Not really, because most of that 20% is the left-overs from Intel in the bottom-end of the market. (Not saying that AMD doesn't make quality products, just describing where they sell them.)
AMD has had about 20% of the CPU market for 10 years now, so nothing is eroding. Their problem is that it has been the worst 20% (least profitable consumer segmenet for the most part, alhtough that's changing).
Intel's argument is: (1) AMD sells every CPU it can possibly make (2) AMD only has capacity for ~20% of the market (3) The fact that AMD can't make profits on these CPUs is AMD's problem, not Intel's.
I disagree. Unlike MS, Intel has been well-aware of potential anti-trust problems. I would even say that they've gone out of their way to keep AMD in business. There's been many times when Intel could have wiped them off the map. Even today, with AMD's faster/better CPUs, they're barely making money. If Intel started a real price war, it would be disastrous for AMD.
Well said. The fact that the Linux end-user even knows what "toolkit" they are running in a given program is geek-marketing gone insane. Talk about a totally irrelevant choice-point foised on the poor users.
A typical Windows install has dozens of toolkits in use, and the user is none the wiser. This is mainly because most common settings are shared in the registry, providing a rough consistancy -- not because the toolkits is are so awesome.
I'm on the Berman-Haters bandwagon as well. But I will give him credit for basically defining the modern Trek Formula with TNG (Space Opera+Soap Opera=Ratings).
If there's anything remarkable about TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT is that it's basically the same show with different characters and it lasted an eternity in television-time.
Basically when it came down to it, it was decided that it would be better to leech the existing fanbase by churning out the same Berman-Trek Formula rather than trying anything different. Eventualy people got bored and left, but that was by design and not until Viacom had made boatloads of cash.
There's another rumored aspect to this... Apple bought out the "portable Toolbox" Windows API used in QT from a third party firm that was selling Mac->Windows migration.
I've heard that Carbon was actually ported from QuickTime/Windows *back* to OS X. Have no idea if it's true or not, but it would be kind of funny if it was.
The name is supposed to be a joke, much like "GNU's Not UNIX". You Aspergers need to take your meds and get on the program. Anyway, WINE does do "bug-compatible" emulation of different versions of Windows.
Not to mention that Cringley said Apple wasn't going to use WINE, so you didn't even RTFA,and thus your entire comment has failed.
Assuming Cringley is correct and Apple has cross-licensed the Windows API, it should be no suprise that their chief technologist told WINE to take a hike. If you've got the real thing, you don't need WINE.
More likely, they are sticking with 32-bit processors because that's all Intel has for laptops, and they're sticking with 32-bit code because OS X isn't entirely 64-bit clean yet.
Well, this might be a complete shock to PowerPC-oppressed Apple Users, but Intel routinely comes out with new-and-improved CPUs. The people that buy Mermon in Q3 will be "snowed" by whatever comes out in 2007.
Also, I have to say most of the posters on this story are idiots. A CPU die-shrink is hardly worthy of all the stupid conspiracy theories posted here.
That and the fact that X11 Apps aren't really a strategic threat to Apple.
Just in very course marketshare terms: 2% Mac APIs + 1% Unix APIs -- versus 97% WinAPIs, so obviously WinAPI would be a bigger threat to Apple technologies if they supported it (which they won't).
Cringely and Dvorak must be making humongous ad-revenue trolling Mac Fans lately. They're eating it up!
It's understandable because Apple has made some radical moves lately (Intel, Windows), so the Mac Zealot's universe must seem like it's in total flux. No longer can they confidently predict Apple's next move using their supposed expertise in everything-apple. If Apple will put Windows on Macs, pretty much anything goes!
Obviously these columnists sense the uncertainly and are having fun stirring things up a bit. Anyway, before you fire off your 1000 word point-by-point response denouncing Cringely, keep in mind he probably wrote this column in 15 minutes while high on cough medicine.
How are they alienating the bloggers, though they are simply trying to stop employees leaking secrets. If a blogger pulls some new Apple product out of his ass, Apple can't stop him.
If you read and discuss Mac news on the web, there's about a 99% chance that you have been informed and entertained by rumors posted by ThinkSecret. It might not be right all the time, but it's correct often enough that most online Mac Fans find it worth their consideration. The rumors from trusted sites quickly spread through the Mac sites and Slashdot. The sites that do "talk out of their ass" are quickly ignored.
It's so pervasive that for example, when Mac fans repeated the "fact" that "Laptops would go to Intel first", they often cited Steve Jobs. But the real source was ThinkSecret. The rumor was repeated so much that everyone just assumed that it was official Apple material.
Of course, Apple is playing both sides of the fence here. If they wanted to, they could shut the whole thing down by simply issuing press-releases with their product plans. But they know they benefit from the rumor mongering, they love the hype and speculation. But in this case they just want to harass the people that are too good at it.
>So what exactly is the difference between a 'blogger' and a 'journalist'?
Just to make it clear, this distinction is NOT a legal issue in this case. The guy isn't even a blogger. It's an idea the blog-o-sphere made up in their eternal wank-fest.
The IT managers at those companies making purchasing decisions, are very likely the types to be informed and hold opinions similar to the slashdot crowd.
Not really. IT Managers has had extreme misgivings about AMD's platform support over the years, tend to be very conservative, and are strongly in the Intel camp. (Because deploying VIA drivers on 1000 PCs is no fun.) Maybe that's softening a little, but it still holds true. Meanwhile, Slashdotters for the most part are whole-hog AMD simply because of the price.
This is understandable, because Linux is not being positioned as a "product in a box", but instead as vehicle for enterprise service contracts. The computer store guys can actually make decent money supporting MS SBS, while Linux sends all the contract revenue back to RedHat etc.
I don't the the user community took the codenames that seriously until Appel started marketing them with "10.2 Jaguar". I certainly can't remember the codenames for 10.1 or OS 9.0 etc being widely used.
Short Answer: Bonjour doesn't compare to Univeral Plug-n-Play
Bonjour compares to NetBIOS-over-TCP/IP (aka NBT aka "Workgroups")... ie it's a broadcast protocol that finds printers and other services on your local subnet.
Unless you are using something Apple-specific like iTunes, most apps already use NBT.
No. The point was that streaming media etc would be faster because of SSE features, which I suppose is marginally true.
Although web browsers are complex layout engines, and therefore browsing speed is a lot more processor dependant than slashdotters generally make it out to be. Try web browsing on an old machine, and the difference is quite noticable.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really, because most of that 20% is the left-overs from Intel in the bottom-end of the market. (Not saying that AMD doesn't make quality products, just describing where they sell them.)
AMD has had about 20% of the CPU market for 10 years now, so nothing is eroding. Their problem is that it has been the worst 20% (least profitable consumer segmenet for the most part, alhtough that's changing).
Intel's argument is:
(1) AMD sells every CPU it can possibly make
(2) AMD only has capacity for ~20% of the market
(3) The fact that AMD can't make profits on these CPUs is AMD's problem, not Intel's.
I disagree. Unlike MS, Intel has been well-aware of potential anti-trust problems. I would even say that they've gone out of their way to keep AMD in business. There's been many times when Intel could have wiped them off the map. Even today, with AMD's faster/better CPUs, they're barely making money. If Intel started a real price war, it would be disastrous for AMD.
Well said. The fact that the Linux end-user even knows what "toolkit" they are running in a given program is geek-marketing gone insane. Talk about a totally irrelevant choice-point foised on the poor users.
A typical Windows install has dozens of toolkits in use, and the user is none the wiser. This is mainly because most common settings are shared in the registry, providing a rough consistancy -- not because the toolkits is are so awesome.
> The value of doing it must be absurdly huge.
Right. Which sums up how ridiclous Cringley's premise is.
Sorry, I meant to imply that Apple would charge you for the privilege.
If you really could replicate Windows for $200 Million, I'm sure you could find some investors however.
I'm on the Berman-Haters bandwagon as well. But I will give him credit for basically defining the modern Trek Formula with TNG (Space Opera+Soap Opera=Ratings).
If there's anything remarkable about TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT is that it's basically the same show with different characters and it lasted an eternity in television-time.
Basically when it came down to it, it was decided that it would be better to leech the existing fanbase by churning out the same Berman-Trek Formula rather than trying anything different. Eventualy people got bored and left, but that was by design and not until Viacom had made boatloads of cash.
> whether it's feasible
Keep in mind that Apple could sublicence XP Home for about $30, and they can also license some virtualization software cheaply.
So, it's ridiclous to work on some crazy Win32-on-Mac implementation when the real thing could be shipped for under $100/box.
There's another rumored aspect to this ... Apple bought out the "portable Toolbox" Windows API used in QT from a third party firm that was selling Mac->Windows migration.
I've heard that Carbon was actually ported from QuickTime/Windows *back* to OS X. Have no idea if it's true or not, but it would be kind of funny if it was.
The name is supposed to be a joke, much like "GNU's Not UNIX". You Aspergers need to take your meds and get on the program. Anyway, WINE does do "bug-compatible" emulation of different versions of Windows.
