You can bet that x86 Macs are not going to worry about supporting legacy Bios Junk that is in a PC for starters, so windows probably won't install out of the box. Hackers might get it it to work, but that is not quite the same thing.
But if it is fairly easy to support my windows legacy apps at full speed, I might get one too.
There are lots of possible outcomes here assuming Apple has PPC rights, this could be just as boring as getting a new supplier.
But there is a strong strategic case for Apple making huge market share gain here and not giving up on proprietary HW.
This is what I would do.
Get Intel agreement to build new x86 CPU with a few trivial Apple only extensions, and an agreement to only sell CPU's with this extensions to Apple. So Apple can now keep its HW monopoly. Still not too exciting.
Well pretty much any CPU going forward is going to be multicore and Intels Vanderpool tech will be ready.
So now you have the ability to run OSX and Windows simultaneously at full speed!
This is the real ultimate switcher box. I can switch and keep my legacy windows apps going. And this won't be some bad software emulation, all native windows and OSX x86 run natively at full speed.
If this is not what they are doing this is what they should be doing. It would cost no more than other multicore boxes but be the only game in town capable of running OSX and Windows.
"Hell, might Intel even be getting into the PPC biz? Stranger things have happened."
I thought something along this line as well. Why they announce a deal with Intel unless Intel were building something for them. If they were going x86 it would make more sense to be open to both AMD and Intel, not to mention that AMD actually has the better chips right now.
Though Apple doesn't build chips, I thought they had rights to the PPC architecture as well, being one of the original PPC alliance.
The installer could also be better. You need to do a deinstall of older version (which is not that automated) and then install newer version.
Some interactions which may not be entirely the fault of flashblock cause certain pages to crash the browser (doesn't happen without it installed). Techreport does this on a regular basis but not all the time, probably dependant on the rotation of their adverts.
All in all my favorite plugin, but it is rough around the edges.
Ok a Motor with a better power to weight ratio is dandy and all, but the real problem is powering the motors. Battery tech has always been the limiting factor.
Power to weight may not be the most important factor either in motor development. Electric Motor weight is not really that much of an issue. Dwarfed by the weight of the batteries.
How about efficiency numbers. Permanent magnet motors seem like the get half the repulsive force for free. Do away with the magnets and dont you have to use your current to provide both the force on the rotating and stationary elements?
I post a direct quote from the man himself, who describes himself as a agnostic, believing only in what there is evidence for. You say this is out of context.
Then you post a quote and links to creatists trying to paint "Scientism" as a religion presumable then they can get rid of that pesky science thing that is taught in school if it is really religion.
From your link: "Why is it then that so many public schools in our country manage to get away with teaching the religions of Scientism and Secular Humanism even in the face of widespread efforts to erect a "wall of separation" between church and state? Where is the indignation and litigation of the American Civil Liberties Union who seem to fancy themselves as the "watch dog" against the inroads of religion in our public schools? Has the ACLU decided that there are acceptable and unacceptable religions for our public schools?"
I have read Contact, Pale Blue Dot, and Demon Haunted World. Read numerous interviews, interviews with his wife. In every word and deed Carl was completely non religious. He was following the evidence. Opening our minds while simultaneously grounding us in reality.
"Carl Sagan, a brilliant astronomer, was also a devoutly religious person."
Are you nuts? Or just like making stuff up? Devoutly religious?? It is extremely clear that he was a non theist.
"In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: "My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it," he said. "An agnostic is somebody who doesn't believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I'm agnostic.""
I use win2k right now and it does eveything I need, even if it does go a bit nuts (My system hive recently grew too big to load which caused many headaches). Overall Debian sounds very good and If I get serious I may head that way.
I really want to get away from MS. I never like supporting monopolies.
"You have not made the case that multiple distributions of Linux is a problem that impedes its adoption."
I am sure fragmentation it is a bonus for experienced Linux users. But it is a source of confusion for anyone less steeped in the culutre. Confusion and uncertainty will impede adoption.
If I go to Opera.com to see what Distros they support. They list 16 Distros that they support for downloads of Opera. Now do I have to go everywhere I want software and see which distros they support?
I may have misconceptions, but they are a misconceptions that will only be greater with folk considering their first distro. Is there actually nothing to consider about Gnome/KDE installation? Or will I find that if I go with a predominately Gnome Distro, I will have to jump through hoops to run KDE programs? Will it slow the system to support both?
Having dozens of distros with alternate Packaging (RPM/Debian) systems, incompatible binaries etc. Means I have to learn about whats in the distro, find out which way I think is the best for me and what seems best supported... etc..
I just want to be able to play my audio/Video and DVDs out my SPDIF into my DD/DTS reciever. Last time when I tried redhat on my Nforce board I couldn't get sound working at all (4? years ago). A computer without sound is pointless to me, so I quickly deleted Linux after about a week of searching the net reading howtos etc...
"Like suggesting that multiple publishers keeps people from learning to read?"
Books don't require special software to read, at least not yet. It is more like deciding to release a new format of DVD disk for home movies to challenge the incumbent format, then fragmenting it into 10 different formats.
I would hardly call myself a complete newbie, I work with Unix everyday (for the last 10 years) and I have installed 2 different distros so far (Slackware and Redhat).
Yet I consider it will be a lot of research before I decide what Distro to try and which side of the Holy war (KDE vs Gnome) I will come down on. I can only see this as much more off-putting to Newbies.
I keep hoping Apple comes out with a machine I really want or jumps to x86 to give me my Unix fix, because this fragmentation is quite tiresome.
These days my head spins at the number of distros. Some may look at this as a good thing, but I am sure this keeps newbies away. There is something to be said for having fewer distros than having more.
I have twice installed Linux, first time was Slackware I DL'd to floppies and brought home to install on my then state of the art 486.
Later I tried Redhat on my Nforce based PC, but I could never get sound working so I eventually deleted it. My main use for my PC is a my media center.
Are all distros these days likely to work with my Nforce sound easily and is there some decent source of info on choosing a distro? Particularly I would like all my sound going out the SPDIF.
Any hints on the Major differences between the Distros?
If there are really negotiations, how could Apple make a transition to x86 and keep a lock (partial) on the HW side?
One way: They could bargain with Intel for a variant of x86 with small Apple specific extensions, nothing affecting normal operations of the CPU, just a couple of new Apple specific instructions and exclusive license for this CPU. Much like MMX, SSE, this is essentially backward compatible.
Now Apple builds OSX-86 and sells x86 Mac HW to run it, not only that but these machines can easily support your old MS windows stuff in a dual boot and take advantage of economies of Scale of PC HW to compete on price.
The box would be the only machine capable of running both native OSX-86 and native Windows. It would be highly desirable, possible the ultimate switcher machine. I would buy one in a hearbeat.
A nice thought, but in reality this is probably just a rumour float to get better pricing out of IBM.
"Would that be mainly because you don't want to compete with them?"
hahahaha! Hell no. I give advice generally only to a small insignificant fraction of the population and it is to help them. I have no effect on the masses who would "compete" with me.
I gave more detailed advice below in another reply, where I said don't do this unless you have stellar talent, such that you can work for a google.
Working as a corporate Software Cog that has to spend an hour in meetings/documentation for each line of code written is something I would only wish on my worse enemy.
I would also advise, that even if you are still interested to major in another technical dicipline and only a minor Computer Science, you will end up with more opportunities. If you are good you can still get the pure Software jobs if that is what you want.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a critical difference.
You can bet that x86 Macs are not going to worry about supporting legacy Bios Junk that is in a PC for starters, so windows probably won't install out of the box. Hackers might get it it to work, but that is not quite the same thing.
But if it is fairly easy to support my windows legacy apps at full speed, I might get one too.
This was so fast I didn't even see it come down.
e ntdetails&id=323316
http://www.torrentspy.com/directory.asp?mode=torr
You would think they would be working on cutting inventories ahead of this announcement, but reports were of high inventories. Not good.
But perhaps longterm gain. Folks like myself who were not really thinking Mac, who think this makes the ideal switcher platform.
Apple has said they will only be allowing OSX x86 on Mac HW, but they won't stop windows from running.
Now if I can get Mac and Windows on the same box both running native Apps at full speed I am getting a Mac.
Yeah, this is the biggest computer story of the past 5 years. I had trouble with a lot of the mac sites as well.
I don't think it is running Mac legacy SW as most imply, it is convincing anyone to keep buying the dead PPC architecture. (Osborne effect)
I never owned a Mac but will seriously consider one if there is a way to run Windows PC Legacy SW at full speed or tri boot, windows/osx/Linux...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect
Who is going to buy a PPC Mac, if they announce a switch to x86? HW sales will plummet.
