nixd2001
Sep 14, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by onemoof
Someone asked the difference between RISC and CISC.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Originally it was Reduced versus Complex instruction set computer. Making simpler processors go faster is generally easier than making complex processors go faster as there is less internal state/logic to synchronise and keep track of. For any given fabrication technology, this still generally holds true. Intel managed to sidestep this principle by investing massive sums in their fab plants, effectively meaning that the fab processes being compared weren't the same.
The opposite end of the spectrum from RISC is arguably the VAX line. With this instruction set, massive complexities arose from the fact that a single instruction took so long and did so much. It was possible for timers, interrupts and "page faults" to occur midway during an instruction. This required saving a lot of internal state so that it could later be restored. There were examples of performing a given operation with a single instruction or a sequence of instructions that performed the same effect, but where the sequence achieved the join quicker because the internal implementation within the processor was able to get on with the job quicker because it was actually a simpler task being asked of it.
The idea of fixed sized instructions isn't directly coupled to the original notion of RISC, although it is only one step behind. One of the basic ideas with the original RISC processors was that an instruction should only take a single cycle to complete. So a 100MHz CPU might actually achieve 100M instructions per second. (This was often not achieved due to memory latencies, but this isn't the "fault" of the processor core). In this context, having a variable length instruction means that it is easy for the instruction decoding (especially if it requires more than one "word") to require for effort than any other aspect of executing an instruction.
There are situations where a variable width instruction might have advantages, but the argument goes that breaking the overall task down into equal sized instructions means that fetching (including caching, branch predicting, ec) and decoding these instructions becomes simpler, permitting optimisations and speed gains to be made elsewhere in the processor design.
Intel blur RISC and CISC into gray by effectively executing RISC instructions internally, even if they support the apparent decoding of CISC insructions. They only do this for legacy reasons.
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
I think this "unbeatable" assertion requires some qualification. It may be that Intel will achieve the best price/performance ratio within a suitable range of qualifications, but this is different from always achieving best p/p ratio whatever. Indeed, IA64 versus Power4 is going to be an interesting battle because Intel has bet on ILP (instruction level parallelism) whereas IBM has bet on data bandwidth. Ultimately (and today!), I think IBM's bet has more going for it. But that's if you want ultimate performance. The PC space is often characterised by people apparenntly wanting ultimate performance but actually always massively qualifiying it with severe price restrictions (such as less than 5 digits to the price).
Someone asked the difference between RISC and CISC.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Originally it was Reduced versus Complex instruction set computer. Making simpler processors go faster is generally easier than making complex processors go faster as there is less internal state/logic to synchronise and keep track of. For any given fabrication technology, this still generally holds true. Intel managed to sidestep this principle by investing massive sums in their fab plants, effectively meaning that the fab processes being compared weren't the same.
The opposite end of the spectrum from RISC is arguably the VAX line. With this instruction set, massive complexities arose from the fact that a single instruction took so long and did so much. It was possible for timers, interrupts and "page faults" to occur midway during an instruction. This required saving a lot of internal state so that it could later be restored. There were examples of performing a given operation with a single instruction or a sequence of instructions that performed the same effect, but where the sequence achieved the join quicker because the internal implementation within the processor was able to get on with the job quicker because it was actually a simpler task being asked of it.
The idea of fixed sized instructions isn't directly coupled to the original notion of RISC, although it is only one step behind. One of the basic ideas with the original RISC processors was that an instruction should only take a single cycle to complete. So a 100MHz CPU might actually achieve 100M instructions per second. (This was often not achieved due to memory latencies, but this isn't the "fault" of the processor core). In this context, having a variable length instruction means that it is easy for the instruction decoding (especially if it requires more than one "word") to require for effort than any other aspect of executing an instruction.
There are situations where a variable width instruction might have advantages, but the argument goes that breaking the overall task down into equal sized instructions means that fetching (including caching, branch predicting, ec) and decoding these instructions becomes simpler, permitting optimisations and speed gains to be made elsewhere in the processor design.
Intel blur RISC and CISC into gray by effectively executing RISC instructions internally, even if they support the apparent decoding of CISC insructions. They only do this for legacy reasons.
