[Wetzel]

Originally posted by Dave Hurt
Mac processors are risc processors. They take large complex equations and break them down into simpler problems. PC processors are becoming more and more risc, that's why Intel and AMD processors have been able to reach such high speeds so fast.

This is somewhat correct.

RISC stands for Reduced Instruction Set Computer. RISC architecture is desinged around the idea that large numbers of smaller instructions are faster to execute than a single large instruction.
The first PC CPU's were CISC(Complex Instruction Set Computer) chips, because all the instructions the processor could execute were built into the chip. This saved memory back in the days when memory was really expensive. To improve CISC chips, new commands were added. With each new command, the programming changed. RISC chips were designed as an alternative to the growing complexity of the CISC chips. RISC turned out to work better.

With the newer Intel and AMD chips, they are now breaking down really complex instructions into smaller instructions in a similar fashion. They are not pure risc chips, but they are a hybrid.

AMD and Intel have had RISC cores since the K5 and Pentium Pro, but with a CISC interepreter.
Windows, both NT and 9x, were built for CISC chips. This has prevented true RISC chips for the pc, because Windows will not run on a RISC chip.

However, "PC processors are becoming more and more risc, that's why Intel and AMD processors have been able to reach such high speeds so fast. " is incorrect and shows a lack of understanding of current CPU developments. The reason that the processors are increasingin speed is because AMD and Intel are adding more and more transistors to their chips. Higher clock speeds mean more calculations per second and more brute power. Here is where Intel and AMD diverge on chip design. Intel is spending their effort seeing how much raw power they can get, while AMD is spending most of their effort refining thier power and making their chips more efficent.

And trust me, if we wanted to run the software that we run on a PC on a mac, we could. Most everything we run is in Java, and can be run on anything from our AS/400's to our macs.

What you say? Most everything I run is not Java, nor are most business apps(office) are not Java.

But mac's are too expensive and too difficult to customize the way you can Linux or Windows to be practical in a buisness enviroment. For the same, if not faster, speed, you can pay 1/4 to a 1/2 for a pc of what you would pay for a mac.

For most buisness applications, a K6-500 is plenty of speed. Most buisness applications are email, spreadsheets, databases, the internet - things that don't need high power. Nor do things need to be highly configured.

There are plenty of choices besides Windows 2000 and XP. There are countless dist. of Linux, Unix, BEos, bsd's.... and most of them arn't very hard to learn, espically the newer releases of Linux. Out of all of them, I perfer Win2k. It's fast, stable, and highly configurable. I also run Xp and Redhat occassionally. They all have their own uses.

I also prefer Win2k. Asto other OS's, you have the fact that Microsoft is already entrenched in the workplace. People know how to use it. They don't like change, especially now with all the uncertanty with major corporations droping left and right now.


Wetzel
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wanna chat further Weffs11 on AIM or goto tigerbolt.
/me is listening to E:\Tom Jones\Tom Jones - She's A Lady (bt Remix).mp3