Category: Mac OS X
Link: Apple Mac OS X on x86: a first test
Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
twoodcc said:i don't image that will be up for long
iGary said:ZDNET isn't stupid.
At the worse, Apple sues them and they get a ton of publicity for it.
You cant buy this kind of publicity Who needs advertising when journos just want to "unlawfully" grab your stuff and test it and then post in on the web so that everyone can read about it and talk about it in discussion forums ShockingiGary said:ZDNET isn't stupid.
At the worse, Apple sues them and they get a ton of publicity for it.
Apparently they are ...iGary said:ZDNET isn't stupid.
At the worst, Apple sues them and they get a ton of publicity for it.
Abstract said:All these early reviews are pointless in the real world until we get some real retail laptops and desktops (and real tests......iTunes encoding? ) to test them on.
OS startup time:
23.5s (XP)
20.5s (OS X)
Abstract said:All these early reviews are pointless in the real world until we get some real retail laptops and desktops (and real tests......iTunes encoding? ) to test them on.
i read it as it takes a PC that long to boot OS XAtHomeBoy_2000 said:SINCE WHEN!? Every PC I have EVER starte up takes at least 2 minutes and then once you see the actual desktop, it takes another minute before you can actuallt begin to start an Application. My iMac G5 goes from pressing the power button to first App in under 50 seconds!
That would be fine if it were iTunes compiled for x86. But it wasn't. So it says it took 3x longer for OSX than XP to encode using iTunes, and that "may be" due to Rosetta emulation.freiheit said:Agreed; any review of any pre-release product is pointless in the real world. But what's wrong with using iTunes encoding as a benchmark? Lots of people do it.