[Ti] Powerbook MacIntel... could be, could be... what do you think?

[Matt Kibildis]

One of the burning points that I brought up in my earlier posts was
about the fact that there have been no g5 powerbooks.  This is
precisely what I don't understand about your argument, Chris.  You
seem to say that IBM has PowerPC processors that are faster, smaller,
cooler, than anything else - like some kind of wonder processors
straight from the divine, but no one has seen these used in practical
applications.  Also, as far as the points you've made, such as the
"divide-by-zero" argument, I agree with Mikael in believing that Apple
has the funding and resources to support programmers that can address
these issues.  However, if these are real things to worry about, I
would appreciate it if you could cite some sources for your
information so that I can better research the topic and make a better
decision for myself in purchasing Apple products in the future. 
Highly technical articles are welcome - I've developed several
projects in both x86 and PowerPC architecture.

On 11/19/05, Mikael Byström <mikael.bystrom at punkass.com> wrote:
> Chris Olson said:
>
> >With the billions of lines of code that have been polished on
> >PowerPC, all the problems are not going to be found in the port to
> >x86.  For instance, an integer divide-by-zero exception in some
> >obscure subroutine results in a crash on 86, while on PowerPC the
> >same operation returns zero.
>
> Where? In applications? The OS? You don't believe that Apple have
> compiled and most likely been testrunning OS X on Intel since 2000, which
> is what Steve Jobs said? You think Apple aren't aware of possible
> problems with the change and have taken preventive counter measures? You
> think you know more than Apple about this matter?
> You don't even know which Intel processor Apple is going to use. You know
> squat about this. That is characteristic of a self-appointed expert.
>
> I will always welcome your informed opinion, if that is what you offer
> and there's nothing wrong with that, but you make it sound like you know
> it all on this matter and quite clearly you don't.
>
> That is not to say that your concerns could be valid, but you must
> realize you present them as FUD. Fatalism isn't informed opinion.
>
> Also, you still haven't said why Apple haven't made any PBs with any of
> IBMs portable processors. Even the G5 came in a 1.3 Ghz portable version.
> No machines for no reason?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Titanium mailing list
> Titanium at listserver.themacintoshguy.com
> http://listserver.themacintoshguy.com/mailman/listinfo/titanium
>
> Listmom is trying to clean out his closets! Vintage Mac and random stuff:
>          http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZmacguy1984
>


--
Your friends confine you in their worlds,
one by one, a string of pearls.