WoW on an Intel-iMac, first progress report

[BTs_GhostSniper]

FW is getting old, and USB2 does the job at the moment. FW800 drains alot of energy. So it wouldn't be very efficiant on a macbook. And from what i've seen FW800 hasn't really been a hit on the market. From what i've seen.

And I guess it's easier to put out USB2 then FW, because theres more computers with USB2 then FW.
And USB2 is "backwards-compatible" with USB1.

Okay, that whole argument is just crazy.  FW800 is not that old and it's TWICE as fast as USB 2.0!  Also, who cares how much energy it takes up?!  The people using it either on their desktop or on their laptop probably aren't using it off of battery power anyway, therefor they don't care how much power it uses...it gets the job done!  And I would say that FW800 is definitely a hit...damn near every hard drive out there makes a FW800 version.  Personally, I can't live without it.

[BFG]

I think its a case of need and want - those of us that need FW800 want it - those of you that have no need for it arn't bothered. Firewire is far from a old or redundant technology - and there are several industrys that rely on it - namely Video. USB2 is no alternative and as for the argument that FW isn't adopted - well as an example right now i have almost 20 Firewire devices in front of me - including Vidio IO box, Deck and 16HDs.
Outdated by USB2 ?? Well the 1394 specification allow a transfer rate of 786.432 Mbit/s - thats a lot faster than USB2!

The low overhead, high data rates of 1394, the ability to mix real-time synchronous and asynchronous data on a single line and the ability to mix low speed and high speed devices on the same single network connection, provides a truly universal connection which many people rely on and which is broadly used.

What i do hope apple does is push SATA by including external SATA ports on the new desktops when they arrive. Drop or have just one FW400 maybe, but to loose FW800 on pro macs would be crazy.

 The SATA interface is faster than both USB and FireWire 800. SATA/150 runs at 150MBps (approx. 1.2Gbps, compared to the 800 Mbps of FireWire 800, or 480Mbps of USB 2.0). SATA/300 doubles the rate to 2.4Gbps.

That said, Firewire is backwards compatable 800 to 400 and the FireWire standard technically supports up to 3.2Gbps... thats faster than SATA/300 !!

So basically don't tell me FW is dead!

[Ethion]

FW is getting old, and USB2 does the job at the moment. FW800 drains alot of energy. So it wouldn't be very efficiant on a macbook. And from what i've seen FW800 hasn't really been a hit on the market. From what i've seen.

And I guess it's easier to put out USB2 then FW, because theres more computers with USB2 then FW.
And USB2 is "backwards-compatible" with USB1.

Okay, that whole argument is just crazy.  FW800 is not that old and it's TWICE as fast as USB 2.0!  Also, who cares how much energy it takes up?!  The people using it either on their desktop or on their laptop probably aren't using it off of battery power anyway, therefor they don't care how much power it uses...it gets the job done!  And I would say that FW800 is definitely a hit...damn near every hard drive out there makes a FW800 version.  Personally, I can't live without it.

Yeah, I know. FW800 is great. although here in Sweden anyway,(which I pointed out)
But look at the Macbook, it doesn't have FW800. The only way of using FW800 is to buy a expresscard.

Still PC is the major computer in everyones home, and the majority of those computers have USB2, or some FW port. But I haven't seen a PC with a FW800 port yet. But i'm not saying that Firewire is dead. But don't you think it's weird that Apple isn't using Firewire anymore on their iPods? Because the majority of the iPod users have PCs, with USB..


--
And wow never heard of FW1600

[BFG]

The reason that FW wasn't more widely adopted in the PC world is a bit painful... basically someone told apple they should charge for the name - ie 1$ per port. Intel said bollocks to that and basically everyone went for USB2... Im certain that apples new motherboards from Intel will have FW on them though - i'll eat my hat if they dont.

[NiKLoT]

A few questions about intel on mac. 1st is it really such fucking better then the ibm version? 2nd if u have a tower G5 is it possible to change from Ibm to intel? 3rd Can u use apple apps written for the ibm version also on intel and the otherway arround?
If some1 has a good link that answers all my questions just gimmi the link. thnx

If FW is gonna die well... Ipod video is all i say... if u have videos and tonnes of music thats easy 30 gigs and i know from my pc friends it takes AGES with usb! thats sertainly not the only thing but i think thats something that would hurt many ppl!

[BFG]

1st is it really such fucking better then the ibm version?
2nd if u have a tower G5 is it possible to change from Ibm to intel?
3rd Can u use apple apps written for the ibm version also on intel and the otherway arround?


1 - we don't know yet. for some things yes for others maybe not. they are two very different chips. reliable bench marks arn't available yet - but i think you can safely say that they arn't slower and for somthings like gaming they will be a lot faster (shorter pipes etc)

2 no - basically!

3. a universal binary means that basically when you hit 'go' the programme will excecute the version of the software that your computer needs - ie PPC or X86. 

Emulation software from apple means that you can run some PPC applications on your intel mac. However there is no current way (other than emulators like Virtual PC) to run a X86 application on a PPC mac.

edit - replaced 'install' with 'execute' to keep ethion happy

[NiKLoT]

rgr that kinda that i expected.. in other words.. buy a new mac again..

[:MoD:Shade]

Not yet though, least I wouldn't get one.  Maybe wait . . half a year . . a year or so.

[BFG]

Not yet though, least I wouldn't get one.  Maybe wait . . half a year . . a year or so.

Absolutly. i wouldn't buy a new mac right now - whats the rush. Most Aps can't take advantage of the new chips and there really isn't any rush. i won't be buying till the end of this year/ feburary of next year at the earliest!

[Ethion]

Universal Application contains code, so it is workable under Intel and PPC.
So BFG, it doesn't install it for a certain platform.
It just works

[BFG]

Universal binaries include both PowerPC and x86 versions of a compiled application. The operating system detects a universal binary from its header, executing the appropriate section depending on the architecture in use. This allows the application to run at full speed on either architecture, with no appreciable performance impact

In other words... Universal Binarys don't just contain code so its workable - it contains two versions of which it selects the appropriate one (X86 or PPC)

... Did you like magic when you were a kid ethion? I can just imagine you waving the magic wand and going "ooh look it just works!"  

[Ethion]

Universal binaries include both PowerPC and x86 versions of a compiled application. The operating system detects a universal binary from its header, executing the appropriate section depending on the architecture in use. This allows the application to run at full speed on either architecture, with no appreciable performance impact

Yes I know that. But you wrote in ithe previous post that it INSTALLS the appropriate version of the application for that platform.

a universal binary means that basically when you hit 'install' the programme will install the version of the software that your computer needs - ie PPC or X86.

Even if you wrote "install" it's not correctly formulated to the real facts.

[BFG]

Ok ok that was badly worded and miss presented. rather than install i should have said 'executes' - duely edited.

My point was the same however - there are two different versions one for PPC and one for X86.

[NiKLoT]

haha freaks, dont spam this threat or theyll lock it =( i hope not cuz its intressting!

[BTs_Mysterio]

The point I had on Firewire is that PC makers aren't using it very much, and now Apple may be ending it too as standard. The worse standard has won before, and we will likely see that happen again.

Back to point, it's impressive to see the first builds of a Mactel game already matching, if not out performing/dollar the PC counterpart.

[Ethion]

"These types of products require a dedicated team and a lot of work to rebuild them for an entirely new architecture. That said, we know that using Windows-based applications on Macs is important to our customers, and we’re working with Apple to figure out the best way to bring this technology to Intel-based Macs. We’ll have a better idea once we have the new machines and can accurately evaluate just what is required to transition the product."

[BTs_Mysterio]

MS has said the same thing when G5s came out.... when Tiger was released.... and now when the x86 mac has been released. There is no sense in quoting the same old trash... especially without source credits.

[Ethion]

Oh, so the old Mysterio wants sources, http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1470

Good enough for you ? Or do you want me to dig even more out for you ? which you aren't going to read anyway?

And what do I care if they have said the same thing over and over again. Apparently on my side this news was fresh. I have no idea where you get your material.

[Civrock]

Eh, that's my link!

http://www.damnr6.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=9808.msg131528#msg131528

[Ethion]

Eh, that's my link!

http://www.damnr6.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=9808.msg131528#msg131528

yes so shut up.. You steal my links all the time..