The 'blame anyone but Apple cadre,' Part 217: AT&T

So AT&T is finally adding MMS support to the iPhone 3G/3GS on September 25, about two months after Apple first announced the feature and other international wireless carriers provided it. Yep, AT&T sucks. And I should know, I've been using this horrible network, first in "EDGE" form, and then with their supposed 3G network, for two years now. God, how I miss Verizon.

There's just one problem. AT&T isn't unique, and all wireless carriers are horrible. And it's hard to credibly assert that Verizon's admittedly superior 3G network wouldn't simply buckle under the pressure of all those iPhone users. It just would. When I had my Verizon USB dongle, speeds were usually decent, but let's face, I was one of 17 people using the thing at any given time.

Also, I've taken my iPhone all over Europe. Allow me to dispel the rumor that any of AT&T's international competitors are any better. In Ireland, Britain, The Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Portugal, I've had all kids of connectivity issues on a variety of iPhone-compatible networks. iPhone connectivity is terrible everywhere. It will be terrible on Verizon if that ever happens.

There's a growing trend to just blame AT&T for all of the iPhone's troubles. I'm not sure that's fair, since most networks simply can't handle the amount of wireless traffic these devices bring. But if ever there was one example of Apple's hold on the press, it's this whole AT&T thing. Consider the Google Voice debacle. Even after AT&T asserted publicly that it had absolutely nothing to do with the Google Voice rejection, publications as credible as The New York Times were still blaming them. Nope, it's never Apple's fault.

It's kind of like the reaction to Snow Leopard, a service pack if there ever was one. There's so much here, I'll just cherry pick the most obvious: If Microsoft had the temerity to ship a mostly-64-bit OS that utilized a 32-bit kernel, the Mac community would be up in arms, ridiculing the software giant endlessly. It's hard to imagine Apple not making an "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" commercial lampooning this. But Apple does just that and ... nothing. Meanwhile, because Apple has run out of ideas and had to improve the low level parts of OS that, three years ago, apparently needed absolutely no improvement at all, the Apple fan base accepts Apple's offering on blind faith: "Because Apple has provided this, this then is exactly what we need." It must be nice to have such a trusting audience, and one that is so eager to spend money, year after year. Even on a service pack.

So let's blame AT&T for everything, please. Just don't be so sure that whatever the next network carrier is will be any better.

Discuss this Article 94

rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 4, 2009
@sjaack327 "they have messed with rosetta too I hear" They removed rosetta from both the new install or an upgrade. The first time you launch an app that needs it it downloads it and install it. Its a small download, less than 20meg I think.
DRWAM
on Sep 4, 2009
Rob, a lot of doctors use Win Mobile. In fact, it's what most docs use for smart phones. While there are some good iPhone apps for doctors, there are many more WinMo apps. I can't see much of a difference as a user, except that they have more useful medical apps in WinMo smartphones
DRWAM
on Sep 4, 2009
64 bit issue I cannot give Apple a pass on this. I have a 3.0 dual core dual CPU Pro Tower which are 64 bit CPU's, but the EFI is 32 bit. Therefore, 64 bit OS is not supported. Apple never said this. They touted 64 bit computing, but never said that our hardware won't support it, even if we sell you a 64 bit super duper CPU. If they could upgrade the EFI to 64 bit, I would be pleased, until then, bring on the class action suit!!!
SPiotr
on Sep 4, 2009
Paul, when EricoF3, and the like start questioning your 64 bit rant and virtually agreeing with the Macfans... things must be getting a little desperate.
SPiotr
on Sep 4, 2009
@DRWAM "Sorry gents, but I'm having a bad day. PS MS fanboi's" No need to apologize. People should realize (Paul too) that being a 'fanboi' doesn't mean that you lose the power of rational thought.
ADRz
on Sep 4, 2009
DRWAM, I can still do much more with my WinMo phone than I can do with the iPhone, but a user needs to customize the WinMo phone whereas the iPhone produces an OK user experience without any customization (actually, it cannot be customized). It is an OK smartphone for those who are not too technically inclined and want something easy to use right out of the box. WinMo phones assume some expertise or that these phones would be setup by an IT department. Most carriers assume that this is the case and they do not spent the time to provide a "nice user experience". For example, the browers for WinMo phones are all better than the mobile Safari but installing either Skyfire or Opera Mobile/Mini is left to the user (who may not be even aware of the existence of these browsers). And so it goes....
kempcv
on Sep 4, 2009
I love it everyone is so blinded by Apple that they can not see the true. It is the same old crap time after time. And on top if that you have to say mother Apple may I if you wish to put anything on your Ipod or Iphone and God help you if you put anything in the iphone or Ipod that mother Apple does not like for you will be slapped and have it taken away. And by the way that is also true with Mother Amazon and the Kindle. Just my two cents worth.
cesjr
on Sep 4, 2009
This really does seem like a lazy, half-____ post to get a few page hits. Paul, we know you can do better.
subzerohitman721
on Sep 4, 2009
Paul, I am not surprised by this rant but I have to strongly and completely disagree. Just recently, PC World did a comparison of all 3G networks in the United States. The article was entitled, A Day in the Life of 3G. With a few cities exception, AT&T got his ass handed to them on a silver platter. Verizon and Sprint in many cases owned AT&T in upload speed, download speed, and reliability. http://www.pcworld.com/article/167391/a_day_in_the_life_of_3g.html The chart really shows the breakdown. http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=167391&page=1&zoomIdx=1 You can't blame Apple for everything that goes wrong with the iPhone because many of the conditions that govern a cell phone is based upon the carrier. With the carrier getting its collective John Brown hindparts trashed by the 2nd and 3rd carrier in the United States, thats plenty of technical reasons to truely blame AT&T for a lot of things. I can tell you as a former AT&T customer that you could pay me a dollar amount to go back. In Dallas, there are still parts of Dallas where AT&T networks don't work in buildings with thick brick and mortar walls. There are still areas where driving where the network drops off. I have my issues with Sprint, but saving cash and getting a consistent 3G signal is a lot of what I pay for. My only issues with Apple on the iPhone? The choice of carrier and the lack of insurance. Thats it. If one other alternative than AT&T came about and there was some insurance, I'd be fine with the iPhone. Heck, you'd be looking at a new iPhone customer. It's that simple. I have my issues with Apple, but they aren't the horrible doom and gloom you're making them out to be. Microsoft has done plenty of idiotic and moronic thing in their day, but they aren't the fools the hardcore Mac fans make them out to be either. However, it doesn't help anyone pandering hard to Microsoft either. This is one article you should retract and apologize for.
TEAMSWITCHER
on Sep 4, 2009
These baseless rants are really starting to wear thin. Your Snow Leopard service pack argument is complete BS. Lets get something straight. Microsoft has never, ever, rolled out valuable new OS features or technology in a service pack. XP Service Pack 2 doesn't count, as that release was only a massive security update to patch a seriously flawed product. There wasn't a lot of new features in SL, but there were new features, some of them (Dock, Boot Camp, Exchange, Quicktime Improvements) I happen to like. And all these features were only $29.00. How much will a Windows 7 Ultimate Upgrade cost? An order of magnitude more! Windows 7 is not a major upgrade for Vista users. I know it, you know it, and your fanboy followers know it. I am beginning to think that all of this new found Apple hatred is a symptom of something. Perhaps you have been to too many Apple stores lately. I know for a fact that you can walk into any Apple Store, on any day, at any time, and find a crowd. This crowd is quite diverse, ranging from toddlers playing on iMacs to the elderly learning how to use their new MacBooks, and every age in between. Perhaps it is the hardware they are selling. The machines are amazingly thin, clad in durable aluminum, and have magnetic power cords, backlit keyboards, and large trackpads. This are not the same plastic sheathed, sticker plastered, design challenged, notebooks they're peddling over at Best Buy. Perhaps it is the software that the machines are running. Programs that are tailor made to effortlessly accomplish tasks common to all modern computing americans. Edit home movies, archive photos of the kids, and sync music, games, and movies, to your iPod. Windows 7 sports only an improved MS Paint application. The kiddies will certainly feel the enhanced productivity of the scenic ribbon! You know that Windows 7 is great, perhaps the best yet. But in the end, it will not stop the hemorrhaging of users to the fruit company you loath so deeply. Apple is a worthy competitor, and (like Sean Hannity of FOX news) you are shouting at the top of your lungs to discredit it. It simply is not working.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 4, 2009
I thought Paul quit using his iPhone, and went pure Windows Mobile. Something about living the dream, or waving the flag?