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
I think this "unbeatable" assertion requires some qualification. It may be that Intel will achieve the best price/performance ratio within a suitable range of qualifications, but this is different from always achieving best p/p ratio whatever. Indeed, IA64 versus Power4 is going to be an interesting battle because Intel has bet on ILP (instruction level parallelism) whereas IBM has bet on data bandwidth. Ultimately (and today!), I think IBM's bet has more going for it. But that's if you want ultimate performance. The PC space is often characterised by people apparenntly wanting ultimate performance but actually always massively qualifiying it with severe price restrictions (such as less than 5 digits to the price).
iPhil
Oct 23, 06:59 PM
Is it confirmed that we get the Leopard before Americans? I know we pay more(!) but I don't want to turn up and find I have to wait around till 6pm USA time.
it's 6pm local time on friday. 10/26/07
it's 6pm local time on friday. 10/26/07
jsquared
Jul 11, 12:10 AM
We have a laptop and I still have my iPhone. There's about 20 people in line now. It's just after midnight...if you couldn't tell by the time the post was made.:apple:
mazola
Sep 25, 11:18 AM
So when's the next Apple Event?
more...
cmaier
Apr 13, 11:07 PM
She probably left this place. Why would anyone want to do business here when all people do is trash Microsoft.
That's not all people do. They spend just as much effort trashing Apple.
That's not all people do. They spend just as much effort trashing Apple.
strabes
Apr 5, 05:20 PM
Headset jack was removed, so had to buy a USB headset for example.
I think you're misinformed. The current models simply combined the 1/8" in and out jacks into one port (TRRS), just like the port on the iPhone. For example, you can plug your iPhone headphones into your Mac for use as a headset.
It also supports optical via mini-TOSlink: http://www.amazon.com/6ft-Toslink-Mini-Cable/dp/B000FMXKC8/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1302041837&sr=8-2
I think you're misinformed. The current models simply combined the 1/8" in and out jacks into one port (TRRS), just like the port on the iPhone. For example, you can plug your iPhone headphones into your Mac for use as a headset.
It also supports optical via mini-TOSlink: http://www.amazon.com/6ft-Toslink-Mini-Cable/dp/B000FMXKC8/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1302041837&sr=8-2
more...
RebelScum
Apr 5, 02:51 PM
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc198/buuuudy/fakie.jpg?t=1302033020
Can't be 100%, but square pixel path around the home button makes it look pretty fake to me.
It's a pretty shyte rez pic though. Could just be artifacting.
Can't be 100%, but square pixel path around the home button makes it look pretty fake to me.
It's a pretty shyte rez pic though. Could just be artifacting.
Dagless
Nov 2, 10:07 AM
It was obvious that the Intel switch was going to be a fantastic move for Apple. My Apple hating friends have bought or are planning to buy C2D iMacs. I knew Apple got it right when one guy who constantly hated Apple said on MSN messenger "I'm in OSX, it's too dangerous online in Windows". I wasn't planning on buying a new Mac for a long time but the Bootcamp ability lets me get back to work on making games and making money. Another mate of mine wants an iMac because they're slim, cheap and very quiet and was impressed as hell when we made a DVD in a few minutes with all our adventure video and photographs.
Intel, you are ****ing legends.
Intel, you are ****ing legends.
more...
pmz
Aug 19, 11:35 AM
If you use this, you're an idiot. Plain and simple. No debate or discussion.
sananda
Oct 19, 11:52 AM
will you all be wearing badges or something so i can recognise you? :D
more...
Denarius
Apr 8, 06:30 PM
This dock means that the future iPhones will sync throught thunderbolt with macs and with usb 3.0 for pcs!!! I guess thins means macs wont come with usb 3.0, so maybe an adapter would come out sometime...
I repeat: sync to macs with thunderbolt and sync to pcs with usb 3.0!!
That sounds messy to me: packing two sets of IO technology into something the size of an iphone doesn't sound like an attractive design option.
I think iPhones/iPods will stick to USB2 for some time to come yet.
I repeat: sync to macs with thunderbolt and sync to pcs with usb 3.0!!
That sounds messy to me: packing two sets of IO technology into something the size of an iphone doesn't sound like an attractive design option.
I think iPhones/iPods will stick to USB2 for some time to come yet.
CrAkD
May 2, 01:00 PM
Cool. Now where are the spy shots of the new iMacs?
more...
realtwang
Apr 20, 01:34 PM
Maybe a little off topic, but could we *please* do something about the auto-play videos on these stories. Not that they're not great videos, but it's annoying as hell when you bring up this page a few times a day...:mad:
Peace
Mar 26, 05:29 PM
#1 there is no front page news here... Sesiously people? It's two guys having coffee and one overheard line someone claims of heard without any real substance or context.
...but to add to the humor aspect going on here... I think Jobs wears the same thing every day to express solidarity with all the Apple users that have to settle for fewer choices and options than PC users.
You want blu-ray? Look I want a shirt I don't pull over my head every morning, but I get by..
You want a replaceable battery in your iPhone? Look I want a different pair of shoes but I get by...
You want USB ports on the iPad? Look I want to wear shorts some time, but I get by...
You do realize one of these "guys" is being indirectly sued by the other don't you ?
...but to add to the humor aspect going on here... I think Jobs wears the same thing every day to express solidarity with all the Apple users that have to settle for fewer choices and options than PC users.
You want blu-ray? Look I want a shirt I don't pull over my head every morning, but I get by..
You want a replaceable battery in your iPhone? Look I want a different pair of shoes but I get by...
You want USB ports on the iPad? Look I want to wear shorts some time, but I get by...
You do realize one of these "guys" is being indirectly sued by the other don't you ?
more...
Winni
Apr 13, 03:06 AM
MS chose not to support calDEV, so no support for google calendars :(
MS Office is BUSINESS software, and Google calendars is not necessarily what I would call a widely accepted and adopted business solution. What the typical Office customer wants is Sharepoint and Exchange Server integration.
(Project and Visio ports would also be more than welcome. OmniGraffle Pro is nice, but most hardcore Visio users either don't find it suitable or just are not comfortable with its different user interface.)
MS Office is BUSINESS software, and Google calendars is not necessarily what I would call a widely accepted and adopted business solution. What the typical Office customer wants is Sharepoint and Exchange Server integration.
(Project and Visio ports would also be more than welcome. OmniGraffle Pro is nice, but most hardcore Visio users either don't find it suitable or just are not comfortable with its different user interface.)
Twe Foju
Apr 23, 02:19 AM
I think to dictate what people should or shouldn't do with their machines is silly. Search the forums and the internet. The Air has proven to be plenty capable as a gaming machine for it's size and has many satisfied users talking about it.
A computer is certainly a tool, but it can also be a gaming machine, a home theater pc, an entertainment hub, etc.; whatever a user may find use for it for.
Obviously, certain machines are better and worse at certain functions than others, but don't forget that this generation of MBA, there are people that actually did go out and buy the Air because one of the reasons is that it did happen to be a decent performer in games, while remaining ultra portable. In this case, I think the Air strikes an excellent balance between function and form.
I use my Air for live music sets and this is exactly a scenario where such a BL KB would be grand. I read similar opinions from other musicians on this forum in another thread. Creative artists like live musicians can definitely find appropriate use for a backlit kb, but even average everyday users who don't share the same skill level as you would also benefit from it. If anything, adding convenience is always a welcome.
If you don't want or need the backlit kb, then you could always turn it off. It's there for people who might need it. Win-win situation.
You sir, just made my morning :D
And i Think this thread should be rename into:
Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt + HD3000 vs 320M
:cool:
A computer is certainly a tool, but it can also be a gaming machine, a home theater pc, an entertainment hub, etc.; whatever a user may find use for it for.
Obviously, certain machines are better and worse at certain functions than others, but don't forget that this generation of MBA, there are people that actually did go out and buy the Air because one of the reasons is that it did happen to be a decent performer in games, while remaining ultra portable. In this case, I think the Air strikes an excellent balance between function and form.
I use my Air for live music sets and this is exactly a scenario where such a BL KB would be grand. I read similar opinions from other musicians on this forum in another thread. Creative artists like live musicians can definitely find appropriate use for a backlit kb, but even average everyday users who don't share the same skill level as you would also benefit from it. If anything, adding convenience is always a welcome.
If you don't want or need the backlit kb, then you could always turn it off. It's there for people who might need it. Win-win situation.
You sir, just made my morning :D
And i Think this thread should be rename into:
Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt + HD3000 vs 320M
:cool:
more...
scaredpoet
Dec 27, 11:06 PM
There are more iPhones, Macs, etc. sold here than anywhere in the world.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
Where are your figures to back this up?
I don't care. I'm an iPhone owner. I don't have to prove affection for Apple products to anyone.
I didn't ask you to prove your affection, nor do I care what your affections are. I'm pointing out that your argument has no validity, irrespective of where your "affections" may lie.
Again you are not getting it. Maybe you never been around thieves but they will after anything they can sell. It is not like if they can't get the iPhone they will pick up their ball and go home.
Of course not, but it deters thieves from using the online system for easy pickins to commit fraud. So it's not as easy to steal an iPhone online anymore, and other smartphones aren't hot sellers, so they'll go find some other scam that affects someone else.
Yes they are linking to the same site. Have you got proof that The Consumerist is an unreliable website?
The burden of proof lies with you, who is to trying to make a point with thin, if any, actual evidence. I'm not using nor relying on the Consumerist to make my point, so I don't have to prove its validity or lack thereof.
