Re: 64 Bit is coming..... But not for us yet

dvanzile quipped:

`&symbol=VASO`&symbol=DELL`&symbol=RMBS`&symbol=SSTI`&symbol=NIPNY`&symbol=NVDA`&symbol=AMD`&symbol=F`&symbol=COVD&cpath=20030819\200308190900CTXBIZ39594963.htm>

there was an article in the most recent Design News (I think) about Itanium, HP, Dell, and IBM. The new intel chip does something like 2100 floating point operations per second. quite fast. It mentioned (sorry, going from memory here) Daimer-Chrysler using MSC and 64-bit Itaniums for simulations. (THOSE are running linux I belive tho.)

I would think 3D modelling would be one of the first things to move over to

64-bit. ANd see a big performance gain.

-nick e.

p.s. SW: why wait for MS to finish their 64-bit OS? Why not design for Linux, seeing as how you can already get Linux compiled on the Operton? :)

Nick,

The Itaniums don't run 32 bit code for squat.

I read an article awhile back that MS was very dissapointed with Intel over this. The AMD Opteron ran 32 bit as well as the Athlon, and out performed the Itanium in 64 bit by a good stretch. So much so, that MS was insisting that Intel get help from AMD.

Yea,... that's gonna happen

Regards

Mark

`&symbol=VASO`&symbol=DELL`&symbol=RMBS`&symbol=SSTI`&symbol=NIPNY`&symbol=NVDA`&symbol=AMD`&symbol=F`&symbol=COVD&cpath=20030819\200308190900CTXBIZ39594963.htm> >

simulations.

Several years ago I heard that it was "blindingly fast" with HP-UX (UNIX) from someone (not in sales) at HP ...

Recompiling 32 bit applications code for 64 bit should be a no-brainer. Why bother to try to emulate it?

Should, could, would... = it's a commitment thang.

.. ;^P

Itanium does run 32-bit Itanium code very good. I guess you are referring to 32-bit x86 code? Itanium is not a x86 CPU so it is not that surprising that emulation of x86 is slower.

Cliff Huprich quipped:

i think the point is to be able to run all your old 32-bit apps. cause in the windos world you actually have to invest a LOT of money on all your software.

-nick e.

What I want (and I doubt it is popular in this newsgroup) is SW on OSX. With the new G5 IBM processor, it would be an ideal workstation for me. Not only can you run the current 32bit apps, but also new 64bit - completely backward compatible! Joy! Since I do everything else on mac (yes, equivalent programs are on PC, but simple are not as integrated for a clean workflow). Also, OSX (remember, BSD UNIX foundation) is rock solid stable.

And as of the last few days, I count myself lucky I do not use my PCs for email or internet access since all my friends now have virus nightmares (this morning I had 90 junk mails with PC viruses - normally only about

10....). There are a million little reasons why I prefer the mac/unix over PC/windows, and probably no one individual one would convert me one way or the other (well, actually Windows is one reason not to use a PC..... However, in the end, it is shear ease of use, productivity, stability and up-time, and consistent / reliable integration between apps that makes me happy at the end of each day with my mac. My PCs on the other hand.....grrrrr

Hmmm, guess I got carried away there... ;-)

And before anyone flames about benchmarks, don't bother, I have read all the various opinions already. I am happy to wait for some real-world tests now that machines are shipping. And remember, what counts is how fast your real world work is, not how fast some obscure (or not) benchmark is.

SolidWorks ease of use with apple ease of use and hardware.... Joy!

But I don't really expect to see this anytime soon.... :-(

Everytime I read an enumeration of the benefits of Mac ownership it sorta makes me want to go out and buy one just to see what the hell people are gushing about.

But then I come to my senses when I remember the little set of shelves that displays the selection of Mac software at CompUSA.

Oh, well. Maybe when Apple finally gives in and starts making PC clones then I'll buy one...

(heh heh)

Amen to OSX/Unix. A thousand times over. I use both Mac & PC, but SolidWorks is the only thing I run on the PC (along with Excel). I really think Bill Gates has structured Windows to keep the user maintenance issues high for some bizarre reason associated with his desire to keep tens of billions in the bank. He does NOT actually understand why some corporations have started looking at and using XServes for the web servers. Uptime!

There is almost no maintenance time on the Mac. No dll, config.sys, etc type problems. No need to do a low level BIOS update just to get the Mac to recognize a 2nd (or 4th) hard drive, and the 802.11 WiFi ran first time out of the box 3+ years back, which my newer Dell DID NOT DO.

I expect to load SWks 2003 on the first dual G5 our Apple Store gets in stock and try it in Virtual PC. As long as I get reasonable speed emulation for my simple work, I'ld be happy.

Bo

You won't find these at CompUSA.

jon

You'd be amazed how much more simpler the equation becomes when you only have to support one combination of hardware. Windows fills a market and it does it well. It's a shame business is about making money. As far as I am concerned, the computer hardware and the CAD software should be made for each other. Who needs an OS? How about CADOS? Oh yeah - I forgot. It is all about money.

Someday...I'll make my own CAD program and rule the world!!!

(Smack! Get back to work you eeediot! You've said too much!)

"jon_banquer" wrote in news:bi13c2$49iat$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-168325.news.uni-berlin.de:

There are a lot of products you won't find at CompUSA.

Also, it's interesting that both of those examples run in Windows.

Markus Wankus wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news1.on.sympatico.ca:

Hmmmm...sorta like XBox but for CAD. "No mess, no fuss! Just plug in a keyboard, mouse, and monitor and you're designing!"

Joel Moore wrote on 21.8.2003 0:25

Sorry, Old myth. Maybe true 6-8 years ago.

And who buys software is a store anyway? I think all the software I have purchased in the last 3 years was online - either direct download or express shipment.

And what software is not there? OK, I know that many specialized engineering programs, and many 3D programs are not (this is changing), but come on! what are you using on PC that you cannot get on OSX?

I use M$ office on OSX and ma PC. By far, I have less problems on the mac version (ironic isn't it). but I will get rid of M$ first chance I get! I now use OSX mail (fantastic junk mail filter), safari browser (very fast page rendering) and iCal (much cleaner than outlook). Sure, there are areas to improve, but at least apple updates the OS regularly with qualitative and functional improvements while M$ waits for apple to make improvements and then copies them!

My impression is the only programs that there are more of on PC are junk game and knitting programs, and more viruses than you can shake a stick at!

Dan

Bo Clawson wrote on 21.8.2003 0:58

Do tell if you do!!! I ran SW 99 (I think) on my PowerBook under OS9 and VirtualPC. Not satisfying at all. However, the dual G5 may be another story. And since M$ now owns VPC, maybe (not) they will optimize it for windows on OSX.

That is something people forget about mac - you can run other OS natively or under VPC. Many programmers are using Powerbooks since they can run OSX, Linux, DOS, Windows 98, windows 2000, and windows XP on the same machine for testing software and web development. How cool is that? (ok, I don't need it, but is does sound useful :-))

The hassle here in Europe is that SW still uses these bloody hasp dongles. I think apple has not has such a massive connector on a computer for over 10 years. I understand in the US these are not required (where is the logic in this? As an American living outside the US I still have to pay taxes, but I cannot use the software without a dongle? Hmmmmm) I had heard that they now have USB dongles which may solve the problem.

Looking forward to your test Bo!

Cheers, dan

Markus Wankus wrote on 21.8.2003 3:38

Well... I certainly agree, the hardware and OS should be made for each other. Then the programs should be able to be more stable.

That is the beauty (and to a degree risk) with apple. True hardware and software integration. They are moving in a direction that is driven by one vision of the goal.

Actually, I have always been a little surprised there are not more engineers excited about apple. Why? Well, what other company actually designs and really "engineers" their products with as much integrity and intelligent innovation as Apple? There are many examples, but I think the new G5 is a good one. Have you looked at photos of the inside of the machine?

Have you ever seen a PC that looked like someone thought about how it goes together? Do you actually see any lose cables? You only achieve that kind of nirvana when you have a team of people with a common vision working together to make it right.

And the biggest joy of owning mac? Well, on my PC if software crashes, whose fault is it, and who supports it? SW says it is the mouse vendor, the mouse vendor says it is M$, M$ says it is the mother board, the mother board says it is the graphics card... And so on. In the end I become an expert on something I just want to work. (why does my keyboard sometimes not respond after booting, and other times it does? No patch or update or changing connectors makes a difference? Why? Who knows, and I certainly am not going to spend my time calling every supplier of a part to find out. I just reboot and pray) On the mac, that loopy loop is very short. "if" there is a problem (and of course, it does happen) there is the Original program vendor, or Apple. Basta.

Whats that? Oh... Right... I'll get down off the soapbox......... And back to work.... Dan

jon_banquer wrote on 21.8.2003 13:45

Well I own Rhino, and what is missing is the history. Once you taste that, there is no going back! However, I did find when I evaluated it last year that it did not "feel" like it was ready, and my other solutions work....

It would certainly be better if it was cheaper, but when compared to Alias, it is reasonable. Also depends on which version you want (but I really hate these segmented programs - one always wants all the features). In the end, if it is a seamless integration with SW, then I am happy!

I have asked before why they do not use those d-cubed tools, but never get an answer (surprise! but they do use some of them...). That would be very nice. However, I do have fantasies that they have a skunk works project that will add wonderful innovative curve and surface tools in the next SP.... I think this will remain a fantasy for a while.

Yeah - but get someone other than Microsoft to put it together. I don't want a 600lb computer on my desk....LOL

How much are the latest & greatest Next systems selling for these days ?

So the guy last year that said everything had to be "Windows Native" was a drooling idiot?

BTW, I noted your post to one of the BBSs saying you were a UNIX user & expert .... what does the "touch" command do? LOL ...