imac - $ to £ this sucks..

[AtW]

Omega: go look at something shiny for a while.

BiB: yes I agree iPod saved Apple, but I am not sure it will last very long.

[Cliphead]

Market share doesn't always equate to quality. Feck yer Macs And Windoze efforts, Linux all the way.

[TheOmegaMan]

Omega: go look at something shiny for a while.

BiB: yes I agree iPod saved Apple, but I am not sure it will last very long.

OMG, it's profund, truly it's deep. Ipod saved Apple everyone. That's penetrating insight you have there AtW. Have you ever thought of coding up some super-de-duper search engine and trying to beat google at their own game?

Of course, you are right, only a Russian Jackass would come up with a scheme like that.

[AtW]

This message is hidden because TheOmegaMan is on your ignore list.

[bogeyman]

Well it was designed that way to make porting code from the 8080 & 8085 easier...

Exactly. The latest Intel chip is still, at heart an 8080 with tons of extensions.

Notice AtW still has not mentioned anything to do with actual cpu architecture, he just bangs on about the commercial success of x86, which is obvious, but doesn't mean x86 is a 'superior architecture'.

Altivec alone makes PPC a superior architecture for many applications.

Also the major killer for x86 is that it has only 8 general-purpose registers in the execution core as opposed to the PPCs 32. Essentially PCC needs less circuitry to do the same task.

The only place x86 really scores is the length of the instruction pipeline.

Anyway, the PPC is not exactly dead an buried is it - xbox 360 for instance.

[AtW]

Tiger tank, and especially King Tiger were superior from that (technical - or in other words wrong) point of view than anything allies had, heck, even Panther was more superior than T-34, however superiority is not just judged by geeks sitting in chairs - real life is what judges at the end whether something was superior or not, like Cray that failed utterly also had "superior" super-computers and where they now?

I am sure Romans were also superior at the time, yet primitive barbarians overrun them just like that.

[bogeyman]

Tiger tank, and especially King Tiger were superior from that (technical - or in other words wrong) point of view than anything allies had, heck, even Panther was more superior than T-34, however superiority is not just judged by geeks sitting in chairs - real life is what judges at the end whether something was superior or not, like Cray that failed utterly also had "superior" super-computers and where they now?

I am sure Romans were also superior at the time, yet primitive barbarians overrun them just like that.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

I know the x86 is more commercially successful, but you claimed it was a 'superior architecture'.

You don't seem able to defend that point so you obfuscate and bluster.

Ever thought of going into politics?

[AtW]

Success (that was not artificial, ie monopoly) is a sure sign of superiority.

Does Tesco have superior architecture in terms of logistics, etc? The results on the market seem to suggest that they do.

[bogeyman]

Success (that was not artificial, ie monopoly) is a sure sign of superiority.

Does Tesco have superior architecture in terms of logistics, etc? The results on the market seem to suggest that they do.

Suggest you fire up SKA and go and find out what a 'CPU architecture' actually is.

Clearly x86 is superior in marketshare - I never disputed that.

The PPC is clearly superior in terms of a CPU architecture and instruction set.

[AtW]

The PPC is clearly superior in terms of a CPU architecture and instruction set.

Why then Apple moved away from this supposedly superior architecture, did you actually read reasons outlined by Jobs?