Intel's Napa Platform with Yonah

[dernhelm]

Are you talking from a hardware perspective? Speed perspective? Price perspective or all of the above?

[snip]

So from the purely hardware standpoint I expect Apple to go nuclear on Dell butt.

Sure, so do I. But that won't be hard, since Dell hasn't produced anything but tinkertoys for the last few years. It's how they stack up against Toshiba, Sony, and their ilk that will matter.

I've still got my money on Apple.

 

[Peace]

Sure, so do I. But that won't be hard, since Dell hasn't produced anything but tinkertoys for the last few years. It's how they stack up against Toshiba, Sony, and their ilk that will matter.

I've still got my money on Apple.

As do I but one can't and shouldn't compare the low-end iBook to a top of the line Toshiba or Sony laptop.

 

[gnasher729]

Why would Adobe want to spend the extra money, time, and effort to make, test, and market an OS X native version when they can just tell users to use VPC, WINE, or dual boot into windows and run their software better?

Because if they don't, a significant amount of their potential customers will tell them "f*** you". Quark had that attitude, and where are they now?

So, if the "most pronounced case" with Norton is 20 msec, I'll stand by my claim that it's "virtually unnoticeable". (Human perception can't discern below about 30-40 msec - anything faster is perceptually instantaneous.)

Whenever I tell my source code editor to compare two folders, each containing a few thousand files, I have to turn virusscanning on, because it takes five minutes instead of five seconds.

 

[Randall]

Whenever I tell my source code editor to compare two folders, each containing a few thousand files, I have to turn virusscanning on, because it takes five minutes instead of five seconds.

You mean turn it off right?

 

[gnasher729]

Umm they aren't breaking any laws....so what they are doing isn't criminal. NDA's and EULA aren't law. You can bet that the MPAA and RIAA wish they were. Its amazing how some people miss that fact.

Copying software that you are not allowed to copy is illegal. Publishing trade secrets is illegal. There are no EULAs involved here. You are right when you say "NDAs are not law". The NDA only is there to keep something that Apple wants to be secret a secret, giving away secrets to developers without NDA would mean the cease to be trade secrets. However, since details of MacOS X for x86 _are_ trade secrets, a developer making them available to others is not only violating an NDA, but _also_ in breach of the law.

 

[minimax]

People please. I am so sick on GHz being compaired as an actual performance test. IT MEANS NOTHING. The bottom line is that the G4 rocked in it's hayday, but that was years ago. Now the G4 sucks a$$.

Although i admire your ability to substantiate your argument so eloquently you might want to reread backdrafts post. Perhaps you'll understand what he said about clock for clock performance on your second try.

 

[Randall]

Although i admire your ability to substantiate your argument so eloquently you might want to reread backdrafts post. Perhaps you'll understand what he said about clock for clock performance on your second try.

You amuse me.

Here is backdraft's quality post...

Pit an X86 with equivalent ghz against PPC and you'll see how the PPC is more efficient and outperforms X86.

Again, he is comparing apples to oranges, but at the same clock speed. Shear brillance.

 

[minimax]

You amuse me.

Here is backdraft's quality post...Again, he is comparing apples to oranges, but at the same clock speed. Shear brillance.

So, exactly... on which infallible basis did you come to your verdict I might ask that allows you to claim the G4 sucks a$$?

Yes, on FP it is weak, but on application's like Photoshop and other integer and vector intensive applications it holds up to the pentium m quite well and beats the G5 with a clear margin. And yes, it still is apples to oranges but we only know how OS X performs to Windows after the switch. So your claims are just as moot untill then.

 

[Randall]

So, exactly... on which infallible basis did you come to your verdict I might ask that allows you to claim the G4 sucks a$$?

Yes, on FP it is weak, but on application's like Photoshop and other integer and vector intensive applications it holds up to the pentium m quite well and beats the G5 with a clear margin. And yes, it still is apples to oranges but we only know how OS X performs to Windows after the switch. So your claims are just as moot untill then.

Alright fine we'll do that. The G4 sucks in three very specific ways: So Hard, So Bad and Wicked Bad.

 

[minimax]

Alright fine we'll do that. The G4 sucks in three very specific ways: So Hard, So Bad and Wicked Bad.

How old are you?

 

[Randall]

How old are you?

Heh. You don't remember that SNL skit a few years back? I guess if you didn't see it then all humor is lost... Anyway I would say it's the fact that the G4 has not seen a major update in years that makes it too much of a dinosaur to be in the Powerbook. Or maybe it is the fact that it's running a pathetic 167MHz FSB. No matter how you slice it, the G4 is not good enough anymore. Hence my comments about it sucking.

 

[minimax]

Heh. You don't remember that SNL skit a few years back? I guess if you didn't see it then all humor is lost... Anyway I would say it's the fact that the G4 has not seen a major update in years that makes it too much of a dinosaur to be in the Powerbook. Or maybe it is the fact that it's running a pathetic 167MHz FSB. No matter how you slice it, the G4 is not good enough anymore. Hence my comments about it sucking.

I didnt see that (not from the States).
Just because apple keeps calling it the G4 doesnt mean nothing happened to it during the years. In fact, the original G4 and the present G4+ are totally different processors just with the same apple sticker on it. And also the G4+ has seen several revisions, with the latest one doubling the L2 cache and improvements on the vector engines. The Athlon main architecture (up to the present ones) is older then the G4+ architecture for that matter so that's a rather weak basis to build your opinion on. You might want to read up on Ars.
Nevertheless, your continuous and somewhat childish smut talk on the G4 isnt only annoying, it's also insulting to people, including professionals, that have one and are quite happy with it. You are only a few days on this forum now, perhaps you should consider adjusting your tune a bit.

 

[Randall]

I didnt see that (not from the States).
Just because apple keeps calling it the G4 doesnt mean nothing happened to it during the years. In fact, the original G4 and the present G4+ or totally different processors just with the same name on it. And also the G4+ has seen several revisions, with the latest one doubling the L2 cache and improvements on the vector engines. The Athlon core is older for that matter then the PPC7450 core so that's a rather weak basis to build your opinion on. You might want to read up on Ars.
Nevertheless, your continuous and somewhat childish smut talk on the G4 isnt only annoying, it's also insulting to people, including professionals, that have one and are quite happy with it. You are only a few days on this forum now, perhaps you should consider adjusting your tune a bit.

You're right. I appoligize to all the G4 owners out there. I was unaware of the changes that went on behind the scenes for the G4, and it's evolution into the G4+. I still feel that it is at a distinct disadvantage compaired to some of the newer processors designed for the mobile platform, in particular the dual core Pentium M coming soon.

 

[The Red Wolf]

PowerBook G4 Bus

• Going from a 1.67GHz G4 on a 66MHz(?) bus, to a dual-core 1.8-2.1GHz Yonah on a 600MHz bus will ease a lot of Rosetta's lag.

It's 167MHz.

 

[tmornini]

Linus Torvals (sp?) had a great article about all the short comings of the Mach 3 microkernel and how Apple would have performance issues going into the future.

That article is *totally* misrepresenting what Linus said.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/04/06/macos_x_is_crap_torvalds/

He was discussing the Mach kernel, which OS X's kernel, darwin (xnu) is *derived* from.

Linus has never liked micro kernels, which Mach is. Darwin is NOT a micro kernel. Apple chose to create a hybrid, for the very reasons that Linux states.

Get the facts straight before making wild statements.

 

[aegisdesign]

Man that is such a generalization..

People will rarely see OSX and Windows on "the exact same hardware" making it very hard to compare and dangerously inaccurate.

It'll be close enough to do comparisons. Same CPU, same memory technology, same system chips, same GPU, same bus, same bus speeds.

Or do you think Apple is going to create a chipset to beat Intel's Napa platform chipset?

Really, from this point on it's all about exterior design and software as the difference between buying an Apple or someone else's computer. If MacOSX is slower than Windows on essentially the same hardware then Apple will have a lot of people asking why.

 

[backdraft]

Just for the hell of it...

P4 vs G5 Watts
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/22/ibm_claims_massive_power_cut/

Intel claims 30% speed increase moving from 65nm to 90nm
IBM, AMD claim 50% speed increase

http://www.eet.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=174901200

More watts:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2578&p=4


Maybe the fact that IBM is going Opensource with the PowerPC design had something to do with the switch I mean PPC outperforms, produces less heat, and uses less watts than X86. Open the architecture up and remove DRM, no Apple wouldn't want that. Opensource = NO DRM

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3571216
http://www.power.org

 

[aegisdesign]

Yah me because Apple has gone on record by saying they won't keep people from installing Windows on Macs.

They didn't say how easy it would be to get Windows running on it, only that they wouldn't stop people from trying.

And even if they get rid of the PC BIOS and implement their own version it will be a matter of weeks before someone figures out a way to boot windows from it if it doesn't just work right out of the box. The basics of what Open Firmware and the BIOS do are basically the same thing. Open Firmware just has a heck of a lot more bells and whistles to it.

I'd bet on Apple using Intel's EFI - http://www.intel.com/technology/efi/

Someone (ie. a hacker or Apple) would have to create a UNIX style bootloader which faked a BIOS implementation with all the needed old crufty PC INT 21's and crap like that or Microsoft would have to support EFI on IA32 just as they did on the Itanium.

Remember at the end of the day Apple gets their bread and butter from hardware sales. If someone wants to load Windows on it why do they care? They just sold a $2000 computer to someone who never had any intention of running OS X in the first place. Its still a sale with the money going into Apple coffers which goes towards making new OS's. I don't really see a problem here.

