BrianMojo
Jul 20, 09:59 AM
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Well, the 80's have made a comeback, who's to say the 90's won't be returning anytime soon?
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Well, the 80's have made a comeback, who's to say the 90's won't be returning anytime soon?
MovieCutter
Aug 15, 11:42 AM
Still waiting for game benchmarks...
gnasher729
Jul 28, 06:32 AM
AFAIK, the Merom CPUs have an improved SpeedStep technology, so that
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
Do you have any links that describe Merom's SpeedStep compared to Yonah's? I thought Yonah's was quite good, allowing you to reduce both clock speed and voltage simultaneously. It is always a problem with Intel, they say "improved SpeedStep", but they never tell you "improved compared to what".
on average the heat generation may infact be lower for Merom.
Do you have any links that describe Merom's SpeedStep compared to Yonah's? I thought Yonah's was quite good, allowing you to reduce both clock speed and voltage simultaneously. It is always a problem with Intel, they say "improved SpeedStep", but they never tell you "improved compared to what".
Tones2
Apr 11, 02:20 PM
The only downside is, Apple may be so darn busy in the fall with new products, that you won't even be able to get in their stores!
That's why god created the internet.......:D
That's why god created the internet.......:D
chatin
Aug 16, 11:58 PM
This poor cache design will kill off the G5's fast in rendering intensive workspaces.
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 03:59 PM
Okay here's the deal....
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
vincenz
Apr 6, 10:42 AM
I'm curious to see what they have up their sleeves for this.
Nuvi
Apr 11, 02:35 AM
Except he rewrote iMovie all my himself before showing it to Apple. Jobs then chose to adopt the new interface.
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
camomac
Jul 20, 02:39 PM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
haha, then Doctor Q's signature could be-
"Oh do pay attention 007. In the wrong hands, this Octopussy could be very dangerous."
LOL.:D
amols
Aug 27, 02:28 AM
I don't give a rat's A** about Santa Rosa. What I do give a Rat's A** about is that Easy Access HD Bay. The ability to have multiple 160 GB HDs standing by for different field purposes can make for revolutionary work flow procedures.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
chicagdan
Aug 6, 08:33 AM
What would I like to see at WWDC? For Jobs to say "we've taken a hard look at the labor practices of our Shanghai facility and what's happened to quality control since we started manufacturing our products in China and decided that enough is enough. We're moving our manufacturing to a variety of locales on the Pacific Rim -- mostly Taiwan and Malaysia -- and increasing prices 10 percent across the board to reflect the higher costs. We're sorry about the price hike, but Apple isn't Apple when it encourages slave labor and creates beautiful products that consistently fall apart."
wpotere
Apr 28, 06:45 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
Amusing isn't it?
Amusing isn't it?
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
OllyW
Mar 26, 10:46 AM
Will I be able to get Lion at a discount for the recent purchase or do I pay full price? I was just wondering. Thanks!
You'll only get a discount for Lion if you buy it just before (or after) the release date is announced. They only give you a couple of weeks though, if you buy it now and Lion comes out in the summer you'll be paying the full price.
You'll only get a discount for Lion if you buy it just before (or after) the release date is announced. They only give you a couple of weeks though, if you buy it now and Lion comes out in the summer you'll be paying the full price.
RebootD
Apr 12, 04:49 PM
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
Well everything outside of no tape capture option. I don't have a professional rig for video so I guess that would mean sticking with CS5. (As in I don't own a capture card, just use FW)
myemosoul
Jun 15, 02:54 PM
Went to my Radio Shack and was the only person there looking for an iPhone4, stood there for an hour from 1 to 2pm while the manager and another associate tried a million times to get me a PIN, finally they told me to go home and they would keep trying and give me a call when they got one.
45 minutes later i got a call that they finally got through and i have a PIN, they told me that even if one phone shows up at the store on release day it's mine.
Now i have to sit and wait 9 days to see what happens on release day, not betting on getting one at this point, i even had to sacrifice and order black when i wanted a white one. When white finally does come out i'm going to the Apple store and asking them to swap phones for all this trouble.
This whole process so far has been one big fat WTF!
45 minutes later i got a call that they finally got through and i have a PIN, they told me that even if one phone shows up at the store on release day it's mine.
