XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy, alt.os.linux.mandrake, comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   XPost: alt.os.linux.redhat   
   From: randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net   
      
   In article ,   
   znu@fake.invalid says...   
   > In article ,   
   >  Randy Howard  wrote:   
   >   
   > > In article ,   
   > > znu@fake.invalid says...   
   > > > Dual core will matter to the markets targeted by Xserves and G5 towers.   
   > >   
   > > People with a dual-processor box like a G5 tower don't need dual core   
   > > at all, unless you think that multithreaded apps on the G5 are so   
   > > slow they need 4 CPUs to get there.   
   >   
   > A lot of the tasks for which people buy G5 towers still push the   
   > capabilities of today's hardware quite a bit. HD video editing, for   
   > instance. Of course, Apple is trying to unload some of this sort of   
   > thing on the GPU, but fast processors are still a must. And four fast   
   > processors (effectively) are better than two.   
      
   True, but I doubt that the majority of people with G5 dual towers are   
   running high load averages currently.   
      
   > > Sure, nice to have, not that big of a deal.  More important in the   
   > > single-socket desktop and notebook market, along with blades and   
   > > rack-mount low profile servers.   
   >   
   > I'm not thinking that the Mac mini's target market needs a dual-core   
   > processor right now.   
      
   Who said they did?   
      
   > They might be nice in high-end PowerBooks, for people who need mobile   
   > media workstations.   
      
   Yep.   
      
   > Well, they don't like this idea, because it's going to result in   
   > increasingly long upgrade cycles, which means much lower sales volume.   
   > But I'm not sure they'll be able to do much about it.   
      
   You forget that Microsoft is in collusion with them.  :-)   
      
   > > You do realize that Windows is the primary delivery vehicle for   
   > > technologies to help spurn new hardware sales (read as: "slow   
   > > the damn thing down so people will upgrade"), right?   
   >   
   > It's pretty funny that Apple, which actually has a very direct interest   
   > in getting people to upgrade their hardware, actually manages to make   
   > the OS *faster* on the same hardware with every release. Some bean   
   > counter should really go yell and the engineers to cut that out .   
      
   It's those damn gcc guys, working on the optimizer.  Maybe Apple   
   should turn it off when building the platform.  :-)   
      
   > It's true, Longhorn will probably drive some upgrades. But if consumers   
   > and business users start only upgrading for new Windows releases, and if   
   > Windows releases are going to come as far apart as XP and Longhorn from   
   > now on, that's going to be a major slowdown. We could see people only   
   > buying new machines every 6-8 years.   
      
   People are buying lots of machines to run Linux on right now, they're   
   just not buying from Dell, HP, IBM, Toshiba, etc.  They're buying   
   them at Fry's, and that's a real problem for the traditional OEM's,   
   and for MS.  And they're also using old Windows boxes to run Linux   
   on, since you can get a lot more mileage out of a back-rev PC on   
   Linux than you can on Windows, and that's another problem for them.   
      
   --   
   Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)   
   "Making it hard to do stupid things often makes it hard   
    to do smart ones too." -- Andrew Koenig   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)