Will Vista be functional with inadequate graphics resources? I personally don't care about semitransparent windows and cool animations. If I lack the graphics resources, I'd like Vista to just function with old-style Windows capability.
I'm sure XP works fine on the Duo...if you don't want the Vista eye candy just stick with XP.
I recently did a head-to-head comparison of a 15" 1.25GHz AL Powerbook against a 2.6 (2.8?) GHz P4 HP notebook running WinXP. The "test" was a clean rebuild of our modularized ant-driven Java project. This includes generating ten or so Apache Axis based web services, generating lots of java constants files from xml, and compiling and merging the outputs. The code generation an general ant manipulation takes about half the wall-clock time. I consisder this to be a fairly typical real-world example of commercial java development.
The result:
the Powerbook was three times faster than the P4 notebook.
I suspect the PowerBook's faster speed is due less to the CPU than to the I/O subsystems and disk. In our build neither type of CPU sits there pegged at 100%. The P4 did seem to be riding closer to 100% though. It also spent the entire time blowing hot air like a hair dryer. The PowerBook fan very rarely comes on.
Overall the PowerBook has been a great development platform for Java. I run eclipse 3M6 on it and while its not as snappy UI-wise as I'd like, once it gets "warmed-up" visiting all the eclipse perspectives and views its not bad at all. Clearly caching is important for eclipse performance.
This brings me to the final point which is that on either machine if you want to use a Java based IDE you will need 1Gb RAM minimum. The IDE's are just pigs for memory. One warning, while running eclipse 2.1 on Windows I ran into nasty eclipse-crashing problems with running out of windows resource handles which I was never able to get around. (The eclipse developers couldn't reproduce this so YMMV.) The PowerBook hasn't had any such problems.
I had the same exerience with Win2k. However, I was able to reboot to the last known good configuration.
I was then able to run iTunes fine though it complained about not being able to access its CD/DVD drivers. I haven't tried ripping or burning a CD. I assume that won't work.
I'm fairly confident that it arises from a conflict with my Adaptec DirectCD driver (that thing even kills itself if you log in using Remote Desktop).
I would really like you or someone to please plainly and calmly explain to me why they think Flash is bad.
I don't think Flash itself is "bad". However, I disabled Flash on my windows box for one simple reason. For my particular usage pattern it seems to only facilitate the presentation of garish ads. I'm thankful that (unlike IE on Windows) Safari lets you choose to be Flash-free without constantly irritating you with dialogs trying to get you to download the plugin.
From a formal point of view, it is clear that one could not equate radiative momentum content with Newtonian momentum. Newtonian momentum is Mv, clearly a vector, while the momentum attributed to radiation is E/c, a scalar, since E is a scalar and c is a universal constant of nature.
He is arguing that momentum carried by sunlight somehow has become a scalar. This is complete garbage. Momentum is a vector quantity, period. While it is true that the magnitude of the momentum vector is proportional to the scalar energy it is not equal to a scalar.
If you (wrongly) grant him that momentum is not a vector then sure a sail won't work, what direction would it go in?
This guy is a crackpot.
Lets skip down to the "formal" argument:
From a formal point of view, it is clear that one could not equate radiative momentum content with Newtonian momentum. Newtonian momentum is Mv, clearly a vector, while the momentum attributed to radiation is E/c, a scalar, since E is a scalar and c is a universal constant of nature.
He is arguing that momentum carried by sunlight somehow has become a scalar. This is complete garbage. Momentum is a vector quantity, period. While it is true that the magnitude of the momentum vector is proportional to the scalar energy it is not equal to a scalar.
If you (wrongly) grant him that momentum is not a vector then sure a sail won't work, what direction would it go in?
This guy is a crackpot.
Because they used RedHat 9 for the test machine's OS.
But why didn't they use XP on the x86 machine. Because then the./'ers would complain that the OS choice biased the benchmark.
But why didn't they run VS under Wine on Linux....
this is getting tiring.
I think the opposite is true. By announcing the 3GHz chips will be available in 12 mos. Jobs is effectively saying its safe to buy now; you can be King of the Hill for a year.
You have to watch out for that pesky reality distortion field of Jobs.
Re:See outside the bubble?
on
Mastering Light
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Woah there nellie. Your talking about shifting electromagnetic radiation up to energies where its wavelength is of the order of the Planck length (10^-35 meters, where the EM and gravitational fields might be unified). Puhleez. No way with this technology which is basically made of stuff whose characteristic distances if of order 10^-10 m.
Don't get me wrong this stuff is really nifty but this is just way overselling it.
The reason Apple will make an x86 configuration is simple. It will save Jobs the embarassment of having to stand up at every MacWorld and show the Mac vs. Wintel benchmark comparisons..." and if you squint just right at the bars for the Photoshop Lorentzian Blur you can see the 1.63 GHz G4 just blows away the Intel 9GHz machine".
