Quake3World

edit* oh its you canis nm

Billy Bellend wrote:edit* oh its you canis nm

Yep! It's me!

bag0shite wrote:What I want to know is, what will stop Joe average computer user installing OSX on his PC? Will it be in the chip? Mobo? And how long before it's hacked....

Well, back in the days of 68000 Macs, you needed (I think it was) a BIOS chip to get Mac OS to run on an Atari ST

amigas could save some mac formats no or am i freakin?

I like how mac fanboys freak out about the P4 being only 32-bit (even though it isn't), when in fact most of new macs are still sold with G4 processors.

They're saying that OS X will be crippled so it dan't run on a non Apple comp, but they won't do anything to prevent Windows from running on the Mactel, so it means yes, you will be able to run a dual boot on your Mactel machine, OS X and Windows, which is good news for gamers. Maybe I'll finally be down to one computer in a coupla years, although I would miss out on all the fun of building my own comp. it would be sweet to be able to do game dev on a mac.

SplishSplash wrote:I like how mac fanboys freak out about the P4 being only 32-bit (even though it isn't), when in fact most of new macs are still sold with G4 processors.

errr... our two best selling products are currently the imac and the new g5s... 64bit products.

I like the performance per watt slide, it confirms a few things for me (well, semi confirms):

* Apple will not ship Pentium 4 based units, THANK GOD.
* Apple will probably base off Pentium 3 architecture or Pentium M hopefully (YEA BABY!!)
* Apple are looking to make their products smaller still.

mjrpes wrote:

Turbanator wrote:
so you paid what for your mac?
what size screen is it?
how much does that size of screen alone retail for by a decent "PC" manufactuer?
what processor is it? what's that equivilent to taking a single 2.7ghz g5 to be equal to 3.6ghz intel (rough, worst case scenario, estimation).

Do you think you could get a better deal if you build the machine as a SFF and purchased the screen seperately.... keyboard mouse and everything... wifi? bluetooth? do you?

Are you trying to argue that Apple computers cost the same or less than PC computers when everything is brought together?

yes, apple products ARE good value for money...

lemme do this in GBP £, because I can't be assed trawling apple us website...

Apple iPod 20GB = £209
Creative Zen 20gb = £219 is the lowest I've seen?
IRiver iHP320 = £249
One is a fashion icon, a good product with amazing support, the others aren't... which makes more sense to buy?

Apple iPod Shuffle 1GB = £99
Courier 1GB Memory Key = £89
Sony E107L 1GB MP3 = £99
The sony e107l requires a cable to connect it to a pc, doesn't even come with a USB head on the product... pain in the ass...

Apple iBook 12" 1.2Ghz = £699
Hewlett Packard dv1225EA CeleronM 1.5 = £699
Sony VAIO VGN-FS215E CeleronM 1.5 = £799
Toshiba Portege A200 PentiumM 1.6 = £899
The A200 is the most iBook esque product, but 200 quid more... The Apple offers amazing value; small, powerful, and lightweight laptop for under £700.
http://www.microanvika.com/product.asp? ... O=TOS14133

I could do the same thing with Mac Mini, iMac, etc. The only product that is a rip off I reckon is the PowerMac G5, but if you NEED serious power, I guess you have to pay for it.

Oh, with apple products:
ALL desktop products, onsite repair FOC. (Mac Mini isn't classed as a desktop product though, I think they class it as an ipod accessory, lol).

All iPods, courier collect and return. Which other manufacturer offers that on their MP3 players? I rang Sony recently to get my sisters HD3 repaired, they practically told me to fuck off and deal with the store I bought it from.... that's great service. Had it been an iPod they'd register my details, do a quick diagnostic and send a courier to come pick it up at my convinience....

so does this mean that the x86 OSX will be capable of running other x86 based applications at some point?

MKJ wrote:so does this mean that the x86 OSX will be capable of running other x86 based applications at some point?

I think this has been answered several times in this thread.
WINE and other emulators may become faster or usable in the first place. That's about it.
OSX will not suddenly get DirectX support.

SplishSplash wrote:I like how mac fanboys freak out about the P4 being only 32-bit (even though it isn't), when in fact most of new macs are still sold with G4 processors.

go back to sleep

SplishSplash wrote:

MKJ wrote:so does this mean that the x86 OSX will be capable of running other x86 based applications at some point?

I think this has been answered several times in this thread.
WINE and other emulators may become faster or usable in the first place. That's about it.
OSX will not suddenly get DirectX support.

DirectX is the last concern as that's only a top layer API used for multimedia and 3D applications. It's more that Windows programs are written and compiled with the Win32 API. For the same reasons you can't run a Win32 application on Linux, you can't run it on an Intel Mac.

What I think is significant is that they're saying Intel's roadmap, not current range, is the best. The P4 dev kits are just that, dev kits. Could be interesting....