By John Gruber
WorkOS launches auth.md — an open protocol for agent registration.
Apple is exchanging the $1000 Developer Transition Kit machines for 17-inch Intel iMacs, one for one, cross-shipped, shipping costs paid both ways. Pretty sweet deal, considering everyone thought they’d have to send back the DTKs in exchange for a steaming pile of corporate gratitude. (Thanks to Nat Irons for that turn of phrase.)
There are lies, damn lies, and benchmarks, but InfoWorld’s Tom Yager thinks Apple’s new benchmarks are especially bogus:
In short, Apple used multiprocessor benchmarks to skew the performance advantage that its Intel-based machines enjoy compared to single-core PowerPC G4 and G5. Apple used the industry-standard SPEC suite components SPECint2000 and SPECfp2000, but here’s the catch: Apple used SPECint_rate2000 and SPECfp_rate2000. Both tests spawn multiple parallel benchmark processes and are specifically intended for comparing multiprocessor systems. Single CPU, or single-core machines do positively lousy on SPEC*_rate2000 tests. That’s predictable and universally understood. […]
Apple uses SPEC*_rate2000 tests as a foundation for claims that Intel-based Macs outperform PowerPC G4 and G5 by a factor of 2 to 5. Well, yeah. A dual-core anything outperforms a single-core anything else by a factor of 2 to 5 in benchmark tests that make use of multiple threads or processes, tests crafted specifically for the purpose of stressing SMP-based systems.
It’s hard to tell for certain from the shrunken screenshots on Apple’s web site, but it looks to me like all the new iLife apps (other than the still utterly goofy-looking GarageBand, of course) are using the same unnamed “looks like unified-title-and-toolbar but dark like brushed metal with curiously squared-off window corners” theme introduced with iTunes 5. (If anyone at the show can let me know for sure, please do.)
Nice comparison chart from Paul Thurrott; the lack of estimated battery life from Apple is either ominous or curious.
Gus Mueller, on the fact that 40 percent of Lightroom is reportedly written in Lua, a scripting language:
Holy Crap. 40%? Wow. That’s nuts. I had heard it described as a Cocoa app, so I needed to download it to check it out.
The first thing I did when I got the .dmg was to open up the package and snoop around a bit. Not that many .nib files laying around, but I bet they are using Cocoa. I found a couple of .lua files.. but they were in byte code for so I couldn’t see what was in them (damn!). A little shell script action reveals that there are 223 different .lua files in there. Wow.