AidenShaw said:
2004/09/24 (update for EM64T) -
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Customer Preview Program Welcome! If you have a 64-bit ready PC, you now have the option to receive trial software for Windows XP Professional x64 Edition via CD or download.
In all fairness, Aidan, I'm willing to concede that Microsoft has hit the 64-bit marketing point first. However, this single link is the only one with any credibility as being even remotely a consumer release of the operating system. The others are all enterprise level software, and probably priced to match that expectation.
Windows on x64 is mostly a recompile of the true 64-bit source code that's been shipping for over 3 years, but Apple is starting from scratch.
Well, I certainly hope that their "true 64-bit source code that's been shipping for over 3 years" is better than their patchy, hole-ridden lack of security that they've been shipping since God only knows when. The fact that code is older doesn't really prove anything except its age, and it certainly doesn't attest to any kind of value. After all, Microsoft has been in the game about as long as Apple, and yet they've still clung to the same horrible security model the whole time, only just now getting to a point where they might even consider the possibility of altering it to escape the morass of viri, trojans, worms, exploits, and backdoors that they created for themselves.
Maxx Power said:
Yep. Apple is the dirty player here, its entirely their fault if they poured millions of marketing dollars into the "Velocity Engine" and the "G4" market names and then when motorolla has problems and it makes apple look bad, Steve just blames the producers.
Uh. Yeah.
It
is the producer's fault if they make promises they can't back up and Apple runs with them, telling the public what was given to them in trust. This happened numerous times with Motorola, who would tell Apple tht they were bringing out Part X for shipping, only to recant and leave them in the lurch. As Jobs said at the last WWDC, the same basic problem has now arisen with IBM, who promised more than they could achieve with the 970 chip and once more left Apple with egg on their faces.
Is some of the responsibility Apple's? Sure, but you can't tar them for it and leave the suppliers untouched.
I was moto, i'd be very pissed at apple for blaming progress problems on me when it was apple who hyped and over hyped the abilities of the G4, keep in mind the primary customer of the "G4" chip is Cisco and affiliates, who use it for strictly embedded applications where general purpose performance is not required.
I'd be willing to bet that the primary customer of P-rated chips for Motorola was Apple, and they'd have been losing money if they sold those parts underclocked to the embedded market. It's not as if dealing parts to Cupertino was exactly costing Motorola money, and you seem to have forgotten that Apple, IBM, and Motorola were
all a part of the original movement to push the PowerPC to begin with. Without IBM's patents, Apple's support, and Motorola's contributions, there would be a far smaller and more limited market for their processors. Oh, and you're short-sighted if you think networking is the big place for PowerPC. Do a search for specific G4 model numbers and you'll come across a ridiculous slew of defense contractors that use them.
We saw it again with the G5, or in my opinion, the more appriopriate name would the PPC970, apple hyped and over hyped again this on this processor, and when IBM, like the rest of the silicon businesses around, slips a step, Apple blatantly blames the problems on the producer. If you can't even produce chips yourself, or don't want to because you can't be man enough to take financial losses, stop blaming others.
They related what IBM told them. Do I need to repeat that again? Is it that hard to understand?
Apple did this with the CPU makers, they did it with the video chipset makers what with the fiasco of Jobs vs. ATI, and the 6800U not being delivered to apple on time. If i was any of these companies, and had some conscience (will never happen), i'd make sure I don't deliver products or make things for apple, anyone who stiffs their own suppliers, retailers, and users deserves a 3% market share.
Exactly how is Apple "stiffing" any of their vendors? If anything, they're the ones who don't support Apple, dragging their feet and handing over the least they can get away with. That goes double for ATI and nVidia, who are only just now starting to make a serious effort to push their higher end products on the mac, and who have never really tried to achieve any sort of retail presence in the market. Sure, we have a smaller marketshare, but the installed base isn't that bad and people tend to hold onto their macs. The upgrade market is probably at least as big as the OEM one, if not even larger, and it makes no sense not to be taking advantage of that with driver recompiles and flashed cards.
Of course, realizing that means giving Apple some credit, and we couldn't have that...
--
As a final note... Thank you, Furrybeagle. I might not agree with everything you said, but it's at least based on the world as it exists, with some basis in reality.
With regards to your PowerBook dilemma, I'll give the same advice I'd give anyone looking to buy a computer. Unless you have inside information regarding product releases, buy what you need now and use it. If something far better comes along soon, realize that it doesn't make your machine any slower, nor does it remove what you can do with your investment. It just means that the top-end has moved somewhat.
Do you get mad if a car manufacturer releases a new model? If not, then why worry if your computer is "outdated" by a future release?