This is the biggest reason I think the rumors are false.
Unless they have x86 HW ready to go, they are toast.
If this is true how do they get peopel to keep buying PPC macs?
I mean if you know the future is x86, why would you get a PPC mac?
There are lots of possible outcomes here assuming Apple has PPC rights, this could be just as boring as getting a new supplier.
But there is a strong strategic case for Apple making huge market share gain here and not giving up on proprietary HW.
This is what I would do.
Get Intel agreement to build new x86 CPU with a few trivial Apple only extensions, and an agreement to only sell CPU's with this extensions to Apple. So Apple can now keep its HW monopoly. Still not too exciting.
Well pretty much any CPU going forward is going to be multicore and Intels Vanderpool tech will be ready.
So now you have the ability to run OSX and Windows simultaneously at full speed!
This is the real ultimate switcher box. I can switch and keep my legacy windows apps going. And this won't be some bad software emulation, all native windows and OSX x86 run natively at full speed.
If this is not what they are doing this is what they should be doing. It would cost no more than other multicore boxes but be the only game in town capable of running OSX and Windows.
I want one....
I agree this is the most likely course for this rumour, but then again, it may just be vapor.
By doing this Apple gets a dual supply chain, they will then get Intel and IBM competing for their PPC buisness.
"Hell, might Intel even be getting into the PPC biz? Stranger things have happened."
I thought something along this line as well. Why they announce a deal with Intel unless Intel were building something for them. If they were going x86 it would make more sense to be open to both AMD and Intel, not to mention that AMD actually has the better chips right now.
Though Apple doesn't build chips, I thought they had rights to the PPC architecture as well, being one of the original PPC alliance.
The installer could also be better. You need to do a deinstall of older version (which is not that automated) and then install newer version.
Some interactions which may not be entirely the fault of flashblock cause certain pages to crash the browser (doesn't happen without it installed). Techreport does this on a regular basis but not all the time, probably dependant on the rotation of their adverts.
All in all my favorite plugin, but it is rough around the edges.
I detest Flash. Why help build open flash?
Maybe time is better spent helping making flashblock better.
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/
Ok a Motor with a better power to weight ratio is dandy and all, but the real problem is powering the motors. Battery tech has always been the limiting factor.
Power to weight may not be the most important factor either in motor development. Electric Motor weight is not really that much of an issue. Dwarfed by the weight of the batteries.
How about efficiency numbers. Permanent magnet motors seem like the get half the repulsive force for free. Do away with the magnets and dont you have to use your current to provide both the force on the rotating and stationary elements?
I post a direct quote from the man himself, who describes himself as a agnostic, believing only in what there is evidence for. You say this is out of context.
Then you post a quote and links to creatists trying to paint "Scientism" as a religion presumable then they can get rid of that pesky science thing that is taught in school if it is really religion.
From your link:
"Why is it then that so many public schools in our country manage to get away with teaching the religions of Scientism and Secular Humanism even in the face of widespread efforts to erect a "wall of separation" between church and state? Where is the indignation and litigation of the American Civil Liberties Union who seem to fancy themselves as the "watch dog" against the inroads of religion in our public schools? Has the ACLU decided that there are acceptable and unacceptable religions for our public schools?"
I have read Contact, Pale Blue Dot, and Demon Haunted World. Read numerous interviews, interviews with his wife. In every word and deed Carl was completely non religious. He was following the evidence. Opening our minds while simultaneously grounding us in reality.
I will greatly miss his Candle in the Darkness...
This quote you have certainly didn't come from Sagan, he would never call Secular Humanism a religion.
Looks like you cut'n'pasted. Care to show the original link?
"Carl Sagan, a brilliant astronomer, was also a devoutly religious person."
Are you nuts? Or just like making stuff up? Devoutly religious?? It is extremely clear that he was a non theist.
"In a March 1996 profile by Jim Dawson in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sagan talked about his then-new book The Demon Haunted World and was asked about his personal spiritual views: "My view is that if there is no evidence for it, then forget about it," he said. "An agnostic is somebody who doesn't believe in something until there is evidence for it, so I'm agnostic.""
Doesn't it go against thier whole earth is the creation of god and christians are the chosen ones that god looks out for.
Throwing aliens into the picture throws more doubt into the picture.
Didn't they harass Galelio just for presenting evidence that Copernicus was correct, that the earth was not the center of the universe.
Downloading a Knoppix variant right now.
I use win2k right now and it does eveything I need, even if it does go a bit nuts (My system hive recently grew too big to load which caused many headaches). Overall Debian sounds very good and If I get serious I may head that way.
I really want to get away from MS. I never like supporting monopolies.
"You have not made the case that multiple distributions of Linux is a problem that impedes its adoption."
I am sure fragmentation it is a bonus for experienced Linux users. But it is a source of confusion for anyone less steeped in the culutre. Confusion and uncertainty will impede adoption.
If I go to Opera.com to see what Distros they support. They list 16 Distros that they support for downloads of Opera. Now do I have to go everywhere I want software and see which distros they support?
I may have misconceptions, but they are a misconceptions that will only be greater with folk considering their first distro. Is there actually nothing to consider about Gnome/KDE installation? Or will I find that if I go with a predominately Gnome Distro, I will have to jump through hoops to run KDE programs? Will it slow the system to support both?
Having dozens of distros with alternate Packaging (RPM/Debian) systems, incompatible binaries etc. Means I have to learn about whats in the distro, find out which way I think is the best for me and what seems best supported... etc..
I just want to be able to play my audio/Video and DVDs out my SPDIF into my DD/DTS reciever. Last time when I tried redhat on my Nforce board I couldn't get sound working at all (4? years ago). A computer without sound is pointless to me, so I quickly deleted Linux after about a week of searching the net reading howtos etc...
Thanks. I definitely like the idea of a lightweight window manger and since XFLD seems to be a live CD, I will probably give that a shot...
"Like suggesting that multiple publishers keeps people from learning to read?"
Books don't require special software to read, at least not yet. It is more like deciding to release a new format of DVD disk for home movies to challenge the incumbent format, then fragmenting it into 10 different formats.
I would hardly call myself a complete newbie, I work with Unix everyday (for the last 10 years) and I have installed 2 different distros so far (Slackware and Redhat).
Yet I consider it will be a lot of research before I decide what Distro to try and which side of the Holy war (KDE vs Gnome) I will come down on. I can only see this as much more off-putting to Newbies.
I keep hoping Apple comes out with a machine I really want or jumps to x86 to give me my Unix fix, because this fragmentation is quite tiresome.
Ummmm. I got rid of the 486 about 7 or 8 years ago... My current machine is an Nforce with Mobile Athlon running at 2GHz, ATI 9700 Pro.
These days my head spins at the number of distros. Some may look at this as a good thing, but I am sure this keeps newbies away. There is something to be said for having fewer distros than having more.
I have twice installed Linux, first time was Slackware I DL'd to floppies and brought home to install on my then state of the art 486.
Later I tried Redhat on my Nforce based PC, but I could never get sound working so I eventually deleted it. My main use for my PC is a my media center.
Are all distros these days likely to work with my Nforce sound easily and is there some decent source of info on choosing a distro? Particularly I would like all my sound going out the SPDIF.
Any hints on the Major differences between the Distros?
If there are really negotiations, how could Apple make a transition to x86 and keep a lock (partial) on the HW side?
One way: They could bargain with Intel for a variant of x86 with small Apple specific extensions, nothing affecting normal operations of the CPU, just a couple of new Apple specific instructions and exclusive license for this CPU. Much like MMX, SSE, this is essentially backward compatible.
Now Apple builds OSX-86 and sells x86 Mac HW to run it, not only that but these machines can easily support your old MS windows stuff in a dual boot and take advantage of economies of Scale of PC HW to compete on price.
The box would be the only machine capable of running both native OSX-86 and native Windows. It would be highly desirable, possible the ultimate switcher machine. I would buy one in a hearbeat.
A nice thought, but in reality this is probably just a rumour float to get better pricing out of IBM.
"Would that be mainly because you don't want to compete with them?"
hahahaha! Hell no. I give advice generally only to a small insignificant fraction of the population and it is to help them. I have no effect on the masses who would "compete" with me.
I gave more detailed advice below in another reply, where I said don't do this unless you have stellar talent, such that you can work for a google.
Working as a corporate Software Cog that has to spend an hour in meetings/documentation for each line of code written is something I would only wish on my worse enemy.
I would also advise, that even if you are still interested to major in another technical dicipline and only a minor Computer Science, you will end up with more opportunities. If you are good you can still get the pure Software jobs if that is what you want.