RESIGNATION OF STEVE JOBS!!
abpp
resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
Apple as a hardware maker. Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
technology.
Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth. His egomaniac
Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
jeaopardy and danger.
The soul of the Mac Platrform is not just the OS. It is all, the
Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
Troubled Tony
I'm still waiting for Alec Baldwin to move out of the USA.
Will you leave Usenet if Jobs doesn't resign? Please say yes.
Jim Polaski
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
Try thinking for a change. While the PPC has more legs, the fact that
IBM can't supply them, isn't interested in higher clock speeds and isn't
speeding towards a cooler running chip for laptops was the death blow
and not something Apple could control and SJ either. Out of SJ's
hands...if you think he was going to bully IBM, you're sadly wrong.
--
Regards,
JP
"The measure of a man is what he will do while
expecting that he will get nothing in return!"
Paul Anderson
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> Apple as a hardware maker.
I am a true Mac user and I don't care who makes the chip inside my Mac,
as long as it's not Microsoft.
I don't know how you come to your conclusion that the Mac platform will
be destroyed if an Intel chip is used instead of an IBM one.
Paul
--
Paul Anderson
OpenVMS Engineering
Hewlett-Packard Company
Dave Balderstone
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> Apple as a hardware maker.
You need this:
<http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html>
--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
Andy Hewitt
Actually, it's probably on a par with finding out that PPC chips were
made by IBM.
Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/thehewitts2/index.htm
(updated Feb 21 2005)
Davoud
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> resignation of Steve Jobs.
How about if I just *PLONK* you, instead?
--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
Troubled Tony
> abpp <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> > resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
> > platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> > old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> > Apple as a hardware maker.
>
> You need this:
>
> <http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html>
Mine has rabbit ears!
Paul Olson
<johnas...@earthlink.net> said:
> On 17 Jun 2005 11:06:57 -0700, "abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey, trollboy! As an Apple Shareholder and Mac user at home, I love
> the move and look to even better performance of Apple's stock in the
> future.
>
As ANOTHER shareholder, i second the motion.
Paul Olson
And if the reception is **just right** I can hear people on Venus.
powermac
I believe the Intel Chip is not a great quality chip, and I am concerned
for some quality control issues from Intel Macs. Apple had not choice
but to switch, it is apparent that IBM could not keep up with intel's
pace. I welcome the the switch, because to me, Apple's hardware and OSX
that I love.
--
powermac
------------------------------------------------------------------------
powermac's Profile: http://www.macosx.com/forums/member.php?userid=8878
View this thread: http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225730
macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.com
Ilgaz Ocal
> Paul Anderson <paul.a...@hp.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1119031617.1...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>> abpp <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
>>> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
>>> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
>>> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
>>> Apple as a hardware maker.
>>
>> I am a true Mac user and I don't care who makes the chip inside my Mac,
>> as long as it's not Microsoft.
>>
>> I don't know how you come to your conclusion that the Mac platform will
>> be destroyed if an Intel chip is used instead of an IBM one.
>
> Actually, it's probably on a par with finding out that PPC chips were
> made by IBM.
>
> Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
Intel is controlled by Microsoft. AMD is controlled by Microsoft. No
conspiracy here: Whoever dominates desktop x86, dominates those
companies desktop chips too.
Xeon is a different story,its a server chip.
Lets not dream, Microsoft isn't going anywhere, BillG will break
virtualpc sales record when mactel ships.
Replying to this topic doesn'T make me support that stupid request BTW,
Steve Jobs fired from Apple? lol
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
<johnas...@earthlink.net> said:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 02:11:11 +0300, Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2005-06-17 22:34:56 +0300, hairy...@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) said:
>>
>>> Paul Anderson <paul.a...@hp.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <1119031617.1...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> abpp <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
>>>>> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
>>>>> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
>>>>> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
>>>>> Apple as a hardware maker.
>>>>
>>>> I am a true Mac user and I don't care who makes the chip inside my Mac,
>>>> as long as it's not Microsoft.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how you come to your conclusion that the Mac platform will
>>>> be destroyed if an Intel chip is used instead of an IBM one.
>>>
>>> Actually, it's probably on a par with finding out that PPC chips were
>>> made by IBM.
>>>
>>> Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
>>
>> Intel is controlled by Microsoft. AMD is controlled by Microsoft. No
>> conspiracy here: Whoever dominates desktop x86, dominates those
>> companies desktop chips too.
>
> Would you care to show us the SEC document showing Microsoft has 51%
> of the stock in both Intel and AMD.
>
> Control in publicly held companies is a matter of record not you
> babbling.
Whatever software company has the biggest market, the features it
needs have more priority than other vendors in the producers eye.
I was really wondering where is that urban legend in IT World coming
from. You know, "mac users are stupid" type.
Microsoft isn't necessarily evil too, keep posting so I will buy MS
Office for mac which my wintel user friends say "its like next version
on windows"
All companies are evil :)
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
<johnas...@earthlink.net> said:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 02:11:11 +0300, Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
>>
>> Intel is controlled by Microsoft. AMD is controlled by Microsoft. No
>> conspiracy here: Whoever dominates desktop x86, dominates those
>> companies desktop chips too.
>
> Would you care to show us the SEC document showing Microsoft has 51%
> of the stock in both Intel and AMD.
>
> Control in publicly held companies is a matter of record not you
> babbling.
Oh btw, all replies are ignored, I am really bored to explain simple
things in 4 paragraphs on this NG.
If you can't understand what I mean, its not my problem.
Have a nice day
Ilgaz
Thundercleets
yarmf...@yahoo.com
when Linux became usable. Never looked back.
Although the NeXT box was very cool. But Steve
screwed that up too by refusing to sell to students,
academics, and individuals. He insisted on selling
only to businesses and in bulk deals to colleges.
OS/X is nowhere near as smooth as NeXT OS.
What is accomplished using only a 68030 processor
was amazing.
da...@geol.invalid
>
> Apple lost its way years ago. I dumped them in 1995,
> when Linux became usable. Never looked back.
1) What are you doing here if you never looked back?
2) Linux is no more "usable" than any other version of Unix
particularly OSX. From the "usable" perspective,
all Linux is ... is Unix with freeware stacked on top of it.
That's all OSX is too. Who are you trying to kid?
I've used Solaris/SunOS every day for nearly 20 years and
Darwin (OSX) is every bit as "smooth" as Solaris if not more so.
> Although the NeXT box was very cool. But Steve
> screwed that up too by refusing to sell to students,
> academics, and individuals. He insisted on selling
> only to businesses and in bulk deals to colleges.
>
> OS/X is nowhere near as smooth as NeXT OS.
> What is accomplished using only a 68030 processor
> was amazing.
Just a clue. Remnants of NeXT OS are still evident
even in Tiger. So what you're saying is ...
they took NeXT OS and degraded it to become OSX 10.4.
Yeah, right.
Stephen M. Adams
>I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
>resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
>platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
>old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
>Apple as a hardware maker. Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
>because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
>fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
>technology.
It's not what Jobs wants, but what the user community wants. The
user community wants a G5 PowerBook and faster G5 towers. IBM could
not produce the chips that the Mac community wanted.
While I'm not thrilled with the x86 switch, but I don't see where
Apple had much choice.
>Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
>Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
>x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth. His egomaniac
>Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
>jeaopardy and danger.
Sticking with a processor line that could not meet the demands of the
user community would kill Apple faster than any switch to Intel chips.
>The soul of the Mac Platrform is not just the OS. It is all, the
>Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
OS X is not going to run on generic x86 hardware.
-Stephen
--
Space Age Cybernomad Stephen Adams
malchu...@AMgmail.com (remove SPAM to reply)
calc...@hotmail.com
years and came up with a less-good, dumbed down consumoized product.
However, it's Steve's company. He and his homies control the
company-like it or go elsewhere. When the head cheese is a stinker and
owns the company, you just go elsewhere.
The statement by Michael Dell that he would like to pay money to put
Jobs' not-that-great front end to BSD Unix that is available free
(which is all OSX is-a mediocre front end to a free core OS) is
interesting. Maybe he will figure out that by hiring five or ten good
people he could build his own OS topping-bypassing X11 as NeXT and OSX
did, but designing something really cool from a clean sheet)-and neatly
making Apple look dumb (he could magnaminously offer his free for
installation atop PPC OSX).
calc...@hotmail.com
Randy Howard
calc...@hotmail.com says...
> Eight to five it will.
It will what?
> Indeed from what I understand it does right now.
It does what right now?
Zero-context in your follow up means we get to guess what you
are replying to above.
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"I don't really care about being right you know,
I just care about success." --Steve Jobs
John
> I believe the Intel Chip is not a great quality chip, and I am
> concerned for some quality control issues from Intel Macs. Apple had
> not choice but to switch, it is apparent that IBM could not keep up
> with intel's pace. I welcome the the switch, because to me, Apple's
> hardware and OSX that I love.
I have NEVER had a Intel Processor fail and I've have owned many over the
years. So to me Intel is a great quality chip.
Tim
outside? Get a real girlfriend, and not one of those blowup dolls?
The things people post here...it's amazing common sense hasn't killed
you yet.
Peter Ammon
If you think you could build OS X-sans-Darwin with "five or ten good
people," you've bellyflopped in the loony pool.
-Peter
--
Pull out a splinter to reply.
abpp
offered more business with the consoles and obviously they
will put more effort on those chips. IBM offered Apple/Jobs to move
to one of those PPC chips (that are faster and better designed), but
Jobs
in his infinite arrogance didn't want to use "the other guys'" chips.
Well,
you know what, now he will use THE OTHER IDIOTS' chips (x86). Screw
Jobs!!
We all trusted him and he betrayed the Mac. The Mac now is nothing but
a
PC with an Apple OS. I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
FULLY commited to the PPC!
abpp
Now the Mac will be nothing but a PC with an Apple OS!!
Let's take a look at the possibilities once Intel is inside:
1) What about Macs running Windows (possible even after what Jobs said)
2) PCs running Mac OS (as you know they will)
3) PC clone makers making Macs-like clones (possible even after what
Jobs said)
4) Apple lossing money when people don't see the need to buy an Apple
Mac
when they can get a PC that runs Mac OS (as you know they will)
5) Macs suffering in graphics processing without AltiVec (as you know)
6) Mac programming code becoming more bloated because Intel code is
more
complex
etc, etc, etc...
Need more??
abpp
relation for so long that now there is no difference! Every Intel chip
made in the last 7 years was basically co-design by Microsoft thanks to
the Microsoft Windows Hardware Engineering Conferences. Can you imagine
the access Microsoft and its cronies (Dell, HP, Gateway, etc.) will
have
to the Mac internals to poop on!!
abpp
realize that they can no longer sell hardware but only some
software.
John A. Stovall wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2005 11:06:57 -0700, "abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey, trollboy! As an Apple Shareholder and Mac user at home, I love
> the move and look to even better performance of Apple's stock in the
> future.
>
>
>
>
> ******************************************************
>
> "I have been a witness, and these pictures are
> my testimony. The events I have recorded should
> not be forgotten and must not be repeated."
>
> -James Nachtwey-
> http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
abpp
with Intel
inside there will be not much difference between that and what Dell or
HP make.
abpp
abpp
abpp
abpp
I'm not the only one who needs to get a life, ah!
John C. Randolph From:
>I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
>resignation of Steve Jobs.
Request denied. (and, FWIW, I've been a Mac user and developer since 1984.
> His stupid decision to change the Mac
>platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
>old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
>Apple as a hardware maker.
The PPC G5 was a great machine, no doubt about it. Apple's customers
couldn't get enough of them. The trouble was, *neither could Apple*!
Apple probably left a billion dollars or more on the table every quarter
since the G5 launched, because IBM couldn't meet their delivery schedules.
> Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
>because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
>fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
>technology.
I know this is hard for you to understand, but take it from someone who
had the same reaction (although in my case, I had it in 1993).
Once you load up OS X on an Intel box, it's just like the OS X you're used
to. (With one exception.. It's faster.)
>Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
>Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
>x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth.
It was true. In the last five years though, Intel caught up.
>Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
>jeaopardy and danger.
The platform is fine. In fact, it's in the best shape it's been in for
a decade.
>The soul of the Mac Platrform is not just the OS. It is all, the
>Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
Dude, you have *way* too much of your ego wrapped up in an implementation
detail. Try to work it out in therapy.
-jcr
mcat
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
> fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
> technology.
>
> Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
> Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
> jeaopardy and danger.
