C&G were giants on OS 9. They had many award winning products some of which I used. However, I haven't heard anything about them in the last few years. Aside from Soundjam becoming iTunes, they haven't really had one breakout product since the transition to OS X. I had thought they just dissolved a while ago since I had not heard of them in so long. Sad to see them go, but they really didn't have much invested in the X software arena.
I agree that kind of stuff needs to be implemented. But it's still going to take years. Until then, I don't think we should completely abandon what we have now. Let's at least finish the ISS that we have already invested tens of billions into.
I stopped reading the article when I got to the subtitle where it refers to Apple as a "Cupertino Fruit Company." Look, Mr. White, if you aren't even going to show any respect at all and even mock one of the companies in your so called comparison, how do you expect anyone to take you're evaluation seriously?
Uh, how can we "experience the vastness of space" as the article puts it, when we currently cannot even reliably send astronauts into low earth orbit for menial tasks such as scientific experiments. Progress comes with a price. Abandoning our current manned space programs is not going to get us to a more far reaching goal anytime sooner.
As someone submitted in the last story, hyperthreading and those other options does not always mean a performance increase in every situation. I am glad to see that Apple responded to clear up the confusion. I had suspected something like this was really the case when the trolls came out looking to bash.
What seems to be missing in all of this is the big picture. Whether or not the G5 is 1.2% faster or slower than the Xeon/P4/Opteron is not a uniform answer. Different apps are going to perform differently on different platforms. Not only that, but there are a million possible variations of benchmarks that could make both sides the winner. Like Greg said in the interview, if Apple was looking to cheat they wouldn't have hired an independent company and provided full disclosure.
Processor speed notwithstanding, most Mac users are so because of Apple's OS not their hardware. Windows would slow me down much more than 6 extra cycles of processor speed. For my circumstances, the fact that Apple now has hardware fast enough that it can even attempt to make the 'fastest' claim is far more important.
I can see why this might be an issue for PC users/possible switchers, but for me as a Mac user, the fact that Apple now has fast enough hardware to even attempt to make this claim is more important to me.
Smeagol is 64-bit, but it contains only minimal 64-bit optimization that allows it to run. Panther contains much more complete 64-bit support which will result in performance improvements.
A haven't seen a Gfps estimate on the G5s yet, but I know the Dual 1 Ghz G4 was 15 Gfps. They have said that the new machines are at least twice as fast so that would put it at 30 Gfps. Now even assuming a typical 20-30% falloff for actual performance, it would still be at most a few dozen, not 123.
Apple already reported that over half the songs sold so far on the iTMS were in album format. Aside from that, these people are missing the whole point of this service. That is the ability to preview which songs you like on an album and choose which ones to buy. If there is a CD that has one or two good songs and the rest are crap, do you think I'm going to spend $17 for two songs? No! But with the iTMS, the record labels make 1 or 2 dollars. If they go back to album only, they will make $0 from me.
Slashdot Mirror
C&G were giants on OS 9. They had many award winning products some of which I used. However, I haven't heard anything about them in the last few years. Aside from Soundjam becoming iTunes, they haven't really had one breakout product since the transition to OS X. I had thought they just dissolved a while ago since I had not heard of them in so long. Sad to see them go, but they really didn't have much invested in the X software arena.
Think Secret says this is the first of many articles that wil focus on all aspects of the OS.
I actually did go back and read part of the article later. It was definitely not out of respect.
what is the RIAA?
I'm guessing the beast with 8 heads or whatever.
I agree that kind of stuff needs to be implemented. But it's still going to take years. Until then, I don't think we should completely abandon what we have now. Let's at least finish the ISS that we have already invested tens of billions into.
My point is let's get the simple programs we have now to work reliably before moving to something more complex (and most likely more dangerous).
I stopped reading the article when I got to the subtitle where it refers to Apple as a "Cupertino Fruit Company." Look, Mr. White, if you aren't even going to show any respect at all and even mock one of the companies in your so called comparison, how do you expect anyone to take you're evaluation seriously?
Uh, how can we "experience the vastness of space" as the article puts it, when we currently cannot even reliably send astronauts into low earth orbit for menial tasks such as scientific experiments. Progress comes with a price. Abandoning our current manned space programs is not going to get us to a more far reaching goal anytime sooner.
iChat AV is forcing an expensive camera on you if you wish to use it.
OMFG! A new piece of software requires a newer piece of hardware to use it. What!!?? Outrageous!
Why, tell me why can't I use Windows XP with my 486?
Maybe it got a little hot with all that sun on it and wanted to cool off.
As someone submitted in the last story, hyperthreading and those other options does not always mean a performance increase in every situation. I am glad to see that Apple responded to clear up the confusion. I had suspected something like this was really the case when the trolls came out looking to bash.
What seems to be missing in all of this is the big picture. Whether or not the G5 is 1.2% faster or slower than the Xeon/P4/Opteron is not a uniform answer. Different apps are going to perform differently on different platforms. Not only that, but there are a million possible variations of benchmarks that could make both sides the winner. Like Greg said in the interview, if Apple was looking to cheat they wouldn't have hired an independent company and provided full disclosure.
Processor speed notwithstanding, most Mac users are so because of Apple's OS not their hardware. Windows would slow me down much more than 6 extra cycles of processor speed. For my circumstances, the fact that Apple now has hardware fast enough that it can even attempt to make the 'fastest' claim is far more important.
I can see why this might be an issue for PC users/possible switchers, but for me as a Mac user, the fact that Apple now has fast enough hardware to even attempt to make this claim is more important to me.
LOL, but you can't fit 8 GB into any of the current Powermacs.
Smeagol is 64-bit, but it contains only minimal 64-bit optimization that allows it to run. Panther contains much more complete 64-bit support which will result in performance improvements.
Yes but at least we now have the speed to back up our bigotry.
In 10.1 you might be right. However with Quartz extreme most of the graphics processing no longer requires the CPU.
Apple.com/games
Uh, yes it is. A G5 won't boot with an OS that isn't 64-bit. The apps don't require changes, but the OS did.
A haven't seen a Gfps estimate on the G5s yet, but I know the Dual 1 Ghz G4 was 15 Gfps. They have said that the new machines are at least twice as fast so that would put it at 30 Gfps. Now even assuming a typical 20-30% falloff for actual performance, it would still be at most a few dozen, not 123.
I bet if I buy 10 new Dual 2 Ghz G5s and cluster them I could make that list.
http://stream.qtv.apple.com/events/jun/happy_wwdc/ wwdc_250_100_56_ref.mov
http://stream.qtv.apple.com/events/jun/happy_wwdc/ wwdc_250_100_56_ref.mov
MacSurfer lists a bunch.
Apple already reported that over half the songs sold so far on the iTMS were in album format. Aside from that, these people are missing the whole point of this service. That is the ability to preview which songs you like on an album and choose which ones to buy. If there is a CD that has one or two good songs and the rest are crap, do you think I'm going to spend $17 for two songs? No! But with the iTMS, the record labels make 1 or 2 dollars. If they go back to album only, they will make $0 from me.
LOL, I wish.