Re: Just when does an application commit to PowerPC vs. Intel?
Re: Just when does an application commit to PowerPC vs. Intel?
- Subject: Re: Just when does an application commit to PowerPC vs. Intel?
- From: Mark Lively <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:36:15 -0500
On 1/12/06, Brian Onn <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Jan 12, 2006, at 5:12 AM, Clark Cox wrote:
>
> > Yes. It's the same basic concept. In fact, before they were dubbed
> > "Universal", they were actually called "fat" on Next.
> >
> > 2006/1/11, ccsccs7 <email@hidden>:
> >> I'm reminded of the old Fat binaries with the 68K to PPC
> >> transition. Do
> >> they work basically the same way?
>
> I think Apple engineers still consider them "fat", given that the
> tool used
> to "thin" them is called "lipo" :)
>
At WWDC when Universal Binaries were mentioned and described the half
of the non-Apple called them Fat. Apple people were apparently under
a dictate to only use "Universal"
There was also a running gag about a Classic/Carbon/Intel binary being
"Morbidly Obese"
-Mark
On his way there himself
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden