PC OR MAC ?

Oh I'd agree with the 'stuff you' comment Rosetta and Classic both helped the transition (not much though, especially Classic which was a right pig), but it was painful to find out that my Mac at the time was obsolete overnight. In retrospect though it was probably the right decision by Apple. And one that Microsoft needs to make about all their legacy systems.

There is in interesting interview with John Sculley floating around the web at the moment where he talks about all the mistakes he made while at Apple, including making the fateful decision to go with PowerPC instead of Intel. Look where that got them! I for one am much happier with Intel processors, performance is much better and being able to run Windows when necessary at native speed is a nice bonus. I even play the occasional PC game now (well okay, I haven't since Oblivion last year, but it was fun for a while)

i use a Mac and it does me good Pc is the sane just let it go just use what you have and shut up

There is some truth in that but also not...

With the 11 inch they use the Core 2 Duo SU9400 that one needs 10W compared to the i5 that use 18W so to keep the power the same they indeed needed to use the igp on th i5. So for the 11 inch it's understandable.

The 13 inch however use the Core 2 Duo SL9400 17W while the i5 use 18w... why not go for the more powerful CPU? No one would lay awake over 1 watt if they get extra processing power...

I'm not sure I follow, in that situation you'd still need to add another GPU to enable OpenCL wouldn't you? So you'd end up with a 3 chip solution (i3/i5+GPU+PCH) compared to the 2 chip solution for the Core 2 Duo (CPU + 320M).

Ah yes but the 3 chip solution (i3/i5+GPU(320M)+PCH) use only 1 watt more than the 2 chip solution for the Core 2 Duo (CPU + 320M) while the i5 solution has more processing power.

Interesting, but I'm having a problem finding figures that agree I can find i3s and i5s with a TDP of 35W, or slow (just over 1GHz w/o turbo) with a TDP of 18W. And that's just for the 'CPU' (obviously IGP, memory controller etc. too in the i3/i5 case), not including the PCH and secondary GPU. I realise this is getting distinctly off topic, so... any pointers?

You need to be looking at the i5 UM (ultra-mobile) not the M (mobile).
The UM are 18w TDP and that's total package so that includes the IGP and the memory controller that's inside it. This i5 560UM for example.
There are also i7 as UM with also 18w DTP.

Sadly there is no benchmark for the 560UM but there is for the 520UM link
And here is the C2D SL9400 link

As you can see the 520UM is roughly preforming the same but the C2D SL9400 cost $284 U.S. and the 520UM $241 U.S.
The faster clocked 560UM is also still only $250 U.S.
If you want to look at the same budget...
There is the i7 620UM for $278 U.S. link
That one is also still 18w tdp

That still leaves the lack of OpenCL support - you couldn't use the 320M/9400M since they're designed to interface with the Core 2 Duo, not the i3/i5/i7, so you'd have to use a discrete GPU and memory, plus a PCH, all of which takes board space.

TDP for the three chips will be a bit more than C2D+9400/320M too, but probably only about 4W (3.5W for PCH, 1W more for the CPU, think the GPUs are roughly the same). Not counting the RAM, no idea how much that would be.

Apple are obviously going to have to switch from Core 2 Duo (especially since the raw performance of the i3/i5/i7 is so much better), but how they do it with Intel without ending up either dropping OpenCL support on some machines, or having bigger motherboards, I don't know.

As far as PC vs Mac, whatever you're more comfortable with

iTunes crashes Firefox!!

I can't believe the aloofness of Apple iTunes I mentioned earlier that they wouldn't even let me into the site because they couldn't find the iTunes virus on my PC. I just tried again to see if they still didn't like the colour of my money. This time they let me in.... the usual warning appears about the missing iTune virus, but it seems to be letting me browse.... then they Lock-UP the latest version of Firefox on XP Pro and I have to CTR-ALT-DLT to stop it

When I restart Firefox I get the following warning:




To me this is just the same as a virus attack

It would be helpful if you defined your term usage more precisely. Apple iTunes virus? :

It's well documented what a nasty piece of software this is. A lot of iPod owners won't even let it on their computers.

Just one site:

http://www.mcelhearn.com/2006/01/14/the-itunes-ministore-fact-and-fiction/

This is just one report of Malwarebytes detecting "a malicious process attempting to start"

http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=62359

or this:

http://www.pctools.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45764

Also don't forget that Apple Quicktime phones home every time you use it which
is why a lot of people use "Quicktime Alternative"

Your first link is from 2006, and your third is from 2007 (and they specifically say that it is a false positive!). Fail.

In your second link the MBAM admins say themselves it appears to be a bug rather than a false positive. Fail again, I'm afraid.

Still suspicious and locked up Firefox today. Why won't they just sell MP3's to prospective buyers like everyone else does if it wasn't malware.

This one about iPhoto is from last week:

iPhoto 11 ate my library

Seems they don't like other people making batteries for Macs

Apple squashes unauthorized MacBook battery maker
from 18th Oct. 2010

A) the software does say "Back up before installing"
B) the far too complicated fix usually involves dragging an xml file to the trash and holding the option key while launching the program and rebuilding the library database.... the images aren't lost unless the problem was a drive failure...

Nice to know that the images can be recovered