So I was playing w/ WinXP yesterday....
- Thread starter thedbp
- Start date
While We Are the Subject of XP vs OS X... or however u guys'd put it...
Can Some Show me their IE Toolbar?! i am continu'in 2 Aquafy my Desktop... and Wanna compare my IE Bar?! ... it may Sound Silly, i dunno... But Can Someone Show me there's So i can Compare?!
Thanks Guys!
Here's mine...
NeYo
Can Some Show me their IE Toolbar?! i am continu'in 2 Aquafy my Desktop... and Wanna compare my IE Bar?! ... it may Sound Silly, i dunno... But Can Someone Show me there's So i can Compare?!
Thanks Guys!
Here's mine...
NeYo
Attachments
WadesWorld, grow a brain will ya, the guy said he tried OSX but none of the software actually works(Thats another point, wont go into it though), Duh. If the app uses two procs itll use em in OS9 i.e photoshop Duh. Either that or you lot are stupid for buying dual macs when OSX wasnt even nearly finished.
That is one damn good review m8, nuff said. The results speak for themselves.
this is not trolling its just pointing out a very good dual proc review, which i though you lot would be interested, it just seems you only like it when the G4 wins, which doesnt happen anymore.
It will be interesting when the G5 comes out, but then again itll have to compete with the Sledge/Claw Hammer from AMD.
That is one damn good review m8, nuff said. The results speak for themselves.
this is not trolling its just pointing out a very good dual proc review, which i though you lot would be interested, it just seems you only like it when the G4 wins, which doesnt happen anymore.
It will be interesting when the G5 comes out, but then again itll have to compete with the Sledge/Claw Hammer from AMD.
ulrik
Registered
Stills, OS 9 utilizes the seconds processor in a different way than OS X. Apps like Photoshop, Final Cut, Cinema 4D etc. used the seconds processor, but, for example, under OS 9, it is impossible to actually share the load onto the two processors. So, Photoshop could do calculation A on processor number 1 and calculation B on processor number 2, but, if, in any case, the following calculation C would need a result from calculation A, it would be impossible to execute it on processor 2, since it can't share the flat registries of the two processors, it has to take another processor cycle to exchange the result into the other registry OR wait till processor 1 is finished. So processor 2 would be stalled! This was pointed out in the Apple Developer Connection a while back when developers asked why multi processor apps are still that slow, and if you ever coded a codec, then you will know that nearly EVERY calculation depens on results from past calculations. There are codecs which are programmed NOT to do this, but the most commons, MPEG 1, MPEG 2, Sorenson, DivX, do this. To prevent the other processor from beeing stalled, you need true SMP support, which is implemented in OS X. This way, you could store the result easily in the registry of the other processor, without having to wait till another processor cycle of that processor is free.
To make it short, OS 9 multi processor apps are far away from the performance of OS X apps, so the test actually SHOULD be redone once the Apps are carbonized or cocoafied.
UPDATE: this post might look like I ever coded a codec. This is not the case
But I red much about it the structure of such codecs since I am a big DV fan...
To make it short, OS 9 multi processor apps are far away from the performance of OS X apps, so the test actually SHOULD be redone once the Apps are carbonized or cocoafied.
UPDATE: this post might look like I ever coded a codec. This is not the case
But I red much about it the structure of such codecs since I am a big DV fan...thats a good point, youve made there, but at the end of the day we use these apps now, dont we? If you are saying we should wait for a recode the MAC isnt really the platform to use for proffesionals who use that software now, Am i right?
The flagship MAC is left far behind in its bread and butter apps, the dual proc PC alternatives are better today and by the time the macs moved on so will the Pc's.
This is the point im getting at here guys.
The flagship MAC is left far behind in its bread and butter apps, the dual proc PC alternatives are better today and by the time the macs moved on so will the Pc's.
This is the point im getting at here guys.
ulrik
Registered
frgmstr:
well, we could argue about that for hours!
You find some benchmarks where the multiprocessor PCs are better, I find some where the Macs are better.
My friend just bought a Dual P4 and told me that now, he can encode to MPEG 2 in 2x realtime. When I told him that my Quicksilver does it in realtime, he didn't believe me. When I showed it to him, he started thinking about buying a Mac
No, seriously, is there any good thing about comparing these systems?
I don't think so. It starts flame wars. "My dad is stronger than yours".
"But my Dad can encode MPEG 2 in realtime!" "so what, my Dad has more software", "my dad has a cristal clear casing and is only as tall as a CD and doesn't need a fan"....etc. etc.
Some of us bitch about your OS, some of you bitch about our OS. We bitch about your commercials, you bitch about our commercials. We both don't have nuclear warheads so we don't have to fear anything...
I don't care about speed. Seriously, if Macs would half as fast as PCs and twice as expensive, I would still buy them and no PCs. I like them.
You like PCs. I will never switch to PCs, you maybe never to Macs. Let's agree there, ok?
well, we could argue about that for hours!
You find some benchmarks where the multiprocessor PCs are better, I find some where the Macs are better.
My friend just bought a Dual P4 and told me that now, he can encode to MPEG 2 in 2x realtime. When I told him that my Quicksilver does it in realtime, he didn't believe me. When I showed it to him, he started thinking about buying a Mac
No, seriously, is there any good thing about comparing these systems?
