<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macbidouille-rumors-followup.26266/>
<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"MacBidouille posts regarding concerns about the similarities between the benchmarks and Barefeats' numbers as well as the concern of Bryce numbers (English Translation by Nonoche):\r\n\r\n\"We contacted our source about the too big similitudes between the benchs we received and those published by Barefeats, and were told that Apple took the numbers of the P IV and dual 1.42 from Barefeats and used their testing protocol. For Bryce [nonoche:not supporting multiple processors], here's the explanation we got:\r\n\r\n\r\n\"I should have told you, the benchmarks with Bryce... were done on a beta of a forthcoming version of Bryce, which should be released in July or August this year. Version 6 will support multiple processors... Bryce 6 beta is available on a few P2P sites, notably on hotline. The real file is Corel Bryce 6 beta.sit, and takes 91.2 MB\"\r\n\r\nWe do not think this is a hoax in any case. A number of details of the dialogs we've been having for 2 months have been reaffirmed in several occasions, starting by the presence of the PPC 970 at the WWDC and the 64 bits optimisation of Panther. We mostly see there a lack of comprehension linked to the language barrier. \r\n\r\n\r\nThe editor clarifies that rumors should be taken for what they are -- rumors, and that they have more to lose by publishing rumors than to gain:\r\n\r\n To conclude, if the rumor of the breathtaking performances of the PPC 970 reveals to be false, I will never again publish rumors. If the rumor gets confirmed and that the PPC 970 reveals to be the bomb we're all waiting for (which I am convinced), I will probably not publish rumors any more neither. Those informations will remain inside the team."
<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/macbidouille-rumors-followup.26266/>