Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Anyone received their Intel iMac?
- Thread starter MartinAyla
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
bigfib said:
Of course you are, your brain doesnt seem to be able to calculate such a [sarcasm]well thoughtout[/sarcasm] private joke.
but well done for getting all hyper about it - wasnt it was OBVIOUS that it didnt run like a 900mhz ibook? and the OBVIOUS name dropping of board members makes this a good joke.
its a shame you took it all too seriously.
BakedBeans said:
Shame on you and your partners in BS. You disrepute the forum and the community by spreading, and maintaining your lies.
I joined this forum today, but now I know it is an adolescents christmas toy i'll go elsewhere for some serious info about the new Imacs.
Byebye.
bigfib said:
Since when have i been spreading anything?
bye - make sure you go somewhere without a sense of humour
EDIT - with the name 'bigfib' - well its just ironic thats all.
I don't think trolling and/or plain lies to increase traffic at another site is funny at all...BakedBeans said:
BakedBeans said:
Bigfib because I edit BIGfib.com, a humour site.... Where we tell lots of satirical BS lies... There are, you see, sites for that. And there are others for people who want some info on the new macs.
I thought this was one of those. Shame on me.
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
Are you accusing ME of that? I just think its a funny joke - XIII had it on good authority that this was the case - i really dont see the problem?
I just thought it was funny that we were all duped by this joke (it was obvious to me - and most, that it was a joke.)
Who cares anyway. If people have their issues with this story which is well and truly finished now then can they use pm messages instead of filling up a thread that's meant to be the views of people that have already got their Intel iMacs.
BakedBeans said:
So you had it on good authority AND we were ALL duped, AND it was obvious it was a joke... Your text is so full of holes...
If you knew it was a joke, and you stated in these forums that you had it on good authority, then, yes, you clearly are guilty of spreading lies to drive traffic as the man says.
bigfib said:
what a load of rubbish - i didnt say I had it on good authority at all - i said XIII did, it was passed on to me (i had no idea, nor did XIII that the user was lying) - if you have a problem, PM me and we can take it further if you like
Trout74 said:
Rosetta is an emulation layer that allows an Intel machine to run PowerPC code. You won't know its being used unless you specifically check. It will be needed less and less throughout the next few years as more and more stuff is release in the form of Universal Binaries. Its basically just there to ensure compatability with old (pre-Intel) applications. Without it you wouldn't be able to run most current applications for OS X. Things like Office, Photoshop and Dreamweaver are all still only PowerPC applications and these wouldn't run right now without Rosetta. When they get replaced with Universal Binaries this won't matter anymore.
Spanky
BTW, 20x stinks anyway because my friend's G5 tower gets 50,000x ripping. (So I'm told, but very reliable)
Also, and this was interesting, when he put his new intel iMac next to his G5 tower, the door to the tower literally opened up and I'll be damned if it didn't EAT his new iMac!! WTF? Is this covered by Applecare?
Also, and this was interesting, when he put his new intel iMac next to his G5 tower, the door to the tower literally opened up and I'll be damned if it didn't EAT his new iMac!! WTF? Is this covered by Applecare?
Hey, bigfib, can you summarize what exactly you are accusing me/bakedbeans of doing? Would be real nice. Why would I want to drive people to my site? I don't have any advertising up, and all it does (as the story is crap it appears), is give my site a bad name. I was fed a story, I believed it, and posted it on my site. I told BakedBeans separately. He posted here. You asked for the link, I didn't go around throwing it in your faces. This is getting really out of order, can you lay off. Thank you.
law guy said:
About XBench 1.2 :
Version History
1.2 [2005-07-30]
* Built as a Universal Binary to run on both PowerPC and x86 Macs
* Re-calibrated 100 point baseline to a 2.0 GHz G5 running Tiger
* Altered graphics code to flush only every 1/60th of a second, in order to cooperate with Tiger beam syncing
* Built Intel code on GCC 4.0, PowerPC remains on GCC 3.3 for 10.3 compatibility
See the last revision date ?..July 30th 2005
Now..
Not sure if I'm still under the NDA for my DTK but..
Mac OS X v10.4.3 Build 8F1111 for Developer Transition Kit Was released NOVEMBER 10th 2005..
Mac OS X v10.4.3 Build 8F1111A for Developer Transition Kit (DTK) was released NOVEMBER 14th..This release included Altivec compatability..
There is no way XBench 1.2 can utilize the inclusion of Altivec in their benchmark app..
Furthermore XCode 2.2 was released AFTER XBench 1.2 making the build faulty.
Unless I'm not seeing an update to XBench AFTER Nov. 2005 any benchmarks are very inaccurate..
I'm putting this thread out of its misery - there's enough FUD already out there with the Intel transition and we don't need people adding to it for ****s and giggles.
- Status