Linked by Universal Mind on Fri 6th Aug 2010 16:16 UTC
Apple The "Macs are too expensive" argument is one of the most tiresome and long-lived flamewars in internet history. Obviously, Apple makes a premium product and charges premium prices, and you can always find a computer from another vendor that seems to match or exceed specs that costs less. But if you look at Apple's Mac Pro line, and compare it not so much to other vendors, but to the past lineup of Mac Pros, you discover some very unpleasant truths that help explain why Apple is enjoying record earnings for their Mac line, but doing so to the detriment of some its most loyal and valuable customers.
Thread beginning with comment 435665
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Computing has changed
by TheGZeus on Fri 6th Aug 2010 19:36 UTC in reply to "Computing has changed"
TheGZeus
Member since:
2010-05-19

...nah.
Processors in 'workstations' et al are gaining cores, and are still gaining ghz vs the privious generations.

Graphics cards? Yeah, gpgpu has alot of buzz now, but without open SDKs and cross-graphics-card APIs (OpenCL support from anything is currently vaporware), developers will _not care_, unless they're already using CUDA, and I do mean already. Anyone who needs gpgpu _now-now-now_ already has a 'supercomputer' of some kind, and is tuning their oceanic/space/geologic simulation for better performance as I type.
No one will write anything that matters for one platform any more (anything using OpenCL basically has to use OSX, and anything that's OSX-exclusive is geared for... morons. (I'm not saying all OSX users are morons, but anyone writing code for that platform alone is writing stuff that can be found in cross-platform software, but is shiny) CUDA works on nVidia only). A closed SDK will turn off nearly all Linux devs, and I'm sure a large number of devs have been turned off to such things by being forced into XCode.

RAM? I use 512mb on average. Were I using a full desktop environment I'd use maybe 1.5gb, and that's assuming I was using that desktop's default application set, rather than what I use now.
Do the other big systems use more RAM? Yeah, wastefully. Why do I say wastefully? Because they're not doing anything more! Shiny effects? KDE4 has them. Heck, Compiz does a decent imitation of OSX. _Less_ default functionality? Written for _one architecture?_ The resource usage for Windows and OSX are certifiable insanity.

Sorry, computing will be CPU-bound for the next decade.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Computing has changed
by james_parker on Fri 6th Aug 2010 20:48 in reply to "RE: Computing has changed"
james_parker Member since:
2005-06-29

Sorry, computing will be CPU-bound for the next decade.


I must disagree. Computing is not really CPU-bound; rather it is main-memory (MM) speed bound. Nearly every other technology used in computers has increased in speed over the last 10-20 years by at least an order of magnitude more than MM.

The "hack" that has been used to ameliorate this problem is to increase the amount of cache available, as well as the number of cache levels. Managing this cache efficiently and correctly is one of the biggest problems faced in CPU/system design today, and it still wreaks havoc with the performance of certain types of software (since the cache hit ratio can dramatically affect performance).

If/when there is a commercially available breakthrough in MM speed (MRAM, memristor-based RAM, etc.), low-level computer architecture will change dramatically, as will programming techniques.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Computing has changed
by TheGZeus on Sat 7th Aug 2010 16:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Computing has changed"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

That's true, but only relevant once Windows is no longer the dominant 'operating system'.
OSX isn't gonna be ported that fast, either.

Do you really think these multi-billion-dollar code bases are going to be re-written in 10 years? I know they could be, but these companies will not.

If I thought 10 years was enough for FOSS to overtake the competition, I'd agree with you, but I don't think it will.

Will supercomputer and hobby-kit users be underwhelmed with standard CPU hardware in 10 years? Yeah. I doubt I'll be running any x86 hardware in 10 years. That said, I'm pretty sure most people still will be.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Computing has changed
by aaronb on Sun 8th Aug 2010 21:48 in reply to "RE: Computing has changed"
aaronb Member since:
2005-07-06

Sorry, computing will be CPU-bound for the next decade.


A lot of projects are now using GPUs for computing (As well as CPUs). ATI and Nvidia have added OpenCL to their drivers. OpenCL is not limited to MacOS X.

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/projects.php
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_opencl_new.html
http://developer.amd.com/gpu/ATIStreamSDK/pages/TutorialOpenCL.aspx
http://www.khronos.org/opencl/

Reply Parent Score: 2