TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 10 °C Monday 20 October, 2014

Comment #1727282 by Neil Cathcart

Neil Cathcart Oct 22 8:23 PM #

I own a Macbook, a Pro even, and it is very good so I can’t be so high and mighty but a thiner iPad? Hardly revolutionary guys. Especially when an Android tablet will cost have the price with double the spec.

Reply
| Share | Report this comment

Read the article where this comment appeared:

Apple unveils new Macs and thinner iPad Air

Apple unveils new Macs and thinner iPad Air

The company showed off the new products at an event in San Francisco.

Comment thread:

  • Neil Cathcart Oct 22 8:23 PM #

    I own a Macbook, a Pro even, and it is very good so I can’t be so high and mighty but a thiner iPad? Hardly revolutionary guys. Especially when an Android tablet will cost have the price with double the spec.

    Reply
    | Share | Report this comment
    • Monty Wuggy Oct 22 8:24 PM #

      Double the spec? This is 64bit and a powerhouse. The more indispensable feature is its lighter weight opposed to its thinness.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Barry O'Brien Oct 22 8:43 PM #

      Does it have more than 4GB RAM? No? Then 64bit isn’t relevant.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • I think you mean 64gb, 64bit will allow you to store 8 letters.

      Most android tablets include a Micro SD port , which you can insert a 64gb sd card for about 50 ,still keeping it at about 60% of the cost of a ipad

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Colm Austin Oct 22 9:43 PM #

      No, 64bit systems allow for more than 4gb of RAM which 32bit systems were limited to.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • See My Vest Oct 22 10:08 PM #

      Oh Sean just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he hasn’t a clue. He’s just here for the Apple bashing!

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Seán O'Sullivan Oct 22 10:15 PM #

      balls, I missed that, a bit pointless if it doesn’t have more than 4gb ,given I have no spec’s I can’t comment

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Andy Murray Oct 22 10:21 PM #

      “Does it have more than 4GB RAM? No? Then 64bit isn’t relevant.”

      Yes, many people have been led to believe that 32 bit systems could not use more than 4gb of memory* but that doesn’t mean that the inverse is true: that any system with less than 4gb can’t benefit from a 64bit architecture.

      *They actually could, but we could keep pulling at the thread until there’s no jumper left at all.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Andy Murray Oct 22 10:25 PM #

      “I think you mean 64gb, 64bit will allow you to store 8 letters.”

      Brilliant.

      Coffee, monitor, monitor, coffee.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Danny Oct 22 10:50 PM #

      Do you work for apple Monty? I like some of their products but Jesus Christ just let people have their opinions will you? Apple are far from perfect.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Monty Wuggy Oct 22 11:30 PM #

      I’m not the one ridiculing people because of the product they choose. I think it’s a superior experience, and that’s my opinion. Your entitled to yours.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Barry O'Brien Oct 22 11:34 PM #

      Andy, a 32bit CPU can address 2^32 bits in memory. That’s just more than 4 billion bits or in computer terms 4GB. Yes there are external buses that were bigger but the CPU itself was limited to 32bit. That’s what the main advantage of 64bit CPU is. There are other minor advantages but if the OS and software isn’t made to take advantage it’s pointless.

      Don’t get me wrong, I’m delighted to finally see 64bit ARM (more excited to see what it will do in the datacentre to be honest) but I think in terms of performance increase it would have made sense for Apple to increase the core count rather than go 64bit.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Andy Murray Oct 23 12:13 AM #

      Thanks for the lesson Barry. Very informative. Incidently, I’ve been programming software (16 bit, 32 bit and 64 bit) for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 48 weeks A year for over 23 years. These days I have a team of 14 developers reporting to me. I beg to differ on your assertion that there are only “other minor advantages” in using 64bit architecture, other than the ability to access more memory. But, sure, what do I know?

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Barry O'Brien Oct 23 12:33 AM #

      Instead of dick swinging why don’t you reply with a counter argument?

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Andy Murray Oct 23 8:52 AM #

      You know what – you are absolutely 100% correct. I was being a dick. My comment was condescending and smug. I want to apologise for it – there was no need for it, and it’s no way to win an argument.

      My counter argument as requested: Processing very high numbers at very high speed.

      Real world example: reading realtime information from hundreds of sensors during flights. It might not require 4gb of memory to do it (most values are discarded after being processed, freeing up the memory), but it does need 64 bits to represent certain numbers, e.g. when you are comparing samples where there have only nanoseconds between them, the timestamp gets into 64 bits after about 7 minutes – most flights are more than an hour). It could be done using a 32bit architecture and bit-shifting but the processing time to do this would increase at least ten-fold and it could mean that you can’t keep up with the information coming in.

      I only gave the example out of respect, not to continue the argument. I will bow-out now. I’ll leave the last word to you.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment
    • Barry O'Brien Oct 23 10:10 AM #

      Fair enough man. That’s a good example.

      Reply
      | Share | Report this comment

Add New Comment