The future of computing...

The superdrives are CDR, CDRW, DVD-R, and DVD-RW all in one drive. For a PC a DVD-RW costs about 400 dollars by itself.
Click to expand...

OUCH. That's nearly the cost of my entire system!!!!

The architecture is different meaning that PC run little indian artichecture meaning if you have four number 1 2 3 4 it reads them like 4 3 2 1, while on an Apple the architecture is big indian the opposite of little indian as the apple will read 1 2 3 4 as 1 2 3 4 in that order.

This is why it is so slow on an emulator because the emulator has to reverse every single operation done by the computer.
Click to expand...

OIC. So that's the case. Sorry for my lack of understanding, but why can't they "convert" from big endian to little endian when porting to x86?
 
My knowledge stops about here, but I'll give this one a try. I would imagine that Apple could convert over to x86 with enough help from major companies, but I believe that Steve Jobs has too much pride to do that. To him it would be like giving in to Gates.

I would think it would be pretty hard to convert all coding that OS X runs on over to little indian architecture, but not impossible. It is just the way Apple has made their chips since they started their company. Right now the enulators are the closest thing we can get to running OS X on a PC, and I believe it will stay this way for a while.

And yes, I also think that the price for a DVD-RW is ridiculous. I'd like to get one, but not until the prices come down ALOT!!! :)
 
geez! for me I don't even have a DVD-ROM, not to say a DVD-RW. I didn't know what you can do with DVD-Rs and DVD-RWs. I only know that CD-Rs and CD-RWs can be used to transfer files from computer to computers without the need for an extra device, with DVD-Rs and DVD-RWs needed at least DVD-ROM, which isn't too common now
 
My knowledge stops about here, but I'll give this one a try. I would imagine that Apple could convert over to x86 with enough help from major companies, but I believe that Steve Jobs has too much pride to do that. To him it would be like giving in to Gates.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. If Apple could convert OSX to x86, it would be much like giving a HUGE wakeup call to Bill. I'm sure there are plenty of corporations out there that wish to see a powerful and trusted OS apart from Windows :D

And yes, I also think that the price for a DVD-RW is ridiculous. I'd like to get one, but not until the prices come down ALOT!!! :)
Click to expand...

I believe it took at least 5 years for the prices of the CD writers to come down. Hopefully the time taken for DVD writers will be considerably less ;)
 
geez! for me I don't even have a DVD-ROM, not to say a DVD-RW. I didn't know what you can do with DVD-Rs and DVD-RWs. I only know that CD-Rs and CD-RWs can be used to transfer files from computer to computers without the need for an extra device, with DVD-Rs and DVD-RWs needed at least DVD-ROM, which isn't too common now
Click to expand...

IMO, DVD-RWs should come in handy for video editing studios where they xfer gigs of files a day. But then again, since DVDs aren't really that fast, I suppose they'll stick back to removable hard disks.

The only reason I see to use a DVD drive is for MSDN :D
 
Originally posted by SuperCheetah

The architecture is different meaning that PC run little indian artichecture meaning if you have four number 1 2 3 4 it reads them like 4 3 2 1, while on an Apple the architecture is big indian the opposite of little indian as the apple will read 1 2 3 4 as 1 2 3 4 in that order.

This is why it is so slow on an emulator because the emulator has to reverse every single operation done by the computer.
Click to expand...

For a start, apart from OS differences the Mac uses Motorola CPUs which are RISC(Reduced instruction set computer) processors. While on the other hand x86 CPUs are CISC(Complex instruction set computer) based.
What this translates to is a different set of instructions for processing code once it is in the low level required for that processor. With RISC it may take more instructions to execute something, but since they are simpler they can be dispatched more rapidly. With CISC it may be a more complex instruction that takes longer but does the same as the multiple RISC instructions.

This article explains the difference a bit more clearly and provides some examples
From cse.stanford.edu :

CISC
Emphasis on hardware
Includes multi-clock complex instructions
Memory-to-memory: "LOAD" and "STORE" incorporated in instructions
Small code sizes, high cycles per second
Transistors used for storing complex instructions

RISC
Emphasis on software
Single-clock, reduced instruction only
Register to register: "LOAD" and "STORE" are independent instructions
Low cycles per second, large code sizes
Spends more transistors on memory registers

The Overall RISC Advantage
Today, the Intel x86 is arguable the only chip which retains CISC architecture. This is primarily due to advancements in other areas of computer technology. The price of RAM has decreased dramatically. In 1977, 1MB of DRAM cost about $5,000. By 1994, the same amount of memory cost only $6 (when adjusted for inflation). Compiler technology has also become more sophisticated, so that the RISC use of RAM and emphasis on software has become ideal.
Click to expand...

Porting code from CISC to RISC
From www.microapl.co.uk/Porting/intro.html :

Software written in a high-level language such as C or Pascal should of course be re-compiled to produce a new executable for the target architecture, taking advantage of the latest advances in high-performance compiler design. This may be very straightforward, but any non-portable or system-dependent parts of the program may need to be changed (in complex systems this can be a non-trivial task, especially if the runtime architecture is also different).
Click to expand...
 
I agree that another OS to compete with Microsoft could be great, but I still think Jobs is too into his creation of Apple. I personally would not want to redesign my entire OS to accomodate PC users when I would be trying to rather lure them to start using my Mac computers.

Apple is also trying to sell computers, software, hardware, etc etc. along with their OS, so they would in essence have to redirect their entire company towards PC users and compete directly with Microsoft, instead of trying to improve upon their current situation and try to lure new computer users to use the Mac OS instead of Windows or Linux or BeOS etc.
 
Is anyone using Linux here? Can I download it somewhere? i wanna try it out. (Hope i dun mess up my partitions, though)
 
My head spinned... Literatelly... Physically...

Kinda tough for me to understand. Thanks for the links and info guys. Perhaps I should find out a bit more about linux. I've grown to like MS-DOS, and accustomed to Windows, the only reason why I wanted to try Linux is to....... be different from my peers >P Guess I needed to find more reasons to convince myself to spend that effort to try Linux :D

P/S Can someone tell me about the different kinds of Linux out there? I saw that there are "Mandrake"... "Red Hat" but I don't really know what is it. Thanks a ton.
 
I agree that Linux is pretty difficult for us Windows users to grasp right off hand. Like I said I tried it, but went back because I really don't have the time to sit down and learn unix.

It would take days to go through all the different versions of Linux and their pros and cons. A few simple things I know is that Mandrake is supposedly the most user-friendly, Suse is geared more towards Professional usage, Redhat is a common home user version of Linux. Then there are the lesser known linux versions like Caldera, Debian, Slackware, etc. that are generally harder to learn and more DOS based.

I would suggest going to www.linux.com and browsing around and taking a look at some of the different software and Linux distributions. It has links to all of the major Linux distributions homepages found here:

http://www.linux.com/interact/links/Software/Distributions/

Hope this helps a little! :) I'll try and study up and get back to you.
 
Originally posted by SuperCheetah
The superdrives are CDR, CDRW, DVD-R, and DVD-RW all in one drive. For a PC a DVD-RW costs about 400 dollars by itself.
Click to expand...

Actually almost all pc DVD-RWs include CD-R and CD-RW now and you can get them for as cheap as $200 now depending on where you go.

And I'm no mac expert (can't afford them, they're the most overpriced machines that I've ever seen in my life) but don't you have to pay like $3500 for a Mac with a DVD burner? I think that you're pointing your "get with it" expectations in the wrong direction... should be pointing them at mac.
 
Originally posted by reallynicejerk
Actually almost all pc DVD-RWs include CD-R and CD-RW now and you can get them for as cheap as $200 now depending on where you go.

And I'm no mac expert (can't afford them, they're the most overpriced machines that I've ever seen in my life) but don't you have to pay like $3500 for a Mac with a DVD burner? I think that you're pointing your "get with it" expectations in the wrong direction... should be pointing them at mac.
Click to expand...

Heh, yeh of course dvd burners are cheaper now, this thread is literally a year old. :)
 
Wow, it actually is, lol.

Anyway I'd love to hear more thoughts about what people think the future of computing will be.
 
I think the future of computing will fall into the hands of "specs". I was watching a program called Ten Things You Didn't Know About, where I saw something interesting; there was an integrated processor chip (Celeron I believe) in a pair of sun glasses. There was a wire connected to a small communications box which you would place into your pocket which sent out a satellite signal and connected to the internet. They demonstrated this by standing outside a library (specs on) and reserving a book to take out, I was very impressed with this, as I'm sure many other people will be; which is why I think this new piece of equipment is going to be big in the near future. I'm not sure, but I think they already use this equipment in USAF fighter jets, as I said though, I am not sure; the program was on Discovery Wings for those of you who are interested ;) .
 
My opinion

After listening to all your excellent ideas, it's time for me to post my creativitiy to discuss.

First of all, I believe that computers should generate to the point where a person can multi-task such as opening MSN, ie, Word, and more programs without delays, which is, no matter how many programs (how big), the program will open right away. Also, Internet 2 should not have those little tiny delays where cable and dsl have right now (sometimes). Basically, what I am saying is that computers should go to the point where everything can be click-done click-done instantly, then it should focus on other things such as stableness and everything. Also, I agree that computers should boot only maximum 10 seconds. Indeed, I believe that computers should be like those palm where it just starts right when you click start, that'd be awesome!! Is it possible? Well! Nothing is impossible on earth (unless you break the rule of whatever .. gravity?). With time and effort, anything can be accomplished!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Shaping the future of exascale computing in Europe: Inno4scale's innovative algorithms
Replies
0
Views
260
Alfonso Maruccia
A
A
Apple guidelines suggest Vision Pro AR and VR apps are "spatial computing apps"
Replies
4
Views
316
Watzupken
W
D
Apple secures iMessage against threats from quantum computers
Replies
1
Views
167
erickmendes
erickmendes

Latest posts

Back