Let me get this straight. You cann a dual ghz xeon because your software cant take advantage of its features (dual cpu's, hyperthreading, etc).
The "joke" appears to be your software. :eek:
cheers,
Justin</strong><hr></blockquote>
Perhaps- but care to suggest a mainstream 3D CAD software for $4000, easy-to-use, powerful & versatile, and is SMP-enabled, hyperthreading, and SSE2 enhanced? What about FEA software below $20k? ...And a kinematics/dynamic mechanism simulator for under $10k? What about integrated support for photorendering and animation? Can any of this be done w/o going ballistic with a full Catia design suite for $100k+ of software and RISC workstation hardware? I would hazard to say I wasn't *****ing and moaning over some $30 shareware CAD software that was a joke. It's just the way things are for mainstream engineering applications at the moment- the last thing they are concerned with is SMP, SSE2, and of all things- hyperthreading support. Just what mainstream software is leveraging hyperthreading support at the moment? As I understand it, hyperthreading has a lot of promise, but it is merely a buzzword at the moment, not a tangible feature. So your mentioning it seems kind of humorous (or somewhat reaking of a P4 fanboy of sorts). Even if you could come up with some alternate software that fits your "not a joke" criteria, we wouldn't switch to it on a dime anyway. We are using what we are using now because certain ease-of-use, feature set, and integration priorities are held at a much higher level over your "not a joke" criteria. All we ask of Dell is for some modern processors that can run our power-hungry software to the fullest extent possible under current x86 architecture. Evidently the best they can do is a 2.2 Ghz P4 that runs like 1.2 Ghz PIII on engineering software. I did concede that performance is likely much better for a few examples of consumer software built for the P4 specifically.
By your choice of username, I can tell you are quite young and possibly not fully in tune with how the real business world works out with regard to software (or maybe you are one of those stunning intellectual examples of PC trolls waiting for us to show up at the link originally posted here, so you come here to stir things up). So I'll just leave it at that.
<strong>WINDMAN is not a troll out to incite gang-flames. He simply wanted someone with an APPLE background to articulate the APPLE side of the story.WM</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't need to defend a machine. It was my choice to use a Mac and that's it. My choice, your choice. Your choice is to be an occasional troll here(you have been here before and your name fits you WINDBAG) when your Windoze/PeeCee forums slow down... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Comments
WM
<strong>
Let me get this straight. You cann a dual ghz xeon because your software cant take advantage of its features (dual cpu's, hyperthreading, etc).
The "joke" appears to be your software. :eek:
cheers,
Justin</strong><hr></blockquote>
Perhaps- but care to suggest a mainstream 3D CAD software for $4000, easy-to-use, powerful & versatile, and is SMP-enabled, hyperthreading, and SSE2 enhanced? What about FEA software below $20k? ...And a kinematics/dynamic mechanism simulator for under $10k? What about integrated support for photorendering and animation? Can any of this be done w/o going ballistic with a full Catia design suite for $100k+ of software and RISC workstation hardware? I would hazard to say I wasn't *****ing and moaning over some $30 shareware CAD software that was a joke. It's just the way things are for mainstream engineering applications at the moment- the last thing they are concerned with is SMP, SSE2, and of all things- hyperthreading support. Just what mainstream software is leveraging hyperthreading support at the moment? As I understand it, hyperthreading has a lot of promise, but it is merely a buzzword at the moment, not a tangible feature. So your mentioning it seems kind of humorous (or somewhat reaking of a P4 fanboy of sorts). Even if you could come up with some alternate software that fits your "not a joke" criteria, we wouldn't switch to it on a dime anyway. We are using what we are using now because certain ease-of-use, feature set, and integration priorities are held at a much higher level over your "not a joke" criteria. All we ask of Dell is for some modern processors that can run our power-hungry software to the fullest extent possible under current x86 architecture. Evidently the best they can do is a 2.2 Ghz P4 that runs like 1.2 Ghz PIII on engineering software. I did concede that performance is likely much better for a few examples of consumer software built for the P4 specifically.
By your choice of username, I can tell you are quite young and possibly not fully in tune with how the real business world works out with regard to software (or maybe you are one of those stunning intellectual examples of PC trolls waiting for us to show up at the link originally posted here, so you come here to stir things up). So I'll just leave it at that.
[ 05-29-2002: Message edited by: Randycat99 ]</p>
<strong>WINDMAN is not a troll out to incite gang-flames. He simply wanted someone with an APPLE background to articulate the APPLE side of the story.WM</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't need to defend a machine. It was my choice to use a Mac and that's it. My choice, your choice. Your choice is to be an occasional troll here(you have been here before and your name fits you WINDBAG) when your Windoze/PeeCee forums slow down... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />