Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheBoy]

I feel that Apple have lost there one advantage they had by ditching the RISC processors....and graphics will suffer as a result (which was always a plus on them) coz a fair chunk of any graphics is processed on the core CPU.

I guess its because its easier and cheaper to produce software for non RISC devices.

Forgetting the complexities of NetBurst for a moment, Pentium Pro and later Intel x86/x64 chips have all been RISC with a CISC emulator built on side (a very simplistic view, but thats the ideal).  Not sure about Core range, but I'd guess similar as they are a development of the older PIII design.

[TheBoy]

Not everything Apple do is right, or even sensible....    

but they are the Mr Kipling of the Computer world....

making exceedingly good.......     cakes  

DRM + iTunes comes to mind.

But yes, I will admit. It's nice when a piece of hardware just 'works' out the box. The iPhone and iPod for example have the most responsive and smooth interfaces I've seen, as well as being gorgeous pieces of kit. If it wasn't for iTunes, I'd own one!

....and the fact that the bluetooth is crap, its not 3G, the battery life aint great and the camera is on a par with that used by fisher price in thier 'my first' range.

Plus Wimax is now loosing out on the mobile broadband front....which is no great surprise

Its a great interface but, a bloody rubbish comms device!

iPhone is just and iPod with an occasional use phone, opposite to Nokia N series for example, which are phones with occasional use music players.

[supermop]

I'll just limp home with my X2 6400 that I bought at the height of AMD's market reign (i.e. 2 weeks before Intel released the Core2 architecture.... self-abusers).

To be honest, I'm slowly coming around to Vista - I knew I would eventually. I just wish MS would take a bit more time to polish things off before releasing stuff with so many obvious problems. I'm also aware of the restrictions in place on XP with all the new CPU architecture out there, but I need an OS thats guaranteed to work, and XP fits the bill perfectly.

It might be time to switch soon anyway for me, since DX10 games are starting to come out by the lorry load!

[TheBoy]

I'll just limp home with my X2 6400 that I bought at the height of AMD's market reign (i.e. 2 weeks before Intel released the Core2 architecture.... self-abusers).

To be honest, I'm slowly coming around to Vista - I knew I would eventually. I just wish MS would take a bit more time to polish things off before releasing stuff with so many obvious problems. I'm also aware of the restrictions in place on XP with all the new CPU architecture out there, but I need an OS thats guaranteed to work, and XP fits the bill perfectly.

It might be time to switch soon anyway for me, since DX10 games are starting to come out by the lorry load!

AMD were always good at integer benchmarks, and older games, due to excellent integer horsepower.

Real world, Athlons seemed slower than P4, due to poor clock rate (the numbering std was comparing integer performance). Athlon64 didn't offer anything at the time. Even now, XP64 is a bitch.

Vista is pretty solid - I haven't had (non driver) crashes since pre betas.  Its not as mature as XP, and developers are only now truely getting to grips with it.

Yes, its hardware requirements are higher, but its 6yrs newer!

For a laugh, a few months ago, I installed Win3 on a vm on the OOF server - from point of DOS starting to load, and Program Manager ready was less than 3s - not that I condone running such old shite

[supermop]

lol 3 seconds  

Never thought of trying that tbh. When I got Virtual PC I wanted to try Win 95 and 98 on it but realised I threw my disks away hehe.

[TheBoy]

lol 3 seconds  

Never thought of trying that tbh. When I got Virtual PC I wanted to try Win 95 and 98 on it but realised I threw my disks away hehe.

I'm a VMware man myself, seems more robust, and wider support for different OSes.  Plus we use ESX or whatever its called this week fairly extensively at work for Windows and Linux hosts, so am 'comfortable' with it.  OOF runs via VMWare, and thats very stable (except that annoying bug where VMWare won't pass traffic over its 'virtual hub' after the Windows host reboots...

[supermop]

MS took Virtual PC under their wing about 4 or 5 years ago. The only reason I got it over VMWare was because it's free! I havent really used VMWare at all.

We use it at work too, but only cos our infrastructure manager is a tight arse.