techdribble
on Sep 4, 2009
Connectivity (HSDPA) is fine in Australia. I live in a rural area and have no issues if anything I have more issues with my work phone (Blackberry Bold) than I do with my personal iphone and they are both on the same network
Mirek2
on Sep 4, 2009
It's strange -- Windows 7 you praise mainly for being so streamlined (that seems to be the #1 improvement you like; the touch features don't affect a very wide audience, the taskbar UI change you don't like, ...), yet when Apple streamlines their OS, you blame them for charging for it?
lotsamystuff
on Sep 5, 2009
"hamiltonstallings". if you're criticizing DRWAM for being an Apple fanboi, clearly you haven't been here long enough or haven't been paying attention. He's one of the very few posters here who truly cherry-pick the best of both platforms for the best products. You, OTOH, are a jackass, sir. "That's another thing - data is data. Texting should cost the same as IM'ing, and should cost the same as web surfing." Wrong as usual, "Waethorn". Texting is basically free for the carriers...texts get a free ride on space that's used whether a text is sent or not. Charging for texting is a ripoff, and the carriers are making a fortune from it: "Perhaps the costs for the wireless portion at either end are high — spectrum is finite, after all, and carriers pay dearly for the rights to use it. But text messages are not just tiny; they are also free riders, tucked into what’s called a control channel, space reserved for operation of the wireless network. "That’s why a message is so limited in length: it must not exceed the length of the message used for internal communication between tower and handset to set up a call. The channel uses space whether or not a text message is inserted. ... "Once one understands that a text message travels wirelessly as a stowaway within a control channel, one sees the carriers’ pricing plans in an entirely new light. The most profitable plan for the carriers will be the one that collects the most revenue from the customer: unlimited messaging, for which AT&T and Sprint charge $20 a month and T-Mobile, $15." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/business/28digi.html?_r=3&partner=rss&...
lotsamystuff
on Sep 5, 2009
"I am not surprised by this rant but I have to strongly and completely disagree. " You can't disagree with Paul. He's traveled the world (Ireland, Britain, The Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Portugal). He has a popular website. He knows more than you. Even when he's wrong he's right. So in the words of Mosspuppet: SHUT UP! http://www.fakesteve.net/2009/07/mosspuppet-arrington-feud-escalates.html
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
There are many good smartphones out there. I don't understand why I have friends ask ' when is Verizon getting the iPhone?" I always tell them just to get a BB because the 3 yr ATT lock may get extended and Verizon's technology is different, blah, blah blah....I then get a blank stare. These are windows users that do not own a Mac, but the hype has gotten to them. A WinMo phone has a lot to offer, no matter what age that anyone claims the OS to be. But perpetual iPhone ads, and no or few WinMo phone ads draw attention. The iPhone ads are pretty good, demonstrating what it does, rather than show a spinning sleek phone. This has been a point of subzerohitman for a while. It's marketing hype. While I'll disagree with those that post wrong things about the iPhone, I will never agree that the WinMo phone is not a great platform. However, I will note that Palm Treo's had poor hardware quality, and some BB's do as well, but that has nothing to do with the WinMo OS. I know too many happy WinMo owners to deny that. They should show what the product does... like subman has been saying for a long time.
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
PS, I know that you think that I'm being a baby, but I'm still unhappy about 64 bit issue. I spent $3600 on a Pro Tower that claimed it was 64 bit. Sure, it was as fast and stable as I wanted, but when Wae told me that 'your 64 bit computer does not run in 64 bit, Doc', I felt that the car that I bought with a V8 engine actually had a V6. Sure the car runs as fast as I need and is reliable, but that 'what if I need more speed or power in the future' question is always there, and why was it labeled 64 bit. Even if I misread the fine print, I feel deceived, because I feel that the big print was placed to make me believe that it was 100% 64 bit. OK, now you can call me a big baby [just remember that I'm REAL BIG]
kent909
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de74@live.com said: I thought Paul quit using his iPhone, and went pure Windows Mobile. Something about living the dream, or waving the flag? ------------ In a recent Windows Weekly podcast Paul revealed while he was in Europe that he was using his iPhone. He wants to get rid of it but can't. He is still waiting for Windows Mobile 6.5. I can't believe for as much as he shills for MS that they can't give him one.
kent909
on Sep 5, 2009
PS, I know that you think that I'm being a baby, but I'm still unhappy about 64 bit issue. I spent $3600 on a Pro Tower that claimed it was 64 bit. ========== How come your tower is not 64bit and my iMac for $1100 is?????
SnakeDoctor
on Sep 5, 2009
Winsupersite Blog Post October 1st 2009 by Paul Thurott. “Today Microsoft will make a major announcement about Windows 7. They have allowed me to speak about it now. I have known for some time about this announcement but I swore to Steve (at Microsoft not the owner of that fruity hardware company) that I would not reveal this for exclusive access to this New Version. That is right there is a new version of Windows 7. It will be officially called Windows 7 SS. SS for Super Sized. I am not a big fan of the name, but once I tell you about this version you will realize it has indeed been Super Sized!. First off all other versions will be discontinued, in fact they were only released as an a beta or RC as a smoke screen to mask this SS version. In talking to Steve (Balmer) Microsoft finally realized that having so many versions was actually a negative because it caused product confusion among customers and IT professionals as well. He also stated that Hardware OEM’s constantly complained about the multiple versions. Lastly if will great simply accounting at Microsoft and save an estimated 25 million in product packaging alone. So we now have this single version. This version will have everything. It is basically the Ultimate version now renamed SS. This version will be a Hybrid 32/64bit version. I can hear the Apple freak show, fanboys now and their copy machine comments. The fact is Microsoft has been working for over a year on this concept, before Apple. This Hybrid version will boot into a 32bit kernel, but if you have a 64 bit compatible CPU and chip set, applications will default to 64bit if they are 64bit. If the hardware in your PC is fully compatible and the drivers and software are fully compatible, you can change the OS to boot using a 64bit kernel. This will only really help if you want to use more than 4gigs of RAM. Steve told me this single version approach will help move software and drivers into the 64bit world with out effecting users at all. A simply brilliant move. It will simply the decisions made by IT deploying Windows 7 in the corporate environment. He also said it will save Microsoft about a billion dollars not having to maintain a 32bit and 64bit only version (or 5 versions each prior to SS) in development and support costs each year. Money that Microsoft hopes to put into Windows Mobile 7. Lastly pricing and upgrading. This new version will upgrade any version of Windows. It will install on a bare hard drive. It will still require activation, so you not getting away from that. Single upgrade pricing will set you back $28. They will also offer a family pack, 6 copies of Windows 7 SS for $48. A special 1 week only pre-order sale, starting today, will go for $27 for single upgrade pricing, and $47 for family packs, while supplies last. That is it. It has been a terrible burden for me to keep this contained. My wife knew something was up. She could see that twinkle in my eye, but I kept my word to Steve (not Jobs). As I type this I can only imagine how those LIARS at that fruity company in Cupertino will take this news!!” Reaction to Paul’s Blog Post. Highest number of pingbacks at the site is recorded on this day. Pro Microsoft, Windows Tech fans that read Pro Windows Blogs are ecstatic and cant believe all of the good news. There is not one negative comment to be found anywhere. Other Windows bloggers that just re-use Paul’s post are ecstatic and basically regurgitate the information. Mike Galos, runs naked through the streets of his town, with tears of joy running down his fat, hairy face. He is ultimately arrested, and admitted to a temporary psychiatric ward until his first hearing as no relatives will admit to knowing him. Weathorn is happy because now he can paint huge discount pricing signs on his store windows and reduce the cost of his super duper home brew desktop computers by exactly the price difference that MS is offering. He takes his weekly shower a day early, and takes his Mom to Arby’s to celebrate. Hamilton celebrates by ordering the last Zune he did not have, completing his Zune collection/memorial/worshiping post. Iketchum writes a post at the super site. In no less than 15,000 words he praises Microsoft as the greatest software company ever and touts again why Windows is so superior to any other operating system and predicts doom for OS X. Pro Apple fans that visit the Winsupersite blast Paul for his snarky comments, stating that he did not have to drop those comments when posting good news about Windows. Pro Apple sites claim Microsoft once again has just copied Apple. Mainstream news outlets (Foxnews, CNN, Time, Newsweek) basically state Microsoft has just copied Apple. Apple releases a new ad where PC says “now we are the same, same pricing, same hybrid version and now people will like me”. Mac asks “what about all that malware and crashing?”. PC hangs his head and walks off stage, end of ad. Joe Average computer buyer does not know or care about Paul or this announcement, they either buy on price alone, or they become switchers because they have seen so many short to the point Apple ads. Windows market share on the desktop continues to slowly decline and Apples market share continues to rise.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
SnakeDoctor Wow, that was long and pointless.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
kent909 to DRWAM "How come your tower is not 64bit and my iMac for $1100 is?????" DRWAM said in his post calling for a class action suit that, "[he has] a 3.0 dual core dual CPU Pro Tower which are 64 bit CPU's, but the EFI is 32 bit. Therefore, 64 bit OS is not supported. " As for why Apple would lock the boot system down to 32 bits and not spec out large enough chips to support flashing them with a 64-bit boot (or even have a fall-back to a BIOS boot), that's a very good question for Apple fans to as, and for Apple corporate to answer. I suspect if DRWAM bought the equivalent of his famous $300 laptop today, it would be capable of running 64-bit Windows 7 so it's not the question of $3,600 vs $1,100 to get 64-bit capability, it's a question of engineering prowess and honesty in advertising.
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
Kent, my dual CPU 3GHz dual core 64 bit Xeon Mac Pro Tower has a 32 bit EFI. They changed the EFI to 64 in late 2008, but I bought it before. It was labeled as '64 bit computing', although I did not buy it because of that. However, I got Snow Leopard and it will not support 64 bit because the EFI is 32 bit. There is a program that will make the 64 bit kernal boot by default, but it shows the mine is not supported and will not. When I tried pressing 6 and 4 while turning on the power, the System Profiler also shows that I an still 32 bit. If they wrote a flash upgrade to the EFI to make it 64 bit, then I will be happy. Many doubt that it will happen. I tend to buy the high end stuff for myself, so I want the best performance, and I feel deceived since I don't have 64 bit computing, even after two upgrades to Leopard and Snow Leopard.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
DRWAM To make it worse, Apple still doesn't admit the problem and has deceptive information on their hardware requirements page on their website. On the Snow Leopard Technical Specifications page (as of 8:40AM PDT on 5 Sept 2009) at http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html there is a column for "Feature-specific requirements" As the ONLY requirement for "64-bit support" they list "requires a Mac with a 64-bit processor" There's certainly no question that your dual processor, dual core Xeon system is a "Mac with a 64-bit processor". In fact, it's a Mac with TWO 64-bit processors and FOUR 64-bit processor cores. According to Apple, then, your Mac Pro meets all of Apple's requirements for 64-bit support. (Just something for your lawyer to think about)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
DRWAM To add insult to injury, if I read things correctly, you CAN run Windows Vista 64-bit and Windows 7 64-bit under Snow Leopard's Boot Camp drivers.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
@DRWAM do you have more than 32gigs or RAM? If I read this... http://www.macworld.com/article/142379/2009/08/snow_leopard_64_bit.html "If you’re running a Mac powered by an Intel Core 2 Duo processor or an Intel Xeon processor, your Mac is 64-bit capable. And Snow Leopard runs 64-bit-capable applications in 64-bit mode regardless of whether it’s booting into a 64-bit or 32-bit kernel. In fact, the only big advantage of booting into a 64-bit kernel would be the ability to use more than 32 gigabytes of RAM. There aren't any Macs that can do that now, anyway, due to hardware limitations." In fact if you could boot into 64bit kernel you may run into problems if all of your hardware was not supported with 64bit drivers.
