linux...
>> I was just joshin' ya Deej (wow, say that three times fast). Cubase LE
>looks
>> to be pretty simple compared to Digital Performer so I shouldn't have
much
>> trouble. If I gradgiate up to SX, I'll look into Thad's book. Even though
>he
>> is a Mac hater! ;>) See the little emoticon Thad? That's mean's I'm
>joshin'
>> with you also.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
>> news:43b306c4@linux...
>> > You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and
a
>very
>> > good one I might add.
>> >
>> > ;o)
>> >
>> > "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
>> > news:43b2cc67@linux...
>> >> Nice!
>> >>
>> >> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with
>Cubase
>> > LE,
>> >> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have
>to
>> >> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>> >>
>> >> Tony
>> >>
>> >> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>> >> > logic pro 7.1
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>> >> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone
got
>> > any
>> >> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>> >> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three
>> >> >>i5's
>> >> >>and
>> >> >>a D6! Yahoo!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Tony
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>I don't mind criticisms of any particular equipment, computers included.
It's just gear. Sometimes criticisms are valid and useful and I learn
something, sometimes they're exaggerated and I still learn something.
Sometimes it's mostly FUD. And I may still learn something.
In any case my gear keeps doing what it does. In ten years I'll be using
something else and looking fondly back at the good old days, or laughing
about them.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
James McCloskey wrote:
> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>>James wrote..
>>
>>
>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>
>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>>Apple, a computer company. <<
>>
>>Is that true?
>>Would've thought there were more iPods than Macs.
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61966 is a reply to message #61960] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 16:39 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
" target="_blank">nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>
>>>it.
>>>
>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
>>>
>>>another
>>>
>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>
>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>>>company
>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>
>>>tires
>>>
>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
>
> get
>
>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
>
>
>>>>exactly
>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
>
> my
>
>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>
>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
>
>
>>>>I'll
>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>
>>>
>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>
> I'll
>
>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>
>
>>>really
>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>
>
>>>try
>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>
> Mac
>
>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>
> how
>
>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>bashing
>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>
>
>>>the
>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>Computer,
>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
>
> our
>
>>>intellect.
>>>
>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
>
> the
>
>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>
>
>>>decisions.
>>>Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the good
>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>
>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>>>I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>>>efficient
>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
>
> Mac
>
>>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version o
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61968 is a reply to message #61964] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 15:47 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
;>>or
>>>>
>>>>>>of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>
>
>>>>>>he's
>>>>>>out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>>>>>>(M$oft
>>>>>>could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>
>
>>>>>>like
>>>>>>they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>>>
>>>manufacturers.
>>>
>>>>>>Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>>>loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>>>
>>>as
>>>
>>>>I'm
>>>>
>>>>>>concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>
> of
>
>>>>profits
>>>>
>>>>>>(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>electronics
>>>>>>division.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>
>
>>>>>>some
>>>>>>possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>
> than
>
>>>>on
>>>>
>>>>>>PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>
>
>>>>>>argue
>>>>>>against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>>>>compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>
>
>>>>>>Apple
>>>>>>wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>>>
>>>>code
>>>>
>>>>>>it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>>>
>>>>is
>>>>
>>>>>>the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>
>
>>>>>>either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>>through
>>>>>>the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>>environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
>
> buy
>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>>>laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>
> so
>
>>>>I
>>>>
>>>>>>can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>
> a
>
>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>>>
>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>>>
>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>>>
>>>>as
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>
> as
>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>>
>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>
>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>>>
>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>
>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>
>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>>
>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>-Jamie
>>>>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>>>
>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>
>
>>>>>>>>years
>>>>>>
>>>>>>after
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>
>
>>>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>
>
>>>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>
>>>hardware
>>>
>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>>>
>>>of
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>>
>>>>to
>>>>
>>>>>>be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>
>>>>dubious
>>>>
>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>>>
>>>>>>between
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>
>>>>may
>>>>
>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>
>
>>>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
>
>
>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>
>
>>>>>>>>else
>>>>>>
>>>>>>does,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>
>
>>>>>>>>point
>>>>>>
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>>>
>>>>>>end,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>>>
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>>
>>>sense
>>>
>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>>>
>>>geeks
>>>
>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>
> it
>
>>>>>>be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>people?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>>
>>>playing
>>>
>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>I don't mind criticisms of any particular equipment, computers included.
> It's just gear. Sometimes criticisms are valid and useful and I learn
>something, sometimes they're exaggerated and I still learn something.
>Sometimes it's mostly FUD. And I may still learn something.
>
>In any case my gear keeps doing what it does. In ten years I'll be using
>something else and looking fondly back at the good old days, or laughing
>about them.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
I'm with you Jamie, but there is a difference between criticisms and bashing.
The post wasn't originally about what is better than what. Everybody has
a right to their opinion, and criticisms that are on subject, but when it's
bashing at every opportunity, it gets old. First the G5 sucks it slow, then
Mac OSX sucks because it's inefficient as a network server. Then Apple sucks
as a company, they made bad decisions. Then The iPod sucks because their
5th generation iPod screen scratches easy and it sucks because even though
it sounds good and it's the number one selling mp3 player it sucks because
something out there sounds better. It's all just finding something to bash
the Mac with, even though they don't use Macs and really wouldn't know.
Everything sucks about Apple, right???
I'm a multi platform user, so I can speak to some things. I have criticisms
of Apple and the Mac, but I use it every day. I don't just run with what
somebody else said about it, then repeat the criticisms, like I know all
about it. I don't take second hand info and swear it's gospel, I know first
hand.
>
>
>James McCloskey wrote:
>> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>>James wrote..
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>>
>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>>>Apple, a computer company. <<
>>>
>>>Is that true?
>>>Would've thought there were more iPods than Macs.
>>>
>>>BTW, lets keep this thread civil, huh?
>>>--
>>>Martin Harrington
>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Every time there is any post about Apple
or
>> Mac OSX the bashing starts from people that don't use Macs. It's getting
>> uncivil. Some of the people here have chosen Macs as there platform of
choice.
>> Mac bashing is down right insulting to some of us, and it's getting
old!
>>
>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:43b317ba$1@linux...
>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
you
>>>>
>>>>a
>>>>
>>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
with
>>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
still
>>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>>
>>>>it.
>>>>
>>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something
or
>>>>
>>>>another
>>>>
>>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>>>>company
>>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>>
>>>>tires
>>>>
>>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets
to
>>
>> get
>>
>>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can
do
>>
>>
>>>>>exactly
>>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low
on
>>
>> my
>>
>>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>>
>>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two
so
>>
>>
>>>>>I'll
>>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>>
>> I'll
>>
>>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>>
>>
>>>>really
>>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>
>>
>>>>try
>>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>>
>> Mac
>>
>>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>>
>> how
>>
>>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>>bashing
>>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>>
>>
>>>>the
>>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>>Computer,
>>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
>>
>> our
>>
>>>>intellect.
>>>>
>>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>>
>>
>>>>decisions.
>>>>Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
good
>>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
make
>>>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>>
>>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>>>>I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>>>>efficient
>>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't
what
>>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
>>
>> Mac
>>
>>>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>>>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but
at
>>
>>
>>>>what???
>>>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>>>>that where the computing world is going???
>>>>
>>>> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
>>
>> best
>>
>>>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
>>
>> user
>>
>>>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
>>>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
>>>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
>>>>Dog/Linux
>>>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
>>
>>
>>>>media
>>>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
>>>>friendly
>>>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>>>
>>>>Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
>>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>>
>>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>>opinion.
>>>>
>>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>>
>>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61969 is a reply to message #61968] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 17:31 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>>>
>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
>>
>> OS,
>>
>>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>>>>
>>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>>
>>>>logic
>>>>
>>>>>>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>>>>
>>>>living.
>>>>
>>>>>>>I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
I'm
>>>>>
>>>>>a computer
>>>>>
>>>>>>>tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm
>>>>>
>>>>>>>still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>
>> By
>>
>>>>>this
>>>>>
>>>>>>>logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
>>
>>
>>>>>>>where
>>>>>>>they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
is,
>>>>>
>>>>>or
>>>>>
>>>>>>>of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>
>>
>>>>>>>he's
>>>>>>>out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>>>>>>>(M$oft
>>>>>>>could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>
>>
>>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>>>>
>>>>manufacturers.
>>>>
>>>>>>>Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
for
>>>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>>>>
>>>>as
>>>>
>>>>>I'm
>>>>>
>>>>>>>concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>>
>> of
>>
>>>>>profits
>>>>>
>>>>>>>(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>>electronics
>>>>>>>division.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>
>>
>>>>>>>some
>>>>>>>possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>>
>> than
>>
>>>>>on
>>>>>
>>>>>>>PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>>
>>
>>>>>>>argue
>>>>>>>against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>>
>>>>the
>>>>
>>>>>>>compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Apple
>>>>>>>wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>>>>
>>>>>code
>>>>>
>>>>>>>it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>>>>
>>>>>is
>>>>>
>>>>>>>the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>
>>
>>>>>>>either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>>>through
>>>>>>>the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>>>environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when
I
>>
>> buy
>>
>>>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>>>laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>>
>> so
>>
>>>>>I
>>>>>
>>>>>>>can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
what
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to
run
>>>>>
>>>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>>
>> as
>>
>>>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on
the
>>>>
>>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
and
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>>
>>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>-Jamie
>>>>>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
find
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>years
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>after
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>>
>>>>hardware
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X
off
>>>>
>>>>of
>>>>
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>>>
>>>>>to
>>>>>
>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>>
>>>>>dubious
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>between
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>>
>>>>>may
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique
in
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>else
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>does,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>point
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>end,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
money
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>>>
>>>>sense
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than
we
>>>>
>>>>geeks
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>
>> it
>>
>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>people?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>>>
>>>>playing
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>No big difference. Some polls have shown the -R to work in more players.
Some burners prefer one kind or other as well - my Liteon 8x didnt like
the -R till I updated the firmware and since then I have burned over 150
DVDs of both types w/o incident. You can find some information on burners,
players and media at videohelp.com and they run some user polls.
CDFreaks.com also has reviews and a large user base. Check their review of
the BenQ burners (highly touted Sony DRU series based on BenQ).
HTH, Edna
"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:43b2f487$1@linux...
> + vs -
>
> What's the difference?
>
>
> Is there a better format?
>
>
> What about burners....suggested brands?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Don
>
>Tony,
I've been waiting for the Saffire to be released,looks
like a pretty cool interface. How are the effects ?
respect
Nappy
"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Nice!
>
>I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase
LE,
>so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have to
>update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>
>Tony
>
>"rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>> logic pro 7.1
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>> <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got
any
>>>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>>>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three i5's
>>>and
>>>a D6! Yahoo!
>>>
>>>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>>>
>>>Tony
>>>
>>
>
>I've heard that the error checking and other format related stuff is superior
on the + format, which is the newer of the two. Hence for backups etc I'd
be using + if you are to trust DVDs at all. Early drives are more likely
to support the - format than + generally, and this includes both household
movie DVD players as well as PC DVD drives.
It was one of those old Sony Vs the world things. + is the Sony format. They
claimed it was better and everybody would have to pay them to use it, but
people used the cheaper royalty - format instead until Sony dropped the price.
The + format does have a few advantages especially in writing DVD video off
live TV, which is near impossible to do with - disks as I understand, but
+ allowed for it in the format. For general data use there is little difference
other than the error correction schemes. How much difference this really
makes I don't really know... often if you get an error you're in trouble
regardless...
Cheers,
Kim.
"Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>No big difference. Some polls have shown the -R to work in more players.
>Some burners prefer one kind or other as well - my Liteon 8x didnt like
>the -R till I updated the firmware and since then I have burned over 150
>DVDs of both types w/o incident. You can find some information on burners,
>players and media at videohelp.com and they run some user polls.
>CDFreaks.com also has reviews and a large user base. Check their review
of
>the BenQ burners (highly touted Sony DRU series based on BenQ).
>HTH, Edna
>
>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:43b2f487$1@linux...
>> + vs -
>>
>> What's the difference?
>>
>>
>> Is there a better format?
>>
>>
>> What about burners....suggested brands?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Don
>>
>>
>
>Neil and Thad would be the go-to guys for SX. Neil has been using it much
longer than I have and Thad literally wrote the book. My area of expertise
would be in persuading SX and Paris to perform unnatural acts together.
;o)
"Mark McDermott" <mark@stateofwail.com> wrote in message
news:43b32347$1@linux...
>
> Careful Tony - the newsgroup server might need a serious disk upgrade if
Deej
> decides to do an SX brain dump!
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Cubase SX3 is pertty cool. Let me know if you decide to go with it and
I'll
> >be glad to impart what knowledge I have gleaned.thus far.
> >
> >;o)
> >
> >"Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
> >news:43b308aa$1@linux...
> >> I was just joshin' ya Deej (wow, say that three times fast). Cubase LE
> >looks
> >> to be pretty simple compared to Digital Performer so I shouldn't have
> much
> >> trouble. If I gradgiate up to SX, I'll look into Thad's book. Even
though
> >he
> >> is a Mac hater! ;>) See the little emoticon Thad? That's mean's I'm
> >joshin'
> >> with you also.
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >>
> >> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
> >> news:43b306c4@linux...
> >> > You should bug Thad instead. He wrote the book on this..........and
> a
> >very
> >> > good one I might add.
> >> >
> >> > ;o)
> >> >
> >> > "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:43b2cc67@linux...
> >> >> Nice!
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with
> >Cubase
> >> > LE,
> >> >> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll
have
> >to
> >> >> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
> >> >>
> >> >> Tony
> >> >>
> >> >> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
> >> >> > logic pro 7.1
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
> >> >> > <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone
> got
> >> > any
> >> >> >>new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a
Focusrite
> >> >> >>Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with
three
> >> >> >>i5's
> >> >> >>and
> >> >> >>a D6! Yahoo!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Tony
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>Well, for a start, I wouldn't say they are too expensive, because they've
been priced competitively, but I do know the iRiver products sound better,
as do some of the creative players.
Others, such as the iRiver, allow direct recording, which is a huge bonus.
The QC problems may be "old news" to the US but it's still continuing here,
so much so that Apple Aust had to come out with PR just before Xmas saying
they will honour warranties etc, something they weren't doing previously.
Respect...who knows??
--
Martin Harrington
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61974 is a reply to message #61966] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 19:07 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
t;>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
>
> you
>
>>>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
>
> with
>
>>>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
>
> still
>
>>>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>>>
>>>>>it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something
>
> or
>
>>>>>another
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>
>
>>>>>>company
>>>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>>>
>>>>>tires
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets
>
> to
>
>>>get
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can
>
> do
>
>>>
>>>>>>exactly
>>>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low
>
> on
>
>>>my
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two
>
> so
>
>>>
>>>>>>I'll
>>>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>
>
>>>I'll
>>>
>>>
>>>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>>>
>>>
>>>>>really
>>>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>try
>>>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>>>
>>>Mac
>>>
>>>
>>>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>>>
>>>how
>>>
>>>
>>>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>>>bashing
>>>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>>>Computer,
>>>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
>>>
>>>our
>>>
>>>
>>>>>intellect.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>>>
>>>
>>>>>decisions.
>>>>>Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
>
> good
>
>>>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
>>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
>
> make
>
>>>>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>>>>>I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>
>
>>>>>efficient
>>>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't
>
> what
>
>>>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
>>>
>>>Mac
>>>
>>>
>>>>>OSX is
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61975 is a reply to message #61969] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 19:14 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>>>>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but
>
> at
>
>>>
>>>>>what???
>>>>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>>>>>that where the computing world is going???
>>>>>
>>>>>Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
>>>
>>>best
>>>
>>>
>>>>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
>>>
>>>user
>>>
>>>
>>>>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
>>>>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
>>>>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
>>>>>Dog/Linux
>>>>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
>>>
>>>
>>>>>media
>>>>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
>>>>>friendly
>>>>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
>>>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>>>opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
>>>
>>>OS,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>-Jamie
>>>>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>>>
>>>>>logic
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>>>>>
>>>>>living.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
>
> I'm
>
>>>>>>a computer
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>>
>>>By
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>where
>>>>>>>>they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
>
> is,
>
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>he's
>>>>>>>>out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>
>
>>>>>>>>(M$oft
>>>>>>>>could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>>they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>>>>>
>>>>>manufacturers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
>
> for
>
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>>>>>
>>>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>>>
>>>of
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>profits
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>>>electronics
>>>>>>>>division.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>some
>>>>>>>>possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>>>
>>>than
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>argue
>>>>>>>>against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>Apple
>>>>>>>>wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>code
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>>>>>
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>>>>through
>>>>>>>>the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>>>>environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when
>
> I
>
>>>buy
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>>>
>>>so
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
>
> the
>
>>>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
>
> what
>
>>>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to
>
> run
>
>>>>>>as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>>>
>>>as
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on
>
> the
>
>>>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
>
> and
>
>>>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>-Jamie
>>>>>>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
>
> find
>
>>>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>years
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>after
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>>>
>>>>>hardware
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X
>
> off
>
>>>>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>>>>
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>>>
>>>>>>dubious
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>between
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>may
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique
>
> in
>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>else
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>does,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>point
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>end,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
>
> money
>
>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>>>>
>>>>>sense
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than
>
> we
>
>>>>>geeks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>>
>>>it
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>people?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>>>>
>>>>>playing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>In case anyone's interested and not aware, Derek Bailey passed away December
25th (Christmas) in London from Lou Gehrig's disease.Hi - I saw several notes on Wormhole but going to the site it just mentioned
file transfer, or I am really missing something...how does this sync PARIS??
I hope you don't mind what is obviously an ignorant question...
And, yes, still using PARIS, got it early on when it came out. Used to hang
out here a lot but strayed away and once in a great while lurk (just to see
if PARIS 4 was released...kidding! - well I do dream).James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms, I'd
like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or derisive.
You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused him
of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
-Chris
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
>a
>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>it.
>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
>another
>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>
>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi company
>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>tires
>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
get
>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
exactly
>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
my
>>list of battles to fight.
>>
>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
I'll
>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>
>>TCB
>
>
>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not. I'll
>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or really
>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
try
>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the Mac
>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and how
>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac bashing
>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
the
>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple Computer,
>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting our
>intellect.
>
>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in the
>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great decisions.
> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the good
>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>Apple, a computer company.
>
>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more efficient
>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say Mac
>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
what???
>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>that where the computing world is going???
>
> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the best
>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive, user
>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow Dog/Linux
>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi media
>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user friendly
>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>
> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
>regardless of what people like you say.
>
>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their opinion.
>
>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>
>
>>
>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
>>
>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>
>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>their thing.
>>>
>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>TCB wrote:
>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>logic
>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>living.
>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
>>a computer
>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>>I'm
>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
By
>>this
>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's where
>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
>>or
>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
he's
>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
like
>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>
>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>manufacturers.
>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>>the
>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>as
>>I'm
>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of
>>profits
>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
>>>> division.
>>>>
>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
some
>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than
>>on
>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>the
>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>code
>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>is
>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
buy
>>a
>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
so
>>I
>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>
>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a s
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61978 is a reply to message #61959] |
Wed, 28 December 2005 22:22 |
Chris Wargo
Messages: 45
Registered: November 2005
|
Member |
|
|
nes":
>>>>>
>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>as
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
as
>>a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>
>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>
>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>
>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>
>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>
>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>
>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>
>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>
>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>>>>
>>>> after
>>>>
>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>hardware
>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>of
>>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>to
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>dubious
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>
>>>> between
>>>>
>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>may
>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
appear
>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
that
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>
>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
else
>>>>
>>>> does,
>>>>
>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>
>>>> end,
>>>>
>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>sense
>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>geeks
>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
it
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>
>>>> people?
>>>>
>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>playing
>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>Nappy,
I just got it hooked up and running on my Power Book tonight, so I haven't
had much time yet to really check it all out. I did play my Parker Fly
through the guitar amp modeling FX for a while. It sounded ok, and I'm sure
with some tweaking could sound pretty good. Not in the same league with NI's
Amps Combos, but useable. I also tried the reverb a little with the Fly.
Again, ok but nothing to write home about. I'm anxious to try out the mic
pre's and compression "supposedly" based on the modeling in the Liquid
Channel. I'll let you know if it's all hype or not once I get some time to
give the thing a workout.
I'm planning on using it for some remote recording, and working on original
tunes when I'm on the go.
It did install easily and worked like expected on my Power Book.
Tony
On 12/28/05 7:54 PM, in article 43b333c1$1@linux, "Nappy"
<mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Tony,
> I've been waiting for the Saffire to be released,looks
> like a pretty cool interface. How are the effects ?
>
> respect
> Nappy
>
>
> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>> Nice!
>>
>> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase
> LE,
>> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have to
>
>> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>>> logic pro 7.1
>>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>>> <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, I'm back from the family gatherings and wondering if anyone got
> any
>>>> new toys for Christmas. I was a good boy last year. I got a Focusrite
>>>> Saffire interface for my Powerbook and an Audix mic pack with three i5's
>
>>>> and
>>>> a D6! Yahoo!
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else get some good studio goodies?
>>>>
>>>> Tony
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>"Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>
>James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms,
I'd
>like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or derisive.
> You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused him
>of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
>it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
>
>-Chris
I started a couple of threads about Mac OSX running on a PC hardware and
mac development and it is instant Mac bash fest. In effect , saying, who
in their right mind would want to run a bloated inefficient piece of crap
like Mac OSX? That is rude and insulting, about 40% of us Paris users,
use Macs. Back up and read all the posts. The threads started out about
information, not what sucks and what doesn't. It wasn't an open invitation
to bash the platform that many of us use. Nor was it meant to be the kick
off of the next Mac vs. PC wars. My post was just to inform, not to start
a bunch of shit.
Thad has a right to his opinion as do I. He stands by his opinion, and so
do I. I say he doesn't have real experience or true knowledge of current
Macs because he does not use them. I would challenge him or anybody else
to use a current Mac for a Year, then come back with their criticisms. Then
his criticisms would have merit, and wouldn't just be something he read in
an anti Mac article. May be even he would see the light after a year. The
lack of maintenance hassle, the ease of use, productivity gains and usability,
multi media capability, feature set , available software, just to name a
few. But of course he wont because Macs suck, just read what he has posted.
Chill out, sure I'll try, but the constant barrage of knocks are uncalled
for. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody that
uses a Mac.
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
>>a
>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they still
>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>it.
>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
>>another
>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>
>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi company
>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their (apparently
>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>tires
>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
>get
>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
>exactly
>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
>my
>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>
>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
>I'll
>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>
>>
>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not. I'll
>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or really
>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>try
>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
Mac
>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
how
>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac bashing
>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>the
>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple Computer,
>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
our
>>intellect.
>>
>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
the
>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great decisions.
>> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the good
>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are successful.
>> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more people
>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>>Apple, a computer company.
>>
>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more efficient
>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
Mac
>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>
>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
>what???
>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>>that where the computing world is going???
>>
>> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
best
>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive, user
>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow Dog/Linux
>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
media
>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user friendly
>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>
>> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>
>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their opinion.
>>
>>It's not App
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61980 is a reply to message #61978] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:37 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
offer
>some
>>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
than
>>>on
>>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
argue
>>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>the
>>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
Apple
>>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>>code
>>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>>is
>>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>either.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
>>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
>buy
>>>a
>>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>so
>>>I
>>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
a
>>
>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>>
>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>>
>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>
>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>as
>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>
>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>
>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>>
>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>
>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>
>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>>
>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>
>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>
>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>>
>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
years
>>>>>
>>>>> after
>>>>>
>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
computer
>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
enviable
>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>hardware
>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>>of
>>>>>
>>>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>to
>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>dubious
>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>>
>>>>> between
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>may
>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>appear
>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
>that
>>>>>
>>>>> it
>>>>>
>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>else
>>>>>
>>>>> does,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
point
>>>>>
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>>
>>>>> end,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>sense
>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>>geeks
>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>it
>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>>
>>>>> people?
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>playing
>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>.. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
> spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
that
> uses a Mac.
..........hmmmmm........sorta' like when people say "we really like
Americans, we just don't like your government".
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43b3923d$1@linux...
>
> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
> >
> >James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms,
> I'd
> >like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or
derisive.
> > You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused
him
> >of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
> >it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
> >
> >-Chris
>
>
> I started a couple of threads about Mac OSX running on a PC hardware and
> mac development and it is instant Mac bash fest. In effect , saying, who
> in their right mind would want to run a bloated inefficient piece of crap
> like Mac OSX? That is rude and insulting, about 40% of us Paris users,
> use Macs. Back up and read all the posts. The threads started out about
> information, not what sucks and what doesn't. It wasn't an open
invitation
> to bash the platform that many of us use. Nor was it meant to be the kick
> off of the next Mac vs. PC wars. My post was just to inform, not to start
> a bunch of shit.
>
> Thad has a right to his opinion as do I. He stands by his opinion, and so
> do I. I say he doesn't have real experience or true knowledge of current
> Macs because he does not use them. I would challenge him or anybody else
> to use a current Mac for a Year, then come back with their criticisms.
Then
> his criticisms would have merit, and wouldn't just be something he read in
> an anti Mac article. May be even he would see the light after a year.
The
> lack of maintenance hassle, the ease of use, productivity gains and
usability,
> multi media capability, feature set , available software, just to name a
> few. But of course he wont because Macs suck, just read what he has
posted.
>
> Chill out, sure I'll try, but the constant barrage of knocks are uncalled
> for. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
> spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
that
> uses a Mac.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
you
> >>a
> >>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
with
> >>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
still
> >>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
> >>it.
> >>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
> >>another
> >>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
> >>>
> >>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
company
> >>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their
(apparently
> >>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
> >>tires
> >>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
> >get
> >>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
> >exactly
> >>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
> >my
> >>>list of battles to fight.
> >>>
> >>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
> >I'll
> >>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
> >>>
> >>>TCB
> >>
> >>
> >>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
I'll
> >>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
> >>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
really
> >>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
> >try
> >>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
> Mac
> >>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
> how
> >>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
bashing
> >>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
> >the
> >>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
Computer,
> >>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
> our
> >>intellect.
> >>
> >>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
> the
> >>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
> >>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
decisions.
> >> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
good
> >>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are
successful.
> >> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more
people
> >>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
make
> >>Apple, a computer company.
> >>
> >>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
> >> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
efficient
> >>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't
what
> >>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
> Mac
> >>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
> >
> >>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
> >what???
> >>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
> >>that where the computing world is going???
> >>
> >> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
> best
> >>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
user
> >>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like
other
> >>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or
write
> >>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
Dog/Linux
> >>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
> media
> >>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
friendly
> >>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
> >>
> >> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer
company,
> >>regardless of what people like you say.
> >>
> >>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
opinion.
> >>
> >>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
> OS,
> >>>
> >>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW
company
> >>>
> >>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
> >>>>their thing.
> >>>>
> >>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>
> >>>>Should be an interesting month.
> >>>>
> >>>>Cheers,
> >>>> -Jamie
> >>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>TCB wrote:
> >>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
> >>logic
> >>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
> >>living.
> >>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
I'm
> >>>a computer
> >>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publis
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61981 is a reply to message #61980] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:09 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
h twenty
articles
> >>>I'm
> >>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
> >By
> >>>this
> >>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
> where
> >>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
is,
> >>>or
> >>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
> >he's
> >>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
(M$oft
> >>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
> >like
> >>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
> >>manufacturers.
> >>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
for
> >>>the
> >>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
> >>as
> >>>I'm
> >>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
> of
> >>>profits
> >>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
electronics
> >>>>> division.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
> >some
> >>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
> than
> >>>on
> >>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
> argue
> >>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
> >>the
> >>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
> Apple
> >>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD
licensed
> >>>code
> >>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently
CodeWarrior
> >>>is
> >>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
> >either.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
through
> >>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
environment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
> >buy
> >>>a
> >>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
> >so
> >>>I
> >>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> TCB
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
> a
> >>
> >>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel
business
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
the
> >>>
> >>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
what
> >>>
> >>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
> >
> >>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>
> >>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor-it allows applications to
run
> >>>as
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run
translated.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
> >as
> >>>a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
processing
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
> >>
> >>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user
interaction
> >>>
> >>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
> >>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
and
> >>>
> >>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
> >>
> >>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs
aren't
> >>>
> >>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly
compute
> >>>
> >>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
> >
> >>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
> >
> >>>>>>Intel OSX?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
> >>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
> >>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
> >>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
> >>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Cheers,
> >>>>>> -Jamie
> >>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
find
> >>>
> >>>>>>interesting:
> >>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>TCB wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
> years
> >>>>>
> >>>>> after
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
> computer
> >>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
> enviable
> >>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
public.
> >>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
> >>hardware
> >>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
> >>of
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my
(soon
> >>>to
> >>>>>
> >>>>> be
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find
highly
> >>>dubious
> >>>>>>>is
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>######################################
> >>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship
forming
> >>>>>
> >>>>> between
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two
companies
> >>>may
> >>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
> >appear
> >>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
> >>>>>>>#####################################
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
> >that
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
> >else
> >>>>>
> >>>>> does,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
> point
> >>>>>
> >>>>> of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the
hardware
> >>>>>
> >>>>> end,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
money
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
> >>sense
> >>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
> >>geeks
> >>>>>>>use it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
> >it
> >>>>>
> >>>>> be
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not
marketing
> >>>>>
> >>>>> people?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
> >>playing
> >>>>>>>by the rules.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>TCB
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>.....Hmmm..... ....again, it seems to be some "religious" jammings here;-)
It seems, when seeing some kind of "the light", but looking directly into
that sun too long can make many blinded.... hmmmmm.... ...what have I wrote
here??... ...it seems more like "religious" writings from me too....
arghh... ...never mind.... ...I think I'm not that religious at all, but who
knows... ...it will allways be someone out there popping up, just knowing
this better than me... ...just like me.... hmm....it seems to be here in
"the civilization" we have these kind of rights...hmmm...it seems that Adam
needed the "Apple" to find out that Eve wanted more of his body than just to
be harmless.......hhhm ...and I think Jobs knowing this well... ...so now a
man just have to say this to a woman he wants to know better: "Lady, I have
an Apple, do you want to taste it?" ......it's just speculations here,
but....Arghhhh, never mind;-o)
erlilo
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
news:43b32e5a$1@linux...
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>>I don't mind criticisms of any particular equipment, computers included.
>
>> It's just gear. Sometimes criticisms are valid and useful and I learn
>
>>something, sometimes they're exaggerated and I still learn something.
>>Sometimes it's mostly FUD. And I may still learn something.
>>
>>In any case my gear keeps doing what it does. In ten years I'll be using
>
>>something else and looking fondly back at the good old days, or laughing
>
>>about them.
>>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>
> I'm with you Jamie, but there is a difference between criticisms and
> bashing.
> The post wasn't originally about what is better than what. Everybody has
> a right to their opinion, and criticisms that are on subject, but when
> it's
> bashing at every opportunity, it gets old. First the G5 sucks it slow,
> then
> Mac OSX sucks because it's inefficient as a network server. Then Apple
> sucks
> as a company, they made bad decisions. Then The iPod sucks because their
> 5th generation iPod screen scratches easy and it sucks because even though
> it sounds good and it's the number one selling mp3 player it sucks because
> something out there sounds better. It's all just finding something to
> bash
> the Mac with, even though they don't use Macs and really wouldn't know.
> Everything sucks about Apple, right???
>
> I'm a multi platform user, so I can speak to some things. I have
> criticisms
> of Apple and the Mac, but I use it every day. I don't just run with what
> somebody else said about it, then repeat the criticisms, like I know all
> about it. I don't take second hand info and swear it's gospel, I know
> first
> hand.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>> "Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>James wrote..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more
>>>>>>people
>>>>
>>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
>>>>make
>>>>Apple, a computer company. <<
>>>>
>>>>Is that true?
>>>>Would've thought there were more iPods than Macs.
>>>>
>>>>BTW, lets keep this thread civil, huh?
>>>>--
>>>>Martin Harrington
>>>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Every time there is any post about Apple
> or
>>> Mac OSX the bashing starts from people that don't use Macs. It's
>>> getting
>>> uncivil. Some of the people here have chosen Macs as there platform of
> choice.
>>> Mac bashing is down right insulting to some of us, and it's getting
> old!
>>>
>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:43b317ba$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
> you
>>>>>
>>>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
> with
>>>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
> still
>>>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy
>>>>>>about
>>>>>
>>>>>it.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something
> or
>>>>>
>>>>>another
>>>>>
>>>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>
>>>>>>company
>>>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their
>>>>>>(apparently
>>>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that
>>>>>>makes
>>>>>
>>>>>tires
>>>>>
>>>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets
> to
>>>
>>> get
>>>
>>>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can
> do
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>exactly
>>>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low
> on
>>>
>>> my
>>>
>>>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two
> so
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>I'll
>>>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>
>>>
>>> I'll
>>>
>>>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say
>>>>>brain
>>>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>>>
>>>
>>>>>really
>>>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>>
>>>
>>>>>try
>>>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>>>
>>> Mac
>>>
>>>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>>>
>>> how
>>>
>>>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>>>bashing
>>>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>>>Computer,
>>>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
>>>
>>> our
>>>
>>>>>intellect.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give
>>>>>them
>>>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>>>
>>>
>>>>>decisions.
>>>>>Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
> good
>>>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are
>>>>>successful.
>>>>>The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more
>>>>>people
>>>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
> make
>>&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61982 is a reply to message #61969] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:11 |
erlilo
Messages: 405
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other
>>>>>company!
>>>>>I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>
>>>>>efficient
>>>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't
> what
>>>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
>>>
>>> Mac
>>>
>>>>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>>>>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but
> at
>>>
>>>
>>>>>what???
>>>>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media!
>>>>>Isn't
>>>>>that where the computing world is going???
>>>>>
>>>>> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
>>>
>>> best
>>>
>>>>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
>>>
>>> user
>>>
>>>>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like
>>>>>other
>>>>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or
>>>>>write
>>>>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
>>>>>Dog/Linux
>>>>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
>>>
>>>
>>>>>media
>>>>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
>>>>>friendly
>>>>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer
>>>>>company,
>>>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>>>opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
>>>
>>> OS,
>>>
>>>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW
>>>>>>>company
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>>>
>>>>>logic
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>>>>>
>>>>>living.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
> I'm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>a computer
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty
>>>>>>>>articles
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>>
>>> By
>>>
>>>>>>this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>where
>>>>>>>>they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
> is,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>he's
>>>>>>>>out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>
>>>>>>>>(M$oft
>>>>>>>>could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>like
>>>>>>>>they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>>>>>
>>>>>manufacturers.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
> for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>>>>>
>>>>>as
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>>>profits
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>>>electronics
>>>>>>>>division.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>some
>>>>>>>>possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>>>
>>> than
>>>
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>argue
>>>>>>>>against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>>>
>>>>>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>Apple
>>>>>>>>wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD
>>>>>>>>licensed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>code
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently
>>>>>>>>CodeWarrior
>>>>>>
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>>>>through
>>>>>>>>the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>>>>environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when
> I
>>>
>>> buy
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>>>
>>> so
>>>
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel
>>>>>>>>>business
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
> what
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor-it allows applications to
> run
>>>>>>
>>>>>>as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run
>>>>>>>>>translated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>>>
>>> as
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on
> the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user
>>>>>>>>>interaction
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most
>>>>>>>>>cases,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs
>>>>>>>>>aren't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly
>>>>>>>>>compute
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>-Jamie
>>>>>>>>>http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
> find
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>years
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>after
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>computer
>>>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>enviable
>>>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>
>>>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get
>>>>>>>>>>their
>>>>>
>>>>>hardware
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X
> off
>>>>>
>>>>>of
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my
>>>>>>>>>>(soon
>>>>>>
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find
>>>>>>>>>>highly
>>>>>>
>>>>>>dubious
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship
>>>>>>>>>>forming
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>between
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two
>>>>>>>>>>companies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>may
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>appear
>>>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique
> in
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>else
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>does,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>point
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the
>>>>>>>>>>hardware
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>end,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
> money
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to
>>>>>>>>>>make
>>>>>
>>>>>sense
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than
> we
>>>>>
>>>>>geeks
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not
>>>>>>>>>>marketing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>people?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have
>>>>>>>>>>been
>>>>>
>>>>>playing
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>James, if you were really honest with yourself, you'd admit that Macs have
as many problems (at least), as PC's.
I work in an environment (my studio complex and TV networks), where there
are plenty of Macs, (Avids etc), and the poor producers and editors are
sometimes pulling their hair out with crashes / lockups etc.
There is no one perfect system...they're just tools, nothing to get so
offended or insulted about.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43b3923d$1@linux...
>
> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>
>>James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms,
> I'd
>>like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or
>>derisive.
>> You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused him
>>of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
>>it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
>>
>>-Chris
>
>
> I started a couple of threads about Mac OSX running on a PC hardware and
> mac development and it is instant Mac bash fest. In effect , saying, who
> in their right mind would want to run a bloated inefficient piece of crap
> like Mac OSX? That is rude and insulting, about 40% of us Paris users,
> use Macs. Back up and read all the posts. The threads started out about
> information, not what sucks and what doesn't. It wasn't an open
> invitation
> to bash the platform that many of us use. Nor was it meant to be the kick
> off of the next Mac vs. PC wars. My post was just to inform, not to start
> a bunch of shit.
>
> Thad has a right to his opinion as do I. He stands by his opinion, and so
> do I. I say he doesn't have real experience or true knowledge of current
> Macs because he does not use them. I would challenge him or anybody else
> to use a current Mac for a Year, then come back with their criticisms.
> Then
> his criticisms would have merit, and wouldn't just be something he read in
> an anti Mac article. May be even he would see the light after a year.
> The
> lack of maintenance hassle, the ease of use, productivity gains and
> usability,
> multi media capability, feature set , available software, just to name a
> few. But of course he wont because Macs suck, just read what he has
> posted.
>
> Chill out, sure I'll try, but the constant barrage of knocks are uncalled
> for. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
> spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
> that
> uses a Mac.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell you
>>>a
>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal with
>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
>>>>still
>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>it.
>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something or
>>>another
>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>
>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>>>company
>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their
>>>>(apparently
>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>tires
>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets to
>>get
>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can do
>>exactly
>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low on
>>my
>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>
>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two so
>>I'll
>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>
>>>
>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>>>I'll
>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>>>really
>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>try
>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
> Mac
>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
> how
>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>bashing
>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>>the
>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>Computer,
>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
> our
>>>intellect.
>>>
>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
> the
>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>>>decisions.
>>> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
>>> good
>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are
>>>successful.
>>> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more
>>> people
>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would make
>>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>
>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>>> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your version of UNIX maybe more
>>> efficient
>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't what
>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
> Mac
>>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>>
>>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but at
>>what???
>>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>>>that where the computing world is going???
>>>
>>> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
> best
>>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
>>>user
>>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like other
>>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or write
>>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
>>>Dog/Linux
>>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
> media
>>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
>>>friendly
>>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>>
>>> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer
>>> company,
>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>
>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>opinion.
>>>
>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
> OS,
>>>>
>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>>>
>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>
>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>logic
>>>>>> I use to individuals and other com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61983 is a reply to message #61980] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 00:14 |
Martin Harrington
Messages: 560
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
panies--you are where you make you
>>>living.
>>>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
>>>>a computer
>>>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty
>>>>>> articles
>>>>I'm
>>>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>By
>>>>this
>>>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
> where
>>>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
>>>>or
>>>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>he's
>>>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>>>>>> (M$oft
>>>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>like
>>>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>>>manufacturers.
>>>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>>>>the
>>>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>>>as
>>>>I'm
>>>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
> of
>>>>profits
>>>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>> electronics
>>>>>> division.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>some
>>>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
> than
>>>>on
>>>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
> argue
>>>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>the
>>>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
> Apple
>>>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD
>>>>>> licensed
>>>>code
>>>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently
>>>>>> CodeWarrior
>>>>is
>>>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>> through
>>>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>> environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
>>buy
>>>>a
>>>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
>>so
>>>>I
>>>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
> a
>>>
>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel
>>>>>>>business
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>>>
>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>>>
>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>
>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>
>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>>>as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run
>>>>>>>translated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>>as
>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>>>
>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>
>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>>>
>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>
>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>
>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly
>>>>>>>compute
>>>>
>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>
>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>
>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
>>>>>>>find
>>>>
>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
> years
>>>>>>
>>>>>> after
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
> computer
>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
> enviable
>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>hardware
>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>>>of
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>>to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>dubious
>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship
>>>>>>>>forming
>>>>>>
>>>>>> between
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>may
>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>appear
>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
>>that
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>else
>>>>>>
>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
> point
>>>>>>
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the
>>>>>>>>hardware
>>>>>>
>>>>>> end,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
>>>>>>>>money
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>>sense
>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>>>geeks
>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>it
>>>>>>
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not
>>>>>>>>marketing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> people?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>>playing
>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>Kim, it's the same I have read, so I'm using the +format on nearly
"everything".
Erling
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> skrev i melding news:43b3346a$1@linux...
>
>
> I've heard that the error checking and other format related stuff is
> superior
> on the + format, which is the newer of the two. Hence for backups etc I'd
> be using + if you are to trust DVDs at all. Early drives are more likely
> to support the - format than + generally, and this includes both household
> movie DVD players as well as PC DVD drives.
>
> It was one of those old Sony Vs the world things. + is the Sony format.
> They
> claimed it was better and everybody would have to pay them to use it, but
> people used the cheaper royalty - format instead until Sony dropped the
> price.
> The + format does have a few advantages especially in writing DVD video
> off
> live TV, which is near impossible to do with - disks as I understand, but
> + allowed for it in the format. For general data use there is little
> difference
> other than the error correction schemes. How much difference this really
> makes I don't really know... often if you get an error you're in trouble
> regardless...
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> "Edna" <edna@texomaonline.com> wrote:
>>No big difference. Some polls have shown the -R to work in more players.
>>Some burners prefer one kind or other as well - my Liteon 8x didnt like
>>the -R till I updated the firmware and since then I have burned over 150
>>DVDs of both types w/o incident. You can find some information on
>>burners,
>>players and media at videohelp.com and they run some user polls.
>>CDFreaks.com also has reviews and a large user base. Check their review
> of
>>the BenQ burners (highly touted Sony DRU series based on BenQ).
>>HTH, Edna
>>
>>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wrote in message news:43b2f487$1@linux...
>>> + vs -
>>>
>>> What's the difference?
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there a better format?
>>>
>>>
>>> What about burners....suggested brands?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>Hello.
Just making new computer for paris.
It's an Intel P4 3.2G Northwood with an Intel 875PBZ mainboard.
As the mainboard have ICH5R chip, I can choose to RAID or to not...
I thougt to take 2x segate 160gig s-ata and put them into RAID...
....or to take one WD Raptor for system and one segate 160 or 250gig for
audio
without a RAID.
Any thoughts?? Any problems in PARIS with that kind of RAID?
RAID I/O size 128kb? or 64kb? or???
Please, hurry up with replies, I must buy hard disks til tomorrow...
Thanks a lot!
SuadHello Suad.
If you want to use RAID, be sure you allways have backups of everything on
those disks. One of my best friends, working in Nuendo, lost a whole
production a couple of months ago here in Norway without any backups. It's
really speedy with RAID, but if you just get problems with one of the
harddisks, you loose the other too.
Erling
"Suad" <suad@sail.hr> skrev i melding news:43b3abd5@linux...
> Hello.
>
> Just making new computer for paris.
> It's an Intel P4 3.2G Northwood with an Intel 875PBZ mainboard.
> As the mainboard have ICH5R chip, I can choose to RAID or to not...
>
> I thougt to take 2x segate 160gig s-ata and put them into RAID...
> ...or to take one WD Raptor for system and one segate 160 or 250gig for
> audio
> without a RAID.
>
> Any thoughts?? Any problems in PARIS with that kind of RAID?
> RAID I/O size 128kb? or 64kb? or???
>
> Please, hurry up with replies, I must buy hard disks til tomorrow...
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Suad
>
>Last nights BSOD crash was something like Device_MM_Controller. If
Paris was reliable for me it sure would be useful. Any tips always
appreciated. This is very frustrating.
John
cujo wrote:
> So this is the cause of the Blue Screen OF Death at shut down? I also have
> an issue woth closing paris.
> I have to turn my comp off at the button.
> Can you explain to a windows novice how to check this?
> thanks
>
>
>
> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>gotcha, thanks
>>
>>Rod Lincoln wrote:
>>
>>>it's the default path of the subsystem installer. Make sure that's where
>
> the
>
>>>Paris app resides. If you hvae version 3, it most likely is. If you have
>>>version 2, it's in the ensoniq folder.
>>>Rod
>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>What's the EMU directory thing ?
>>>>
>>>>Martin Harrington wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>That sounds right, but I'm going from memory here as I don't have Paris
>>>
>>>
>>>>>anymore and haven't used it for about 2 years.
>>>>>Don't forget the Emu directory thing though.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>I'm looking for an adapter that will allow me to send a midi signal down a
standard XLR snake. I've seen them so I know they exist but it's been
years. Does anyone know of a company that would still make these?....assuming you're using the "I want more speed" type raid.
Raid comes in many varieties. Why you'd need more hdd speed with Paris I
don't quite know with today's hdd speeds. Brian T was able to drive Paris
to the full with drives many years old now. If you're using raid for mirroring
or some such thing you should get better reliaiblity than without.
....I think. I'm pretty sure at least... I have had a hell of a lot to
drink tonight... thank you to the taxi driver... ;o) and that Nat chick
who I'm seeing again on NYE seems a bit alright... I'm not sure that she
likes me, but there's something sexy about an accountant who's qualified
as a lawyer, and is also very cute and laughs a lot. I do at least now have
her phone number... ;o)
I really should go to bed. I have to work tomorrow...
Cheers,
Kim.
"erlilo" <erlilo@online.no> wrote:
>Hello Suad.
>
>If you want to use RAID, be sure you allways have backups of everything
on
>those disks. One of my best friends, working in Nuendo, lost a whole
>production a couple of months ago here in Norway without any backups. It's
>really speedy with RAID, but if you just get problems with one of the
>harddisks, you loose the other too.
>
>Erling
>
>"Suad" <suad@sail.hr> skrev i melding news:43b3abd5@linux...
>> Hello.
>>
>> Just making new computer for paris.
>> It's an Intel P4 3.2G Northwood with an Intel 875PBZ mainboard.
>> As the mainboard have ICH5R chip, I can choose to RAID or to not...
>>
>> I thougt to take 2x segate 160gig s-ata and put them into RAID...
>> ...or to take one WD Raptor for system and one segate 160 or 250gig for
>> audio
>> without a RAID.
>>
>> Any thoughts?? Any problems in PARIS with that kind of RAID?
>> RAID I/O size 128kb? or 64kb? or???
>>
>> Please, hurry up with replies, I must buy hard disks til tomorrow...
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>>
>> Suad
>>
>>
>
>Actually, it's gotten to the point where the majority of Americans don't
like their government. Although, as I understand it, the current
president is a Mac user and an iPod person.
So I guess merely having a Mac will not necessarily assure domestic or
worldwide popularity, or inspiring governance.
Yet another strike against Apple? ;^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> . The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
>
>>spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
>
> that
>
>>uses a Mac.
>
>
> .........hmmmmm........sorta' like when people say "we really like
> Americans, we just don't like your government".OK, I'll take these in order.
&
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61991 is a reply to message #61959] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 08:08 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
Now then, if you'll excuse me my new HP laptop just showed up (with an AMD
64 in it, whoo hooo!). I was going to image it with the XP image we use at
work and put Debian on it but instead I think I'll walk around town from
coffee shop to coffee shop finding people using OS X and then smashing them
in the back of the head with my new laptop! That's what us MCSE's do for
fun!
TCB
> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer company,
>regardless of what people like you say.
>
>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their opinion.
>
>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>
>
>>
>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the OS,
>>
>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>
>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>their thing.
>>>
>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>TCB wrote:
>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>logic
>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>living.
>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now I'm
>>a computer
>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty articles
>>I'm
>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
By
>>this
>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's where
>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future is,
>>or
>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
he's
>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft (M$oft
>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
like
>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>
>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not car
>manufacturers.
>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders for
>>the
>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as far
>as
>>I'm
>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage of
>>profits
>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer electronics
>>>> division.
>>>>
>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
some
>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster than
>>on
>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles argue
>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>the
>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that Apple
>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD licensed
>>code
>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently CodeWarrior
>>is
>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs through
>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing environment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when I
buy
>>a
>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for me
so
>>I
>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with a
>
>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel business
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between the
>>
>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>
>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if what
>>
>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>
>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>
>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>
>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run
>>as
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
as
>>a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the
>
>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>
>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and
>>
>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>
>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>
>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute
>>
>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>
>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may find
>>
>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few years
>>>>
>>>> after
>>>>
>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop computer
>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an enviable
>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing public.
>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>hardware
>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X off
>of
>>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>to
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>dubious
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship forming
>>>>
>>>> between
>>>>
>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>may
>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
appear
>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique in
that
>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>
>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
else
>>>>
>>>> does,
>>>>
>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole point
>>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the hardware
>>>>
>>>> end,
>>>>
>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of money
>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>sense
>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than we
>geeks
>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
it
>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not marketing
>>>>
>>>> people?
>>>>
>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>playing
>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>yes that is the one I get too.
but Paris still works for me!
I would liek to figuure it out though
John <no@no.com> wrote:
>Last nights BSOD crash was something like Device_MM_Controller. If
>Paris was reliable for me it sure would be useful. Any tips always
>appreciated. This is very frustrating.
>
>John
>
>cujo wrote:
>> So this is the cause of the Blue Screen OF Death at shut down? I also
have
>> an issue woth closing paris.
>> I have to turn my comp off at the button.
>> Can you explain to a windows novice how to check this?
>> thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>>gotcha, thanks
>>>
>>>Rod Lincoln wrote:
>>>
>>>>it's the default path of the subsystem installer. Make sure that's where
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>Paris app resides. If you hvae version 3, it most likely is. If you have
>>>>version 2, it's in the ensoniq folder.
>>>>Rod
>>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What's the EMU directory thing ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Martin Harrington wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>That sounds right, but I'm going from memory here as I don't have Paris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>anymore and haven't used it for about 2 years.
>>>>>>Don't forget the Emu directory thing though.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Disk performance under XP is so obscenely fast for audio there's no performance
reason to RAID machines. Howerver, RAID means a lot of different things.
http://www.raidweb.com/whatis.html
That's a good tutorial. On my servers at work we tend to RAID 1 the OS drives
(in other words, mirror them so if one blows up the other comes on line seamlessly
and se just have to rebuild the RAID at our convenience) and RAID 5 the data
drives. We also have overnight data backups if we lose two drives at the
same time. My next audio machine will be set up that way simply because drives
are so cheap these days.
TCB
"Suad" <suad@sail.hr> wrote:
>Hello.
>
>Just making new computer for paris.
>It's an Intel P4 3.2G Northwood with an Intel 875PBZ mainboard.
>As the mainboard have ICH5R chip, I can choose to RAID or to not...
>
>I thougt to take 2x segate 160gig s-ata and put them into RAID...
>...or to take one WD Raptor for system and one segate 160 or 250gig for
>audio
>without a RAID.
>
>Any thoughts?? Any problems in PARIS with that kind of RAID?
>RAID I/O size 128kb? or 64kb? or???
>
>Please, hurry up with replies, I must buy hard disks til tomorrow...
>
>Thanks a lot!
>
>Suad
>
>TCB wrote:
> OK, I'll take these in order.
> As far as my qualifications, I'm not an MSCE and in fact I have no formal
> computer training at all. I have a dusty old humanities B.A. around here
> somewhere. As far as my knowledge of Macs, you might want to google my name
> along with words like "audio" "Apple" and "computers" to see what shows up.
> I probably had 30 articles published about Macs and audio before 90% of the
> people currently using computers for music had heard of one. I've been at
> this long enough that I remember booting into Open Firmware and having to
> learn a little bit about Forth scripting in order to boot [pirated] beta
> versions of BeOS and some Linux distro on a 603e based Mac. Am I a "Winoz"
> user? Yes and no.
MSWindows and Linux seem to be where you have current experience.
> What exactly Apple is or isn't is purely subjective. I think they were a
> visionary company a long time ago. I think they are still a superb consumer
> electronics and design company, and nobody can managey hype like Steve Jobs.
> They were first to market with a really superb product that will be emblematic
> of the oncoming tidal wave of portable devices that will largely replace
> the desktop computers that we use now. Then again, they were first to make
> a home computer seem like a good (and chic) idea and they managed to parlay
> that into . . . near bankruptcy. That's what I think Apple is.
What Apple was, actually. You should get up to date on that.
Like Microsoft, Apple got stuck in their early 80s decisions and really
struggled to get past that.
But that's ancient history at this point. Once the decision was made to
go with NeXTSTEP, things began to change. That's when Apple became very
interesting to me (although I did write for MacWEEK and MacUser before
OSX - so I know the era you're stuck in).
As far as the financial performance NOW, the stock is through the roof FWIW.
> I don't think they've been terribly visionary of late.
IOW, they don't support open source as much as you'd like. Which is a
fair point.
But as far as providing capabilities for media production on fast
hardware, they've been doing pretty well of late. Long term support of a
new OS has paid off. Long term vision has come to fruition. You should
look into it.
> You should read my other post to Jamie. The question put to me, somewhat
> snidely in my opinion, was to prove that I wasn't passing off "urban legend"
> about OS X performance being less than fantastic on PPC processors. This
> came in response to someone saying a 1.3 Ghz Celeron running OS X was out-benchmarking
> much faster/more expensive G5s. I had heard similar things some time back
> and investigated and found articles about how poorly multiple threads are
> managed. Presented with the fact that, surprisingly considering how dense
> I am, I was not peddling "urban legend" Jamie decided that OS X was good
> enough for him. This has absolutely nothing to do with the argument and I
> said so.
Dude, sorry if I offended you. When you posted an assertion with no
references, I gave an opinion (email does not convey voice tonality -
I'm a very relaxed person so picture a calm voice). You backed up your
assertion after that and I gave you full credit for that.
However, it's not just a matter of "good enough for me" although I offer
that as evidence in the discussion. It's a matter that despite a design
criticism of threading problems under certain kinds of server loads
MacOSX still manages to easily offer a better overall media production
platform than Linux, for the moment anyway. And IMO OSX also offers a
better experience than MSWindows.
So for your part, while it's well and good to look for weaknesses in OSX
as anyone can do, it would be more balanced to take the overall picture.
I don't see in any of your posts that you understand what Apple has
accomplished with OSX so far. It's head and shoulders above their
previous OS on many points. If you are only digging for the negative
then you will miss that.
In short, if you are saying OSX has some weaknesses, that's fine. If you
can't see the strengths of OSX, you are looking at an incomplete picture.
If you're implying that OSX is not worth considering for media
production, that's simply incorrect.
> So on the desktop usability front (for civilians,
> of course, multi-media authoring is still only possible on XP/OS X) I'd say
> OS X and XP have roughly a 10% advantage over Ubuntu, probably 15% over vanilla
> Debian.
For getting media work done I'd say OSX, then MSWindows, then Linux. A
paltry number of choices but there it is.
> Of course both GNU\linux variants have an infinite advantage in freedom,
> and a huge advantage in package management/OS patching.
True.
> Remember, if this is a pissing contest I didn't start it. I provided factual
> information showing that OS X runs demonstrably slower under stress *on the
> same hardware* than does Yellow Dog Linux. For that I have been accused by
> Jamie of being a free software zealot and by you of being a Windows zealot.
> Y'all might want to huddle up and get your stories straight.
I wouldn't say "accused" I'd say "recognized." Big difference. You are
certainly a Linux advocate and that's not at all a bad thing. If you
reread my posts with a more relaxed tone of voice in your head, you may
better understand.
On the OSX vs. MSWindows thing, your current experience is with
MSWindows. If you worked with the current version OSX and tried some of
the currently available OSX software for a while I think your opinion
would change on some issues. Not the open source issue, though.
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.comDoes anyone have a web site that makes it clear regarding audio cds and
video dvds regarding copying? Like:
LEGALLY...........
Can you copy a cd yo
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61994 is a reply to message #61991] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 07:57 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
user and an iPod person.
>
> So I guess merely having a Mac will not necessarily assure domestic or
> worldwide popularity, or inspiring governance.
>
> Yet another strike against Apple? ;^)
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
> DJ wrote:
> > . The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and mean
> >
> >>spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
> >
> > that
> >
> >>uses a Mac.
> >
> >
> > .........hmmmmm........sorta' like when people say "we really like
> > Americans, we just don't like your government".Guys, computers all suck. all of 'em.
On a good day, some suck less than others.
There's several things we know.
For the amount of money they make Microsoft still provides
products that are, well, POS's. Imagine! an OS that lets scummers
put things in the registry and install apps! That's just the beginning
of course, but why belabor the point. XP is crap, compare to what
it should be by now.
Apple, like MS, Sony, GM and E-MU is quite capable of putting out
utter crap as well as quite good stuff. (GM had a great idea with
Saturn but are too stupid to make it work. etc etc) I am typing
this on one of the famous logic-board-failure iBooks. We had to
band together and actually start collecting signatures for a class
action lawsuit before they fixed it. This computer went back 3
times for the same problem and they were just putting the same
bad logic boards in until the warranty expired. Pretty cynical huh?
After the class action threat, it went back the fourth time and they
seem to have gotten it right. I use a blue-white G3 for Paris, and it
is almost as stable as a reel-to-reel, but that came from a week of
developing a dedicated extension list. Why in hell did I have to do
that? Because computers suck. all of them. I use a new Mac Mini
for general stuff and it is OK, but has a problem with desktop
management, moving folders all over the place and not opening
them... I will get the latest OS, but Mr. Mac Tech support is not
sure that will fix it, but he couldn't fix it either, and stopped taking
my calls as soon as he legally could do so...
COMPUTERS SUCK! all of them.
The industry benefits much more from gripe-and-bitch types,
providing they are reasonably informed, than from from boosters.
Oh, and I use a VAIO running XP at work. The new Soundweb
London app will not run on it. The code writers never checked the
app with a VAIO... dickheads.
Informed critique is the ONLY way we get better gear.
Big computer/software companies are not your friend.
Smaller, more responsive companies are much better. I was a beta
tester for the mac version of Peterson Strobotune, and it was sooo
cool to be able to get the project director's response, and a new,
fixed version of the app, within days of sending them an email.
Let's hope Apple can still do this with OSX. MS is a lost cause;
we use them when we must. Which is why open-source stuff
exists.
Platform wars are the biggest waste of time I can imagine,
next to this:
http://www.maggiore.net/greenacres/
I'd rather sing a song...
Countin' flowers on the wall
That don't bother me at all
Playin' solitaire till dawn with a deck of fifty-one
Smokin' cigarettes and watchin' Captain Kangaroo
Now don't tell me I've nothin' to do
ho-hum....
DCYes Kim I know...
I'm using Paris from 1998.
My first PARIS computer was asus P2BS mainboard with
PII 350mhz and 9GB IBM scsi harddrive and 128MB ram, win98SE. - worked cool!
I'm using this computer till today. ..just changed CPUwith PIII 800mhz,
added 512MB ram and 160GB IDE audio drive (ata 33). First Win ME and now
Win XP.
All works as a charm! In PARIS, of course.. Never had a single problem...
But, opening/saving BIG files in Wavelab, doing montage in Sony Vegas with
large DV video files and other OS specific stuff like booting, opening
programs,
shutdown.... all that stuff can NEVER be fast enough. That is why I'm
considering
RAID. ..like on my second (Cubase) computer. 2x Segate 250GB. Works good.
I'm just affraid if RAID can degrade PARIS performance. Streaming errors,
etc...
Protools lite DIGI 001 and 002 doesnt like RAID! Many streaming errors!
Digidesign also recomend not to use RAID on their systems.
In my expirience, 2x250GB s-ata hard drives in RAID can be worse for PARIS
than 4 year old ATA-33 ide drive... I'm not sure, but there is a
possibility.
But, other programs like Vegas, Wavelab and OS itself will benefit from RAID
for sure.
PARIS is an old mother f____r! Sounds and works great, but, you never know
what will happen if you bring it to the new teritory! (XP, RAID, dual CPU,
HT, PCIx...)
What do you think?
Thanks for your reply!
Suad
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43b3f307$1@linux...
>
>
> ...assuming you're using the "I want more speed" type raid.
>
> Raid comes in many varieties. Why you'd need more hdd speed with Paris I
> don't quite know with today's hdd speeds. Brian T was able to drive Paris
> to the full with drives many years old now. If you're using raid for
mirroring
> or some such thing you should get better reliaiblity than without.
>
> ...I think. I'm pretty sure at least... I have had a hell of a lot to
> drink tonight... thank you to the taxi driver... ;o) and that Nat
chick
> who I'm seeing again on NYE
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #61998 is a reply to message #61991] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:23 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
...strange streeaming errors, ets...
PARIS is old! And you never know what will happen if
you put it in the new teritory...
Cheers!
Suad
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43b3fe8b$1@linux...
>
> Disk performance under XP is so obscenely fast for audio there's no
performance
> reason to RAID machines. Howerver, RAID means a lot of different things.
>
>
> http://www.raidweb.com/whatis.html
>
> That's a good tutorial. On my servers at work we tend to RAID 1 the OS
drives
> (in other words, mirror them so if one blows up the other comes on line
seamlessly
> and se just have to rebuild the RAID at our convenience) and RAID 5 the
data
> drives. We also have overnight data backups if we lose two drives at the
> same time. My next audio machine will be set up that way simply because
drives
> are so cheap these days.
>
> TCB
>
> "Suad" <suad@sail.hr> wrote:
> >Hello.
> >
> >Just making new computer for paris.
> >It's an Intel P4 3.2G Northwood with an Intel 875PBZ mainboard.
> >As the mainboard have ICH5R chip, I can choose to RAID or to not...
> >
> >I thougt to take 2x segate 160gig s-ata and put them into RAID...
> >...or to take one WD Raptor for system and one segate 160 or 250gig for
> >audio
> >without a RAID.
> >
> >Any thoughts?? Any problems in PARIS with that kind of RAID?
> >RAID I/O size 128kb? or 64kb? or???
> >
> >Please, hurry up with replies, I must buy hard disks til tomorrow...
> >
> >Thanks a lot!
> >
> >Suad
> >
> >
>Polls are not always wrong. It's true that they can be poorly designed
but it's not true that they always are.
The polls that show citizen opinion about government are typically
repeated at intervals so that, using the same questions, changes in
response can be seen over time.
The water has been muddied by the use of push polls, which aren't really
polls but rather exist as PR efforts or smear campaigns. I've gotten a
few of those.
BTW, if you want to count on elections to figure out what people really
think, that will depend on a transparent, trustworthy and accurate
voting system. Ours (USA) needs a lot of work to achieve that. In the
name of making the system better we've made it worse with insecure,
hackable computer-based systems.
http://blackboxvoting.org/
http://www.votetrustusa.org/
|
|
|
|
| Polls and voting (was Re: Intel developing next-generation PowerMac) [message #62002 is a reply to message #61997] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 08:49 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nk">http://www.maggiore.net/greenacres/
>
>
> I'd rather sing a song...
>
> Countin' flowers on the wall
> That don't bother me at all
> Playin' solitaire till dawn with a deck of fifty-one
> Smokin' cigarettes and watchin' Captain Kangaroo
> Now don't tell me I've nothin' to do
>
>
> ho-hum....
>
>
> DCThanks Tony,
I'll be looking forward to your review!
respect
Nappy
Tony Benson <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>Nappy,
>
>I just got it hooked up and running on my Power Book tonight, so I haven't
>had much time yet to really check it all out. I did play my Parker Fly
>through the guitar amp modeling FX for a while. It sounded ok, and I'm sure
>with some tweaking could sound pretty good. Not in the same league with
NI's
>Amps Combos, but useable. I also tried the reverb a little with the Fly.
>Again, ok but nothing to write home about. I'm anxious to try out the mic
>pre's and compression "supposedly" based on the modeling in the Liquid
>Channel. I'll let you know if it's all hype or not once I get some time
to
>give the thing a workout.
>
>I'm planning on using it for some remote recording, and working on original
>tunes when I'm on the go.
>
>It did install easily and worked like expected on my Power Book.
>
>Tony
>
>On 12/28/05 7:54 PM, in article 43b333c1$1@linux, "Nappy"
><mgrant01@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Tony,
>> I've been waiting for the Saffire to be released,looks
>> like a pretty cool interface. How are the effects ?
>>
>> respect
>> Nappy
>>
>>
>> "Tony Benson" <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>> Nice!
>>>
>>> I'm going to use the Saffire with my Power Book, but it came with Cubase
>> LE,
>>> so now I've got another program to learn! Arghhh! I suppose I'll have
to
>>
>>> update to SX3 someday. Then I can bug Deej for advice even more! ;>)
>>>
>>> Tony
>>>
>>> "rick" <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:q9o4r15a59vr0nvcrenjarp54j479g09ft@4ax.com...
>>>> logic pro 7.1
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 12:01:06 -0600, "Tony Benson"
>>>> <tony@standinghampton.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'm back from the family gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62004 is a reply to message #62003] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:01 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
anks
>>>
>>>Rod Lincoln wrote:
>>>
>>>>it's the default path of the subsystem installer. Make sure that's where
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>Paris app resides. If you hvae version 3, it most likely is. If you have
>>>>version 2, it's in the ensoniq folder.
>>>>Rod
>>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What's the EMU directory thing ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Martin Harrington wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>That sounds right, but I'm going from memory here as I don't have Paris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>anymore and haven't used it for about 2 years.
>>>>>>Don't forget the Emu directory thing though.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>Does anyone have a web site that makes it clear regarding audio cds and
>video dvds regarding copying? Like:
I don't know of a specific web site, but copyright law
essentially states (with regard to your particular questions):
>Can you copy a cd you own?
Yes, for your own use. Not to be distributed to anyone else,
regardless of whether or not you profit from said distribution.
>Can you copy a friends cd if you own the vinyl album?
Yes, because you've already paid for the particular work
yourself, albeit in a different format, is all - again, for
your own use you can can do this. Now, if the vinyl edition you
own is different from the CD version (example: the CD has bonus
tracks) it's a different s
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62005 is a reply to message #61998] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 09:07 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
tory... you'd be OK, I believe, from
a legal standpoint, if you copied only the tracks from the CD
that you already own on the vinyl version.
>Can you copy a cd you get from the library?
Nope.
>Can you copy a dvd that you own?
Yes, for your own use. Not to be distributed... etc, etc.
>Can you copy a dvd that you get from the library?
Nope.
>Can you copy the world onto your video/audio ipod?
I don't think the whole world can fit into 6 gigs.
Neilos and projects ARE on different drives AND controllers and caching is
turned OFF on both. Os is on IDE1 master and projects is on IDE2 master
Edna wrote:
> Not sure what the "MM" refers to(multimedia?). You might research this
> error at Microsoft site. Do you have your OS and projects on different
> drives/controllers?
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:43b3d299$1@linux...
>
>>Last nights BSOD crash was something like Device_MM_Controller. If
>>Paris was reliable for me it sure would be useful. Any tips always
>>appreciated. This is very frustrating.
>>
>>John
>>
>>cujo wrote:
>>
>>>So this is the cause of the Blue Screen OF Death at shut down? I also
>
> have
>
>>>an issue woth closing paris.
>>>I have to turn my comp off at the button.
>>>Can you explain to a windows novice how to check this?
>>>thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>gotcha, thanks
>>>>
>>>>Rod Lincoln wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>it's the default path of the subsystem installer. Make sure that's
>
> where
>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Paris app resides. If you hvae version 3, it most likely is. If you
>
> have
>
>>>>>version 2, it's in the ensoniq folder.
>>>>>Rod
>>>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>What's the EMU directory thing ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Martin Harrington wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That sounds right, but I'm going from memory here as I don't have
>
> Paris
>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>anymore and haven't used it for about 2 years.
>>>>>>>Don't forget the Emu directory thing though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>3.x
Rod Lincoln wrote:
> Are you using Paris 2.x or 3.x?
> Rod
> John <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>Last nights BSOD crash was something like Device_MM_Controller. If
>>Paris was reliable for me it sure would be useful. Any tips always
>>appreciated. This is very frustrating.
>>
>>John
>>
>>cujo wrote:
>>
|
|
|
|
| the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62028 is a reply to message #61946] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 14:39 |
steve the artguy
Messages: 308
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
double
dual core Athlons and be the happiest kid around.
But multi-media had nothing to do with this. OS X runs much slower in *any
highly multi-threaded environment* be that server, workstation, or toaster
oven. Server apps by their nature tend to spawn more threads, but not always.
>So for your part, while it's well and good to look for weaknesses in OSX
>as anyone can do, it would be more balanced to take the overall picture.
>I don't see in any of your posts that you understand what Apple has
>accomplished with OSX so far. It's head and shoulders above their
>previous OS on many points. If you are only digging for the negative
>then you will miss that.
Saying OS X is better than OS 9 is like saying XP is better than Windows
3.1. I mean, it freaking better be, right?
>In short, if you are saying OSX has some weaknesses, that's fine. If you
>can't see the strengths of OSX, you are looking at an incomplete picture.
>
>If you're implying that OSX is not worth considering for media
>production, that's simply incorrect.
I never even implied such a thing, even a little bit.
>
> > So on the desktop usability front (for civilians,
>> of course, multi-media authoring is still only possible on XP/OS X) I'd
say
>> OS X and XP have roughly a 10% advantage over Ubuntu, probably 15% over
vanilla
>> Debian.
>
>For getting
|
|
|
|
| Re: the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation PowerMac [message #62029 is a reply to message #62028] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 14:08 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
media work done I'd say OSX, then MSWindows, then Linux. A
>paltry number of choices but there it is.
>
>
>> Of course both GNU\linux variants have an infinite advantage in freedom,
>> and a huge advantage in package management/OS patching.
>
>True.
>
>
>> Remember, if this is a pissing contest I didn't start it. I provided factual
>> information showing that OS X runs demonstrably slower under stress *on
the
>> same hardware* than does Yellow Dog Linux. For that I have been accused
by
>> Jamie of being a free software zealot and by you of being a Windows zealot.
>> Y'all might want to huddle up and get your stories straight.
>
>I wouldn't say "accused" I'd say "recognized." Big difference. You are
>certainly a Linux advocate and that's not at all a bad thing. If you
>reread my posts with a more relaxed tone of voice in your head, you may
>better understand.
>
>On the OSX vs. MSWindows thing, your current experience is with
>MSWindows. If you worked with the current version OSX and tried some of
>the currently available OSX software for a while I think your opinion
>would change on some issues. Not the open source issue, though.
Well, if you wanted to know if OS X is usable for multimedia content creation
we could have saved ourselves a whole lot of time. That isn't what you asked
to begin with. So, I would like to state unequivocally that OS X is a perfectly
fine choice for multimedia content creation (as is XP, while GNU\linux is
far, far away from being a viable option) and OS X is a truly disastrous
operating system when managing highly multi-threaded applications. Also,
apparently the compilers need a lot of work. Sound about right?
TCB
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62030 is a reply to message #61994] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:56 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
com" target="_blank">http://www.JamieKrutz.comHey Steve,
I certainly think that using the logic of "where the money comes from" is
trickier with individuals than with companies. It's pretty obvious to me
that you're an artist, it's pretty obvious to me that I most likely am not.
However, I use the money trail standard more when dealing with loser unemployed
people who call themselves artists or musicians and don't produce any music
or art. To those people, I am fond of saying, "you're a waiter. You can call
yourself Salvador Dali if you want to, but as long as you wait tables to
pay your rent you're a waiter." I'm also strict with myself. I don't call
myself a writer anymore, even though I write a lot in general and some for
money, but I'm a computer tech which to me is a perfectly honorable and noble
thing to be, just like a home care provider and an heir are perfectly honorable
and noble things to be.
As you know, I'm anything but mellow, and I'm not very "nice" either. After
working a year of 70-90 hour weeks keeping a network nearly 24/7 available
and I'll bite back when I'm told I'm "brainwashed" and uninformed. I yam
what I yam.
Boston is a weird town. The history is great, the land of John Admas and
all, but for some reason it always seems more pressured than even NYC. And
colder, of course, and full of colleges. Glad you're back on Northern California
with the cat.
TCB
"steve the artguy" <artguy@svnpilesofspittle.net> wrote:
>
>What a fascinating thread!
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same logic
>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you living.
>
>well.
>
>By that logic, I've been an in-home elder care provider for years, until
>the job disappeared, and now I'm a heir. Art and music haven't paid my rent
>entirely probably for a decade. But I prefer to think of myself as an artist/musician.
>Pride on my part.
>
>As to those pesky computer things, I love 'em all. I'm typing on my old
second-hand,
>internet-virus-proof iMac, which works just swell. Beside me is my handmade
>XP machine, which hums along swimmingly on two monitors. The G4 is waiting
>for me to finally get my act together and install Paris in it. When will
>it happen? Who knows? So many things seem to intrude.
>
>Jamie and Thad are among my favorite online folk. {I've met Jamie in person,
>so I know he's really as mellow as he says. I feel like I"ve met Thad, but
>we've only talked online.) They both have forgotten more than I'll ever
know.
>Dj, too, only he's truly dangerous...!
>
>Meanwhile, Boston was fun - a cold, a crowded schedule, and just plain fear
>of the unknown stopped me from contacting Paris folk in the area. Sorry.
>I'll try again if there's a next time -
>
>The cat is asleep on my lap.
>
>-steve the jetlaggedhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4564944.stm
Tom Cruise voted *both* the best movie star in the world and the
most annoying movie star in the world...
hilarious.
Oh, and he beat out De Niro...
Besides, EVERYONE knows that Marty Feldman was the best movie
star ever...
Walk THIS way....
DCthank you matt drudge...
"DC" <dc@spamtom.org> wrote in message news:43b46e2f$1@linux...
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4564944.stm
>
> Tom Cruise voted *both* the best movie star in the world and the
> most annoying movie star in the world...
>
> hilarious.
>
> Oh, and he beat out De Niro...
>
> Besides, EVERYONE knows that Marty Feldman was the best movie
> star ever...
>
> Walk THIS way....
>
>
> DC
>lol... classic wierdness...
hey steve you're a wimp! haha j/k
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:43b46e22$1@linux...
>
> Hey Steve,
>
> I certainly think that using the logic of "where the money comes from" is
> trickier with individuals than with companies. It's pretty obvious to me
> that you're an artist, it's pretty obvious to me that I most likely am
> not.
> However, I use the money trail standard more when dealing with loser
> unemployed
> people who call themselves artists or musicians and don't produce any
> music
> or art. To those people, I am fond of saying, "you're a waiter. You can
> call
> yourself Salvador Dali if you want to, but as long as you wait tables to
> pay your rent you're a waiter." I'm also strict with myself. I don't call
> myself a writer anymore, even though I write a lot in general and some for
> money, but I'm a computer tech which to me is a perfectly honorable and
> noble
> thing to be, just like a home care provider and an heir are perfectly
> honorable
> and noble things to be.
>
> As you know, I'm anything but mellow, and I'm not very "nice" either.
> After
> working a year of 70-90 hour weeks keeping a network nearly 24/7 available
> and I'll bite back when I'm told I'm "brainwashed" and uninformed. I yam
> what I yam.
>
> Boston is a weird town. The history is great, the land of John Admas and
> all, but for some reason it always seems more pressured than even NYC. And
> colder, of course, and full of colleges. Glad you're back on Northern
> California
> with the cat.
>
> TCB
>
> "steve the artguy" <artguy@svnpilesofspittle.net> wrote:
>>
>>What a fascinating thread!
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>logic
>>>I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make you
>>>living.
>>
>>well.
>>
>>By that logic, I've been an in-home elder care provider for years, until
>>the job disappeared, and now I'm a heir. Art and music haven't paid my
>>rent
>>entirely probably for a decade. But I prefer to think of myself as an
>>artist/musician.
>>Pride on my part.
>>
>>As to those pesky computer things, I love 'em all. I'm typing on my old
> second-hand,
>>internet-virus-proof iMac, which works just swell. Beside me is my
>>handmade
>>XP machine, which hums along swimmingly on two monitors. The G4 is waiting
>>for me to finally get my act together and install Paris in it. When will
>>it happen? Who knows? So many things seem to intrude.
>>
>>Jamie and Thad are among my favorite online folk. {I've met Jamie in
>>person,
>>so I know he's really as mellow as he says. I feel like I"ve met Thad, but
>>we've only talked online.) They both have forgotten more than I'll ever
> know.
>>Dj, too, only he's truly dangerous...!
>>
>>Meanwhile, Boston was fun - a cold, a crowded schedule, and just plain
>>fear
>>of the unknown stopped me from contacting Paris folk in the area. Sorry.
>>I'll try again if there's a next time -
>>
>>The cat is asleep on my lap.
>>
>>-steve the jetlagged
>Thad, sorry to hear you're having a cranky day/year/whatever. I don't
envy your job running a mixed network 24/7. How you find time to write,
let alone record, I'll never know.
Since you say you're not trying to make a case that OSX sucks for media
production, then we're done. You did the googling for me on the
threading thing you brought up and I did it for you on the ease of Intel
porting thing you asked about, so we're even there.
Have a nicer day. :^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
http://www.JamieKrutz.com
TCB wrote:
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>>TCB wrote:
>>
>>>OK, I'll take these in order.
>>
>>>As far as my qualifications, I'm not an MSCE and in fact I have no formal
>>>computer training at all. I have a dusty old humanities B.A. around here
>>>somewhere. As far as my knowledge of Macs, you might want to google my
>
> name
>
>>>along with words like "audio" "Apple" and "computers" to see what shows
>
> up.
>
>>>I probably had 30 articles published about Macs and audio before 90% of
>
> the
|
|
|
|
| the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62031 is a reply to message #62028] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 16:15 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
r />
>
>>>people currently using computers for music had heard of one. I've been
>
> at
>
>>>this long enough that I remember booting into Open Firmware and having
>
> to
>
>>>learn a little bit about Forth scripting in order to boot [pirated] beta
>>>versions of BeOS and some Linux distro on a 603e based Mac. Am I a "Winoz"
>>>user? Yes and no.
>>
>>MSWindows and Linux seem to be where you have current experience.
>
>
> Probably in order of expertise I go Windows - Debian - OS X, though Debian
> is getting close. That said, when long time OS X only people break their
> machines (graphic designers, musicians, civilians) they call me to fix them
> and I do. Also, every article I write for Electronic Musician and the books
> I wrote I had to check on OS X and Mac compatibility. So I'd guess my OS
> X skills would be somewhere above the median for *techs* not users. I don't
> think ignorance clears the hurdle as an excuse.
>
>
>>>What exactly Apple is or isn't is purely subjective. I think they were
>
> a
>
>>>visionary company a long time ago. I think they are still a superb consumer
>>>electronics and design company, and nobody can managey hype like Steve
>
> Jobs.
>
>>>They were first to market with a really superb product that will be emblematic
>>>of the oncoming tidal wave of portable devices that will largely replace
>>>the desktop computers that we use now. Then again, they were first to
>
> make
>
>>>a home computer seem like a good (and chic) idea and they managed to parlay
>>>that into . . . near bankruptcy. That's what I think Apple is.
>>
>>What Apple was, actually. You should get up to date on that.
>>
>>Like Microsoft, Apple got stuck in their early 80s decisions and really
>
>
>>struggled to get past that.
>>
>>But that's ancient history at this point. Once the decision was made to
>
>
>>go with NeXTSTEP, things began to change. That's when Apple became very
>
>
>>interesting to me (although I did write for MacWEEK and MacUser before
>>OSX - so I know the era you're stuck in).
>>
>>As far as the financial performance NOW, the stock is through the roof FWIW.
>
>
> I'm not "stuck in" any era. I deal with these things all the time, maybe
> 15% of my tech work. And the stock going through the roof has jack to do
> with OS X, that's the iPod and there's a lot of future success built in to
> the current price.
>
>
>>>I don't think they've been terribly visionary of late.
>>
>>IOW, they don't support open source as much as you'd like. Which is a
>>fair point.
>>
>>But as far as providing capabilities for media production on fast
>>hardware, they've been doing pretty well
|
|
|
|
| Re: the Today report - was:Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62034 is a reply to message #62031] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:33 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
absolutely nothing to do with the argument and
>
> I
>
>>>said so.
>>
>>Dude, sorry if I offended you. When you posted an assertion with no
>>references, I gave an opinion (email does not convey voice tonality -
>>I'm a very relaxed person so picture a calm voice). You backed up your
>>assertion after that and I gave you full credit for that.
>
>
> Dude, you didn't offend me, dude. However, dude, I don't like being told
> I'm passing undigested misinformation around as fact, nor do I like being
> called brainwashed (I realize the second part wasn't you). Also, as you probably
> have noticed over the years on this NG I'm not a particularly nice person
> and don't pretend to be otherwise. That said, I do have a good (though admitedly
> dark) sense of humor and am not averse to well founded criticism. Accusing
> me of dispensing "urban legend" without even taking the time to google "os
> x vs linux G5" does not, in my book, qualify as well founded critique, dude.
>
>
>
>>However, it's not just a matter of "good enough for me" although I offer
>
>
>>that as evidence in the discussion. It's a matter that despite a design
>
>
>>criticism of threading problems under certain kinds of server loads
>>MacOSX still manages to easily offer a better overall media production
>>platform than Linux, for the moment anyway. And IMO OSX also offers a
>>better experience than MSWindows.
>
>
> Throughout this discussion I have said every single time that linux is not
> a good platform for multi-media authoring. This has more to do with the fact
> that the software vendors us proprietary file formats and processing than
> the underlying OS. If VST ran under linux I'm sure ableton would produce
> the most badass version of Live you could imagind that I would run on double
> dual core Athlons and be the happiest kid around.
>
> But multi-media had nothing to do with this. OS X runs much slower in *any
> highly multi-threaded environment* be that server, workstation, or toaster
> oven. Server apps by their nature tend to spawn more threads, but not always.
>
>
>>So for your part, while it's well and good to look for weaknesses in OSX
>
>
>>as anyone can do, it would be more balanced to take the overall picture.
>
>
>>I don't see in any of your posts that you understand what Apple has
>>accomplished with OSX so far. It's head and shoulders above their
>>previous OS on many points. If you are only digging for the negative
>>then you will miss that.
>
>
> Saying OS X is better than OS 9 is like saying XP is better than Windows
> 3.1. I mean, it freaking better be, right?
>
>
>>In short, if you are saying OSX has some weaknesses, that's fine. If you
>
>
>>can't see the strengths of OSX, you are looking at an incomplete picture.
>>
>>If you're implying that OSX is not worth considering for media
>>production, that's simply incorrect.
>
>
> I never even implied such a thing, even a little bit.
>
>
>>>So on the desktop usability front (for civilians,
>>>of course, multi-media authoring is still only possible on XP/OS X) I'd
>
> say
>
>>>OS X and XP have roughly a 10% advantage over Ubuntu, probably 15% over
>
> vanilla
>
>>>Debian.
>>
>>For getting media work done I'd say OSX, then MSWindows, then Linux. A
>>paltry number of choices but there it is.
>>
>>
>>
&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62035 is a reply to message #62030] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 15:38 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
gt;>>Of course both GNU\linux variants have an infinite advantage in freedom,
>>>and a huge advantage in package management/OS patching.
>>
>>True.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Remember, if this is a pissing contest I didn't start it. I provided factual
>>>information showing that OS X runs demonstrably slower under stress *on
>
> the
>
>>>same hardware* than does Yellow Dog Linux. For that I have been accused
>
> by
>
>>>Jamie of being a free software zealot and by you of being a Windows zealot.
>>>Y'all might want to huddle up and get your stories straight.
>>
>>I wouldn't say "accused" I'd say "recognized." Big difference. You are
>>certainly a Linux advocate and that's not at all a bad thing. If you
>>reread my posts with a more relaxed tone of voice in your head, you may
>
>
>>better understand.
>>
>>On the OSX vs. MSWindows thing, your current experience is with
>>MSWindows. If you worked with the current version OSX and tried some of
>
>
>>the currently available OSX software for a while I think your opinion
>>would change on some issues. Not the open source issue, though.
>
>
> Well, if you wanted to know if OS X is usable for multimedia content creation
> we could have saved ourselves a whole lot of time. That isn't what you asked
> to begin with. So, I would like to state unequivocally that OS X is a perfectly
> fine choice for multimedia content creation (as is XP, while GNU\linux is
> far, far away from being a viable option) and OS X is a truly disastrous
> operating system when managing highly multi-threaded applications. Also,
> apparently the compilers need a lot of work. Sound about right?
>
> TCB
>
>
>>Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>And I thought it was Sir Charles Nelson Riley!
"DC" <dc@spamtom.org> wrote:
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4564944.stm
>
>Tom Cruise voted *both* the best movie star in the world and the
>most annoying movie star in the world...
>
>hilarious.
>
>Oh, and he beat out De Niro...
>
>Besides, EVERYONE knows that Marty Feldman was the best movie
>star ever...
>
>Walk THIS way....
>
>
>DC
>Bite the bullet and buy a really good one. You will use it all the
time.
I like these
http://www.summitaudio.com/
TPA 200B 2 channels. Very, very nice. about 2400.00 street.
2BA-221 1 channel. Very nice and not expensive. about 550 street.
http://www.johnhardyco.com/M-1details.html
M1 clean, sweet and detailed. 1700.00 for 2 channels.
There are many more, but these 2 are my favorites.
DC
"Jon Jiles" <no@nomo.com> wrote:
>
>.. and you couldn't spend a fortune, what would it be?
>
>Thanks,
>Jon"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>James, if you were really honest with yourself, you'd admit that Macs have
>as many problems (at least), as PC's.
>I work in an environment (my studio complex and TV networks), where there
>are plenty of Macs, (Avids etc), and the poor producers and editors are
>sometimes pulling their hair out with crashes / lockups etc.
>There is no one perfect system...they're just tools, nothing to get so
>offended or insulted about.
>--
>Martin Harrington
>www.lendanear-sound.com
Martin, I wasn't looking to do a comparison, but if you want me to be honest,
i'll say A Mac running OSX isn't perfect, it just looks that way next to
an XP box; ) Remember I run multi platform. I was a computer dealer for
years and still could be if their was money in it. Anyways, I've used many
OSs, linux, yellow Dog, red hat, BeOS, Lindows, all versions of Mac and Windows.
I think they all have their strong and weak points.
As far as OSX crashing I've never had OSX crash, so I have no idea what your
media guys are doing, it may be a bug in the software they are running???
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:43b3923d$1@linux...
>>
>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>
>>>James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms,
>> I'd
>>>like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or
>>>derisive.
>>> You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused
him
>>>of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
>>>it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>
>>
>> I started a couple of threads about Mac OSX running on a PC hardware and
>> mac development and it is instant Mac bash fest. In effect , saying,
who
>> in their right mind would want to run a bloated inefficient piece of crap
>> like Mac OSX? That is rude and insulting, about 40% of us Paris users,
>> use Macs. Back up and read all the posts. The threads started out about
>> information, not what sucks and what doesn't. It wasn't an open
>> invitation
>> to bash the platform that many of us use. Nor was it meant to be the
kick
>> off of the next Mac vs. PC wars. My post was just to inform, not to start
>> a bunch of shit.
>>
>> Thad has a right to his opinion as do I. He stands by his opinion, and
so
>> do I. I say he doesn't have real experience or true knowledge of current
>> Macs because he does not use them. I would challenge him or anybody else
>> to use a current Mac for a Year, then come back with their criticisms.
>> Then
>> his criticisms would have merit, and wouldn't just be something he read
in
>> an anti Mac article. May be even he would see the light after a year.
>> The
>> lack of maintenance hassle, the ease of use, productivity gains and
>> usability,
>> multi media capability, feature set , available software, just to name
a
>> few. But of course he wont because Macs suck, just read what he has
>> posted.
>>
>> Chill out, sure I'll try, but the constant barrage of knocks are uncalled
>> for. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and
mean
>> spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
>> that
>> uses a Mac.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
you
>>>>a
>>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
with
>>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
>>>>>still
>>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>>it.
>>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something
or
>>>>another
>>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>>>>>company
>>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their
>>>>>(apparently
>>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>>tires
>>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets
to
>>>get
>>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can
do
>>>exactly
>>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low
on
>>>my
>>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>>
>>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two
so
>>>I'll
>>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>>>>I'll
>>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>>>>really
>>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>>try
>>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>> Mac
>>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>> how
>>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>>bashing
>>>>and it's getting old. I post some thing about what is going on,FYI for
>>>the
>>>>Mac guys, and you go on the attack. It is obvious you hate Apple
>>>>Computer,
>>>>so don't try to come off as an equal opportunity hater, it's insulting
>> our
>>>>intellect.
>>>>
>>>>Apple as a computer company has been probably the biggest innovator in
>> the
>>>>personal computer industry. It's too bad some people refuse to give them
>>>>credit for all their innovation and vision, not to mention some great
>>>>decisions.
>>>> Through their history they have made some bad decisions, however the
>>>> good
>>>>decisions have out weighed the bad ones. That is why they are
>>>>successful.
>>>> The iPod is a great product, but it is a fact, there is a lot more
>>>> people
>>>>using Apple computers, than there are using Apple iPods. That would
make
>>>>Apple, a computer company.
>>>>
>>>>Apple has sold more UNIX based operating systems than any other company!
>>>> I wouldn't call that insignificant. Your vers
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62038 is a reply to message #61983] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 18:23 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
great and innovative computer
>>>> company,
>>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>>
>>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>>opinion.
>>>>
>>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
>> OS,
>>>>>
>>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>>>>
>>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>
>>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the same
>>>>logic
>>>>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make
you
>>>>living.
>>>>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
I'm
>>>>>a computer
>>>>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty
>>>>>>> articles
>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>>By
>>>>>this
>>>>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
>> where
>>>>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
is,
>>>>>or
>>>>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but now
>>>he's
>>>>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>>>>>>> (M$oft
>>>>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>>like
>>>>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not
car
>>>>manufacturers.
>>>>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
for
>>>>>the
>>>>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as
far
>>>>as
>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>> of
>>>>>profits
>>>>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>> electronics
>>>>>>> division.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>>some
>>>>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>> than
>>>>>on
>>>>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>> argue
>>>>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly that
>>>>the
>>>>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>> Apple
>>>>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD
>>>>>>> licensed
>>>>>code
>>>>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently
>>>>>>> CodeWarrior
>>>>>is
>>>>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>>>>>>> environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when
I
>>>buy
>>>>>a
>>>>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for
me
>>>so
>>>>>I
>>>>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel
>>>>>>>>business
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
what
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>
>>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an
>>
>>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to
run
>>>>>as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run
>>>>>>>>translated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run
>>>as
>>>>>a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on
the
>>>>
>>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
and
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>>
>>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly
>>>>>>>>compute
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D
>>>
>>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC and
>>>
>>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
>>>>>>>>find
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>> years
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>> computer
>>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have an
>> enviable
>>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>>hardware
>>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X
off
>>>>of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my (soon
>>>>>to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>>dubious
>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship
>>>>>>>>>forming
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>>may
>>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>appear
>>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique
in
>>>that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>else
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>> point
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the
>>>>>>>>>hardware
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> end,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
>>>>>>>>>money
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to make
>>>>sense
>>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than
we
>>>>geeks
>>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>>it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not
>>>>>>>>>marketing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> people?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have been
>>>>playing
>>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>Actually, he was voted "biggest", not best. Big difference.
And it's true. He is the biggest ever. The numbers are not a matter of
opinion.
Most annoying? Perhaps.
But DEFINITELY one of the creepiest.
BTW, the Pew polls are basically iron-clad, if you care.
Jimmy
"DC" <dc@spamtom.org> wrote in message news:43b46e2f$1@linux...
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4564944.stm
>
> Tom Cruise voted *both* the best movie star in the world and the
> most annoying movie star in the world...
>
> hilarious.
>
> Oh, and he beat out De Niro...
>
> Besides, EVERYONE knows that Marty Feldman was the best movie
> star ever...
>
> Walk THIS way....
>
>
> DC
>Great River.
Jimmy
"Jon Jiles" <no@nomo.com> wrote in message news:43b4287f$1@linux...
>
> .. and you couldn't spend a fortune, what would it be?
>
> Thanks,
> JonHi James,
There is a way to crash an osx box - or any unix varient for that matter.
In unix, for a process to launch a new process, it has to first copy itself
and then change the copy into what it wants to create. And if the original
process is really big and the child it is trying to spawn is really small,
it still needs to create a process as big as itself just to launch the new
small process before it can shrink it down. This can take, for a short time,
a lot of RAM - sometimes too much. That's why OSX boxes with too little
memory can be prone to crashing depending on the software they are running.
Cheers!
Mike
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Martin Harrington" <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>James, if you were really honest with yourself, you'd admit that Macs have
>
>>as many problems (at least), as PC's.
>>I work in an environment (my studio complex and TV networks), where there
>
>>are plenty of Macs, (Avids etc), and the poor producers and editors are
>
>>sometimes pulling their hair out with crashes / lockups etc.
>>There is no one perfect system...they're just tools, nothing to get so
>>offended or insulted about.
>>--
>>Martin Harrington
>>www.lendanear-sound.com
>
>Martin, I wasn't looking to do a comparison, but if you want me to be honest,
>i'll say A Mac running OSX isn't perfect, it just looks that way next to
>an XP box; ) Remember I run multi platform. I was a computer dealer for
>years and still could be if their was money in it. Anyways, I've used many
>OSs, linux, yellow Dog, red hat, BeOS, Lindows, all versions of Mac and
Windows.
> I think they all have their strong and weak points.
>
>As far as OSX crashing I've never had OSX crash, so I have no idea what
your
>media guys are doing, it may be a bug in the software they are running???
>
>
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:43b3923d$1@linux...
>>>
>>> "Chris Wargo" <na@na.na> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>James, As someone who doesn't give a rats ass about computer platforms,
>>> I'd
>>>>like to suggest that Thad wasn't being confrontational, insulting, or
>
>>>>derisive.
>>>> You on the other hand have just called that "brainwashed" and accused
>him
>>>>of not knowing shit about what he was talking about. Chill out brother,
>>>>it's just a manufactured product. It's not a religion.
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> I started a couple of threads about Mac OSX running on a PC hardware
and
>>> mac development and it is instant Mac bash fest. In effect , saying,
>who
>>> in their right mind would want to run a bloated inefficient piece of
crap
>>> like Mac OSX? That is rude and insulting, about 40% of us Paris users,
>>> use Macs. Back up and read all the posts. The threads started out about
>>> information, not what sucks and what doesn't. It wasn't an open
>>> invitation
>>> to bash the platform that many of us use. Nor was it meant to be the
>kick
>>> off of the next Mac vs. PC wars. My post was just to inform, not to
start
>>> a bunch of shit.
>>>
>>> Thad has a right to his opinion as do I. He stands by his opinion, and
>so
>>> do I. I say he doesn't have real experience or true knowledge of current
>>> Macs because he does not use them. I would challenge him or anybody
else
>>> to use a current Mac for a Year, then come back with their criticisms.
>
>>> Then
>>> his criticisms would have merit, and wouldn't just be something he read
>in
>>> an anti Mac article. May be even he would see the light after a year.
>
>>> The
>>> lack of maintenance hassle, the ease of use, productivity gains and
>>> usability,
>>> multi media capability, feature set , available software, just to name
>a
>>> few. But of course he wont because Macs suck, just read what he has
>>> posted.
>>>
>>> Chill out, sure I'll try, but the constant barrage of knocks are uncalled
>>> for. The Mac bashing is more than just an opinion, it's ignorant and
>mean
>>> spirited, and it deserves a response. It really is a slam on anybody
>
>>> that
>>> uses a Mac.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If you jump up and down and make a big fuss some companies will sell
>you
>>>>>a
>>>>>>machine without at OS. Often they won't, becuase they signed a deal
>with
>>>>>>Microsoft saying the never would do precisely that, and usually they
>
>>>>>>still
>>>>>>wind up paying for the Windows license anyway so they aren't easy about
>>>>>it.
>>>>>>Dell will sell me a linux box, but only Red Hat Enterprise something
>or
>>>>>another
>>>>>>which I just have to wipe off of it anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Whether Apple is an intergrated HW/SW or an integrated sushi/sashimi
>
>>>>>>company
>>>>>>they shouldn't be legally allowed to force me to pay for their
>>>>>>(apparently
>>>>>>performance murdering) operating system. If I have a company that makes
>>>>>tires
>>>>>>I can't force my customers to buy my line of rims or fleece jackets
>to
>>>>get
>>>>>>my tires. That's explicitly against the law. But Apple and Dell can
>do
>>>>exactly
>>>>>>that to me as a consumer. Still can't figure out why but that's low
>on
>>>>my
>>>>>>list of battles to fight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>However, my new AMD 64 laptop will be arriving in only a day or two
>so
>>>>I'll
>>>>>>get to find out how 64 bit Windows and Debian run on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That's right, your a Windoz user, so please don't act like your not.
>
>>>>>I'll
>>>>>bet your even Microsoft certified!!! Aren't you? Or should I say brain
>>>>>washed! You may network Macs, but that doesn't mean you use them or
>
>>>>>really
>>>>>know shit about them. You make your statements based on what you read,
>>>>try
>>>>>using a Mac with OSX, and only OSX for a year then get back to all the
>>> Mac
>>>>>guys here. Then you can tell us how shitty Apple is as a company, and
>>> how
>>>>>inefficient and unusable Mac OSX is. As others have said, it's Mac
>>>>>bashing
>>>>>and it's getting old. I post so
|
|
|
|
| Re: Intel developing next-generation Power Mac [message #62041 is a reply to message #62038] |
Thu, 29 December 2005 19:37 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294
Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ersion of UNIX maybe more
>
>>>>> efficient
>>>>>and more robust as a net work server than Mac OS, however that isn't
>what
>>>>>Mac OS was geared for. It's nothing more than a pissing match, to say
>>> Mac
>>>>>OSX is inefficient compared to some other version of UNIX, but at what?
>>>>
>>>>>You can say that another version of UNIX is better than Mac OSX, but
>at
>>>>what???
>>>>>It's not as usable as a Mac. Certainly not for A/V, multi media! Isn't
>>>>>that where the computing world is going???
>>>>>
>>>>> Mac OSX is geared for personal computing, which in my opinion is the
>>> best
>>>>>OS for general, personal, and multi media computing. It's intuitive,
>
>>>>>user
>>>>>friendly, easy to use, and it's not a PITA to run and maintain like
other
>>>>>systems! Apple made it easy on you, you don't have to hack it, or
write
>>>>>your own software, but you can if you want. Maybe some day Yellow
>>>>>Dog/Linux
>>>>>will be able to keep up or surpass Mac OSX when it comes to A/V, multi
>>> media
>>>>>production, but not today. Mac OSX is much more usable, and user
>>>>>friendly
>>>>>for the majority of computer users than any other form of UNIX.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple is and will continue to be a great and innovative computer
>>>>> company,
>>>>>regardless of what people like you say.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's too bad some people wont let the facts get in the way of their
>>>>>opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's not Apple that is the Borg, it's the alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You may want to ask Dell to make you a laptop without paying for the
>>> OS,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>since they are a hardware company. Apple is an integrated HW/SW company
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(call them what you wish, they do what they do) so that wouldn't be
>>>>>>>their thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Macworld expo is next month, just after the big Intel announcements.
>>>
>>>>>>>Should be an interesting month.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>> As far as what Apple is, I'll stick by what I said. I apply the
same
>>>>>logic
>>>>>>>> I use to individuals and other companies--you are where you make
>you
>>>>>living.
>>>>>>>> I was a writer for two years because I made a living writing. Now
>I'm
>>>>>>a computer
>>>>>>>> tech, and if I write three novels this year and publish twenty
>>>>>>>> articles
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>>> still a computer tech as long as I'm cashing checks to pay my rent.
>>>>By
>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>> logic Apple is an iPod company--that's where the margin is, that's
>>> where
>>>>>>>> they make a market leading product, and that's where their future
>is,
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>> of course isn't. Steve Jobs is obviously a brilliant fellow but
now
>>>>he's
>>>>>>>> out there competing with the biggest of the bigs, Sony, Microsoft
>
>>>>>>>> (M$oft
>>>>>>>> could give a rip about 5% of the desktop market, but they sure look
>>>>like
>>>>>>>> they're not laying down on the video front), Comcast, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As an aside, by this logic Ford and GM are finance companies not
>car
>>>>>manufacturers.
>>>>>>>> Save a few high end models and trucks their cars are loss leaders
>for
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>> loands they sell people, so that makes them a finance company as
>far
>>>>>as
>>>>>>I'm
>>>>>>>> concerned. And if you want a real hoot go find out what percentage
>>> of
>>>>>>profits
>>>>>>>> (not income, profits) the Playstation is for Sony's consumer
>>>>>>>> electronics
>>>>>>>> division.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But I digress. I read most of those articles and they seem to offer
>>>>some
>>>>>>>> possible alternatives to why OS X on Intel could be so much faster
>>> than
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>> PPC. I still would vote for kernel changes, though thouse articles
>>> argue
>>>>>>>> against it, but according to those pieces the problem is mostly
that
>>>>>the
>>>>>>>> compilers are really, really, really bad. It's not surprising that
>>> Apple
>>>>>>>> wouldn't want to improve gcc, it's GPL'd and Apple prefers BSD
>>>>>>>> licensed
>>>>>>code
>>>>>>>> it can outright steal, but it is surprising that apparently
>>>>>>>> CodeWarrior
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>> the best option and it's not exactly the best compiler in the world
>>>>either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In any case, it looks like after all of those Photoshop bakeoffs
>
>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>> the years OS X users can look forward to a much faster computing
>
>>>>>>>> environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And yes, it's silly that I have to pay for a Windows license when
>I
>>>>buy
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>> laptop. Do you suppose Apple would knock $75 off of an iBook for
>me
>>>>so
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>> can put Yellow Dog on it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Another way of putting it is that Apple is a computer company with
>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>strong presence in the creative community, building a parallel
>>>>>>>>>business
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>around the marketing of creative works. There's a synergy between
>the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>two lines that seems to be helping both.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>BTW, it's ridiculous to have to pay for either MacOSX or WiXP if
>what
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>you really want is a Linux box.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>How hard is it to make your app run on both PPC and Intel OSX? With
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Rosetta it may already run unchanged.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>From the "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines":
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Rosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on
an
>>>
>>>>>>>>>Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to
>run
>>>>>>as
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run
>>>>>>>>>translated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they
run
>>>>as
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>native binary because the translation process itself incurs a
>>>>>>>>>processing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on
>the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>type of application. Applications that have a lot of user interaction
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite
>>>>>>>>>compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction
>and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases,
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly
>>>>>>>>>compute
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for
3-D
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>modelling, or compute ray tracing. "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>OK, so how hard is it to make your app run NATIVELY on both PPC
and
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Intel OSX?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://emperor.tidbits.com/TidBITS/Talk/493/?@572.UOwNar5Sbg j@
>>>>>>>>>http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20051209073025309
>>>>>>>>>http://osx86.theplaceforitall.com/software/
>>>>>>>>> http://www.momathome.com/viewfromhome/2005/06/adobe_porting. php
>>>>>>>>>http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=130673
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>PS. Here's a discussion about early decisions in OSX that you may
>
>>>>>>>>>find
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>interesting:
>>>>>>>>>http://www.unsanity.org/archives/000044.php
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>TCB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Makes a lot of sense, especially if Apple is realizing now (a few
>>> years
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a lot of us) that they're an iPod company dressed up as a desktop
>>> computer
>>>>>>>>>>manufacturer. Their consumer electronics are high margin, have
an
>>> enviable
>>>>>>>>>>market share, and are known as "best of breed" by the purchasing
>
>>>>>>>>>>public.
>>>>>>>>>>The computers they make are the precise opposite. If they get their
>>>>>hardware
>>>>>>>>>>costs in line I'm all for it--I'd be just as happy to wipe OS X
>off
>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>laptop to put Debian on it as I am happy to wipe XP Home of my
(soon
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>delivered) HP laptop to put Debian on it. One thing I do find highly
>>>>>>dubious
>>>>>>>>>>is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>######################################
>>>>>>>>>>The analyst also fueled rumors of an even closer relationship
>>>>>>>>>>forming
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Apple and Intel, saying there are indications that the two companies
>>>>>>may
>>>>>>>>>>be working together on a custom microprocessor chip-set that would
>>>>appear
>>>>>>>>>>only in Apple systems.
>>>>>>>>>>#####################################
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has a "chipset" that is unique
>in
>>>>that
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>uses a bunch of commodity parts put together in a way that nothing
>>>>else
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>or it might have some embedded graphics or whatnot. But the whole
>>> point
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Intel Mac is getting margins back up by reducing costs on the
>>>>>>>>>>hardware
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> end,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and a truly proprietary chipset will cost an enormous amount of
>
>>>>>>>>>>money
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>a company with such a small market share. That doesn't seem to
make
>>>>>sense
>>>>>>>>>>unless they word "chipset" is being used in a different way than
>we
>>>>>geeks
>>>>>>>>>>use it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Does anyone know about the development issues? How easy/tough will
>>>>it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>to port apps over to the Intel Macs? From real sources, not
>>>>>>>>>>marketing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> people?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I'm guessing it will be fairly easy as long as developers have
been
>>>>>playing
>>>>>>>>>>by the rules.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>TCB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>"uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Actually, he was voted "biggest", not best. Big difference.
Oh good, cuz Marty Feldman was the best.
Igor, would you help me with the bags?
Have a nice New Years! Let's all go see some blues or jazz and
leave our computers off and forget about politics!
DCI almost posted Marty Feldman a few minutes ago! That's hilarious!
Really. That's pretty weird.
"Damn your eyes!"
"Too late!"
"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:43b4a0ff$1@linux...
>
> "uptown jimmy" <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >Actually, he was voted "biggest", not best. Big difference.
>
> Oh good, cuz Marty Feldman was the best.
>
> Igor, would you help me with the bags?
>
>
> Have a nice New Years! Let's all go see some blues or jazz and
> leave our computers off and forget about politics!
>
>
> DCI think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many gremlins.
I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All of my samples for BFD are on this
drive. All will be well for a couple of days and then suddenly, for no
discernable reason, BFD loses the ability to load and stream samples with
any speed at all. CPU usage goes to around 50% and life just plain sucks.
Restoring a Ghost of my system drive wherein BFD was working properly prior
to the Ghosting will fix the problem.
I'm wondering if maybe DMA isn't enabled or there is some bus mastering
wierdness happening. I can't find the DMA or bus mastering options anywhere.
I'm running win XPSP1a with DX9 installed. Where the heck do I check this?
2. Gremlin #2-I've got 4 x matched 1G RAM sticks. This is good CAS2 Corsair
XMS stuff. They all are functioning normally in pairs and three at a time.
Any three sticks will show up in any three of my RAM slots......plus I have
tested all of them singly to make sure they show up and are doing the things
that RAM is supposed to do. However, after adding all four RAM sticks to the
4 x RAM slots on the mobo, only 3 gigs of system memory shows up. I have
tested every RAM slot in the mobo individually in singles, pairs and
configurations of three and all four of the slots work fine, but when a
fourth RAM stick is added, only three G of RAM are available as system
memory. This suck'eth most seriously.
I'm thinking *big bullseye on DAW* right about now. It's been a while since
I've unlimbered my 12ga.
Someone please save my computer's life. It's in mortal and immediate danger
right about now.
TIA,
Deejo'yeah......should write caching be enabled on my HD's? Could this be a
problem? Guess i should check huh?
Grrrrr..........;o(
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43b4a4f1$1@linux...
> I think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many gremlins.
> I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
>
> 1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
> Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All of my samples for BFD are on
this
> drive. All will be well for a couple of days and then suddenly, for no
> discernable reason, BFD loses the ability to load and stream samples with
> any speed at all. CPU usage goes to around 50% and life just plain sucks.
> Restoring a Ghost of my system drive wherein BFD was working properly
prior
> to the Ghosting will fix the problem.
>
> I'm wondering if maybe DMA isn't enabled or there is some bus mastering
> wierdness happening. I can't find the DMA or bus mastering options
anywhere.
> I'm running win XPSP1a with DX9 installed. Where the heck do I check this?
>
> 2. Gremlin #2-I've got 4 x matched 1G RAM sticks. This is good CAS2
Corsair
> XMS stuff. They all are functioning normally in pairs and three at a
time.
> Any three sticks will show up in any three of my RAM slots......plus I
have
> tested all of them singly to make sure they show up and are doing the
things
> that RAM is supposed to do. However, after adding all four RAM sticks to
the
> 4 x RAM slots on the mobo, only 3 gigs of system memory shows up. I have
> tested every RAM slot in the mobo individually in singles, pairs and
> configurations of three and all four of the slots work fine, but when a
> fourth RAM stick is added, only three G of RAM are available as system
> memory. This suck'eth most seriously.
>
> I'm thinking *big bullseye on DAW* right about now. It's been a while
since
> I've unlimbered my 12ga.
>
> Someone please save my computer's life. It's in mortal and immediate
danger
> right about now.
>
> TIA,
>
> Deej
>
>
>Well........****!!! I just figured out the RAM situation. Due to the
southbridge resource allocation on the mobo, 4G of DDR will only show up as
3G and change.....which is exactly what is happening. RTFM is such a PITA
sometimes ;oP
OK.......so that's solved........now WTF is happening with my HD and
BFD???.............Grrrrrrrr..........;o(
guess I'll read some more, but I still can't find where to check to see
whether DMA is enabled/disabled..
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote in message
news:43b4a4f1$1@linux...
> I think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many gremlins.
> I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
>
> 1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
> Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All of my samples for BFD are on
this
> drive. All will be well for a couple of days and then suddenly, for no
> discernable reason, BFD loses the ability to load and stream samples with
> any speed at all. CPU usage goes to around 50% and life just plain sucks.
> Restoring a Ghost of my system drive wherein BFD was working properly
prior
> to the Ghosting will fix the problem.
>
> I'm wondering if maybe DMA isn't enabled or there is some bus mastering
> wierdness happening. I can't find the DMA or bus mastering options
anywhere.
> I'm running win XPSP1a with DX9 installed. Where the heck do I check this?
>
> 2. Gremlin #2-I've got 4 x matched 1G RAM sticks. This is good CAS2
Corsair
> XMS stuff. They all are functioning normally in pairs and three at a
time.
> Any three sticks will show up in any three of my RAM slots......plus I
have
> tested all of them singly to make sure they show up and are doing the
things
> that RAM is supposed to do. However, after adding all four RAM sticks to
the
> 4 x RAM slots on the mobo, only 3 gigs of system memory shows up. I have
> tested every RAM slot in the mobo individually in singles, pairs and
> configurations of three and all four of the slots work fine, but when a
> fourth RAM stick is added, only three G of RAM are available as system
> memory. This suck'eth most seriously.
>
> I'm thinking *big bullseye on DAW* right about now. It's been a while
since
> I've unlimbered my 12ga.
>
> Someone please save my computer's life. It's in mortal and immediate
danger
> right about now.
>
> TIA,
>
> Deej
>
>
>Hey Deej,
Well, it sounds to me like these are two unrelated problems. Problem number
one sounds like software of some kind. DMA isn't really an issue, it's enabled
by default. The real sign that it's software is ghosting back to the original
setup makes it work. Is there another drive on that IDE controller? Check
to be sure it isn't on cable select or something screwy like that.
The second problem DOES sound like hardware. What's the mobo? I might do
a www.google.com/groups search to see if anyone else is having the same problem
with the memory. I'd also check with the mobo vendor for a BIOS update, it
certainly sounds like the memory hardware is fine and it's a mobo issue.
In case you're wondering, I'm posting this from my admitedly heavly and clunky
new HP laptop but it's running Debian amd64 testing like a champ. The amd64
installers seem a little more tempermental but all of that Windows nastiness
is off of it already. Too bad I'll have to put it back on to get Live running
on it.
TCB
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>I think I may have a defective mobo. I've been chasing too many gremlins.
>I've managed to kill off all but two, as follows-
>
>1. Gremlin #1-I have a 400G drive dedicated to samples. It's a 7200RPM
>Seagate Barracuda and is IDE2 master. All o
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 09 23:45:35 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07874 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
