PowerPC had good performance for several years. When the 603 and 604 were around they had better performance than x86 did. The problems started when the Pentium Pro came out. Even then it was not manufactured in enough numbers to be a real issue. Then the Pentium II came out...
And even that still go creamed whenever SIMD was used.
They'd released the i860 (RISC, not x86-compatible) in 1989 and tech magazines were saying it would kill x86. Windows NT was originally written for the i860 and only later ported to x86, so even Windows looked like it might not be tied to x86 in the long term.
This is technically true. Windows NT was originally designed to be OS/2 version 3.0 and at first they targeted the i860 which never did well, so they changed to the MIPS platform. Prior to release Microsoft decided to make it their next Windows platform and the rest was history.
What made Windows NT unique at the time was the Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) that allowed Microsoft to target multiple processor platforms. At release, Windows NT supported i386 (called IA-32 at the time), Alpha, and MIPS.
And later, it ran on PowerPC.
the whole point of Apple's ebook efforts was to provide a bulwark against the Amazon Ultron-like eater-of-worlds mopolistic behavior.
It was replacing one monopoly with another, in fact the Apple case was worse because
... Apple was never anywhere near a monopoly - and that's obviously the worst kind of monopoly.
Regardless of what you think of Amazon and them being a monopoly, Apple colluded with publishers to raise the price of ebooks. It was anti-competitive at it's core and it's illegal under US law. Not to even mention that it cost the average US buyer $5 per book.
Too bad (for your argument that is) that in reality ebook prices actually fell in all stores but Amazon. Even on Amazon, only those Amazon had sold below price rose in price. Provable fact.http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304355104579236261045331876 (paywalled) http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/
You actually think full disk encryption with a 4 digit PIN actually protects your data?
LOL, you really need to read up on Dummy's Guide to Tech Security.
Well, you can use a longer password on an iPhone - maybe not on whatever you use.
Open source IOS for auditing and release the compile tools so we can build our own firmware and compare it to whats actualy on the phones
Because the recent security SNAFUs in Open Source software shows that that is enough.
Those links are dated, and don't do a thing to refute the plots being discussed.
So you claim is that Dr. Spencer has all of a sudden stopped with his long standing tradition of messing with his graphs? Yeah right.
Ever since then I've operated in the belief that robust technologies trump cool technologies.
So walk, don't fly. Much safer.
How about we just use nuclear power for most cases because it's more efficient, safer, etc.?
Let's pretend - what about cooling? You are aware that when it gets hotter, most NPPs have to be shut down? Which means that they are obviously not the solution to Global Warming.
You mean 'falsifiable': when a scientist publishes a hypothesis, the standard procedure is to describe what observations might support that hypothesis and which could call it into question.
Climate deniers claim: I can't prove it's false, so it's not falsifiable. Ergo it's not science.
really? that's who you go to for your information?
YOu shoudl read this. Over the last 100 yeas I can cherry pich 10 year tretchs where it is even, or seem to decreas, but the overall trend is an ncrease.
The way pro-AGW fanatics present arguments often stinks of conspiracy theories. (Those evile brothers, Big Oil, etc.)
As opposed to "all climate scientists as well as all governments all over the world, for several decades". Yeah, one of those sounds like a conspiracy theory, say like MKUltra. The other one gets you laughed at by flat earthers and moon hoaxers for being over the top.
Posting AC because even mild skepticism of AGW will get you burned as a heretic on
Gee, since you are modded at +4 ATM, you are either an idiot or a liar.
" The GCMs really do not seem to work." why do you think that? they work very well. They have even lead us to make new discoveries about the climate.
" They clearly run way too hot. " no, they doi not. Another baseless statement I suspect you have no clue how models work. in general, much less in any specific field.
When I keep seeing graphics like this and and this which all show the majority of computer climate models over-prediction the current temperatures.
Hint: stop looking at graphics faked by "sceptics".
Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker
