Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.os.beos    |    Underrated early 90's OS, sad it died...    |    1,512 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 1,009 of 1,512    |
|    Jim Polaski to imouttahere@mac.com    |
|    Re: OsX compared to Linux and BeOS    |
|    28 Apr 05 22:51:12    |
      XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy, alt.os.linux.mandrake, comp.os.linux.advocacy       XPost: alt.os.linux.redhat       From: jpolaski@NOSPMync.net              In article <1114623917.644738.77600@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,        imouttahere@mac.com wrote:              > >>Is extremely seriously considering a move to x86 hardware       >       > >Not going to happen.       >       > Don't be so sure.       >       > Like I've said before, I know people who know people who've seen OS X       > (as in the Finder) run on x86.       >       > >From a developer's standpoint x86 isn't that big a deal any more,       > there's very little difference between an x86 box and a G5. Stuff like       > CoreData can deal with endian issues, accelerate could handle SIMD, and       > CoreImage could expose the differing graphics stuff.              I doubt Apple would be so stupid as to not have a contingency plan       should severe problems befall IBM and/or Freescale.              >       > Now, the percentage of this happening is dependent on how unlikely IBM       > can keep up with AMD (I don't think Apple cares to get into bed with       > Intel).       >       > I wouldn't put any money on it, but I wouldn't be surprised, either.       >              --       Regards,       JP       "The measure of a man is what he will do while        expecting that he will get nothing in return!"              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca