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
At 6/9/2005 03:01 PM, dhbailey wrote:
Eden - Lawrence D. wrote:
When Apple goes Intel, will Macs become targets for the latest viruses
like our PC friends, or will a Mac still be a Mac?
Since the viruses attack the users of a particular OS (windows users get
viruses, Mac users don't) I don't
At 03:51 AM 06/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given loner G5's
I had to read this a couple of times -- you mean loaner, yes? I hate to
think of a bunch of computers, each nursing their own whiskey at the end of
a bar
Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 03:51 AM 06/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given loner G5's
I had to read this a couple of times -- you mean loaner, yes? I hate
to think of a bunch of computers, each nursing their own whiskey at
David Fenton wrote:
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
On Jun 10, 2005, at 7:26 AM, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 03:51 AM 06/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given loner G5's
I had to read this a couple of times -- you mean loaner, yes? I hate
to think of a bunch of computers, each
Christopher Smith wrote:
David Fenton wrote:
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
On 10 Jun 2005 at 0:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
On 10 Jun 2005 at 8:39, Christopher Smith wrote:
David Fenton wrote:
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.
On 10 Jun 2005 at 0:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
On 10 Jun 2005, at 8:07 AM, dhbailey wrote:
Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 03:51 AM 06/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given loner G5's
I had to read this a couple of times -- you mean loaner, yes? I
hate to think of a bunch of
Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 03:51 AM 06/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
studies are in their early stages. Developers at WWDC are being
given loner G5's
I had to read this a couple of times -- you mean loaner, yes? I
hate to think of a bunch of computers, each nursing their own
whiskey at
Who said I was basing it off of this article?
In other words, there wer no facts in evidence at all?
That's one interpretationthere are others.
loner G5's
I think you mean loaner PCs ;).
Yes I did and I rather liked the responses that were posted in
response to my
On 10 Jun 2005 at 13:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[quoting me:]
Nor do I. I don't run full-time virus monitoring, because the benefit
is not worth the CPU cycles it uses up.
I hope you aren't passing the viruses along as the result of not
saying on top of this.
How, exactly, could I do
Earlier on June 10, 2005, David W. Fenton wrote:
In other words, you were talking out your ass.
On Jun 10, 2005, at 3:46 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
*How* you say something is as important as what you're trying to say.
Are these sentences related?
Chuck
Chuck Israels
230 North
On 10 Jun 2005 at 16:00, Chuck Israels wrote:
Earlier on June 10, 2005, David W. Fenton wrote:
In other words, you were talking out your ass.
On Jun 10, 2005, at 3:46 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
*How* you say something is as important as what you're trying to
say.
Are these
In other words, you were talking out your ass.
If you are saying that the many years of experience I have been
sitting in front of both PC's and Macs...reading and comparing
specs for both...running them both...etc. etc. counts for nothing
and that I have absolutely no idea what I
On 11 Jun 2005 at 1:18, Simon Troup wrote:
In other words, you were talking out your ass.
If you are saying that the many years of experience I have been
sitting in front of both PC's and Macs...reading and comparing
specs for both...running them both...etc. etc. counts for
Somene makes a a categorical and inflammatory statement, then
essentially retracts it, and *I'm* the one that gets flamed for
calling them on it?
No - I'm saying outright that on occasion you are terse and impertinent to the
point of rudeness.
Simon Troup
Digital Media Art
On 11 Jun 2005 at 2:54, Simon Troup wrote:
Somene makes a a categorical and inflammatory statement, then
essentially retracts it, and *I'm* the one that gets flamed for
calling them on it?
No - I'm saying outright that on occasion you are terse and
impertinent to the point of rudeness.
And I should care about your opinion because...
... because I doubt I'm the only one who is offended by the comments.
Simon Troup
Digital Media Art
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
On Jun 10, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Simon Troup wrote:
And I should care about your opinion because...
... because I doubt I'm the only one who is offended by the comments.
Simon Troup
Digital Media Art
_
You are not.
Chuck
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA 98225-5836
On Jun 10, 2005, at 9:28 PM, Chuck Israels wrote:
On Jun 10, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Simon Troup wrote:
... because I doubt I'm the only one who is offended by the comments.
Simon Troup
Digital Media Art
You are not.
Chuck
Chuck Israels
Indeed, it was surprising to read ass in that context.
(N.B. -- these are developer models only, shipping MacIntels will
not use the P4):
Yup...I think this is true...I think the Pentium 4 and most probably
Pentium M are for Beta purposes only...the M may show up in early
MacIntel boxes but ultimately there will be better/faster chips that
are
Darcy James Argue wrote:
An anonymous developer speaks about the Developer Kit MacIntels (N.B. --
these are developer models only, shipping MacIntels will not use the P4):
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
First, the thing is fast. Native apps readily beat a single 2.7 G5,
and sometimes beat
On 09 Jun 2005, at 5:03 AM, dhbailey wrote:
If they're really Pentiums, and if they really run Windows with no
problems, there won't be any problem with MIDI issues. At least not
on the hardware side of things -- how Apple programs its OSX for the
new chips is an entirely different matter.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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/chipput it on a faster Intel chip and it will
scream compared to windows!
Please include the benchmarks
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
When Apple goes Intel, will Macs become targets for the latest viruses
like our PC friends, or will a Mac still be a Mac?
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
I've always been told that the reason Macs don't get viruses is that the
vastly lower numbers of Mac users doesn't attract the miscreants who write
the viruses, not because of any inherent immunity. Have I been misinformed?
Ken
At 11:27 AM 6/9/2005, you wrote:
When Apple goes Intel, will
At 6/9/2005 02:27 PM, Eden - Lawrence D. wrote:
When Apple goes Intel, will Macs become targets for the latest viruses
like our PC friends, or will a Mac still be a Mac?
Depends on the OS.
But I recently read that Linux is becoming more common.
When that happens, they will; become a prime
On 09 Jun 2005, at 2:34 PM, Ken Durling wrote:
I've always been told that the reason Macs don't get viruses is that
the vastly lower numbers of Mac users doesn't attract the miscreants
who write the viruses, not because of any inherent immunity. Have I
been misinformed?
There's certainly
You have been misinformed.
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5534/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5393/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5371/
Ken Durling wrote:
I've always been told that the reason Macs don't get viruses is that
the
On 9 Jun 2005 at 14:27, Eden - Lawrence D. wrote:
When Apple goes Intel, will Macs become targets for the latest viruses
like our PC friends, or will a Mac still be a Mac?
Mac will still be the Mac.
Hardware is completely irrelevant to the propagation of viruses,
which is entirely a
Eden - Lawrence D. wrote:
When Apple goes Intel, will Macs become targets for the latest viruses
like our PC friends, or will a Mac still be a Mac?
Since the viruses attack the users of a particular OS (windows users get
viruses, Mac users don't) I don't see any reason that Mac users will be
On 9 Jun 2005 at 11:44, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
You have been misinformed.
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5534/
This article does a real disservice to Mac users with this attitude:
Can you imagine a world where (today) you can click on anything and
never worry
Analysis: Apple eyes the Pentium M
The first Apple systems with Intel inside will use the Pentium M chip,
sources say
News Story by Tom Krazit
JUNE 08, 2005 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - A processor alliance between Intel Corp.
and Apple Computer Inc. would have seemed unthinkable five years ago, when
On 08 Jun 2005, at 1:58 PM, Phil Daley wrote:
One chip company on the outside looking in is Advanced Micro Devices
Inc. Several industry analysts said they felt that if Apple was ever
going to move to x86 chips, it might have found AMD a more suitable
partner, given the underdog status of
Darcy James Argue / 2005/06/08 / 02:09 PM wrote:
I think the main reason Apple didn't go with AMD because that might
easily have meant a continuation of the yield/supply problems that
plagued IBM and Motorola/Freescale.
And/or Apple is pissed with AMD Hypertunnel controller that causes
packet
The first Apple systems in 2006 will use Intel's Pentium M
processor, according to sources familiar with the companies' plans.
The Pentium M uses the same x86 architecture as the Pentium 4 but
consumes far less power. Its design philosophy is expected to be the
model for Intel's future
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Looks like a switch to these chips may make a G5 powerbook possible. And
that would be great!
Except, they wouldn't be G5s...
Maybe we will see some new powerbooks at MacWorld San Francisco! in
January!
Hardly. At least not with Intel chips.
Johannes
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks like a switch to these chips may make a G5 powerbook possible. And
that would be great!
No, it would make a Pentium M notebook possible.
Best regards,
Jari Williamsson
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks like a switch to these chips may make a G5 powerbook
possible. And that would be great!
No, it would make a Pentium M notebook possible.
O.K...I should have said G5 powerbooks. The point of my post was
that this is a speed/cooling barrier that Apple has been
Well, technically G5 is only a marketing name, anyway. The actual
name of the chip is IBM PPC 970, and it doesn't even share the same
lineage as Moto/Freescale's G4 series. Prior to the Intel
announcement, there was some speculation that Apple would use a
next-gen 64-bit dual-core chip from
An anonymous developer speaks about the Developer Kit MacIntels (N.B.
-- these are developer models only, shipping MacIntels will not use the
P4):
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/
First, the thing is fast. Native apps readily beat a single 2.7 G5,
and sometimes beat duals. Really.
[...]
They
On the other hand, they will probably want to avoid the word
Pentium if at all possible. I suppose it depends what arrangement
they've worked out with Intel. Steve wouldn't have partnered with
them if they hadn't been willing to make exceptions to their usual
marketing practices -- for
46 matches
Mail list logo
