Status of 6.0 for production systems

[Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC]

Ted

It would be nice if you could at least get your "facts" straight

(continued below)

On Nov 15, 2005, at 6:15 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

>>
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:23 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>
>>>> A lot of people wondered how Steve Jobs could dare change over to
>>>> Intel
>>>> chips.
>>>> In Steve Jobs keynote speech announcing the big move Intel chips  
>>>> was
>>>> just about entirely stated as because of the 'performance per watt
>>>> ratio' of Intel CPUs. Check out the picture of the key note speech
>>>> and
>>>> look at the bottom of the picture with Intel and IBM's PowerPC
>>>> processor.
>>>> http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2005/WWDC/
>>>> perfperwatt.jpg
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is a bunch of whitewashing as anyone in the tech industry  
>>> knows.
>>
>> Wrong.  WHat jobs said was exactly correct
>>
>>> Jobs changed over to Intel for two reasons.  First, because Intel  
>>> gave
>>> him a better price on the CPU's.
>>
>> This is also a consideration.  Price always is/
>>
>> However, the main reason was that the performance they needed at the
>> wattage they needed (for laptops) was not on the horizon for PPC.
>> The G5 can compete against the Intel desktop offerings but there was
>> not a laptop G5 coming any time soon [because of energy dissipation)
>> and the G4 for laptops was not cutting it.
>>
>
> Rubbish.  They could simply use Intel for laptops until IBM got it
> together.
> Or signed a letter of intent which would prod IBM.  There is nothing
> inherent
> in the design of the G5 that makes it so that you cannot make low  
> power
> and low heat versions of it.

Ted.  Apple did play some games to try and prod IBM.   And your  
assertion that they could use Intel for laptops until IBM got its act  
together is hysterical.  Glad you aren't running Apple or any other  
real company.  You want them to commit to a much more expensive 2- 
architecture strategy indefinitely?  That makes a lot of sense.  IBM  
was not interested in making a G5 caliber chip made for laptops.    
There was nothing in their roadmap and nothing technology wise they  
were showing.  Intel has some nice laptop chipsets  and cpus.  It is  
difficult and expensive as is to do a multi year transition and keep  
support of PPC machines for the sveeral years that they will be doing  
so after the transition.

It probably was technically feasible to come up with a G5 caliber  
laptop chip but IBM was not interested for someone as "low volume" as  
Apple.  They are much more interested in XBox 360 , Playstation 3 and  
Nintendo evolution.

>
> Other computer manufacturers have no problems using different CPU's in
> their products.

Name one major manufacturer in the same market as Apple that has an  
indefinite long term strategy of multiple CPUs.  I can only think of  
Big Iron like Sun and IBM.

>
>>> Second because doing this instantly
>>> obsoletes the older power PC macs thus pushing all the Mac users to
>>> fork over money for new software and hardware.
>>
>> Wrong.  Conspiracy-Ted at it again.
>>
>
> But of course you have no answer to the software obsolescence issue.

There is no software obsolescence issue.  Besides making it quite  
easy to port software to OS X Intel for most people, since the  
underlying OS and libraries is the same, Apple has invested a ton of  
money into the Rosetta technology which allows PPC software to  
continue to run on the Intel boxes.  And they are also still  
introducing PPC machines for a while and will continue to support PPC  
machines for several years so as to avoid the problem.

>
> Once again typical Apple apologizing.  When Apple dumped MacOS Classic
> in favor of MacOS X, all the Apple proponents who for years were  
> saying
> that MacOS was the best OS in existence, didn't let the door hit  
> them on
> the
> ass on the way out of the mac Classic room.

?????  classic MacOS  (OS 9) was good for the market it was competing  
in but could not last forever.  Apple has the Classic compatibility  
in OS X and for a few years after OS X was introduced continued to  
introduce new machines that support OS 9 natively.  I can still run  
lots of my System 7 apps on my G5 under Classic today...  no software  
obsolescence and nothing to worry about hitting me in the ass.

> When Apple dumped Motorola
> in favor of IBM all the Apple people who for years had been  
> claiming that
> Apples were so much better because they held their value over the  
> years
> while PC's didn't, conveniently forgot that now the resale value of  
> the
> 68k
> Mac was zero.

Dude, you have no idea what you were talking about.  The PPC Mac was  
introduced in late 93 and 68K based Macs still had value (including  
resale) for a long while (I know as I sold one then).  Your good on  
making crap up but bad on facts and history.

>
> What I think is the biggest joke is that you Apple guys worship the
> ground
> that Jobs walks on like he's Apple's Savior, Jobs can do no wrong  
> is the
> mantra.

Jobs can do wrong.  But he has been a lot more successful than you or  
most any other industry executive over the last 7 years.  I give the  
guy a break most of the time since he has a track record.

> Yet to the non Apple-colored-eyglasses computer industry, the
> guy
> is just as money-grubbing profit-grubbing as any other.

Actually not.  I don't like the guy personally, but I respect where  
he has taken Apple and the way he has given Apple new life. Just FYI  
-- He had a $1 salary at Apple for a long while.  He did take some  
stock grants and options after turning the company around.  You like  
to spew for venom and to you everything is a conspiracy or everyone  
but Ted is a zealot.

> This is a guy
> that didn't
> even know that FreeBSD was one of the bases of MacOSX and was telling
> people it was built on -LINUX- for crying out loud.

???????????????  Who are you talking about?

Btw.  FreeBSD is NOT one of the "bases" for Mac OS X.  Mac OS X did  
inherit the FreeBSD userland and add in a BSD kernel compatibility  
layer compatible with FreeBSD.  But Mac OS X is based on OpenStep  
which was a mach based BSD personality (pre FreeBSD) OS.

>
> Jobs switched CPU's to get a whole lot of you guys to dump you  
> "holds its
> resale value" hardware in the ashbin, and run out and give a lot of  
> money
> to
> Apple for the latest and greatest Intel gear, as well as help out  
> all the
> software
> ISV's writing software for MacOS X by giving them a reason to prod  
> all of
> you
> into buying software upgrades.  And you can't get enough of it!   
> Simply
> amazing!
> Apple is working exactly like Microsoft these days yet you all  
> think it's
> still better!

Ted the conspiracy man.  Spewing forth his BS.  Ted.  You don't have  
a clue of what you are talking about.

>
> I guess one of these days when General Motors finally gets stick of
> propping up
> Saturn (Saturn has never turned a profit since it was founded) all the
> Saturn
> owners who think they are 'different kinna car people' will be saying
> that
> Chevrolet is a 'different kinna car'   Cast from the same mold you all
> are.
>
>
> Ted

Ted, reading your stuff would be humorous if it wasn't so sad.  You  
are pretty smart guy in technical matters.  Too bad you are such an  
ass otherwise.

Every person who wants FreeBSD to adopt a real logo is a right wing  
Christian wacko.

Every person who uses OS X is an Apple Zealot who worships the ground  
Jobs walks on.

That is the world according to Ted Mittelstaedt.

Stick to answering technical posts Ted.  You are good at that.  Lay  
of the conspiracy crap that your fevered mind makes up.

Chad


---
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC
Your Web App and Email hosting provider
chad at shire.net