Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: dnetc benchmarks  (Read 38286 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zylesea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2006
  • Posts: 638
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.via-altera.de
Re: dnetc benchmarks
« Reply #14 from previous page: February 05, 2012, 08:10:36 PM »
Quote from: jorkany;679385
And I don't see IBM going PPC in favor over POWER...


Power = ppc. There's no difference anymore since Power ISA 2.03 and ppc is the outdated name. I prefer to use it out of tradition. Nitpickingly you are right, ppc is dead. But power isn't. Neither at ibm, nor at Freescale. Freescale are using both name schemes, PowerPC and Power. I think they do it because of tradition like I am doing it.


Quote from wikipedia:
Quote

The PowerPC specification is now handled by Power.org where IBM, Freescale, and AMCC are members. PowerPC, Cell and POWER processors are now jointly marketed as the Power Architecture. Power.org released a unified ISA, combining POWER and PowerPC ISAs into the new Power ISA v.2.03 specification and a new reference platform for servers called PAPR (Power Architecture Platform Reference).

Offline zylesea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2006
  • Posts: 638
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.via-altera.de
Re: dnetc benchmarks
« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2012, 09:34:55 PM »
Quote from: Iggy;679592
Seems unlikely as Hyperion (not Acube) controls OS4. Also, Acuibe would hardly profit by a port to Mac hardware.

Acube is a distributor of OS4, hence they would have profited from OS4 for Mac sales. Anyway, it didn't happen.