Not to mention that Cringley said Apple wasn't going to use WINE, so you didn't even RTFA,and thus your entire comment has failed.
Assuming Cringley is correct and Apple has cross-licensed the Windows API, it should be no suprise that their chief technologist told WINE to take a hike. If you've got the real thing, you don't need WINE.
More likely, they are sticking with 32-bit processors because that's all Intel has for laptops, and they're sticking with 32-bit code because OS X isn't entirely 64-bit clean yet.
Well, this might be a complete shock to PowerPC-oppressed Apple Users, but Intel routinely comes out with new-and-improved CPUs. The people that buy Mermon in Q3 will be "snowed" by whatever comes out in 2007.
Also, I have to say most of the posters on this story are idiots. A CPU die-shrink is hardly worthy of all the stupid conspiracy theories posted here.
That and the fact that X11 Apps aren't really a strategic threat to Apple.
Just in very course marketshare terms: 2% Mac APIs + 1% Unix APIs -- versus 97% WinAPIs, so obviously WinAPI would be a bigger threat to Apple technologies if they supported it (which they won't).
and if you take my advice, which I know you do: Beer ...
I'm pretty sure that Linus has already taken that advice.
Cringely and Dvorak must be making humongous ad-revenue trolling Mac Fans lately. They're eating it up!
It's understandable because Apple has made some radical moves lately (Intel, Windows), so the Mac Zealot's universe must seem like it's in total flux. No longer can they confidently predict Apple's next move using their supposed expertise in everything-apple. If Apple will put Windows on Macs, pretty much anything goes!
Obviously these columnists sense the uncertainly and are having fun stirring things up a bit. Anyway, before you fire off your 1000 word point-by-point response denouncing Cringely, keep in mind he probably wrote this column in 15 minutes while high on cough medicine.
How are they alienating the bloggers, though they are simply trying to stop employees leaking secrets. If a blogger pulls some new Apple product out of his ass, Apple can't stop him.
If you read and discuss Mac news on the web, there's about a 99% chance that you have been informed and entertained by rumors posted by ThinkSecret. It might not be right all the time, but it's correct often enough that most online Mac Fans find it worth their consideration. The rumors from trusted sites quickly spread through the Mac sites and Slashdot. The sites that do "talk out of their ass" are quickly ignored.
It's so pervasive that for example, when Mac fans repeated the "fact" that "Laptops would go to Intel first", they often cited Steve Jobs. But the real source was ThinkSecret. The rumor was repeated so much that everyone just assumed that it was official Apple material.
Of course, Apple is playing both sides of the fence here. If they wanted to, they could shut the whole thing down by simply issuing press-releases with their product plans. But they know they benefit from the rumor mongering, they love the hype and speculation. But in this case they just want to harass the people that are too good at it.
>So what exactly is the difference between a 'blogger' and a 'journalist'?
Just to make it clear, this distinction is NOT a legal issue in this case. The guy isn't even a blogger. It's an idea the blog-o-sphere made up in their eternal wank-fest.
The IT managers at those companies making purchasing decisions, are very likely the types to be informed and hold opinions similar to the slashdot crowd.
Not really. IT Managers has had extreme misgivings about AMD's platform support over the years, tend to be very conservative, and are strongly in the Intel camp. (Because deploying VIA drivers on 1000 PCs is no fun.) Maybe that's softening a little, but it still holds true. Meanwhile, Slashdotters for the most part are whole-hog AMD simply because of the price.
This is understandable, because Linux is not being positioned as a "product in a box", but instead as vehicle for enterprise service contracts. The computer store guys can actually make decent money supporting MS SBS, while Linux sends all the contract revenue back to RedHat etc.
I don't the the user community took the codenames that seriously until Appel started marketing them with "10.2 Jaguar". I certainly can't remember the codenames for 10.1 or OS 9.0 etc being widely used.
The Windows version (NBT) is not specific to printers. However, you're more likely to see it in use for finding SQL Servers than for chat programs.
Short Answer: Bonjour doesn't compare to Univeral Plug-n-Play
... ie it's a broadcast protocol that finds printers and other services on your local subnet.
Bonjour compares to NetBIOS-over-TCP/IP (aka NBT aka "Workgroups")
Unless you are using something Apple-specific like iTunes, most apps already use NBT.
No. The point was that streaming media etc would be faster because of SSE features, which I suppose is marginally true.
Although web browsers are complex layout engines, and therefore browsing speed is a lot more processor dependant than slashdotters generally make it out to be. Try web browsing on an old machine, and the difference is quite noticable.