Now i have to sit and wait 9 days to see what happens on release day, not betting on getting one at this point, i even had to sacrifice and order black when i wanted a white one. When white finally does come out i'm going to the Apple store and asking them to swap phones for all this trouble.
This whole process so far has been one big fat WTF!
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
gnasher729
Apr 27, 08:35 AM
A "bug" right? ;)
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
I thought they said that there was not any concerns?
There was never anything to worry about. However, paranoia strikes, everyone goes mad without any reason, so what is Apple supposed to do? Note that the same paranoia has been striking against Windows phones as well now (look at theregister.com), with dozens and dozens of clueless idiots complaining that Windows is even worse than Apple, or equally bad as Apple, or almost as bad as Apple, based on the fact that Windows is using the same crowd sourcing that Apple (and Google) uses, and a general misunderstanding of what is actually happening.
The only actual _real_ privacy problem that I have seen so far is that Google's database (they have a database of WiFi locations, just as Apple, Windows, Skyhook, and I think Nokia) is not secured enough and lets anyone get access to lookup the location of any WiFi base station (my home network is located within about 100 meters or about 20 homes; the centre of the circle is quite exactly where I live). Which means if for some reason you want to go into hiding, you better don't take your WiFi router with you. (People got all paranoid about the iPhone, but anyone trying to find you first has to find your iPhone, and usually that means they've found you as well, whether there is any data on the phone or not). This problem with Google's database affects _anyone_ with a WiFi router in the whole world, whether they have any phone or not.
How much is it costing me to send the data to apple so they can crowdsource locations for everyone? I doubt AT&T isn't counting this towards data use.
Apple sends this preferably over WiFi, in which case it costs you almost nothing. But you have benefits: Your GPS works immediately when turned on instead of taking up to several minutes (like the bloody TomTom in my car does, which is pretty annoying at times), and you can find yourself quite precisely on a map in the middle of London where GPS just doesn't work because of all the tall buildings; New Yorkers probably appreciate it just as much.
BlondeBuddhist
Jun 9, 11:30 AM
Just went to the Radio Shack that's less than a quarter mile from my house and talked with the rep.
All good to pre-order by adding a line of service on the 15th.
Looks like the best spot for me to purchase considering the closeness and the fact that I seriously doubt anyone is going to think to purchase there.
Its located in a tiny strip "mall" (if you even wanna call it that) on the wee edge of town of 15,000.
All thats left to do is get a Visa Prepaid Debit card and put $350-400 on it. That and wait for the 15th to come.
Live this Moment.
Blonde Buddhist.
All good to pre-order by adding a line of service on the 15th.
Looks like the best spot for me to purchase considering the closeness and the fact that I seriously doubt anyone is going to think to purchase there.
Its located in a tiny strip "mall" (if you even wanna call it that) on the wee edge of town of 15,000.
All thats left to do is get a Visa Prepaid Debit card and put $350-400 on it. That and wait for the 15th to come.
Live this Moment.
Blonde Buddhist.
kenypowa
Apr 27, 08:19 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It was never a big deal. Either you are holding it wrong or there is a misunderstanding. Apple never makes mistakes, didn't you get the memo? ;)
e-coli
Mar 26, 01:08 PM
Am I the only person not particularly thrilled with Lion?
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
ericmooreart
Apr 25, 03:41 PM
This suit has merit. If I turn off location services there should be no record of where I go.
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
With that and other simple info I can find out where you work, where you bank, where you live, what time you usually get home. All it takes is one website or email attachment to compromise your device. This info is not encrypted.
I do think if Any device does this they should be sued
TheKrillr
Aug 26, 11:57 PM
Please Sustantiate Your Reasoning Why You Think September 18th. :confused: Three more weeks of anxiety ridden torture! :eek:
Simple. Apples' current sale for students on getting a MAJOR discount on iPods when you buy a new mac, ends on Friday the 15th. Thus, the following monday, will come the new updates. They wouldn't release before, because they would be cutting their profits even more than they are now.
Simple. Apples' current sale for students on getting a MAJOR discount on iPods when you buy a new mac, ends on Friday the 15th. Thus, the following monday, will come the new updates. They wouldn't release before, because they would be cutting their profits even more than they are now.