Because I'm sure they'd much rather sell them software and services than just the hardware. Once they've sold them the hardware, the profits are done. Selling them new versions of OSX, iLife, iWork, FCP, Aperture, Motion..... is profit that keeps on repeating.

 

[aegisdesign]

Yeah you're right, who needs top of the line ATi graphics cards for x86. Use of COTS video cards is a major perk with the move to intel.

You'll still need MacOSX drivers for them so essentially you're still stuck with whatever drivers Apple support in the OS, just as now.

 

[aegisdesign]

Everyone keeps bringing up the Intrepid2 controller. Again go to barefeats.com look at the benchmarks. (they have new PowerBook benchmarks from October.) There is virtually no difference. A memory controller update isn't going to make that big of a difference when you are hitting the CPU with, as the example you used, such things as iTunes encoding.

Where? I've looked on barefeats and there's no tests of the new powerbook other than preliminary thoughts.

 

[DeepIn2U]

Thank you 840Quadra your insight is always appreciated. Nevermind AidenShaw, man that guy doesnt make talking in the rumor/threads fun or easy anymore, sheesh - jk glad to be as informed as he helps all of us, keeps the trolls away.

Aiden I agree with you about MS Beta AntiVirus app its SWEET! (mind you its because of 3 acquisitions of other experienced company's though). I'm suprised that you use it and have forgotten the unseen danger in the windows world - and often hard to troubleshoot.

Scripts! Ever troubleshoot a users laptop and bang just after the bios screen BEFORE WinXP splash screen you get strange text - very minimal and nothing short of a reinstall/reimage resolves it?

Man I hate scripts in Windows world, the bad ones that is. Very few spyware, antivirus apps protect against this.

 

[AidenShaw]

thank you, I think?

Nevermind AidenShaw, man that guy doesnt make talking in the rumor/threads fun or easy anymore.

I hope that this is a back-handed compliment - that I make it harder for people to simply BS their way through a post!

Scripts! Ever troubleshoot a users laptop and bang just after the bios screen BEFORE WinXP splash screen you get strange text - very minimal and nothing short of a reinstall/reimage resolves it?

Man I hate scripts in Windows world, the bad ones that is. Very few spyware, antivirus apps protect against this.

Actually, I've never seen a problem like that.

There have been a number of stories recently about how the bad guys (note that the prime source of malware these days is organized criminal networks - not script kiddies) are feeling the pressure from OS improvements - and are going after holes in applications as an easier entry point.

It's nice that OSX helps keep viruses and spyware out - but if Safari and Firefox have holes that let the criminals mine your credit card info does it really matter?

Longhorn ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Vista will finally tighten Windows security model - that will make it harder to crack the OS, and increase the hazard of application vulnerabilities.

 

[otter-boy]

PS- Hypertransport == SSE2\SSE3 (Maybe not as fast but its in the ballpark.)

I'm not sure what you were going for with this one

Did you mean that Hypertransport != SSE2\SSE3?

From Wikipedia:

"HyperTransport (HT), formerly known as Lightning Data Transport (LDT), is a bidirectional serial/parallel high-bandwidth, low-latency computer bus."

and

"SSE (Streaming SIMD Extensions) is a SIMD (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) instruction set designed by Intel"

 

[shigzeo]

Didn't you two know that Japan's Earth Simulator had been the world's fastest supercomputer for so long until the end of last year?

And it is for a peaceful purpose.

And no, the Japanese goverment didn't need any freaking help from anybody to build it.

I am really dismayed and appalled by both of you

I've got to agree here. it seems nowhere does this rumour site show its head more than in some of the purely ignorant comments that come up. Further, the us of a has a government that has basically written the Japanese constitution, and if it did place an embargo to not deliver a g4 (which was never held back from Japan, if anything, there are more mac sites in Japanese of people complaining on their slow g4's) it would be severe insult to injury. It could just be the tough guy american 'english tutors' who put g4's in their sweaty little pockets to substitute for a lack of international graces.

 

[digitalbiker]

That article is *totally* misrepresenting what Linus said.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/04/06/macos_x_is_crap_torvalds/

He was discussing the Mach kernel, which OS X's kernel, darwin (xnu) is *derived* from.

Linus has never liked micro kernels, which Mach is. Darwin is NOT a micro kernel. Apple chose to create a hybrid, for the very reasons that Linux states.

Get the facts straight before making wild statements.

That is not the article I was referring to.

Yes, the register report did misrepresent Mr. Torvalds viewpoint on Darwin and the Mach 3 microkernel.

You and I will have to agree to disagree because Linus did not confine his comments to just the Mach 3.0 Microkernel. He specifically discussed the performance issue problems that Apple will have with Darwin and feels that the Mach 3.0 microkernel was a poor choice on which to base Darwin.

I made no "wild statements" and I do have the facts straight.