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
MIke, it figures! At first 64 bit Vista was not approved for bootcamp. I am dying to try Win 7 and will probably give it a shot in 64 bit on another partition. I have four HD's in my Pro cheese grater, with 2 for RAID 0. I'm probably going to upgrade the 500GB for a 1TB then partition it for fun, then put the 500 GB drive in my custom XP rig for backup. OT what's the best program to make a backup clone for Windows to use if the boot drive dies? Thanks, Doc
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
DRWAM There are a bunch of factors (what type of backup medium, which Windows, etc? (we should probably take if offline since this is WAY OT)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de I am so amused by all the Mac sycophants responding to Apple screwing up the 64-bit transition (in Panther and Tiger and Leopard and Snow Leopard) by saying, "Hey, you don't really need 64-bit" After all, those grapes are probably sour anyway. (See, The Fox and the Grapes at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes for those who don't know their Aesop)
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
Mike on DRWAM's box apps written in 64bit will run. How is that saying "you dont need 64bit"? Fact DRWAM can use 64bit apps on SL. Fact if he needs more than 32gigs of RAM he will need Mac that has a 64bit EFI. If he upgrades to say iLife 10 that will no doubt be both 32/64bit capable, it will run in 64bit mode on his Mac Pro.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
http://gizmodo.com/5346418/snow-leopard-review-lightened-and-enlightened Watch the performance video, showing preview re-written in 64bit. DRWAM would see this boost because preview will run in 64bit mode on his Mac Pro. That is a perfect example of using 64bit apps regardless of which kernel you have booted with.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
@DRWAM I suggest.... http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/ You can image your Windows drive while in Windows with True Image. You can boot from a CD that True Image will create for you, and image back down to a new drive. You can explore an image backup file, while in windows, to extract specific files that you want. Its Vista compatible so I would imagine it will be 7 compatible from day 1, if not it may require a minor patch.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de On DRWAM's box, the OPERATING SYSTEM will not run 64-bit. And that's more than just being able to access more RAM than 64GB. That's also things like not having the processor stuck in hybrid mode and switching contexts and having to use the 64->32 bit memory manager to limp along with emulating a true 64-bit environment. So, yeah, saying that it's OK that your OS doesn't run in 64-bit because you can use a kluged, hybrid environment to run 64-bit apps in a 32-bit environment is doing NOTHING else but saying "Apple doesn't offer it so you don't need it". And, of course, the related "Apple now offers it so it's a critical item that everybody needs" that will come from the same zealots whenever Apple finally gets their act together. Say, with Mac OS X 10.7 "Hairless Siamese Cat" in 2010 or so.
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
My Mac Pro tower was built in 2006 and has the 32 bit EFI, so it will not boot in Snow Leopard in 64 bit mode, as I have posted. The EFI limits it to32 bit [because it is a 32 bit EFI]. The newer towers built in late 2008 have the 64 bit EFI and wil boot in 64 bit mode. I have tried and it will not as posted. Here is a good source, which is the web page for the SN 64 bit startup selector, which has a chart of supported models of Macs that boot in 64 bit SN. Note the Pro Towers are dated in 2008. And I have tried the utility which shows 64 bit is not supported on my Pro Tower. Here is the link: http://www.ahatfullofsky.comuv.com/English/Programs/SMS/SMS.html But thanks for the recommendation for backup. I will check some of them out.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
DRWAM It's also worth noting that your Pre-2008 Mac Pro also does not support OpenCL or QuickTime H.264 Hardware Acceleration according to the chart at Ed Bott's blog http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1275 and Stephen Foskett's blog posts at http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/08/24/mac-os-106-snow-leopard-hands-august... and http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/08/30/64bit-snow-leopard-kernel/?wscr=1680...
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
@DRWAM assuming your on SL right now. Open Safari. Then open Activity Monitor. Look under the "Kind" column it will say either "Intel (64bit)" or "Intel"....which does it say?
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
@Mike you are wrong the memory space is 64bit. From DRWAM link... "This limitation only affects the kernel! 64-bit applications (like Finder, Mail, Safari, iCal, and iChat) will run just fine (including benefits) on a 32-bit kernel in Mac OS X! Snow Leopard is 64-bit for all users with a 64-bit CPU. The applications are, the memory space is. The ONLY THING that doesn't load into 64-bit - ON PURPOSE - is the kernel!" There is no hybrid once the OS is up. If your app is 64bit it runs 64bit to include accessing the memory at 64bits.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
Mike from you link... "But Mac OS X can run 64-bit applications regardless of the bitness of the kernel. I am writing this post in 64-bit Safari running on a 32-bit Snow Leopard kernel. Many of the applications I normally run are 64-bit in Snow Leopard, including Safari, Mail, and the Finder. This last is important: All Snow Leopard users get a speedy 64-bit ground-up rewrite of Finder, which is their main operating system experience."
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de And not one item in either post changes what I said. The operating system itself is NOT running in 64-bit. The Apps run on top of the operating system. It's not like the 32-bit OS and 32-bit drivers magically disapper after boot. Every system call goes from 64-bit apps to 32-bit OS back to 64-bit app. Every driver call goes from 64-bit apps to 32-bit OS to 32-bit driver back to 32-bit OS back to 64-bit app. And that is costly both in performance, in complexity and thus bugginess of the code and in backward and forward compatibility with pure 32-bit and pure 64-bit designs. So, make up your mind which camp you want to shill for. Either there are benefits to 64-bit (which you quote a lot) or it doesn't make any difference (which you also quote a lot).
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de "Snow Leopard is 64-bit for all users with a 64-bit CPU" So are you saying that DRWAM's dual Xeons aren't 64-bit CPUs (which would be news to Intel) or are you saying 64-bit computing is now redefined as "some 64-bit, some 32-bit, some of whatever else we feel like putting in" (the same bogus statement Apple started using with their 64-bit claims in Panther)
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
SystemProfiler shows that the sytem software overfiew has 'No' in the field where it shows "64-bit Kernel and Extensions', even when I hold 6 and 4 while turning on Power, but many apps show 64 bit capable under framework. I copy and pasted it: System Version: Mac OS X 10.6 (10A432) Kernel Version: Darwin 10.0.0 Boot Volume: RAID Set Boot Mode: Normal Computer Name: WAM’s Computer (2) User Name: WAM (wam) Secure Virtual Memory: Not Enabled 64-bit Kernel and Extensions: No Time since boot: 1:55
DRWAM
on Sep 5, 2009
Sorry it took a while to post, but I'm in the basement lifting, so I had to go upstairs to the Pro Tower. I wonder if those Psystars are all 64 bit ;) You can surely dual boot Win/Mac on those baby's!
mikegalos@msn.com
on Sep 5, 2009
rr0de Or, to take it back to Paul's actual post: Where he said, " If Microsoft had the temerity to ship a mostly-64-bit OS that utilized a 32-bit kernel, the Mac community would be up in arms, ridiculing the software giant endlessly. It's hard to imagine Apple not making an "I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" commercial lampooning this. But Apple does just that and ... nothing. " Nothing is NOT what happens when Apple does this, praise from their fans is what happens. Actual praise for a "solution" that's just appallingly bad. But, Paul did get it right on the reaction that those buying this malarky would say "Because Apple has provided this, this then is exactly what we need." in almost the exact wording. So interesting that the posts on this thread did such a great job of showing that even as nuts as Paul paints the Mac fanatics, they're even worse. So, thanks guys, for making Paul's point even better than he could.
rr0de74@live.com
on Sep 5, 2009
Mike you are correct. Best case scenario would be pure 64bit, kernel, drivers, applications. It would be the best for a number of reasons, complexity and performance. That said I think it would take a benchmarking program to see in difference between a 64bit app on a 64bit kernel vs a 64bit app on a 32bit kernel. Most of the performance gains will come from moving the app from 32bit to 64bit and then from utilizing Open CL and Grand Central. The latter is dependent upon having a compatible GPU/video card for the most part.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use