I just had a chat with a senior apple service technician and he was describing to me how Altivec was not used at all by OSX? He said it was mostly important for OS9. Anyone have anything to add to this?
Originally posted by makkystyle
I just had a chat with a senior apple service technician and he was describing to me how Altivec was not used at all by OSX? He said it was mostly important for OS9. Anyone have anything to add to this?
LOOL this is funniest thing i read in my life..Originally posted by makkystyle
Yeah I thought what he was saying sounded like a load of crap. I mean I'm no genius when it comes to the inner workings of my PB but I do read enough to know the basics. He was trying to explain to me that the old problem with OS9 memory allocation (where 1 program would suck up most if not all of the memory) was the reason for "Altivector" and that because of OSX's UNIX underpinnings the OS didn't need altivec anymore to control multiple CPU's. First it's for RAM now it's for the processor?
If anyone from TypeTech in Ireland reads this thread, your "senior service technician" is an idiot.
Thanks for the reinforcement on this guys.
Originally posted by makkystyle
Yeah I thought what he was saying sounded like a load of crap. I mean I'm no genius when it comes to the inner workings of my PB but I do read enough to know the basics. He was trying to explain to me that the old problem with OS9 memory allocation (where 1 program would suck up most if not all of the memory) was the reason for "Altivector" and that because of OSX's UNIX underpinnings the OS didn't need altivec anymore to control multiple CPU's. First it's for RAM now it's for the processor?
If anyone from TypeTech in Ireland reads this thread, your "senior service technician" is an idiot.
Thanks for the reinforcement on this guys.