>
> Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
>
toys compared to powerpc, but the reality is the new macs will be out in
2006, and jobs don't think to use x86 in mac machines, I suspect the new
macs will use Itanium processors (the PowerMacs surely will be big
workstations with 64 bit Itanium 2)....the things are: IBM is working on
Cell, Cell is an architecture specifically made for big machines and not
for laptops so it is impossible to use them on low end machines.
the best part of apple is Mac OS and the perfect interaction between OS
and hardware, this interaction will become much evident and necessary
with Itanium, because of its dynamic architecture......
windows will run on macs, but it is very improbable Mac OS will run on
PCs.....Apple and Intel are joint-working on DRM and others means to
help OS to recognize hardware on which it is running......
and finally I think a lot people (I surely) will buy an Apple Mac for
"serious computing" leaving PCs as children's toys......
IBM is incapable of serious PowerPC improvements and Cell is just too
complex and too multimedia oriented to be used on a general purpose
computer......Itanium instead has a lot of nice capabilities and around
300 internal registers.....it is just a supercomputer on a chip, so I
think Jobs is making the right thing
Andy Mulhearn
[snipped]
> PC with an Apple OS. I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
> FULLY commited to the PPC!
>
[snipped]
When you've finished wiping the saliva off your chin, would you care to
list the companies apart from Apple that are shipping PPC based personal
computers.
Andy
Tom Stiller
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
> Well, he was fired once, wasn't he!
And look at what happened to the company in the aftermath.
--
Tom Stiller
PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3
7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF
John Savard
>Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
>because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
>fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
>technology.
That would make sense _if_ the disparity weren't, clearly, going to get
worse in the future - much worse.
If Apple were to stay with the PowerPC, eventually it would become a PDA
maker, leaving the computer field to Microsoft Windows-based computers.
The PowerPC may be a more elegant architecture (but like the Itanium, it
wastes RAM on bulky programs; a clean CISC architecture like the 68000's
is what is really best IMO) but what PowerPC chips one can buy is,
unfortunately, a key to what kind of PowerPC-based computers one can
make.
John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
powermac
I do not understanding programming. It is plausible that people (average
consumer) will not get OSX running on a PC and vise versa. I am sure
Apple must have a plan to help eliminate the possibility of a average
person purchasing a version of OSX and installing it easily on their
Think-pad, for example. Certainly, we all realize that Apple is not
going to survive on just selling iPods and OSX.
As a lay person on these matters, I feel if Jobs did not promise too
much, that IBM could not deliver, then the switch may have not been
necessary, or at least for awhile. I wished the IBM was more committed
to the PPC chip. I truly blame them for the position they put Apple in.
As Jobs said in the Keynote, they have been planning this, and ported
OSX to intel since the first version.
Truthfully, if OSX works easily on any PC and vice versa, I would still
purchase Apple hardware.
mhz
He wish to become a new Dell computer cie.
People buy Mac because Mac computer sit at top.
MacTel is (now) a computer just like any other PC.
Steve kill the Mac.
ELVIS2000
>
>Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
>Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
>x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth. His egomaniac
>Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
>jeaopardy and danger.
And you bought it hook, line, and sinker. Sucker.
ELVIS2000
>you know what, now he will use THE OTHER IDIOTS' chips (x86). Screw
>Jobs!!
>We all trusted him and he betrayed the Mac. The Mac now is nothing but
>a
>PC with an Apple OS.
At least now the laptops won't have cripped CPUs.
ELVIS2000
<johnas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Would you care to show us the SEC document showing Microsoft has 51%
>of the stock in both Intel and AMD.
Wal*Mart effectively controls many of their vednors -- not by owning
stock -- but by being their only customer (or at least representing a
majority of their busness).
You don't need to "own" the stock to be in control.
ELVIS2000
>5) Macs suffering in graphics processing without AltiVec (as you know)
>
>6) Mac programming code becoming more bloated because Intel code is
>more
Yout last two points here were never true to begin with.
ELVIS2000
wrote:
>On 2005-06-17 14:27:42 -0500, Troubled Tony <t...@hotmail.com> said:
>
>> Dave Balderstone <dave@n_o_t_t_h_i_s.balderstone.ca> wrote:
>>> abpp <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
>>>> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
>>>> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
>>>> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
>>>> Apple as a hardware maker.
>>>
>>> You need this:
>>>
>>> <http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html>
>>
>> Mine has rabbit ears!
>
>And if the reception is **just right** I can hear people on Venus.
SURE! Just like they would never go to INtel, right?
Andrew J. Brehm
Genesi
Eyetech
--
Andrew J. Brehm
Marx Brothers Fan
PowerPC/Macintosh User
Supporter of Chicken Sandwiches
Andy Mulhearn
> Andy Mulhearn <mu...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>abpp wrote:
>>[snipped]
>>
>>
>>>PC with an Apple OS. I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
>>>FULLY commited to the PPC!
>>>
>>
>>[snipped]
>>
>>When you've finished wiping the saliva off your chin, would you care to
>>list the companies apart from Apple that are shipping PPC based personal
>>computers.
>>
>
>
> Genesi
OK, I'll pay that one.
>
> Eyetech
>
Hmm, looks a bit Amiga ish to me. Does it run a mainstream OS?
Andy
Andrew J. Brehm
> Andrew J. Brehm wrote:
> > Andy Mulhearn <mu...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>abpp wrote:
> >>[snipped]
> >>
> >>
> >>>PC with an Apple OS. I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
> >>>FULLY commited to the PPC!
> >>>
> >>
> >>[snipped]
> >>
> >>When you've finished wiping the saliva off your chin, would you care to
> >>list the companies apart from Apple that are shipping PPC based personal
> >>computers.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Genesi
>
> OK, I'll pay that one.
Ok.
> >
> > Eyetech
> >
>
> Hmm, looks a bit Amiga ish to me. Does it run a mainstream OS?
>
They apparently support Linux.
Bob Blaylock
yarmf...@yahoo.com wrote:
The company I worked for at the time bought a second-generation NeXT
when they came out, and I was the one who got to play with it. In its
time, it was an amazing, wonderful system; years ahead of Windows and
MacOS of the time.
But that was many years ago. Both Windows and MacOS have continued to
be developed, and NeXTStep has not, at least not in that guise.
It seems to me that MacOS X is very close to what NeXTSTep would have
become, if NeXT had stayed in the business, and continued to develop
NeXTStep to this day.
--
I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email
address. Remove the string "HatesSpam" from this email
address before you use it: BobHat...@Blaylock.to
Ever wonder what it'd be like to be a blood-sucking parasite?
http://tinyurl.com/7wxk
ZnU
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
> You don't see it??!!
>
> Now the Mac will be nothing but a PC with an Apple OS!!
>
> Let's take a look at the possibilities once Intel is inside:
>
> 1) What about Macs running Windows (possible even after what Jobs said)
I doubt there will be much interest. Running Windows in a virtual
machine will probably be fairly popular, booting it natively not so
much. It might not even be possible, depending on how different Apple's
hardware is. They've said they won't deliberately prevent it, but I
doubt they'll take any steps to make sure it works either.
> 2) PCs running Mac OS (as you know they will)
Sure, h4x0r types will get hacked versions of OS X running on generic
x86 hardware, probably. Won't have much impact on Apple's bottom line.
> 3) PC clone makers making Macs-like clones (possible even after what
> Jobs said)
Nothing can be Mac-like without OS X, and there's no indication that
Apple will let anyone else ship it.
> 4) Apple lossing money when people don't see the need to buy an Apple
> Mac when they can get a PC that runs Mac OS (as you know they will)
The ability to run hacked up versions of OS X on home-built boxes is not
going to be significant to Apple's sales.
> 5) Macs suffering in graphics processing without AltiVec (as you know)
Graphics processing is mostly moving to the GPU. AltiVec would have
become largely irrelevant to there anyway.
> 6) Mac programming code becoming more bloated because Intel code is
> more complex
This doesn't make any sense. Code actually tends to be a bit smaller for
x86, because it's a CISC architecture.
[snip]
--
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply
ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table."
-- George W. Bush in Brussels, Belgium, Feb. 22, 2005
Andy Mulhearn
> Andy Mulhearn <mu...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Andrew J. Brehm wrote:
>>
>>>Andy Mulhearn <mu...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>abpp wrote:
>>>>[snipped]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>PC with an Apple OS. I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
>>>>>FULLY commited to the PPC!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>[snipped]
>>>>
>>>>When you've finished wiping the saliva off your chin, would you care to
>>>>list the companies apart from Apple that are shipping PPC based personal
>>>>computers.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Genesi
>>
>>OK, I'll pay that one.
>
>
> Ok.
>
>
>>>Eyetech
>>>
>>
>>Hmm, looks a bit Amiga ish to me. Does it run a mainstream OS?
>>
>
>
> They apparently support Linux.
>
http://www.eyetech.co.uk/addbar.php?Address=/PRODUCT/PAMA1/AMIGA001.HTM
I stand corrected.
Andy
Dave Balderstone
<z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> Running Windows in a virtual
> machine will probably be fairly popular, booting it natively not so
> much.
I'm told by someone who was at WWDC that while he was there he saw
Windows programs running as if in Classic.
--
~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~
------------------------------------------------------
One site: <http://www.balderstone.ca>
The other site, with ww links<http://www.woodenwabbits.com>
Steve Hix
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
> All that "IBM cannot supply" crap is just that, crap. IBM was being
> offered more business with the consoles and obviously they
> will put more effort on those chips.
So much for promises of things like, say, 3GHz G5s a year or two ago.
>IBM offered Apple/Jobs to move
> to one of those PPC chips (that are faster and better designed),
Better suited for game consoles, yes, for general-purpose computers,
definitely not.
> We all trusted him and he betrayed the Mac.
It would have been betrayal had he stuck with the faltering G5 and G4
processors; neither of them being produced by companies interested in
the personal computing space.
Why aren't you wailing about Apple abandoning the 68K Mac? After all, it
was the original True Mac(tm).
This is just a switch to another CPU.
> The Mac now is nothing but a PC with an Apple OS.
- There are currently no intel-based Macs on the market. (Even the
developer machines shown at WWDC aren't; they won't be going on the
market for sale to end users.)
- You don't know what implementation Apple is going to offer when they
finally do ship intel-based Macs. The information currently publicly
available indicates that they will *not* the a "PC with an Apple OS" in
that they probably won't run Windows out of the box, and possibly not
without a good deal of effort. They probably won't even be running on a
currently-available Intel CPU.
> I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and FULLY commited to the PPC!
You mean Yellowdog Linux is still committed to the PPC. Other than YDL,
PPC support is a bit thin on the ground.
Have fun, and don't let the door, etc.
Craig Koller
Blaylock <BobHat...@Blaylock.to> wrote:
> In article <1119054002.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> yarmf...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > Apple lost its way years ago. I dumped them in 1995,
> > when Linux became usable. Never looked back.
> >
> > Although the NeXT box was very cool. But Steve
> > screwed that up too by refusing to sell to students,
> > academics, and individuals. He insisted on selling
> > only to businesses and in bulk deals to colleges.
> >
> > OS/X is nowhere near as smooth as NeXT OS.
> > What is accomplished using only a 68030 processor
> > was amazing.
>
> The company I worked for at the time bought a second-generation NeXT
> when they came out, and I was the one who got to play with it. In its
> time, it was an amazing, wonderful system; years ahead of Windows and
> MacOS of the time.
>
> But that was many years ago. Both Windows and MacOS have continued to
> be developed, and NeXTStep has not, at least not in that guise.
>
> It seems to me that MacOS X is very close to what NeXTSTep would have
> become, if NeXT had stayed in the business, and continued to develop
> NeXTStep to this day.
You could easily argue it's Apple that went out of business. NeXT/Jobs
took Apple over and MacOS X *IS* NeXTStep... the move to Intel seals
the deal.
http://www-teaching.physics.ox.ac.uk/~leeg/next/jobs_NS30_demo_large.mov
Today's Mac bears little resemblance to OS9, in comparison to NeXT.
Ilgaz Ocal
> In article <3hh59gF...@individual.net>,
> Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> Oh btw, all replies are ignored, I am really bored to explain simple
>> things in 4 paragraphs on this NG.
>>
>> If you can't understand what I mean, its not my problem.
>
> Oh, we understand what you mean. We just think that you're FOS.
I am bored from that kind of replies too.
Want me to swear too? I try to prove my point while that jerk can't
understand what I mean and speaks about SEC filings.
Intel will ship a 64bit capable (very different from G5) CPU next year.
Apple can't be that stupid to move back to 32bit after coding world's
only stable, compatible for home user demands 64bit kernel.
What will have Intel have as 64bit commands (extensions)? AMD 64
extensions. WHY? Because Microsoft told them they can't mess with 2
competing CPUs on same platform. What did they do? They released 64bit
XP running via AMD 64 commands. What does it mean? It means they forced
Intel to use AMD extensions for 64 bit.
That's the power of Redmond. That's what people, ordinary people say
when they talk about the problem of desktop dominant Microsoft.
We speak about a company added 3-4 bugs to their OWN OS to stop rival
from functioning. Old timers here will remember DR DOS story. Also,
they actually had Apple as a real rival that time, they weren't that
powerful.
Ilgaz
Randy Howard
se...@NOSPAMspeakeasy.netINVALID says...
That might change after Apple's focus shifts predominantly to intel
hardware. There will be a lot of systems out there where Linux would
be a way to extend the life of those machines.
Besides, it's not like it's difficult to port open source code from
one Linux to another.
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"I don't really care about being right you know,
I just care about success." --Steve Jobs
Randy Howard
> On 2005-06-18 22:26:53 +0300, Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> said:
>
> > In article <3hh59gF...@individual.net>,
> > Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Oh btw, all replies are ignored, I am really bored to explain simple
> >> things in 4 paragraphs on this NG.
> >>
> >> If you can't understand what I mean, its not my problem.
> >
> > Oh, we understand what you mean. We just think that you're FOS.
>
> I am bored from that kind of replies too.
>
> Want me to swear too? I try to prove my point while that jerk can't
> understand what I mean and speaks about SEC filings.
>
> Intel will ship a 64bit capable (very different from G5) CPU next year.
> Apple can't be that stupid to move back to 32bit after coding world's
> only stable, compatible for home user demands 64bit kernel.
It's not a 64-bit kernel, sorry to burst your bubble.
> What will have Intel have as 64bit commands (extensions)? AMD 64
> extensions. WHY? Because Microsoft told them they can't mess with 2
> competing CPUs on same platform.
IA-64 didn't die because of MS, it died because nobody wanted to pay
3X as much for a slow processor with a very good architecture on paper,
but in practice it turned out to be *very difficult* to write a decent
compiler for it.
> What did they do? They released 64bit XP running via AMD 64 commands.
Instructions you mean.
> What does it mean? It means they forced Intel to use AMD extensions for 64 bit.
It means IA-64, despite years of head start, lost in the marketplace.
They chose poorly. :-)
> That's the power of Redmond. That's what people, ordinary people say
> when they talk about the problem of desktop dominant Microsoft.
You wouldn't want Itanium on your desktop or in a notebook. Get a clue.
Lefty Bigfoot
> You don't see it??!!
>
> Now the Mac will be nothing but a PC with an Apple OS!!
As it has been for years. The power pc wasn't black magic.
An Apple is a pretty PC in a nice chassis with a different
OS than usual. That's it.
> Let's take a look at the possibilities once Intel is inside:
Ok.
> 1) What about Macs running Windows (possible even after what Jobs said)
So? Apple charges for a copy of OS X with every box in the
base price. What do they care? Most people seem to steal
the updated versions after that. So no big loss. I am sure
Apple would rather sell the hardware and let them run Windows
on it than not sell it at all.
> 2) PCs running Mac OS (as you know they will)
If they had a hard to defeat activation mechanism this would
not be a problem for Apple either. If you want to pay $189
or whatever it turns out to be for OS X on your PC, why will
Apple want to not make that money? Profit margin on Tiger
must be as good or better than on an iMac.
> 3) PC clone makers making Macs-like clones (possible even after what
> Jobs said)
So they sell even more copies of OS X, and more third-party
hardware vendors start writing drivers for it.
> 4) Apple lossing money when people don't see the need to buy an Apple
> Mac
> when they can get a PC that runs Mac OS (as you know they will)
If their hardware is compelling it will sell. This is /no
different/ than Dell versus HP versus Sony in the PC market.
They compete on hardware features and price, not their
uniqueness.
> 5) Macs suffering in graphics processing without AltiVec (as you know)
It's all about the GPU these days. Welcome to the 21st
century.
> 6) Mac programming code becoming more bloated because Intel code is
> more
> complex
Not true. It's actually less complicated (and fewer
instructions) than on power pc. You think that Objective-C
code looks different on Intel than it does on current macs?
What have you been smoking?
> Need more??
No, that was enough gibberish for one day.
Fetch, Rover, Fetch
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
> fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
> technology.
>
> Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
> Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
> x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth. His egomaniac
> Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
> jeaopardy and danger.
>
> Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
>
Don't worry -
You'll get you wish -
give Apple about 2 years after the switch
Jobs announcement of the Intel switch, is the end of Apple computer as a
computer vendor.
Apple may suvive as 'Applesoft', or as 'ApplePod', but Apple computer is
dead.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <MPG.1d1e44f32...@news.verizon.net>):
>> That's the power of Redmond. That's what people, ordinary people say
>> when they talk about the problem of desktop dominant Microsoft.
>
> You wouldn't want Itanium on your desktop or in a notebook. Get a clue.
All I can say to anyone who takes Itaniums seriously is...
go look at the specs for Windows Server 2003 on x86. Then look at the specs
on Intanium. There are several reasons for the differences, one being that
x86s simply do certain things better and faster at a lower clock rate and
with less RAM than do Itaniums.
I really, really, REALLY hope that Apple doesn't plan on using Itaniums. If
it does, I shall be first in line to buy as many PPC machines as I possibly
can, 'cause I won't be buying anything with an Itanium in it. Sorry.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Steve Hix
We've heard that before. Multiple times. Over the past 20 years.
Still waiting.
Ilgaz Ocal
<randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> said:
> In article <3hjf9iF...@individual.net>, Il...@spamcop.net says...
>> On 2005-06-18 22:26:53 +0300, Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> said:
>>
>>> In article <3hh59gF...@individual.net>,
>>> Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh btw, all replies are ignored, I am really bored to explain simple
>>>> things in 4 paragraphs on this NG.
>>>>
>>>> If you can't understand what I mean, its not my problem.
>>>
>>> Oh, we understand what you mean. We just think that you're FOS.
>>
>> I am bored from that kind of replies too.
>>
>> Want me to swear too? I try to prove my point while that jerk can't
>> understand what I mean and speaks about SEC filings.
>>
>> Intel will ship a 64bit capable (very different from G5) CPU next year.
>> Apple can't be that stupid to move back to 32bit after coding world's
>> only stable, compatible for home user demands 64bit kernel.
>
> It's not a 64-bit kernel, sorry to burst your bubble.
I can't reply to this bullshit, sorry.
>
>> What will have Intel have as 64bit commands (extensions)? AMD 64
>> extensions. WHY? Because Microsoft told them they can't mess with 2
>> competing CPUs on same platform.
>> IA-64 didn't die because of MS, it died because nobody wanted to pay
> 3X as much for a slow processor with a very good architecture on paper,
> but in practice it turned out to be *very difficult* to write a decent
> compiler for it.
>
> What did they do? They released 64bit XP running via AMD 64 commands.
>> Instructions you mean.
>
> Oh big deal, really! We were coding in 8bit ASM than Seka ASM to cheat
> games, thanks for letting me know its not command, instruction . Are
> you NG spellchecker or something?
What does it mean? It means they forced Intel to use AMD extensions for 64 bit.
>>
>> It means IA-64, despite years of head start, lost in the marketplace.
>> They chose poorly. :-)
>
> Yes, Intel lost the desktop 64bit Desktop CPU war since they never took
> 64bit serious for home computers. That hippie moron should have heard
> Andrew Grove's famous quote about being paranoid.
That's the power of Redmond. That's what people, ordinary people say
when they talk about the problem of desktop dominant Microsoft.
>>
>> You wouldn't want Itanium on your desktop or in a notebook. Get a clue.
>
> Where the hell I suggested it? You better get a clue. Is this a special
> trolling tactic? I SAW THE DAMN GIANT CPU, its not fit to laptop of
> course.
Nobody tells use Itanium (Itanic) on desktop too.
I personally laughed to people's dreaming about G5 laptop too since
just 2 days ago I installed RAM, when you see the CPU physically with
that huge heatsink, you laugh.
Doesn't mean its a bad CPU for workstations. Just like Itanium is fine
for pro workstations, Softimage running etc. As a "bonus", thanks to
excellent 32bit compatability, we have games.
If this is some sort of fun, I don't get it... You should really get
new hobbies.
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
<Fetch-Ro...@K9University.edu> said:
Hi,
I figured that Apple could die because of their customers in last 2
weeks. They are too similar to Amiga customers in basis of zealotry.
As a guy using only g5 at home, I have been amazingly attacked here
just because saying Intel isn't right way to go.
IBM was advertising PowerPC over Macintosh, people didn't even get that
simple fact. Intel doesn't need advertisement too and as no rivalship
left, computer (desktop) progress could be effected.
I am beta testing a huge game here, as all beta tests, people became
super geeks :)
AMD 2600 (yes, AMD even): 15 fps
(my) G5 1600 : 15 fps.
AMD guy had 2 gigs RAM, mine got 1.5 gb.
I have nothing more to say. What a sad thing that announcement was. For
entire computer world.
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
> In article <1119078946.3...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> You don't see it??!!
>>
>> Now the Mac will be nothing but a PC with an Apple OS!!
>
> As it has been for years. The power pc wasn't black magic.
> An Apple is a pretty PC in a nice chassis with a different
> OS than usual. That's it.
>
Hi,
http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teamstats
Check Nr 11. Also check how many team members as we aren't certainly
not some overclocker team, people got AVID to run, Protools to run and
they constantly quit folding while doing business.
Have a nice day
Ilgaz
Randy Howard
> >> Intel will ship a 64bit capable (very different from G5) CPU next year.
> >> Apple can't be that stupid to move back to 32bit after coding world's
> >> only stable, compatible for home user demands 64bit kernel.
> >
> > It's not a 64-bit kernel, sorry to burst your bubble.
>
> I can't reply to this bullshit, sorry.
That's good, because there is no counter argument.
> > Yes, Intel lost the desktop 64bit Desktop CPU war since they never took
> > 64bit serious for home computers.
To AMD you mean? It's not settled yet, but it will be one of those two,
for sure.
Lefty Bigfoot
Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On 2005-06-19 00:12:51 +0300, Lefty Bigfoot <nos...@awol.info> said:
>
> > In article <1119078946.3...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > "abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> You don't see it??!!
> >>
> >> Now the Mac will be nothing but a PC with an Apple OS!!
> >
> > As it has been for years. The power pc wasn't black magic.
> > An Apple is a pretty PC in a nice chassis with a different
> > OS than usual. That's it.
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teamstats
>
> Check Nr 11.
You must be pulling our leg. Certainly you don't think a
list of "teams" for a distributed computing project imeans
anything about the power pc versus anything else.
> Also check how many team members as we aren't certainly
> not some overclocker team, people got AVID to run, Protools to run and
> they constantly quit folding while doing business.
So they have thousands of members, and you know them all,
and you know they run it only part-time. You also know that
none of the other teams above them or below them do the same.
> Have a nice day
Thank you, you do the same.
Lefty Bigfoot
Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> I figured that Apple could die because of their customers in last 2
> weeks. They are too similar to Amiga customers in basis of zealotry.
>
> As a guy using only g5 at home, I have been amazingly attacked here
> just because saying Intel isn't right way to go.
That just means that you are doing more to harm Apple than
any other mac owner is. What is the point? It's done.
You're not going to change it, but you might scare some
people away. What is your real goal?
> IBM was advertising PowerPC over Macintosh, people didn't even get that
> simple fact. Intel doesn't need advertisement too and as no rivalship
> left, computer (desktop) progress could be effected.
No, AMD and Intel are in a death match, and the competition
is fierce.
> AMD 2600 (yes, AMD even): 15 fps
> (my) G5 1600 : 15 fps.
>
> AMD guy had 2 gigs RAM, mine got 1.5 gb.
Like that memory difference matters to frame rate,
particularly when you are both over 1GB of RAM already.
It must be a really shitty game, because 15fps sucks. This
is 2005 dude.
> I have nothing more to say.
Uh huh. Sure.
> What a sad thing that announcement was. For
> entire computer world.
I suspect that Intel was very happy, AMD probably not so
much, and the PC hardware vendors were probably ecstatic, at
least in the short term. Mac sales are probably drying up as
we speak. Your continued claims of doom and gloom are not
helping either.
ELVIS2000
hairy...@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) wrote:
> Actually, it's probably on a par with finding out that PPC chips were
> made by IBM.
>
> Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
This from a guy with an "Intel Outside" x-face. Time for an update.
ELVIS2000
John A. Stovall <johnas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Yes you do... You don't understand "control" and confuse it with a
> business being dependent on a single customer.
It's called buying power. Check it out -- referenced in some Economics
textbooks. Don't try to argue this point.
JW
Bob Blaylock
Craig Koller <cwko...@STOPSPAMmac.com> wrote:
> .
> .
> .
> Today's Mac bears little resemblance to OS9, in comparison to NeXT.
I've never thought of it that way, but yes, that does seem like a
valid way of looking at it. Certainly, MacOS X has more in common with
NeXTStep than it does with MacOS 9 or below.
It may indeed be fair to say that MacOS X is NeXTStep with several
years of development and evolution beyond the last product that was
actually called by that name; and with some Macintosh stuff grafted into
it.
--
I hate spam, but that isn't really part of my email
address. Remove the string "HatesSpam" from this email
address before you use it: BobHat...@Blaylock.to
Ever wonder what it'd be like to be a blood-sucking parasite?
http://tinyurl.com/7wxk
LawsonE
"Randy Howard" <randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1e74556...@news.verizon.net...
> In article <3hjqgfF...@individual.net>, Il...@spamcop.net says...
>> >> Intel will ship a 64bit capable (very different from G5) CPU next
>> >> year.
>> >> Apple can't be that stupid to move back to 32bit after coding world's
>> >> only stable, compatible for home user demands 64bit kernel.
>> >
>> > It's not a 64-bit kernel, sorry to burst your bubble.
>>
>> I can't reply to this bullshit, sorry.
>
> That's good, because there is no counter argument.
what do you mean by "64-bit kernel?"
LawsonE
"Tom Stiller" <tomst...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:tomstiller-B359C...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <1119079958....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, he was fired once, wasn't he!
>
> And look at what happened to the company in the aftermath.
The stock went down, the revenues went up, I made a loto f money on the
stock I purchased when he left, etc...
LawsonE
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:180620051150547323%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> In article <znu-0B97E2.1...@individual.net>, ZnU
> <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Running Windows in a virtual
>> machine will probably be fairly popular, booting it natively not so
>> much.
>
> I'm told by someone who was at WWDC that while he was there he saw
> Windows programs running as if in Classic.
well, seeing how MacOS X is pretty darned close to Linux at the low-level,
and you can run most Windows programs in Linux using WINE...
LawsonE
"Michelle Steiner" <mich...@michelle.org> wrote in message
news:michelle-6F6E75...@news.west.cox.net...
>>
>> said)
>
> development. But Macs run Windows now.
>
>> 2) PCs running Mac OS (as you know they will)
>
>
>> 3) PC clone makers making Macs-like clones (possible even after what
>> Jobs said)
>
>
>> 4) Apple lossing money when people don't see the need to buy an Apple
>> Mac when they can get a PC that runs Mac OS (as you know they will)
>
>
>> 5) Macs suffering in graphics processing without AltiVec (as you
>> know)
>
>
>> 6) Mac programming code becoming more bloated because Intel code is
>> more complex
>
> it be more complex?
What's the executable size of a Powerpc vs an Intel? I suspect that the
Intel executable is slightly smaller...
Leonard Blaisdell
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote:
> His stupid decision to change the Mac
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> Apple as a hardware maker.
I haven't read the 82 replies so far. When a supplier fails to at least
keep up with current technology that you wish to compete with, you dump
them or die.
> Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
> because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
> fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
> technology.
Keeping up with the technology a company is competing against is not
extravagant.
> Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
> Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
> x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth.
PPC probably is if IBM didn't stagnate in the personal computer field.
But they did for whatever reason.
> His egomaniac
> Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
> jeaopardy and danger.
It was in a whole lot more danger until he retook it over.
>
> The soul of the Mac Platrform is not just the OS. It is all, the
> Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
Chill. Things will be fine. Or they won't.
leo
LawsonE
"abpp" <ab...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1119080079....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> DAMN RIGHT!
>
>
>
> yarmf...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Apple lost its way years ago. I dumped them in 1995,
>> when Linux became usable. Never looked back.
>>
>> Although the NeXT box was very cool. But Steve
>> screwed that up too by refusing to sell to students,
>> academics, and individuals. He insisted on selling
>> only to businesses and in bulk deals to colleges.
>>
>> OS/X is nowhere near as smooth as NeXT OS.
>> What is accomplished using only a 68030 processor
>> was amazing.
>
What is this about Jobs not selling to education? The only cheap way to get
a NeXT box was to be in education...
LawsonE
"Bob Blaylock" <BobHat...@Blaylock.to> wrote in message
news:BobHatesSpam-B697...@azure.impulse.net...
> In article <180620051340292816%cwko...@STOPSPAMmac.com>,
> Craig Koller <cwko...@STOPSPAMmac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <BobHatesSpam-984E...@azure.impulse.net>, Bob
>> Blaylock <BobHat...@Blaylock.to> wrote:
>>
>> > It seems to me that MacOS X is very close to what NeXTSTep would have
>> > become, if NeXT had stayed in the business, and continued to develop
>> > NeXTStep to this day.
>>
>> You could easily argue it's Apple that went out of business. NeXT/Jobs
>> took Apple over and MacOS X *IS* NeXTStep... the move to Intel seals
>> the deal.
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> Today's Mac bears little resemblance to OS9, in comparison to NeXT.
>
> I've never thought of it that way, but yes, that does seem like a
> valid way of looking at it. Certainly, MacOS X has more in common with
> NeXTStep than it does with MacOS 9 or below.
>
> It may indeed be fair to say that MacOS X is NeXTStep with several
> years of development and evolution beyond the last product that was
> actually called by that name; and with some Macintosh stuff grafted into
> it.
>
But not always the best stuff. OpenDoc has been replaced by Widgits and GX
Typography replaced by AAT with most GX features buried or burned away.
LawsonE
"Randy Howard" <randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in message
> In article <1119061621....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> calc...@hotmail.com says...
>> Eight to five it will.
>
> It will what?
>
>> Indeed from what I understand it does right now.
>
>
> It does what right now?
>
> Zero-context in your follow up means we get to guess what you
> are replying to above.
>
Run on generic PC hardware, I think he meant...
Josselin
> I'm so glad that Linux is getting better and
> FULLY commited to the PP
Best Joke of the Year !!
> IBM was being offered more business with the consoles and obviously
> they will put more effort on those chips.
IBM PCs are chinese now !!! and IBM wil move out of manufacturing ....
they do consulting !
Andy Hewitt
Not yet! ;-)
I'll change it when it happens. Besides, I couldn't find a 'Microsoft is
evil' x-face!
--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/thehewitts2/index.htm
(updated Feb 21 2005)
Travelinman
"LawsonE" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Somehow, I knew that you'd bring up GX somewhere in this thread.
It's dead. Get over it.
Ilgaz Ocal
I am arguing with illiterates about altivec's advantages on a
scientific project.
Folding@home master runs a G4 mac at home.
You guys are hopeless zealots, whatever that Steve Jobs crook says,
must be true. IBM didn't give a FUCK to his 3ghz G5, live with it. They
don't give a fuck to home users either, they sold their PC biz to
chinese. They are happy with AS/400, RS/6000 sales and 30.000 seat
government terminal purchases. I see myself as a customer of Apple, not
some sort of freak cult member so I heard Intel news, flamed a bit, now
living with it.
