Jonathon McKitrick wrote:
> Has anyone seen this product yet? Does it have the Composer or the
> Windows-style IDE?
Hi,
yes, I've got a license, and no, there is no Windows-style IDE. On the
other hand, Emacs+SLIME is a great IDE for any lisp.
David
···················@gmail.com wrote:
> yes, I've got a license, and no, there is no Windows-style IDE. On the
> other hand, Emacs+SLIME is a great IDE for any lisp.
I'm *very* close to buying one, probably the 12 or 13 inch.
So it's pretty straightforward to get Emacs, SLIME, etc up and running
on the new machines? Which Emacs binary version is best to use for the
least hassle?
On 2006-04-27 17:14:22 -0400, "Jonathon McKitrick"
<···········@bigfoot.com> said:
> ···················@gmail.com wrote:
>> yes, I've got a license, and no, there is no Windows-style IDE. On the
>> other hand, Emacs+SLIME is a great IDE for any lisp.
>
> I'm *very* close to buying one, probably the 12 or 13 inch.
>
> So it's pretty straightforward to get Emacs, SLIME, etc up and running
> on the new machines? Which Emacs binary version is best to use for the
> least hassle?
There is currently no 12- or 13-inch Mac offering with Intel inside.
Emacs built from CVS can be made native quite easily. Slime CVS works
great with SBCL 0.9.11 (I grabbed binaries).
Zac
Zachery Bir <····@urbanape.com> writes:
> There is currently no 12- or 13-inch Mac offering with Intel inside.
I suspect that there will be before long. Consider that, with each
MacBook Pro that has been introduced, the similar-sized PowerBook has
simultaneously been removed from the catalog. I suspect that we will
see the 12" PowerBook disappear from the catalog when supplies run
low, to be replaced with a 12" or 13" MacBook Pro.
Then, the iBooks and PowerMacs would be all that remain PowerPC. It
almost feels to me like the iBooks will be replaced with non-Pro
MacBooks, running Core Solo rather than Core Duo processors. The
PowerMacs, though I don't even want to guess at Apple's plans.
On 2006-04-27 18:13:01 -0400, Ari Johnson <·········@gmail.com> said:
> suspect that there will be before long. Consider that, with each
> MacBook Pro that has been introduced, the similar-sized PowerBook has
> simultaneously been removed from the catalog. I suspect that we will
> see the 12" PowerBook disappear from the catalog when supplies run
> low, to be replaced with a 12" or 13" MacBook Pro.
One rumor is that the only small offering will be the iBook
replacement, the MacBook - that there will be no small MacBook Pro.
Also, this small Mac Book is rumored to be a widescreen 13.3"
So if you're looking for a high end intel mac portable they may both
already out there - the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros.
BTW, my G5 died and I replaced it with the 20" iMac Core Duo - really
nice machine. I'm running Aquamacs Emacs, slime and sbcl on it and it's
quite a lisp IDE.
So now that the 13.3" MacBook has arrived, it's time to decide.
How important is the screen size and other advantages of the Pro over
the portability of the smaller one? I've found Lisp on Linux to
sometimes chew up CPU, but mostly during compilation rather than
running. And I've heard SBCL is coming along nicely on OS-X Intel.
But the question is a matter of performance/portability/price, I guess.
Any thoughts, now that the smaller option has arrived?
"Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
> Any thoughts, now that the smaller option has arrived?
I just ordered the small one with the largest disk and memory options.
The only obvious drawback I see compared to the pro models, is the
rather el-cheapo graphics card (Intel integrated graphics, like on the
Mini), but I guess graphics will be way faster than on my current PB
G4 (12" 1.33Ghz). And it supports large resolutions and dvi on
external displays, and not only in mirroring mode like on the iBook,
so I guess we'll see a lot of these as presentation tools on the next
Lisp Meeting ;-)
--
(espen)
Espen Vestre wrote:
> "Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> > Any thoughts, now that the smaller option has arrived?
>
> I just ordered the small one with the largest disk and memory options.
The 1.8GHz or the 2.0? White or black?
"Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
> > I just ordered the small one with the largest disk and memory options.
>
> The 1.8GHz or the 2.0? White or black?
The 2Ghz white.
--
(espen)
Espen Vestre wrote:
> The 2Ghz white.
Let me know what you think of the keys on the keyboard. I can't decide
what I think of them yet. They remind me of big calculator keys.
"Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
> Let me know what you think of the keys on the keyboard. I can't decide
> what I think of them yet. They remind me of big calculator keys.
I got my MB yesterday. The keys are unusual, but so far, I like them.
The screen is beautiful - this is really a nice machine. Only drawback
so far is that the built-in webcam and the Photobooth application
draws so much attention from the kids that I barely have had time to
play with the machine myself ;-)
--
(espen)
Espen Vestre wrote:
> "Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> > Let me know what you think of the keys on the keyboard. I can't decide
> > what I think of them yet. They remind me of big calculator keys.
>
> I got my MB yesterday. The keys are unusual, but so far, I like them.
> The screen is beautiful - this is really a nice machine. Only drawback
> so far is that the built-in webcam and the Photobooth application
> draws so much attention from the kids that I barely have had time to
> play with the machine myself ;-)
I just got mine as well, and I love it! The only catch is having to
learn an all new operating system. But it certainly seems worth it so
far.
In article <··············@doduo.vestre.net>,
Espen Vestre <·····@vestre.net> wrote:
> "Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> > Let me know what you think of the keys on the keyboard. I can't decide
> > what I think of them yet. They remind me of big calculator keys.
>
> I got my MB yesterday. The keys are unusual, but so far, I like them.
> The screen is beautiful - this is really a nice machine. Only drawback
> so far is that the built-in webcam and the Photobooth application
> draws so much attention from the kids that I barely have had time to
> play with the machine myself ;-)
I find it a bit heavy. It gets also a bit too warm. Not much
of a problem, but just a bit less would be fine. In winter
it might get useful. Runtime surely can be also be improved.
But if you look at the whole package, it is a very good
machine.
For execution of some Lisp software the Intel Core Duo (1.83Ghz)
seems to be almost as fast as my older G5 (2*2.5Ghz). Which is quite
nice for an entry-level laptop like the MacBook. Single CPU
usage indicates it to be twice as fast as a G4 PowerBook (1.33Ghz),
which has a faster disk.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> writes:
> I find it a bit heavy. It gets also a bit too warm. Not much
> of a problem, but just a bit less would be fine.
I agree with both, but it's about the same weight and size as my PB
12", so it's OK. I had hoped for about 500g less weight, though.
> For execution of some Lisp software the Intel Core Duo (1.83Ghz)
> seems to be almost as fast as my older G5 (2*2.5Ghz). Which is quite
> nice for an entry-level laptop like the MacBook.
Yes, the Core Duo seems to be a nice processor for lisp. We've tested
it with linux in a server, too, and it's certainly much better for our
kind of lisp usage than even the fastest P4 servers, which suffer from
the long P4 pipelines.
--
(espen)
+ Espen Vestre <·····@vestre.net>:
| Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> writes:
|
|> I find it a bit heavy. It gets also a bit too warm. Not much
|> of a problem, but just a bit less would be fine.
|
| I agree with both, but it's about the same weight and size as my PB
| 12", so it's OK. I had hoped for about 500g less weight, though.
And the opening angle?
I saw David Pogue complaining that the machine is a full two inches
wider for an extra one inch of screen diagonal (okay, 1.2 inches), and
indeed this seems about right according to the specs (48 mm extra
width, so his inches are smallish). OTOH, at only 8 mm extra depth it
should still be possible to use in an airplane seat. *If* they got the
opening angle big enough. Oh, I see the aspect ratio of the screen
has changed to something slightly above 4:3, which explains why the
machine grew more sideways. Still, there seems to be a lot of edge
around the screen on all sides, which makes me wonder why Apple has
not gone the way of much of their competion and made their screens
almost as wide as the lid. Perhaps there are issues with solidity,
but if others can solve that problem, so should Apple be able to do
the same.
--
* Harald Hanche-Olsen <URL:http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/>
- It is undesirable to believe a proposition
when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true.
-- Bertrand Russell
Harald Hanche-Olsen <······@math.ntnu.no> writes:
> And the opening angle?
It could be better, but it's enough for my needs: 132 degrees on the
MacBook, versus 123 on the Pro models, which I really couldn't have
used (The alu PB 15" used to be 135 degrees, I think, and my PB 12"
opens to 143 degrees).
--
(espen)
In article <··············@doduo.vestre.net>,
Espen Vestre <·····@vestre.net> wrote:
> Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> writes:
>
> > I find it a bit heavy. It gets also a bit too warm. Not much
> > of a problem, but just a bit less would be fine.
>
> I agree with both, but it's about the same weight and size as my PB
> 12", so it's OK. I had hoped for about 500g less weight, though.
>
> > For execution of some Lisp software the Intel Core Duo (1.83Ghz)
> > seems to be almost as fast as my older G5 (2*2.5Ghz). Which is quite
> > nice for an entry-level laptop like the MacBook.
>
> Yes, the Core Duo seems to be a nice processor for lisp. We've tested
> it with linux in a server, too, and it's certainly much better for our
> kind of lisp usage than even the fastest P4 servers, which suffer from
> the long P4 pipelines.
SBCL 0.9.12 is a bit faster on the 1.83 Core Duo compared to
the 2*2.5Ghz PowerPC 970fx in my PowerMac G5.
Keep in mind though, that SBCL is only 32bit. A 64bit version
on the G5 would be faster for some benchmarks.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> wrote:
> Keep in mind though, that SBCL is only 32bit. A 64bit version
> on the G5 would be faster for some benchmarks.
I would expect a 64-bit ppc SBCL to be faster than a 32-bit one on
very few realistic benchmarks. Increasing the size of a lispobj, also
increases the pressure on both caches and the memory bus. This is a
major problem for any program that is even moderately memory-bound.
The potential advantages of a 64-bit lisp are rather minor in
comparison, e.g. faster bignums or having an immediate single-float
representation.
The selling point of a 64-bit system is generally the larger address
space, not performance.
--
Juho Snellman
Am 29.05.2006 11:03 Uhr schrieb "Juho Snellman" unter <······@iki.fi> in
·····················@sbz-30.cs.Helsinki.FI:
> Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> wrote:
>> Keep in mind though, that SBCL is only 32bit. A 64bit version
>> on the G5 would be faster for some benchmarks.
>
> I would expect a 64-bit ppc SBCL to be faster than a 32-bit one on
> very few realistic benchmarks. Increasing the size of a lispobj, also
> increases the pressure on both caches and the memory bus. This is a
> major problem for any program that is even moderately memory-bound.
> The potential advantages of a 64-bit lisp are rather minor in
> comparison, e.g. faster bignums or having an immediate single-float
> representation.
Some advantages:
- less consing. 32bit integers aren't bignums
- less boxing / unboxing in lots of operations
- more tag bits -> benefit for runtime type-checking
- larger arrays with fixnum addresses
> The selling point of a 64-bit system is generally the larger address
> space, not performance.
But that's not the only advantage. Especially in programs with large number
of small objects (fixnums, ...) which could fit in a single 64bit word you
can save lots of cycles.
A benchmark of 64bit Allegro CL vs. 32bit Allegro CL on the same machine
would be interesting.
Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> wrote:
>> The potential advantages of a 64-bit lisp are rather minor in
>> comparison, e.g. faster bignums or having an immediate single-float
>> representation.
>
> Some advantages:
I didn't say those were the only advantages, but the others are also
minor ones.
> - less boxing / unboxing in lots of operations
Could you elaborate on that?
> - more tag bits -> benefit for runtime type-checking
At least for SBCL this is a non-issue. The x86-64 port does have a
larger tag-space, and does use a few of the extra tags, but there's no
real performance benefit to be had there.
> - larger arrays with fixnum addresses
I don't quite understand how larger arrays would be a performance
advantage. Desireable for other reasons, sure. But really this is just
another instance of the larger address space being the reason people
need a 64-bit lisp.
>> The selling point of a 64-bit system is generally the larger address
>> space, not performance.
>
> But that's not the only advantage.
It is the main advantage, by a wide margin.
Even if there are some minor performance benefits here and there, they
are eclipsed by the common case performance issues caused by lower
data- and code- density.
As a concrete example, x86-64 adds 8 new general purpose registers and
an SSE unit to the x86 ISA. Despite this, SBCL/x86-64 doesn't win a
lot of non-bignum benchmarks against SBCL/x86. With the ppc64 ISA
having no similar advantage over the ppc ISA, a 64-bit ppc lisp would
have an even harder time.
> Especially in programs with large number
> of small objects (fixnums, ...) which could fit in a single 64bit word you
> can save lots of cycles.
Sorry, I don't get this. How would you fit multiple fixnums in a word?
--
Juho Snellman
On Sun, 28 May 2006 22:35:58 +0200, Thibault Langlois
<·················@gmail.com> wrote:
> How hot does it get ? When hot, is the cooling fan noisy ?
> Thibault
>
Shht.. It's a portable. ;)
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
In article <·······················@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Thibault Langlois" <·················@gmail.com> wrote:
> How hot does it get ? When hot, is the cooling fan noisy ?
> Thibault
It gets warm. A bit too warm I'd say.
The fans are not noisy.
--
http://lispm.dyndns.org/
Ari Johnson <·········@gmail.com> writes:
> The PowerMacs, though I don't even want to guess at Apple's plans.
It's a common and pretty good guess that they will be introduced at
WWDC in August, with delivery a month or two later. At that time,
Intel will release its 64 bits workstation and server processors based
on the "core" (i.e. Pentium 3 ;-)) architecture. At the same time,
Intels 64-bit mobile processor will be released, so one thing is
certain: Those of us who need to buy an intel mac portable now, will
have very outfashioned machines in just some months, when 64 bits
portables start to arrive...
--
(espen)
Espen Vestre wrote:
> certain: Those of us who need to buy an intel mac portable now, will
> have very outfashioned machines in just some months, when 64 bits
> portables start to arrive...
Well that makes for a painful decision. I don't know what anyone would
*need* a 64-bit portable for, but even still, Apple will be staying
with the 32-bit duo core, correct?
"Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
> I don't know what anyone would *need* a 64-bit portable for,
I do. I want to run a 64 bit lisp on it.
> but even still, Apple will be staying
> with the 32-bit duo core, correct?
There's no reason to believe that they won't start using Merom, the
64-bit mobile processor of the Core family (in fact, the 32-bit
verison will probably have a relatively short lifespan, I
think). Latest rumors claim that this processor will be out already in
August.
--
(espen)
Espen Vestre wrote:
> "Jonathon McKitrick" <···········@bigfoot.com> writes:
>
> > I don't know what anyone would *need* a 64-bit portable for,
>
> I do. I want to run a 64 bit lisp on it.
This is really best for calculation intensive stuff, right? And I
guess a larger addressable memory space.
How much will the battery life, weight, heat and so on be affected?
Dramatically or relatively little?
> There's no reason to believe that they won't start using Merom, the
> 64-bit mobile processor of the Core family (in fact, the 32-bit
> verison will probably have a relatively short lifespan, I
> think). Latest rumors claim that this processor will be out already in
> August.
So as exciting as the new MacBooks are, it really might make sense to
wait, then?
On 2006-04-27 14:14:22 -0700, "Jonathon McKitrick"
<···········@bigfoot.com> said:
>
> ···················@gmail.com wrote:
>> yes, I've got a license, and no, there is no Windows-style IDE. On the
>> other hand, Emacs+SLIME is a great IDE for any lisp.
>
> I'm *very* close to buying one, probably the 12 or 13 inch.
>
> So it's pretty straightforward to get Emacs, SLIME, etc up and running
> on the new machines? Which Emacs binary version is best to use for the
> least hassle?
Hello, you will want to check out Aquamacs Emacs at:
www.aquamacs.org
I have set it up with SLIME 2.0 very recently and it looks like it
works fine, though I admit I haven't had time yet to do much more than
rudimentary poking around.
Aquamacs is currently distributing a universal binary that runs on both
Intel and PPC macs. (I'm using a PPC Powerbook.)
Take care..