Like it fucking matters who made the tiny wafer of silicone deep inside your computer?drmotte wrote:i will never buy a mac with ... inside!
IBM is a cuddly treehugger that pets koala bears in his spare time while Intel is the evil incarnated?
Mactels not as fast as Apple claims....
-
Michael-SW
- Posts: 2054
- Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:05 pm
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
-
dirtystudios
- Posts: 1196
- Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 1:28 am
The specs that Jobs quoted in the keynote are correct. If you actually watch the keynote, you'll notice that he clearly states that the specs are based on a two specific benchmarks that are generally accepted as the most important when measuring a computers performance. He also notes that this does not mean that real world performance will match those numbers, as real world performance is highly subjective.
He also went so far as to demo a PPC version of Photoshop on the Intel machine running through Rosetta, and stated that, as was obvious from the demo, Photoshop was clunky and was not really usable for professionals at this point, but might be fine for amatures.
Once we see universal binaries for these programs however, I think they will begin to approach the quoted specs. Though, again, real world performance is incaculable, so in most cases, that machine won't be 4-5 times faster.
I think that the real benefit that will arise from Apple's switch to Intel will be in the arena of software development. Having the Mac x86 based will vastly improve the library of available software, as the cross platform development will be much easier.
Plus, the SDK's provided with Xcode are simply amazing, as can be seen by the explosion of software for OSX over the past few years, especially by lone developers and small teams of coders. I think these SDK's, coupled with an x86 OSX wich will make coding for Windows and Linux much easier on the Mac, may prove to be an atractive alternative for universal developers, which in turn, will result in exponential growth for the Mac software library.
k
He also went so far as to demo a PPC version of Photoshop on the Intel machine running through Rosetta, and stated that, as was obvious from the demo, Photoshop was clunky and was not really usable for professionals at this point, but might be fine for amatures.
Once we see universal binaries for these programs however, I think they will begin to approach the quoted specs. Though, again, real world performance is incaculable, so in most cases, that machine won't be 4-5 times faster.
I think that the real benefit that will arise from Apple's switch to Intel will be in the arena of software development. Having the Mac x86 based will vastly improve the library of available software, as the cross platform development will be much easier.
Plus, the SDK's provided with Xcode are simply amazing, as can be seen by the explosion of software for OSX over the past few years, especially by lone developers and small teams of coders. I think these SDK's, coupled with an x86 OSX wich will make coding for Windows and Linux much easier on the Mac, may prove to be an atractive alternative for universal developers, which in turn, will result in exponential growth for the Mac software library.
k