🚀 go-pugleaf

Dave Glue (daveacg@interlog.com) wrote:
: gato@freud.inst.com (gato) wrote:

: >workking in music, academia, and a few other fields dominated by right
: >brainers who seem to have trouble installing CD-ROMs and using a
: >command-line interface rather than a native GUI interface), and, when you
: >resort to running PC software in emultaion mode, MAYBE equal performance. 

: Jesus.  This above paragraph speaks for itself.

Yeah, that's why I wrote it.

: >
: >developer support.  Politics, not performance, determine the superiority
: >of a system, unfortunately:  what good is a PPC system if there are so few
: >apps for it?  

: There are "so few" apps for a PPC?  Have you checked out the size of
: the Power Macs native software base lately?  Hardly small- even games
: are flowing to it like water.

"Hardly small?"  Maybe by Apple standards.  (Which is not saying much.)

: I
: >Finally, the P6, whether or not the initial 133MHz version's stats impress
: >you, will be in an architecture designed around SMP.  Systems with as many
: >as four procs are expected. 

: Already available with the 604 actually.  Nothing new here.

Big deal, they cost you an arm and a leg too.  I'm talking personal 
computers, not servers or workstations.  Like I said, affordability is a 
big issue, and with marketing like Apple's (worst disaster I've seen 
since new Coke) the prices will probably stay way up there, if history's 
any reference.  By the way, I'm still curious why PPCs are so much 
cheaper to manufacture (with so few transistors) and yet such costly 
systems, even though their architecture is becoming evre more PC-like 
(Apple has announced a commitment tostop ignoring standards).  

: >that kind of power, if the fools at Microsoft had bothered to add
: >multithreading to the PEM.  

: "Fools"?  You want Windows 95 with SMP, get NT 3.6.  No point in
: providing SMP for a desktop OS like 95.

Windows NT is a power users environment.  Again, I am talking about
personal computers for home usage.  There IS a point in providing SMP for
a desktop OS, because the desktop, "family"systems will be SMP eventually,
and unlike PPC, wont be limited to power users. 

: >there, and that's just ihe 133MHz chip.  The 200MHz chips, of course, will
: >blow that out of the water. 

: And the 604 will stand still?

Yeah, as far as the market for PCs is concerned. IBM has screwed its
opportunity to provide these PPC systems the same way they screwed (are
screwing) OS/2.  The technology of PCs (more so than their OSes) spirals
upwards, and the price/performance war remains heavily in the PC's favor. 
Interseting time for Mac to drop its disdain for PC standards, eh?  The
Mac came through with a leap in processor performance, but the P6,
combined with the superior PC architecture, will eclipse these systems. 

Incidentally, if PCs with their 16 bit OSes and slower chips are 
dominating the PC market now, what will happen with Win95 and the P6?
No wonder Apple's scrambling so desperately for a market share.  As for 
the upcoming onslaughts by PC  companies, they may just be the nails in 
the coffin as far as the war for home computing is concerned.

: My oh my, what an ill-informed invidual.

No, I'm a "left brained PC user."  Is all this logic too much for you?