inout YOU WRITE, WE RESPOND
118 MAXIMUMPC DECEMBER 2005
We tackle tough reader letters on...
PWindows XP x64 POS X for x86
PWindows Vista PSubwoofer Magnetism
SYSTEM RESTORE AND XP X64
In the November issue of Maximum PC, there’s an
article discussing the history of Windows (“Happy
Birthday, Windows”). In the section about Windows
XP Professional x64, it says System Restore is not
available in the OS. But if you look at the screenshot
directly above the paragraph, the top left tab on the
System Properties window for x64 says “System
Restore.” As a user of x64 myself, I can attest to the
fact that System Restore is indeed present in XP x64.
—Doug McCloudOS X FOR X86 AND YOU
I have come upon a website that has a guide for
running Mac OS X (the x86 version for developers)
on an Intel PC with SSE2 and SSE3 capabilities. My
question is: If it does run, will it be fast? Or will it
be just painfully slow. Also what about its hardware
driver compatibilities?
—John Kenneth IbanezEDITOR IN CHIEF WILL SMITH RESPONDS: We
haven’t actually tried OS X for x86 on a non-Apple
machine in the Lab, because we’d have to download
an image of the OS, which we don’t have a license
to use—unless you’re a registered Apple developer
who bought a devkit, OS X for Intel is off-limits. That
said, we do have some “friends” who have OS X
running on their own SSE3-equipped machines and
they’ve told us about their experiences.
According to our sources, the Intel build of
OS X runs both native OS X apps and the new OS
X x86 native apps at the same speed—very fast.
In fact, one such user has a difficult time telling
the difference between his Intel box and a dual-
G5 powered Mac. He has hit only a few snags:
Anything that requires the G5’s Altivec engine
chokes, and hardware support is limited to the
gear that’s in Apple’s devkit box.
At Maximum PC we’re indeed interested in
running OS X on our own hardware. But we’ll holdoff until Apple sees the light and releases OS X
for all Intel machines, rather than build a limited
config just to run it (illegally) ourselves.SUPERB SUPERLATIVES
In reference to your review of nVidia’s GeForce 7800
GTX (September 2005), you are misusing the word
“ultimate.” As wonderful as the card might be, ulti-
mate means “beyond which there is no advance.”
In the context of ever-advancing technology, such a
claim is clearly rubbish as a better card is bound to
appear in due course.
Couldn’t you cut out the hyperbole (exaggeration)
as it’s manifestly ludicrous, patronizing, and techni-
cally inept of you to indulge in such BS!
—Frank RomeEXECUTIVE EDITOR MICHAEL BROWN RESPONDS:
As much as we dig the 7800 GTX today, we
know—indeed, we kneel down and pray to the
technology gods before we lay our heads down
to sleep each night—that some bright, shiny,
new GPU will soon eclipse it. In fact, if our ferventprayers are answered, this mystical chip will
emerge from a design lab heretofore unknown
to the world, humbling both ATI and nVidia and
forcing both to return to their proverbial drawing
boards in a quest to create a product even more
potent! In other words, lighten up, Frank.WHAT’S IN A NAME?
As I was shaving the other morning, I started think-
ing about the new OS from MS: Vista. Vista? Is this
an operating system or a new hybrid car? I suspect
that Vista will be to XP what Millennium was to 98.
Microsoft might be starting to show a pattern when
christening an OS with a name—which they pay
someone to think up—rather than numbers/letters.
—Steve G.SIX OF ONE...
In your spec charts for videocards based on
nVidia’s GeForce 7800 GTX, you report memory
clock speeds ranging from 600- to 650MHz.
Other magazines and websites, however, publish
memory clock speeds for the same cards rangingThe Naked
Prey
I recall reading in your pages about a
case alternative that enables you to
easily set up multiple pieces of a PC,
because the box is open and all the parts
are easily accessed. I’ve gone though all
my back issues and can’t seem to find
it. Can you point me in the right direction?
—Jeff RobrechtSENIOR EDITOR GORDON MAH UNG
RESPONDS: We use a couple different rag-top designs: High Speed PC’s HSPC Tech
Station (www.highspeedpc.com), pictured here, and the Senfu Tech Station (www.
senfu.com.tw). I prefer the HSPC Tech Station these days, because it sports a noncon-
ductive plastic base, comes in larger sizes, and offers support for add-in cards. The
Senfu is the original, but it feels a little rickety.inout YOU WRITE, WE RESPOND
CUTCOPYPASTE
Apparently, a byline gremlin had its way with our
Holiday issue. To set the record straight: The Puget
Systems Custom PC was reviewed by Claude McIver,
and Quake 4 was reviewed by Josh Norem.