On the other hand, you are using ONLY the Consumerist (and a couple blogs that are blindly parroting the Consumerist without doing any research of their own), and just telling me I HAVE to beleive the consumerist because YOU say it's "well-respected." Well, *I* never really respected the Consumerist, because it has a history of blindly following sensationalist leads and has a marked anti-corporate leaning. I'm more inclined to respect sources that are objective and don't have a mission that blatantly compromises that objectivity. So sorry, you'll have to find additional evidence. And I'm not going to do your homework for you.
What in the hell does this have to do with zip codes. They are blocking NYC. Period.
They are blocking sales online, by zip code. that makes it the cornerstone of this issue, and has everything to do with it.
Now you're getting me pissed.
Why, because you can't effectively prove your case because it relies on a single, un-corroborated source? Then you're taking this too personally. Why you have so much invested in convincing people that AT&T is blocking iPhone sales - and only online - for network resource control, is beyond me. Especially when such a tactic would have no effect on the problem this alleged conspiracy would supposedly solve. And the fact that you need to sell it so hard that it "pisses [you] off" that someone would challenge your thin and faulty argument kinda confirms you don't really have a leg to stand on.
macridah
Oct 26, 10:57 PM
After more testing, I notice that the new .mac interface doesn't have a feature that other AJAX web based email has (yahoo, hotmail (live.com), and more)
You cannot press the secondary button (control+click) on a message or folder and have a menu appear with some functionality. for example, hightlight a message(s), control click, and either delete, mark as read, move to ... etc.
You cannot press the secondary button (control+click) on a message or folder and have a menu appear with some functionality. for example, hightlight a message(s), control click, and either delete, mark as read, move to ... etc.
samiwas
Apr 11, 10:32 AM
That's true but I can't understand how anyone can be looking at this years budget deficit on top of the entire 14trillion+ deficit and not saying America needs huge (in the trillions) cuts and raised taxes and now.
You forgot one thing. I added it for you. You're welcome.
I love how so many here talk about needed cuts, but never talk about needing to raise taxes. :rolleyes:
You forgot one thing. I added it for you. You're welcome.
I love how so many here talk about needed cuts, but never talk about needing to raise taxes. :rolleyes:
calsci
May 1, 01:57 PM
This is so awesome.
clintob
Oct 26, 10:48 PM
Awesome, I love it! I want to sign up for .Mac so bad, but I can't justify it being worth $99 per year. I would gladly pay $49 per year, especially since I would use iWeb, Photocasting, and all the other good stuff.
$8.25 a month is too much to keep multiple computers in sync? That alone is worth $8.25/month for me. I hardly use the .mac Mail, and rarely even the iDisk (although it's nice to have). The syncing of bookmarks and address book is mindlessly easy, and invaluable for me.
$8.25 a month is too much to keep multiple computers in sync? That alone is worth $8.25/month for me. I hardly use the .mac Mail, and rarely even the iDisk (although it's nice to have). The syncing of bookmarks and address book is mindlessly easy, and invaluable for me.
Bk-Sebastian
Jun 10, 12:16 PM
what you non AT&T people don't seem to understand is that your carrier has cheap rates because it has less subscribers and less popular devices...if and when iPhone comes to Teen-Mobile or sprint you will see those unlimited data plans disappear and tiered data in it's place
Gotta agree. Once these companies experience data usage from iPhone owners they'll realize tiered plans make more sense. AT&T had unlimited txt plans pre-iPhone too.
Also how does an analyst's note count as true rumor anyway. These guys are always wrong. They know jack. If it was up to them iPhone 4 would have come out in 2009 and my iPad would be baking cookies right now.
Gotta agree. Once these companies experience data usage from iPhone owners they'll realize tiered plans make more sense. AT&T had unlimited txt plans pre-iPhone too.
Also how does an analyst's note count as true rumor anyway. These guys are always wrong. They know jack. If it was up to them iPhone 4 would have come out in 2009 and my iPad would be baking cookies right now.
P-Worm
Sep 22, 10:07 AM
Isn't it amazing that no matter what the topic of a thread is about it always seems to degrade into people getting mad at how expensive a Macintosh is? Not to change the subjedt or anything...Carry on.
P-Worm
P-Worm
MorphingDragon
Mar 28, 01:48 AM
I can't help but think that along with Steve's various email responses to customers, that Steve is morphing. Into what exactly, I'm not sure, but he seems to be more interested in responding to people. Maybe that new liver has something to do with it? At any rate, it's a very calculated move. Nothing he does is without a goal in mind.
Maybe Steve realizes that Apple isn't everything. Yea, people say he was bhuddist, but then people say they're christian and they aren't really.
Maybe Steve realizes that Apple isn't everything. Yea, people say he was bhuddist, but then people say they're christian and they aren't really.
No comments:
Post a Comment