On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 22:53, bad-magic-number wrote:
> X-Mailer: NeoMail 1.25
> X-IPAddress: 65.188.53.13
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> > On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 14:29, bad-magic-number wrote:
> >
> > If 90% of you time is at the shell, then why not get a 2GHz x86 box?
> > For the same $2,499 cost of the "Faster" G4 box, you could stuff a
> > whole lot into a clone box...
>
> Well, I'm trying to break that habit, but only for OS X. I'll gladly stick to the shell
> for OpenBSD and Linux.
>
> > http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/53/wo/
> HYqVr1S9nkI5ays88V2/0.3.0.3.27.37.1.0.1.3.1.3.1.1.0?110,72
> >
> > If the choice was only between OSX and Wintel, the choice would
> > be difficult, but with Linux & *BSD running on x86, how does
> > OSX perform substantially better, except in niche markets?
>
> Better chips under the hood.
Well, I do know that AltiVec *screams* when doing brute-force RC5-64
code cracking...
If the Hammer ever comes to market, it's going to smoke all of them.
(Literally, if you don't bathe it in Freon.)
> That, and I need that platform for OS 9.2.2 for use
> with music software I'll be using. Intels perform poorly when
> dealing with more than a few digital channels of audio when mixed.
In other words, the other 10%.
Is it the Intel processor that doesn't handle many digital channels,
or is or the ancient PC architecture?
-- +------------------------------------------------------------+ | Ron Johnson, Jr. mailto:ron.l.johnson@cox.net | | Jefferson, LA USA http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson | | | | "they love our milk and honey, but preach about another | | way of living" | | Merle Haggard, "The Fighting Side Of Me" | +------------------------------------------------------------+ ___________________ Nolug mailing list nolug@nolug.orgReceived on 11/04/02
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST