[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Salty 

No. But if they wanted to make a touch screen MacBook that would be the best way to do it by far. The swivel screen idea is just too cumbersome, and probably breakable.

What I'm amazed about is the fact that nobody is talking about what sort of new features they're hoping for out of iLife, iWork or Lion... I mean... really... are you all that content with your machines? I can't believe that MacNN users are truly content.

Actually, by and large, yes.

I have so little to complain about that I've resigned to just happily using it.

[P]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

think it's the birds next?

OS X Canary
OS X Thrush
OS X Raptor
OS X Albatros (this will be the last one before the iOS line is merged upwards)
iOS Phoenix will be the merged new full-use OS with touch interface
iOS Flamingo will be the refined version for the artsy creative folk.

I think "birds of prey" is one possible group to use. Got any other groups that you think might work?

[P]

It's obvious what we need: A new file system. It's also obvious what they've been working on for a while for future use: Resolution Independence. The big interface issues from the OS X launch are mostly solved now that the Dock isn't so overloaded. There are few things really missing from 10.6 - yes, we're still missing TRIM support, the OpenGL support is behind the times (GLSL 1.3 already!), the split into QT7/QTX is silly, but it's mostly OK. I find myself wishing that they don't kill Rosetta, don't remove all the good QT7 features, don't mess up the interface, don't sabotage the spatial Finder any more, etc.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by P 

I think "birds of prey" is one possible group to use. Got any other groups that you think might work?

Marsupials. Australia will be THRILLED, as will be the 'possum.

[P]

Originally Posted by AKcrab 

Marsupials. Australia will be THRILLED, as will be the 'possum.

I'm not sure about their marketing value, though - marsupials have an image of more odd and amusing than especially powerful.

I could see them using names of stars or other astronomical objects, maybe, but then it is more neutral than evoking a specific image.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by P 

It's obvious what we need: A new file system.

Look how long it took to get ext4 fully stable and use for public consumption. With nary a word from apple and abandoning of ZFS, I'm not sure we'll see a new file system at this point.

I wonder what the odds of ZFS returning to the table, with Oracle buying Sun and Larry being best buddies with Steve.

[Eug]

I still find it ironic that DVD Player plays (non-DRM'd) HD DVD.

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I still find it ironic that DVD Player plays (non-DRM'd) HD DVD.

Only a small subset of them, however (MPEG2-based ones).

[P]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

Look how long it took to get ext4 fully stable and use for public consumption. With nary a word from apple and abandoning of ZFS, I'm not sure we'll see a new file system at this point.

I wonder what the odds of ZFS returning to the table, with Oracle buying Sun and Larry being best buddies with Steve.

Yes, because Apple has never managed to keep a secret before...

Apple has some very good filesystem engineers inside the company, and has had them for quite some time. One of the best known is Dominic Giampaolo. He mentions working on file systems and Spotlight, and "Since Spotlight shipped, I'm back with my file system team hat on most of the time." Spotlight shipped with TIger in 2005 - 5 years ago. They probably had other things to do for Leopard (Spotlight was updated) but I don't think Snow Leopard changed anything related to the file system. Ext4 was in unstable branch of the kernel for 2 years (according to Wikipedia). They had time to do it, if they wanted. I'm just hoping they did, and are ready to present something now.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by P 

Yes, because Apple has never managed to keep a secret before...

But file systems developed in secret can be inherently weak, that is not being tested to the depth and breadth needed to ensure they are completely bullet proof. I'm not sold that apple can pull off a completely new file system that is bullet proof and ready for general consumption in such a short time, i.e., 2 years.

If that is the case, I'll hold off on using 10.7 for a period of time until word gets out on how solid the file system is

[Eug]

Originally Posted by P 

Only a small subset of them, however (MPEG2-based ones).

H.264 too. (No VC-1 though.)

[P]

HFS+ was developed internally only, and so were most file systems outside open source. Apple could have been testing it internally (with good backups) for years.

DVD player can play H.264? Interesting. I had no idea that the OS could decode High Profile at all.

[Spheric Harlot]

It occurs to me that if you intend to release a new file system that you've been developing and testing internally for a number of years, it would be an EXCELLENT idea to release a public beta of it six or ten months before the final release of an operating system that uses it.

Maybe they could use some sort of press event or something to promote it…

[Eug]

Originally Posted by P 

DVD player can play H.264? Interesting. I had no idea that the OS could decode High Profile at all.

DVD Studio Pro will burn HD DVD-compliant H.264 discs. These play in both standalone HD DVD players as well as Apple DVD Player.app (4.6 or later).

However, I don't actually know what profile of H.264 DVD Studio Pro is outputting. I don't really use DVD Studio Pro, but I have tested a few of the H.264 HD DVD discs from DVD Studio Pro - short H.264 clips burned on DVD but in HD DVD format - and they worked fine on my standalone HD DVD player and DVD Player.app, as well as on my Xbox 360.

Well, not quite. If the bitrate was too high, they'd stutter on the standalone player. I guess the drive in the standalone player couldn't spin DVD media fast enough to compensate for the high bitrate. No problem in my iMac though with DVD Player.app.

[SierraDragon]

• Resolution Independence
• Desktop App Store
• Touch Screen Display
• MBA
• MBP Speed Bumps, maybe GPUs too

The touch screen display is a personal wish of mine that I expect in 2011 but sooner would be nice. Currently Apple gives up a lot of the Point-Of-Sale market for no good reason. Apple-branded POS displays provide a nice visual presentation to the world. Lots of people notice.

And for those of us developing in the POS arena Apple touch screen display support would be a boost.

[lpkmckenna]

It would be great if Lion also had improved 3D chops, moving up to the OpenGL 4.1 spec.

I'd also love it if Steve again invited Epic Games to make a presentation, this time for Unreal Engine 3 on the Mac, with several games ready or in the pipeline. For instance: Batman Arkham Asylum, Borderlands, Transformers War for Cybertron, UT3, the Mass Effect series, and Mirror's Edge, with Bulletstorm, Arkham City, and BioShock Infinity as definite future Mac titles. After seeing Epic Games plug for the iOS, anything is possible now. (Yes, Epic didn't make all these games, but porting the engine is the crucial step.)

There's a rumor that Mirror's Edge is already coming to the Mac this year, so maybe that's one of several UE3 games? Here's the rumor at the Unofficial Apple Weblog.

I'd also love a pony.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon 

• Resolution Independence
• Desktop App Store
• Touch Screen Display
• MBA
• MBP Speed Bumps, maybe GPUs too

The touch screen display is a personal wish of mine that I expect in 2011 but sooner would be nice. Currently Apple gives up a lot of the Point-Of-Sale market for no good reason. Apple-branded POS displays provide a nice visual presentation to the world. Lots of people notice.

And for those of us developing in the POS arena Apple touch screen display support would be a boost.

I would bet that including all of the above stuff, the one feature that you and we all will benefit from the most is not even listed above: new file system.

[Salty]

I kind of hope we don't get touch screens in our computers. To be honest Windows touch screen computers have sold like rocks from what I've seen. If they did do a touch screen computer it'd have to end up being like a slider phone or something to get the keyboard in there... it it'd end up having a virtual keyboard like the iPad which would make it pretty useless for real typing. I just can't think of a way that Apple could do touch based Macs well.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Salty 

I kind of hope we don't get touch screens in our computers. To be honest Windows touch screen computers have sold like rocks from what I've seen. If they did do a touch screen computer it'd have to end up being like a slider phone or something to get the keyboard in there... it it'd end up having a virtual keyboard like the iPad which would make it pretty useless for real typing. I just can't think of a way that Apple could do touch based Macs well.

I don't think it is that hard.

You create a touch option for people that want it, provide a secondary keyboard accessory of some sort for people that want that. The question is, what kind of inputting do people do the most often, and does touch provide enough of a benefit for enough people to warrant the switch?

I'd say that there is a good argument that it does:

- smaller devices
- younger generations of phone users are already familiar with touch
- there is a tremendous potential in new software UI possibilities that involve touch
- for people that don't need to do a lot of typing, touch might be more efficient
- it's a more natural form of input

[Spheric Harlot]

It's a lot more difficult than that, besson.

You introduce a dichotomy of two *completely* disparate interfaces - one single-point, pixel precise abstract mouse cursor analogy, and the other is multi-touch direct manipulation.

This requires a complete break in the interface, a complete switch to redesigned interfacing.

This complete discongruence is the reason the Windows touch machines are flopping. Might as well just stick with the mouse.

I'm sure Apple is wracking their brains over how to get this into a single line, and if there's one company that can pull it off, it's them. Eventually.

What's in the near future is iOS remotes. Yesterday's Logic update includes native support for TouchOSC remote on iPad/iPhone. Rad.

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by P 

I'm not sure about their marketing value, though - marsupials have an image of more odd and amusing than especially powerful.

I could see them using names of stars or other astronomical objects, maybe, but then it is more neutral than evoking a specific image.

SunOS

Oh, Wait....

[Salty]

They could use planets though that would take the guessing out!

Oooo how bout Doctors?

Mac OS X Tennant? Mac OS X Smith?

[Eug]

So, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple did release an 11.1" - 11.6" Air. However, my guess is if they did, it'd likely cost more than a 13" MacBook Pro, which of course would put it in the same joke category as the current Air. And if it's SSD-only, the pricing would be even more crazy.

Personally, I'm actually starting to consider a low power Win 7 PC for an ultraportable, mainly because of price. I could see myself (when dual-core higher spec'd low power chips arrive) in 2011 getting a Win 7 11.6" machine for $500-$600.

The only way I could seriously consider an 11.1" - 11.6" Air would be if it cost less than the MacBook.

[Salty]

Hmm yah I don't know about that. It does seem kind of like a bad idea to make it the exact same price as the 13 inch pro. Ultimately yah it's a premium laptop, but unless you care nothing about performance who wouldn't go with the 13 inch Pro

[Eug]

I have the 13" MacBook Pro already. I find it too big. I want a physically smaller laptop, not just lighter. However, you're right. I wouldn't pay more than a 13" MBP for it. Nonetheless, that's exactly how they priced the 13" Air. It's slower, has less ports, but has as big a footprint as the Pro yet costs more.

P.S. If Apple were to release a new 21.5" iMac quad Core i5, I'd probably buy it. I doubt it though, since the iMacs were updated just a few months ago. I dislike my Core i7 27". It is very unergonomic. In fact, I'm already considering the 3.6 GHz dual-core Core i5 21.5". It's a CPU downgrade, but the height is more reasonable. Apple REALLY needs to do away with that chin.

[The Godfather]

The new Macbook Air will tank if it is costlier than $800.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Apple REALLY needs to do away with that chin.

Apple REALLY needs to do away with the laws of physics.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

The new Macbook Air will tank if it is costlier than $800.

Has the Macbook Air tanked generally because of its high price? Is it considered a failure?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Apple REALLY needs to do away with the laws of physics.

Not really sure what you're on about, as I've used all in one machines before that had no chin. Most of them weren't Macs, but one of them was, and it was the lampshade iMac. That's my favourite iMac form factor of all time actually. For a non-lampshade iMac, it's still not as if it's utterly impossible to design one with no chin. It's extremely difficult in an ultrathin form factor of course, but I'd rather the iMac be a little thicker than have a chin that prevents it from being ergonomic.

This is yet another example where Apple goes a little too far in emphasizing form over function. The best example though was the no-button shuffle. That was an exercise in utter stupidity.

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Has the Macbook Air tanked generally because of its high price? Is it considered a failure?

Dunno about failure, but it isn't a great success either. Reminds me of the Cube, but perhaps not as bad.

[P]

Eug: VESA mount and a monitor arm - or just fasten it to the wall.

As long as Apple keeps the current design of nothing in the foot, the chin really is because of the laws of physics. There must be a certain depth for the ports to work without the cables hanging out. I think the power cord is the deepest.

I know that everyone who had the sunflower iMac loved it, but it really didn't sell well. The airflow was bad, and the design only worked because the CPU used was a weak embedded version and the GPUs were garbage. You needed thermal paste to fully upgrade the RAM. The included speaker was a joke even compared to iMac speakers in general. As a "lifestyle" computer in the vein of the 20th anniversary and the Cube, it worked. As a desktop, it didn't really - so we got the eMac to fill the void.

You could move some things (optical, HD, ports, PSU) down into the foot, if you wanted, and that might let you remove the chin, but I don't think that that design will work. The current design is a very successful one for Apple, and it seems unlikely that they will make such a change.

[Eug]

I'm not saying Apple should or will make another lampshade. It was very ergonomic, but it also cost too much. Having the G4 didn't help it either, esp. later on.

I'm just saying the current iMac is not a very ergonomic design. Not only is there that chin, it's not even height adjustable. I'm also saying that Apple could probably reduce the chin size by increasing the thickness, but that offends Jobs' aesthetic sensibilities, ergonomics be damned. If someone thinks having the chin is an absolute necessity because of the laws of physics, then that someone is probably drinking a little too much of the Apple koolaid, considering that ergonomic all-in-one designs have existed in the past, including from Apple.

As for a VESA mount, I've been looking at that. However, basically it means drilling holes in the wall or getting a humungous desk clamp for a 3 digit $ amount just to decrease the height 2 inches, potentially affecting the speakers and adding the worry the bottom of the computer will hit the desk. In that context I'm thinking I might just be better off getting the smaller iMac. I'd even considered the Mac mini, but it's overpriced and not a good performer in comparison to the iMac. The other option is a hackintosh, but that's not a very good option obviously. BTW, the pixel density on the 27" is too high IMO. Yet another reason resolution independence would help greatly.

PS. I've wondered what a chinless iMac but one with a big forehead would look like. That design could maintain the iMac's thinness, and move the power supply to the top, right next to the vent. However, I wonder if that would make it top heavy. Anyone see a mockup like that anywhere?

[P]

Fully agree about the height adjustable thing - it should have that, and I can even design a version that I think would look good - but what we're talking about is shaving off a maybe two inches in height and another two from the chin. The screen is just that big.

My friend has his screen mounted to the wall on a simple tilt and swivel mount. Looks great - I'd copy him, but my desk is so deep and I need the display closer.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Maflynn 

But file systems developed in secret can be inherently weak, that is not being tested to the depth and breadth needed to ensure they are completely bullet proof. I'm not sold that apple can pull off a completely new file system that is bullet proof and ready for general consumption in such a short time, i.e., 2 years.

If that is the case, I'll hold off on using 10.7 for a period of time until word gets out on how solid the file system is

Agreed. 10.7 could be the release of the file system in some sort of experimental, non-default state though.

[Eug]

Speaking of file systems, do you think Apple will ever include something akin to ReadyBoost? Or will they just continue to push SSDs (with all Macs having a bare minimum of 2 GB RAM)?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Like I said, resolution independence.

Oh and Blu-ray support from iMovie and iDVD, with Blu-ray drives in Macs. It'd also be nice if iMovie actually got rid of all the sucktitude that appeared post iMovie '06. ie. Maybe iMovie '11 will be what iMovie '08 should have been... only three years later.

This I agree with 100%. It's downright sad that Apple essentially 'supports' HD-DVD (when it is dead) and not BD (which is the winner - even over the digital downloads fad)

Even more so in light of the H.264/year of the HD/all-HD lineup of Macs that Apple has been pushing. It's great to want to make HD video, but then you're going to have to choose Windows.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Speaking of file systems, do you think Apple will ever include something akin to ReadyBoost? Or will they just continue to push SSDs (with all Macs having a bare minimum of 2 GB RAM)?

Only the white MacBook, MacBook Air and Mac mini have 2GB RAM.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Speaking of file systems, do you think Apple will ever include something akin to ReadyBoost? Or will they just continue to push SSDs (with all Macs having a bare minimum of 2 GB RAM)?

I could see that happening, and it would be similar to iOS (and probably iOS-based). However, iOS boots more slowly on the iPhone 4 than SL does on my MBP.

[Spheric Harlot]

How often do you boot either, anyways?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Only the white MacBook, MacBook Air and Mac mini have 2GB RAM.

Yeah, what I meant is having no Mac less than 2 GB RAM. With a modern OS (circa 2010), something like ReadyBoost is probably less important I'm told, once memory is 4 GB or more. By the time all Macs (except for the very lowest end entry level Macs) have 4 GB (when OS X 10.7 Lion is released?), having a ReadyBoost-like feature might be somewhat superfluous, unless of course 8 GB of Class 16 type flash becomes cheap as borscht.

So is there any reason to look for that feature at all?

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I could see that happening, and it would be similar to iOS (and probably iOS-based). However, iOS boots more slowly on the iPhone 4 than SL does on my MBP.

Except no iOS device actually has a hard drive.

The iPhone 4 boots slower presumably because it has a lot less CPU power.

[Eug]

That got me thinking. What would it take to get the full OS X running on ARM/A4 for the mainstream?

Considering that OS X already runs fine on Atom, and iOS is being developed concurrently on ARM/A4, it does make me wonder. I don't think Apple wants to go back to supporting two distinct architectures in its laptops and desktops, but nonetheless it is an interesting thought, especially for the small and thin portable market and some future wunder iDevice.

P.S. I'm pretty sure Apple has most of the full OS X on ARM already (not just iOS), just in case, just like they had OS X on Intel back in the PPC days.

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

That got me thinking. What would it take to get the full OS X running on ARM/A4 for the mainstream?

A recompile.

No, seriously: The hard work on things like designing an appropriate ABI, getting it to boot etc is already done. gcc supports ARM, so it should be reasonably easy.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Considering that OS X already runs fine on Atom, and iOS is being developed concurrently on ARM/A4, it does make me wonder. I don't think Apple wants to go back to supporting two distinct architectures in its laptops and desktops, but nonetheless it is an interesting thought, especially for the small and thin portable market and some future wunder iDevice.

Sure they could, but why would they? Do you think Adobe would port CS-whatever to ARM just like that? MS hasn't even managed to port Office to its own PocketPC/Win CE ARM. ARM is NOT powerful enough to run something like Rosetta, and doing a Rosetta-thing for an ancient garbage ISA like x86 is why harder than doing it for PPC anyway.

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. I'm pretty sure Apple has most of the full OS X on ARM already (not just iOS), just in case, just like they had OS X on Intel back in the PPC days.

So do I - so why did you ask?

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Speaking of file systems, do you think Apple will ever include something akin to ReadyBoost? Or will they just continue to push SSDs (with all Macs having a bare minimum of 2 GB RAM)?

I've thought about this a bit, but I don't see how something like ReadyBoost can provide any real benefit unless the OS is starved for RAM (like 32-bit Windows is). Yes flash is faster, but the USB connection adds latency back again. Why bother?

It should be possible to check. Any modern Mac seems to have an SD card slot. Buy a fast SD card, insert it there and put some tape over the slot so you don't eject it by accident, and then move the pagefile there. If it truly is faster, there should be a small performance boost.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Eug 

That got me thinking. What would it take to get the full OS X running on ARM/A4 for the mainstream? [snip]

P.S. I'm pretty sure Apple has most of the full OS X on ARM already (not just iOS), just in case, just like they had OS X on Intel back in the PPC days.

I love the idea as well.
However, I think it's too early. ARM has announced the A15 architecture which is geared towards small servers and more powerful netbooks/notebooks. Only then would Apple have a cpu that is somewhat fast enough for mainstream computing. This cpu family won't be available for another year or two.

If I think of running a full-blown OS X on an A4 (I happen to have one in my new iPod touch), it would feel like going back several years in terms of performance. Don't get me wrong, it's fine for single-task stuff, but for `real' multitasking I think the cpu doesn't have enough beef to deal with today's expectations.

[P]

More specifically, it needs to have out of order processing (which is what Atom also lacks, which is why I'm no fan of it) and it would really really help if it had some sort of SMT.

[OreoCookie]

The A15 is an out-of-order design. I haven't heard whether it is supposed to have SMT, but it's designed to have multiple cores (up to 8) and SMP. It supposedly has a TDP similar to that of an Atom, whatever that means (that is for a chip at which clock speed and core count?).

BTW, I was a bit overly optimistic, I forgot that this chip isn't expected to be released until 2012, 2013. Even if you forget about laptops, ARM hopes to get into the cloud server market with this chip (hence the emphasis on virtualization and symmetric multiprocessing). Let's see what Apples does here, I think it will be interesting to see.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by P 

Sure they could, but why would they? Do you think Adobe would port CS-whatever to ARM just like that? MS hasn't even managed to port Office to its own PocketPC/Win CE ARM. ARM is NOT powerful enough to run something like Rosetta, and doing a Rosetta-thing for an ancient garbage ISA like x86 is why harder than doing it for PPC anyway.

"some future wunder iDevice"

Some may argue that an iOS or similar OS might be more suited to the lower spec'd Apple appliances of the future that we can't think of, but who knows. Maybe we'll see more of a convergence between iOS and OS X in the next couple of years, as iPad hardware and its cousins evolve.

Originally Posted by P 

I've thought about this a bit, but I don't see how something like ReadyBoost can provide any real benefit unless the OS is starved for RAM (like 32-bit Windows is). Yes flash is faster, but the USB connection adds latency back again. Why bother?

It should be possible to check. Any modern Mac seems to have an SD card slot. Buy a fast SD card, insert it there and put some tape over the slot so you don't eject it by accident, and then move the pagefile there. If it truly is faster, there should be a small performance boost.

I wonder what I'd need to implement it on my MacBook Pro. If something like a 16GB Class 10 card, I'm not overly keen on spending $50 on this experiment yet, since the OS isn't necessarily optimized for it. (See below.)

However, I do know that flash-based disk cache (just using a consumer but fast 4 GB Class 10 SD card) speeds things up in Windows 7 with some setups, including mine. The implementation is important though, since I'm told that it works way better on Win 7 than it ever did on Vista, with the same hardware. My Win 7 setup is not exactly RAM starved, but it's not RAM rich either (2 GB, with 128-256 MB eaten by video), and it's slow to begin with since it's got a laptop drive, and runs on Atom. However, even with this lowly hardware, with the SD disk cache it now feels faster than my 13" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro running OS X.

Originally Posted by P 

More specifically, it needs to have out of order processing (which is what Atom also lacks, which is why I'm no fan of it) and it would really really help if it had some sort of SMT.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

The A15 is an out-of-order design.

Even A9 ARM has out of order execution now.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

If I think of running a full-blown OS X on an A4 (I happen to have one in my new iPod touch), it would feel like going back several years in terms of performance. Don't get me wrong, it's fine for single-task stuff, but for `real' multitasking I think the cpu doesn't have enough beef to deal with today's expectations.

I run WIn 7 just fine on Atom, and others have done the same with OS X on Atom, hence my comment about Atom in the previous post. In fact, I could run that (dual-core) Atom machine all day long and not rip my hair out, as long as I didn't have to run Aperture or Handbrake or something like that. (Quicktime would suck though, since there is no GPU acceleration in QT.)

A fast Atom is faster than A4 (which is A8 derived, no?), but 2012 really isn't very far away...

[OreoCookie]

@Eug
I'm aware of that. But the A9 only delivers performance comparable to the faster Atoms -- which is a lot for a smartphone/tablet, but not too much if you think of laptops where you expect the power of a Core 2 Duo or a Core i3.

In the meantime, it is reasonable to expect that Apple switches to a Cortex A9-based design for their A5 (= A(4+1)). So it's not like we're stuck with the A4

But I think if Apple intros an ARM-based OS X machine, it'd probably start with the MacBook Air.

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

However, I do know that flash-based disk cache (just using a consumer but fast 4 GB Class 10 SD card) speeds things up in Windows 7 with some setups, including mine. The implementation is important though, since I'm told that it works way better on Win 7 than it ever did on Vista, with the same hardware. My Win 7 setup is not exactly RAM starved, but it's not RAM rich either (2 GB, with 128-256 MB eaten by video), and it's slow to begin with since it's got a laptop drive, and runs on Atom. However, even with this lowly hardware, with the SD disk cache it now feels faster than my 13" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro running OS X.

But that's your nettop with a slow 2.5" HD, right? I can see it helping there more than it does with a fast 3.5" drive.

Since it's USB anyway, a memory stick would be as fast, and easier to reuse if the experiment failed. I'm just trying to find out if anyone has tried it already.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Even A9 ARM has out of order execution now.

I know, and so does Ontario/Zacate that we talked about in the other thread. The issue is cooling - the execution window is always on, so needs to be cooled - but the gain is too large to be ignored. And of course two cores is better than one with SMT, but SMT is a cheaper way to achieve much of the same.

Originally Posted by Eug 

I run WIn 7 just fine on Atom, and others have done the same with OS X on Atom, hence my comment about Atom in the previous post. In fact, I could run that (dual-core) Atom machine all day long and not rip my hair out, as long as I didn't have to run Aperture or Handbrake or something like that. (Quicktime would suck though, since there is no GPU acceleration in QT.)

A fast Atom is faster than A4 (which is A8 derived, no?), but 2012 really isn't very far away...

I know you can run OS X fine on Atom - the issue isn't that, it's that the price saving compared to a cheapo Core 2 solution is miniscule.

I don't think OS X on ARM will ever happen, for several reasons.

* Intel has the process node advantage, and that makes a difference. They've been at 32 nm for a year and will be at 22nm in late 2011.
*Intel is very well aware of the iPad and that there isn't an Intel chip in it, and they know that nothing they have will work for something like that.
*Intel sees what ARM is doing, and what AMD is doing. They have to respond.

An Atom with OoOE, an integrated memory controller (with a real, Lynnfield-style connection), a GPU based on Sandy Bridge, powergated to the max and manufactured at 22nm will be VERY hard for anyone to match, and they can have that out by the beginning of 2012.

Weigh all this against the work for every developer to port to a new architechture again, and I think that an MBA on ARM is one of those things that look good on paper but just won't ever pan out in the real world.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by P 

But that's your nettop with a slow 2.5" HD, right? I can see it helping there more than it does with a fast 3.5" drive.

Yes. I'm not really suggesting it for a fast iMac with 3.5" drive and 8 GB RAM (which is what my iMac has). For a 2.5" drive it's not that slow, but it's still a 2.5" hard drive.

I'm thinking more along the lines of entry level machines and perhaps some other currently non-existent but insanely great product that would be dependent upon a hard drive.

Since it's USB anyway, a memory stick would be as fast, and easier to reuse if the experiment failed. I'm just trying to find out if anyone has tried it already.

Good point. I actually do have a very fast 16 GB USB flash drive already I could try, with my Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro. I don't know how fast the USB ports are on that laptop, but it should be OK as a realworld test.

So, how do I do this?

However, on Windows it prefetches the data to fill the cache before you even use the programs. My understanding was that this is not the case in Snow Leopard so the performance improvement may be far less noticeable. Is that correct? The other issue is I think I already have 4 GB of RAM in that unit. Or maybe not. I honestly can't remember.

EDIT:

Here is a bench of a different sort of solution that does seem to help greatly.

It's a Seagate laptop hard drive with 4 GB of flash built in.



The difference here though is that it's only a read cache, but the disk cache remains intact after a power off. Note that the Velociraptor is a 10000 rpm 3.5" drive.

Originally Posted by P 

Weigh all this against the work for every developer to port to a new architechture again, and I think that an MBA on ARM is one of those things that look good on paper but just won't ever pan out in the real world.

iPad on Atom then in 2013?

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Good point. I actually do have a very fast 16 GB USB flash drive already I could try, with my Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro. I don't know how fast the USB ports are on that laptop, but it should be OK as a realworld test.

So, how do I do this?

1.) Backup.

2.) How can I move the Mac OS X virtual memory swap files to a different drive or partition? - Apple - Stack Exchange

Originally Posted by Eug 

However, on Windows it prefetches the data to fill the cache before you even use the programs. My understanding was that this is not the case in Snow Leopard so the performance improvement may be far less noticeable. Is that correct? The other issue is I think I already have 4 GB of RAM in that unit. Or maybe not. I honestly can't remember.

Windows does something different, yes. Windows introduces a new speculative disk cache that I understand is separate from the VM system. OS X only uses the VM system for cache. Moving the pagefile would increase the speed a lot if the system has to start paging out and in, but ideally it shouldn't have to do that.

Hmm. Probably it won't do much, and installing more RAM likely helps more. This discussion was still useful though, because it made me realize how I will make my SSD installation when I finally get around to it in two years or whatever: I take the connectors from the optical drive to the SSD, put a USB-to-SATA converter on the optical, and take the USB connection to the SD card reader to the new USB-to-SATA converter. USB to SATA connectors are cheap enough (if nothing else I can buy a cheap slimline external chassie) and that SD card reader is only SDHC in any case.

Maybe I can fit into the keyboard somehow?

Originally Posted by Eug 

iPad on Atom then in 2013?

It's a definite possibility. Of course, by then I expect the iPad line to have swelled to several different models, but at least some I think will use an Intel chip. The process technology and compiler advantage will be too big.