Programming C, C++, Java, PHP, Ruby, Turing, VB
Computer Science Canada 
Programming C, C++, Java, PHP, Ruby, Turing, VB  

Username:   Password: 
 RegisterRegister   
 Programming Tip of the Day
Index -> General Programming
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
View previous topic Printable versionDownload TopicSubscribe to this topicPrivate MessagesRefresh page View next topic
Author Message
wtd




PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:00 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Well, this is an area that's really troublesome. You have to match the assignment to the concept without getting too far ahead. Teachers shouldn't be giving students problems which call for aggregate data structures (records, objects) when students have not yet been given any idea how to deal with that.

The thing to keep in mind, I think is that once you teach something, it's very difficult to unteach it. Once someone learsn to handle aggregate data management with parallel arrays, they'll fall back to that even when shown how to use aggregate data structures in a single array.
Sponsor
Sponsor
Sponsor
sponsor
wtd




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:01 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Converting a fanatic is not the same as opening a mind.

You got your friend to switch from Windows to Linux, or frm using Java to using Ruby. Congratulations, but if he or she brings slavish, unquestioning, fanatical devotion to that new technology, then you have not done anyone a favor.
Martin




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:19 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

wtd wrote:
Converting a fanatic is not the same as opening a mind.

You got your friend to switch from Windows to Linux, or frm using Java to using Ruby. Congratulations, but if he or she brings slavish, unquestioning, fanatical devotion to that new technology, then you have not done anyone a favor.


cough95percentofapplesuserbasecough
wtd




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:23 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

I was actually thinking of those solidly entrenched in the AMD vs. Intel flamewars.
Martin




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:43 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Those people too. But Mac people now also fall into that category. As much as I like my iMac, I hate that it means I now belong to a closer demographic to these crazy Mac people.
wtd




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:48 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

I think the problem is that the ones you see are the zealots. You don't see the legions of folks using Macs professionally. Go to a Java conference hosted by Sun or OSCON and look at the sea of iBooks and Powerbooks that have replaced the sea of Thinkpads. Are these people raving fanatics with undying loyalty to Apple?
Martin




PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:51 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

True that.
Geminias




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:15 am   Post subject: (No subject)

i dont use a mac, but i'd say its safe to say where these mac people are coming from. Mac computers have always been better, performance wise, than any pc. Which is why people who understand this grit their teeth at how ignored Mac is in the software department...

i read an article that the mac x2 or x3 (i forget) has a bus speed of 1.1ghz.

I suppose pc could do that too... but at the consumers cost. I believe current bus speeds (pretty much the most important thing to look at now that processers have topped 1.5ghz) for a pc are 400mhz for top of the line motherboards. sigh.
md




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:26 am   Post subject: (No subject)

Geminias wrote:
i dont use a mac, but i'd say its safe to say where these mac people are coming from. Mac computers have always been better, performance wise, than any pc. Which is why people who understand this grit their teeth at how ignored Mac is in the software department...

i read an article that the mac x2 or x3 (i forget) has a bus speed of 1.1ghz.

I suppose pc could do that too... but at the consumers cost. I believe current bus speeds (pretty much the most important thing to look at now that processers have topped 1.5ghz) for a pc are 400mhz for top of the line motherboards. sigh.

Performance on Macs is not always better. Macs do have very good performance but it is definitely possible to build a better performing PC, though it might cost a bit more then the mac.

As for bus speeds, the current top bus speen for PCs is 1066 MHz, and the most common bus speed after that is 600 MHz. But that only applies to intel chips as AMD uses an entirely different way of doing things that is very similar to the way PowerPC chips do things.

Be sure of what your saying next time, otherwise you just look dumb.
Geminias




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 10:30 am   Post subject: (No subject)

umm bus speeds as in the ram module sending data to the cpu. its at 400mhz, commonly. and you say mac is not always better than pc... well ever since macs and pc's existed at the same time mac has been ahead in every aspect 90% of the time... there were a few instances where pc manufacturers developed some higher technology faster, but then that didnt matter too much because the macs would still out perform the pc's due to the pc's being unable to properly implement it due to: bad design. which is what pc is still struggling to get itself out of today.

but of course thats just my oppinion based on the few articles i read and also my uncle who used to be a computer engineer designing mobo's for pc.
wtd




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:18 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Yes, Apple does have the opportunity to more optimally design computers since they make the whole thing. You don't have to worry about some shady company selling computers with fast processors, but really slow hard drives or such.

But Apple is not perfect. Cosnider the G4. It was great in its day, but bus issues formed a bottleneck in the system that Apple has had a very hard time dealing with.

It's the software that makes Apple special, and the emphasis on design.

The most common bottleneck for a modern personal computer is the human sitting in front of it. If the software makes it possible to do what you want to faster and easier, then even a slower computer can seem faster.
Geminias




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:30 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

yeah definitely, definitely, but when discussing such things as hardware performance you have to assume that both are tested with equally optimum or equally crappy software. Otherwise, its no longer about hardware but software.
md




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:46 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Geminias wrote:
umm bus speeds as in the ram module sending data to the cpu. its at 400mhz, commonly. and you say mac is not always better than pc... well ever since macs and pc's existed at the same time mac has been ahead in every aspect 90% of the time... there were a few instances where pc manufacturers developed some higher technology faster, but then that didnt matter too much because the macs would still out perform the pc's due to the pc's being unable to properly implement it due to: bad design. which is what pc is still struggling to get itself out of today.

but of course thats just my oppinion based on the few articles i read and also my uncle who used to be a computer engineer designing mobo's for pc.


I'm not trying to start a flame war... just pointing that out... but,

Bus speed is not the speed of the memory, and the memory speed on both PCs and Macs is generally the same; though PCs usually adopt new, faster standards quicker. Point, PC.

PCs also generally don't suffer from bad design. There are definitely bad designs out there, but if you're buying your own hardware you can easilly avoid the crappy stuff. That's one of the advantages of PCs, you can pick and choose your componets as opposed to relying on what one specific company says you can use.
Martin




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 8:04 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

AMD64's have 2GHz FSB's guys...

Power isn't really what Apple's all about though. Apple computers are quick enough, but you can get a faster PC at any Apple price point no problem. There's no argument - you can get faster, better hardware for cheaper for a PC.

What Apple's about is design in both hardware and software. You get a fairly decent software package with the mac, and OSX is for the most part nicer to use than Windows. I can't say that it's nicer than Linux though. I ditched OSX for it pretty quickly, mostly because the Finder is by far the most useless program ever invented. I'd rather use Microsoft's Hearts for file management. Want to see the path to your current directory? Hah, tough. Want to merge the contents of two folders? Good thing you know how to use Perl!

Apple's big problem I think right now is the lack of flexibility that their hardware offers. Want to upgrade your iMac? Great! It's really easy - just throw it out and buy a new one.
wtd




PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 8:14 pm   Post subject: (No subject)

Did you try using something like Pathfinder, instead of Finder? Did you research alternatives to the Finder since you find it unpleasant?

The key to Apple's success, in a nutshell, has generally been to not ship hardware without software that can take advantage of it.

I mean, doesn't take much to get a Wintel box with a DVD burner anymore, but I still see people using Windows going nuts trying to find software that can make that piece of hardware useful.
Display posts from previous:   
   Index -> General Programming
View previous topic Tell A FriendPrintable versionDownload TopicSubscribe to this topicPrivate MessagesRefresh page View next topic

Page 3 of 13  [ 184 Posts ]
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Jump to:   


Style:  
Search: