No. If you want to test relative compiler technology, you benchmark compilers on the same platform.
If you want to test the platform itself, you use software which is the fastest possible.
If you want to test if a program is portable you use gcc (as it uses the same frontend on all platforms).
If you are Apple you use a mix of gcc and some strange fortran compiler with different versions and flags to show that the G5 can be faster than the p4 even though it clearly is slower in SPEC.
If Apple was to follow the rules, then why do they not post their results on SPEC???
> Obviously the list goes on Why? >It could be said that there are even more games >released for the console market Yes, but that would not be the truth >It seems to me though that games that tend to be >commercially viable tend to be ported to the Mac I think that sentence do speak for itself.
They all exist on Windows, and runs faster and more cheap there, so if it is not the "mac experience" you want I think you better buy an AMD/Intel computer.
>This is a transitory situation for a specific >generation. The fundamental concept here is the >architecture; the PowerPC one is shared and quite >open (OpenFirmware, GNU/Linux the primary OS >supported by vendors), while x86-64 and IPF aren't: >proprietary boot schemas, preference for MS >Windows...
That may be true for the PowerPC, but not for Apple hardware. Booting is backward compatible and I am sure works just fine with grub.
I think there will be way more Debian on 64-bit Opteron/Athlon64 then on G5 machines.
Why? Because it will be faster and way cheaper. Although the PowerPC ISA is more 'elegant', who realy care?
64-bit windows will be running on 64-bit x86 before 64-bit MacOS will run on the G5.
Allready has 32-bit windows been running 64-bit x86 for months, and finally 32-bit MacOS will run on 64-bit G5. And this, *even* when it is Apple that is making the OS, *that* is not good.
>> [...] but that will change once IBM begins to >> ship their version of the same processor.
Come on, it is IBM that has made the G5 *not* Apple. And the G5 is the consumer version of the Power4, why, why, why do you think IBM will make another consumer version? And *who* do you think would run it? Really, if it is not Apple that is doing the benchmarketing the x86 processors are both cheaper and faster.
>So go G5. There are two vendors of compatible >processors, IBM and Motorola, while the only vendor >of x86-64 is AMD, and the only vendor of IPF is >Intel... not only that, the PowerPC is more >efficient and has a technically brighter future.
No, only IBM produces the G5, motorola only produces 32 bit variants. And that is just the processor. If you are using Opteron you get hardware from many companies, not only Apple.
Neither has I, but then I do not publish my address on the net. When I create "register accounts" on hotmail.com or mail.com they get flooded right away.
Athlons run well on 300W power supply. I think the avarage power consumption is way bellow that, considering that a normal computer has a power hungry graphic card several hard drives cd-rom and cd-burner. Remember that the grading of the power supply is the maximum it can deliver.
I posted before starting to read. Do not like to register, but I have now read it, so I think you are right, I am blind, dumb and idiotic. But as of the rest I think I am right.
Slashdot Mirror
No. If you want to test relative compiler technology, you benchmark compilers on the same
platform.
If you want to test the platform itself, you use software which is the fastest possible.
If you want to test if a program is portable you
use gcc (as it uses the same frontend on all platforms).
If you are Apple you use a mix of gcc and some
strange fortran compiler with different versions
and flags to show that the G5 can be faster than
the p4 even though it clearly is slower in SPEC.
If Apple was to follow the rules, then why do
they not post their results on SPEC???
> Obviously the list goes on
Why?
>It could be said that there are even more games
>released for the console market
Yes, but that would not be the truth
>It seems to me though that games that tend to be
>commercially viable tend to be ported to the Mac
I think that sentence do speak for itself.
They all exist on Windows, and runs faster and more cheap there, so if it is not the "mac experience"
you want I think you better buy an AMD/Intel computer.
MIPS is not open in any way. It is controlled by
MIPS corp. MIPS does not produce MIPS chips, only
sell there IP. Is *that* open?
We do have an open RISC and that is the SPARC
developed by ESA, the core is called Leon and
is under the GPL.
The x86 today is allmost RISC, only unused instructions are interpreted by the microprogram.
And while The Hurd do boot on the PowerPC
(and maby on the Alpha) it only runs (semi stable)
on the x86 platform.
They do *not* develop an open source OS.
They take BSD mix it with MACH, both of which is
open, and adds a --- no open in any way ---
graphic user interface based on NeXT.
>This is a transitory situation for a specific
>generation. The fundamental concept here is the
>architecture; the PowerPC one is shared and quite
>open (OpenFirmware, GNU/Linux the primary OS
>supported by vendors), while x86-64 and IPF aren't:
>proprietary boot schemas, preference for MS
>Windows...
That may be true for the PowerPC, but not for
Apple hardware. Booting is backward compatible
and I am sure works just fine with grub.
I think there will be way more Debian on 64-bit
Opteron/Athlon64 then on G5 machines.
Why? Because it will be faster and way cheaper.
Although the PowerPC ISA is more 'elegant',
who realy care?
64-bit windows will be running on 64-bit x86
before 64-bit MacOS will run on the G5.
Allready has 32-bit windows been running 64-bit
x86 for months, and finally 32-bit MacOS will
run on 64-bit G5. And this, *even* when it is
Apple that is making the OS, *that* is not
good.
>> [...] but that will change once IBM begins to
>> ship their version of the same processor.
Come on, it is IBM that has made the G5 *not* Apple.
And the G5 is the consumer version of the Power4,
why, why, why do you think IBM will make another
consumer version? And *who* do you think would run
it? Really, if it is not Apple that is doing the
benchmarketing the x86 processors are both cheaper
and faster.
>So go G5. There are two vendors of compatible
>processors, IBM and Motorola, while the only vendor
>of x86-64 is AMD, and the only vendor of IPF is
>Intel... not only that, the PowerPC is more
>efficient and has a technically brighter future.
No, only IBM produces the G5, motorola only produces
32 bit variants. And that is just the processor.
If you are using Opteron you get hardware from
many companies, not only Apple.
But they are only faster then the p4 that Apple
benchmark. Read the artikle.
I think you are all wrong.
BSD* has no java port.
BSD* does no run an emulated Linux Java virtual machine. Instead it run it as a normal process
and maps Linux calls to simular BSD calls.
No he is not, he is the boss of the 2.6 releases.
Why not redirect them all to /dev/null ;-)
Neither has I, but then I do not publish my address
on the net. When I create "register accounts"
on hotmail.com or mail.com they get flooded right away.
Athlons run well on 300W power supply.
I think the avarage power consumption is
way bellow that, considering that a normal
computer has a power hungry graphic card
several hard drives cd-rom and cd-burner.
Remember that the grading of the power
supply is the maximum it can deliver.
As much heat as power.
ca 100 boxes
ca 200 W/box
ca 20 kW
Computers are often restarted at airplanes.
For example when hit by lightning.
I guess they do not take 2 min to start though.
> ...I just wonder if it would have been better to try and accomplish this within the project that currently exists?
Maby they did not succed.
>Worse yet, naming a project after an obscure occult
>reference is likely to be offensive to those of
>various religions.
Why? And if, then why should they care???
We have no oil, take our neighbours instead...
> SCO do still have some developers, right?
Not many.
yes, but my OS is too secure for it :)
I did read the headline of the story, i did not register. The headline made me think that it was
all clear and just a bad excuse.
I thought it was a good excuse *even* if he was guilty, but as I said, the headline fooled me.
I posted before starting to read.
Do not like to register, but I have now read
it, so I think you are right, I am blind, dumb
and idiotic. But as of the rest I think I am right.