Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Dec 2005 14:26 UTC, submitted by Robert Gelb
Thread beginning with comment 75127
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.






Member since:
"Apple switching to Intel is actually one of several hardware decisions that made me scratch my head. The others included the introduction of new chips with powerPC cores for XBox 360 and PS."
yeah, this one has me scratching my something too. I still wonder who Intel(and the "analysts" pimping this move for the last several years) paid off to get Apple to choose them over AMD, as Intel is continuing to lag AMD on pretty much every front. Of course, the more amazing thing is that Apple is switching to x86 at all. The best that I can see from this is that Apple no longer has to support optimizations for ppc gcc code generation, and other ppc optimizations in various packages. The so-called developer claiming quicker port times are so full of ---- that it scares me. If they were any good they should be able to handle endian issues with minimal(maybe a few weeks on a HUGE poorly designed/non-portable project) delays.
Immediate effect: well, I won't be buying any more Apple hardware products based on x86 until they hit their second full ground up design. IOW no more Apples here until, oh, probably, 2007/8.
One good effect: I can, hopefully, ditch the second/3rd/4th/etc. PC(s) for running Windows/games as long as x86 powermacs(OSX) actually have drivers and support for generic/non-"standard" expansion cards(video, audio, etc)
Rest of article: I have to agree with whomever above said something along the lines that this guy is the master of pointing out the obvious, but it DID get him alot of hits...