AidenShaw said:The problem would be that there would be no applications available. It's hard to market an operating system if there's nothing that runs on it.
That's entirely the point of .NET - they didn't copy Java for nothing ...
AidenShaw said:The problem would be that there would be no applications available. It's hard to market an operating system if there's nothing that runs on it.
X-Baz said:That's entirely the point of .NET - they didn't copy Java for nothing ...
.NET is really neat that way; It has really 3 ways to run: native compile, a really nice JIT compiled (default), and an 'interpreted' mode.AidenShaw said:Have I been wrong in believing that .NET was high-performance native compiled code, and not pig-slow bloated interpreted byte-code?
it's a bit of both - it is an implementation detail as to how it is run - interpreted, JIT-compiled or compile on install.AidenShaw said:Have I been wrong in believing that .NET was high-performance native compiled code, and not pig-slow bloated interpreted byte-code?
Thank you IBM for stepping up to the plate.Macrumors said:The fact that Apple had considered using the Intel processors for their PowerMac line was previously revealed in another internal IBM publication.
jouster said:Ahh..because LotD has been such a roaring success?
AidenShaw said:...
You can't find many of the important commercial apps running on PPC Linux, however.
1macker1 said:I don't think Intel is really bothered by this, it's just IBM. I think they are more concerned with AMD.
Catfish_Man said:IBM is a heck of a lot bigger threat than AMD is. AMD has one fab and two high performance chip architectures. I have no idea how many of each IBM has, but I can think of three high end chip architectures off the top of my head: POWER4, POWER5, and 970 (750GX doesn't really count as high performance at this point). AMD is doing pretty well right now (beating or matching both Intel and IBM), but they're still a lot smaller than IBM, as well as having a less advanced manufacturing process.
AidenShaw said:Have I been wrong in believing that .NET was high-performance native compiled code, and not pig-slow bloated interpreted byte-code?
---------------------PlaceofDis said:i just wonder where/how IBM is going to expand next? they are an interesting company but i have never really kept tabs on them too much, i wonder if they are going to try to go head to head with intel?
spinko said:If LotD means "Linux on the Desktop" then I would say yes, very much so. It has most all of the same type of office programs that the vast majority of corporate staff or people in education and other sectors would use. Plus it is supported by a very large, dedicated base, is mostly hardware independant and quite cheap to acquire. (I don't know about the running costs). The only reason I'm not using Linux (as a backup) is because Macromedia and Adobe havn't ported their apps. Not that I dislike MacOSX![]()
3Dfx_man said:---------------------
Havent you guys around here heard about the promising "Cell" processor
which will be out in 2005 ? Is being developed by IBM, Sony & Toshiba !!!
Will be in Playstation 3, and coming computers. 1 Teraflop ANYONE ???
IBM is now looking for someone to develop an OS for the coming systems.
I beginning to love Apple and am going to purchase a Mac G5 somtime.
But news as the "Cell" processor being out in 2005 leaves me a little
annoyed.. since well.. not all is bout processing power but i really need
it since im drooling complex 3D scenes in 3D applications such as Cinema 4D.
![]()
Dont Hurt Me said:...G5 we still compare 2 of those vs 1 of the otherside and the otherside can still match those 2 G5s in most aspects and even beat them in others...
... seen any G5 is the fastest PC commercials lately?...
And now we only have to wait till someone comes in and says: But Apple crippled the PC's scores, to make them look bad and the G5 look good.Snowy_River said:Gee, if you look at the comparisons on this Apple page, it certainly seems that they are comparing singles to singles and duals to duals, such as
![]()
Or
![]()
As a matter of fact, yes. I saw one about a week and a half ago.
...Go troll somewhere else...
iggyb said:I was watching some IBM commercial the other night, and they were talking about their Blade Servers running Intel Xeon processors. This made me wonder, why aren't they offering servers with their own processors? Does it have to do with the software involved?