Apple hasn't done it until now not because they fear clones. Their lawyers can shut down x86 cloners just as fast as PPC cloners. Rather, until OS X, Apple had no means of migrating to the x86.
The only scenario I can see against this eventuality is if the successors to the 970 just mop the floor with the x86's progeny. I'm not holding my breath. As long as Apple can't measure up in the MHz war they are hamstrung. The mass market just can't see past clockrate.
Slashdot Mirror
Killed by a TLA.
I'm sure XP works fine on the Duo...if you don't want the Vista eye candy just stick with XP.
What is the treatment for tritium ingestion
Drink lots of beer. No...really it is. (or at least was once upon a time)
How about Marathon from Bungie in 1994. Sure it was on a Mac but it was 3D.
I recently did a head-to-head comparison of a 15" 1.25GHz AL Powerbook against a 2.6 (2.8?) GHz P4 HP notebook running WinXP. The "test" was a clean rebuild of our modularized ant-driven Java project. This includes generating ten or so Apache Axis based web services, generating lots of java constants files from xml, and compiling and merging the outputs. The code generation an general ant manipulation takes about half the wall-clock time. I consisder this to be a fairly typical real-world example of commercial java development.
The result:
the Powerbook was three times faster than the P4 notebook.
I suspect the PowerBook's faster speed is due less to the CPU than to the I/O subsystems and disk. In our build neither type of CPU sits there pegged at 100%. The P4 did seem to be riding closer to 100% though. It also spent the entire time blowing hot air like a hair dryer. The PowerBook fan very rarely comes on. Overall the PowerBook has been a great development platform for Java. I run eclipse 3M6 on it and while its not as snappy UI-wise as I'd like, once it gets "warmed-up" visiting all the eclipse perspectives and views its not bad at all. Clearly caching is important for eclipse performance. This brings me to the final point which is that on either machine if you want to use a Java based IDE you will need 1Gb RAM minimum. The IDE's are just pigs for memory. One warning, while running eclipse 2.1 on Windows I ran into nasty eclipse-crashing problems with running out of windows resource handles which I was never able to get around. (The eclipse developers couldn't reproduce this so YMMV.) The PowerBook hasn't had any such problems.
Was it playing a song? The memory usage goes up when playing.
Check out the Process Viewer when its running.
iTunes
Minimized, not playing: 6MB
Visible, playing: 12MB
WinAmp: 2/14MB
MUSICMATCH 7.5: 2/18.5
Seems like iTunes is doing pretty well in this department.
I had the same exerience with Win2k. However, I was able to reboot to the last known good configuration. I was then able to run iTunes fine though it complained about not being able to access its CD/DVD drivers. I haven't tried ripping or burning a CD. I assume that won't work. I'm fairly confident that it arises from a conflict with my Adaptec DirectCD driver (that thing even kills itself if you log in using Remote Desktop).
Lets skip down to the "formal" argument: From a formal point of view, it is clear that one could not equate radiative momentum content with Newtonian momentum. Newtonian momentum is Mv, clearly a vector, while the momentum attributed to radiation is E/c, a scalar, since E is a scalar and c is a universal constant of nature. He is arguing that momentum carried by sunlight somehow has become a scalar. This is complete garbage. Momentum is a vector quantity, period. While it is true that the magnitude of the momentum vector is proportional to the scalar energy it is not equal to a scalar. If you (wrongly) grant him that momentum is not a vector then sure a sail won't work, what direction would it go in? This guy is a crackpot.
Because they used RedHat 9 for the test machine's OS. But why didn't they use XP on the x86 machine. Because then the ./'ers would complain that the OS choice biased the benchmark.
But why didn't they run VS under Wine on Linux....
this is getting tiring.
I think the opposite is true. By announcing the 3GHz chips will be available in 12 mos. Jobs is effectively saying its safe to buy now; you can be King of the Hill for a year. You have to watch out for that pesky reality distortion field of Jobs.
Woah there nellie. Your talking about shifting electromagnetic radiation up to energies where its wavelength is of the order of the Planck length (10^-35 meters, where the EM and gravitational fields might be unified). Puhleez. No way with this technology which is basically made of stuff whose characteristic distances if of order 10^-10 m. Don't get me wrong this stuff is really nifty but this is just way overselling it.
The reason Apple will make an x86 configuration is simple. It will save Jobs the embarassment of having to stand up at every MacWorld and show the Mac vs. Wintel benchmark comparisons..." and if you squint just right at the bars for the Photoshop Lorentzian Blur you can see the 1.63 GHz G4 just blows away the Intel 9GHz machine". Apple hasn't done it until now not because they fear clones. Their lawyers can shut down x86 cloners just as fast as PPC cloners. Rather, until OS X, Apple had no means of migrating to the x86. The only scenario I can see against this eventuality is if the successors to the 970 just mop the floor with the x86's progeny. I'm not holding my breath. As long as Apple can't measure up in the MHz war they are hamstrung. The mass market just can't see past clockrate.