I don't think so. It starts flame wars. "My dad is stronger than yours".
"But my Dad can encode MPEG 2 in realtime!" "so what, my Dad has more software", "my dad has a cristal clear casing and is only as tall as a CD and doesn't need a fan"....etc. etc.
Some of us bitch about your OS, some of you bitch about our OS. We bitch about your commercials, you bitch about our commercials. We both don't have nuclear warheads so we don't have to fear anything...
I don't care about speed. Seriously, if Macs would half as fast as PCs and twice as expensive, I would still buy them and no PCs. I like them.
You like PCs. I will never switch to PCs, you maybe never to Macs. Let's agree there, ok?
Wait a minute i thought MACs were half as fast and cost twice as much , only kidding.
I was making the point relating to pro's who make a living out of this software, it would matter to em.
Anyway this is turning into a good little debate, oh and i would have a G4 aswell as my PC if i could afford it, Poor student you see.
, only kidding.I was making the point relating to pro's who make a living out of this software, it would matter to em.
Anyway this is turning into a good little debate, oh and i would have a G4 aswell as my PC if i could afford it, Poor student you see.
ulrik
Registered
I conside myself a pro, earning my money with it ...as most graphic designers do
But well, lets settle it!
PS: I have to admit, until about two months ago, I worked for a company as a programmer...on PCs. But I decided to go the way of a freelancer, switching to cocoa and - what I am doing for living - to 4D
...as most graphic designers do But well, lets settle it!
PS: I have to admit, until about two months ago, I worked for a company as a programmer...on PCs. But I decided to go the way of a freelancer, switching to cocoa and - what I am doing for living - to 4D
konrad
Registered
renders a standard benchmark project about 20-25% faster than ae 5 under os9. under os9, only a few plugins support multiprocessor rendering. if you use ae5 in osx classic mode and watch the cpu monitor, you can see that mostly processor 1 is used. in ae 5.5, both processors can share the load.
i think this is why the dual g4 was that slow in the test.
i think this is why the dual g4 was that slow in the test.
ddma
The Most Stupid Member
Oh well... I saw a PC folk cannot live with his previous statements and try to say somethin' stoopid...
I mean you have to study again WHAT IS AN OPERATING SYSTEM. Aqua is apart of the OS and is one of the most important part - GUI. If we are talking about the OS, why we can't talk about Cocoa, Carbon, Aqua, Darwin?
I think if you only want to compare the letters in "OS X" and "XP", it really sounds silly...
Again... Aqua is not only the candy screen you had seen, but also the way you use to control your computer... If there is a Save Box in your MS Word XP, can you still compose other documents? So, again, what is the so-called new theme - Luna - has brought to you? Just some silly words of saying Aqua sucked by your fingers?
By the way, I know XP good. It won't hang... But so what? What is the different between XP and 2000? Why Bill Gates can call it a ground-breaking product? Why 95% of Mac users have given X Thumbs up but there are 48% Thumbs down for XP at CNET site?
WHATEVER, I just want you know what is the defination of GUI...
**GUI is not only a theme...
By the way, I know XP good. It won't hang... But so what? What is the different between XP and 2000? Why Bill Gates can call it a ground-breaking product? Why 95% of Mac users have given X Thumbs up but there are 48% Thumbs down for XP at CNET site?
Well that might be now but when OSX first came out people reffered to it as BETA and were quite disgusted with it. I can only imagine what you lot would say if M$ did that with one of their OSes.
Why slte Bill for calling XP revolutionary, i mean Steve only needs to take a dump and its revolutionary. I mean must of the time he takes a dump out his mouth anyway. come on Man
Well that might be now but when OSX first came out people reffered to it as BETA and were quite disgusted with it. I can only imagine what you lot would say if M$ did that with one of their OSes.
Why slte Bill for calling XP revolutionary, i mean Steve only needs to take a dump and its revolutionary. I mean must of the time he takes a dump out his mouth anyway. come on Man
When steve takes a dump, it usually IS revolutionary. He could discard 50 times as many good ideas in one day as Bill gets in a whole year. And usually when the light bulb goes off over Bill's head, the next sentence usually starts something like this: "Hey! Let's steal ____________!"
Easy. We Mac users are evangelists of our own platform. Even Mac users who like OS X so-so give it a thumbs up in public. Because we're the little ones in the public. Those 48% thumbs down for XP could very well be all the Mac lovers united.
I think XP hasn't changed that much in the PC world. It's a 'normal' upgrade to Win 2K. What it DID was it brought the stability of NT (3.5, 4.0, 5.0, 5.1) to the consumer version of Windows.
OS X brought the stability of UN*X to the Mac. Yes, we made a bigger step, but let's also not forget that Mac OS 9 was on very shaky legs.
I think XP hasn't changed that much in the PC world. It's a 'normal' upgrade to Win 2K. What it DID was it brought the stability of NT (3.5, 4.0, 5.0, 5.1) to the consumer version of Windows.
OS X brought the stability of UN*X to the Mac. Yes, we made a bigger step, but let's also not forget that Mac OS 9 was on very shaky legs.