Panther isn't 64 bit either (but with some 64bit like kernel)
True, but Panther rocks Windows' world. We'll see a 64 bit Mac OS long before we see anything even close to that from the Wintell world. Longhorn is 32 bit, if I'm not mistaken. And we won't even see that until 2007.
And about that eMachine, again, the Wintell world playing catchup to Macs.
True, but Panther rocks Windows' world. We'll see a 64 bit Mac OS long before we see anything even close to that from the Wintell world. Longhorn is 32 bit, if I'm not mistaken. And we won't even see that until 2007.
And about that eMachine, again, the Wintell world playing catchup to Macs.
Well it would be really nice if Apple would "catch up" in getting a clue and not selling say professional towers with 256 megs of RAM when you are shelling out $1800+. I can understand scrimping on the low end machines, but the low end G5 tower is supposed to be a professional machine and Apple ships it with 256.
I'm not a total spec whore, but Apple has done this ram bullshit for a long time.
Yea, I was talking about the Beta version of Longhorn, we won't see a production version till at least 2008
And to trumptman: Your right, I think even the 1.6 needs to ship with more ram than it does. These machines are way too high end to only have 256mb, thats not even close to enough to do what Apple claims that they are capable of.
Well, 64 bit really just means it can handle more memory right?
but if the OS isn't 64 bit enabled at all, even if you had 8 gigs of RAM, you'd only be able to use 4?
There are tricks to access more than 4GB of ram on a 32 bit machine. Virtual memory and so forth. A single program may have a hard time accessing beyond 4GB, but most recent 32bit machines can handle more than 4BG of physical RAM. In fact a lot of mid-size servers and such already have that much or more.
64 bit-ness does have the nice effect of making these tricks unnecessary for the rest of any of our lives.
OK I've had it with ignorant people (mostly journalists not people here) bitching about Panther not being 64-bit, and I know you were likely playing Devil's Advocate, but for the benefit of others perhaps: Panther can access more than 4 gigs of RAM. In fact as Ast3r3x posted you can buy 32 GIGS of RAM for a G5. That is the whole point of 64 bit, at least for most people, that it can access more RAM, because soon apps will need it. The tech media is so stupid and likes to jump at Apple for the dumbest things. </rant>
Quote:
Well it would be really nice if Apple would "catch up" in getting a clue and not selling say professional towers with 256 megs of RAM when you are shelling out $1800+. I can understand scrimping on the low end machines, but the low end G5 tower is supposed to be a professional machine and Apple ships it with 256.
I'm not a total spec whore, but Apple has done this ram bullshit for a long time.
the dual G5s (with 8 RAM slots) can theoretically address 18 Exabytes of RAM
thats 18 Billion Billion bytes.
Quote:
Boger was keen to point out that the G5's 64-bit architecture is not merely double that of the previous 32-bit chip builds. As 32-bit means 2 to the power of 32, and 64-bit means 2 to the power of 64, the new architecture is actually 4.3 billion times as expandable.
For example, although Apple states the maximum memory of the top-end Power Mac G5 as 8GB, it could - if the DIMMs existed - stretch to an almost unthinkable 18 exabytes (a billion billion bytes). 1 exabyte equals 1,024 petabytes. 1 petabyte is [1,024 terabytes] or a quadrillion bytes. [1 terabyte is 1,024 gigabytes.]
18 exabytes is a hell of a lot of RAM!
Boger claimed that if memory requirements doubled every year, the G5's 64-bit architecture would still support our needs in 32 years.
Comments
eMachines.......
mmmmm.....
yeah................
Straight from Office Space.
Originally posted by \\/\\/ickes
and it is not 64 bit power... it is a 64 bit chip running 32bit code... windows
Good point. If the OS isn't marginally 64 bit, then the programs sure aren't 64 bit.
Originally posted by Leonis
Panther isn't 64 bit either
True, but Panther rocks Windows' world.
And about that eMachine, again, the Wintell world playing catchup to Macs.
Originally posted by DMBand0026
True, but Panther rocks Windows' world.
And about that eMachine, again, the Wintell world playing catchup to Macs.
Well it would be really nice if Apple would "catch up" in getting a clue and not selling say professional towers with 256 megs of RAM when you are shelling out $1800+. I can understand scrimping on the low end machines, but the low end G5 tower is supposed to be a professional machine and Apple ships it with 256.
I'm not a total spec whore, but Apple has done this ram bullshit for a long time.
Nick
Originally posted by DMBand0026
And we won't even see that until 2007.
you mean in 2008?
Originally posted by Placebo
You can get a more 64 Bit Power for $1500: The new Powermac G5 1.6, sans Superdrive.
wow - 2 posts - same second :-)
Originally posted by Krassy
you mean in 2008?
Yea, I was talking about the Beta version of Longhorn, we won't see a production version till at least 2008
And to trumptman: Your right, I think even the 1.6 needs to ship with more ram than it does. These machines are way too high end to only have 256mb, thats not even close to enough to do what Apple claims that they are capable of.
Originally posted by Krassy
you mean in 2008?
Wow ... your quite the optimist.
but if the OS isn't 64 bit enabled at all, even if you had 8 gigs of RAM, you'd only be able to use 4?
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Well, 64 bit really just means it can handle more memory right?
but if the OS isn't 64 bit enabled at all, even if you had 8 gigs of RAM, you'd only be able to use 4?
There are tricks to access more than 4GB of ram on a 32 bit machine. Virtual memory and so forth. A single program may have a hard time accessing beyond 4GB, but most recent 32bit machines can handle more than 4BG of physical RAM. In fact a lot of mid-size servers and such already have that much or more.
64 bit-ness does have the nice effect of making these tricks unnecessary for the rest of any of our lives.
-Spyky
Well it would be really nice if Apple would "catch up" in getting a clue and not selling say professional towers with 256 megs of RAM when you are shelling out $1800+. I can understand scrimping on the low end machines, but the low end G5 tower is supposed to be a professional machine and Apple ships it with 256.
I'm not a total spec whore, but Apple has done this ram bullshit for a long time.
Nick
Right on!
Originally posted by trumptman
I'm not a total spec whore, but Apple has done this ram bullshit for a long time.
Heh, i'd prefer the opposite. I'd rather have Apple sell me a machine with no RAM included for them to mark-up.
thats 18 Billion Billion bytes.
Boger was keen to point out that the G5's 64-bit architecture is not merely double that of the previous 32-bit chip builds. As 32-bit means 2 to the power of 32, and 64-bit means 2 to the power of 64, the new architecture is actually 4.3 billion times as expandable.
For example, although Apple states the maximum memory of the top-end Power Mac G5 as 8GB, it could - if the DIMMs existed - stretch to an almost unthinkable 18 exabytes (a billion billion bytes). 1 exabyte equals 1,024 petabytes. 1 petabyte is [1,024 terabytes] or a quadrillion bytes. [1 terabyte is 1,024 gigabytes.]
18 exabytes is a hell of a lot of RAM!
Boger claimed that if memory requirements doubled every year, the G5's 64-bit architecture would still support our needs in 32 years.
source
I know that this was a limitation when the G5s were released (10.2.8 ).
There are a few scientific applications that could really do with this capability...