or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › power mac won't get any faster
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

power mac won't get any faster - Page 6  

post #201 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by rickag
. . . I say the next G5 will not be multicore, but will include a low-k dialectric and will either run cooler and/or faster at the same power consumption of the current 2.5 GHz G5. . .



That may be sticking your neck out, unless you have inside information. There is some evidence that IBM has a dual core 970MP in the works.
post #202 of 297
I don't expect it to be multicore either. Of course it's in the works, but that doesn't mean we'll get one.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
post #203 of 297
I think the rev c Pmac G5 will be dual core. As long as IBM doesn't run into trouble with antares(which they shouldn't since they have exprience with dual core CPU's). IBM should have them shipping in January. Oh look just in time for the Pmac to be upgraded. I am sure the next Pmac rev will not be silent since apple will want to show off the first dual core processor to the consumer/pro in an event.
post #204 of 297
Here are two things I've learned over the years. #1 Don't get your hopes up. If you think something should be, and is going to be released at a particular show your setting your self up for a huge let down.
#2 See #1.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
post #205 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker

#2 See #1.



I would be too surprised if the next Power Mac update brings dual core processors. What would we get, a quad processor Mac, if the dual processor design is retained? Too expensive (or too much) to be true for the beginning of next year.
post #206 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
IBM

even though you don't even have to work to find out

just join ACM SIGARCH

im sure you will learn a lot

Amazing what crops up when you are driving cross country.

Hmmm, I'm a member and don't know what you are referencing at all. Nothing of note comes up in the Portal either. Your fingers are currently caught in the cookie jar.

Sounding like a ego wounded sixteen year old that has read a few technical articles and decided to stir the pot a bit. Your utter predictional failure last time around (which was noted on the first page) doesn't seem to have convinced many that you don't really know anything of use here, especially when you are constantly cut off technically by others that have shown technical expertise in the past.

I await your summary all cap single sentence version of "he's wrong!"
post #207 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by kwikfx
If communication has anything to do with IMPACT, or stirring response then Nr9 wins hands down.

Communication doesn't. Trolling, on the other hand, is all about stirring response. *cough*
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #208 of 297
It's going to be interesting to see what we get at San Fran 05.

Powerbook G5 and 'Tiger'?

Antares Dual Core PowerMac running at 2.5/3 gig?

A credit card 'memory card' style iPod?

A new iBook?

Hmmm...

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
post #209 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
That may be sticking your neck out, unless you have inside information. There is some evidence that IBM has a dual core 970MP in the works.

I would be surprised if IBM releases it in 1H 2005. I expect there will be a speed bump during then though.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
post #210 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Telomar
I would be surprised if IBM releases it in 1H 2005. I expect there will be a speed bump during then though.

Dig this. As I said if Antares doesn't get delayed(which it shouldn't since IBM has exprience with dual core CPU's), IBM plans to have them out and shipping in January. Just in time for the Pmac rev updates.

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/antares.html
post #211 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by AirSluf
Amazing what crops up when you are driving cross country.

Hmmm, I'm a member and don't know what you are referencing at all. Nothing of note comes up in the Portal either. Your fingers are currently caught in the cookie jar.

Sounding like a ego wounded sixteen year old that has read a few technical articles and decided to stir the pot a bit. Your utter predictional failure last time around (which was noted on the first page) doesn't seem to have convinced many that you don't really know anything of use here, especially when you are constantly cut off technically by others that have shown technical expertise in the past.

I await your summary all cap single sentence version of "he's wrong!"

of course information specific to the 970fx is only available in IBM. the thing i had last time wasn't a prediction, it was inside information. Turns out that the plans were changed. i was never technically wrong in any of these threads and the peole who argued with me were wrong. as you fail to see that, your probably just a 5 year old who pays forty bucks a month to get access to the ACM portal and also fail to take note of anything interesting in there. if you are in SIGARCH and haven't noticed the shift towards power consumption as a priority, the forty bucks you pay are probably not worth it. you should go home, sit down on the toilet and try to pipe as much shit out of your ass as you can. until then, don't add meaningless messages to a dicscussion
post #212 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
of course information specific to the 970fx is only available in IBM. the thing i had last time wasn't a prediction, it was inside information. Turns out that the plans were changed. i was never technically wrong in any of these threads and the peole who argued with me were wrong. as you fail to see that, your probably just a 5 year old who pays forty bucks a month to get access to the ACM portal and also fail to take note of anything interesting in there. if you are in SIGARCH and haven't noticed the shift towards power consumption as a priority, the forty bucks you pay are probably not worth it. you should go home, sit down on the toilet and try to pipe as much shit out of your ass as you can. until then, don't add meaningless messages to a dicscussion

So you admit that you were wrong? Also, personal attacks are not welcome here.
post #213 of 297
Try taking your own advice, Nr9.

a) You haven't any information that has been substantiated by the very sources you've suggested.

b) You've tried to hide behind 'well clear communication isn't needed anyway because I'm an engineer' (Sorry, not enough typos in there, I know, but bear with me.)

c) Your arguments have been... um... nonexistent.

d) You resort to personal attacks when called on a-c.


Yup, troll.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
post #214 of 297
Nr9,

If you do work at IBM, how much is Apple paying IBM for 970s and 970fx's?
post #215 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Tuttle
Nr9,

If you do work at IBM, how much is Apple paying IBM for 970s and 970fx's?


Most people who work at IBM do not have access to that kind of financial information. Not only that, but someone who is 19/20 years old and working at IBM is probably a co-op/intern at best. The chance that he/she would have any sort of inside knowledge is slim, and is probably limited to whatever was overheard at meetings. Regardless, that still could be "inside information", but chances are it's pretty volatile.
post #216 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by quagmire
So you admit that you were wrong? Also, personal attacks are not welcome here.

since when did i do that
post #217 of 297
My, what a short memory you have:

Quote:
your probably just a 5 year old who pays forty bucks a month to get access to the ACM portal and also fail to take note of anything interesting in there. if you are in SIGARCH and haven't noticed the shift towards power consumption as a priority, the forty bucks you pay are probably not worth it. you should go home, sit down on the toilet and try to pipe as much shit out of your ass as you can. until then, don't add meaningless messages to a dicscussion

Not welcome. Stop it.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
post #218 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by costique
Programmer, have you ever considered becoming a teacher? If not, you should. Seriously.

Yes, but those that can do and those that can't, teach. Plus teacher's pay sucks.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #219 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
since when did i do that

This will be my last contribution to this thread.

Here is the exact words you said,

Quote:
of course information specific to the 970fx is only available in IBM. the thing i had last time wasn't a prediction, it was inside information. Turns out that the plans were changed. i was never technically wrong in any of these threads and the peole who argued with me were wrong.

Hmmm. sounds like you admitted you were wrong. But, then you took the easy way out and say plans changed. How has the plan changed on the 970fx? Hmmm, you have no proof. How do plans change anyway? Oh, have they changed their mind and said we can make the core go faster? I think they were already planning that. Then you say," I was never technically wrong in any of these threads and the people who argued with me were wrong." Yep, thats sounds like the cowards way out of being wrong. Hey, I should know. I did once. But, I fixed myself and just in time because I learned I was about to get temp. banned. You better do the same.

PS: Don't let you confuse this as a personal attack. I am not insulting you. But, I am insulting your false info and the way you ran away from it.

PSS: This thread should be locked!
post #220 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
since when did i do that

You really like to do everything you can to derail discussion, don't you?

I also don't buy the "stuck at exactly 2.5 GHz" prediction. Its not impossible, but I'd be suprised if IBM has hit the wall quite that hard. They do have some more advanced process options which should make a bit of a difference.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #221 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by quagmire
This will be my last contribution to this thread.

Here is the exact words you said,



Hmmm. sounds like you admitted you were wrong. But, then you took the easy way out and say plans changed. How has the plan changed on the 970fx? Hmmm, you have no proof. How do plans change anyway? Oh, have they changed their mind and said we can make the core go faster? I think they were already planning that. Then you say," I was never technically wrong in any of these threads and the people who argued with me were wrong." Yep, thats sounds like the cowards way out of being wrong. Hey, I should know. I did once. But, I fixed myself and just in time because I learned I was about to get temp. banned. You better do the same.

PS: Don't let you confuse this as a personal attack. I am not insulting you. But, I am insulting your false info and the way you ran away from it.

PSS: This thread should be locked!

im referring to the powerbook g5 thing. the thing i had last time is not the thing i had this time. the 970fx thing is true.
post #222 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Yes, but those that can do and those that can't, teach. Plus teacher's pay sucks.

Mozart taught! He wasn't paid very much however.
post #223 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by costique
No, there is no exact number to qualify as an absolute limit. What we're talking about is that crazy overclockers can make PPC970fx run at, say, 5GHz right now, but only in a can of liquid Nitrogen. Since IBM won't even consider shipping insanely overclocked chips, it roughly equals IBM having stuck at 2.5GHz. They may reach 3GHz or so for mass production of PPC970fx, but they are still having problems producing them even at 2.5GHz in quantities sufficient for Apple. You know what I mean: if those 3GHz chips turn out to be too hot, too few or too expensive, it will be just as though IBM haven't made a single chip running at 3GHz. Nobody gives a damn about a theoretical clock speed of a given chip - it only matters what clock speed the chip is running at on your desktop.

Yes, but the point is if Intel can get to 4 GHZ, IBM can as well. It might take a longer pipeline, but it can be done. We've not hit a wall just yet.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
post #224 of 297
Well there are a number of things to consider, one is that the effort to extend clock rate really isn't scaling if you take Intels approach. That is Intel streteched out the pipelines with each (almost all) revision of the Pentium and by doing so slowed the chips down, sometimes considerably. In effect Intel took the approach that went for clock speed at the expense of efficent operation of the CPU.

There is no doubt that IBM could take this approach but there is a big question related to benefits. Intel's approach leaves the processor with a large amount of idle time as it tries to keep those pipelines filled. The thing is that Intel does make out real good when the right types of instruction streams come along, a 4 GHz chip can be twice as fast as a 2 GHz chip under ideal conditions.

The Approach on the PPC is for much shorter pipelines and reduced penalties because of the shorter pipelines. With respect to the 970FX at 2.5GHz this has really worked out well, with many apps seeing the clock rate increase. What one ends up with, with IBM's current tech, is a very hot chip. We really don't know what the top frequency is for this chip as it does seem to be thermally limited, we don't know how fast the logic is capable of operating. That is why I think it is very important to see where IBM goes with reductions in thermal demand and also see where the rest of the industry goes. There is information floating about that does seem to indicate that 90nm done right can pay off and all extending the clock rate of a 130nm design.


What I find interesting though is that my account has been offline two days and this discussion is still going on. I'm also surprised that so many still want to throw in the towel. This is barely round one, it time to get up off the matt and breath some fresh air.

If we want to give Nr9 credit for anything he may be on to the 970MP release. It may very well come out at the same clock rate as the current 970FX's, but that may be related to a number of things. The number one thing problly being the doubling of thermal load. May the number one issue being shared with the thought that IBM still doesn't have an alternative process.

Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Yes, but the point is if Intel can get to 4 GHZ, IBM can as well. It might take a longer pipeline, but it can be done. We've not hit a wall just yet.
post #225 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Nr9
<snip> your probably just a 5 year old who pays forty bucks a month to get access to the ACM portal and also fail to take note of anything interesting in there. if you are in SIGARCH and haven't noticed the shift towards power consumption as a priority, the forty bucks you pay are probably not worth it. <snip>

I would think you could at least get the price right if you were a member. You can't even get a student membership for $40 and SIGARCH is another $28++ on top of that. Or start with $198 for a full access including the Portal if you're a professional member (plus the $28++ for SIGARCH), but the $40 figure crops up nowhere. The facts keep unravelling, and the rhetoric more vile. The usual for a vain salvage attempt.

I second the lockination here. Maybe a fresh and unsullied thread could take it's place if folks still wanted to hash CPU issues out, but free of this threads baggage.
post #226 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
<snip>If we want to give Nr9 credit for anything he may be on to the 970MP release. It may very well come out at the same clock rate as the current 970FX's, but that may be related to a number of things. The number one thing problly being the doubling of thermal load. May the number one issue being shared with the thought that IBM still doesn't have an alternative process.

Dave

If that hadn't already been discussed thoroughly in the wild since late July he might have had a chance, but two months late to the dance don't get credit for original thought, let alone justify a declaration of no more Hz--ever--for anyone.
post #227 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Yes, but those that can do and those that can't, teach.

post #228 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by AirSluf
...but two months late to the dance don't get credit for original thought, let alone justify a declaration of no more Hz--ever--for anyone.

