I am a trained bullsh***er, Chuck (;-)), but even I won't try to
explain the way this might work out. Except to say that I believe
that the fastest retail Mac available was compared with the fastest
retail Windoze machine - in the UK.
But it is also worth mentioning that Parallels runs the OS in its own
window, it doesn't emulate. The Intel chips have apparently made it
possible to do this with Windoze, Linux and 3 other OSs.
Chris
On 19 Nov 2006, at 22:06, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I'd believe that if Macs had access to different processors than PC's
> do. But a Mac running Windoze has to run the same software running on
> the same processor and, in addition to the PC's workload, it has to
> pass
> through the Parallels translation layer at least part of the time.
>
> I suppose it's possible that Apple does their own motherboard support
> chips which might convey a performance advantage but I don't consider
> that likely given their historic cost/volume problems. Sounds like
> more
> Mac folk lore to me. But I'd consider it a resounding success if
> there
> was no more than 10% overhead and that is probably quite doable and
> pretty much unnoticeable.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|