It doesn't mean Intel CPU is a good thing.
It doesn't mean PPC became worse than a god damn pentium 4 gaming CPU!
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
> In article <3hjr30F...@individual.net>,
> Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> I figured that Apple could die because of their customers in last 2
>> weeks. They are too similar to Amiga customers in basis of zealotry.
>>
>> As a guy using only g5 at home, I have been amazingly attacked here
>> just because saying Intel isn't right way to go.
>
> That just means that you are doing more to harm Apple than any other
> mac owner is. What is the point? It's done.
> You're not going to change it, but you might scare some
> people away. What is your real goal?
I am not Steve Jobs, I openly say currently dual g5 WORKSTATION is a
good purchase, iMac, iBook is NOT since Apple software houses have some
amateurs and CS students like you, they won'T spare time to Altivec for
home software, games.
>
>> IBM was advertising PowerPC over Macintosh, people didn't even get that
>> simple fact. Intel doesn't need advertisement too and as no rivalship
>> left, computer (desktop) progress could be effected.
>
> No, AMD and Intel are in a death match, and the competition is fierce.
>
> When my machine becomes unusable, I will buy AMD, it looks like its the
> new inventor in business. If it can't run OS X without hacking, its not
> my problem, I install longhorn DVD and live with it.
AMD 2600 (yes, AMD even): 15 fps
>> (my) G5 1600 : 15 fps.
>>
>> AMD guy had 2 gigs RAM, mine got 1.5 gb.
>>
>> Like that memory difference matters to frame rate, particularly when
>> you are both over 1GB of RAM already.
>
> It must be a really shitty game, because 15fps sucks. This is 2005 dude.
>
> Thats why I didn't give the games name. ITS BETA TESTING. THE FINAL
> RELEASE WORKS IN 60 FPS- 70 FPS NOW. As you have no clue about
> computers, they would get needlessly mentioned by trolls, zealots like
> you.
I have nothing more to say.
>> Uh huh. Sure.
>
> So, the thing you understand from usenet is needless 50 article threads
> about nothing. Fine. Just to note you can't make me shut up and this
> thread can well go until 2008 when Apple releases the biggest flop in
> computer history. Lets hope your hippie cult leader has "supply terms"
> in his Intel contract. Intel may get hard time to supply Apple. Word
> winTEL didn't come out from nowhere.
What a sad thing that announcement was. For entire computer world.
>>
>> I suspect that Intel was very happy, AMD probably not so much, and the
>> PC hardware vendors were probably ecstatic, at least in the short term.
>> Mac sales are probably drying up as
> we speak. Your continued claims of doom and gloom are not
> helping either.
>
> We lost the only end user, consumer oriented 64bit RISC cpu with vector
> processing.
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
> ELVIS2000 <elvis...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gybigq.11demno1d99uikN%hairy...@spamcop.net>,
>> hairy...@spamcop.net (Andy Hewitt) wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, it's probably on a par with finding out that PPC chips were
>>> made by IBM.
>>>
>>> Intel have never been the baddies here, just MicroSoft.
>>
>> This from a guy with an "Intel Outside" x-face. Time for an update.
>
> Not yet! ;-)
>
> I'll change it when it happens. Besides, I couldn't find a 'Microsoft is
> evil' x-face!
I have a Intel sticker unused, no shit. Its from 2003, my P4 1800 box
which I gave up for PPC 1600.
Still happy ;)
Apple community became Intel whores, rotfl. Whatever, I don't care, my
Simcity 4 comes in Monday, purchased 1.5 gb ram, happy here.
Ilgaz
Ilgaz Ocal
Oops, its closer to FreeBSD in fact (while there is mach kernel), if
you will follow WINE development, check FreeBSD/Wine developments.
At INIT level (how machine inits etc), Slackware is really close to Mac
since its closer to BSD style of doing things.
Ilgaz
Tom Randy
> I here by call to all TRUE Mac users to demand the immediate
> resignation of Steve Jobs. His stupid decision to change the Mac
> platform from a clear superior microprocessor to an inferior and
> old-designed one will destroy the Mac platform, if not the demise of
> Apple as a hardware maker. Please, make Steve Jobs understand that just
> because a chip provider doesn't abide by his extravagant demands as
> fast as he wants, he should not change a whole platform to an inferior
> technology.
>
> Steve Jobs is not a CEO that can be trusted. Since he came back to
> Apple he always told us (and showed us) that PowerPC is superior than
> x86, and now he is just ignoring the truth. His egomaniac
> Bill-Gates-want-to-be attitute will put Apple and the Mac platform in
> jeaopardy and danger.
>
> The soul of the Mac Platrform is not just the OS. It is all, the
> Hardware, the Software, and the users; all unique and special.
And the PPC was going NOWHERE FAST. We as users won't see much of a
difference when the switch comes.
R_E_L_A_X_.....it'll be o.k......
--
Chris: "Dad, what's a blowhole for?"
Peter: "I'll tell you what it's NOT for and then you'll know why I can
never go back to Sea World."
Tom Randy
> I am a true Mac user and I don't care who makes the chip inside my Mac,
> as long as it's not Microsoft.
And it has OS X on it!
> I don't know how you come to your conclusion that the Mac platform will
> be destroyed if an Intel chip is used instead of an IBM one.
>
He has the sky is falling syndrome....
--
PCs, like air-conditioners, are useless when you open Windows.
Andy Hewitt
<Snipped Text>
> >> This from a guy with an "Intel Outside" x-face. Time for an update.
> >
> > Not yet! ;-)
> >
> > I'll change it when it happens. Besides, I couldn't find a 'Microsoft is
> > evil' x-face!
>
> I have a Intel sticker unused, no shit. Its from 2003, my P4 1800 box
> which I gave up for PPC 1600.
Shirley a 6100?
> Still happy ;)
That's what matters realy isn't it?
> Apple community became Intel whores, rotfl. Whatever, I don't care, my
> Simcity 4 comes in Monday, purchased 1.5 gb ram, happy here.
And that too. As long as your computer does what you need it too, what
else matters?
not who you think I am
Ilgaz Ocal <Il...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> I am arguing with illiterates about altivec's advantages on a
> scientific project.
>
> Folding@home master runs a G4 mac at home.
>
> You guys are hopeless zealots, whatever that Steve Jobs crook says,
> must be true.
U R A TROLL