It is one thing to be late to the dance, it is another thing to come with new information. I would hope that we as a group here would continue to be receptive to information from any number of sources related to things like the 970MP. There has to be more information floating about with respect to that chip that I would like to hear about.

Nr9's decleration that there will be no more Hz increases though is problematic. I'm not sure he understands how this statement so completely underminds everything else he states. Maybe the first release of the MP won't be that much faster than current devices, but that does not mean that the end of future speed increases is here. This may be where Nr9 is confused.

Dave
post #229 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by wilco
Quote:
Yes, but those that can do and those that can't, teach.



What, have you guys never heard that quote before? I thought it was funny...
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #230 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Yes, but the point is if Intel can get to 4 GHZ, IBM can as well. It might take a longer pipeline, but it can be done. We've not hit a wall just yet.


Ugh. Are you ignoring me, or just not getting it? If IBM has decided that the tradeoffs to increase clock rate (power, longer pipelines) aren't worth it, then they have effectively hit a "wall". It is a fuzzy and vaguely defined one, but it is the outer envelope of the processor performance space made possible by the available technology... and the technologies that they have on their roadmap. We won't really know if Nr9 is right until they revise their roadmap and the POWER6 is no longer a 5-6 GHz monster, but is instead a massively multi-core one.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
post #231 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
We won't really know if Nr9 is right until they revise their roadmap and the POWER6 is no longer a 5-6 GHz monster, but is instead a massively multi-core one.

The Power6 was intended to be massively multicore al along.. At least according to 2 year old roadmaps. Morpherus (at AppleNova) hints that the 6 GHz target is still on schedule for Power6, and all your talk about higher clockspeeds for small Cell cores might fit perfectly with this. No? If Power6 is Cell based that is.
post #232 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by Programmer
Ugh. Are you ignoring me, or just not getting it? If IBM has decided that the tradeoffs to increase clock rate (power, longer pipelines) aren't worth it, then they have effectively hit a "wall".

Never!
When was IBM introducing the 90nm-Process? In October 2003, maybe.
And nine month after the introduction of a new manufacturing process they hit the wall

I don't think so....
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
post #233 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
Nr9's decleration that there will be no more Hz increases though is problematic.

I'm not defending Nr9, but it's possible and quite believable. I can imagine the situation like this:

When IBM got 2.5GHz chips and realized that they're too hot (they may still be acceptably hot for IBM, but Steve said he's not buying chips any hotter), this instantly became a limitation #1. IBM engineers then had 2 big headaches: low yields and high power dissipation. They worked on these and managed to improve yields somehow. However, better yields are money today while better power consumption is money tomorrow. They tried and tried and tried and yes, they have 3+GHz chips right now, which are either too few for a customer like Apple, or too hot for showmen like Steve, or just too unreliable in the long term. IBM can tweak the process more, of course, to squeeze a couple of MHz without sacrificing the far-from-excellent yields, but... The dual-core version got so much closer during this struggle that it's probably more economically effective to launch PPC970MP now, than to delay it until they perfect the process so that you can stick a 3.5GHz PPC970FX into a pocket PC.

This does not mean we'll never see a PowerPC running at more than 2.5GHz. This only means that we may see a dual-core before the painful transition to 90nm culminates in higher clock rates. This only means that IBM engineers may find it easier and quicker to launch a dual-core 970 than to mass-produce any PPC at, say, 3GHz with their current technology. And this does not mean IBM suddenly stops maturing the process in favour of dual-core designs, because this same process (if I'm not totally off) will help them make faster both single and dual cores until they switch to 65nm. And if they do switch to 65nm in the near future is an 'if'.

What do you think?
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. Putts Law
post #234 of 297
It isn't being argued that IBM have hit a wall. Clearly there is still room to grow on 90nm, but the headroom from starting a new process, to reaching the wall of the progress given the architecture of the CPU is quite clearly evident if it is mearured in terms of clock speed increase.

Chips will get faster for sure, but parallelism is the new clockspeed.
post #235 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by MarcUK
It isn't being argued that IBM have hit a wall. Clearly there is still room to grow on 90nm,

That's exactly what's being argued and it's not clearly at all that there's room to grow on 90 nm. Not to some at least.
post #236 of 297
I can only clarify what I meant by "hitting a wall," because I did in fact use that phrase: I meant that what they were doing abruptly stopped yielding results. So IBM, and everyone else, is changing course to route around the wall they ran into.

Put in less dramatic terms, they squeezed all they could out of one approach, and now they're turning to another. It's happened many times before ("the Pentium will never reach 200MHz!"). It's not the end of the world.

It is funny, though, that the assumptions behind the PowerPC alliance are just now beginning to come true, years after AIM disintegrated: Power consumption finally did hit a wall; small, efficient cores finally are an advantage; an inherently 64-bit platform finally has paid off; and dual cores, which Motorola was investigating when the G4 was still a design candidate codenamed "Max," have finally become economical (two decades after speculation about the limits of single-core designs spawned research into actor languages!).

Well, you know, better late than never. Speaking as a software guy, I think it'll be a healthy switch overall. It'll force a lot of uuuuuugly legacy C and C++ code to get properly factored and cleaned up and threaded, and it'll attach a limited but significant material advantage to proper design.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #237 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
It is one thing to be late to the dance, it is another thing to come with new information. I would hope that we as a group here would continue to be receptive to information from any number of sources related to things like the 970MP. There has to be more information floating about with respect to that chip that I would like to hear about.

Agreed, I just don't see anything new yet.

Quote:
Nr9's decleration that there will be no more Hz increases though is problematic. I'm not sure he understands how this statement so completely underminds everything else he states. Maybe the first release of the MP won't be that much faster than current devices, but that does not mean that the end of future speed increases is here. This may be where Nr9 is confused.

Dave [/B]

Well in answer to this and Nr9, Morpheus (over at AppleNova) posted this morning:
Quote:
"... and shouldn't be long till we see Altair-based 2.7Ghz PMs...

Morpheus"

He started the thread off a few weeks ago with [my bold]:
Quote:
"In the begining there was the chip known as GPUL aka PPC970. Next the GPUL 10S aka Altair aka PPC970FX. Next? An****s aka PPC9****!"

Nick from Thinksecret vouches for him as the real deal, as do a few others who know his posting. He has consistently painted a conservative but progressing picture and was the one who broke the 970MP (Antares) openly and widely into the rumor wild. That first post pre-dates everything else on the MP I have seen firsthand or seen discussed. So far he has stood up to 2 1/2 months of scrutiny with no dents in the proverbial armor.

We have been hearing of the "Wall" for decades in just about every engineering endeavor man has undertaken, and I can't yet think of a single instance where this wall was proven just to be anything other than the next solved engineering challenge. To think we hit the wall 6 months ago while industry still has plans to go 45nm and smaller over the next 2+ process improvements is just too Chicken Little to me. Especially in light of the many technical opinions put forth otherwise, which do accept difficulties, but not outright complete and total future failure to move forward. AND information from vouched for sources that directly contradict dire predictions from an already failed predictor.
post #238 of 297
Quote:
Originally posted by snoopy
That may be sticking your neck out, unless you have inside information. There is some evidence that IBM has a dual core 970MP in the works.

I couldn't remember the link, however, THT graciously supplied them in the New Powerbook thread.

CHIPWORKS DISCOVERS IBM STRAIN AT 90NM, DELAY IN LOW-K

A quote from the article which was written September 8th(over a month ago)
Quote:
"They have been reported to be qualifying low-k during the last few months, and we are expecting to see low-k product soon. We want to compare it with the other low-k processes that we have analyzed."

Granted, the "low-k product" Mr. Dick James, Chipworks' senior technology analyst, was refering to may be the dual core G5 MP, but my bet is that it isn't. The current 970Fx using a more aggressive low-k dialectric would be a drop in replacement with the same pin layout. Same motherboards, same controllers etc. Heck, Apple/IBM may start using them in the current line up with NO CHANGES in speed until a full ramp up would allow them to announce new G5's @ higher speeds and possibly a laptop sometime near the end of the year/beginning of next year. Anyway, that's what I would do.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
post #239 of 297
Quote:
It'll force a lot of uuuuuugly legacy C and C++ code to get properly factored and cleaned up and threaded, and it'll attach a limited but significant material advantage to proper design

Nah, applying the super new bodges is much easier ! (vectorisation! gcc 4! Converting XML to (sensible, object-like) C structures then to legacy C structures we can't edit!))
Stoo
Stoo
post #240 of 297
How about the other way around? C to XML?

Or how about C to OO?

C++ to XML?

How you want it?
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › power mac won't get any faster