knowitall

dewme said:

Wow, this is a full DED broadside attack on a floundering and apologizing Gates. I can’t disagree with it. 

I still have a lot of respect for Bill G as a developer in his day, for some his humanitarian causes, and for the respect he finally showed to Steve Jobs during Steve’s final days. But Bill G, like many Microsofties, is seriously infected with a highly contagious strain of self-respect-eating hubris and blind faith belief in Microsoft Exceptionalism (ME), like it’s a real thing. Sure, history has shown us that there was a real ME, but it was a steaming turd pile OS spawned from a burning dumpster fire and it was not even remotely exceptional, much like Microsoft in general. 

Never seen software he developed (MS-DOS was created by someone else), I think the scale of philanthropy is reversely proportional to the rightfulness of the money obtained and I think Mr. Jobs was the one who could stand above the conflict with Mr. Gates.

Kudos for writing such a coherent and 99,999% correct piece.

I promoted most of Apple products and software development from 2000 (start of OSX) onwards.
My ultra techie collogues loathed and some even despised me for that, because it was a commercial US enterprises with obvious only moneymaking intensions. This was the common notion intellectuals and universities had at the time.
I was even criticized for ‘defending’ Apple while not even working for them.
I made clear that I wasn't defending Apple but simply correcting the false notion that was put forward and thus defending ‘what was true’ and what was innovative and new.
What hampered these techies was that they didn't expect something good from Apple, and as an ultra techie had obviously better ideas about computers.
Fact of the matter was that they had no clue about innovation and innovative  products and as a basic handicap (née, politically correct: challenged) no taste at all.
When word came out that Apple would release a device with only touch input people reacted that this would be - instead of a revolution - a bad mistake and Apple would of course sell nil. (Really no kidding!)
Gloating at any perceived misstep (of Apple) they tried to mask their constant wrong.
My aim was to promote a real alternative to the dark ages of Microsofts stranglehold, its ugliness and its more than dreadful MCS certification.
I didn't succeed, but luckily Apple has and the world is a much better place because of that, Mr Jobs was right: it really boils down to taste. 

mjtomlin said:

lkrupp said:

My 27” iMac 14,2 (late 2013) is getting long in the tooth but I will not wait until the latter half of 2020 to find out if Macs are moving to ARM. The 2019 iMac may be my last Intel Mac but I don’t really care.

Really? My 27" iMac (11,1 late 2009) is still chugging along just fine. Although it is stuck on High Sierra - the first time I've ever owned a Mac that doesn't have the latest OS.

deegee1948 said:

Great hire! This guy has some big chops, AMD, INTEL, and ARM! Just watch what’s coming!

Possible in-house x64 based CPUs?

Dito (10,1) here, but running on the latest macOS, its a bit of an hassle but look at dosdude1: http://dosdude1.com/mojave/

x64 is a bad design and instruction set, impossible to do performance tweaks in machine language for Intel x86 CPUs, for example, because of its hardware translation to an internal RISC instruction set and enormous pipelines (you never know what instructions sequence is chosen even if the internal RISC instruction set is documented).
Intel does hardware translation because x86 is otherwise completely bogus ...

I expect the transition to ARM to be swift (pun intended) and complete.
Intel will be readily forgotten like Kodak and other dinosaurs.

Intel got its Kodak moment because it developed a bureaucratic grind down and lost all interest in innovation. Instead they performed a Bubka (minimal uninspired improvement) once in a increasingly longer while.
Intels x86 design is inherently handicapped (nee! politically correct: challenged) by its internal hardware translation to RISC and its slow transition to smaller feature size.
What happened is that designing a new chip became more and more a software issue (the right VHDL tools and combined physics calculations) and making the hardware (steppers) more and more an order for ASML.

Apples ARM processors will be the best high end processors you can buy, only at a fraction of the cost and as part of a device.

larryjw said:

ericthehalfbee said:

While I think it's poor coding on the part of Google to monopolize a resource, I also think Apple should make it so that an App can't monopolize any framework.

This reminds me of the early days of Windows and co-operative multitasking where you had to rely on a program to behave and not steal all the processor time sp your other programs could also run.

Well, the problem is Unix, Linux, MacOS seem to not be preemptive OSes in Kernel Mode, where it seems this Framework is executing. 

Handbrake (more than excellent tool by the way) seems to be doing fine.
Google snafu so it seems.