[syadasti]

I'm not sure who stole what from who, and I don't really care. I do know that MS seems to follow Apple/Mac inovative ideas.

Lets run down the history of various innovative technologies...

GUI - Xerox's idea, not Apple's
64-bit PCs - Alpha PC was first in 1992, not Apple ten years later
DAP - MPMan was first in 1997, not Apple in late 2001
HDD DAP - Remote Solutions was first in late 1999, not Apple in late 2001
Mini HDD DAPs - Creative, iRiver, Rio all had products on the market at least 6 months before the iPod Mini was announced
Cellphones with MP3 Players - been out for a few years, not an Apple first either

Apple steals ideas just like any other company only their marketing is more convincing...

 

[Barbaton]

Lets run down the history of various innovative technologies...

GUI - Xerox's idea, not Apple's
64-bit PCs - Alpha PC was first in 1992, not Apple ten years later
DAP - MPMan was first in 1997, not Apple in late 2001
HDD DAP - Remote Solutions was first in late 1999, not Apple in late 2001
Mini HDD DAPs - Creative, iRiver, Rio all had products on the market at least 6 months before the iPod Mini was announced
Cellphones with MP3 Players - been out for a few years, not an Apple first either

Apple steals ideas just like any other company only their marketing is more convincing...

oh god. more.

and drowing in an avalanche of TLAs.

what is DAP, anyway?

 

[Ridemonkey]

I don't think anyone is claiming that Apple did those things first...they just do them better. That in itself is innovation.

 

[BUCKET]

This looks encouraging...

Checkout the bluescreen of death to the right of the Vista sign.

 

[syadasti]

what is DAP, anyway?

Digital Audio Player (DAP)

The reality is that Apple's products are not their innovations, just improved knock-offs of existing technologies. MS products on the otherhand are usually crappy knock-offs of existing technologies.

 

[SkaredShtles]

I don't think anyone is claiming that Apple did those things first...they just do them better. That in itself is innovation.

No - they don't *do* them better, they *market* them better. I mean, every Metrosexual in the country has an iPod now.

 

[Barbaton]

Digital Audio Player (DAP)

The reality is that Apple's products are not their innovations, just improved knock-offs of existing technologies. MS products on the otherhand are usually crappy knock-offs of existing technologies.

aah, i thought as much, or else Digital Apple Penis.

*(barbaton confesses that his mac just crashed after being on for 6 months and he had to wait a few seconds for it to sort itself out and restart)*

 

[syadasti]

The Apple Product Cycle

Some humor for you...

 

[SkaredShtles]

The Apple Product Cycle

Some humor for you...

Seems pretty accurate to me............

 

[Ciaran]

No - they don't *do* them better, they *market* them better. I mean, every Metrosexual in the country has an iPod now.

And every ipod owner is a metrosexual.

 

[syadasti]

I don't think anyone is claiming that Apple did those things first...they just do them better. That in itself is innovation.

Apple claimed to have the first 64-bit PC which was invalidated by the BBB and several other trade assocations...

Also Apple and the press have claimed some DAPs are iPod knock-offs when you can't be a knock-off of a product which is already a knock-off itself...

 

[SkaredShtles]

And every ipod owner is a metrosexual.

They are?!?

 

[Barbaton]

Apple claimed to have the first 64-bit PC which was invalidated by the BBB and several other trade assocations...

We get really uncomfortable looks from our apple reps when we ask them how they plan to deal with the fact that the Intel 64bit roadmap is fairly pathetic after they made such a hooey about the G5, and the Intel chips they're shipping with the devel systems are 32bit only.

 

[syadasti]

We get really uncomfortable looks from our apple reps when we ask them how they plan to deal with the fact that the Intel 64bit roadmap is fairly pathetic after they made such a hooey about the G5, and the Intel chips they're shipping with the devel systems are 32bit only.

Well they are Apple Reps - that explains it.

Its easy to see if you look at Intel's Roadmap. Apple is doing the low-end system first which will have a Pentium M derivative which will eventually include 64-bit in the form of Conroe which is when (Fall of 2006) we'll see the 64-bit Intel Macs...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conroe

 

[Barbaton]

Well they are Apple Reps - that explains it.

Its easy to see if you look at Intel's Roadmap. Apple is doing the low-end system first which will have a Pentium M derivative which will eventually include 64-bit in the form of Conroe which is when (Fall of 2006) we'll see the 64-bit Intel Macs...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conroe

<geekout>

assuming they'll eventually use chips with em64t, you're right. unfortunately, people aren't very happy with the 64bit extensions intel tacked onto the instruction set to compete with opteron. i'm not sure that doubling the cache like intel did will be enough. at the very least, i'd expect apple to design their own FSB around the chips, rather than the poor intel design of having all their cores share the same really slow bus to memory.

we'd much rather see apple use an AMD native 64bit chip with an onboard memory controller like opteron than an em64t chip. this would allow an x86 architecture that's pretty close to the power architecture they currently use.

</geekout>

oh, and I guess I should add that I build HPC systems for a living, so our requirements are special and it's not a "space" that apple really plays in, though they want to. for consumer machines, who cares what they use as long as it's shiny.

 

[Ridemonkey]

No - they don't *do* them better, they *market* them better. I mean, every Metrosexual in the country has an iPod now.

I've had both, and I choose Mac...that's not marketing, that's being educated and picking the superior product.

 

[syadasti]

One of the Dell boys from Austin already posted about that. Most tests I've seen show the Operton duals much better for servers but Dual Intel platform better at workstation centric tasks. Consider Apple sells up to prosumer level workstations, it makes sense to go for the Intel platform, especially considering they've already got the OS pretty far a long on Intel and Intel offers a complete well rounded P8 CPU line-up they can use in consumer PCs, laptops, workstations, and low to mid-end servers.

Actually, AMD64 has better processor-memory throughput but EM64T has better drive I/O and network I/O throughput.

Basically if your task is very processor or memory intensive (i.e. HPCC, technical, floating point, compute intensive, etc.) then AMD will give you better performance, but in the vast majority of what servers are running (i.e. file/print sharing, email/messaging, virutalization, database, SAN compute node, ERP/CRM, etc.) you'll see better performance on EM64T because of the better I/O to disk.

If you look at the processor utilization for the majority of the servers out there, you'll see that they are running between 15-30% utilization - you'd be insane for running beyond 50% because of the potential from crashing from spikes. I/O utilization, on the other hand, is typically up above 50%, sometimes topping out on some systems. When processors peg the needle, the system crashes, when I/O tops out the applications continue to run. Administrators need more I/O bandwidth in most cases.

Processor analogies are all about being able to say you can go from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds instead of 6 seconds when the reality is that it's rush hour on I-35 most of the day.

The vast majority of the CIOs and IT directors that I talk to are more concerned about virtualization (using something like VMware to consolidate multiple servers and gain better efficiency on the processing power that they have) then buying faster clock speeds. The mix for processor bin speeds skews to the low end with only a small portion choosing the highest bin speeds (because they look more for price/performance than raw performance.) If customers wanted higher performing processors, 80% of the time they could get them by just stepping up to the higher bins.

Not to geek out on this, but from a server perspective, it's far more likely that 4Gb fibre channel, PCI Express and 10Gb Ethernet will have a much more pronounced impact on the performance of networked applications than faster processors. Unless you are in an HPCC, then all bets are off and you're having a discussion about maximizing performance. But you can count the number of HPCCs pretty easily. Outside of commercial CGI rendering, oil exploration, pharmaceuticals, education and some governement applications, you don't come across them that often.

 

[syadasti]

I've had both, and I choose Mac...that's not marketing, that's being educated and picking the superior product.

Considering the PowerPC platform costs more and its slower, its not superior. Until OSX Apple did not have a modern OS - OSX is good, but prior was crap.

It will be an attractive platform once it has the cheaper and faster Intel hardware and you can multiboot to whatever OS and application you need all on the same machine.

 

[binary visions]

I've had both, and I choose Mac...that's not marketing, that's being educated and picking the superior product.

Oh, please. If you choose Mac, that's fine, but it's not a superior product. It's different, it's got some pluses, some minuses, and if the pluses outweigh the downsides for you, great, that's the best choice. There are plenty of people for whom the Mac is simply not the better choice.

sydasti is just as bad with this except on the PC side.

The upsides and downsides can be argued about all day, but anyone who thinks one or the other is completely and utterly superior is badly deluded.

 

[syadasti]

sydasti is just as bad with this except on the PC side.

The upsides and downsides can be argued about all day, but anyone who thinks one or the other is completely and utterly superior is badly deluded.

No a full battery of various benchmarks and the CEO of Apple cannot be refuted, the Intel hardware was and is better...

Steve Jobs has officially said the PowerPC platform is inferior for their future product plans...

Apple Throws the Switch

G5 crap for notebooks:

As for why Apple was making the shift, Jobs pointed both to past problems and to the PowerPC road map, which he said won't deliver enough performance at the low-power usages needed for powerful notebooks.

PowerPC doesn't have the performance power that Intel offers:

Two years ago at the same conference, Jobs introduced the first G5-based Power Macs and promised developers that the company would have a 3GHz PowerMac within 12 months. The company still doesn't have a machine that fast. "We haven't been able to deliver," he said. Nor has Apple been able to introduce a G5-based laptop--something Jobs said "I think a lot of you would like."

Things weren't looking better in the coming months, Jobs said, saying that IBM's PowerPC road map would only deliver about a fifth the performace per watt as a comparable Intel chip.

Jobs officially made it clear Intel IS BETTER. Macs and PCs use mostly the same components these days (minus the CPU and a few minor components) only they usually come out first on the PC - first with faster memory standards, first with next generation interfaces - serial ATA, PCI Express (and dual video card rendering), faster wireless standards, high definition audio (intel includes support in their chipsets - no PCI cards required), first with new video/soundcards.

 

[binary visions]

Thanks, as someone who has been in the PC industry for years, I sure didn't know that Mac switched over to Intel hardware

You seem to be totally blind to the fact that numerics aren't the only way to measure something. I know it's really appealing to boil things down to that which can be charted and measured, but that's not the way the real world works. In the real world, aesthetics, usability, and intangible qualities like "feel" all have a huge impact on the experience a user has with a product.

I like the vague statement you bolded, by the way, the "road map" and what it would deliver. For someone who loves his stats so much, you don't seem to care whether or not that "road map" is two or twenty years out, nor the fact that these so-called road maps are subject to enormous changes.

 

[syadasti]

I like the vague statement you bolded, by the way, the "road map" and what it would deliver. For someone who loves his stats so much, you don't seem to care whether or not that "road map" is two or twenty years out, nor the fact that these so-called road maps are subject to enormous changes.

I've already seen the various benchmarks through out the years. As for the current platform G5 - Athlon 64, Xeon, and Opteron systems all beat it in various benchmarks...

The roadmap is for a products that will coming out the first half of next year (32-bit) and second half (64-bit), not 2-20 years.

I bolded them cause they were straight from the horse's mouth - Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple...