On 8 Jun 2005 at 23:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
>
>>First, the thing is fast. Native apps readily beat a single 2.7 G5,
>>and sometimes beat duals. Really.
See...this is the beauty of the Mac OSX operating system...put the Mac
OS on a " slower" machine/chip and it will run faster than Windows on
that same machine/chip....put it on a faster Intel chip and it will
scream compared to windows!
Er, what? What is your basis for any comparison to Windows based on
the information quoted from www.xler8yourmac.com?
Who said I was basing it off of this article?
And has there been any benchmarking comparing OS X Finale to Windows
Finale? I'm not a Mac user, but it seems to me that from what I've
heard y'all complaining about, Windows is going to win hands down.
Of course not! No bench marking of Finale at this point...Coda is
so far behind the eight ball right now..they are just trying to get
up to XCode pace right now as far as I can discern.. they are just
trying to get out of the gate..its a moot point. But I'm rootin' for
'em!
I'll consider this post as a response to Jari's request for a
benchmark study as well. I had a link but it has since been taken
down (oops..for obvious reasons). As you (we) can imagine, these
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given "loner G5's" (in quotes you'll notice) which have Intel chips
in them...but they are specifically required to stay mum about any
bench mark testing.
Regarding my own benchmark testing (O.K., maybe you did or didn't
ask) ...my testing...as opposed to laboratory benchmark
testing...takes place in the real world under the conditions of
sitting at a desk with a cup of loose leaf tea in front of both a PC
and Mac...as opposed to in the "laboratory." In the real world
things are messy...spy ware programs, anti-virus programs etc. run in
the background on windows machines...and are ultimately slowing them
down regardless. Something that thus far, Apple doesn't have to
worry about.
There is an analogy that makes sense to me...when a windows
programmer gets a flat tire, he just bolts another good tire to the
outside of the axle rather than fixing the flat. Mac programmers
anticipate a flat tire and do their best to have an alternative plan.
I've owned both windows machines and Apple machines. I'm sticking
with Apple...that's just my personal preference.
In addition...historically, Apple machines have run more efficiently
on lower mhz machines vs. their PC counterparts...(google it) though
reports are somewhat subjective and I prefer to not get into yet
another Mac vs. PC war. I'll stick with my own experience
("benchmark testing") thank you.
The machine(s) that Steve jobs used in his demo are merely place
holders if you will, beta machines....I expect that the machines that
Macintosh ultimately releases will far outpace these beta machines.
And I think even so the beta machines are hanging in there quite well.
>
>[...]
>
>>They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so
>>you can download drivers and run XP on the box.
I'm not sure how this will play out...does Apple allow windows to run
natively on their boxes or do they close the loopholes and allow only
OS X . . .
Folks don't seem to be paying attention to the things posted on this
list, because I posted a couple of days ago a quote from an Apple
spokesman that answers this question:
http://news.com.com/2100-7341_3-5733756.html
After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller
addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no
plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That
doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably
will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run
Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow
running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.
"We won't do anything to preclude that" seems pretty definitive to
me.
No...I (or folks) didn't ignore your post...but remember, as recently
as May 2005, Apple was saying about the move to Intel chips
"....while Apple said the news should be placed 'in the category of
rumour and speculation"...(Wall Street journal) Definitive is
relative...:-)
So, buy the rumor sell the news...it is all up in the air as of now...
Nonetheless...it is a win win situation (IMHO) for Apple if Apple
decides that Windows is allowed to run on Apple machines natively but
that OS X (or whatever the next gen of the OS is named) isn't allowed
to run on a "windows" machine. Having said that, I don't think that
Apple will ship it's machines running Windows necessarily...but then
again who knows...Steve Jobs is smarter than I am!
I'm getting the feeling from the little news I have been able to
gather from busy developers up in San Francisco, that they are
feeling pretty good about this move. From an intuitive standpoint,
I think I agree....For those of you that are more scientists rather
than theoreticians (not to say that theoreticans aren't also
scientists) and need more concrete evidence...stay tuned in the
coming days and weeks...it can't be published now but it eventually
will be!
Best,
Karen
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
